Twyford not standing

April 21st, 2009 at 4:41 pm by David Farrar

has just announced he will not stand for for Labour.

This is a huge call, and shows how worried Labour were by the thought of the by-election turning into a referendum on Judith Tizard returning to Parliament.

I suspect Phil Goff will be pleased with the outcome. Goff’s leadership would have been fatally undermined if Labour lost Mt Albert due to voters not liking who would enter Parliament for Labour.

It is a tough break for Twyford. He is well regarded and respected, and in different circumstances would have won the nomination and very probably the seat.

He may need to wait a while to get a safe seat in Auckland. Mt Roskill may come up in 2014. I suspect Manurewa and Manukau East will come up in 2011 also. Te Atatu could also come up in 2011 or 2014 arguably.

So who will be the candidate? Nominations close tomorrow. At this stage I would say it is between and .

Tags: , , ,

35 Responses to “Twyford not standing”

  1. Monty (949 comments) says:

    But the Tizard timebomb does not go away – it is merely deferred until the next list MP leaves parliament for any reason – such as another public tit upon which to suck – or a heart stops beating – or illness – or an implosion from within the ranks.

    The only safe thing for those who want Tizard to stay unemployed is that the chance of any Labour MP leaving for a better job than what they have is nearly zero – in the real world all Labour MP that are left (especially those on the list) must be considered ne

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Gooner (995 comments) says:

    I have previously commetned on this and knew it would happen.

    Bates stands. In 2011 Twyford stands and Bates gets a favourable list placing as a thank you for stepping aside fir Twyford.

    It’s pretty simple. She’s young and has time to “find” an electorate.

    [DPF: Getting an electorate MP to give up their seat for a colleague is about as easy as getting a donation from a deceased person]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Loco Burro (82 comments) says:

    Or he could run in Auckalnd Central, Waitakere or Maungakiekie and kick one of those jokers out! :)

    Twyford will get his chance, he will be an extremely strong candidate in any electorate. (he was quite impressive on Backbenxhes the other day as well)
    Running the revitilisation line is a smart move by Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    Phil will be an extraordinarily good MP for Auckland Central. Nikki Kaye your days are numbered …

    [DPF: Well he can only do better than Judith I suppose]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Bullitt (136 comments) says:

    Or he could stand for Mt Albert in 2011 if National wins the by election. Its unlikely but its not impossible.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. tvb (3,945 comments) says:

    Labour obviously think their majority is vulnerable so that clever little campaign vote Twyford get Tizard has worked. My congratulations to Cameron Slater.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    3 Green candidates nominated – all high on the Green list from the last General election.

    The “Tizard factor” from Twyford standing would have helped the Greens. But, alas, not to be.

    But the Nats can’t win it now either, for the same reason, so you Natties should all tactically vote for the Green candidate so Labour doesn’t win it. After all, the Greens have a Memorandum of Understanding with the Nats, and are working together on a (very limited, admittedly) range of policy areas in Parliament, and Labour are the outcasts who have no-one in Parliament giving them any support.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    DPF said: Well he can only do better than Judith I suppose.

    Who couldn’t?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. dad4justice (7,406 comments) says:

    Helen

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Pat (76 comments) says:

    Mt Albert is the first test for Andrew Little. By asking Tywford to step aside shows he has already lost his bottle. Henceforth he should always be known as Chicken Little.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. godruelf (52 comments) says:

    But its not just Tizard its the next 2 on the list as well that don’t inspire lot of confidence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    Toad

    The Green party have really peed me off recently. I gave you guys a donation last time because I thought that you had principles. Right now I want a refund.

    On the day that the Maori Party justifiably get really upset because tangata whenua will not have representation on the Auckland Council you guys sign a MOU with the nats.

    And you guys stand a candidate in what is a FPP election, winner takes all. If (it is a huge if) the Nats win Mt Albert then the left may as well give up for 10 years and let the right wing destroy any chance of any environmental protection.

    And what do you do? Stand a candidate that may affect Labour’s chance of regaining the seat.

    I think that Nandor’s organic contributions to meetings has affected your thinking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Chthoniid (1,967 comments) says:

    Yet Mickysavage, the Nats conservation policy shows strong signs of having taken onboard the ideas of Paul Jansen. Labour didn’t have a conservation policy going into last years election. All I got from them was the 2005 stuff.

    Wetapunga now have a captive breeding programme, after recommemdations that this be used in 1998. And I have some nice photos of John Key opening the new falcon enclosure at Otorohonga (with Shane Ardin) via CMaG.

    Conservative parties tend to have a strong stewardship ethic (rather than intrinsic value ethic). The best way to cement in environmental protection is to make is to create a broad, cross-party consensus. If you insist on the Green tactical gambit of sulking on the extreme left, then you risk getting taken for granted by centre-left parties and ignored by centre-right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207 comments) says:

    So good to see MickySavage see the reality of the Socialist Dilema.

    Helen Clark already had that plum job lined up.

