Good news, National are afraid of David Cunliffe

Written By: - Date published: 8:46 pm, June 18th, 2014 - 222 comments
Categories: david cunliffe, national/act government, Politics, same old national, spin - Tags:

First things first, this Donghua Liu thing is a set-piece smear from the National party, it could be nothing else.

The classic signs of National’s comms stick out like dogs balls….

  • timed the breaking of the story for when John Key is out of the country, keeps him clear of the dirt.
  • info was leaked to the tentacles of National’s comms (whaleoil, farrar) as was clearly hinted by barnsley bill (Cameron Slater’s right-hand man) who couldn’t keep his mouth shut on dimpost a couple of days ago.
  • the perfectly timed OIA release.

  • and the fact that Donghua Liu is still tight with National.

Reliable sources have also told me that Donghua is still donating cash to National too. (Any journos reading might like to ask Jamie-Lee Ross about this)

It’s no accident that this was released a couple of days before the 3 month interval that Claire Trevett covered in the herald. Interestingly Farrar made a big deal about this the other day.

Personally I’m very encouraged by this attempted smear, it means National are worried about Cunliffe, their internal polling will be showing they are weak on issues that Labour can be strong on and they know that Cunliffe is the only member of caucus who can go toe to toe with Key.

The Nats are making it clear just how dirty their campaign is going to be.

222 comments on “Good news, National are afraid of David Cunliffe ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Blue 1
    18 June 2014 at 8:57 pm

    Now I know why the Herald was advocating for Cameron Slater to be considered a journalist. It’s because he’s their chief political reporter.

    • lprent 1.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:23 pm

      That certainly seems to what is happening. There certainly seems to be a hell of a tie up between the NZ Herald “investigations” and the Whaleoil / Kiwiblog / Nat dirty tricks department

      Such a pity for them that the courts don’t seem to agree that Cameron is a journalist eh?

      • Ennui 1.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 9:23 am

        Jeez thats an ugly photo. A mental health beneficiary and a beneficiary of collective mental ill health. Yuck.

  2. karol 2
    18 June 2014 at 9:02 pm

    What 3 month interval? Sounds intriguing.

    • lprent 2.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:12 pm

      The rules about leadership in the NZLP caucus mean that the membership and unions don’t get a look in during the regulated period – ie three months out from an election starting June 20th.

      The reason for this is pretty obvious. There isn’t really time to hold a primary during that period and to win an election if a leader drops dead like Michael Joseph Savage did.

      • karol 2.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 10:30 pm

        Geezus! Just started reading it. Talk about a major spoiler for those of us that don’t have Sky, and just started watching the latest season on Game of Thrones. How about journos use comparisons with stuff accessible to all of the public?

        I’m finding it pretty unreadable.

  3. Ad 3
    18 June 2014 at 9:04 pm

    Get angry and fight back.

    • realist 3.1
      19 June 2014 at 10:13 am

      Get angry and fight back??

      Surely all you DC apologists must realise this looks incredibly bad for him… Labour have spent the better part of 3 Months frothing at the mouth over Judith Collins and then Maurice Williamson (the latter is different and worse than DC i will admit).. Yet why they never thought to check their own closets for any Rick Barkers or DC letters seems at the very least incompetent and now makes them look both hypocritical and weak. What started out as character assassination of ministers has turned out to be murder suicide…

      Surely they need to play the ball and not the man.. Like him or otherwise John Key is significantly more popular than DC.. get over it.. the more you allow your hatred of him to fester the longer you and what has been a pathetic opposition will wallow on the opposition benches…

      We do need a strong opposition.. every democracy needs one.. but dont blame the Government for this.. need to look a little closer to home..

      Either way I dont think DC would make a good PM, too many mistakes in such a short space of time.. not a safe pair of hands whatsoever… and if nothing else surely he illustrates just how much despite him saying to the contrary (and the left choosing to ignore) that he is very much the “Rich Prick” that you paint John Key out to be

      • framu 3.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 12:31 pm

        “Either way I dont think DC would make a good PM, too many mistakes in such a short space of time.. not a safe pair of hands whatsoever… and if nothing else surely he illustrates just how much despite him saying to the contrary (and the left choosing to ignore) that he is very much the “Rich Prick” that you paint John Key out to be”

        paint john out to be? – thats rather generous

        but what interests me here is the double standard – cunliffe has to be clean as the driven snow – but key can take a shit at a presser and everyone thinks its awesome.

