Labour MP Shane Jones to step down

Forums › Off topic › Labour MP Shane Jones to step down

1 | 2 | 3

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1029545 23-Apr-2014 08:25

Nathan pretty much sums it up for me.

Jones didn't really fit with labour as he is just a normal good bloke.

NordVPN

Protect your online activity with NordVPN (affiliate link).

alasta

6233 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1029589 23-Apr-2014 09:00

surfisup1000: Nathan pretty much sums it up for me.

Jones didn't really fit with labour as he is just a normal good bloke.

Which really highlights the fact that Labour have really disconnected from their traditional support base - ordinary hard working New Zealanders.

gundar

488 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1029616 23-Apr-2014 09:49

Wasn't he the one cought renting porn with our money?

gzt

15205 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1029647 23-Apr-2014 10:17

tdgeek:
gzt: Multiple mainstream sources are reporting he will be "Pacific Economic Ambassador" a role created by the current government especially for him. It sounds a lot like 'free lunch'.

Maybe he feels he cannot progress any further? Or if it was felt that his "shock" announcement would cause the fuss it has, he may be unhappy with Labour and his leaving is a means to adversely affect them?

I suspect the timing had more to do with the revelation the previous day, that Jones had accepted a donation from a senior national party figure towards his bid for labour leadership. I'd withhold judgement on the reasons for giving or receiving but he showed entirely very bad judgement in accepting.

wasabi2k

2092 posts

Uber Geek

#1029654 23-Apr-2014 10:25

My favourite Labour MP by a long way.

Used to listen to Newstalk ZB when he was the Labour Political opinion commentator on a weekly show. He was always good on there.

Did some dumb stuff (porn at hotels on ministerial card) but still a decent guy.

gzt

15205 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1029658 23-Apr-2014 10:29

KiwiNZ:
Gilco2:
KiwiNZ:
Gilco2: again not getting into left vs right party etc but it is not a good look for Labour stability in an election year. Any political party need to show unity/stability even more so in election year and especially when said election is roughly 5 months away

Nearly all the parties will have a few that will say enough. Finishing at an election is the honourable way to do it.
thats correct but it is more worrying for a party that has been in such disarray as labour has been and trying to put on a front of unity.

I agree re Labour, without getting into party politics I think Labours main issue is they have struggled to find a viable leader in the post Clark era. I thought last time they should have gone for new blood like say Jacinda Ardern I built on that. I just don't think Mr Cunliffe is a leader.

It's difficult to say. Not many would have seen that ability in Clark for instance. Time will tell.

alasta

6233 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1029671 23-Apr-2014 10:59

gzt:
KiwiNZ: I agree re Labour, without getting into party politics I think Labours main issue is they have struggled to find a viable leader in the post Clark era. I thought last time they should have gone for new blood like say Jacinda Ardern I built on that. I just don't think Mr Cunliffe is a leader.

It's difficult to say. Not many would have seen that ability in Clark for instance. Time will tell.

I predict that David will lose this election and cling on to become prime minister in 2017. However he won't win 2017 on his own merits - he'll win it off the back of voter fatigue with the incumbent National government.

Labour probably won't roll him between now and then because they won't want to be seen to have had three consecutive failed leaders.

hangon

397 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1029705 23-Apr-2014 11:45

nathan: the one guy in Labour that a lot of NZers liked, not a union man or one of the "gaggle of gays"

him and the guy who said that

well, Damien O'Conner probably doesn't have nearly as much exposure in the North

JimmyH

2820 posts

Uber Geek

#1030024 23-Apr-2014 19:04

Pity, he was one of the more sensible ones.

At least he understood that you need a strong economy to have prosperity and jobs, and that mining, fishing, forestry and using energy resources are all part of this. Plus, being more than a career politician, he had a grasp of how the real world actually worked.

I think he was frustrated at being muzzled, and realised that he was never going to prosper under the current regime - even if they won. I think he knew he would never be close to the core of a Labour administration - particularly given his obvious attraction to many as an alternative leader (which means the incumbent wouldn't want him getting traction), his failure to belong to one of the core party factions, and his thinly veiled dislike for the Green's economic policies (who they now need to cozy up to, given current poll ratings).

