Nippert on Bradford
October 25th, 2009 at 9:56 am by David FarrarMatt Nippert from the HoS profiles retiring Green MP Sue Bradford. A long article – here are some extracts:
Greg Fleming, founder and head of the arch-conservative Maxim Institute, has clashed repeatedly with the Green MP in recent years. On smacking and prostitution reform Bradford describes the organisation as a “deadly enemy”, but Fleming says he’s sad to see a fellow ideologue go.
“The thing that’s been delightful about our friendship – and we’ve disagreed over almost everything – is that she’s actually very clear about why she believes what she believes,” says Fleming.
A nice compliment.
She says she had high hopes that Jim Anderton’s breakaway party could shatter the male-led old boys’ club of national politics. “But of course in New Labour I was right back into an old patriarchal model – with bells on.”
Bradford quit in 1990, barely a year after she had joined, and refused to take part in the Alliance because of bad blood with Anderton. She joined the Greens in 1998 only after they split from the Alliance.
(Asked about his brief political liaison with Bradford, Jim Anderton declined to comment.)
Sue just got out early. Jim made very clear later on that he would leave unless complete control of the party was ceded to him. McCarten and Harre refused, so he bailed.
While Bradford was able to eventually recruit both John Key and Helen Clark into her drive to remove the Section 59 defence, resulting in a resounding 113-7 victory when the third reading was passed, her inability to connect with the public has been labelled a “catastrophic failure of propaganda” by a source who previously worked for the Greens.
“It ended up being labelled a bill against smacking, which it never was,” says the source.
It did not start off like that. The original bill merely removed S59. But the final bill was a bill against smacking. It basically said you can use reasonable force in numerous situations except correction.
Turei defends the change, saying it has been a conscious process.
She does not openly criticise Bradford, but it’s impossible to hide Turei’s differences with the MP who unsuccessfully battled her for the leadership.
Turei explains the evolution in Green thinking: “I don’t want to
exclude people who don’t hold that old left-wing culture, that can’t relate to that old 1970s hard-core working-class struggle.”While Turei insists that Green policy remains unchanged, she supports moving the party away from under Labour’s wing and into a position where they could – conceivably – work with National in the future.
Says Bradford: “I’ve always been clear that if we wanted to be a party that would enter coalition with National, I would leave it.
As I have said numerous time. The Greens will never choose a National-led Govt over a Labour-led Govt. But they need to be able to hold open that possibility to stop Labour treating the like a doormat.
The most I would ever expect to see between the Greens and National is an agreement to abstain on supply and confidence.
THERE’S ALSO the possibility of a return to politics – albeit not in Wellington. Auckland Supercity mayoral candidate and Manukau Mayor Len Brown has expressed an interest in having her around the council table.
“I do support Len Brown for mayor and think he’s a great guy, and I live in Manukau at the moment,” she says, non-committally.
“Standing for council would be a big job and I think the process of forming tickets and who will be on those tickets will be tense. I don’t want to cut off the option, I’m quite open to it, but that does not a campaign or ticket make.”
Not yet, but Deputy Mayor of Auckland must be a tempting prize for a woman who quit national politics partly because she never got to be a Minister. I can’t imagine Sue would want to just be a Councillor, so if she is on the ticket, it will be fair to assume she has been promised the Deputy spot.
Related posts:
- Greens abandon Bradford, she claims
- Bradford quits
- Bradford hurting
- Bradford threatened to quit if Greens are not left-wing enough
October 25th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Turei “conceivably-work with National” . Priceless, poor old Philu will be shitting bricks, there is a God.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 11:54 am
turei also said there is ‘no way’ she could work with this nationa/keyl govt..
(and when in the greens..i argued against the demonising of national voters..favouring a ‘softly softly’ approach..)
and bradford as deputy-mayor..?
or..in a new leftwing party..as co-leader with hone harawira..
whoar..!
eh..?
wouldn’t they/that rock ‘n roll’..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Bradford is a relic from a bygone era.
Vote:I would even say people like her were necessary at one time, but like other “war time” leaders they are just no good when the war is over.
It is ridiculous that the greens rule out National, the only reason to do so is because of the influence of ideologue relics like Bradford.
Quite frankly I am looking forward to the possibility of a “green” party that actually cares more about the environment than a progressive socialist agenda.
The greens could play an important role in NZ politics if they can learn to compromise on the non environmental issues.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Phool
Oh yes, a new bludgers party led by John Harawhira and Comrade Bradford is just what we need.
Hell, they might even get as much as 0.3% of the vote.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“..It is ridiculous that the greens rule out National, the only reason to do so is because of the influence of ideologue relics like Bradford…”
um..!..!
no..!
how about policies that fuck over the poorest/weakest..?
and just favor those who already ‘have’..?
d’yareckon that could be a reason..?
oh to see turei/norman..as part of a national govt..
