"Why is that?" we hear you asking? Well, David Parker won't be getting beaten for a third time by Jacqui Dean. He's moved north, and is expected to be confirmed as the Labour Party's candidate for Epsom in the next few days, in all probability unopposed. Journalist Felix Marwick supposedly broke the story yesterday on Twitter:
@felixmarwick Felix MarwickLabour frontbencher David Parker seeking party nomination to stand in Epsom
Felix Marwick is a bit behind the times however. Once again, the Vast Right Wing Comspiracy broke the story the day before. Both David "Happy Feet" Farrar and Cameron "WhaleOil" Slater had the goss on Tuesday; WhaleOil blogged:
Labour is being silly again accusing National of a stitch up in the Epsom selection. It would be funny if it wasn’t so outrageous that a party with the selection processes of Labour complains about a system where there are a minimum of 60 delegates each with their own mind and their own vote. The only party that has stitch ups for selections is Labour.
Never mind that it appears Labour is doing it’s own stitch up in Epsom by parachuting in David Parker.
Now, David Parker is a Southern Man. Quite how he will cope in the Big Smoke is anyone's bet, but he has a huge task ahead of him; Epsom is bluer than blue. Just take a look at the 2008 election result; Rodney Hide won the seat with 21,102 votes. National's Richard Worth came second with 8,220 votes and Labour's Kate Sutton was a distant third on 5,112 votes, just 13.5% of the total votes cast. In the Party Votes stakes, Labour fared little better, with just 20% of the vote; well below its national percentage.
So why is Parker putting his career on the line when history suggests that he will become a three-time loser? We can't answer that. Personal reasons have been cited for his move; his partner works for an Auckland-based MP. But it does seem a bit odd that Labour is accusing National of a stitch-up in Epsom when the Labour Party can't even attract a credible local candidate, and has to fly in a leadership aspirant to fill a gaping hole.
And surely David Parker will be aware of this salient fact; since the first MMP election, every New Zealand Prime Minister and all but one Opposition Leader have been electorate MP's. Don Brash is the only exception to that rule. This is a very interesting move by Labour and by David Parker, but we suspect that it will be an exercise in futility.
12 comments:
About as interesting as watching paint dry.
The only interesting question is who will be solely campaigning harder for party votes - Goldsmith or Parker.
I will make the prediction right now that Parker won't get within a bull's roar of the number of votes Kate Sutton got in 2008.
Put aside personality, DP, for the moment. This a classic example of political parties becoming more and more sophisticated in their use, or abuse of MMP to the determent of voters.
Act and National have done a deal in Epsom- more deals to follow no doubt.
Ele at Homepaddock, today, explains how it works and almost, but not quite, condones the practices.
Epsom, might, one hopes. will will be the tipping point for MMP
Let us hope that this cynical use of MMP, by all parties, will be rejected by voters.
Well said Anon. It's ironic that for years, Labour claimed to have been better at working in an MMP environment than National. Nothing that either party has done is illegal under MMP; any accomodations have been within the rules. Whether or not they are in the public interest is another matter altogether. But Labour is certainly aiding and abbeting the Vote for Change cause with both its protestations over Goldmith's selection in Epsom, and with the parachuting in of David Parker.
Surely the only logical reason for Parker to make this move, is to provide an easy sidestep to Mt Roskill once Goff retires following his post-election rolling?
The local labour volunteers in Epsom will be hoping Parker takes the contest more seriously than he did contesting Waitaki in 2008.
He conceded that seat at a public meeting in Geraldine a couple of weeks before the election.
HP,
The volunteers are probably asking who?
Mind you I didn't realise there was a Labour Party branch in Epsom.
If David Parker is regarded as a possible leader he must have some political skills.
Bringing those skills and profile to a high-profile place like Epsom will see the impact if any effective campaign spill over into wider Auckland and perhaps the country, too.
I don't know why so many people still don't understand the party vote under MMP is the serious vote. It's the one that elects multiple MPs while your FPP vote usually goes into the rubbish electing no one.
It's fairly obvious the National Party has taken over the ACT Party as its plaything.
If this was to lead to cynicism on the party voters it;s National who should wear the grief...not the voting system they are attempting to rort.
National are rorting the voting system.
It's obvious.
Happy with that Inv2?
Who's rorting anything Robert? Goldsmith won narrowly, on the third ballot by the 60 voting delegates. There wasn't a unionist or Goffice staffer in sight, unlike Mana, Manurewa, Te Atatu...
Inv2 and Mt Albert.
Quite so pdm; well remembered. Mind you, the circumstances were a wee bit different there. Helen Clark had annointed Phil Twyford, but that would have meant the return of The Tiz. Labour blinked.
Steve Withers said:
If David Parker is regarded as a possible leader he must have some political skills.
Bringing those skills and profile to a high-profile place like Epsom will see the impact if any effective campaign spill over into wider Auckland and perhaps the country, too.
Valid points, Steve.
The more likely benefit though, I think, is that if Parker is to have any chance of leading the Labour Party, then he needs to lift his profile in the Auckland area where the bulk of Labour's support comes from. His background ticks none of the wider Auckland boxes - unions, rainbow, feminist, ethnic diversity - so he has no ready support base, but he desperately needs public recognition that he can't engender from Dunedin. While his profile also describes Phil Goff, Parker is a fresher and younger face and he may have enough general appeal to broaden Labour support amongst their less traditional voters who have been alienated over the last 15 to 20 years. I suspect this is rather a clever move promoted by Parker's backers and those who do not want David Cunliffe in charge. James Stephenson suggests Parker could logically move into Mt Roskill when Goff departs post-election. In the meantime, Epsom will give him the highest possible exposure where losing will be immaterial.
David
Post a Comment