Who else will be demoted?

November 21st, 2012 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Vernon Small at Stuff reports:

leader David Shearer is refusing to rule out sanctions against David Cunliffe’s supporters, after winning unanimous backing at a crisis caucus meeting. …

Mr Shearer said he had no plans to demote any of Mr Cunliffe’s backers, thought to number fewer than 10 by yesterday.

“I want to sit down with them and see where they are going in the future. I have no plans at the moment, but that will be done in my own time if that was to come.”

Party sources expected a reshuffle to be announced before Parliament resumed on Tuesday.

It is understood Mr Shearer is balancing the need to further stamp his authority with the requirement to reunify his caucus.

The reshuffle is going to be a challenging test for Shearer – in some ways more challenging that Cunliffe’s demotion.

Numerous commentators and editorials have pointed out that Labour as a whole has not been greatly effective. The recent front bench ratings by the Herald showed that. At a minimum two of his front benchers are not performing anywhere near well enough to justify staying on there.

But if Shearer actually does a reshuffle based on merit and ability, then he will increase the number of disaffected MPs in caucus. And just a couple of MPs may be needed to make the vote in February 2013 a toss-up.

Hence my conclusion is Shearer will not rock the status quo very much. He’ll do a couple of promotions based on the sacking of Cunliffe, but will in the main leave non-performers alone.

Also this article by Tracy Watkins is revealing;

What would it take to quieten Camp Cunliffe after Labour’s pro forma backing of David Shearer? An olive branch, and preferably with the heads of Trevor Mallard, Annette King and Phil Goff skewered on it. …

Mr Shearer was perceived as having been anointed by the ABC – Anyone But Cunliffe – club, whose key members included Mr Mallard, Ms King and Mr Goff. …

Those three are seen very much as the controlling bloc in caucus, backed by their former staff members – Robertson, Ardern and Hipkins.

If this is Shearer’s last reshuffle, then keeping them on will be signalling that they all plan to stand again and will be senior Ministers in a future 6th Labour Government, just as they were in the 5th and even the 4th!

 

Tags:

13 Responses to “Who else will be demoted?”

  1. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    The next demotion – assuming Cunliffe isn’t able to strike back in Feb – will be Shearer when Robertson stabs him in the back.

    Of course if Cunliffe is successful in Feb there will never be the opportunity for an “e tu Grante” moment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Alan Johnstone (1,062 comments) says:

    Who else will be demoted? No one.

    To demote others make it very explicit he has a lot of internal enemies, it also forces them into the Cuncliffe camp for ever.

    It’s just bad politics to do so; give David C a kicking whilst extending an Olive branch to his supporters would be smart. In Shearers place I’d promote one or two of the softer supporters in the aim of picking one or two off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Pete George (22,839 comments) says:

    I can think of a few who should be demoted but it’s not likely, Shearer seems to be owned by them.

    Shearer was promoted as a refreshing new kind of leader when he was chosen (by caucus overriding the party) to replace Phil Goff. The only difference has turned out to be the old hand’s grip on the leader’s testicles has repositioned and tightened.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Peter (1,578 comments) says:

    So Labour have solved nothing.

    Their much-needed internal fight and resulting churn of the old guard is yet to happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. lastmanstanding (1,204 comments) says:

    Onr of the strangest things about this matter is that the caucas can have a Leader foisted upon them if i understand the process correctly. Now one of the rules of good governance is that the governing body of any organisation gets to elect the Chairman/President call it what you will and Deputy from their numbers.

    The simple reason is so those persons have the support and confidence of the rest of the governing body.

    This is the case in public listed companies sports organisations not for profits etc etc.

    To foist a person on the governing body that the member of that body dont have absolute confidence in and support is a receipe for disaster.

    It aint gonna work. The governing bosy will tear itself to pieces cause thats the way human operate.