‘supporting’ the giving of the profitable bits of our state-run insurance-system..
to the australian insurance companies..eh..?
not to mention opening up the conservation estate to (aussie again?) mining companies..?
dream on..!..eh..?
one thing key has guaranteed..
is that in 2011..turei/norman will be confirming they will not be going with national/supporting a national govt..
..of this ilk..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
and..y’know..!
just in a schadenfreude sense..
imagine the wailing/gnashing of teeth/rending of garments..?
of those righties who brought the super-city to being..
being forced to gaze upon the smiling visage of sue bradford..
up the top of the power-tree..
..in that/(their?) super-city..?
that rocks…!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Hey phool, how long you planning on pushing the Australian insurance companies canard?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
philu sense of entitlement is nauseating. What an arrogant and lazy oxygen thief.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Hey, as long as Phil and the Greens keep believing that things like he just said above are in fact the truth, the public will never give them any real authority. I mean, you don’t give children matches, same principle here.
Keep talking phil, what else do the Greens think is going to happen?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
“..Hey phool, how long you planning on pushing the Australian insurance companies canard?..”
what ‘canard’..?
key gave a speech in sydney .. before the last election..(that was woefully under-reported/examined/noted here..)
where he promised a gathering of those insurance companies mavens..
that he would privatise a.c.c. for them..
(which wd give them revenue of 3-4 billion..
and profits of about $200 million a year..)
and this is what he is now doing..
where is the ‘canard’..?
these are provable facts..
(if you still doubt..i can post the links..
just gizza yell..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
ACC isn’t being privatised, tool.
What have you got against dem furriners, anyway?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
give us the link phil, and at the same time, pray explain why in your view it’s a terrible thing.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
“..Keep talking phil, what else do the Greens think is going to happen?..”
i have absolutely nothing to do with the green party..
so wouldn’t have a clue..what they ‘think’..about anything..
(i am just observing from the sidelines..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
phil, you can say that but its pretty clear from the actions of the Greens that they consult with you pretty closely before they make any major move. I mean you can tell that your wisdom and theirs is so close as to be inseparable.
You’re their Karl Rove, aren’t you. I know you can’t and won’t admit it and may even deny it, but that intellectual association meeting-of-the-minds thing is there for all to see, plain and simple.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
(..this is what i reported in early july 2008..)
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/national-has-plans-to-privatise-accand-should-they-do-thisaussie-insurance-companiesinsurers-will-make-a-killing-of-some-200-million/
“..Australian insurers are poised to make a $200 million killing if National wins power and goes ahead with an “informal” plan to privatise ACC, a broker’s report says.
The report, issued by the Australian broking arm of investment bank Merrill Lynch, said privatisation could unlock $2.1 billion in new premium income, adding an “incremental kick” of $200 million to the industry’s after-tax earnings.
Prime candidates for privatisation were the workers’ compensation and motor accident accounts.
“Publicly, as best we can identify, and contrary to the statements made by several insurers we have met with in New Zealand, the National Party has made no formal statement on its plans for the ACC,” the report by analyst Andrew Kearnan says.
“Informally, however, we understand the National Party has been very clear in saying it will privatise the ACC…”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Additionally philu is a blog-hog.
Is there no way to filter out his pathetic and expansive ‘posts’?
Is there some way we can dob him into the narcotics dept of the NZ Police?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Yeah phil, so why is this a bad thing?
As well as why is mining the conservation estate a bad thing within the frame of reference that Brownley’s put up: i.e. it’s not being raped
As well as, precisely how do the same economic policies that are followed by all of the world’s wealthiest nations “fuck over the poor?”
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
yeah swiftman..!
give them a call..!
say you know someone who admits to smoking pot..!
i’m sure they’ll ‘drop everything’..eh..?
and hey..!
you won’t be the first of the knuckle-draggers to do that..
eh..?..
(join the queue over on the right..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
I wonder what chance SB would have standing for the super city as she only got about 1969 votes in East Coast Bays last election.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
“..Yeah phil, so why is this a bad thing?..”
so//you are happy as about over 2 billion in gross revenue..
flowing into the coffers of the australian insurance industry..?
(instead of staying here..)
eh..?
well i guess we have to differ there..eh..?
i actually don’t think that is such a crash-hot idea..
(and i can’t be fucked engaging in the listing of those obvious reasons..)
“..As well as, precisely how do the same economic policies that are followed by all of the world’s wealthiest nations “fuck over the poor?”
and that is just fucken hilarious..!
(once again..’ i can’t be fucked engaging in the listing of those obvious reasons.,”)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
“so//you are happy as about over 2 billion in gross revenue..flowing into the coffers of the australian insurance industry..?(instead of staying here..)”
