Curious developments

So according to the T-Bomb, Darren Hughes hasn’t formally resigned:

She had checked with Parliament’s officials and was told Mr Hughes had not yet formally resigned so the process to replace him had not yet begun.

She denied she was making things more difficult for Labour.

“There is a simple constitutional process which has not yet been engaged. I’m not playing games about this. Many people are arguing it is a constitutional position and having made a commitment three years ago, I’m obliged to take it. I’ve always been somewhat of a Brownie and I tend to do what I say I’ll do.”

What’s the bet that Phil Goff and his inept advisers are thinking that they can get a police vindication before Lockwood Smith arrives back at Parliament and then try and keep Darren Hughes on.

There might be a problem with that though because today is the last day for Clark’s patsy commissioner and his deputy after they got the arse from Crusher.




THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • davidw

    “I’ve always been some­what of a Brownie …………………. ” in J’s case conjurs up images of things other than junior girl guides.

  • abjv

    What, he hasn’t actually quit?

    This is going to go down like a cup of cold sick – just what game is Phil and Annette playing here? “He wanted to resign, he tried to resign, but the system wouldn’t let him resign…” ????

    Is this the best Phil’s front bench could come up with yesterday? Monty Python is alive and well and lives in the Otago University Library.

    The next poll will be interesting,

  • chuck

    Cam, I am curious as to your view as to why Goff should have stood Hughes down. This may seem like a silly question but I would be interested in your reasoning under what circumstances should an MP be stood down if a complaint has been made to the police.

    When I first heard the of the complaint I thought it was fair enough for him not to be stood down. However, after hearing of the naked young man leaving Hughes residence I certainly changed my mind. I do not think I need to go into all the details but a naked man leaving Hughes residence and later laying a complaint of a sexual nature leads me to beleive there was a prima facie case to be answered.

    If someone lays a serious complaint of a sexual nature against an MP the police must take it seriously and investigate. However, the complaint particularly if it is of a historic nature may be of a frivolous or vexatious nature and I beleive the MP should not have to stand down.

    My second concern is the long delay. The longer the police delay this the greater the chance the complainant may drop charges particularly if he reads the blogs or listens to talkback where he is being blamed. It sounds like Labour have enlisted their volunteer talk back callers.

    I beleive in the past I believe there was political interference in the decision to prosecute MPs and also police. Clint Rickard is the most notable example.

    Do you believe political interference could be the reason for this long delay or do you not think there is enough evidence to go to depositions?