    A vote for Twyford does get Tizard worked a treat.

    The constituency of the MT Albert that Helen made her own will depend so much on the National approval ratings, and especially those of John Key.

    Given they are likely to be at an all time high at election time. His smiles and confidence, versus the scarper mentality of Dear Leader.

    I forecast a deluge of Blue votes, and a splitting of the Left voting patterns in 4 ways.

    This will certainly re-inforce the mood of the country, and bring even more optimism.

    Happy Times.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. clintheine (1,560 comments) says:

    Toad – “3 Green candidates all high from the list”.. and that is supposed to give us peace of mind and inspire confidence?

    So we are to expect; Mojo Mathers, Mikaere Curtis and Mike Ward then?
    http://www.greens.org.nz/people/candidates

    Good god, we’re doomed – if you had a prayer of winning :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    mickysavage said: And what do you do? Stand a candidate that may affect Labour’s chance of regaining the seat.

    And do I give a stuff? Actually, does anyone? The electorate doesn’t really count, given the NACT government will have a majority anyway whatever the outcome.

    The Greens don’t want to stay at 7% of the vote, and the most likely voters to move to us are Labour’s.

    Your Labour-led Government spent 9 years pissing around with climate change, initially supported a carbon tax, then put it all on hold because you did a deal with the reactionary and populist NZF and UF parties, and then finally introduced a weak emissions trading scheme the Greens struggled to agree to support so late in the piece that the Nats could cancel it before it even started.

    Labour also maintained the discriminatory In-Work Family Support Tax Credit they has opposed when National introduced its equivalent in the 90s, and failed to do anything to raise core benefit levels. And Labour’s “Clean Streams Accord” was a PR exercise that allowed water quality on streams and rivers to severely deteriorate under their watch.

    So why do you think the Greens owe Labour anything regarding an electoral accommodation in Mt Albert?

    Tell your Labour mates to put up, or shut up. If Labour wants Green support, then talk to our leadership re policy accommodations. Otherwise, you won’t get electoral accommodations. Or talk about both. So far, Labour has operated in FPP mode, and doesn’t seem to want either on the agenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Chthoniid (1,967 comments) says:

    Best piece I’ve read from you there, Toad. Thanks :D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    clintheine said: So we are to expect; Mojo Mathers, Mikaere Curtis and Mike Ward then?

    Actually, none of them. I was a wee bit surprised Mikaere didn’t nominate, as he lives locally, although on the Maori roll. Would ahve been a good candidate. But there are three at least equally as good with their names in.

    Keep guessing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    Toad

    “And do I give a stuff? Actually, does anyone? The electorate doesn’t really count, given the NACT government will have a majority anyway whatever the outcome.”

    I see that you did not get past 101 of NZ MMP Political studies.

    “The Greens don’t want to stay at 7% of the vote, and the most likely voters to move to us are Labour’s.”

    Have 15% and a few more seats and curse that the left can only get to 40% of the total vote. So you get 20 MPs and the country’s environment goes to pac because the right is in control. Do you really mean this?

    “Your Labour-led Government spent 9 years pissing around with climate change, initially supported a carbon tax, then put it all on hold because you did a deal with the reactionary and populist NZF and UF parties, and then finally introduced a weak emissions trading scheme the Greens struggled to agree to support so late in the piece that the Nats could cancel it before it even started. ”

    You guys should have campaigned better and got ONE more seat and things would have been different. Labour had to go with Peters and Dunne (gasp) because that was the way the numbers were. If Labour went with the Greens they would have lost the first vote. So why should they have done this?

    How do you feel about the current Government’s climate change policies? What do you think about the ETS review committee or the destruction of the NZ biodiesel industry or the reversal of the inefficient lightbulb ban? Want to relitigate the possibility that climate change may not be happening? Is this really better than what you had under Labour?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Ed Snack (1,540 comments) says:

    Toad, you’re deluded if you think the Greens have a snowballs chance of even getting close to taking Mt Albert. You might get 10%, but frankly I doubt it, and if you roll up your head wackos on the campaign trail, like Delahunty, then you would be lucky to get 5%. Your major role will be to make a National victory more certain by splitting a certain number of left votes. Now, that is probably exactly the intention, make Labour take you more seriously, but it’s hardly a goal to crow about. And candidates, if you are serious that they in any way ressemble ward, Mathers, or Curtis, 8% tops.

    As an ex Mt Albert voter, I think it is close to a National win on paper. The residual Clark loyalty may help although the organisation is pretty thin on the ground these days. Failing any last minute bombshells of scandal, plus a good active candidate, my pick is a close National win, but I’m not totally convinced National has the wit to select a suitable candidate.

