Tracy Watkins

Tracy Watkins article on Hekia Parata starts with the headline:

“Parata loses her poise under pressure”

Then it goes on to say:

When Hekia Parata was promoted to the education portfolio, she was pegged by some as a future leader, ruffling a few feathers among her colleagues.

All the ingredients were there – a rags to riches back story, professional success and powerful mentors, including Finance Minister Bill English and Prime Minister John Key, who saw in her an echo of his own rise to the top.

But she also had the all important X-factor – supreme self-assurance, an engaging personality and a guffawing laugh that could fill a room.

As blunders mounted one on top of the other in the education portfolio, however, Ms Parata’s poise deserted her. Hard questions were met with obfuscation and, when under stress, she reached for the bureaucrat’s trick of papering over the cracks with jargon.

The pressure began to tell in other, more personal, ways. Beehive insiders talk about a tense and poisonous atmosphere within her ministerial office, brought on by an increasingly demanding minister, who was out of her depth and casting around for others to blame.

The only part Tracy Watkins left out was that Hekia lobbied hard for the Education portfolio, she elbowed Tolley out of the way believing and selling the PM that she could do a better a job.

Why Hekia being a total disaster as Education Minister surprises anyone is a shock. She is an arrogant, unpleasant bully, and was called out by this blog on November 14th 2010 when Audrey Young, who should know better, wrote a hagiographic article about Hekia.

Fairfax and APN editors should start asking a few questions of their political journalists. They have really dropped the ball on this one. They should ask the following questions:

• After losing five parliamentary Executive Assistants in the first two years in parliament, do they think Hekia will front the next CTU anti 90 day advertisement?
• Are they aware that if you lose four EAs in around a year Parliamentary Services remove your right to recruit your own office staff?
• Do they know why the Maori Affairs select committee had a change of personnel? And was it because Hekia was publicly yelling at Tau Henare, who was actually in the same party as her, for those press gallery reporters who were in some doubt?
• Have they scrutinised her employment record in her career before she entered parliament?
• Are they confident she would be able to run a ministerial office, and work with departmental chief executives and staff, or would they need a special golden handshake fund for her department?

Hekia Parata might make a good person to be the MP for Mana, but being one of Bill English’s acolytes and having a rotating door on staff at a rate equal to or better than McCully doesn’t make her a good prospect for cabinet.

There are better choices and ones who would be more effective.

The omnishambles that has been Hekia’s tenure as minister of education was clearly predictable. The questions above should have alerted enough the most bovine journalistic intellect to the problems Hekia would face.

The only real question for John Key is will he let someone he would have instantly fired at Merrill Lynch continue to pull him down in the polls?

Percentages.    They’re hard.

From Stuff Politics today:

Voters have responded by giving it a marginal fail for its performance this year – on a scale of zero to 10, the average score was 4.9 per cent.

Tracy Watkins deserves a D on a scale of zero to 10.

Winston Peters got slung out of the house today for his utter petulance. Tracy Watkins writes:

Parliament’s tribute to three dead Kiwi soldiers has been married by acrimony which led to NZ First leader Winston Peters being ejected after parliament’s Speaker accused MPs of behaving like spoilt brats.

Speaker Lockwood Smith ordered Mr Peters out after a series of exchanges following a tribute to three kiwi soldiers killed in Afghanistan on Sunday.

Dr Smith said Parliament had just paid tribute to the soldiers who had lost their lives.

“And we carry on like spoilt brats.”

After Mr Peters left, Dr Smith said he had received “numerous complaints” in recent days from people concerned about the behaviour of MPs in the house.

The exchange occurred during normal parliamentary business and question time after MPs delivered speeches honouring the dead soldiers. Mr Peters was disputing the way Prime Minister John Key had answered a question.

Now he is “explaining” in a press release, attacking Tracy Watkins and even spells her name incorrectly.

New Zealand First says Fairfax reporter Tracey Watkins latest diatribe on events in Parliament today is a disgraceful piece of journalism.

Rt Hon Winston Peters says tributes to three dead soldiers occurred in Parliament but business had then moved on to Question Time.

“To suggest what happened in Question Time reflects on their memory is totally irresponsible but not untypical of this reporter.

As regular readers will know, explaining is losing and it looks like Winston peters will be joining Trevor Mallard at the dementia ward.

I see that John Drinnan has caught up with my post about Shearer’s dinner with Sky TV’s lobbyist, Tony O’Brien.  Drinnan appears to get the serious perception issues around Shearer meeting with O’Brien in a private setting.

The dinner party was alluded to by the right-wing blogger Whale Oil.

Alluded to? I wrote a full detailed post about it, that said this happened…if that was alluding I wonder what I have to do to be obvious…post a video of Shearer pulling up outside?

