Labour endorsing candidates in DCC election
Incumbent Dunedin city councillor Steve Walker (right) and hopeful Jett Groshinski, pictured yesterday in George St, have been given Labour Party endorsement for the coming October local body elections for the Dunedin City Council. PHOTO: PETER MCINTOSH
Labour has announced it is endorsing two candidates for the Dunedin City Council at this year's election.
They are incumbent councillor Steve Walker and Jett Groshinski, who at present holds the post of political representative at the Otago University Students' Association (OUSA).
A statement from the Labour Party yesterday said that there had been a "a robust and considered selection process".
Cr Walker, who was first elected to the council in 2019, had served two successful terms as a Labour-endorsed councillor, the statement said.
Mr Groshinski, a former mayoral and council candidate in the 2022 elections, was actively involved in community advocacy, with a focus on student wellbeing, accessible public transport and creating inclusive civic spaces, the statement said.
"Southern Labour is confident that both candidates bring the experience, passion and progressive values needed to represent the diverse voices of Dunedin and build a fairer, more sustainable city for all," it said.
In 2022, Labour endorsed Cr Walker and Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board chairwoman Joy Davis, who was unsuccessful in her bid to join the council. — APL
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
London mayor says King apologised for taking so long to knight him
The King apologised to Sadiq Khan for 'taking so long' to knight him, Labour's Mayor of London has claimed. Khan was given the honour by the monarch at Windsor Castle today NZT after being nominated by the British Prime Minister. The knighthood went ahead despite more than 220,000 people signing
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
With so many parties 'ruling out' working with each other, is MMP losing its way?
Analysis - There has been a lot of "ruling out" going on in New Zealand politics lately. In the most recent outbreak, both the incoming and outgoing deputy prime ministers, ACT's David Seymour and NZ First's Winston Peters, ruled out ever working with the Labour Party . Seymour has also advised Labour to rule out working with Te Pāti Māori . Labour leader Chris Hipkins has engaged in some ruling out of his own , indicating he won't work with Winston Peters again. Before the last election, National's Christopher Luxon ruled out working with Te Pāti Māori . And while the Greens haven't yet formally ruled anyone out, co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has said they could only work with National if it was prepared to "completely U-turn on their callous, cruel cuts to climate, to science, to people's wellbeing". Much more of this and at next year's general election New Zealanders will effectively face the same scenario they confronted routinely under electoral rules the country rejected over 30 years ago. Under the old "first past the post" system, there was only ever one choice: voters could turn either left or right. Many hoped Mixed Member Proportional representation ( MMP ), used for the first time in 1996, would end this ideological forced choice. Assuming enough voters supported parties other than National and Labour, the two traditional behemoths would have to negotiate rather than impose a governing agenda. Compromise between and within parties would be necessary. By the 1990s, many had tired of doctrinaire governments happy to swing the policy pendulum from right to left and back again. In theory, MMP prised open a space for a centrist party which might be able to govern with either major player. In a constitutional context where the political executive has been described as an " elected dictatorship ", part of the appeal of MMP was that it might constrain some of its worst excesses. Right now, that is starting to look a little naive. For one thing, the current National-led coalition is behaving with the government-by-decree style associated with the radical, reforming Labour and National administrations of the 1980s and 1990s. Most notably, the coalition has made greater use of Parliamentary urgency than any other government in recent history, wielding its majority to avoid Parliamentary and public scrutiny of contentious policies such as the Pay Equity Amendment Bill . Second, in an ironic vindication of the anti-MMP campaign 's fears before the electoral system was changed - that small parties would exert outsized influence on government policy - the two smaller coalition partners appear to be doing just that. It is neither possible nor desirable to quantify the degree of sway a smaller partner in a coalition should have. That is a political question, not a technical one. But some of the administration's most unpopular or contentious policies have emerged from ACT ( the Treaty Principles Bill and the Regulatory Standards legislation ) and NZ First ( tax breaks for heated tobacco products ). Rightly or wrongly, this has created a perception of weakness on the part of the National Party and the prime minister. Of greater concern, perhaps, is the risk the controversial changes ACT and NZ First have managed to secure will erode - at least in some quarters - faith in the legitimacy of our electoral arrangements. Lastly, the party system seems to be settling into a two-bloc configuration: National/ACT/NZ First on the right, and Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori on the left. In both blocs, the two major parties sit closer to the centre than the smaller parties. True, NZ First has tried to brand itself as a moderate "common sense" party, and has worked with both National and Labour, but that is not its position now. In both blocs, too, the combined strength of the smaller parties is roughly half that of the major player . The Greens, Te Pāti Māori, NZ First and ACT may be small, but they are not minor. In effect, the absence of a genuinely moderate centre party has meant a return to the zero-sum politics of the pre-MMP era. It has also handed considerable leverage to smaller parties on both the left and right of the political spectrum. Furthermore, if the combined two-party share of the vote captured by National and Labour continues to fall (as the latest polls show ), and those parties have nowhere else to turn, small party influence will increase. For some, of course, this may be a good thing. But to those with memories of the executive-centric, winner-takes-all politics of the 1980s and 1990s, it is starting to look all too familiar. The re-emergence of a binary ideological choice might even suggest New Zealand - lacking the constitutional guardrails common in other democracies - needs to look beyond MMP for other ways to limit the power of its governments. * Richard Shaw is a Professor of Politics at Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa - Massey University - This story originally appeared on The Conversation.
