Member log in

David Shearer’s Green-free Plan B

The standard assessment is that the 2014 election is between Labour/Green and National/NZ First.

To recap: The theory goes that Labour/Green and National will win about the same vote share, with Winston Peters holding the balance of power.

Mr Peters must then choose: Be the third wheel and office junior in a Labour/Green coalition or deputy prime minister, foreign minister and Sir Winston Peters in a National/NZ First government.

The theory assumes, on good evidence, that John Key is utterly determined to join Jim Bolger and Helen Clark’s third-term club – and, like them, will pay Mr Peters whatever entry requires.

But the theory also assumes David Shearer is totally out of his league, his party the victim of a reverse takeover by Russel Norman and Metiria Turei, and a mere observer of events.

While there is good evidence for those assumptions, consider the counterfactual: That Mr Shearer is capable of independent action, has no intention of leading a loony-left government condemned to one term, and is willing to be as ruthless as Mr Key to reach the top.

Labour whispers
Wise heads in Labour whisper that the Greens are outperforming them in capturing daily media attention but the cost of that is more and more outlandish promises being made.

Dr Norman has tried hard to mitigate voter fears that the Greens would do wacky things on the economy.  He tells fairy tales of a kiwi nirvana: clean, green, internet-based industries, powered by solar panels and windmills, with everyone on high wages as they export high-value organic products and computer software to the world.

In recent months, the façade has collapsed.

Since October, the Greens have announced they would print money to rebuild Christchurch, abandon the Reserve Bank’s price stability goal, progressively close down all mining activity, ban offshore oil exploration, prevent the expansion of agricultural production, impose higher costs on the tourism sector, nationalise electricity generation and legislate without compensation against contracts they don’t like.

They remain adamantly opposed to genetic science and are advising friendly business groups they would replace the roughly $2/tonne market-based ETS with a new $25/tonne carbon tax.

Mr Shearer knows that the Greens are no longer naïve but basically decent Coromandel hippies like Jeanette Fitzsimons.  Those who now control the party are communists philosophically and entrists politically.

He also knows Labour cannot concede any more policy ground to the Greens and remain a mainstream party.  The rise in unemployment and collapse in investor and business confidence would condemn him to a single term.

Experienced Labour strategists realise he must seek an alternative path to power, and one is obvious.

No Green leverage
Between the 2005 and 2011 elections, the Greens gained some leverage over Labour by flirting with National.

  Their 2009 memorandum of understanding saw, among other things, the unlikely combination of Ms Fitzsimons and Gerry Brownlee develop a home insulation scheme that became the centrepiece of that year’s budget.

  Those days are long gone.  The Greens’ far-left political positioning means any arrangement with National – real or perceived – is impossible for both. 

  That means the Greens – despite Dr Norman strutting about as finance minister in waiting – have no political leverage at all.

  After any election giving Mr Peters the balance of power, Mr Shearer could simply call the old charlatan and match Mr Key’s likely offers of deputy prime minister, foreign minister and a knighthood.

  Labour and NZ First would not even need the magic 61 seats in parliament themselves.

  All Mr Shearer would need to do – as Ms Clark did in 2005 – is apologise to the Greens, advising them sadly that a Labour/Green government just won’t work out this time.  We’re all on for next time though!

  Were the Greens to throw their toys, Mr Shearer would then gently suggest they try their luck with Mr Key.

  The result would be beautiful for Mr Peters.  He would get all the status, travel and baubles he wants, could defend his actions as the price necessary to keep the loony left out of power, and deliver final utu to National which he has never forgiven for forcing him out in 1993 and 1998.

  For his party, Mr Shearer would form a government which might just have a chance of a second term, and he could always tilt back to the Greens should Mr Peters prove unreliable.

  Even the Greens might see the silver lining: They could keep their supporters enthralled with ever-more loony ideas without the constraints of government.

  You doubt the theory?  Just ask Mr Shearer if Labour plans to go into the 2014 election promising to abolish knighthoods.

Comments and questions

It is a measure of the right wings fear of the Greens that they paint their policies in more and more lurid terms. What you dont fear you can safely ignore, but Hooten exposes the mounting alarm in the ranks of the right. Most pleasing to behold.

Yes, the right do fear the Greens, as should anybody else who loves New Zealand. Because after less than a term of them in power, I fear that the New Zealand I grew up in will cease to exist, to replaced by a communist "nirvana" along the lines of 1950s Soviet Russia and North Korea, and anywhere else the real policies promoted by the Greens have been implemented.

