Greens go Haywire

November 27th, 2013 at 5:16 pm by Jadis

Talking to various sources it has become abundantly clear that is an ‘interesting’ character.  All sources including the current male co-Leader ’s media comments are polite enough publicly but behind closed doors there must be some serious wonder going on.

So let us look at the possible motivations behind Hay’s challenge to Norman. First, there’s the obvious one.  He’s a man who has very little profile (except may be in his own mind) and desperately wants to be higher up the list.  If he was a smart man he’d use the challenge mechanism to rally support behind him to elevate him up the list. He’d be using lots of talk abut how the growing grassroots membership needs more voice, he’d have a very clear plan of what he would say to media and he would also have a few MPs or high profile Greens pre-organised to say more positive things about him – including behind closed doors to media and bloggers alike.  None of that has happened.  Indeed the opposite is true.  So I think we can mostly strike that motivation out.

In the last hour Hay has been interviewed by Duncan Garner on Radio Live.  A pretty soft interview but to be honest give this man a forum and he is going to say some pretty batty stuff.  First there was the fighting talking from Hay of how Russel has been a great leader.  Oops. Then he admitted that Russel would inevitably remain Leader. Oops again.  Hay’s one concern that he managed to express at all was that the Greens need to reposition themselves to takeover ’s position and stop being the ‘handbag’.

It is possible that the Greens are so cunning that they are using a moron to shoot across the bow of Labour but I think the obvious is clear.  Hay is acting mostly alone – albeit after a bit of enthusiastic excitement from a few Greens close to him worried about the lack of presence in Auckland. Hay named them clearly in the Garner interview as the likes of Denise Roche and others.

So this leads me to think that something is wrong with the Greens that happens to all parties as they grow.  They have lost connection with their grassroots.  You see, if they had real connection they would have known Hay was going to do this and would have managed the situation – even in a democratic way.  Instead, Hay surprised the parliamentary wing of the Party with his shock announcement.

So, what other motivations could Hay have?  Well, the cynic in me suggests that the Greens could also be copying the Labour model.  Labour’s membership increased by 75% through the leadership contest.  More members means more potential helpers on the ground.  Is it possible that Hay is actually a very loyal, albeit media inept, hack who is doing the Party a service by driving membership and showing how ‘good’ co-Leader Russel really is?  More than a little possible.  Indeed if I were the Greens I might spin it that way to look mildly united and politically savvy.

So, there’s a few possibilities that motivate Hay – is it personal gain to get up the List, is it greater good for the Greens, is it to drive up membership, or is to put a spanner in the works of what has been a pretty well run Greens machine of late?  Whatever it is he is a useless front man.

*And before someone freaks in the comments that this doesn’t seem like a DPF post.  It isn’t. It is Jadis and I am a tad more blunt that friend to all Dpf.

Tags: , , , ,

17 Responses to “Greens go Haywire”

  1. Pete George (23,476 comments) says:

    It’s worth repeating Hay’s blog post here:

    Leadership Challenge FAQs

    Q: What’s wrong with Russel’s Leadership?

    A: I’m not attacking Russel. He has been a very good co-leader: he is the de facto leader of the opposition; he has raised the Greens credibility in the economic debate; and he and Metiria have created a solid platform of credibility and competence for the Greens going into the next election.

    Q: So why challenge him?

    A: this is about the future direction of the Greens: where we go next and how we get there.

    The Green Party is weak in Auckland – only five electorates raised the party vote above the national average for the Greens, sixteen fell below. We need a strong presence of Green MPs in Auckland, including one of the co-leaders. I’m currently the highest ranked male Aucklander on the party list (except for Kennedy Graham, who is a Christchurch refugee).

    I’m also saying that the Greens need to replace the Labour Party as the party of the centre-left in New Zealand. We need to play a “big game” to move New Zealand to a zero carbon economy within a few decades.

    I’m putting that vision for the future of the party into the public spotlight for Green Party members and for voters, especially voters in Auckland, to consider. If we can’t overtake the Labour Party in Auckland, we will forever be seen as Labour’s junior partner.

    Q: What do you expect the outcome of the challenge to be?

    A: I think the most likely outcome is that Russel will retain the co-leadership, with a renewed mandate.

    If he doesn’t, then the Greens will have a different leader who will be the right person to lead the Greens into government after the next election. And that might not be me; it depends if anybody else puts their name forward.

    Whatever the outcome, Green Party members and voters can be sure that the Greens are putting the best man forward for this position.

    Q: How much support do you have within the party?

    A: I’m not sure. I kept the challenge under wraps because I didn’t want to implicate or embarrass other party members if it turned sour.

    The party is going to begin its list-ranking process in February next year, and through that I will be able to gauge the level of support for this leadership bid. If I’m moved down the party list, then I will withdraw the challenge. But if I get a high ranking (within the top 4 or 5), then I will go ahead.

