What will happen to National now?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › What will happen to National now?

1 | ... | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | ... | 111

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2953249 11-Aug-2022 01:25

On another note, it’s concerning that once again the buck in the National Party appears to stop with an emotional junior staffer RNZ - Luxon says staffer knew of red flags regarding Sam Uffindell but did not inform him. Not sure if it came up in this thread already.

Does this indicate a policy of building plausible deniability by not telling the boss certain things? Or is this further reflective of the culture problem within the National Party, in the sense that a staffer considered Uffindell’s past was either acceptable and not a problem, so Luxon wouldn’t need to know; or wasn’t unacceptable enough for Luxon to need to know about? Or deliberately withheld for some reason?

Assuming of course that Luxon is being truthful he didn’t know. There’s a lot Luxon “doesn’t know” - like for example that his airline was servicing Saudi military aircraft when he was CEO over at Air NZ. Does this guy drive a culture of hiding things? Or one of low standards where that behaviour is acceptable? Or do his people mistrust or fear him? Friends of mine at Air NZ speak extremely poorly of him as CEO there, for what it’s worth.

GV27

5885 posts

Uber Geek

#2953252 11-Aug-2022 06:43

quickymart:

But as someone said earlier in the thread (networkn?), apparently the president of the party has 0 to do with candidate selection.

That's not entirely true, and ultimately, it is their responsibility anyway as party president either way.

sen8or

1778 posts

Uber Geek

#2953267 11-Aug-2022 08:21

I guess the question is what would Helen Clarke or John Key do in the same situation, they seem to be the last stable / decisive leaders of their respective parties. I would suspect that under either of their watch, he would be gone (if he got there in the first place).

Whilst I don't disbelieve the other claims that are coming out, no one but those involved actually know all the facts and I'm therefore not in a position to judge, but in politics (and business) optics matter and right now, they look bad for National. Luxon is in a lose/lose situation. Sack Ufindel and on one hand, he's claiming back some decisiveness, but on the other, hes conceding he got it wrong. Don't sack him and hes supporting a team member, but will come across as either soft or condoning the actions. Which is the lesser of the two evils.

For National, at least this is still 12 months away from an election, 1 month is a long time in politics, 12 is virtually a lifetime and this chapter will largely be forgotten.

From the election perspective, National can't go into the next general election with Ufindel in Tauranga, it would simply be too easy of a target for the other parties to use to distract voters away from other issues

alasta

6687 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#2953276 11-Aug-2022 08:39

Personally I think Chris needs to show that he is bold and decisive - which means giving Sam the sack. The problem is, assuming Sam is the sort of person I think he is, then he will refuse to resign and will therefore remain MP for Tauranga as an independent. That will leave him agitating on the sidelines all the way up to the election.

quickymart

13779 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2953292 11-Aug-2022 09:15

Either that or (yet another) by-election. Like I said, if that happens, I hope National foot the total bill for it, not the taxpayer - why should we have to pay the bill for this screw up? So much for them being the "fiscally responsible" party.

networkn

Networkn
32246 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2953295 11-Aug-2022 09:20

quickymart:

Either that or (yet another) by-election. Like I said, if that happens, I hope National foot the total bill for it, not the taxpayer - why should we have to pay the bill for this screw up? So much for them being the "fiscally responsible" party.

I don't disagree in theory, but if the Taxpayer had to foot the bill for Mallard......

networkn

Networkn
32246 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2953296 11-Aug-2022 09:22

antonknee: On another note, it’s concerning that once again the buck in the National Party appears to stop with an emotional junior staffer RNZ - Luxon says staffer knew of red flags regarding Sam Uffindell but did not inform him. Not sure if it came up in this thread already.

This has also been the case with Labour on multiple occasions in the past 5 years too and when they were in opposition. I don't agree with either party doing it, and I feel like there needs to be better process in place around these sort of things, but to paint it like it's not happening for one party but is to another is nonsense.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

networkn

Networkn
32246 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2953301 11-Aug-2022 09:30

antonknee:

Disagree. The comparison is directly between the National Party of the last five years and the Labour Party of the last five years. I’m certain you can go back through history since day dot and find examples of both parties behaving badly.

There were plenty of scandals and mishandlings and missteps in both Labours time in opposition and first 18 months of being in power. Labours first 18 months were the worst I'd ever seen of an incoming Government.

I think you’re getting in the weeds of conspiracy theory suggesting that Kirton is in Air NZ courtesy of the government, who then used a baby to cover it up. Let’s not forget that Kirton made clear his intention to stand down before that scandal even occurred. I do agree it wasn’t handled well and the public never got the transparency they deserve or were promised. I also think that that particular scandal is probably indicative there are/were other similar issues in Labour.