        You highlight mistakes – and yes i agree that we cant use key as a yard stick for the appropriateness of cunliffes behaviour – but key has made mistake after lie after bullshit after mistake – and no one says the same about him – which i find somewhat odd

        • realist 3.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 2:10 pm

          what? who started throwing the mud in the first instance around this guy.. Cunliffe has played into Keys hands with this one.. he has made himself the story and painted himself out to be the hypocrite.. as he has done with the rich prick and the trust account…

          Fact is he isnt up to the job… you want to make that about Key somehow and his bowel movements.. its simply not dealing with the issues at play here. DC isnt popular with the Country as a whole, and he isnt within his own peers in Wgtn.. is that really sustainable?

  4. Graham 4
    18 June 2014 at 9:05 pm

    Please don’t chuck mr cunlife in the brier patch

  5. Saarbo 5
    18 June 2014 at 9:08 pm

    Everyone knows that this election is on a knife edge, National are desperate and playing dirty, but they better be careful…I am hearing from a lot of swing voters who are getting sick of this shit. Once DC gets more TV time we will see some more voters switching to labour, National know this.

    One more thing, how low has The NZ Herald fallen, that article from John Armstrong today was just embarrassing for them, people are seeing through this stuff, come on NZ Herald…support democracy for fucks sake.

    • lprent 5.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:25 pm

      Bearing in mind their lack of coalition partners and that their polls are so far down on the 20111 election at this point in the game, they’re looking pretty damn desperate.

    • Tat Loo 5.2
      18 June 2014 at 10:19 pm

      Labour must not fight back with more mud slinging, the electorate hate that, they want strong policy presented with guts and positive gusto.

      “National have run out of ideas for struggling New Zealanders and they are afraid that Labour are going to change the game in favour of ordinary Kiwis. Yes we will.”

    • Chooky 5.3
      19 June 2014 at 10:14 am

      Sarbo +100…and good post !…Nacts are running VERY SCARED!….Kathryn Ryan asked the hard questions of David Cunliffe and he came up squeaky clean…and very impressive!

      Now all Labour MPs need to do it is bring out the ROTTWEILER and attack the rotten underbelly of John Key and NACT at every opportunity ( where is Trev?) ….and put some very impressive policies on the table.!

      ..NZers NEED strong incentives to vote Labour! : eg

      *abolish university student interest on loans
      * lower age for super for working people nearing retirement.
      *guarantee that peoples precious savings will be safe from overseas predators ( bolster/protect NZ banks esp. Kiwi Bank)
      *special support and protection for beneficiaries
      * stop overseas speculators buying up precious NZ housing and land
      *free high quality state education for all (…with special funds allocated for students with special needs ..get rid of corrupting privatised charter education run by USA companies)…
      * incentives for R@D…support for business ventures eg high tech, medical research, rural business diversification , farmer ventures / reservoirs which dont drain and pollute rivers
      * get rid of the Motorways costing billions ( which will only serve the over population/ immigration speculators of NACT and cronies)…and put this money into rail , public transport..health and education and housing

      etc etc

      • Once was Pete 5.3.1
        19 June 2014 at 11:22 am

        Wrong Chooky the public are sick off it, and this very tactic is what set Cunliffe up for the fall in the first place. By the way, this is word for word your response another post!

  6. chris73 6
    18 June 2014 at 9:10 pm

    Yes you can see the fear in John Keys eyes:

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Key-lunches-with-Clinton-in-New-York/tabid/1607/articleID/349133/Default.aspx

    But seriously does anyone really believe this:

    “Personally I’m very encouraged by this attempted smear, it means National are worried about Cunliffe, their internal polling will be showing they are weak on issues that Labour can be strong on and they know that Cunliffe is the only member of caucus who can go toe to toe with Key.”

    • lprent 6.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:14 pm

      Actually yes. The contrast between Nationals treatment of David Shearer as leader of the NZLP caucus and that of David Cunliffe has been pretty strikingly different.

      I realise that you aren’t particularly reflective and have a memory like a sieve. But even you must have noticed that?

      • chris73 6.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:19 pm

        I disagree Cunliffes brought this all on himself, out of these 7 gaffes I count 5 to Cunliffe and the rest to underlings within Labour and if give National and the msm so much ammunition of coure they’re going to use it

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10173411/David-Cunliffes-catastrophes

        • lprent 6.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 10:05 pm

          But my point was that David Shearer wasn’t hit by any of the types of smear routines when John Key was safely out of the country away from all of that vile shit-slinging that he started.

          They had ample opportunities, and never used them.

