Sunday, May 12, 2013

Quote of the Day - 12 May 2013

It's fair to say that Herald on Sunday columnist Paul Little is not great fan of the current Government. So his condemnation of Labour and the Greens this morning comes out of left field; quite literally; check this out:

Shakespeare, it seems, didn't have much time for petitioners:
"O vain petitioner! beg a greater matter;
Thou now request'st but moonshine in the water."
- Love's Labour's Lost
He might have considered an attempt to stop the sale of public assets no more important than "moonshine in the water". But he knew a lot about leadership and getting things done.
Were he to take as his theme the suitability of Labour and the Greens to hold office it is doubtful he would have found in it the stuff of tragedy - a subplot in a comedy, perhaps.
The collapse of the petition organised by those parties to oppose state asset sales was as comical as anything the lunkheads on the other side of the house have managed in this, the Year of the Great Ineptitude.
In every field of human endeavour there is an aspect, easily overlooked by those not involved, that is crucial to its success or failure. In media, for instance, it is distribution. You can produce the world's greatest magazine or movie, but if people can't find it in their newsagent or cinema, you've wasted your time and money.
On the successful 1953 Everest expedition, several oxygen systems were taken and used. Although Hillary and Tenzing were the second pair of capable climbers from the group to attempt the summit, they succeeded because their oxygen system was more efficient.
In politics, while your policies and personnel are important, it is the ability to organise people that makes the difference between winning and losing. That is why, well into her tenure as Prime Minister, Helen Clark could still be found turning out at the Otara market, signing people up to the electoral roll.
The conditions of the Citizen Initiated Referenda Act 1993 aren't that challenging. Be eligible to vote. Full name and address. Date of birth optional. Don't sign twice. "Donald Duck" - not funny.
Getting 308,753 signatures on a petition takes some organising. Nevertheless, several people have gathered the numbers necessary to trigger citizens-initiated referenda.
Margaret Robertson, of Karori, drove a petition seeking to reduce the number of MPs; Norm Withers was behind one that sought to change the way violent crime was dealt with. The Firefighters Union wanted to prevent the number of firefighters being reduced. Sheryl Savil sought to retain the right of parents to hit children.
Margaret Robertson, Norm Withers, the Firefighters Union and Sheryl Savil were never going to ask us to help them win the Treasury benches. But if they could get a petition sorted, then it's not unreasonable to expect that people who do have that goal should be able to manage it. Labour and the Greens together may have the heart, the vision, the ideas and the talent to make this country great. But if they can't even organise a petition they don't deserve our confidence, let alone votes. Perhaps they should set their sights on organising something less ambitious, such as a piss-up in a brewery.

The one point that Paul Little misses here is an important one; Margaret Robertson, Norm Withers and to a lesser extent Sheryl Savil and the Firefighters Union did not have the financial resources of two of New Zealand's three largest political parties behind them. They weren't able to pay people to collect signatures as the Greens did, at the taxpayers' expense. They weren't able to commit administration support from the party to help in the field.

That makes the Labour and Greens stuff-up this week even more noteworthy. When Paul Little says "Labour and the Greens together may have the heart, the vision, the ideas and the talent to make this country great. But if they can't even organise a petition they don't deserve our confidence, let alone votes. Perhaps they should set their sights on organising something less ambitious, such as a piss-up in a brewery.", voters should take note.


lovinthatchangefeeling said...

Little is not the only Liarbore lovin pinko who rubbishes the political party petition. Chris Trotter discusses that failed Green/Labour petition to re-write an election result:

The attempt to use the Citizens Initiated Referendum process to halt the Government’s partial privatisation programme was always a risky strategy. Political parties, in particular, take a huge risk in associating their names with operations in which so many things, over which they have no control, can go wrong. And now, of course, they have gone wrong – badly wrong – and at the worst possible moment.

It’s the perception that the “Keep Our Assets” petition has failed, on the very eve of the Government learning how much Mighty River Power’s shares are worth, that’s done the damage.

Political insiders may know that CIRs almost always fall short on the first official count. That someone has only to shift flats, and write their new address on the petition form, for the Clerk of the House to disallow that person’s signature. Unfortunately, 90 percent of the voters don’t know. If John Key tells them that one-in-four of the petition’s signatures are “fake” – they’re quite likely to believe him.

New Zealand voters aren’t silly. They have a fairly shrewd appreciation of what is and isn’t politically possible. They knew back in 1996 that the forests were going to be sold, CIR or no-CIR. And they’re pretty sure the same is true in 2013 – Hell! John Key’s told them often enough. So, when they see people standing outside the supermarket with a clip-board in their hands and a “Keep Our Assets” T-Shirt covering their torso, they don’t think: “Labour/Green/Aged Care/CTU Hero!” Nope, they just shake their heads and mutter: “Nuts!”

It isn’t a reaction conducive to instilling trust and confidence in a Labour-Green alternative government.

Even worse, the Labour-Green failure to collect the required 10 percent of registered voters on the first attempt has provided the National Party’s strategists with some extremely useful intelligence. It tells them that neither of their main opponents possesses anything like the activist base required to pull off such a labour-intensive propaganda exercise.

George Chapman said...

The referendum will succeed in exposing the unpopularity of Key's asset stripping behaviour. It will see him off at the coming election.