Scoop
12 hours ago
- Scoop
Labour Keeps Door Open For Te Pāti Māori, But Urges Focus On ‘Core Areas'
Chris Hipkins says Te Pti Mori needs to focus on important issues such as jobs, health and homes, like Labour is. Chris Hipkins says Te Pāti Māori needs to focus on important issues such as jobs, health and homes, like Labour is, keeping the door open to working with them despite three of their MPs being suspended from Parliament. Labour Māori development spokesperson Willie Jackson told Te Pāti Māori not every Māori supported them after three of its MPs disrupted a vote on the Treaty Principles Bill last year with a haka. The party could have responded differently after the three representatives – co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi, and first-term MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke – were referred to the Privileges Committee, and suspended, Jackson said last week. 'They love you, I love you, but some of the stuff is not going down well,' Jackson said. Labour Party said last month while it agreed the actions met the criteria of contempt, it was concerned that the penalties were 'unduly severe'. Labour's own Peeni Henare took part in the haka, but was not suspended after apologising. Hipkins told Morning Report on Monday the feedback he was getting from around the country was that Māori wanted to see Labour focused on the issues that bring New Zealanders together and lead the country forward. 'That includes focusing on things like jobs, health, homes, the sorts of things that New Zealanders all want to see their government focused on.' He said while his party worked in co-operation with Te Pāti Māori, they were also in competition for votes. 'We have previously held all the Māori electorates, we'd like to do so again. We're gonna, you know, we're gonna go out there and contest those vigorously at the next election, but we can also work together on areas where we have common ground.' The most recent RNZ-Reid Research poll found Labour could lead the next government, but it would need both the Greens and Te Pāti Māori. Hipkins said Labour would look to have a similar relationship with Te Pāti Māori as it had with the Green Party and 'set out clear parameters for a working relationship'. 'I think that's one of the things that Christopher Luxon hasn't done with ACT and with New Zealand First to say, 'Look, these are the areas where we think we can work together. These are the areas where we're not willing to compromise.' 'And, you know, I think that includes setting clear standards of expectation around ministerial behaviour – so anyone who's going to be a minister in any government that I lead will be expected to behave like a minister, and that doesn't vary by party. 'So unlike Christopher Luxon who seems to think that Winston Peters and David Seymour are subject to different rules to everybody else; I think all ministers should be subjected to the same rules.' Hipkins rejected a suggestion that Jackson was appeasing pākeha with his comments. 'Ultimately, if you want to be part of the government, then you need to follow the rules of the government.' Asked how Labour could work with a party whose MPs broke those rules, Hipkins said it was 'ultimately' down to voters. 'We're going to be going out there competing vigorously for every vote we can get for Labour. If people believe in the sorts of things that the Labour Party believes in, they want to see a government that's focused on core areas like jobs, health, and homes, then they need to vote for Labour in order to achieve that.' Hipkins said he would prefer to have an 'environment where the government of the day, whomever that was, always had a majority'. 'That would be great, but that's not the reality. That's not what New Zealand voters have chosen for our electoral system. They've chosen a system in which we have to work with other political parties. 'I think unlike the current government though, I'll be clear that, you know, there are some areas where, we, we will have standards and everybody will have to follow them.'
