Audrey on the Green flip-flop

Audrey Young is a seasoned political journalist. And she knows a strategic retreat, the swallowing of a dead rat or a flip-flop when she sees one; she opines:

The Green Party's ditching of its money-printing policy is a welcome dose of pragmatism from the so-called party of principle.
From the moment it was announced last October until today's back-down, the party has been beaten about the head for it by political opponents.
Quite why the Greens didn't see that coming is a mystery.
No one ever marched in the streets demanding quantitative easing.
It was a vanity policy, allowing Greens co-leader Russel Norman to show he could foot it in the big international debates of the day.
That was unnecessary. Dr Norman was already establishing his credentials as a highly credible economic spokesman.
It was political blindness not to see it would be used as weapon against them from day one.
Perhaps what wasn't so predictable was that it would be used effectively against Labour as well, the Greens potential coalition partner in Government.

But Norman and his economic advisers were too caught up in the policy to see the politics of it. 

Audrey Young is right on the money here, especially with that last line. Leading up to yesterday, the political realities caught up with the Greens, and they were forced to make an embarrassing back-down. 

And we agree with Young's assessment of Norman establishing some credibility. We blogged several times after the 2011 election and Labour's leadership change that Dr Norman was performing like a de facto Leader of the Opposition. More recently though, that is less applicable as Green policies and personal attacks bring greater scrutiny to the party.

Audrey Young closes with a reminder to the good Dr Norman:

Norman suggested there had been no blow back from his own party members over his money-printing plan - though that is hard to judge given that the news media was banned from large portions of their conference at Queen's Birthday weekend.
Norman this morning said that during the Labour-Greens- New Zealand First inquiry into manufacturing, it became clear he did not have the support for the policy to be implemented.
With respect, that was also obvious from day one when David Parker pointed out it would not support telling the independent Reserve Bank Governor what to do - and it was already a tool he could use now it were deemed necessary.
It says it has ditched the policy because it has listened. More likely it doesn't want to listen to the mockery of the Prime Minister for the next 18 months about money printing.
Yes, it is a policy being pursued to stimulate some of the biggest economies in the world - US, UK and Japan.
That does not follow it could simply be replicated easily by small countries with similar results.
Smaller countries are more vulnerable. Smaller parties too, Dr Norman has been reminded.

What? The Greens banned media from large portions of their conference at Queen's Birthday weekend? Whatever happened to the Greens' reputation for openness and transparency? Was that merely a facade, like the value which stated that they would argue policies, not personalities?

And the point that Audrey Young makes about the Greens being a small party is worth noting. The Greens did well in 2011, but that was at the expense at Labour, which slumped to its worst election result in something like 70 years.  The Greens' result should not necessarily be seen as a vote of confidence from the public.

Russel Norman and his adviser Clinton "Hey Clint" Smith can play all the word-games they want, as DPF notes. Instead of shooting the messenger, the Greens need to be honest about the reasons why this policy was ditched, and accept the political fall-out.