He's no Obama, it's true, but his speech was the best I've seen from him, and it's as good as any other speech I've seen from a Labour leader in recent years.
I've been critical of David Shearer, but I liked what I saw today, and if we could see more of that sort of Shearer then I think much of the angst about his leadership would dissipate.
I accept that it's only one performance, and what Shearer really needs to do is speak confidently and with clarity whenever he is interviewed. Nailing a set speech is one thing, but being able to think on one's feet is critical.
Shearer's detractors tend to focus on a perceived inability to articulate clearly what he is on about, and what to them appears to be a failure on his part to move the party in a leftward direction. Shearer did all he could usefully do in one speech to address those concerns. His speech was solid and he made his points clearly, and there was little or none of the stumbling and stuttering we have seen from him in the past. He talked clearly about Labour's policies and values, and denounced the current hands-off economic model in a way that should have satisfied most party members.
It's possible that Shearer has finally found his groove. It's just as possible, I suppose, that nothing has really changed. I don't claim to have the answers, unlike so many of the pundits.
Shearer is now under immense pressure, with a leadership challenge seemingly under way, and with continuous calls for his head from various factions.
Any leadership battle will be messy, and Labour's enemies will be drooling over the bloody mess created by a caucus stoush, but perhaps the party just has to have this fight and get it over with. What won't help Labour, though, is three months of turmoil. There's speculation that Shearer may call for a caucus vote on his leadership in the next couple of days. Any such vote would (as I understand it) be conducted on a simple majority vote. There will also be a leadership vote in February, in which the leader will require at least 60% of the caucus to vote for him if he is to avoid a contest under the new 40-40-20 electoral college system being introduced. So there is potential for this to go on for months.
I suspect Shearer has a majority of the caucus on his side, but it is unclear whether he would have the 60% plus needed to win a vote in February. If Shearer calls for an early caucus vote and gets more than 60% of the caucus behind him, my hope is that any challenger will get the message and won't try their luck again in February. That vote would then become a formality.
I'm not inclined to take sides in any battle at this time, if there is to be one, and I'm beginning to find some of the cheerleading for one candidate over another in some sections of the media and blogosphere a bit wearying, if not tedious. "Fixing" the leadership is one of many things Labour has to do to be regarded as a credible opposition, and even if we get a new leader I see many problems still ahead.
It's hard to say how well this speech will have worked. There's no doubt it was well received at the conference, and it was easily Shearer's best performance, but...
ReplyDeleteThere was immediate criticism amongst the same old at The Standard. Some of the most dangerous (for now) critics don't seem to have changed their minds.
It may have clarified some things - ie signalling a completely different direction - but it didn't say a lot about how that would actually be done, and in fact some of the speech was very soft on change ie on maybe buying back assets.
For me there is still far too much political claptrap. Go back and read the first dozen or so lines of the speech without the buzz of the occasion and see what you think.
There was immediate criticism amongst the same old at The Standard.
DeleteSome of them will never change their minds. I'm not sure that's a useful gauge.
It may have clarified some things - ie signalling a completely different direction - but it didn't say a lot about how that would actually be done
It didn't have to go into specifics. It was a vision speech designed to motivate the party. Specifics are for an election year. Labour's critics on the left want to see signs that the party has repudiated the hands-off approach to economics. There was enough in the speech to satisfy some of those critics. Others will never be happy.
The speech was fine. Not a masterpiece of oratory, but a good speech that was well given and well received.
It seems to have motivated the party so it was successful on that count, but it was fairly vague on the vision front.
DeleteI'll be happy if I see the real David Shearer as opposed to the carefully coached and rehearsed David Shearer, but I suspect it's too late for that. He has become a construct.
People win support and elections, and the only real people stuff we seem to be seeing is dominated by ambition and conflict.
What I'm really worried about for Shearer is that he's pretty much established himself as an incoherent, inarticulate mess when a microphone is stuck into his face and that impression will be the one that sticks, regardless of whether or not it's true. I think what we need to see is Shearer appear to be relaxed and composed more often in a lot more settings. So basically more of the Shearer we saw when he eviscerated Nikki Kaye on Backbenchers a few months ago.
Deletesince I got back from conference tonight, I've had several (unsolicited) emails from other party members angry about Cunliffe's tactics. I think he is seriously underestimating how badly the membership will take a leadership challenge.
ReplyDeleteI think it's a bloody awful time to be fighting so blatantly for leadership, it has detracted substantially from what should be a prime party promotion.
DeleteDorothy, what tactics are they? I keep reading that there's disloyalty, and a big challenge coming up, but what is the actual evidence? Refusing to rule out a confidence vote is hardly gunning for the top job.
ReplyDeleteFirstline this morning was another Shearer train wreck.
ReplyDeleteI saw that interview and I thought Shearer did fine.
DeletePerhaps your expectations of "fine" have been beaten into submission by the deluge of "umms".
DeleteHe needs total immersion in a room for a year of kings speech type reprogramming.
Compare it with the violent assault that John key gave Rachel Smalley and her screechy sound bite persona on Sunday morning and then tell me he did "fine"
John Key's a strong communicator, and Shearer has a long way to go before he can get to that level. But Shearer's effort was fine. He made clear points and answered clearly the questions put to him.
DeleteSorry Scott, but Danyl at the Dim-Post called this one, well before the speech.
ReplyDeleteIn short: One-way communication versus Two-way. Shearer is fine on home turf, with weeks of preparation ... and nobody else at the microphone.
As soon as somebody challenges him (known as a "debate" or "interview") he struggles - painfully so. Barnsley Bill is wrong about everything, but today is an exception.
So Shearer's all set to win the election in 1914, with speeches to a crowded hall. In 2014 he would be a disaster.
But don't worry, there's no way Labour will let that happen. If Cunliffe is unacceptable, then Robertson will step up. It's a shame we have to waste even more time before the inevitable change, but the caucus must play their games, alas.
I think Shearer has had it. The Mallard led old-guard caucus clique isn't going to get it's early leadership vote. If one takes Shearer at his word then based on this mornings RNZ interview the caucus gang may be planning to try and expel Cunliffe.
ReplyDeleteIf that is so, it will simple further illustrate how isolated and out of touch the Mallard gang is, because there is no way the NZLP council will have a majority to expel Cunliffe.
Should Shearer try and expel Cunliffe and fail it would be the end of his leadership, he would have to resign. If he does not try and force an expulsion, it seems likely likely he'll be rolled in February. Either way, he is a dead man walking.
I don't expect the self-servers of the Mallard clique to take any of this lying down. The failure of their candidate will inevitably be followed by their purging when candidate selection takes place. I reckon those with strong electorate seats (and maybe a few others) will split and form their own party before that happens, and hope to hang on a la Peter Dunne - cyncial troughers selling their vote to whoever promise them a cabinet salary.
Have you seen the praise that the Herald political commentary team are throwing towards Shearer? Armstrong, Trevett and Young have all given Shearer 9 out of 10. Would that be somewhat consistent with your views, Scott?
ReplyDeleteIt was an excellent speech and he delivered it well. I'd also rate it highly. I've heard quite a few Shearer speeches, but none were anything like as good as the one he gave on Sunday.
Delete