Anyway…Does anyone remember ‘Dinnergate’?  Shipley and Saatchi’s Kevin Roberts spent weeks answering questions about the appropriateness of their dinner and what was discussed.  It all came on the back of Saatchi & Saatchi being awarded a $30M account with the Tourism Board.

The difference of course is that Shearer is only Leader of the Opposition.  O’Brien is no mug and will know it is all about positioning… even for the long game.  If Shearer isn’t the next Prime Minister in waiting then I am sure O’Brien will have a new best friend over for dinner, who just so happens to be the next Labour leader.

So, why aren’t the mainstream media asking more questions of Shearer? May be Tracy Watkins could have a go.

Simple stuff like:

• What was discussed over dinner?  Anything to do with politics, positioning, the work of Sky TV?  Shearer has said “mostly football, US politics, the role of the Citizens Advice Bureau and what my wife and I had done while working overseas for the UN and other humanitarian organisations”.  Really, no mention of NZ politics… none at all?
• Was Shearer a tad naïve to think as Leader of a major party he can have a private, no strings dinner with one of the most competent lobbyists in New Zealand?  Would he do it again?
• Does Shearer understand that O’Brien is undertaking good lobbying practice? i.e. get close to those in or likely to be in power, know a bit of personal information, be seen to be a nice guy and develop the relationship all so that when the time is right said lobbyist can have a more specific and direct conversation about what he (and who he represents) needs from Shearer.
• Would the discussions count as lobbying under Holly Walker’s lobbying disclosures bill?
• Shearer says broadcasting policy wasn’t talked about… does he mean Labour’s?  What about broadcasting policy in general, perhaps even US broadcasting policy?
• What would happen if another guest at the dinner party had brought up broadcasting policy, would Shearer leave the room, operate a cone of silence or perhaps hum ‘Country Roads’?

Here’s Shearer’s problem.  He really is that naïve. He really thinks Tony wants to be his friend, to listen to his wonderous UN back story about he fed starving African with just the skins of mangos and laugh at his witty jokes.  Shearer is just as naïve to Robertson’s positioning.  Next he’ll be saying “Oh no, he’s a nice guy, he’d never do anything like that. We speak every day.”

ᔥ NZ Herald

In the Herald today it is reported that Kim Dotcom is going to release his bank transactions regarding the donations to John Banks.

I wonder if he will also release any other donation details to other political parties and/or candidates.

There was a recent general election, it is well known that he is not enamoured with the current government or parties, so I wonder if  perhaps he made donations to other politicians or political parties.

If Tracy Watkins was any good, she would be ringing Kim Dotcom and asking that, just in case she gets scooped by a well informed blogger.

I wonder too why on really rather loud but diminutive opposition politician has been very, very quiet over the Banks donations, when normally in such a muck racking story he would be rent a quote?

ᔥ Dominion Post

It looks Tracy Watkins is a bit miffed that people talked to me and not to her…

The latest leak, over outgoing chief of staff Stuart Nash’s abrupt departure from Wellington on Thursday, should be what causes Mr Shearer the most sleepless nights. It appeared on right-wing blog Whale Oil within hours of Mr Nash’s departure.

Fairfax had found out purely by chance only an hour or so earlier. The leak to Whale Oil was more deliberate, and according to people in the know, could only have come from either a very tight circle of senior staffers, or one or two very highly placed MPs.

The implications are all bad for Labour. Whale Oil’s Cameron Slater is almost single-mindedly bent on undermining and destabilising the left-wing of politics.

He regularly runs half-baked conspiracy theories and innuendo up the flagpole just to see if he can get the mainstream media running. Why anyone within Labour would give him credence is mystifying.

Interesting, so leaking to her (by mistake)… is better than leaking to me…deliberately?

It is true that I am single-mindedly bent on undermining and destabilizing the left-wing of politics. So Bloody What…at least I am honest about it, unlike the media fan-bois who pretend to be impartial but are far from it.

Those paragraphs just show the professional jealously that an Auckland based blogger, not inside the beltway or even the gallery can gazzump and ruin her story for the next day. Boo hoo, dry your eyes Tracy.

ᔥ Dominion Post

The Labour party is in turmoil with leaks and counter leaks. One thing is clear the leaks that are being run now are designed to neutralise David Shearers support. Tracy Watkins obviously doesn’t have the stones to name me like the NZ Herald does. As the Labour civil war gathers momentum the tipline is humming:

The Labour leader’s office appears to be in turmoil after David Shearer’s chief of staff abruptly left Wellington.

Former Labour MP Stuart Nash, who has been in the job just a few months, was seen leaving Parliament yesterday after a meeting with Mr Shearer’s incoming chief of staff Alistair Cameron. He later confirmed that he would be working on projects from his home in Napier for the next couple of weeks. He is due to finish on May 31.

