What is Labour doing in Epsom?

Sources inside Labour are telling this blog that there is disquiet within Labour at the tactics being employed in Epsom to destroy ACT.

Strategically destroying ACT makes sense for Labour as takes a coalition partner out, so National has to govern alone. As this blog has repeatedly pointed out National has almost no chance of regularly getting the 48% required to govern alone, so it is a sensible move from Labour to attack ACT.

Labour have got it wrong by running stupid attacks and lying and this is what is causing concern. One of the few Labour MPs with any degree of integrity in his past, David Parker, has to take responsibility for a hamfisted brochure attacking Banks. Then there are the untrue malicious rumours about Banks that no one is brave enough to publish because they know they will be sued.

Then in a fit of stupidity Parker has attacked the Sensible Sentencing Trust for donating to ACT in exchange for getting David Garrett a high list position. This is obviously untrue and Sensible Sentencing have referred this to their solicitors. SST have plenty of lawyers who work pro bono so Parker is likely to have to make a full and groveling apology for lying or face legal action and more news cycles labeling him as nasty and a liar.

Only Labour in 2011 could come up with a good strategy and then bugger up the execution.

  • Peteremcc

    It’s not even a good strategy.

    The more desperate the Labour attacks on Banks get, the more obvious it is to National supporters in Epsom that they need to vote Banks.

    • RW4L

      Banks is a wanker anyway. He should leave ACT and join UF with the other Fanatical Christians.

  • Bill Barnsley

    “One of the few Labour MPs with any degree of integrity in his past, David Parker”.
    Bwahahaha.
    The only surprise is that he has managed to climb off Chris Knox’s wife long enough to actually bother campaigning.
    He fits right in with the rest of the immoral, thieving, lieing degenerates that currently infest the party workers party.

  • jonno1

    I’m puzzled by the anti-Banks rhetoric flying around – not so much that originating from Labour and Labour supporters who recognise the danger, as desperation can lead to all sorts of irrational behaviours including ad homs. But it’s the criticism from those who might be presumed to be right-wingers that seems out of place. I believe Whaleoil has it right in saying that National needs ACT, and it follows that ACT needs John Banks.
     
    But it’s true that ACT under Don Brash has messed up badly, for example that marijuana comment was bizarre, although at least he honestly stated his position on this. There almost seem to be two ACTs, or ACT factions: the conservative wing (based on judeo-christian ethics), and the libertarian wing. So if the libertarians are taking over ACT, then maybe Colin Craig is onto something with his Conservative Party filling a gap.

83%