          Don’t you ever wonder why? And why National and their poodles like Gower have been targeting David Cunliffe ever since he first became a contender back in 2011/2012.

          • john 6.1.1.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 11:47 am

            David Shearer got hammered when he “forgot” he had masses of cash in an overseas bank account. But he probably didn’t make a large number of major gaffes.

            David Cunliffe has been scoring own goal after own goal.

            It’s really really dumb politics to go after National for helping Liu and taking his donations,
            while failing to disclose the fact that you’ve also been helping Liu and taking his donations.

            • lprent 6.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 1:32 pm

              The money he’d earned being overpaid at the UN was hardly as political issue in NZ apart from the outrage in the right wing blogs.

              He made a lot of gaffes at various levels. In particular his guy with a disability on the roof absolutely infuriated the base of left activists inside and outside of the NZLP. Similarly the politically hamfisted attempt to scapegoat David Cunliffe for not mounting a coup attempt at the 2012 NZLP party conference.

              In my view those two incidents (and a host of others) are what caused him to be eventually dumped by members and unions.

    • geoff 6.2
      18 June 2014 at 9:28 pm

      I dont expect an honest response to this from you but it’s pretty basic politics, if you see a credible threat you attack it. The left are at least honest enough to recognise that John Key is a credible threat both politically and to the well-being of the country.

      If a political opponent is ignored then that clearly means they aren’t considered a threat.

      Honestly chris, you and the rest of the nutters would be far more convincing if you didn’t keep attacking cunliffe so much.

      • chris73 6.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:32 pm

        They’re attacking him because hes the leader of the opposition but fear him? What do they have to fear from Cunliffe? What has Cunliffe done in his time as the leader of the opposition to make National fear him?

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10173411/David-Cunliffes-catastrophes

        You should try going through his gaffes with the theme to the benny hill show on, makes it all the more amusing

        • geoff 6.2.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 9:46 pm

          As I said, I didn’t expect an honest response and that’s precisely what I got. Good on ya mate for sticking up for your team.

          • chris73 6.2.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 9:53 pm

            Just so I’ve got this worked out right…disagreeing with you = dishonest and agreeing with you presumably = honest?

            • geoff 6.2.1.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 10:01 pm

              Yes! Well done, I think you’re catching on, old boy 😉

            • Simon Johnston 6.2.1.1.1.2
              18 June 2014 at 10:52 pm

              You’re really this childish, Chris? And really that lacking in basic self awareness?

              • Tracey …
                19 June 2014 at 8:51 am

                chris and slylands et al consider gaffes by cunliffe career ending but lies and deliberate misleading statements by key, collins and bennett business as usual. I hope that clarfies the basis of their “thinking”.

                Surely everyone knew slater was going to retaliate for his main squeeze judith… It just wasnt going to be at the expense of her staying round the cabinet table.

        • David H 6.2.1.2
          19 June 2014 at 8:46 pm

          @ C73. And here’s TricKey’s Gaffe’s, Brain Fades, memory losses, and other goodies.

          http://thestandard.org.nz/still-an-honest-man/

          I’ll take your 9 gaffes and raise you 264.

          Damn Trolls

      • john 6.2.2
        19 June 2014 at 11:58 am

        geoff – Most of the country see Labour and Cunliffe at their lowest ebb, so claiming National fear him lacks credibility in most people’s eyes, to the point of looking like desperation.

        Reinforcing this, is the fact that whether or not National are “scared” of him is largely an irrelevant point – except perhaps to you.

        What does have relevance, is whether people are more or less likely to vote Labour.

        You seem to have overlooked this important point, in favour of chasing some kind of political brownie point that is totally meaningless to most people.

        What many see as obvious desperation and an unbelievable claim, is more likely to weaken your position rather than strengthen it.

  7. Mainlander 7
    18 June 2014 at 9:13 pm

    Seriously is this pathetic wee article the best you can do to try and join the dots, Labour and Cunliffe are sinking faster than the Titanic, yet instead of trying to rally the troops Geoff comes out with utter rot about National being afraid
    Apologies if this was actually meant as satire

    • srylands 7.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:30 pm

      It is satire.

      • Ross 7.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:46 pm

        Says the defunct economist. The Right and satire should never be used in the same sentence.

        • North 7.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 11:06 pm

          Not to forget the diplomat. SSLands. The man of many farts and stupefying parts.

