Goff soft on flag, Shane Jones tough: Who is the Leader?

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 9:50a.m.

The Maori Tino Rangatiratanga flag

By Duncan Garner

Phil Goff has lost the courage of his convictions. He's wimped out.

At his race relations speech three weeks ago Goff accused the Government of pandering to the Maori Party.

He highlighted the ETS deal. He said deals like this have the potential to divide NZ, to pit Maori against Pakeha.

He said he will continue to speak out about such pandering - and won't be shut down.

That was until last night.

I asked him numerous questions about John Key's decision to fly the Maori Tino Rangatiratanga flag on Waitangi Day - and he was weak in his response.

Where was the Phil Goff from three weeks ago? Is he dead?

If anything is pandering to the Maori Party, then this flag decision surely rates a mention if Goff is going to continue his theme.

So let’s compare Goff's meek and mild pussyfoot reaction compared to the man I now call his main leadership rival in the caucus - Shane Jones.

From my interview with Goff last night;

Duncan: Does Labour support the decision?

Goff: It's not a big issue for me, I quite like the design of the flag. I don't mind there being a flag that represents the pride of Maori people and Maoridom, but for me, the real flag for me is the flag we fly everyday of the year. That's the flag that Kiwis, Maori and Pakeha fought and died under for their country.

Duncan: But you have no problem flying it on one particular day?

Goff: I have no particular problem with flying the Tino Rangatiratanga flag, it's a good design. That's fine by me.

And get this;

Duncan: Do you think Key is pandering to the Maori Party on this one?

Goff: No that's not an issue I worry about. I worry about an issue where New Zealand gets an appalling piece of legislation like the Emissions Trading Scheme.

So, Goff has no problem with the flag. Presumably Labour has no problem.

Well, who knows. I'm confused, especially when you listen to Labour MP Shane Jones' comments this morning.

Jones said on Radio NZ;

"This is a sop to the Maori Party".

"This is a farce".

"This is Hone's flag".

So who is the leader here? What is Labour's position? Why has Goff backed off his criticism of National and its relationship with the Maori Party.

Goff looks soft on this - when there's plenty of room to criticise. He appears to have lost the courage of his convictions.

Where does that leave the status and credibility of his race relations speech?

In politics there's always someone willing to fill the void.

Cue Winston.

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide

Name

(Won't be published)

Your comment

Comments

08 Mar 2010 07:00p.m.

simon wrote:

duncan lets see ya be half that tough on key an national , you wouldent bloody dare would ya . what a dork mate .

10 Feb 2010 01:29a.m.

Paulus Telfer wrote:

The only flag to replace and fly in New Zealand and that is the 51st State flag, thereby no more the City of London appointing and running the NZ government, which economically results in placing New Zealand 72 out of 73 states of all the North America and Australia states combined, with New Zealand just narrowly beating Prince Edward Island.

20 Jan 2010 06:35p.m.

amanda wrote:

Deanne I think you should take over Duncan's job

22 Dec 2009 02:07a.m.

Alex wrote:

It's not really that hard to believe that a media owned and controlled by corporations is going to avoid reporting issues or events that are detrimental to the interests of corporations, or that they might actually engage in the creation of propaganda that is favourable to them. The reliance on advertising revenue to generate a profit leads media organisations to report things that will get them the highest number of viewers. This means reporting stupid, useless crap like the separation of conjoined twins, Paris Hilton's latest sex video or which celebrity's cheating on their partner - lowest common denominator (this means appealing to the most people, not to the dumbest people) stuff to attract as many viewers as possible, at the expense of issues and events which are objectively much more important - eg. the genocide in East Timor that went more or less unreported throughout the 90s, or Saddam Hussein's genocide of the Kurds that went unreported when it first happened because the West supported Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war. When it was time for the first Gulf War that changed, and the whole world knew about the killing of Kurds in Iraq. If reporting something potentially means the loss of profit chances are it'll go unreported, or at least have very little attention paid to it. Note I'm not accusing Duncan Garner of propaganda or bias here; just pointing out it's incredibly naive to think a privately owned and controlled media doesn't have its own interests that will distort reality to suit itself.

15 Dec 2009 02:34p.m.

cherie wrote:

Deane how come you always bang on about the media being one sided.
You see from people on the right they think the media are anti them.
The media will go anyone who puts their head up and makes a blue or flip flops or tells lies.
Both National and Labour get done in this regard.
That is the medias job silly, otherwise if it was only one sided it would be very boring wouldn't it, and people like you would have nothing to moan, nag and whine about. And people like me would have nothing to laugh about!!