    So if im right and the 40% members and the 20% Union vote can outweigh the 20% caucus vote then bring it on cause the LP is gonna to doomed to failure.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. loonybonkersmad (27 comments) says:

    I think this is relevant here: http://i.imgur.com/Owm7U

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Alan Johnstone (1,062 comments) says:

    @LMS, 40 + 20 + 20 = 80.

    The caucus has 40% of the vote, not 20. (Over 1% for each mp today)

    This is process is in line with political parties all over the world.

    Of course it’s correct that those who pay the bills, members and affiliated organisations have a say in the leadership.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    See that poor old Mickey Savage bleating that poor old silent T has been treated unfairly FFS

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/7978273/Labour-in-public-war-Key

    overtly white anting your boss and you bleat how unfair. Presland you are a dolt

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Paulus (2,501 comments) says:

    Are there enough Labour MPs in caucus to enable anybody to be demoted ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. lastmanstanding (1,204 comments) says:

    Alan Johnstone You miss my point. If you have a look at the consitutions of most PLCs private companies the shareholders elect the directors and the directors elect the Chairman and Deputy Chairman. Same goes for most NFPs. For the reasons I have outlined. If you let the membership chose the Chairman and that person doesnt have the 100% support of the rest of the governing body then its a disaster. seen it before.
    So in the case of the LP if the members/Unions elect an MP that the rest of the caucus doesnt see as their natural leader it will be a shambles.

    Doesnt matter that other pollies do it. thats why they have so much leadership problems as I see it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Reid (15,947 comments) says:

    Onr of the strangest things about this matter is that the caucas can have a Leader foisted upon them if i understand the process correctly. Now one of the rules of good governance is that the governing body of any organisation gets to elect the Chairman/President call it what you will and Deputy from their numbers.

    lms this is prevented by the leftist’s tendency to coalesce in factions. Maori, LGBT, The Sisterhood, Unions, PI. Leftists do this all the time as a permanent part of their politics. Conservatives do it for temporary things like leadership struggles but not as a lifelong fundamental belief-structure thing like lefties do. For not all but many leftists their faction is a part of their political DNA, to the extent in many cases it dictates who they’re prepared to vote for as leader based on the leader’s factional perspective not on what is the best thing overall.

    It’s a shame for them for it’s quite, quite mental. But there we are. That’s what they doing now by the ABC factional coalition and that’s what they’ll keep doing. If you were a lefty and wanted to stop being mental, the key is to put a wedge between the Sisterhood and LGBT. How you’d do that I don’t know but that’s Hulun’s power bloc which wasn’t there as the citadel of doom before she came along. She basically took a tiny innocent tadpole of a faction and turned it into a black dark forbidding fortress of doom sitting at the top of a 400 ft high shear cliff at the bottom of which is a swiftly flowing treacherous river filled with super-venomous snakes, crocodiles and piranha. But luckily, cracking that is not my problem. That’s what you lefties have to do if you want to stop your caucus from being mental.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Now one of the rules of good governance is that the governing body of any organisation gets to elect the Chairman/President call it what you will and Deputy from their numbers.

    Except that the caucus (and front bench in particular) is more analogous to an executive. The executive of a private company do not select the CEO.

    That would be the Board. Perhaps Labour should allow their parliamentary leader to be selected by the party president and board?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. graham (2,215 comments) says:

    Pauleastbay at 1:07 pm:

    Yes, and although I usually steer well clear of The Standard, I have taken a brief peek at some of the bleatings going on there today. Mike Smith has been taking aim at Greg Presland, who is hitting back.

    http://thestandard.org.nz/keystone-coups-mark-2/

    This is just one example of the trainwreck that is the Labour Party at the moment. (I know, I know, Lprent, The Standard is not the Labour Party – you just happen to have a load of party members actively contributing). There is an incredible amount of infighting bubbling to the surface here. I do wonder if we are seeing the day that the Labour Party falls from being one of the two major parties in NZ politics, to ranking alongside the Greens who for some time now have been sitting very comfortably in an arena way above all the other minor parties.

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

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.