Written By: - Date published: 2:28 pm, October 29th, 2008 - 64 comments
Categories: bill english, im/migration -
Tags: bill english, lockwood smith, maurice williamson
Oh dear. In the same week Lockwood Smith made his racist remarks and Maurice Williamson committed the gaffe of talking openly about National Party policy, it appears Bill English pulled a wee Lockwood of his own.
According to the Ashburton Guardian, English complained to a local Greypower meeting about the Filipino ‘invasion’ in his home town of Dipton and talked about the plight of a poor farmer ‘whose sole Kiwi worker was arrested before he started his first milking shift’.
The issue of migrant workers from the Phillipines is a contentious topic in Southland, with the Sunday Star Times recently reporting that migrant workers have been abused, isolated and ignored by the mono-cultural locals.
Comments like this from Bill English, their local MP, are unhelpful to say the least.
[Source: Ashburton Guardian, 21/10/08. Hat tip: S McGee.]
UPDATE: Sounds like Bill actually said ‘infusion’ rather than ‘invasion’ and was misquoted by the Ashburton Guardian. Good to hear.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
“The phrase he used was “an infusion of philipinos’, not invasion.
…Oh. If Nat HQ asks for a retraction they’ll be in order… Where did you find that audio, felix?
Anita – don’t assume too much…
Paraphrasing can be done for a range of reasons. It might be to alter the tense or part of speech, or it might be to encapusulate a long idea into a single word, or it can be done for effect. If English used the word invasion, because of its strenght and connotations, I would expect it to be in quote marks. But he might have said “Dipton has been invaded…” which is the same thing just a different tense, so no quote marks. Or there could have been a comment by someone else about an invasion and he might have said “we’re seeing a similar thing happen in Dipton…”
Thanks Felix.
Can everyone calm down now?
Akldnut: No, it’s not semantics. Political speech is (usually) very specific, and it rests on peoples’ utterances being taken literally – to the full extent of what they actually say. Not more, not less.
I’d say the word `infusion’ is a smart one to use in this case. While it might invoke `invasion’ among some people, in general use it’s a neutral term which is sometimes used to describe a dose of something beneficial – such as `cash infusion’.
If that’s the same quote the A-G heard, I’d say their report is guilty of promoting racism, not English’s statement.
L
Thank Felix. That’s conclusive
So in short, there is no story. The reporter got it wrong. Will the standard writers pull or amend the item now, or leave it up as a dog whistle?
[lprent: Generally leave it up and maybe amend it if the poster feels so inclined. Problem is that if we take it down, then people get wound up about their comments that disappeared, and the more paranoid start feeling there is a vast conspiracy. This is common amongst the blogs, for instance DPF still has posts up saying that I am the NZLP. Besides it should sit there as a permanent record of a mistake]
Thank Felix. That’s conclusive
So in short, there is no story. The reporter got it wrong. Will the standard writers pull or amend the item now, or leave it up as a dog whistle?
Scribe my bad, I had only read the article but have just listened to the audio and an apology is in order. Consider this it……….. I’m not totally unreasonble
Lew – I’d say their report is guilty of promoting racism, not English’s statement.
Thats true
Insider – last time an article was removed the bloggers were accused of rewriting history – it’s hard to get it right when you can’t get anything right (according to some…)
MP,
It’s from National Radio’s election feed.
i’m calm now… wtf Ashburton Guardian?
infusion/invasion?
Actually it does show just how easy it is to mis-hear a word or two which changes the tone somewhat. But I still think that that is being done deliberately and wholesale by media and politicians and it is very hard to do anything about. Perhaps we should be very discriminating instead.
Akldnut,
Are you apologising to me? No need, my friend. You’re courteous, compared to some on here. I usually get told to F#%k off. I hope people know a little bit more about how newspapers work, now.
I did suspect Bill would have been speaking of the Filipino “invasion” as positive, and would have been surprised if he’d used the word.
As someone pointed out above, this sort of thing happens all the time. I think National needn’t bother itself with asking for retractions etc. The Guardian might be wise to correct it, though.
Matthew
sheesh – admitting a mistake is rewriting history. Good grief.
Good lord, the Ashburton Guardian can’t write, isn’t coherent, can’t listen, and doesn’t factcheck.
To repeat and extend my sentiments above; for once I am faintly grateful for the Dominion Post and there’s something I never expected to say
Ianmac: Never attribute to malice what may more readily be explained by incompetence.
L
Good lord, the Ashburton Guardian can’t write, isn’t coherent, can’t listen, and doesn’t factcheck
Everybody makes mistakes. When journalists make mistakes, they’re in circulation for ever.
If this was done with malice, the journalist needs to be brought into line. Otherwise, a simple correction and private apology to Bill English would be in order.
Lew – Political speech is (usually) very specific, and it rests on peoples’ utterances being taken literally – to the full extent of what they actually say. Not more, not less.
I’d agree with this. Does that mean you don’t think that the intention behind a particular speech (utterances) has any bearing?
Wow, that is a pretty dreadful misquote from the Guardian. I’ve amended the post. To be honest it’s a relief to hear.
opps shouldv’e been – I’d like agree with this
arrrrggg shouldv’e been – I’d like to agree with this
Scribe,
If it was just the infusion/invasion bit I’d kinda agree. But none of the extract of the article above actually makes much sense. Someone should have read it and realised it was incoherent and illogical (even if they didn’t check what English actually said).
But yeah, everyone makes mistakes and it’s tough to be a regional paper.
Tane,
Your correction is “Sounds like” the Guardian got it wrong?!?!?!
Insider – yep it sure is. As I said, last time that happened, people from the Right accused The Standard of rewriting history. Good grief indeed. Although in this case, I don’t think it was this blog that made the mistake – If I’d read that comment I would want a fair few people to know about it too.
Akldnut: “Does that mean you don’t think that the intention behind a particular speech (utterances) has any bearing?”
No, but if it’s not evident within the utterance, proving intention is very tricky and must be approached very carefully. But I certainly agree it should be approached.
L
Scribe. It’s an audio clip, hence the ‘sounds’.
Anita – I did have a bit of a double take, hearing difficulty in hiring workers described as long-term unemployment problems.
This is beginning to seem like it might be a legitimate National Party tactic trying to mop up the Peters vote and pander to their old- right base.
has it been reported anywhere else?
sorry this is a fly-through visit, but a couple of comments look standout.. feel like conflating two of them to : dipton dipped out—the infusion, the infusion!! [ not teabag, eh bill!!]
well done Felix,
all others, if you haven’y already try giving me a click for how-tos and who-bys in banking..