    I will also be interested to see if this challenge makes a difference to Green Party support in the opinion polls. Although Russel has performed well in parliament, the polls show that the Greens have flat-lined since the last election. If the electorate indicates support for a change, then I’m sure the party will get behind me.

    Q: Is this the right time to be making a challenge, so close to the next election?

    A: The Green Party process is to elect, or re-elect, its leadership team at the Annual General Meeting, held on Queens Birthday weekend every year. That’s not my decision.

    If the list ranking process indicates I lack support, then I will withdraw the challenge. I expect to know where I am on the list some weeks before the AGM.

    In the meantime, I hope voters will be looking at the Greens with fresh interest and learning more about who we are, what we stand for, and where we are heading. Because I have great confidence in the party, I think that can only be good for us. This is exactly the right time for people to be thinking about the Greens.

    http://sophocrat.blogspot.co.nz/2013/11/leadership-challenge-faqs.html

    “I will also be interested to see if this challenge makes a difference to Green Party support in the opinion polls.”

    Yes it will, But it will be too late for the latest Roy Morgan which must be just about due out.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Don the Kiwi (1,705 comments) says:

    Don’t give a damn really – as long as the wetheads don’t get into office.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Dave Guerin (32 comments) says:

    I had just assumed it was a way to lift the profile of Russel and the Greens. It’s always healthy to have to overcome a challenge to retain leadership.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Reid (16,290 comments) says:

    So apparently we have a galloping mental lurking within the Gween anatomy who seems to think he’s leadership material?

    And if this really is a fiendishly clever plot then we have to assume either that (a) they couldn’t find anyone in the Auckland wing who wasn’t mental or (b) the only one in the Auckland wing who Wussell could be sure wouldn’t give him a good thrashing is mental.

    Whichever way you look at it, this says a whole hell of a lot about their party and the people in it, doesn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. dime (9,849 comments) says:

    A way to boost membership?

    Does this mean we could see uf try this too?

    Pg to challenge dung?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. simo (150 comments) says:

    The sheer arrogance of these plonkers….that the ploddy little peasants will trot along behind this garbage. It truly makes their membership look like a dim lot, bat shit mad but pretty dim. Does remind me of the hole in the ground and juniper tree scene in Life of Brian:

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. bhudson (4,738 comments) says:

    So apparently we have a galloping mental lurking within the Gween anatomy who seems to think he’s leadership material?

    So we’ve moved on and are discussing the Green list as a whole then?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. BeeJay (71 comments) says:

    Dumb & dumber in self destruct mode! It’s all downhill for the green wankers from now!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. hj (6,915 comments) says:

    I remember him countering a point: “and I have read Marx”. So he is from the othet side of yhe track.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. burt (8,233 comments) says:

    So this leads me to think that something is wrong with the Greens that happens to all parties as they grow. They have lost connection with their grassroots.

    I don’t really have an opinion on this at a party level, but for Norman – absolutely … For many years.

    Back when the EFA was still the EFB I saw Norman protesting outside the ANZ. I stopped and asked him how he felt about the upcoming requirement of putting his full name and residential address on his protest material. He said it didn’t bother him.

    I was stunned and asked him how the leader of a party founded in activism and protest could reconcile needing to be personally identified on protest material – he said he had no problem with it. I cast the question to the people protesting with him and none of them seemed to like the idea but they were constantly glancing at Norman and saying they hadn’t really though too much about it.

    Note also Norman continued to support the EFA when even Labour were happy to see it go…

    So sure, he’s lost the connection with the grassroots for sure.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. burt (8,233 comments) says:

    Ps : the protest outside the ANZ was about the ANZ having investments in companies decimating rain forests… I can’t say I disagreed with the protest – but it was stunning to see a Green Party leader so shockingly supporting the Labour Party attempt to restrict free speech.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Richard Hurst (841 comments) says:

    Greens go Haywire… and thats new???

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. KevinH (1,217 comments) says:

    David Hay is obviously politically naïve and most definitely not leader material. His announcement is inept, he has no identifiable support, no plan, and no profile. He has made a fool of himself publicly and has revealed the Greens to be composed of bumbling idiots.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. davidp (3,580 comments) says:

    >A pretty soft interview but to be honest give this man a forum and he is going to say some pretty batty stuff.

    You’ve answered your own question here. The Greens love batty. Norman is either going to have to assault another world leader with his flag and then photocopy thousands of banknotes to give to his supporters, or Hay will win in a landslide.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. 3-coil (1,215 comments) says:

    I agree with what Kevin Hague said at 8:31pm (and he should know).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. NK (1,229 comments) says:

    If you’d seen him in Epsom in 2011, this is not abnormal.

    He’s a few votes short of a majority.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. freemark (569 comments) says:

    If the Roach is anywhere near it, it is dirty business. There have been allegations made of electoral fraud, they have yet to be disproved. There will be a bigger trough somewhere that someone wants their snout in, guaranteed. The Gween Scum need to be eradicated.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.