Greens Selection and Ranking
I blogged previously about how some Green Party members had taken out advertisements in newspapers urging members to support a rule change requiring the members to have more say in the ranking of the Green List. At the moment their involvement is at the discretion of the Executive.
I’ve now got a copy of the current “process” for Green candidate selection and list ranking. It is attached here – GP Candidate Selection and List Ranking process April 2007-1
This is not part of the constitution adopted by the members. Unlike National, which has almost all parts of the process in the party’s rules, the Greens have left it up to the ruling Executive to determine the rules and process. Very top heavy for a party that claims the opposite.
First the Executive established a Candidate Selection and List Ranking Committee. Now in National the List Ranking Committee has two thirds of its members appointed directly by grassroots members at party conferences.
The Greens Executive appoints the entire Candidate Selection and List Ranking Committee.
This committee has the power to block a member from being a candidate if they do not think candidates will make a positive contribution to the Greens.
This is considerably more centralised than in National. The National Board does have a veto over candidates, but it is used very very rarely and only for patently unsuitable candidates – normally if people have criminal offending etc.
The interviews with potential candidates to determine suitability are done at local level with a pre-selection committee of nine, five being electorate members, two regional reps and two national reps. The locals have the majority on the pre-selection committee.
So in two major ways the Greens are significantly more centralised than National.
Then we have their list ranking. They have three stages of list ranking, compared to two for National. National is:
- Regional rankings done by grassroots delegates at party conferences
- The five regional lists are combined into one national list, and adjusted, by the national list ranking committee – two thirds of whim are elected by grassroot delegates at regional conferences.
The Greens process is:
- An initial rating by the Co-Leaders, Co-convenors, Policy Co-convenors, Candidates and one or two delegates from each electorate. (Rather weird to have candidates themselves voting)
- A ranked list is sent out to all members, who rank the candidates. The inital rankings are very influential, but members sometimes change them (for example they promoted Mike Ward last time).
- The Executive on the advice of the CSLRC can then adjust the result of the member’s ballot.
I do like giving all members the vote, and think this is good. Easier to do of course in a smaller party.
Now in terms of what these adjustments are, the Executive has left no room for doubt. They have quotas for everything. The Executive has decreed the following:
- a minimum of 10% of candidates shall be of Maori descent
- a maximum of 60% of candidates shall be male; a maximum of 60% of candidates shall be female
- a minimum of 40% of candidates shall be from the North Island; a minimum of 20% of candidates shall be from the South Island
- a minimum of 10% of candidates shall be under 40
Overall the Executive is very powerful. They appoint the CSLRC which can stop a member from being a candidate, and gets the final say on the party list.
But it doesn’t stop there. The entire process is at their discretion. Again, in National there are scores and scores of rules spelling out how candidate selection and list ranking works. The Executive has to follow these rules. In the Greens, the Executive has basically unfettered discretion.
The fact some members have taken to advertising in newspapers for a rule change, suggests a few members want this changed.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:08 pm
What no quota for Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender?
Not very PC in view of the Messiahs latest declaration.
Time they got to work on it.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:12 pm
5.a maximum of 10% of candidates will have triple digit IQ’s
6.a minimum of 90% shall with able to recite the Communist Manifesto verbatim
7.a minimum of 10% shall be adept at throwing fleeces in the only Buddhist shearing gang in Aotearoa
8.a minimum of 90% shall be vociferously and demonstrably anti-Israel
9.a minimum of 90% shall be vociferously and demonstrably pro-Muslim
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Don’t like them?
Don’t vote for them.
Where’s this chip on your shoulder taking you?
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:42 pm
A very centralised process indeed, as is the way of the left.
Giving candidates the ability to vote at stage one is probably why the Greens have had such difficulty rejuvenating their party list over the years.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:43 pm
“Where’s this chip on your shoulder taking you?”
If you’re talking about the Bloggeur, he’s a bit of a politics tragic so just can’t help himself in my professional opinion.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:44 pm
RRM: In case you have not noticed it I extensively blog on electoral issues. I have covered such issues for all parties. I even have criticised National’s decision at the last election to protect the Caucus.
So no chip on the shoulder. Just exposing the reality behind the spin.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:46 pm
Very interesting. The Greens usually make a fetish of decentralisation of power.
It’s also interesting how silent the Green leadership and activists have been on this issue – they’ve mostly gone to ground. I raised the question on a “General Debate” blog post over at Frogblog to see if anyone was willing to explain what was going on, and answer given was “Frogblog is primarily a parliamentary blog” – hence we don’t debate issues about the Green Party! However, another activist, “icehawke” has been a bit more forthcoming, but plays the issue down to say the ads have been taken out by an over-zealous member concerned with boring detail. You can read this stuff here:
http://blog.greens.org.nz/2010/06/02/general-debate-2nd-june-2010/
I’ve put forward my analysis in a blog post here:
http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2010/06/the-green-party-list-selection-conflict.html
Helpfully, a few Green activists have now left comments at the end of the blog post to correct some mistakes in my analysis and detail.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Didn’t the Greens manipulate the list after the election at one stage? I vaguely recall one of those occasions where the Greens have existing MPs resign in order to bring someone new from the list, that they had the top ranked candidates step aside in order to bring someone in from lower down the list.
Was it Norman? Were the wishes of the list-ranking members ignored in order to bring Norman in to parliament?
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:53 pm
“Was it Norman? Were the wishes of the list-ranking members ignored in order to bring Norman in to parliament?”
