Archives

BLISTERING RED HOT HAM SPECIAL

To celebrate smoking Colin Craig we have a red hot deal for you.

Due to our special relationship with our supplier we can offer you a blistering red hot ham special right now.

Here’s the details, but you will need to be quick, there are limited supplies.

Whale Meat Frozen Hams have been taste tested and approved by Oilers around the country and the positive comments are too many to mention.?? Read more »

Craig vs Slater: What the judge said about me

His honour Justice Toogood also made some very important comments about, how I handled the story and my own personal ethics in covering stories: Quote:

[20] On Mr Slater?s counterclaim, I have held that I do not accept that:
(a) Mr Slater spread lies about Mr Craig; or
(b) made up allegations about him; or
(c) gathered information that he knew was fake or untrue; or
(d) published material on Whaleoil knowing it not to be true.

[21] I am satisfied Mr Slater is neither a compulsive nor a calculated liar.

[22] I have held, therefore, that Mr Craig?s defence of truth to Mr Slater?s counterclaim fails.? ?

Read more »

Craig vs Slater: MacGregor vindicated

The judgment is out and everyone can read what Justice Toogood has to say but Colin Craig sued me because he wanted to clear his name. The exact opposite has occurred and Justice Toogood has made some key findings.

Just like Oscar Wilde, Colin Craig’s legal strategy has backfired.

This post is about those key paragraphs. Quote:

[17] For the reasons set out below, I have found that:

(a) It is not established that Mr Craig was guilty of sexual harassment of Ms MacGregor up to and including the incident on election night 2011 when there was intimacy between them, because I am not satisfied that Mr Craig?s behaviour was unwanted by Ms MacGregor at that time.
(b) It is true that Mr Craig was guilty of moderately serious sexual harassment of Ms MacGregor, on multiple occasions from early 2012 to 2014 by telling her that he remained romantically inclined and sexually attracted to her, and that those expressions of his views were not welcomed by Ms MacGregor at the time they were communicated to her. Ms MacGregor chose not to complain about the harassment because of her concern about the effect of a complaint on her employment.
(c) The imputation that MrCraig sent ?dirty text messages? to Ms MacGregor is not strictly true, but it is materially true in substance in that he sexually harassed Ms MacGregor by communicating to her sexually oriented written messages between early 2012 and 2014 that were unwelcome.
(d) The imputation that Mr Craig sexually harassed Ms MacGregor so seriously that he settled the sexual harassment claim by paying her a six-figure sum of money is not strictly true, but it is materially true in substance in that he provided MsMacGregor with a substantial financial benefit in exchange for her agreeing she would not pursue a justifiable claim that Mr Craig had been guilty of moderately serious sexual harassment.
(e) The imputation that Mr Craig lied to the board of the Conservative Party by claiming he had paid Ms MacGregor substantially less than six figures to settle the employment matters when in fact he paid her a six-figure sum to settle her sexual harassment claim is not strictly true. It is materially true in substance, however, in that Mr Craig misled the board intentionally about the true nature of his behaviour with and towards Ms MacGregor, the foundation and merits of Ms MacGregor?s allegations against him, and the true nature of the settlement with her.

Read more »

Craig v Slater: The fabricated letter

As you know the judgment has now been released.

Justice Toogood has done some fine work and there are many many findings about the conduct of Colin Craig. I will highlight key paragraphs for readers below: Quote:

[80] Although Ms MacGregor and Mr Craig talked about setting boundaries for their personal relationship, I am satisfied that Mr Craig did not take any practical step in that regard at that time, other than to resolve there should be no intimacy of the kind that occurred on 26 November 2011. If Mr Craig had thought that he had put up a genuine boundary or barrier against other forms of inappropriate conduct by the discussions he had with Ms MacGregor, the terms of a letter he sent her in February 2012 indicate that he cannot have thought there was any impediment to harbouring sexually-oriented thoughts and expressing to Ms MacGregor his continuing interest in a sexual relationship with her.End quote.

Read more »

Craig v Slater: Damning findings against Craig, found to have sexually harassed Rachel MacGregor

After 504 days Justice Toogood finally delivered his judgment, taking two days per page to complete.

The judgement could be considered a technical draw, which I will explain in this post, but it is rather damning of the behaviour of Colin Craig.

