Phillip Field

The logic of The Cunliffe

Yesterday David Cunliffe rushed of to make a statement about the conviction of John Banks, and his diminutive candidate in Epsom did likewise. Michael Wood defamed John Banks in his press release, Banks was found guilty of filing a false electoral return which is not electoral fraud as he claimed. But that is by the by. Both Cunliffe and Wood both think that because of something that John Banks did in 2010, standing as an independent in a local body election which he lost, somehow impacts on the Act party in 2014.

Labour Leader David Cunliffe said Mr Banks’ conviction “underlines a sorry chapter in our political history” and he should “accept his sentence and move on”.

“His conviction is also a reminder of the dodgy deal that kept him in Parliament over the last three years – and of the heavy-handed pursuit of the media by the police in its wake.”

However, with Prime Minister John Key this week saying he would again do deals with Act and United Future, “the National Party has learned nothing from this distortion of the MMP system”.

“National has been kept in power by a self-evident manipulation of our democratic process – relying on discredited and irrelevant support parties such as ACT and United Future which owe their place in Parliament to cups of tea and a nod and a wink.

“Labour will remove coat-tailing to make the electoral system fairer and more transparent.”

Basically their premise is because John Banks filled out a form incorrectly in 2010 when he wasn’t even a member of the Act party and subsequently was pursued by a convicted fraudster, tax cheat and blackmailer then sfor some reason people shouldn’t vote for  Act this election.

“You failed to disclose only two donations. There is nothing to suggest it was a pattern of offending,” Justice Wylie said.

But it was not a victimless crime, he said, the victim of the offending was the community at large.

Which is not particularly accurate, as John Banks at the time had lost the election and was then a retired politician and a private citizen.

Cunliffe’s claims were a long bow and he failed to draw it properly.  Read more »

Cunliffe making stuff up on TV3’s Firstline

On Firstline yesterday David Cunliffe gave us all a demonstration in weapons grade making stuff up.

At 3:00 he says that:

“The Prime Minister is responsible for the lowest standards of Ministerial conduct that I can remember in my time in Parliament, bar none”.

What about Labour’s Taito Phillip Field, the only ever MP found guilty of corruption?

When he was in the dock, David Cunliffe, Helen Clark and Michael Cullen all went into bat for him saying that “all Taito is guilty of is working hard for his constituents”.

Cunliffe even defended him multiple times in the house.

Lockwood Smith, at the time, issued this press release:

National Party Immigration spokesman Lockwood Smith says the Labour Government has “stooped to a new low” with its efforts to avoid accountability over the Taito Phillip Field fiasco.

“The Immigration Minister, David Cunliffe, is now refusing to answer legitimate questions about warning notes and telephone calls by Immigration Department staff to the Minister’s office.

“Those messages focused on the fact that Thai overstayers, who were later given visas on special Ministerial direction, were working for Taito Phillip Field while he was advocating on their behalf.    Read more »

The hypocrisy of the left

The left wing, and Russel Norman in particular are extreme hypocrites.

In this article about Maurice Williamson, he says;

“There appears to be a thin line between money and political influence in the National Party.”

Oh really, and no mention of his frequent trips to the Dotcom Mansion.

No mention of Winston Peters and his questions in the house of behalf of Kim Dotcom.

No mention of the cosy deal between the Internet Party and Mana party.

And no mention of his willingness to suspend the rule of law and block a fat fraudster from being extradited.

Not to mention the media has conveniently forgotten the Bill Liu corruption, the Darren Hughes cover up, Annette King getting Cunliffe to “disappear” problems for her husband in the Hawkes Bay, Helen Clark buying her UN job with overseas aid from our pockets, Mike Williams handful of government appointed directorships to subsidise his Presidency of the Labour Party and a hundred other examples of real graft…not to mention Phillip Field who Helen Clark was guilty of only helping his constituents.

Apparently now, according to the left wing, helping constituents is now a resigning offence.

Then there is the performance of David Cunliffe…

when politicians just repeat the same lines over and over again, it just makes me want to discard the audio altogether. grump.

— Jessica Williams (@mizjwilliams) May 1, 2014

Read more »

The Press on Dunedin City Council’s backhanders to Labour man

The Press calls out the Dunedin City Council over the dodgy backhanders deal bewteen the mayor and Labour’s Pete Hodgson.

The “gentlemen’s agreement” is an old-fashioned notion, almost to the point of quaintness. It suggests that a gentleman’s word is as good as his bond, and a handshake as binding as a written contract.

Of course, it belonged to a time when women were not expected to worry themselves with business matters, avoiding the possibility that one of the gentlemen involved might actually be a lady. But there are better reasons than that for not relying on such handshake deals in the modern age, particularly for the spending of public money.

Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull is defending the agreement under which former Dunedin North MP Pete Hodgson was paid by Cull’s council to lobby the Government to retain the core functions of AgResearch at Invermay. Hodgson was paid $3400 for duties which included advocating on the council’s behalf, contributing to a letter to Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce and writing a 10-page report for the board of AgResearch.

The council says that Cull was its main point of contact with Hodgson, but it could not locate a single email, contract or any other document relating to the agreement. Cull said: “I could describe it as a gentleman’s way of doing business in the south.”  Read more »

Dare you to run Aaron

He knows what you are...a cocksmoker.

He knows what you are…a cocksmoker.

Aaron Gilmore should put his money where his mouth is and prove he is right about the right person being able to win Christchurch East in the general election.

I’ll bet good money that even the Green candidate would beat him.

Disgraced former Christchurch list MP Aaron Gilmore says National picked the wrong candidate for the Christchurch East by-election campaign and will probably lose badly this weekend.

Just four days before the vote, the man who helped National win the party vote in the electorate at the last election predicted a Labour win.

He said new electorate boundaries should make it National’s to lose in next year’s general election, but only if the party picked the right person.

That is unlikely to be Gilmore.

However, he said yesterday that he had “huge pressure” to stand as an independent candidate and would not rule out another tilt at politics.

Prime Minister John Key poured cold water on those aspirations yesterday, saying it was “unlikely” Gilmore would stand for National again.  Read more »

Letting politicians lie

Outside the Beltway

Politicians lie…we all do, show me someone who says they don’t lie and i’ll show you a liar. Sometimes the lies are little…”yes dear, that was really good”, and then there are the whoppers…”no Dad, it wasn’t me that put that massive scratch down the side of your car by driving along the pillar”.

But somehow we allow politicians to lie to us…all the time. One of the best ever lies was the superannuation lie…that if you all put 1 and 6 aside then in your retirement the government will look after you…followed up with another lie that superannuation will be universal for all for ever.

Doug Mataconis examines political lying:

Lying in order to cover-up a potential crime, for example, is still political suicide, as are the kind of lies that John Edwards told about his personal life. Fourteen years ago, Bill Clinton learned that lying under oath could lead to an Impeachment proceeding, though most Americans came to believe that his particular form of lying should not be punished by removal from office. But when it comes to telling a “lie” about a piece of legislation, or misrepresenting the facts for political purposes, which we have come over the last two decades or so to refer to as “spin,” though, the American people do indeed seem to have just decided to accept the fact that politicians lie and there isn’t a whole lot they can do about it.

I am sure we all believe that Phillip Field and Clayton Cosgrove are guilty of nothing more than being helpful to their constituents…I eman Helen Clark and Grant Robertson have told us so.

And Winston Peters really did mean NO, when asked about receiving donations. But perhaps the movie line is right…we can;t handle the truth:

There’s another side to this, though, and I noted it above. Sometimes, Americans want their politicians to lie to them about certain things. Do voters really want to hear the truth about how painful its going to be to fix our fiscal and entitlements crises? Do they want to hear that there are some problems in the world that America can’t, or shouldn’t fix, or that the economy isn’t going to return to the boom days of the 90s any time soon? I’d argue that they most definitely don’t want to hear the truth about these and many other subjects, so we let our politicians lie to us about them all the time.

Coincidences

Earlier I posted a video about the Uruwera raids, and the rewriting of history.

This was a coincidence.

The real reason I was hunting through the archives, was to remind myself what happened with Taito Phillip Field and his ‘helping’ people with immigration issues.

It’s a lot like the Bill Liu/Shane Jones case.

Liu was also ‘helped’ by a series of Labour MPs.

And on review, the two cases are more similar than I remembered.

  • Immigrant gets unexpected ‘help’,
  • The Party Leader says the MP wants an inquiry to clear name
  • Narrow inquiry into process ‘clears’ MP
  • Dover Samuels defends and supports MP accused of corruption

So many coincidences…

Winston is upset, Good

Winston Peters is upset because John Key may have insulted his bewildered supporters who still think he is the messiah.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters says National could face a backlash from older voters following speculation about comments John Key made in a secret tape recording.

I’ve always said that a good hard cold winter and a virulent dose of bird flu would solve the Peters problem.

I still wonder why journalists before even entertaining listening to New Zealand’s most corrupt politician, after Phillip Field, don’t ask when he plans to pay back the $158,000 his party still owes the taxpayer.

Selwyn’s SOS has been answered

Selwyn Pellet is calling for assistance to spread the Labour message. Never-mind that he may have actually fallen foul of electoral law by virtue of being an unregistered promotor, it appears that the call has been answered, he has

Yesterday Phillip Field was released from prison.

He is just in time to assist Labour in their election. He can certainly rescue Labor and assist them in their polling.

If I was Phil what would I do?

I see from the news that Phil Goff has started next years election campaign early. I think he may be shooting his bolt a bit early. On Friday night on NewstalkZb  he was doing high dudgeon exceedingly poorly as he feigned outrage over Pansy Wong. His outrage is hugely ironic given his penchant for family trips all over the place on the taxpayers ticket. He was doing well until Larry Williams gave him a slap for his attitude given Labour’s poor record over Phillip Field’s corruption. Then all the rehearsed lines and talking points went out the window and the lies started. Luckily Larry Williams is well versed on labour’s position on corruption.

Nevertheless I think that Phil Goff is being poorly advised.

If Phil Goff was really serious about winning next year then he would be using this message.

If Phil Goff was smart he would also adopt the considered and serious approach instead of trying to emulate Mr Smile and Wave and failing badly at it. Last week at the memorial service for the Clark 29 he had his smirk plastered all over his face and it went down like a cup of cold sick after a night on the twon. Even his “Stayin’ Alive” walk needs to be ditched.

Phil Goff just needs to keep asking people if things are any better after 3 years of National. He doesn’t need to propose silly things, or promise even sillier ones. He needs to just keep asking if things have got any better since National took over. Putting out statements and making speeches about how National hasn’t smacked tax dodgers and how he’d tinker at the edges when Labour had 9 years to do something but did nothing despite the best of economic times just smacks of desperation and idiocy.

So, if I was Phil Goff, I would ditch the silly walks, the cheesy grins and the meaningless statements. I would even dispense with policy and just keep asking people of things are any better after three years of National. Make the choice binary. It either will be or it won’t be and they can make the decision based on that. If necessary he could have a follow up question. He could ask, “That irrespective of the the previous answer, do you think that National really deserves another three years?”.

Keeping the message simple, and keeping it binary, i.e. Yes or No should allow much more cut through for Phil Goff than his current approach. Of course I could be completely full of crap and he could ignore me and keep fdoing what he has been doing…that’s been an astounding success so far.

Nothing stops a leadership coup like success.