Nah he got in under the Ginga (Ranga in his case) quota requirements surely.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:54 pm
The Greens are one party whose executive I can’t seem to find on the internet…
Does anyone know where to find the executive make up..?
Does anyone even know who there party president is..?
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:55 pm
Does anybody really care?
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:58 pm
Yip…
June 3rd, 2010 at 3:05 pm
No, I don’t. I would prefer the Luddites, a retrograde political party who would happily send us back to the Stone Age, to go under 5% of the votes and to disappear from the political scene.
However, that could be wishful thinking on my part considering the large number of gullible people, callow youths, and irrational worshippers of Gaia around NZ. But, there is always hope.
June 3rd, 2010 at 3:16 pm
How does Labour do it? Or is it too horrible to contemplate?
June 3rd, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Labour?
1. Helen Clark SMSes the list from New York.
2. Judith Tizard is in a prominent place, even tho she won an award for being the world’s worst MP.
3. Phil Goff complains…
4. …but just has to put up with it because Clark is still polling higher than he is.
June 3rd, 2010 at 3:47 pm
Off-topic but related:
Didn’t take Delahunty long to diss the sistas….
http://blog.greens.org.nz/2010/06/03/miss-universe-contestants-at-parliament/
June 3rd, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Clearly some animals are more equal than others…
June 3rd, 2010 at 4:31 pm
That Delahunty is a miserable sort
“It must have been a bit like time travelling to see them all emanating “I am not just a sex object” for the benefit of the Parliamentarians.”
Nobody would ever consider mad Cath a sex object, perhaps she is a just a tad jealous.
June 3rd, 2010 at 4:33 pm
Toad, Toad, TOAD, where are you?
Usually SO vocal.
June 3rd, 2010 at 4:43 pm
At the moment the Greens are having a massive wank off over saving “free” borrowing from the Tauranga Library.Typical of the bludger mindset that they rejoice in people wanting a freebe off of the backs of ratepayers.
As we have plenty of private “libraries” like Video ezy,fatso,McEntees,Hire pool etc (think about it) then for what possible reason do we need state run book lending centres?
June 3rd, 2010 at 5:31 pm
Does Toad regard her as a sex object perhaps? That might be why he is otherwise engaged Auberon.
June 3rd, 2010 at 6:49 pm
In their religious zeal to be fair and equal these dumb fucks would probably throw out someone with real skill because they didn’t meet the right quota. When these clowns work out life isn’t equal of fair they might make some headway.
June 3rd, 2010 at 6:57 pm
Talent has nothing to do with Green party selection, you could be the most able (talented is the wrong word to use when describing the Greens) candidate but unless you believe in the Greens version of the Treaty then you will never be selected.
June 3rd, 2010 at 8:25 pm
Where’s Hashish Henry when you need him?
Come on Phool, I thought you’d have something to say…….eh
June 3rd, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Does anyone even know who the Green Party President is..?
I mean all the rest of the political parties Presidents are so vocal, Andrew Little is on TV more than Goff, am I the only one wondering why I’ve never heard the Greens President speaking out..?
June 3rd, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Jeremy:
Perhaps their President looks like Zaphod Beeblebrox with a male and female head (one brown one white of course) and as such the TV stations won’t allow him/her/it to be televised before midnight as he/her/it would frighten the children and we all go to bed too early to ever see him/her/it.
Just a thought. But I agree with you who is it?
June 3rd, 2010 at 8:49 pm
Given the rhetoric on this site about the Greens being no hopers on a soapbox, you think everyone here would be constantly talking about how they wanted to enslave us or make us poor, or very, very curious about why this person is never speaking out..?
Is it possibly one of their MPs..?
June 3rd, 2010 at 8:56 pm
@Auberon 4:33 pm
Here I am – can’t be here 24/7 – I’m not independently wealthy, so do have to earn some money sometimes.
This stuff is internal to the Green Party. My personal view is that I consider the list ranking process should be determined by the Party’s the Constitution, rather than its Executive. But even with it being a process established by the Party’s Executive, it has been far more democratic in practice than that of any other party. What other party has its members rank the list?
June 3rd, 2010 at 8:58 pm
Toad
If that is the case then how on earth can you defend the way the executive rorted the system (and went against the wishes of the party) to allow Comrade Norman to enter the house?
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:21 pm
Ah toad, good to see you. I’m interested in your response to KIA over at the Israel Wrong thread.
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Any party that has Mad Cath in the top 10 is seriously lacking in ability
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:29 pm
Yeah, they’re suffering Mad Cath Disease
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:33 pm
If anyone wants a fucking good laugh, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxu5xWqaaMI
It seems she has convinced herself that, despite her skin, she is a pure Maori.
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:35 pm
she is just batshit crazy!
surely toad cant be a fan
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Buggered if I know nick she seemed to be speaking Samoan or somesuch today in question time when she addressed the speaker. At first I thought she had had a race change to go with her obvious sex change (from something to God knows what) but then I hear other MP’s warbling in jigaboo.
Anyone know WTF that was all about??
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Toad is deeply in love dime. Show some respect you Philistine.
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:44 pm
Toad, do you know who the President is..?
I feel like a conspiracy nut… Bush did 9/11..!
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Moammar Gaddafi.
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:53 pm
Past presidents include
Pol Pot..
Karl Marx…
Joseph Stalin…
June 3rd, 2010 at 10:13 pm
Krazy Katherine and dour faced Commie cow Sue Bwadford. They must have got up to so much fun on Friday nights.