It's right out of Helen Clark's playbook. They regularly released information that wasn't beneficial to them at the same time as other big news to distract away from the issue, or did so at the same time as a big data dump. Labour did so again last year and was criticised in the press for it.

Kirton should not have been given a highly paid position inside a Government owned entity, he should have been sacked for grossly mishandling that series of events. His judgement was clearly well off the mark.

Also, as it relates to other threads in this discussion, Arden was not made aware of those events.

None of this excuses failures on National's part, but don't pretend they aren't all at least as bad at each other.

GV27

5885 posts

Uber Geek

#2953305 11-Aug-2022 09:35

And again, people are flogging themselves if they think one side does not create plausible deniability or avoid releasing information until the last possible minute.

The last Friday before Xmas (when everyone was three sheets to the wind at office Xmas dos) used to be bad-news prime-time. Everyone does it. They shouldn't but they do.

networkn

Networkn
32246 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2953306 11-Aug-2022 09:38

GV27:

And again, people are flogging themselves if they think one side does not create plausible deniability or avoid releasing information until the last possible minute.

The last Friday before Xmas (when everyone was three sheets to the wind at office Xmas dos) used to be bad-news prime-time. Everyone does it. They shouldn't but they do.

Totally. Having said that, it's made a little more galling if the party doing it, stands up after being 'elected' and promises to be the most transparent and honest government ever.

I believe they perhaps have a fundamental misunderstanding on the word transparent. :)

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18604 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2953313 11-Aug-2022 09:55

networkn:

None of this excuses failures on National's part, but don't pretend they aren't all at least as bad at each other.

Apart from the fact that you seem to have an emotional longing for a return to National government, I am struck by the way you respond to every criticism of National and the people affiliated with it: 'Yes, but look what Labour did!'

Go back over your posts. Every time someone points out a National failing, your answer is Labour did it too or Labour is worse. Even if true, I'm not sure what this achieves. I for one long for good government in New Zealand, regardless of the party. I don't happen to believe that the principles espoused by National are the way to get to that, but if that is what it takes, then so be it.

Saying Labour is worse every time someone points to a National failing doesn't help with solutions. Instead, say what would be better.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

GV27

5885 posts

Uber Geek

#2953319 11-Aug-2022 10:18

The trick is really just insisting that your favourite party never made a mistake in the first place, apparently.

networkn

Networkn
32246 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2953320 11-Aug-2022 10:21

Rikkitic:

Apart from the fact that you seem to have an emotional longing for a return to National government, I am struck by the way you respond to every criticism of National and the people affiliated with it: 'Yes, but look what Labour did!'

Go back over your posts. Every time someone points out a National failing, your answer is Labour did it too or Labour is worse. Even if true, I'm not sure what this achieves. I for one long for good government in New Zealand, regardless of the party. I don't happen to believe that the principles espoused by National are the way to get to that, but if that is what it takes, then so be it.

Saying Labour is worse every time someone points to a National failing doesn't help with solutions. Instead, say what would be better.

I'm guessing that you are unaware you do pretty much exactly the same thing in reverse?

As it relates to my recent interactions with antonkee, they were related to his patently incorrect assertion that only National is guilty of particular things, that clearly Labour is at least equally guilty of.

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2953321 11-Aug-2022 10:22

Yeah I’m sorry @networkn, but I find it incredibly hypocritical and quite telling that rather than accept criticism of National (which is after all the point of this thread), you instead deflect everything on the basis of “yeah but the other team”. Two wrongs don’t, in fact, make a right.

It’s also a little frustrating that you keep talking about Labour’s problems, to deflect criticism of National, and claiming they were the worst incoming government in history - without actually pointing out what those problems are. It’s especially galling that this is generally in response to criticism of specific National issues and scandals.

You’re what abouting the most open and transparent government? I’ll engage in some what about Ian of my own. National claim to be the party of personal responsibility, the party of family values, the party of law and order. They don’t live up to those claims either.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18604 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2953374 11-Aug-2022 10:45

networkn:

I'm guessing that you are unaware you do pretty much exactly the same thing in reverse?

There you go again. National bad, so is Labour, networkn wrong, so is rikkitic. You are using the same dodge, just changing the names.

networkn:

As it relates to my recent interactions with antonkee, they were related to his patently incorrect assertion that only National is guilty of particular things, that clearly Labour is at least equally guilty of.

It goes back a lot farther than that.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | ... | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | ... | 111