Posts by Keir Leslie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Yeah, I thought it was intended like that.
I also wonder if Jones would have spoken like that at the Auckland Regional Conference, face to face with the people he was insulting.
-
Might be worth saying that the Labour Party doesn’t use focus groups for policy generation (for the obvious and legitimate reason that we have a democratic internal process) so it’s not really a surprise that the focus was on presentational issues, rather than on policy.
Also yeah they have now lost their jobs if they worked in the Leader’s Office.
-
If Shane Jones becomes leader, then it will be time to watch for the pigs gently lofting away.
Also, hey, Sacha, should the Greens firmly punish anyone who slags Labour?
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Rob Stowell,
Grant chaired the Policy Council that wrote the new Party Platform. I'm not super concerned about his policy chops.
It's also worth saying that Grant's been in a position for the past few years where he hasn't been able to articulate a vision of a Robertson-lead government, because that would have been spectacularly disloyal.
-
Eh I have no ide what the courts would fall back on but I suspect it's way more likely to be doctrines around evidence, privacy, and the rights and liberties of the subject rather than employment or tort law.
-
I think trying to use principal/agent analysis here is kinda pointless. Likewise vicarious liability. (Apart from anything else, both are civil concepts.)
The indeterminacy of the law means that all acts are ambiguously legal. The GCSB (as a secret agency evading the courts) is particularly prone to that.
It is hard to escape feeling though that the GCSB was (a) acting badly and (b) had no effective oversight and so were never going to be held to account. Neither of those things are really acceptable.
-
You may think so, but most of the population will switch off – and Key’s swingers will particularly hate it.
The evidence just doesn't back this up. Leadership contests are good for parties --- look at Obama/Hillary, or even Dave/Ed.
-
If you want Labour to decide things quietly and clinically behind closed doors you are basically asking for it to be run the way Douglas did.
Also, from a purely media standpoint, you know what I'm really looking forward to? Four weeks of headlines about cool Labour MPs talking about how awesome Labour is in various dramatic situations. The press love a show, and a leadership race's a real good show, so let's have it.
-
Also, Sacha, I think it is totally legitimate, and in fact really important, to discuss the ways in which discrimination has affected political leadership when we're looking at the leadership of a party that's pretty keen on fighting that discrimination. It's not the only issue to look at, but it's a pretty important one, especially if we want to avoid replicating that discrimination.
-
Sorry this is total anorak-ness, but: Barnett's not chair. He's General Secretary (i.e an employee.)