Hooton on Goff and ETS
September 11th, 2009 at 1:00 pm by David FarrarMatthew Hooton writes (offline) in the NBR:
The clock is surely ticking on Phil Goff’s leadership. New Zealand’s most accurate polls, TV3 and Roy Morgan, both put Labour below 30%, half the support of National and its partners.
Worse for Mr Goff, while the Greens are secure in Parliament, Labour’s other essential ally, Winston Peters, has no chance of resurrection.
And Anderton is retiring. That means Labour and the Greens between them need to get at least 62 seats. They currently have 52 but on the latest polls are below 50.
Mr Goff does not help himself with his choice of issues. This Tuesday he used all his parliamentary questions to quiz John Key on whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Mfat) had advised sending SAS troops back to Afghanistan before the cabinet decided to do so.
Mr Key easily swatted Mr Goff away, saying that no specific advice had been given. The cabinet would decide about putting kiwi soldiers into harm’s way, not bureaucrats.
Yet Mr Goff pushed on, asking increasingly detailed questions about what Mfat may have told Mr Key about security in central Asia. …
It’s difficult to see what Mr Goff hoped to achieve. Afghanistan is far from a driver of voting behaviour.Informed observers also know that Ms Clark was so committed to Afghanistan that she broke up her coalition with the Alliance and called an early election on the issue in 2002.
I’ve said it many times before. Labour keep concentrating on Wellington issues, not issues that connect with the average voter.
And a useful reminder of how committed Labour was to the war in Afghanistan.
Were Mr Goff prime minister, it’s likely he’d be far quicker than Mr Key to provide military support to the United States.
Most embarrassing, Mr Goff’s parliamentary attack coincided with revelations that Ms Clark had secretly sent kiwi spies to Afghanistan.
As her foreign affairs and then defence minister, there is no doubt Mr Goff was intimately involved in that decision. Only parliamentary rules prevented him being called a hypocrite.
The thought that Labour would turn down President Obama’s request for assistance from the SAS, after lending them to President Bush on three previous occasions is farcical. Of course they would have.
Mr Goff’s last hope lies with the emissions trading scheme (ETS). Labour understands that Mr Key became prime-minister-assumptive when he stood with Ms Clark on smacking.
Mr Goff knows that if a deal is done, he and Mr Key will stand as equals. Labour’s broad approach to climate change will be implicitly endorsed.
More importantly, the National/Maori Party/ACT Government would be seen as dysfunctional.
The business, farming and iwi sectors would be furious.
The ratings agencies and influential media such as the Wall Street Journal would continue lampooning New Zealand for our stupidity.
What international investment that might be possible in the midst of a global recession would evaporate.
National would get the blame for the $5,400 a year the ETS will cost a family of four. And Mr Goff would be back in the game.
It is definitely an opportunity for Goff. His problem is whether he has enough control of his caucus to get them to back any compromise he does with Key.
September 11th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
If Goff revealed that NZ has sent spies to Afghanistan then he has committed a security blunder. What NZer will be safe in the hands of the Taliban armed with that information. “You are spies” they will say and shoot the NZers unlucky enough to get caught. Thank -you Phil Goff.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Don’t Labour realise that they are still living their “Past Glories” of their so called social revolution.
If they don’t get over such as the Springbok tour I cannot see them ever becoming a useful opposition, and certainly not under Goofy who dwells on the past ……………………”when I…………………..”
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
“The thought that Labour would turn down President Obama’s request for assistance from the SAS, after lending them to President Bush on three previous occasions is farcical. Of course they would have.”
well yes the theory is Labour are just opposing what ever National does just for the sake of it but they have maintained this very odd position for a while now.
Neither Goff nor Shearer show any evidence they’re familiar with anything Obama or his foreign policy team have said on Afghanistan. Which doesn’t bode well for Labour developing foreign policy.
But then they took no notice of how Obama ran his campaign against McCain so it’s not surprising they’re not paying attention now. And having no ideas they’ve reverted to the sort of foreign policy they had as students.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Leave Phil and his mates alone.
They’re doing a great job.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
And by continually questioning on Afghanistan and all that Keith-Locke-stuff Labour continually encroaches into the Greens area thereby reducing their voice and profile and that’s Labour’s only coalition partner. Silly.
I also think the ETS is a big opportunity for Goff but Key, seeing Goff on 7% or whatever it is, will not want to give him any opportunity.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
as much as I think Labour should actually engage with what the Obama admin is saying, and suspect that somewhere there still lurks anti-Vietnam demo fantasies, I doubt they’ll be encroaching too far into the Green’s craziness. From the Green’s website -
“And on this 8th anniversary of 9/11, what has changed? ”Progressive” Obama follows in the footsteps of George II, while Kiwis discover their government has been secretly supporting the US in Afghanistan with spies for years.”
scare quotes even.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Philin is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he turns dog on the Nats ETS plans claiming they will bankrupt the country the Melons will spit the dummy. If he says the Nats haven’t gone far enough in their emissions plans, the general population will be more aware of the damage this will do come 2011, then calling for greater penalties will go down like a shower of shit to the voters. He’s stuffed.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Since ACT and Maori Party issued minority dissenting reports on Nick Smith’s brain dead ETS proposal the PM has pursued Labour’s votes to get it into place. Hopefully Hooton’s pointing out an additional unintended political consequence of the PM’s current intent will get his attention. Something needs to, because rational argument isn’t.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
To pursue the ETS would be to repeat the mistake of the Anti-Smacking referendum and Boscowen private members bill.
The ETS is a catastrophic waste of money for zero benefit.
If Phil Goff were to contribute to NZ’s downfall by supporting the ETS, it would an even greater tragedy.
Vote:September 11th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Its National policy to support an ETS, thats what they campaigned on last election. Next APEC meeting would be interesting if we ditched the ETS.
Vote:September 12th, 2009 at 9:47 am
A deal between National and Labour over an ETS would be a win for New Zealand because it would provide stability and predictability for business. That is more important that getting a win for any politician.
That said, a deal would be an even bigger win for Key than for Goff – it would almost make him a non-politician (and most people would far prefer to vote for a non-politician than a politician).
I think the perception might be that Goff had been forced to agree because he was in such a weak position.
Vote: