Hughes Slips On Party List


Disappointing to see Greens’ transport spokesman Gareth Hughes be knocked down one rung on the Greens’ list announced today.
A newcomer, former Canterbury councillor and Forest and Bird spokesman Eugenie Sage gets in before him.

Greens will need to get seven MPs for Hughes to get into the next parliament. Last time the Greens increased their share of the vote to 6.72%, enough for 9 MPs. With Labour so woeful, they may pick up even more of a share unless they lose some to the new Mana party.

Wellington’s Jan Logie, who stood for the Greens in the recent Mana by-election, is at 9, with another  local body politician - Auckland’s Denise Roche - at 11.

Mrs Turei and fellow co-leader Russel Norman fill spots 1 and 2 on the Green Party list, with the Party’s five other current MPs who are standing again in the top eight.

Hughes at a pro CBD rail rally this month | J.F. Hall

The Green Party has ranked 30 candidates for the 2011 general election and has an additional 14 candidates currently confirmed to contest the party vote in November.

The list is:

1 Metiria Turei

2 Russel Norman

3 Kevin Hague

4 Catherine Delahunty

5 Kennedy Graham

6 Eugenie Sage

7 Gareth Hughes

8 David Clendon

9 Jan Logie

10 Steffan Browning




  1. James says:

    I was a bit disappointed by that too. Gareth Hughes has been excellent on transport issues. He seems to be the only person who questions the government about transport. Labour just doesnt seem to care

  2. Gareth says:

    Thanks for the support. I’m really happy to be in at 7 and will likely be back (with lots of new faces) to keep up the transport pressure on the Government.

    I was adjusted down a place to ensure we had a gender balance.

  3. The Trickster says:

    Its the namby pamby “gender balance” crap that pisses me off about the Greens.

    Gareth has been one of the hardest workers in this parliament and to put him a further place down the list in what could potentially be very tight circumstances is a mistake.

    In saying that Eugenie Sage might turn out to be a damn good MP too, but to ping one excellent MP because of gender reasons - its that kind of crap that turns people off the Green party as being “too PC” etc even though they have some excellent ideas and are certainly 1000x better than Labour at the moment.

  4. ingolfson says:

    Meh, while I echo the sentimen of wanting Gareth back in, at least “gender balance” is a easily understood criteria, not a backroom deal.

  5. Feijoa says:

    I am going to be a first time Greens voter, specifically because of the party’s transport policies and in particular the hard work you put in, Gareth.

    It seems like quite a different party compared to 10 years ago when I would never have considered voting for them. I hope a lot of other kiwis decide to put their vote where their ‘clean green’ intentions are.

  6. Owen Thompson says:

    Madness to demote a proven MP.

  7. Doloras says:

    What does “namby pamby” mean? Is it a gay slur, like Peter Dunne’s “pink think”?

  8. Anthony says:

    I just turned 18 on the 7th of May, and it looks like my first vote will go to the Greens. You have my full support Gareth!

  9. DT says:

    Doloras, see Namby Pamby

  10. tbird says:

    Almost got him mixed up with _Darren_ Hughes!

    Anthony, I voted Greens/Labour my first ever election at 18. I was a student in Dunedin at the time.

    The next election I voted Labour/Labour. I couldn’t bring myself to vote for the Greens because of their anti-science views. (This was around the time GE-food was big news).

    Many years later after working in the real world, and getting some life experience you realise that most of what they say does not make sense economically. And you begin to resent paying dole bludgers and sickness beneficiaries for smoking weed all day. (Plus new tires for their cars, all their fines, legal aid etc). You also begin to hate government interference in what lightbulbs you can use, and whether you are allowed to buy a double-down - have the Greens said it is too unhealthy and should be banned?

    Then, when you work closely with your boss, you realise that small business is a good thing. These are the people who are paying you, and if the business doesn’t succeed you don’t have a job. You realise how much money is written off from employee fraud and theft because it is too expensive to charge the thief.

    Greens have some good points. They were the only party who opposed the internet three-strikes law. Labour all voted in favour of this. The Greens also have a few more pollies who actually believe what they are saying, which is a good thing - even if it’s wrong. (c.f. Labour)

    Anyway, that was much longer than intended. Enjoy your first election - btw, it’s more enjoyable if you place a bet with iPredict.

  11. Cam says:

    @Deloras - Namby Pamby means weak and insipid. I’m surprised you’ve not heard the saying before. It is quite common.

  12. Doloras says:

    Gender balance is “weak and insipid”, then? I’m afraid I still don’t get it.

  13. Owen Thompson says:

    I would prefer a list based on merit, rather than sex.

  14. The Trickster says:

    Selecting someone based on the internal plumbing instead of on merit - yes it is weak and insipid and unfortunately things like that, alongside Morris Dancing is what puts people off the Green Party.

  15. The Trickster says:

    So Deloras, I take it your position is the following:

    If Person A is an excellent proven performer but is female and Person B is a new option but an unknown but is male and currently the party has more females than males in parliament you’d rather pick Person B instead of Person A?

    Would that still apply if as in my example that Person B happened to be male, or does it only work the other way around?

  16. kalelovil says:

    To quote the UN

    “Political parties are among the most important institutions affecting women’s political participation. The role of women in political parties a key determinant of their prospects for political empowerment, particularly at the national level.

    In many countries the rights of women are enshrined in law, and there are no formal legal barriers to women’s political participation in election processes. In practice, however, there are often formidable obstacles to women’s active participation in politics.

    In addition to dealing with unfavourable cultural predilections, women are often more likely than men to face practical barriers to entering politics, including a paucity of financial resources, lower levels of education, less access to information, greater family responsibilities, and a deprivation of rights that has left them with fewer opportunities to acquire political experience. With the exception of the close relatives of male politicians, women generally lack the political networks necessary for electoral success.

  17. luke says:

    Gareth was ranked 4 spots higher than last time.

  18. George D says:

    The logic of the 5% threshold in parliament for parties with no electorate MPs means that they will almost certainly have 7 MPs, or none at all. Gareth is guaranteed a seat in parliament if they make it past 5.1%. The list was chosen by the party, so it means that they ranked Hughes at 5 or 6 and he was swung back rather than forward. Better this open process than some autocratic handover which appoints a leader nobody asked for (Goff), a coup (Key), or a money and votes grab (Brash).

    Trickster, sounds like you’ve got some pretty strong opinions. Generally, as kalelovil notes, women affirmative policies mean that capable women are promoted, not at the expense of talent, but because of it.

  19. kalelovil says:

    In a sense its a chicken and egg situation.
    There needs to be strong representation of women in parliament to act as role-models for the next generation of female politicians, and to encourage women to participate in the political process, even if that just means voting.
    If there were less women in parliament then less women would vote.

    AFAIK the Green Party list is gender balanced in general, if there were women than men it would be adjusted as well.

    If you look at National I think only around 26% of their MPs are women and in 2008 there were only 4 women in the top 24 MPs in the list ranking. If nothing else the Greens are setting an example since the major parties are still failing to do so.

  20. ingolfson says:

    Morris Dancing? You are sure you haven’t been ‘discussing’ the correct use of weed with someone? ;-) I have been to a couple Greens events, and there was none of that…

    In fact, there were friendly people and insightful left-wing speeches at each event, which was the common thread I noticed. But no morris dancing, Trickster.

  21. Pim says:

    Yes, I think we need to get our facts straight before we go ranting on why or why not based on stereotypes and rumors. Not only will this ranting not benefit anyone (maybe your mental stability), it may also make people think that people like you are hard national voters, and also deter them from voting national. We all need to take the facts, and not listen to people who spin them. Not naming any names of course.

  22. The Trickster says:


    Hahaha. I don’t doubt that for a second and to be honest after a Google search the only reference to it was from right wing bloggers, an April Fools joke from the Greens themselves this year and Paul Holmes back in 2006. However I do vaguely remember some actual Morris dancing going on in the leadup to the 1999 or 2003 (?) election. I could be wrong however.

    Anyway, ultimately the thing is that unfortunately in some arenas perception is reality.

    Answer to your first question, promptly, and preferably sharing alike? Haha.


Leave a Comment


XHTML: You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>