Mr Nash rejected suggestions he had been “frogmarched” out of the building or given orders to clear his desk but his abrupt departure coincides with rising conflict in the Labour Party over Mr Shearer’s continued poor polling and lack of a clear strategy.

Some of that conflict has been laid bare in leaks to a Right-wing blog that could only have come from either senior MPs or highly placed members of the leadership team.

There is definitely a whispering campaign going on. I certainly heard about Stuart Nash’s departure before he did, and it wasn’t from Wellington beltway sources.

Mr Nash’s departure will only fuel speculation over the ambitions of his deputy, Grant Robertson, who has been forced to deny interest in the leadership after some key appoinments were filled by Robertson allies.

Mr Cameron, a Wellington-based lawyer and Aids Foundation Trust chairman, is a former adviser to Labour MP Marian Hobbs, in whose office Mr Robertson also worked. Another appointment seen as “Robertson-friendly” included his former Wellington Central campaign manager Patrick Leyland and there are suggestions Jordan Carter is poised to replace Chris Flatt as party secretary.

The Labour luvvies are gossiping and the Auckland ones are squawking nicely. The gay grapevine is way quicker than the political pigeons in getting news out.

The media smell blood, and not without some justification, there is a perfect storm of Michelle Boag, Nick Smith and Winston Peters:

Duncan Garner blogs:

Winston Peters alleged yesterday that there’s more to this, hinting that the relationship with Bronwyn Pullar may go deeper than just knowing each other through the National Party.

Smith said “his private life is his private life”. What does that mean? Was he in a relationship at some stage with her?

If he was then that surely makes this worse.

So this morning John Key should haul Smith into his office and ask him the following;

1. What was the nature of his relationship with Pullar?
2. Was it more than a friendship?

If the answer is yes – Smith must go on the spot.

If the answer is no, he must still go. Ministers should NEVER use their position to go into bat for their friends.

It is the first rule of being a Minister.

Smith knows the rules. He’s been here for 20 years. He’s not a junior Minister. We rarely use the word corruption in NZ. But in my opinion it’s a corrupt practice to use your Ministerial powers and warrant to advance the interests of a friend.

Duncan is dead right here. Anyone who has friends who are ministers or MPs, if they are indeed a friend, should never place their friend in a position that could cause potential embarrassment.

Tracy Watkins isn’t pulling any punches either and her wording is very emphatic:

John Key’s refusal to cut Nick Smith loose over revelations that he intervened in a close friend’s long-running battle with ACC while still ACC minister will come back to haunt him.

Yesterday, Winston Peters labelled it cronyism, a shabby little deal and a case of National ministers looking after their mates – and the bad news for Mr Key is that it looks like all those things and worse.

Presumably Dr Smith would have been gone by lunchtime had he still been ACC minister when his letter on a ministerial letterhead supporting the claim of National Party activist Bronwyn Pullar emerged.

That may have been the reason Mr Key failed to move against him yesterday, even as the story over whether or not the letter was on a ministerial letterhead changed. But it doesn’t lessen the size of Dr Smith’s error or the scale of his misjudgment.

The NZ Herald editorial is scathing:

Nick Smith is one of the Government’s more experienced ministers. It is staggering that he saw fit to write in support of a friend’s ACC claim when he was the minister in charge of the corporation. His judgment plainly deserted him that day and it deserted him again when the letter – which was sent to medical assessors – came to light this week.

“Ministers still have friends,” he said, “and providing there is no inappropriate influence, it is quite appropriate for them to provide information or evidence for medical assessments and other legal processes.”

It is not “appropriate” for them to do any such thing when the medical assessments and legal processes involve the agency that must answer to the minister.

Nick Smith is a political corpse…he is starting to stink up the joint.

There is a valuable lesson though in all of this…having any association with Michelle Boag only ends in disaster.

David Shearer delivered a competent speech this morning in front of the teleprompter. Delivered in a swanky upmarket club in Labour’s Wellington stronghold he could only muster one member of his caucus to witness his “vision”.

However it was the stand ups afterwards that have caused him problems again.

When Labour fan-boi John Hartevelt calls it for Key for the head to head speech battle then you know you are in deep trouble. Even Tracy Watkins is underwhelmed.

But perhaps the most egregious part of the whole exercise for David Shearer was his use of National’s slogan.

It was at the stand ups afterwards that have caused him problems again.

In his media conference after the speech he uses the phrase Brighter Future, not once, but twice – and that was after the media had called him on it. To be fair to Duncan Garner who seems a little touchy today, it was him who called out Shearer for the use of National’s slogan.

Tracy Watkins explains Phil Goff’s mission:

Labour thinks a good poll is one that puts it at 29 per cent instead of 25 per cent. Phil Goff’s mission, this election, is simply to avoid a rout.

Right now that is looking difficult. labour has dropped in almost every poll this week.