The key findings are as follows: Quote:

[17] For the reasons set out below, I have found that:

(b) It is true that Mr Craig was guilty of moderately serious sexual harassment of Ms MacGregor, on multiple occasions from early 2012 to 2014 by telling her that he remained romantically inclined and sexually attracted to her, and that those expressions of his views were not welcomed by Ms MacGregor at the time they were communicated to her. Ms MacGregor chose not to complain about the harassment because of her concern about the effect of a complaint on her employment.

[18] I have held that Mr Slater and SMCL have no defence to two of the claims by Mr Craig that he was defamed by them. At the conclusion of this judgment, I make a declaration under s 24 of the Defamation Act 1992 that the defendants are liable to Mr Craig in defamation for the untrue statements that Mr Craig:

  1. had placed Ms Rachel MacGregor under financial pressure to sleep with him; and
  2. sexually harassed at least one victim other than Ms MacGregor.

[19] I have also held that the reputational damage which Mr Craig suffered throughout the events traversed at length in this judgment resulted almost entirely from his own actions. To the extent, if any, that his reputation suffered further damage because of the two defamatory statements for which I have held the defendants to be liable, I am more than satisfied that the declarations that he was defamed in that way provide adequate vindication. I conclude, therefore, that Mr Craig is not entitled to an award of general damages to compensate him further for such damage. Mr Craig’s remaining causes of action and his claims for damages in defamation are dismissed. End quote.

Read more »

Rodney Hide on the drive for a rich pricks tax

Rodney Hide discusses the wonky thinking of the Tax Working Group as it drives towards a rich pricks tax: Quote:

In heading up the?Tax Working Group?Sir Michael Cullen has produced a great many reasons for taxing capital gains, including that it would help pay for future retirees, be fairer to women, and wouldn?t be a new tax.

Not one stacks up.

The problem is that for the Tax Working Group capital appears manna-like, unearned and untaxed.

That?s nonsense. Capital has to be earned and is already taxed.?End quote.

Read more »

A very sensible idea from NZ First

NZ First have proposed a very sensible bill: Quote:

New Zealand could be a step closer to increasing the minimum residency required to get New Zealand Superannuation after a bill proposing an increase from 10 to 20 years was drawn from the parliamentary ballot.

New Zealand and Australia currently have the lowest residency requirements in the OECD at 10 years for eligibility to the state pension while the average across the OECD is 26 years.

Read more »

Herald breaks news that Simon Bridges called me, after I already wrote about it in the morning

For some reason, it appears to be bad to care about the life of someone that the National party leadership pushed so hard that he reached the point of making an attempt on his life.

David Fisher thinks that it is news that Simon Bridges rang me.

What is more news is that Simon Bridges rang me on Sunday and didn’t give two hoots about the welfare of his former front bench man. He rang to explain himself and his actions and to tell me he sleeps well at night.

He even went so far as to tell me repeatedly that he is a man of integrity. He didn’t really like it when I pointed out that men of integrity rarely need to tell people that.

Nonetheless, what the phone call revealed to me is that Simon Bridges is scared and that he is lying and covering up.? ? Read more »

Oral Questions – 24 October 2018

Questions to Ministers??

  1. Hon SIMON BRIDGES?to the?Prime Minister:?Does she stand by all her Government?s statements and actions?
  2. Hon AMY ADAMS?to the?Minister of Finance:?Is it a goal of this Government?s economic policy to make it easier for New Zealand families and businesses to get ahead?
  3. TAMATI COFFEY?to the?Minister of Finance:?What are the most significant investments the Government has made in the past year?

    Read more »

The best article on American politics that I have read in a very long time

President Donald Trump

David Gelernter writes at the Wall Street Journal: Quote:

Every big U.S. election is interesting, but the coming midterms are fascinating for a reason most commentators forget to mention: The Democrats have no issues. The economy is booming and America?s international position is strong. In foreign affairs, the U.S. has remembered in the nick of time what Machiavelli advised princes five centuries ago: Don?t seek to be loved, seek to be feared.

The contrast with the Obama years must be painful for any honest leftist. For future generations, the Kavanaugh fight will stand as a marker of the Democratic Party?s intellectual bankruptcy, the flashing red light on the dashboard that says ?Empty.? The left is beaten.

This has happened before, in the 1980s and ?90s and early 2000s, but then the financial crisis arrived to save liberalism from certain destruction. Today leftists pray that Robert Mueller will put on his Superman outfit and save them again.

For now, though, the left?s only issue is ?We hate Trump.? This is an instructive hatred, because what the left hates about Donald Trump is precisely what it hates about America. The implications are important, and painful.?End quote.

Read more »

×