I also fear that, if I hang around, I will get bloody bored with the plaintive cries of the useful idiots by around mid 2015 - "Oh, I didn't think they do that", "I thought they were just for the environment" and "It wasn't as bad as this when Mr Key was PM, can we get him back"

You loons on the the left would have a smidgeon more credibility if you could bother to get Hooton's surname correct.

Perhaps the fact that we don't bother tells you something about how highly we rate your esteemed scribe?

Granted, he has his uses, as his wailing today has shown.

Heard a very popular radio host on Newstalk ZB say he was so sick of the Australian known as Russel Norman and part owner of the electorally unelected list MP party" Greens", and his perpetual whining and snivelling,that he would make his morning slot Russel Norman free from interference.

That'll make a change from RNZ which perpetually leads with the Greens, F&B and the Labour unionists.

It is entirely unnecessary to discredit the Green's lunacy with lurid terms. To anyone with a brain, you need simply quote them accurately:

"Since October, the Greens have announced they would print money to rebuild Christchurch, abandon the Reserve Bank’s price stability goal, progressively close down all mining activity, ban offshore oil exploration, prevent the expansion of agricultural production, impose higher costs on the tourism sector, nationalise electricity generation and legislate without compensation against contracts they don’t like.

They remain adamantly opposed to genetic science and are advising friendly business groups they would replace the roughly $2/tonne market-based ETS with a new $25/tonne carbon tax."

Merely regurgitating word for word Hooten's polemic hardly advances your case does it? We can all read the original article.

It wasn't plagiarism that did for your curtailed scientific career by any chance?

Sorry, Crowd pleaser, my comment was only addressed to, and intended for, anyone with a brain.

You weren't talking to yourself then, glad to know you are one of the ZB listening morons, very predictable.

Your strange delusions obviously make you bitterly happy, Paul. Who am I to disturb them and possibly make you bitterly unhappy?

Perhaps I should just stand aside and let you and Crowd pleaser insult each other? After all that is what the Left generally resort to when left to yourselves.

Alan, you really shouldn't bother with Paul N. He is, for whatever reason (and, of course, it will be somebody else's fault!), incapable of seeing reason on these issues. He is determined that the watermelon coalition will lead us to nirvana and no amount of facts or sound reasoning will change that. You will see from the balance of like/dislikes that the vast majority in this forum see him in this light.
So, give it up and leave him to his blissful ignorance.

Those are not quotes from the Greens. Instead, the two paragraphs are statements made by a commentator - of the the article above! Talk about having a brain!

They accurately and objectively summarise Green policy. Refute anything you can or roll over and accept their self-evident lunacy.

I was almost taking this article seriously (note; that's not the same as agreeing with it) until I read the above word.
Now I'm chuckling as I type this comment.

A Labour, Green, NZ First Government would be extremely stable with sufficient influence from each to ensure moderate government

Hilariously sad.

Exactly -and it would be very, very electable. Hence the panic from Hooton and his fellow travellers.

Sorry, was this supposed to be a joke?

Interestingly, Peters' concern about Chinese immigration dovetails nicely with the Green's desire to restrict immigration in general. There will be other overlaps in areas of policy. Fascinating that the right wing party in power should be so blind to the immigration question, though less so when you consider they have in effect been captured by those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo (the real estate industry, those keen to flog New Zealand assets off to whichever bidder they can etc).

"the right wing party in power..."

Ah. No. National are in power.

"Yeah, right".

I've ñever seen a 4-headed Taniwha do anything but cannibalise itself, whilst spitting venom at itself constantly.

Yep... Àbout as credible as a chocolate teapot...

What? A short-assed liar, an Aussie commie, and a bumbling loser of foreign bank accounts = stability? Where you been man?

An association with Greens and Labour holding hands together could end up being a poisoned chalice. Noticed the Australian Labor Party found out a little too late that being in bed with such a psycho partner, and following their utopian ideas, was, in fact, a short cut for disaster. Australian Labor dumped their political bedmate partners. They went into a popularity death dive in the polls, thanks to their psycho coalition partner. The miscalculation will be a massive defeat at the next Australian election.

In the last couple of years it has become increasingly clear that the Green Party is now truly an electoral alternative to the two-party system.

In the last couple of years it has become increasingly clear that the Green Party is now truly a suicidal alternative to future prosperity and security.

The only thing that has become increasingly clear in the last couple of years is that the Greens ( of the Fitzimmons/Donald era) have been taken over by the extreme left and the Fabians. I wonder how much longer it will take for the real environmentalists to realise this?

Green is the new Red! Why don't they just say so in order that everyone is clear about it.

Green is the old red.

This article nailed my fear of the disaster that will be a Green motivated government.

Peters will be bad enough but is still a better alternative.

The best use of Greens is in coalition with National. Influencing not leading.