15 Dec 2009 12:35p.m.

Alien wrote:

Deane, do you have a clue? Most likely not. As someone who lives in the South Island, I know for a fact people have been able to fit their homes out with the governments help with insulation, I also know that through winter where I live was typically warmer than the north island. Now listen carefully, because I don't think you understand this. Every day the government deals with a lot of different issues. It is the media to report on these, not to focus on the fact that the National ETS means we paying half of what we would have to under Labour. It is the media's job to report on all issues, not a one trick pony like Goff, who has one issue and can't move past it until he realizes that he is failing yet again. As for water privitzation, again do you know your facts? Because all national has done has added on to what Labour did with privatizing Auckland's water. Jezz, go learn your facts before you mouth off. Typical Labour supporter, doesn't know much

15 Dec 2009 11:41a.m.

Duncan Garner wrote:

Deane, if you track back I think you'll find a very recent blog and news stories where we question Key about his Copenhagen u-turn, and I have lost track of the number of stories we have done this year piling into Bill English. Get some perspective mate - this is an isolated blog about Goff's change and weakening of position. I stand by it. Thanks for your comments.

15 Dec 2009 11:11a.m.

Deane Bird wrote:

Another point I failed to mention here is that flying the flag is all about perception. It has a feel good factor, the perception that somehow despite adversity, Maori and no Maori are "United" working side by side.

We all know that water is becoming an expensive product, the sooner our water ways can be corporatized, the more money is the be made.

By removing Maori representation in local government, will make it harder for Maori guardianship of our water ways despite reference to guardianship in the RMA.

The reality is that Maori are now worse off than ever. Why, they got hit real badly with the super city seats being squashed. There is now way they will get representation on Maori issues facing the Auckland super city, especially the sale of assets.

Then there were axing of Maori representation on the polytechnic and technical institutes boards.

The worst hit by the tax cuts were low paid Maori, as well as cuts to special education affecting low income people, sadly mostly Maori.

Then there is the home insulation scheme in Northland, the warmest part in NZ, where Maori in the south missed out which happens to be the coldest.

Can anyone please explain to me the logic in that?

They can do all the touchy feely feel good propaganda they like, but at the end of the day, the real proof is in the income gap between Maori and non Maori, and sadly this government has exploited them for political gain, leaving them with nothing but a few trees.

I think the whole saga is sad really, and I really feel for those given false hope.

You can only get way with propaganda for so long, and when it is to late, Geoff in his orginal speech will turn out to be right.

Maori will be against Maori, Maori against non Maori and so on and so on.

The speech was a warning from an experienced diplomat based on experience.

You see its not just about flying the flag, its about money.

15 Dec 2009 10:45a.m.

j wrote:

I have to agree with Phil on this one. An ETS has much more of a resounding effect on all New Zealanders, in contrast, flying a flag from a bridge means nothing.
Bit of a beat up here Duncan - you know Shane is talking on behalf of many in the North who'd rather see the united tribes flag flown.
It's sad to see the propgation of negative race relations coming from someone who's known in this country as being a leading political personality.
Hats off to Goff who hasn't fallen into the guttural politics of Brash, Peters, or yourself.

15 Dec 2009 10:43a.m.

Deane Bird wrote:

Duncan, the issue here is not whether a dam flag is being flown, what colour it is, but rather the ETS, and how it is being handled.

You as a journalist should be focusing on that not the dam flag.

Again your sloppy journalism has let us, the educated public down once again.

Now, what about JKs even worse flip flop over attending to Copenhagen, and embarrassment he has caused New Zealand.

That has wider international political implications affecting NZ then flying the flag.

Last night Geoff was placed in a situation where no matter what he said, in your eyes he has is wrong. It was a set up.

If he said I oppose the flag, then he is a racist and is compared to bigot Don. If he said he supported it, then he is accused of flip flopping and if he gave a fair answer for diplomacy, then he’s weak.

Get real Duncan, you stop pussy footing around JK and start demanding answers about his stuff ups, and the stuff ups about Bill English continuously contradicting John Key over the recession, and the rest of the National MPs contradicting Bill.

Just recently two National MPs in Hamilton painted a gloomy picture of the recession and justifying their cuts. When in the NZ Herald Bill English is touting that the recession is all but over, oh, by the way unemployment is still expected to rise.