    [DPF: In the last three by-elections, a minor party has come very close to winning the seat]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. gingercrush (153 comments) says:

    Mickey you need to shut up. The only one that doesn’t get ” NZ MMP Political Studies (whatever the fuck that is) is you. The Greens would be mad to not stand a candidate. By-elections is all about the issues of the day. The Super City angle could be huge. The Greens likewise can push an environment issue surrounding roading. Does the Green standing a candidate mean Labour can lose the seat? Sure it does. But this is one by-election where everyone needs to play.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Say Goodbye to Hollywood (552 comments) says:

    As a current Mt Albert voter I will have much pleasure in not voting for any of the idiots from the left. Bring it on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    mickysavage said: Have 15% and a few more seats and curse that the left can only get to 40% of the total vote. So you get 20 MPs and the country’s environment goes to pac because the right is in control.

    Hey, it is you Labour guys who stuffed up (Taito Phillip Field, David Benson-Pope, Mark Burton re Electoral Finance Act, continued tolerance of Winston Peters) and let the Nats in. Don’t blame the Greens.

    You guys should have campaigned better and got ONE more seat and things would have been different. Labour had to go with Peters and Dunne…

    No – they could have got the Maori Party on board. But they perceived them as traitors (esp Tariana) so would not contemplate going there. It was Labour who expropriated potential Maori property rights to the seabed and foreshore for racist political advantage, and we still haven’t seen them backtrack from that opportunist decision.

    How do you feel about the current Government’s climate change policies?

    Bloody awful! But not much more awful than I felt about Labour’s. Both Labour and national are either clueless or are burying their heads in the sand re climate change. The only thing positive I can say about either of them in that regard is that they are not wrong all the time, as Rodney is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. clintheine (1,560 comments) says:

    Toad – YES! I want a strong stroppy Green Party! I agree that you guys have been soft cocks with Labour for too long – so I expect you to come out with all guns blazing.

    The stronger your party gets the better the public will understand you properly. You guys have had it too good for too long.

    Labour must be pissed at you guys, but that’s because they want you to fall into line as you usually do.

    Mikaere’s comments about why he wanted to be a candidate were pretty wishywashy, so you’ll need to do better than him. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Loco Burro (82 comments) says:

    Ed Snack – “the organisation is pretty thin on the ground these days”

    Where did you get this bollocks from? I have witnessed the Mt Albert Labour Party organisation in action and they are extremely well organised. They have a high level of activists compared to many electorates, even since Clark quit.
    I have enjoyed arguing with the Mt Albert Labour members in the past, and they are very motivated, I would not sell them short as you are clearly attempting to do.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. clintheine (1,560 comments) says:

    Er Toad, Rodney has a fair bit more knowledge than you do. I’d stick to slamming Labour today as it seems to be the only clever thing to come out of your mouth in ages.

    Unless your arrogance of environmental issues stuffs it all up for you…. even I don’t say my opponents are *always* wrong. I’d pull my head in about Rodney :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    clintheine said: even I don’t say my opponents are *always* wrong. I’d pull my head in about Rodney

    Hey, Clint it was a reference to a Gareth Renowden post on Hot Topic last year that I thought most people here would be familiar with – hence my tounge in cheek comment.

    There are actually things I agree with Rodney on too – especially re civil liberties and protection of the individual from the excesses of the state. Oh, and on property rights, as I mentioned in the Foreshore and seabed reference above.

    Problem for me with ACT though, is I haven’t found anything I can agree with Garrett on, and his positioning is subverting that of Rodney and ACT as “the Liberal Party”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. spector (180 comments) says:

    If I was Phil Twyford, and I was smart I’d seriously consider standing as the Green candidate. It would consolidate the left vote without changing the status of Judith Tizzard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    The stronger your party gets the better the public will understand you properly. You guys have had it too good for too long.
    It it me or does that not make sense?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. getstaffed (9,188 comments) says:

    Labour rejuvenated its ranks before the last election and has a crop of new MPs in Parliament.

    Rejuvenated?!? WTF – their talent pool was, and remains puddle deep. The way NZPA report this you’d think that Labour was storming the political fortress to the publics’ collective amazement. Remind me what Phil Goff’s preferred PM rating is again?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Tuija (220 comments) says:

    test test1

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Circe (13 comments) says:

    My money is on Meg Bates. She ticks all the boxes for the electorate. Almost a Helen Mini-Me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. MikeE (555 comments) says:

    Greens should nominate nandor and put a strong campaign in. I’d probably vote for him. Would be good to get someone who isn’t a complete communist back into the green party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. georgedarroch (305 comments) says:

    Toad, Labour will run a very good electorate campaign. If the Greens want to take a proper crack at it they need to do the same. Otherwise you might as well just stay home.

    It might make good practice for running electorate campaigns in the general election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. clintheine (1,560 comments) says:

    Tuija – it makes complete sense. The Greens still haven’t got the media publicising their hard left background as much as they should. Some people think the Greens are only about the environment when in reality they are anti business, anti capitalist and anti choice.

    If the Greens get into a position where they would challenge Labour the press would delve a lot further into their background and THEN they would be completely unelectable. Just like the Alliance and the National Front.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.