O’Connor got rolled

February 16th, 2011 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

When the Govt announced in August that the Government would be implementing high country rentals based on earning capacity it was welcomed by Labour’s Damien O’Connor as “a good principle” and one that offered a “principled position” that would be “welcomed by farmers”. Damien, one of ’s few farmers, said the decision reflected ’s position.

But last night when the Bill came up for its first reading Damien had clearly been rolled and  Labour withdrew its support with giving what can only be described as a spite and hate filled speech calling the policy

  • “rent reductions being given to millionaires”
  • “A sop from National to its farming mates”
  • “Governing in the interests of narrow few”
  • ” a small number of rich people are getting millions of dollars at the expense of taxpayers”

So Labour shat over their own spokesperson, just to try and score some petty points. Another reason not ready to govern. Maybe an inquisitive jouranlist could ask Damien if he agrees with what David Parker said last night.

Tags: , ,

20 Responses to “O’Connor got rolled”

  1. k.jones (210 comments) says:

    that’s kinda like “we will not be increasing GST”, but in irrelevantland

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Graeme Edgeler (3,289 comments) says:

    How lucky that you both remembered that media release and was watching the first reading of the Crown Pastoral Land (Rent for Pastoral Leases) Amendment Bill!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. jaba (2,142 comments) says:

    I thought O’Connor was their spokesman for Agriculture and rural affairs?
    David the fidget Parker is making a deputy move maybe

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. alex Masterley (1,517 comments) says:

    David Parker is shallow and spite filled.
    What gets me is that in his former life, a partner in a major south island law firm, he would have acted for some of the farming families that he so clearly dislikes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Bevan (3,924 comments) says:

    I wonder how long before O’Connors press release is no longer available from their website.

    No matter I guess, screen shot taken.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    What gets me is that in his former life, a partner in a major south island law firm, he would have acted for some of the farming families that he so clearly dislikes.

    Parker & co probably don’t dislike farmers, or even the rich. They are simply willing to attack and demonise various sectors of society for electoral gain.

    As Labour’s original press release said, they actually think the Government’s position is principled and sensible. But an election’s coming up, so it’s time to jettison principle and break out the politics of envy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Michael (909 comments) says:

    While it might sound like the leaseholders are getting a better deal it sounds like the new charging regime is sound as the land is getting a higher value because of scenic and lifestyle value, instead of a economic oppurtunity based value. Farmers would eventually have to give up the land to overseas millionaires to use as a lifestyle ranch that has some stock on it – hardly a way to improve export earnings from the land.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Offshore_Kiwi (500 comments) says:

    If this move is about National looking after their farming mates, then all I can say is it’s about fucking time. They’ve spent the past 2 and a half years shitting on them in their lust for the left, green and brown votes. It’s about fucking time they remembered their core constituency.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. tvb (4,425 comments) says:

    The Labour Party wants to play the politics of envy on everything they can because that is all they have going into the election. This stance by Parker is entirely predictable. If the National Party has not figured that by now then they had better hurry up. However there is no harm at all to making things as uncomfortable as possible for O’Connor and others when this “envy” policy shafts previously held positions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    Now where in gods green earth would one find an “inquisitive journalist”,suggestions please.
    Obnoxious, shallow, idiotic, dumb, lickspittal, obsequious, manipulated, ignorant, idle, superfluous, thick, indoctrinated yes but inquisitive, now what would that mean.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. niggly (830 comments) says:

    “rent reductions being given to millionaires”
    “A sop from National to its farming mates”
    “Governing in the interests of narrow few”
    ” a small number of rich people are getting millions of dollars at the expense of taxpayers”

    As I’ve said before, Labour’s election 2011 strategy is primarily one of vindictiveness and spite this time around.

    (What, are Labour so lacking in strategy and vision, that are they desperately receiving txt mssges from H1 in NY on strategy now instead)?

    Which is totally appalling on Labour’s behalf, as one would have expected them to be mature adults, not muck raking little kids misbehaving in a sandpit. No wonder why politicians are despised, gee, thanks Labour.

    Expect more of the same “wreckers and haters” speech coming from Labour this year. Losers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. annie (539 comments) says:

    # Offshore_Kiwi (485) Says:
    February 16th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
    If this move is about National looking after their farming mates, then all I can say is it’s about fucking time. They’ve spent the past 2 and a half years shitting on them in their lust for the left, green and brown votes. It’s about fucking time they remembered their core constituency.

    Two things, Offshore:
    1) The government shouldn’t be ‘looking after’ any pet group, they should be governing the country for the good of the whole.
    2) There don’t even begin to be enough farmers to vote them back in if they alienate the rest of the electorate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. BeaB (2,123 comments) says:

    And why is Mallard sucking up to Lockie? Does he want his job? Or just a pat on the head?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. niggly (830 comments) says:

    Maybe Lockie (through his activist intelligence gathering ‘connections’) has some real good dirt on Mallard :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. niggly (830 comments) says:

    And why is Mallard sucking up to Lockie? Does he want his job? Or just a pat on the head?

    Actually the real reason for Mallard being nice to Locke is apparently because when Locke stands down at the upcoming election, Mallard wants to take over being Parliament’s Village Idiot. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. homepaddock (408 comments) says:

    The unintended consequence of this is that leasholders will now be determined to freehold land under tenure review for fear of what might happen if/when Labour gets back in to power.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. lastmanstanding (1,297 comments) says:

    heh niggly Parliaments Village Idiot LOL Mind if I use that one in the future.

    Mind you theres 122 of them so its hard to single one out

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Offshore_Kiwi (500 comments) says:

    @Annie

    In answer to (1) you’re right, pollies of all flavours should govern for the country as a whole. Sadly, none do and that’s why they have core constituencies. Liarbore governs to the benefit of its mililtant and funding wing (unions), the watermelons are in the parliament to serve their two core constituencies (the lunatic left and the eco-mentalists). National traditionally have been kinder to business in general, and farmers in particular (although they currently have no ideological base and are therefore pandering to as many minorities as they can in a desperate lust for the left vote).

    In answer to (2) you’re right, but the current National government did not need to go out of its way to alienate its core constituency, chasing votes that will never, ever, in a million years come their way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Inky_the_Red (759 comments) says:

    It could be the idea is good in general. However when Labour saw the detail they were not happy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Inventory2 (10,342 comments) says:

    It could also be that Phil Goff has little, if any control over his caucus …

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