All in all, he probably made the right decision. It is a shame tho'.

tdgeek

28616 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1030047 23-Apr-2014 19:31

JimmyH: Pity, he was one of the more sensible ones.

At least he understood that you need a strong economy to have prosperity and jobs, and that mining, fishing, forestry and using energy resources are all part of this. Plus, being more than a career politician, he had a grasp of how the real world actually worked.

I think he was frustrated at being muzzled, and realised that he was never going to prosper under the current regime - even if they won. I think he knew he would never be close to the core of a Labour administration - particularly given his obvious attraction to many as an alternative leader (which means the incumbent wouldn't want him getting traction), his failure to belong to one of the core party factions, and his thinly veiled dislike for the Green's economic policies (who they now need to cozy up to, given current poll ratings).

All in all, he probably made the right decision. It is a shame tho'.

i dont disagree, but where does watching pron on taxpayer funds stand?

MikeB4

18131 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1030050 23-Apr-2014 19:34

tdgeek:
JimmyH: Pity, he was one of the more sensible ones.

At least he understood that you need a strong economy to have prosperity and jobs, and that mining, fishing, forestry and using energy resources are all part of this. Plus, being more than a career politician, he had a grasp of how the real world actually worked.

I think he was frustrated at being muzzled, and realised that he was never going to prosper under the current regime - even if they won. I think he knew he would never be close to the core of a Labour administration - particularly given his obvious attraction to many as an alternative leader (which means the incumbent wouldn't want him getting traction), his failure to belong to one of the core party factions, and his thinly veiled dislike for the Green's economic policies (who they now need to cozy up to, given current poll ratings).

All in all, he probably made the right decision. It is a shame tho'.

i dont disagree, but where does watching pron on taxpayer funds stand?

From memory He repaid it therefore it wasn't on tax payer funds.

tdgeek

28616 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1030052 23-Apr-2014 19:37

KiwiNZ:
tdgeek:
JimmyH: Pity, he was one of the more sensible ones.

At least he understood that you need a strong economy to have prosperity and jobs, and that mining, fishing, forestry and using energy resources are all part of this. Plus, being more than a career politician, he had a grasp of how the real world actually worked.

I think he was frustrated at being muzzled, and realised that he was never going to prosper under the current regime - even if they won. I think he knew he would never be close to the core of a Labour administration - particularly given his obvious attraction to many as an alternative leader (which means the incumbent wouldn't want him getting traction), his failure to belong to one of the core party factions, and his thinly veiled dislike for the Green's economic policies (who they now need to cozy up to, given current poll ratings).

All in all, he probably made the right decision. It is a shame tho'.

i dont disagree, but where does watching pron on taxpayer funds stand?

From memory He repaid it therefore it wasn't on tax payer funds.

I often agree with you, but a BAD mistake

MikeB4

18131 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1030062 23-Apr-2014 19:48

tdgeek:
KiwiNZ:
tdgeek:
JimmyH: Pity, he was one of the more sensible ones.

At least he understood that you need a strong economy to have prosperity and jobs, and that mining, fishing, forestry and using energy resources are all part of this. Plus, being more than a career politician, he had a grasp of how the real world actually worked.

I think he was frustrated at being muzzled, and realised that he was never going to prosper under the current regime - even if they won. I think he knew he would never be close to the core of a Labour administration - particularly given his obvious attraction to many as an alternative leader (which means the incumbent wouldn't want him getting traction), his failure to belong to one of the core party factions, and his thinly veiled dislike for the Green's economic policies (who they now need to cozy up to, given current poll ratings).

All in all, he probably made the right decision. It is a shame tho'.

i dont disagree, but where does watching pron on taxpayer funds stand?

From memory He repaid it therefore it wasn't on tax payer funds.

I often agree with you, but a BAD mistake

If the point was Did he make a mistake and act inappropriately then my answer is absolutely, but a bottom line is he ponied up the refund so the ledger is clear sort of, fiscally only. He still has a shadow over his record.