Hipkins gone

September 16th, 2013 at 12:10 pm by David Farrar

Will it be one whip or both whips who go? Hipkins is Senior Whip and Fenton Junior Whip.

A fair enough move. A new leader should be able to have whips that they have full confidence in. This does not mean Hipkins will not remain in the Shadow Cabinet, just that he won’t be Senior Whip.

Tags: ,

25 Responses to “Hipkins gone”

  1. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    And the Tiber ran red with blood.

    Or is it the Hutt River littered with body parts

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. jaba (2,142 comments) says:

    one of MANY to be moved .. this will be great watching.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (8,487 comments) says:

    Hipkins always put me in mind of the Young Pitt in Blackadder.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Nigel Kearney (1,013 comments) says:

    If the Labour caucus is anything like the Kremlin (and it is), the most trustworthy people are the ones who were most loyal to the previous leader. The ones who deserted him when the wind changed will desert the next leader as well if it suits them.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    So; all that sweetness and light, unity and communal singing of Kumbaya lasted for 21 hours. Who would ever have predicted that?

    And I wonder if Trevor Mallard will even bother returning from San Francisco.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Lance (2,655 comments) says:

    @KS
    “And I wonder if Trevor Mallard will even bother returning from San Francisco.”

    The same Trevor Mallard who is proudly letting us all know it was Labour who provided the money for this and it was a wise investment…. you know yachting, rich pricks waste of money when homeless children are starving in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Quite so Lance; being consistent was never Trevor Mallard’s strongest suit, or that of the Labour Party.

    Anyway, the tax windfall from an America’s Cup defence, if it gets to that, will show that the initial investment (the purpose of which was to allow ETNZ to retain key personnel) was money well spent.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Ian McK (237 comments) says:

    Thank God we don’t have to look at a grinning wimp sitting behind the losing leader any longer. This little greaser was a pathetic sight.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. burt (8,272 comments) says:

    A fair enough move. A new leader should be able to have whips that they have full confidence in.

    But if your cleaners are useless and you offer a new cleaning company the contract you need to take the existing staff – fair enough – A company should not be allowed to have confidence in their cleaners …..

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. nickb (3,687 comments) says:

    was money well spent.

    That is opinion only. I enjoy the America’s Cup as much as anyone but this is really a Labour Party attitude and I am disappointed to see it is becoming the attitude of many National supporters as well. There are a myriad of things that a Government could get a return from but this habit of “picking winners” really has no principled basis and given the America’s Cup amounts to more corporate-driven entertainment than grassroots sport then money given to ETNZ can rightly be called corporate welfare in my opinion.

    If it is such a money generator then why can’t ETNZ fund itself by corporate sponsorship? Why does government handouts have to be the first course of action, and by a supposedly right-wing government at that?

    What next, the government stepping in to prop up the pay packets of ABs to stop them heading offshore? The All Blacks pump far more money into NZ than a few yacht races ever will, so why this in principle any different?

    Maybe I don’t understand all the arguments fully, maybe I am a grinch but surely a compelling case for what is effectively a corporate subsidy is required before govt steps in? Obviously I am showing my naivete given the past actions of Labour Lite.

    Anyway this is all widly off topic.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,903 comments) says:

    Very good, burt!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Nigel Kearney (1,013 comments) says:

    Keeping Stock, are you saying that money is well spent if the resulting tax revenue is greater than the amount of taxpayer money put in?

    We should be subsidising every hotel in the country if that is the test. The only difference is a political one: Americas Cup sailors are more popular than hotel owners.

    I can only imagine how much potential commercial activity there is that would generate tax revenue but is only viable with a sufficiently large government handout.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. jacob (16 comments) says:

    long as he doesn’t go Francis Urquhart on him

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. backster (2,172 comments) says:

    “Will it be one whip or both whips who go? Hipkins is Senior Whip and Fenton Junior Whip.”

    Surely part of the deal with the Unions was for Fenton to be promoted.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Changeiscoming (189 comments) says:

    Watch for Iain Lees-Galloway to rise up the ranks. Top 10 on the next list for sure.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Ian McK (237 comments) says:

    How come Lees-Galloway did not support Robertson, he is in the same camp, so to speak.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    jacob says:

    long as he doesn’t go Francis Urquhart on him

    Leaving aside the fact that that’s an egregious insult to FU, that’s like saying “what if the Chihuahua Paris Hilton carries in her handbag gets rabies?”

    1. It’s highly unlikely, given the cosseted life of privilege it leads; and
    2. If it did, it’s unlikely to have enough strength to fight its way out of a bag to deliver the fatal bite; and
    3. Assuming 1 & 2 are negated, no one would mourn the victim in any case.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. leftyliberal (651 comments) says:

    What camp (so to speak) would that be Ian McK?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. kowtow (8,487 comments) says:

    Camp?

    During the leadership contest it was perfectly acceptable to raise and question Robertsons’ sexuality. (All sides and the media did it)

    The contest is over so the old new rules apply…….that’s hate speech ,whatever hate speech is.

    Quite Orwellian really.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. beautox (422 comments) says:

    It’s hard to believe that Hipkins could be a senior milk monitor let alone a whip.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    “If it is such a money generator then why can’t ETNZ fund itself by corporate sponsorship? Why does government handouts have to be the first course of action, and by a supposedly right-wing government at that?”

    I dont think Team NZ are allowed to collect GST and PAYE and keep it..

    Bloody hard to get corporate sponsorship when there was no guarantee we would actually make it to an event.

    Add up every dollar the govt has put it and offset that with the tax we got back (plus benefit to businesses, redeveloped viaduct etc) and we are well ahead.

    We spend 30 mill a week on the DPB? Dime has no issue blowing the same amount on something that is actually enjoyable to watch.

    but yeah, off topic. ill be back in GD later if you wish to retort :D

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Dime

    Larry ellison has spent 150 million in NZ in the last ten years. I found out he doesnt have to pay GST if the boats leave the country but thats still a lot of PAYE etc. And still there are miserable bastards on here bemoaning 30 mill.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Yoza (1,875 comments) says:

    What I don’t understand is this media fascination with Cunliffe having to make concessions to unite the caucus. The voting process that elected Cunliffe to the position of leader clearly demonstrated how far out of touch the bulk of the caucus were with the majority of the membership.

    Cunliffe and his caucus supporters could video themselves ‘happy slapping’ the ABCers and upload the result to Youtube without worrying about the effect that would have on Cunliffe’s popularity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    Well well – Cunners has been busted telling his first lie. The first of many, I’m sure.

    Cue the “Cunliffe vows to spare detractors” article –
    http://www.3news.co.nz/Cunliffe-vows-to-spare-detractors/tabid/1607/articleID/313349/Default.aspx

    What a lying slimy git this guy is.
    So much for the worth of his “vows”.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Yoza (1,875 comments) says:

    What a lying slimy git this guy is.
    So much for the worth of his “vows”.

    But he’ll never be able fake sincerity with natural ease that Key manages.

    That ABC crowd are going to be punished because the membership wants their heads. They have been a self selecting band of apparatchiks and the membership, more than Cunliffe, wants them to pay for their contempt of the rank-and-file. The only thing that is saving many of these people is the fact that an election is only a year away and it would be too disruptive to drown them all in the same sack.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote