The only thing I can remember him doing in relation to transport was jumping up in parliament to state he disliked the City Rail Link even more than Steven Joyce.
It was actually Bill English who jumped in with that comment but I agree it didn’t seem to be a great choice. To me it is quite telling how worried national must be on transport that it is being handed to someone so high up the pecking order.
A man of his girth is unlikely to be a fervent public transport supporter over road transport in a chaffeur driven car. Maybe he can be enlightened in the benefits of a walk to the train station for the public health purse.
Wow whale oil is scary stuff. Close down every bus service that doesn’t make a profit? I wonder if we can close down every school that doesn’t make a profit or every hospital or every road. Sounds rather like the 14th century.
How will this be any worse than what we had for the last 3 years? You can’t get much more pro-roads, 1960′s planning mentality than Joyce and Brownlee has just as little knowledge. It will simply be another hollow man of another name proposing more motorways. His dslike of heritage, demonstrated by his eagerness to bulldoze all of Chch is probably only surpassed by his dislike of PT. But that’s the National party through and through – anyone who expected change without a change in government was deluding themselves.
“Gerry Brownlee will return as Leader of the House, which he stepped down from to concentrate on the Christchurch earthquake recovery, and remains Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery. He also picks up transport.”
Does this mean Key doesn’t think his Government needs to concentrate on the Christchurch earthquake recovery anymore or does losing the Economic Development and Energy & Resources give Brownlee the time to bring the same genius to Transport and earthquake recovery that he demonstrated in those other portfolio’s? This is the guy who has used his CERA powers to authorise a subsidivision on the most unstable farmland on the outskirts of Kaiapoi so I rather think we wont be looking forward to a modern approach to rebuilding damaged transport infrastructure in the greater Christchurch urban transport catchments. Nor is it likely that funding the $750m of CCC road damage will be funded ahead of Joyce’s RoNS. At September’s Board meeting NZTA recommended dipping into the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Fund to the tune of $300m and capping it’s annual payments to CCC at half the amount it collects in RUCs and excise duty from traffic using CCC roads.
Oh no this is worse, the provincial minded ChCh bullying wrecker is worse than the scheming, but intelligent and energetic fixer. Brownlie’s natural tendency is to break stuff. He is there to break Len Brown. Joyce giving it up is interesting, I think he knows it gets harder from here.
Clearly Joyce feels he has made his mark here, he has set in tow years of spending. The ‘creative’ work has been done and now it just needs toughing out as it is executed. A job that a bullying plodder can manage. Also Brownlee, as No3, needed some face-saving for losing economic development, bingo- a swap. Joyce’s mitts will still be all over everything but Brownlee will now have to front against the pesky rail and PT lobby and deal with messes like the Rena grounding, while Joyce can fiddle with the much more abstract and ‘feel-good’ portfolio of economic development. Oh joy.
I think we should wait and see what he does before rushing to judgements, and he has a very thin record on transport issues so we don’t really know where he stands, but I agree its unlikely we’ll be pleasantly surprised.
Brownlee has probably been underestimated by most people. He almost became deputy-PM under Brash, handled not only both Christchurch earthquakes but also the Pike River disaster (as energy and resources minister) so has become a bit of the disaster response guy. The fact he has held major portfolios under Key (and also been important under Brash and English) indicates that those in the National Party who know him well (or atleast the leaders)rate him quite highly, and managing the whole rebuilding of Christchurch as well as building all the new motorways will be quite a big demanding job.
It will be interesting to see where he takes transport, but I don’t expect much change from Joyce.
By the weay regarding Kaye she has only been in Parliament for 3 years. She is still at the very begining of her political career and it will take time for her to get into cabinet etc
Pull-ya Benefit was a first-term MP who became minister of one of the most delicate portfolios. Leaving Kaye on the bench is calculated, rather than any reflection on her second-termer status.
Note that I’m not advancing any kind of conspiracy theory one way or the other about Kaye being left on the bench. Using Bennett for Welfare was an incredibly cynical move on Key’s part – “I was a DPB mum who got to take full advantage of the compassionate system that operated under Labour. Now that I’m here, I can pull up the ladder behind me and then accuse my former fellows of being lazy and unmotivated when they cannot achieve the same things I did.” Kaye doesn’t have the same utilitarian back-story that she can use to sell divisive, inhumane policies.
Both Joyce and Hekia Parata have also only been in parliament for 3 years and they are on the front bench.
I’m with Ingolfson. Kaye has never professed support of the CRL. I asked in specifically about her support and got a ‘I will work with the Minister of Transport and the Mayor of Auckland in working through what is right for Auckland’. Given the huge difference in stated goals between those two that’s hardly steadfast support for the link.
“By the weay regarding Kaye she has only been in Parliament for 3 years. She is still at the very begining of her political career and it will take time for her to get into cabinet etc”
Phil Goff and Helen Clark were both elected in 1981. Goff made Cabinet in 1984 while Clark had to wait another three years. Clark went on to spend nine years as PM and has a job at the UN. Goff just led Labour to their worst defeat in 80 years and is watching two other blokes fight over his job. Who would you rather be?
There are 24 National MPs elected in 2008 or earlier who aren’t Ministers. There aren’t enough senior jobs to go around when you’ve had the sort of electoral win National have just had. That might be an issue for them… too many people on the back bench with too much time on their hands. I suspect we’ll see a few old timers retiring during the term of this parliament with promotions and by-elections.
Still, Kaye will be pleased that so many people here are concerned with her career prospects.
“The only thing I can remember him doing in relation to transport was jumping up in parliament to state he disliked the City Rail Link even more than Steven Joyce.”
So, you are saying Brownlee doesn’t like Steven Joyce?
“This is bad” was my immediate reaction too. But we should give him the benefit of the doubt although if he puts as much thought into the portfolio as he did into the proposal to mine Schedule 4 (i.e. nil) we’re going to be very disappointed.
Need to face facts people, even if they put in the most pro-PT person in the National party in that role, not much if anything would have changed from the current situation. Despite the common notion, ministers don’t actually have that much autonomy to make policy decisions. They’re usually bound by party ideology (and internal party politics), Cabinet & the PM. So even if they got someone in there who wanted to build the CRL, they couldn’t do it without the party + cabinet + PM actually giving agreeing to it. The finance minister also has a big part to play it too. The only way things will truely change is a change in the party/cabinet mindset, or a change in government.
Kaye could always threaten to become an independent MP if the CRL doesn’t go through. What has she to lose? Nothing. What does National lose ? Its majority.
He did a terrible job as Earthquake Recovery Minister and the left swallowed him whole in Christchurch. Except of course National increased its vote by 7% in Christchurch, Labour lost 10% in the city, and Christchurch Central now has a National MP for the first time since the seat was created in 1946.
I would say that National won on the back of the departure of large numbers of residents from Christchurch, many of whom were from the lower-income and inner-city suburbs that traditionally support Labour. The certainly didn’t win on the back of 7% more votes than 2008.
In fact, National got fewer party votes nationally this year than they did in 2008. They won because Labour voters didn’t come to the polls, rather than because they swayed more people to vote for them. We’ve had three years of population increase, including the start of the mini-boom coming of voting age, and they couldn’t even achieve an increase in their absolute support.
That’s not a 7% increase, it’s about an 18.7% increase. You don’t even understand how to do the statistical maths.
An increase of 98 votes in the party vote doesn’t mean diddly, when one looks at how far Act’s share of the party vote dropped in absolute numbers. National couldn’t even capture 20% of the decrease in Act’s fortunes. Not exactly resounding success.
Yes that’s certainly my first thought.
Finance and Infrastructure – Bill English
Economic Development – Steven Joyce
Transport – Gerry Brownlee
Pretty well stitched up I’d say.
Uuuuurrrggghhhhh!!!!
It’s going to be a long 3 years.
Can I say it again? A fortnight ago you made a huge mistake New Zealand.
It was actually Bill English who jumped in with that comment but I agree it didn’t seem to be a great choice. To me it is quite telling how worried national must be on transport that it is being handed to someone so high up the pecking order.
Yeah English did jump in but I think Brownlee also jumped out of his seat or eagerly raised his hand. Will have to dig out the video.
A man of his girth is unlikely to be a fervent public transport supporter over road transport in a chaffeur driven car. Maybe he can be enlightened in the benefits of a walk to the train station for the public health purse.
Found it, the question is at 2:15 in and it looks like Brownlee raises his hand (he is in the far left of the shot at 2:25)
The highlights of his Wikipedia page are bashing an elderly protestor and wanting to mine the conversation estate. Oh fantastic.
Maybe we could get a geologist to say that there is a coal seem under the city running from Mt Eden to Britomart?
Ha ha. Good point.
My instant reaction was “OH GAAAAWD!”
Nikki Kaye gets nowt. Wonder if that is anything to do with supporting trams and the inner city rail link…
I hope not. Jeez, what a waste.
And Ingolfson- we’re not playing “No she didn’t, yes she did” again.
http://electwho.org.nz/nikki-kaye/
even the whale…
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/tag/rail/
Wow whale oil is scary stuff. Close down every bus service that doesn’t make a profit? I wonder if we can close down every school that doesn’t make a profit or every hospital or every road. Sounds rather like the 14th century.
Guys, the damage is done already. Don’t get all excited about (bad) business as usual.
Oh, and Nikki Kaye? Why should she get something? Also, she never supported the City Rail Link.
How will this be any worse than what we had for the last 3 years? You can’t get much more pro-roads, 1960′s planning mentality than Joyce and Brownlee has just as little knowledge. It will simply be another hollow man of another name proposing more motorways. His dslike of heritage, demonstrated by his eagerness to bulldoze all of Chch is probably only surpassed by his dislike of PT. But that’s the National party through and through – anyone who expected change without a change in government was deluding themselves.
“Gerry Brownlee will return as Leader of the House, which he stepped down from to concentrate on the Christchurch earthquake recovery, and remains Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery. He also picks up transport.”
Does this mean Key doesn’t think his Government needs to concentrate on the Christchurch earthquake recovery anymore or does losing the Economic Development and Energy & Resources give Brownlee the time to bring the same genius to Transport and earthquake recovery that he demonstrated in those other portfolio’s? This is the guy who has used his CERA powers to authorise a subsidivision on the most unstable farmland on the outskirts of Kaiapoi so I rather think we wont be looking forward to a modern approach to rebuilding damaged transport infrastructure in the greater Christchurch urban transport catchments. Nor is it likely that funding the $750m of CCC road damage will be funded ahead of Joyce’s RoNS. At September’s Board meeting NZTA recommended dipping into the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Fund to the tune of $300m and capping it’s annual payments to CCC at half the amount it collects in RUCs and excise duty from traffic using CCC roads.
Every new thing I learn about the National-led government has me asking “they can’t get any worse, can they?”
Now I learn they’re happily screwing Christchurch over. Truly irksome.
Oh no this is worse, the provincial minded ChCh bullying wrecker is worse than the scheming, but intelligent and energetic fixer. Brownlie’s natural tendency is to break stuff. He is there to break Len Brown. Joyce giving it up is interesting, I think he knows it gets harder from here.
Clearly Joyce feels he has made his mark here, he has set in tow years of spending. The ‘creative’ work has been done and now it just needs toughing out as it is executed. A job that a bullying plodder can manage. Also Brownlee, as No3, needed some face-saving for losing economic development, bingo- a swap. Joyce’s mitts will still be all over everything but Brownlee will now have to front against the pesky rail and PT lobby and deal with messes like the Rena grounding, while Joyce can fiddle with the much more abstract and ‘feel-good’ portfolio of economic development. Oh joy.
I think we should wait and see what he does before rushing to judgements, and he has a very thin record on transport issues so we don’t really know where he stands, but I agree its unlikely we’ll be pleasantly surprised.
Brownlee has probably been underestimated by most people. He almost became deputy-PM under Brash, handled not only both Christchurch earthquakes but also the Pike River disaster (as energy and resources minister) so has become a bit of the disaster response guy. The fact he has held major portfolios under Key (and also been important under Brash and English) indicates that those in the National Party who know him well (or atleast the leaders)rate him quite highly, and managing the whole rebuilding of Christchurch as well as building all the new motorways will be quite a big demanding job.
It will be interesting to see where he takes transport, but I don’t expect much change from Joyce.
By the weay regarding Kaye she has only been in Parliament for 3 years. She is still at the very begining of her political career and it will take time for her to get into cabinet etc
Pull-ya Benefit was a first-term MP who became minister of one of the most delicate portfolios. Leaving Kaye on the bench is calculated, rather than any reflection on her second-termer status.
Word I heard was that she is irritates Joyce, mind you that is probably in her favour….
Note that I’m not advancing any kind of conspiracy theory one way or the other about Kaye being left on the bench. Using Bennett for Welfare was an incredibly cynical move on Key’s part – “I was a DPB mum who got to take full advantage of the compassionate system that operated under Labour. Now that I’m here, I can pull up the ladder behind me and then accuse my former fellows of being lazy and unmotivated when they cannot achieve the same things I did.” Kaye doesn’t have the same utilitarian back-story that she can use to sell divisive, inhumane policies.
Both Joyce and Hekia Parata have also only been in parliament for 3 years and they are on the front bench.
I’m with Ingolfson. Kaye has never professed support of the CRL. I asked in specifically about her support and got a ‘I will work with the Minister of Transport and the Mayor of Auckland in working through what is right for Auckland’. Given the huge difference in stated goals between those two that’s hardly steadfast support for the link.
“By the weay regarding Kaye she has only been in Parliament for 3 years. She is still at the very begining of her political career and it will take time for her to get into cabinet etc”
Phil Goff and Helen Clark were both elected in 1981. Goff made Cabinet in 1984 while Clark had to wait another three years. Clark went on to spend nine years as PM and has a job at the UN. Goff just led Labour to their worst defeat in 80 years and is watching two other blokes fight over his job. Who would you rather be?
There are 24 National MPs elected in 2008 or earlier who aren’t Ministers. There aren’t enough senior jobs to go around when you’ve had the sort of electoral win National have just had. That might be an issue for them… too many people on the back bench with too much time on their hands. I suspect we’ll see a few old timers retiring during the term of this parliament with promotions and by-elections.
Still, Kaye will be pleased that so many people here are concerned with her career prospects.
“The only thing I can remember him doing in relation to transport was jumping up in parliament to state he disliked the City Rail Link even more than Steven Joyce.”
So, you are saying Brownlee doesn’t like Steven Joyce?
“This is bad” was my immediate reaction too. But we should give him the benefit of the doubt although if he puts as much thought into the portfolio as he did into the proposal to mine Schedule 4 (i.e. nil) we’re going to be very disappointed.
Oh. Dear.
So nothing changes basically.
Need to face facts people, even if they put in the most pro-PT person in the National party in that role, not much if anything would have changed from the current situation. Despite the common notion, ministers don’t actually have that much autonomy to make policy decisions. They’re usually bound by party ideology (and internal party politics), Cabinet & the PM. So even if they got someone in there who wanted to build the CRL, they couldn’t do it without the party + cabinet + PM actually giving agreeing to it. The finance minister also has a big part to play it too. The only way things will truely change is a change in the party/cabinet mindset, or a change in government.
Kaye could always threaten to become an independent MP if the CRL doesn’t go through. What has she to lose? Nothing. What does National lose ? Its majority.
Excellent point Zeus…
What was that House of Cards quote?
“You might well think that, I couldn’t possibly comment.”
Why can’t Nicky play pork barrel politics? Or is that exclusively reserved for South Canterbury Farmers ?
Sorry I mean Nikki
Chris Tremain, Associate Minister of Transport
“this is a potential solution which may ensure that using rail is a real alternative to trucks”
http://www.christremain.co.nz/index.php?/archives/94-KIWI-RAIL-CONSIDERS-FORESTRY-HUB-FOR-WAIROA-AREA.html
Brownlee is terrible. But so terrible its probably going to work in favour for the left. He won’t last, he’ll be swallowed whole.
He did a terrible job as Earthquake Recovery Minister and the left swallowed him whole in Christchurch. Except of course National increased its vote by 7% in Christchurch, Labour lost 10% in the city, and Christchurch Central now has a National MP for the first time since the seat was created in 1946.
Well in Obi. But it think that more to do with the appeal of John Key and how matesy he is with Richie McCaw and rugby in general?
Time will tell!
Herald editorial this morning describes Brownlee’s selection as ‘perplexing’.
Actually, obi, National lost votes in Christchurch Central. So did Labour, obviously, but you cannot claim that National got 7% more votes than 2008 when they very clearly didn’t.
2008 results for Christchurch Central: 13,134 for National candidate
2011 results for Christchurch Central: 12,064 for National candidate
I would say that National won on the back of the departure of large numbers of residents from Christchurch, many of whom were from the lower-income and inner-city suburbs that traditionally support Labour. The certainly didn’t win on the back of 7% more votes than 2008.
In fact, National got fewer party votes nationally this year than they did in 2008. They won because Labour voters didn’t come to the polls, rather than because they swayed more people to vote for them. We’ve had three years of population increase, including the start of the mini-boom coming of voting age, and they couldn’t even achieve an increase in their absolute support.
National Christchurch Central party vote 2008 = 37.58%.
National Christchurch Central party vote 2011 = 44.63%.
That is where the 7% comes from. They also increased the absolute number of votes by a small amount.
That’s not a 7% increase, it’s about an 18.7% increase. You don’t even understand how to do the statistical maths.
An increase of 98 votes in the party vote doesn’t mean diddly, when one looks at how far Act’s share of the party vote dropped in absolute numbers. National couldn’t even capture 20% of the decrease in Act’s fortunes. Not exactly resounding success.