The real point is not the $2B in gross revenue but the level of service that’s extracted from that money. If a private company can give better service for a given dollar spend and given the ACC bureaucracy that should not be difficult, then I have no problem with it philosophically.
But people like you won’t even entertain the idea. Liarbore’s the same when it canned the private prison when even the local iwi was urging them to keep it open.
Ideologically driven fruit-cakery is what you appear to accuse many conservatives of, when you lefties do it yourselves all the fucking time.
Are you fucking blind or just plain stupid?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
this is the same ‘benifit to consumer’ bullshit you lot bandied about when you ended the govt ‘monopoly’ on electricity..
and that all went well/as promised..
didn’t it..?
just the same old ‘govt. bad..!..’freemarket good..!’
you have used for decades..
meh..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
phil, on the odd occasion here where I’ve taken to commenting on Bradford’s reforms, I’ve always criticised them. Just like I’ve always criticised Fay and Richwhite and wondered why they weren’t given jail terms instead of knighthoods and just like I’ve always criticised the price they sold Telecom for. All of these things really stink and were quite stupid, but just because something has been poorly implemented, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the strategy was flawed.
You simply cannot run a business when you have political concerns entering into the equation: the two don’t mix just like oil and water. Commerce and politics have different considerations and drivers at every level: strategic and tactical.
The thing some people on the right do wrong is thinking the market is a panacea for every ill. It’s not: it’s a great determinant of efficiency, but that’s about the limit of its use. When you need to service political considerations such as helping those less able – young, old and frail – the market is lousy at providing for those people. That doesn’t mean that the market does not have any place whatsoever.
Being a fanatic is never a good idea and most people on the left appear fanatical about this subject. You certainly are and so are most of the Liarbore supporters and politicians. That’s because you lefties have created a cause celebre out of this – you’ve even given it a slogan “the failed policies of the 90′s.” This is a real shame for the good of the country because that kind of thinking is a recipe for disaster and now you’ve created that cause you can’t back away from it.
If only the reef-fish would get this simple fact through their thick skulls NZ would have a fighting chance with its living standards but because they’re political children they’ve been sucked in by your insidious evil and disingenuous sloganeering and now many people on the street including highly intelligent ones have no fucking idea that their sincerely held views on how NZ should be structured are in fact naive fantasies based on false premises deliberately fed to them by evil politicians who are doing it not because they believe it but because it gives them a base.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
“..You simply cannot run a business when you have political concerns entering into the equation: the two don’t mix just like oil and water. Commerce and politics have different considerations and drivers at every level: strategic and tactical…”
precisely why you cannot allow business to control/unduely influence politics..
if only for the reason the last thing business has in mind..
is the common good..
they are more than happy to fuck us/the environment/our health..
all in the name of profit..for them..
(the food-industry is the one that is screaming for some serious arse-kicking..
they peddle foul/unhealthy muck..
and would be first in line for ‘regulation’/cracking down on..)
“..Being a fanatic is never a good idea and most people on the left appear fanatical about this subject..”
um..!..didn’t you notice..?..that that model has both fucked our environment..
and eaten global economies..
through pure greed..
you’ve had decades of doing/trying this..
and have brought us to these twin crises..of didintergrating economies..and a tanking environment..
time for a new model..eh..?
(and that/any new model..does not include giving our state/local-owned acc..to the (slavering on the sidelines) australian insurance companies..
mm..kay..?..)
“..because they’re political children they’ve been sucked in by your insidious evil and disingenuous sloganeering and now many people on the street including highly intelligent ones have no fucking idea that their sincerely held views on how NZ should be structured are in fact naive fantasies based on false premises deliberately fed to them by evil politicians who are doing it not because they believe it but because it gives them a base..”
wow..!..that’s the national party 2008 election campaign..in a nutshell..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
reid, Don’t waste your time with philu. He’s a greedy and lazy conman who bludges off the workers and who tries to trick you into believing that hard working successful people are the real greedies. He’s trying to ‘sell you a bridge’.
In other words, philu is parasitic scum.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
and y’know the really funny thing..?
karl marx predicted all this..
that when capitalism went global..
that it would eat itself..
and this has now come to pass..
(tho’..(he forgot/failed to warn us.. it would also eat/devour the planet..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
“karl marx predicted all this..”
Did he also predict the collapse of Soviet Russia phil?
