Labour’s Women’s Vice-President slams Labour front bench
January 13th, 2012 at 1:19 pm by David FarrarLabour activist Patrick Leyland blogged on Labour’s front bench and how it has only two women, comparing it to previous front benches. His conclusion was the number of women is much the same as it was in the past.
However the Women’s Vice-President of Labour, Kate Sutton, commented:
This is meaningless Patrick. Why don’t you have a look at the last time we didn’t have a woman at number 1 or 2? People can explain their way out of any stats but this front bench is worse for women full stop.
Now that is a damning comment from a party vice-president on their front bench.
Another activist notes:
This is a sad situation, that’s why many Labour women are so unhappy about this recently leadership selection process. It is important for the current leadership team to recognize this issue and reconcile with the general Labour Party membership.
Sounds wide-spread.
One commenter effectively suggested that Jacinda Ardern should be moved from No 4 to No 3, ranking her ahead of Finance Spokesperson David Parker.
A contrary view is given by Meryn:
This is very interesting Patrick. As a woman I am more interested in the content of someone’s beliefs and their ability to sell, then deliver a progressive set of policies to the electorate rather than whether they have a penis or a vagina.
Indeed. I think diversity is useful, but must be secondary to beliefs and ability.
Suri says:
I think you’d be interested to know that many women in the party have directed their disappointment to the caucus. Not one has received a reply back yet.
This has obviously brought to the surface considerable underlying tensions.
Related posts:
- Putting the Vice back into Vice-President
- Tamihere on Labour front bench
- A fresh new front bench?
- Front Bench still all Clark era Ministers
January 13th, 2012 at 1:32 pm
What, surely there must be some unemployed lesbians out there that like telling others how to run their lives. I feel truly sorry for the Liarbore party, ha ha, yeah right.
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 1:34 pm
Great to see that the Labour fall out and internal fighting will continue into the new year.
What a dysfunctional bunch of losers they are.
Kate Sutton is dead right, until Labour start selecting the best people (irrespective of gender, sexual preference, race or union background) they will remain anonymous and risk losing their ranking as ‘her Majesties opposition’ to the Greens.
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 1:37 pm
“This has obviously brought to the surface considerable underlying tensions.”
Fomenting happy mischief?
Now what interest would a National Party blogger have in creating the perception of division and discord in the Labour party…
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 1:42 pm
[DPF: 30 demerits]
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
Could be NZ Labour Party’s new slogan.
“Worrying about front bench penis or vagina proportionality, since 1916″
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 1:58 pm
And the whole rotting edifice crumbles a little more…
Shame
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 2:25 pm
BB
“Kate Sutton is dead right, until Labour start selecting the best people (irrespective of gender, sexual preference, race or union background) they will remain anonymous and risk losing their ranking as ‘her Majesties opposition’ to the Greens.”
1. Labour and all its policies are based on identity politics. No identity politics, no Labour.
Vote:2. The Greens are even worse than Labour.
January 13th, 2012 at 3:32 pm
Ardern illustrates the problem Labour currently has with its women MPs. She and Nikki Kaye are similar in age and background. Kaye has just given Ardern a hiding in what should be a safe Labour seat. Yet Kaye is still on the back bench while Ardern is number 4 in Labour’s lineup. That is insane. The only reason she is in that position is that the other Labour woman MPs are so unappealing. Most of them seem to be nasty union thugs who turn off most voters. Labour needs to find some female (and male, but mostly female) candidates who look like normal people, rather than union muscle.
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Of course Ardern has the place Sutton should have if the Party picked on merit, grassroots work in NZ, work experience and loyalty. Sutton then had to face the embarrassment of campaigning in Cow Town while watching the Labour Party opening ad proudly display Ardern preaching from Murupara.
Vote:Little wonder she’s blowing a head gasket or two.
January 13th, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Hardly. Adern has done less than absolutely fuck all in real life and in line with Liebour’s selection criteria, is eminently qualified to rank ahead of Sutton
Vote:January 13th, 2012 at 6:18 pm
Isn’t Grant Robinson a reasonable compromise?
Vote:January 14th, 2012 at 12:22 am
Who’s counting? Who gives a fuck about Labour’s problems.
Vote:January 14th, 2012 at 10:48 am
Labour appear quietly to be tearing themselves apart, again, again.
Vote:But this time with those who it has in Parliament, and the Party, they have no real options.
Usual inept failed unionists, teachers of some sort, and professional political parliamentary hacks.
They do not have many homosexuals to choose from as they did before, which makes gender differentials difficult.
Phil – are you still out there ? – or did you let it happen around you – or were you dropped in the shit by Clark and
Simpson, and their cohorts (yes Grant and you).
Keep up the good work. Anybody seen Shearer or has Grant Robertson taken over already ?.
January 14th, 2012 at 11:00 am
Labour only have themselves to blame for this. The reason there are so few competent, electable women in Labour’s caucus is because they didn’t rank them high enough on the list (or parachute them into safe labour electorates).
So we wound up with the likes of Darien Fenton and Sue Moroney.
Vote: