Tim Pankhurst

If not Cunliffe then who? Please explain Tim

The other day I blogged about the early release of the details of a select committee report to Tim Pankhurst at Seafood NZ.

Well Tim Pankhurst took exception to my post and commented as well as emailed and accused me of interviewing my keyboard.

Unfortunately as a former editor, even a “decent journalist, trained and skilled”, he should have thought just for one second before he angrily emailed and commented on the blog.

You see, I never suppose anything, never ask a question or posit a position without already knowing the answer. Perhaps Tim could explain this email.

From: LYNDS, Samantha [[email protected]seafood.org.nz] On Behalf Of?PANKHURST, Tim
Sent: Friday, 19 July 2013 9:06 a.m.
To: Seafood New Zealand Directors
Subject: FCV legislation update – Confidential

Dear Directors,

SNZ has been informed by an impeccable parliamentary source that the FCV bill will be reported back from the Primary Production Select Committee to the House after the recess with the support of all parties. ? Read more »

Cunliffe’s Leadership Tactics – Leaking Committee Reports


Via the tip line

What is the Labour Fisheries spokesperson doing these days? Who you ask is that?

That’s right, Labour’s leader in waiting David Cunliffe. In between gazumping his leader on Thursday night at the public meeting and running around plotting coups, maybe Cunliffe would like to dispel a tip that he leaked the report from the Select Committee that’s considering how to deal with Foreign Charter Vessels in the commercial fishing industry? ? Read more »

Take a bow Panky

Tim Pankhurst has reacted to the continued name suppression of the Smarty Devil in Disguise.

Newspaper Publishers’ Association chief executive Tim Pankhurst said yesterday that media companies should challenge the suppression to protect the principles of open justice.

“The courts in this country are far too ready to offer suppression. A justice system operates the most effectively in full sunlight and any sort of suggestion that people of influence … are protected, undermines the system.”

Mr Pankhurst said the name suppression put pressure on other 46-year-old entertainers. “We’ve already had other so-called celebrities saying `it’s not me’.”

He said the man would have avoided a media storm if he had come clean when he was charged.

The celebrity’s lawyer, Jenny Smith, declined to comment on why he is continuing to argue for suppression.

Hmmmm…I wonder if TVNZ will make an announcement as to whether or not they will be challenging this name suppression. So far it is the glaring ommission from the list, I wonder why that is?