Swiftman, I’ve known phil since his first comment here. At least he’s been consistent. He’s a useful insight into the lefty mindset. Obviously, HE’s never going to change his mind, but by understanding his perspective, you get insights into why those with more open albeit mistaken minds, think the way they do. Personally, I can’t be arsed usually arguing with a lefty since they’re so transparent. Most of the time I tend not to but when I’m bored on a long weekend…
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
To a certain extent that’s true phil and don’t forget that those who make the decisions in those corporations are not some alien species but are actually people who have families and go to church and do volunteer work and all sorts of other things too. Lefties appear to fantasize that corporate executives are some separate vile evil breed of human beings bent on raping and killing but in fact they’re not and you’d know that if you weren’t so fanatical. A small number of them of course are complete wankers and bullies and just total pricks but the majority of them are nice ordinary people just like you and I. Unfortunately the income levels available and the opportunity to control and direct resources tends to attract people with large egos and that’s why at the higher levels you get the wankers. But they all operate within well-established legal and ethical frameworks and wo betide anyone who steps out of line. It’s not an inviting prospect for a middle-aged executive to go to prison.
It is a fact that their job is to maximise profit and it’s a fact that capitalism is open competition and companies compete with each other. So what? When elephants fight, the grass gets trampled. Are you saying that in order to protect the grass we shouldn’t have any elephants? They are rather useful, you know.
Yeah, in your vegan opinion. Newsflash phil. You don’t own the world. You have no more right to tell me what to eat than I do to come over to your place and force a steak down your fucking throat. I wish you’d get that cause I get a bit tired of your self-righteous vegan hand wringing claptrap. It’s one of the worst aspects of your various positions and you really should just shut the fuck about it. How would you like it if I told you ad infinitum that it was necessary for you to become a Christian because if you don’t you’ll go to Hell and I went on and on and on and on and on about it. It’s your choice phil, happy to give you info if you ask, but it’s your choice. I suggest you adopt the same attitude about carnivores because quite frankly phil, saving your soul of whole lot more important than the life of an animal and if I can shut up about that, you should be able to do the same about your little barrow.
Bzzt. As has been said many times, the capitalist system is not perfect but its a better alternative than any other we have. Greed is a vapid fleeting superficial motivation and it would be nice if humans could operate on a more spiritually elevating model. Unfortunately, reality is, we can’t. There is no alternative phil. If there is, name it. And puhlease, don’t mention the Commies. It doesn’t work. Never has, never will. What’s lacking is appropriate regulation and that requires politicians who are interested in the people and not in themselves. Unfortunately there are very few politicians in any country who are genuinely from that ilk, most of them are self-interested egotistical wankers just like those execs I mentioned above and the left has just as many if not more than the right. So what’s the answer phil? Be realistic please.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
The Phool Party would institute forced veganism and do-gooding for all. Party vote Phool for real leftism!
..im philip ure..
..and i aprove this mesage…
..eh?..
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
“..So what’s the answer phil? Be realistic please..”
the greed/avarice/self-interest/economic imperatives dictated by shareholders/the freemarket..
has to be countered/controlled by regulation protecting the common good..
had we that system in place..
our rivers would not now be fucked..
the global economy wouldn’t have fallen off a cliff..
and ‘food’-manufacturers wouldn’t be anble to be poisoning us by peddling unhealthy muck..
disguised/marketed as ‘healthy-food’..(and i don’t just mean meat/dairy..)
(want an example..?..start with breakfast cereals..)
so..y’know..!
and denigrate ‘commies’ all you like..
but karl marx predicted..a long time ago..
what has now come to pass..
ol’ karl..eh..?
(that must stick in yr craw a bit..eh..?..
i wonder what else he was ‘right’ about..eh..?)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Phool,
Vote:re your post at 3.40. You feeling ok? Lost your pipe?
I mean the layout … paragraphs and using caps, commas.
Almost presentable, the content was shit.
See what happens when you are not off your trolley?
October 25th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
“…regulation protecting the common good…”
So phil we have millions of words on the statutes now purporting to do just that.
What about that specifically would you change/add to?
And you still haven’t told me if Marx predicted the fall of Soviet Russia, and indeed why did Maoist China convert to a free-market system not to mention explaining the stellar success of the North Korean economy and what that’s doing for its people right now. I understand 9 million are currently facing starvation in the people’s paradise. How very peculiar. If it works so well, how come it actually hasn’t anywhere, or is that just western propaganda put out by the bankers?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
You mean the regulation that fucked up the world economies in the late 1970s?
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
“You mean the regulation that fucked up the world economies in the late 1970s?”
No I’m sure phil wasn’t talking about the regulations that made it illegal to take more than a few $100 out of the country and if you wanted to order a computer it took six months and eleven trips to Wgtn.
Not that regulation, surely.
Vote:October 25th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
“..See what happens when you are not off your trolley?..”
‘scuse me..!..while i kiss the sky..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:October 26th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Anyway, back on the topic at hand…I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:
An Andrew Williams/Philip Field ticket would attract more votes than a Len Brown/Sue Bradford one. I mean shit, Brown & Bradford? An iron curtain at the Bombays and another at the Brynderwyns, anyone?
Vote: