Comments on: Phil Goff Interview

By: Lisa

Lisa — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 22:27:37 +0000

The first photo of the article/interview is intereting. The article is about Phil Goff and yet the first photo is of Helen Clark with Phil Goff standing in the background looking suitably impressed with Helen. Was that on purpose? The sense is that Phil will always be second to Helen. Poor Phil.

By: Gordon Campbell

Gordon Campbell — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:10:31 +0000

Ed, you’re using different criteria and a different timeframe. My point was simple and more inclusive – namely, that of the leaders of the two major parties in the past 40 years, only a handful had not been, or had not become, Prime Minister. Phil Goff can take heart from the fact that, as I said, all of those in this category were from the National Party.
The corollary, which was related to the opening questions I directed at Goff, is that the Labour Party has shown a lot of leniency towards its leaders who lose elections. Norman Kirk lost in 1966 and 1969, but was retained for his winning bid in 1972. Bill Rowling lost in 1975, 1978 and again in 1981, and yet came within a hair’s breadth of being retained for 1984. Helen Clark lost in 1996 and was kept on to win in 1999. No mercy was shown by National to Jim McLay, Bill English and Don Brash. Jim Bolger was kept on after his 1987 defeat, mainly because he grew the National vote by nearly 9 % and significantly bridged the gap with the Lange government – perhaps making him a role model for Goff in 2011 and 2014.

By: Ed

Ed — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:16:03 +0000

“Hang around in the leadership of National or Labour long enough, and chances are you will become Prime Minister. Don Brash, Bill English, Jim McLay, John Marshall – in the last 40 years, you can count on one hand the major party leaders who haven’t ended up running the country, and they’ve all been Tories.”

It’s unclear what criteria you’ve used here. John Marshall served as PM and then lost an election – if you count him as a major party leader who hasn’t ended up running the country, you should include Bill Rowling, Jenny Shipley and Mike Moore – all of these people became PM before coming Leader of the Opposition and never returned to being PM.

Anyway, I disagree with your proposition. It is quite tough to go from being Opposition Leader to PM. I’m going to stretch back 45 years and the record goes something like this:

Opposition Leader to PM (5)
Norman Kirk
David Lange
Jim Bolger
Helen Clark
John Key

Opposition Leader to nowhere (8)
Arnold Nordmeyer
Bill Rowling
Mike Moore
Jenny Shipley
Jack Marshall
Don Brash
Bill English
Jim McLay

Sloppy stuff Gordon.

By: Bruce Thorpe

Bruce Thorpe — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:39:05 +0000

Good to see a full interview.
I could have heard a bit more about what an agreeable and accessible man he is.
What seems most interesting is the striking difference between the work experience and history of teamwork between the leaders of our major parties.
It was all summed up in the byelection for me.
This was a major strategic battle . The Nats had a foot on the throat of their rival and failed totally to deliver the death blow.Key picked an unproven candidate and his party organisation, even when so-called expert minders were called in, completely failed to save anything from the defeat.
And John Key also slipped away and nobody who mattered in the party stood by their candidate in the hour of defeat.
Goff kept his head and won control of a tricky, damned if you do or don’t, candidate selection. The party support was impressive on every level from level of political nouse and expertise to the turn out of hundreds of foot soldiers.
A big team victory from the ultimate team player.

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:40:43 +0000

Nice, work, well done. Good to see some good journalism.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:06:47 +0000

Wow, a full interview. That’s good quality compared to all the rubbish on Tv. It isn’t the most riveting read for me, but it’s good seeing a half decent interview with Mr Goff, given his position.

By: Olwyn Stewart

Olwyn Stewart — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:55:12 +0000

It is nice to visit Scoop and see some actual journalism for a change. I admire Phil Goff’s work ethic, but worry about the growing inequalities in NZ which it seems verboten for anyone to address, except in very limited ways. I sometimes think the whole Western world is living in some sort of fake Hegelian end-of-history, blanking out the overflowing prisons and widespread alienation/desperation that this entails. You would suppose the economic crisis might have brought about a rethink by now, but this doesn’t seem to be the case.

By: Relic

Relic — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:06:38 +0000

What a churlish tone to this interview, Mr Goff had patience aplenty to sit through an hour of this dull interrogation. Variations on -when did you stop being a right winger-are only interesting for so long. Why not ask him about his motorcycle, or how he plans to re engage those that saw fit to not vote in 08.

By: stuart munro

stuart munro — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:30:37 +0000

It’s funny – I don’t remember a time in recent years when the economy was ‘running red hot’. I think a better term would be moribund. Of course, it could seem pretty good from the dizzying heights of a ministerial salary + perks.
So, like Lange and Douglas before him, it does not seem that Mr Goff knows any more about the economy than Mr Key. And consequently, we cannot anticipate any improvement from him, since if you persist in the ineffective habits of the past, no positive change is to be expected. In recent times, like the British Labour Party, New Zealand’s Labour party has been remarkable only for its desire to be epiphenomenal.
This being so, there is no reason whatsoever to vote for Mr Goff, indeed perhaps he has collected his sinecure for long enough.