Thursday, June 14, 2012

That explains it (part deux)

Andrew Little's speech in the snap debate he sought and was granted yesterday was a poor one. It had no structure, and was just a series of angry rants against Judith Collins, Nick Smith, the National-led Government and Uncle Tom Cobley and all.

But over at Stuff, Jane Clifton explains in her weekly column entitled The Little dog that lost its bark:

There is one thing worse for an Opposition MP than getting knocked back on an application for a snap debate in Parliament on a subject embarrassing to the Government - and that is being granted a snap debate when you are not expecting it and suddenly having little to say.
That was the fate yesterday of Labour's Andrew Little, who must have felt like the dog that chases cars, but cannot think what on earth to do on the day one obligingly stops and surrenders. He had to get up and speak about the Government's ACC woes for 15 long minutes, and by the time he had lamented the running down of the corporation, upbraided the Government for being beastly to claimant Bronwyn Pullar and her friend Michelle Boag, and demanded ACC Minister Judith Collins be sacked, he had started to repeat himself rather forlornly.
Not normally given to flowery language, he had little choice but to give it a go - for as National's Paula Bennett kept meanly pointing out, he still had lots of time left. ACC had become a "corporate behemoth", he railed, "the plaything of ministers". It was victim to "tawdry, nasty, filthy little strategies" to "fleece" injured New Zealanders in their time of need.
Then he hit on the idea of helping the Government pick the next ACC minister. So it was that humble backbencher Jonathan Young, who happened to be sitting opposite Mr Little, was startled to be allocated the job. "This is so not a leadership bid, this speech!" interjected Ms Bennett. She, too, got offered ACC by Mr Little.
But, in time, the fabled Labour machine swung into action. Frontbencher David Parker took out a pad and started scribbling large-print notes, which he passed behind him to Trevor Mallard, who appeared to proof-read them, before passing them on to Mr Little, who quickly glanced down at each sheet of paper and, without missing a beat, introduced a new aspect of the Government's perfidy. Socialism in action. 

Oh dear; fancy not being prepared for a debate that you yourself initiated. That's a terrible look for a man who just months ago was being seen as a potential future leader of the Labour Party.

Jane Clifton continues:

When finally his ordeal was over - no-one was mean enough to move an extension of time - Ms Collins, who has seen off four senior ACC figures this week and had the air of looking around for more prey, rose to wield her power-smirk like a blunt instrument.
"[Labour leader] David Shearer is very safe. That member [Mr Little] is supposed to be a lawyer, I understand," she said with theatrical scepticism. "Hard to believe. I'm actually getting a little tired of having to correct him." 
She proceeded to speak about ACC blithely, as though the wholesale political carnage inside it was such an everyday event, it was scarcely worth refreshing one's lipstick afterwards.
At least she made a point of finishing off her prey quickly, and making sure they were quite dead - in this case by giving fulsome praise to the recently departed directors and chief executive, whose valuable reforms she said she had backed.
"By sacking them!" several Opposition MPs observed. And a new definition of the term "tough love" was born. 

This is vintage Clifton. And she's right about Judith Collins' rebuttal of Andrew Little; it was mercifully swift; unlike Mr Little's tortuous speech.

If only Mr Little has done his homework, he might have been able to use his speech yesterday to genuinely address the issues over ACC instead of simply giving viewers and listeners reinforcement into why Judith Collins is suing him. Urgent Debates are rarely granted, and Andrew Little wasted a precious opportunity yesterday.

FOOTNOTE: For those who can endure it, here's the speech in question, courtesy of www.inthehouse.co.nz  Be warned though; it's fifteen minutes of your life that you'll never get back!



14 comments:

The Gantt Guy said...

Just one minor point, I wouldn't call Andrew Little a "lawyer". He might have a law degree, but other than that he's just a union hack.

Anonymous said...

When you say

"Oh dear; fancy not being prepared for a debate that you yourself initiated."

do you mean like yourself, who does exactly that, but daily?

bsprout said...

I think Kevin Hague, who has largely led the debate around the ACC concerns, made a better fist of it here. A good lesson in preparation and understanding the core issues: http://www.greens.org.nz/speeches/kevin-hague-speaks-urgent-debate-acc-13-june-2012

The Gantt Guy said...

Anon, I suspect you confuse Inv's lack of desire to get diwn and dirty, and to wrestle with the various pigs and trolls who show up here each day and fling poo around, with a lack of preparedness to debate.

In my experience, Inv is more than willing to engage on issues in a grown-up conversation. Which is something of which some of the chimps who turn up just to fling poo, are incapable.

Care now to discuss the issue, which is, I believe, Andrew Little going completely unarmed into a battle of wits with Crusher...

Keeping Stock said...

@ bsprout - did you not see my post earlier today commending Kevin Hague for an excellent, factual speech where he played the ball rather than the person? He is one Green MP whom I have a degree of respect for.

Keeping Stock said...

@ Anon - I don't quite get the connection. Being prepared has nothing to do with chosing not to respond to inane comments and questions.

gravedodger said...

Watch it with the sound off.

Makes it look powerful punchy and effective.

Dont watch the body language of Mallard, Moroney or Galloway, they look like passengers realising they are on the wrong train and when they contribute appear to ask him to hit the emergency button.

Images of dear old Joseph at a National Socialist rally came to mind.

bsprout said...

Apologies, KS, missed it in my rush, appreciated your thoughts on Kevin's performance.

It was interesting to hear Matthew Hooton on National Radio trying to scare the public by getting them to imagine Green MPs as Cabinet Ministers. All of our MPs are pretty well qualified to do the job and Kevin especially has already proven his capability as the CEO of a DHB. We Greens actually do the background research and listen to advice before a decision, which would be quite refreshing if our current government followed the same practice.

Judge Holden said...

Jeez Gantt, you really need a job buddy. You're being consumed by hatred, fear and paranoia.

The issue here is how terribly inept Collins and the rest of the government are turning out to be. Trying to hide that behind Jane Cllifton's skirts will not really work.

Keeping Stock said...

Wrong again Judge; the issue here is what a goose Andrew Little made himself look yesterday. You're the one who's trying to change the subject.

Judge Holden said...

OK, so it's another cheap, substance free, gotcha post. I guess that's all you have.

Tough days for the shill.

jabba said...

"inept Collins and the rest of the government are" .. come on Drudge, keep up with play. The Crusher should find out who the employee was who made the cock-up in the 1st and add them to the cull. That's her only failing so far.
Where is your mate bOb .. you usually attack in tandem?

Anonymous said...

"power-smirk"

That's it in a nutshell.

Collin's ACC department is a dog's breakfast. She's responsible for the atrocious mess that it's in. Her response is to depose the National Party appointee/cronies that have made things so much worse that they've ever been. Are we to applaud her for eating her own? Apparently, you think so!

Judge Holden said...

And what was her role in the complaint to the Police? Did she know about it? And why did it take the 60 minutes show before she took any action at all? Did she not know about anything to do with her portfolio before that? She can scowl a good scowl, implement unused and useless legislation and indulge in frivolous law suits, but that does not a good Minister make.