Pop Quiz
Who said this?
So for this reason I am announcing today that XXXX (name deleted) will not be going into a formal coalition with either Labour or National.
We do not think there is sufficient common ground to base a formal coalition on - and we are not prepared to compromise our principles simply to pursue the perks of office.
We are not the desperate lonely hearts of New Zealand politics - looking hopefully and forlornly for a suitor.
Now just to be sure there is no misunderstanding of what I am saying let me be clear - no coalition means just that, it is not a play on words.
There are some important questions which follow from this decision.
Where does this leave XXXX?We will be sitting on the cross benches.
Will XXXX oppose supply and confidence to either Labour or National?
No - we will ensure that whoever the voters back to form a government, that government will have stability over the next three years.How will XXXX decide which of the two parties to support?
According to constitutional convention - the party which gains the most seats is the party which must first try and form a government. We will support this constitutional convention in the first instance.Will XXXX hold the government to ransom?
No we will not - we did not do this in the past three years and we will not do this going forward.
Now that we have seen the result of the negotiations we have to ask, can we trust this guy to tell us the truth? Or is he a master at the art of political double speak?
October 18th, 2005 at 9:05 am
Ooh! Ooh pick me! It was Winston Peters.
Oh wait…
October 18th, 2005 at 9:14 am
we all knew he was a master of double speak to begin with. I mean really, who actually thought that he would keep his word. What is the point of him keeping his word, since he has got all his policy concessions anyway so his voters will continue to vote for him.
October 18th, 2005 at 9:33 am
this is really disgutsing fwwog, do yous see that old farrier called you Green a poodel, like one of them dooggy that mariah carey take round with her for fun,
October 18th, 2005 at 10:35 am
He’s a bullshit artist of the first order.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:47 am
Bloody hell. How’s about this for another pop quiz:
What will ‘peterquixote’ do first:
a) learn to spell, or
b) fuck off?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:11 am
Now I think that’s one thing the Greens, National and ACT can co-operate on: A joint caucus meeting with a good voice coach, so all learn to recite the above words with suitably amused contempt. I suspect you’ll have many, many opportuntities to do so over the next three years.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:59 pm
Was it Jim Anderton?
October 18th, 2005 at 1:00 pm
DF
Pay attention - LOL
October 18th, 2005 at 5:03 pm
Who is Jim Anderton?
October 18th, 2005 at 6:24 pm
A friend from Europe has just emailed me asking me if it is true that a Labour government has just appointed a xenophobic anti-immigration nationalist as Foriegn Minister.
I had to reply Yes - that Labour has betrayed the Greens and sold any remaining integrity to go for the “centre”. I added that this Foriegn Minister would not even be in cabinet and not actually be part of the government.
She thinks I am joking!
So my question is this:
Winston Peters has repeatedly come out with outrageous and xenophobic attacks, often on completely innocent people, has had bizarre conspiracy theories, and assaulted an MP in parliament. Realistically, we can expect more of this behaviour from Winston Peters. Will the Greens support a Labour-led government when one of its Ministers engages in this behaviour?
October 18th, 2005 at 7:33 pm
frog:
I think you should answer the question from Spatacus (post above this one) …
” So my question is this:
Winston Peters has repeatedly come out with outrageous and xenophobic attacks, often on completely innocent people, has had bizarre conspiracy theories, and assaulted an MP in parliament. Realistically, we can expect more of this behaviour from Winston Peters. Will the Greens support a Labour-led government when one of its Ministers engages in this behaviour?
“Will the Greens support a Labour-led government when one of its Ministers engages in this behaviour?” “
October 18th, 2005 at 7:49 pm
poor little pale yellow, just not up to it,
October 18th, 2005 at 9:28 pm
Spartacus,
Why not inform this person from Europe about precedent in MMP countries - The Free Democrat Foreign Minister in Germany?
Then add that the FM would not deal with immigration, refugee and trade ministers in New Zealand (do they do so in European countries?).
So he has baggage from internal political populism (don’t all politicians?). He at least, is not known as in the pro war camp or associated with any “complicating” policy ideas (such as Dunne on Taiwan). His “immigration” concern about terrorist networks, is not out of place with the modern diplomatic climate.
Peter’s is bound by collective responsibility on foreign policy - in both formulation and administration. He wears a suit well and can read a Ministry brief. He will be competent in the job.
So is the issue is how he is perceived abroad by those who disapprove of his anti-terrorist posing and who oppose his restrictive immigration policy stance - which is less and less and less of Europe and the USA.
Peters has now managed to extract Treasury out of National and FM out of Labour - respect form the conservative free market financial and now the liberal diplomatic establishment. Quite a trick for some Maori fisherman. Who knows what he would ask of National, should they be able to govern in 2008 with his votes. He may want to stay in this job and then retire in say 2009/10 to some foreign shore post.
October 19th, 2005 at 1:07 am
The deal isn’t good enough, and the Greens must repudiate it.
This putatative government will do nothing good for NZ, and guarantee a National succession. It must be rejected out of hand. Without a Green abstention, on present numbers, noone can form a government. So much the better.
Run with existing legislation for one year and hold another election, meantime no inflated incomes or ministerial vehicles for anyone. The winner will be New Zealand.
October 19th, 2005 at 1:32 am
Spartacus/eredwen, I agree that that is worth thinking about, but what I want to know is, what if Winston is caught drink driving, or brawling in the Wellington Streets or peeing in a hotel corridor? None of which are beyond the realms of possibility. If it were a Labour minister, Clark would have to sack him or her, but would Clark be able to sack Winnie? If she did, he might pull NZ Last out of the government.
October 19th, 2005 at 2:11 am
Its 61 - 50 before Greens and MP vote - they only have 10 votes between them.
October 19th, 2005 at 5:47 am
The democratic process has failed. It is time for a more sanguinary approach.
October 19th, 2005 at 10:08 am
south fury on the ball, fancy fancy, a green with balls and brain, pull up, pull up, other wise you get extincted like us, turn into a neutered newt fwwog, newt like toad, yous have to sack rod fwog to survive,
October 19th, 2005 at 6:23 pm
SPC wrote:
“Why not inform this person from Europe about precedent in MMP countries - The Free Democrat Foreign Minister in Germany?”
No idea who. Perhaps you could tell us?
Incidentally, Genscher, the Free Democrat who was Foriegn Minister, was also in the government (he was also Vice Chancellor). Peters told a lie.
In fact in Germany the MMP system is stablised by insisting that senior members of the coalition are in cabinet and that there is tight cabinet responsibility. What we have now got in New Zealand is bizarre.