Labour actually isn't that bad. I have a lot of time for David Parker but their prospective wife in the Greens will make for ugly, stupid kids...

Yes, at least Winston is not stupid enough to believe what he says.

True, but can he find 5% who are?

Perhaps, but they have a very short attention span so they won't show up until the election. Or perhaps he will stand in Epsom.

Great article.

There are other possibilities also. Like if Key/National tred to help both Labour/Shearer's call for more transparency and Greens/Normans calls for an enquiry on everything... By Key re-ordering the GG to do another investigation into Labour/Jones and the passport for cash corruption saga... Except this time... no terms of reference apart from co-joint investigation with the Aditor General into "political donations for passports" investigating the TRUE source of ALL of their donations.

The GG needs to investigate the entire funding/donation activities of the entire Labour Party and all the unions that fund them... Not just Jones.

Then a Utube clip made of EPMUs And Labours list MP Little calling employers "parasites" with clips of Cunliffe and his infamous "Cousy bro in at the markets" speech, Shearer explaining the finer details on their power policy... And NZinc then decides who has the most credibility to run NZ.

National romps home in an ever larger landslide as if NZInc still as FPP as our electoral system, needing no coalition partners.

NZ prospers even more. Norman and Shearer decide the best way to live in a socialist utopia if you can't make one... Is to join one, so they elope together to Cuba... And get even cheaper electricity, until death do them it has in Aussie.

Never underestimate the canibalistic tendencies of a 4-headed Taniwha that wants to rule the World...control and own everything... Even water and air...

I decided not to vote Greens/Labour when I found out even a small little business run from home would attract CGT. That is what lies ahead for anyone who wants to be self-employed. Of course, none of that will happen if real NZers make sure the potential financial sabotage by the Norman/Turei and Shearer parties are never given the opportunity.

To get back to Hooton's thesis, as Labour is unlikely to be the largest party it would suffer a lack of credibility and mandate as the leader of a minority Government. That, plus collisions with reality, would almost certainly force it to do things it didn't like and the Greens hated.

Hard to see it surviving a full term or the next election.

I think Anonymous has summed it up perfectly. The reality is that the Greens, under the socialistic pretensions of their radical Australian leader, are ursurping the policies of Labour under the weak leadership of David Shearer. Shearer must strike for the middle ground, and stopping 'tree hugging the Greens', otherwise Labour is doomed to spend a third electoral cycle in opposition. As a businessman, that wouldn't concern me, needless to say.

We seem to see more of Dr Norman on TV commenting on political and economic issues than we do of Mr Shearer. And when Mr Shearer is there, Norman is at his shoulder like a minder. So who's driving the tram?


The media just loves an idiot saying things that they, (the interviewers), know will wind viewers/readers/listeners up.
Does anybody know what his "Dr" is?

John, his PhD is in political science. His thesis looked at whether or not the Alliance was a truly democratic party and he found that it was not.

Yes, he got it for believe it not ,a real Ripleys.for studying the inept inane redundant, Willie Jacksons controlled Alliance Party.He arrived in NZ in 2007,a real carpetbagger.Just imagine ,he is here to show us how to live and perform.The track record of him and his sick philosophy,is a throwback to his Australia communist teachings,as well as the also rans who made up the Alliance Party.

"Norman is at his shoulder like a minder"? More like a ventriloquist with a dummy.

We should stop calling him Dr Norman, and call him Red Russel or Comrade Norman - both of which are closer to the truth.

Would it not be more correct to refer to the "Green" Party as the new Communists?
Am I the only one that believes the "Green" Party has become a refuge for Trotsky believers that have found that "Communist Party" has become just too unpalatable for the general public?
Mr Norman sure is a fan of Government ownership!

It is not who owns an asset that is pivotal; It is who controls it. Like all communists / socialists / totalitarian leaders, they all want to control. They may wrap it up in candy floss saying it is "for the good of the people" however what lies hidden is the envy and wanting control of that which they don't have.

The sad fact is that many socialists are unaware of what drives them; their desire to control or revolt has causes that remain hidden to them. In essence they are driven either by greed - getting some of what someone else has produced; or a sense of injustice that they have less than their "fair" share. And fair share to them means an equal slice of the cake even if they did nothing to create it.

It is just a modern day Robbin' Hood. Stealing from those that have rightfully earned wealth, to give to those that haven't,

What concerns me most is not Noman, but those members of fthe public who are so much in La La Land, that they give him support. They simply can't see past the fairy story. Norman is a fraud, an imposter, with shonky values and ethics, and should be treated accordingly.

The Labour Party and Watermelon Greens are societal terrorists who should be hammered and sickled.