Phil Twyford is Labour’s campaign chair for next year, he is also a massive liability because he was the architect of the Chinky names attack and not even Helen Clark trusted the weasel.
Stacey Kirk looks closely at Phil Twyford…no doubt she will be attacked for her efforts.
There’s an argument that attacking the messenger sends a message itself.
If that’s the case, Labour MP Phil Twyford might like to take another look at the image he’s conveying – both for himself and his party.
His reaction to a report revealing initial gaps in the costing of a key Labour policy, to pay young people the minimum wage for up to six months of community work, was nothing short of Trumpian.
To that end, perhaps it was entirely intentional.
It transpired a six-month, $60m policy had only been calculated on a four-month average – a fact they did not disclose. It meant that when reporters did their sums, the numbers didn’t add up.
Twyford, and the rest of Labour did not like the claim in a TV report, it had gotten its figures wrong.
They had not, and were perhaps within their rights to feel aggrieved at that.
But their omission was glaring, and if deliberate then misleading. If not deliberate, then concerning.
Either way, it was something they should expect to be called out on, which perhaps makes Twyford’s reaction all the more nasty.
He publicly attacked said TV journalist – incidentally one of New Zealand’s most respected political reporters – for doing her job and questioning the apparent gap in the numbers.
Describing the report as “biased” and a “hatchet job” on Twitter, he doubled down on the nastiness the following day.
What has many baffled is why he was allowed to launch into such a diatribe without a flick from his leader or the wider party.
Andrew Little has not publicly supported Twyford’s media attack, though he hasn’t denounced it either.