Labour MP says Parker would have won

April 2nd, 2011 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

An interesting profile of by Vernon Small in the Dom Post. What grabbed my attention is:

But last week one senior Labour MP said he believed if Mr Parker moved, he could get the numbers to roll the leader.

A senior Labour MP must mean a front-bencher I’d say. It confirms what I suspect that if someone did want the job, they would have it.

Tags: ,

18 Responses to “Labour MP says Parker would have won”

  1. Inventory2 (10,436 comments) says:

    What it does mean though is that there is going to be an all-in shitfight when Labour gets dealt to in November and Goff gets rolled.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Pete George (23,686 comments) says:

    It confirms what I suspect that if someone did want the job, they would have it.

    It’s not hard to suppose that would be the case. You could hardly get a more opportune time to make a move as far as leadership weakness goes, it’s just the bigger picture they will be looking at, ie after the election.

    And yes, it does suggest a no holds barred battle after November. Too soon for Little, he will be looking on hopeful that whatever emerges from the debris is only temporary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. BeaB (2,148 comments) says:

    Surely they could have learnt from the swiftness of Labour in Australia. Leaving Phil limping on is the gutless option.
    I am amazed there is no-one in Labour with the ambition or drive to seize the moment even if it means going down in flames later in the year. There is always a chance that the change of leader could also change the chances of the party.
    But then the party is made up of people who have played it safe all their lives, chosen safe careers, kept themselves safely away from making decisions – these sorts of people don’t take risks or have a go so will condemn Labour to years in opposition. Worst of all they keep the door open for Mr Grim to take charge.
    Those tough old Labour guys will be turning in their graves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. jaba (2,146 comments) says:

    he would have won what????????????????? the chance to lead the Labour Party until Little bulldozers his way into the job soon after the election.
    hands up anybody who would be comfortable with Mr Fidget being our PM .. I would prefer Goff (choke)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. K.Reed (18 comments) says:

    Gossip and Vernon Small’s opinion passes for a “profile”, huh? What a load of shit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. dog_eat_dog (790 comments) says:

    So they’d get rid of Phil because he mislead the media and flip-flopped and replace him with someone who lied to the Companies Office and flip-flopped? Mr. Parker as a few skeletons in his closet too, which I am amazed that everyone seems to have forgotten.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Mark (1,493 comments) says:

    “Inventory2 (6,025) Says:
    April 2nd, 2011 at 9:18 am

    What it does mean though is that there is going to be an all-in shitfight when Labour gets dealt to in November and Goff gets rolled”

    IV2 I am pleased you are so sure that Labour will be out of the picture in November because I am certainly not as confident. I an worried that the weaker the labour party is the more likely we are to see Winston get in the mix. If that happens then National have a fight on their hand even tho they will be in all likelihood the strongest poling party by a wide margin.

    I am concerned about the timing of the election in November with all the risks of a disaffected Christchurch population beginning to blame the government for things not moving fast enough, hard budget and deferral of Auckland and Wellington Capital projects could have the government under a bit of pressure come November. It is almost worth the risk for key to go to the polls early and seek a mandate to deal with the earthquake issues. At present labour are self destructing and National is riding well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. jaba (2,146 comments) says:

    I share Marks concern BUT I have faith that voters will look at National and compare them with the alternatives .. if they do that rationally they, Labour/Green/Winston 1st, will be on the opposition side for at least 3 more years

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Whafe (650 comments) says:

    With more or less a 2 party country, I find it almost criminal that the country seems to accept that the opposition is as weak as piss. If Goff shouldnt be there, some other pinko soft cock should stand up…. Yep I think they will get smashed come November, but that is not really a good reason to have a plonka like Goof leading the Labour Clown Show…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. scanner (340 comments) says:

    Why would anyone, sane or otherwise want the job FFS. Talk about the original poison chalise, far better to let Phool carry on and lose the election by a huge margin, then roll his arse as a spectacular failure.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Manolo (14,070 comments) says:

    Meanwhile, the Huruld looks past Parker to start selling the image of a future “first gay PM”.

    Grant Robertson doesn’t think he’s that special.

    “Hard work” is the cliche the Wellington Central MP offers when asked why he has risen through the Labour Party ranks so quickly to sit on the front row just two years into his first term in parliament.

    When pressed, he shrugs and says: “Ask Phil Goff.”

    The 39-year-old is already being touted as a future party leader and, potentially, the first gay Prime Minister of New Zealand. Is he deserving of such praise?

    http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10716603

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Michael (911 comments) says:

    Eventually electorate MPs Ian Lees-Galloway, Chris Hipkins, Brendon Burns, Clayton Cosgrove and others lower down the list will start to worry about their chances of re-election and revolt in desperation as Labour did in 1990 to dump Palmer for Moore.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. jaba (2,146 comments) says:

    Robertson is the 1 Labour MP who doesn’t piss me off .. the only thing I have against him is his lack of experience outside of the public teat (includes time in the UN) .. many Labour MP’s fall into this category .. it’s a reason I was concerned about Jamie LR. He will probably be a very good MP (and possibly PM) but if you haven’t experienced the real world then it’s like a Nun giving sex classes to students.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. oddity fan (314 comments) says:

    I think under FPP, a move would have been made by now. Self preservation is the main motivation to roll a leader and not as many will be looking for new employment after the election undr MMP as there would be under FPP. So a few nobodies in the caucus wont be coming back, well those individuals will probably know that when they see where they sit on the list when it comes out anyway.

    Consider Bolger’s loss in 1987 – he was safe because National had removed McLay. Although Moore led Labour to defeat in 1990, he was leader because the caucus saw that as being less harmful than a reult under Palmer’s leadership. Both events were pre MMP environments. National’s faith in Bolger pre (and post) 1987 was rewarded in 1990 with one of the biggest majorities in NZ history.

    Labour should look to its past, put in someone they see could lead them out of the doldrums now. Consider Kirk, he led them through two defeats in 66 and 69 before winnning the prize in 72.

    Retaining Goff shows their contempt for the NZ public. It is not good for our democracy to have such a weak opposition. Also, as others have commented, it improves Winston’s chances. National can’t expect to pick up many Labour voters, indeed they may lose some from from 2008. So where is the vote going to shift to? Labour voters will stay at home or vote for Greens, or NZF. The latter worriies me, even if they stay at home, it could help NZF.

    I dont agree with Michael – those with constituencies should be safe in 2011

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Caroline Castle (16 comments) says:

    All this just reinforces the fact that National will win easily in November! As a member of the public I find Parker dull and boring, no charisma. Cunliffe is just as bad. It wouldn’t good if the leader of the Labour Party didn’t hold an electoate seat and Parker is a list only MP. Does anyone know if he is standing for an electorate this election? Anyone who voted for the Labour Party before will probably vote Green.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. kowtow (8,776 comments) says:

    Chris Trotsky was plugging Parker too in a recent column of his.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Viking2 (11,571 comments) says:

    This will be the catalyst for Labour to get its Act together. A big wake up for the factions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Mike Readman (366 comments) says:

    What I can’t understand is why in the world he became leader in the first place.

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