    • Nakiman 7.2
      18 June 2014 at 10:06 pm

      National afraid of Cluster fuck, that’s hilarious
      its labour that should be afraid, he is the reason that they are below 30% in the polls.
      After this fiasco they will be lucky to get 25%
      Just watch there support go to National and the Greens.
      Even some of his own MPs wouldn’t back him up on the news

  8. dimebag russell 8
    18 June 2014 at 9:13 pm

    national are permanently scared.
    they a pack of crummy anally fixated accountants propped up by a gang of knuckledheaded wonks.
    they are just about gone and then the country can breathe easy.

  9. Graham 9
    18 June 2014 at 9:15 pm

    By your logic the Labour Party has been lieing on the ground in a quivering mess with its eyes closed hugging its knees moaning john keys name over and over again for at least 7 years
    Don’t you get irony

  10. Graham 10
    18 June 2014 at 9:19 pm

    And what you are saying is whenever someone comes out with over the top statements calling torys thieves ,scum,liars etc they are shaking in their boots

    • geoff 10.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:32 pm

      I suppose I am guilty of anthropomorphising an abstract entity but any rational person will understand what I was getting at.

  11. john 11
    18 June 2014 at 9:20 pm

    This article smacks of even more desperation.

    There’s media calls for Cunliffe to resign, he’s not far from single figures in the prefered PM polls, LOWER in those polls than the person he rolled, and this is all supposed to add up to fear on the part of National.

    I get a distinct feeling that not even the author believes what he’s writing.

    • geoff 11.2
      18 June 2014 at 10:00 pm

      You’d be wrong, John (yet again)

      I very much do believe what I wrote.

      What I don’t believe is the claims from RWNJs that Cunliffe is a nothing. You don’t aggressively attack a political opponent who you don’t think is a credible threat.

      • chris73 11.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 10:17 pm

        You do if you want to win

      • john 11.2.2
        18 June 2014 at 10:18 pm

        geoff says “You don’t aggressively attack a political opponent who you don’t think is a credible threat.”

        Nonsense. Otherwise that means the left felt fools like Aaron Gilmore were a credible threat.

        Cunliffe has shot himself in the foot so many times it looks like he’s wearing snow shoes.

        I’m sorry but I laughed when I read your headline.

        It’s no more credible than David Cunliffe’s complaints about secret trusts and anonymous donations, or that his $2.5m house is only a do-er upper.

        • geoff 11.2.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 10:24 pm

          Aaron Gilmore was shot down by one of his own!

          sheesh.

        • lprent 11.2.2.2
          18 June 2014 at 10:26 pm

          ..the left felt fools like Aaron Gilmore were a credible threat.

          🙂 astonishing. You mean attacks like this page.

          He was an object of laughter, not exactly a threat.

          • geoff 11.2.2.2.1
            18 June 2014 at 10:31 pm

            hadn’t seen that one before, gold!

          • john 11.2.2.2.2
            18 June 2014 at 10:46 pm

            Exactly my point. geoffs theory was someone isn’t attacked unless they’re a threat.

            His writings look transparently like an extraordinarily weak attempt to reverse the embarrassment for Cunliffe.

            I thought Labour supporters would have just learnt a big lesson about credibility.

            Instead of putting forward arguments that are so obviously not credible. It only adds more damage.

            • lprent 11.2.2.2.2.1
              18 June 2014 at 11:01 pm

              The point is that aaron wasn’t attacked.

              He was made fun of because he was such a pompous stuffed shirt and kind of hilarious.

              This is probably my favourite

              or this..

              See what I mean.

              [lprent: any future aaron nostalgia to OpenMike please. ]

              • john …
                18 June 2014 at 11:14 pm

                That’s even funnier than geoff’s contention that Cunliffes blunder is good news for Labour.

                • geoff …
                  18 June 2014 at 11:20 pm

                  How does getting smeared by National equate to a blunder?

                  Oh that’s right, it doesn’t.

                  • john …
                    19 June 2014 at 12:21 am

                    Blunder x2 (of several)

                    Saying there were no donations, then finding out there were.

                    Saying he had nothing to do with Lui’s application, then finding out he did.

                    The only smearing going on is David Cunliffe smearing egg onto his face.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      19 June 2014 at 12:27 am

                      Meh nit picking, and quite unlike interfering with a police investigation (Williamson) or organising to make money for your partner using Ministerial resources (Collins).

            • Tracey 11.2.2.2.2.2
              19 June 2014 at 8:55 am

              when did labour attack gilmore or even report his behaviour? By all means disagree but dont use examples that dont apply.

  12. Tat Loo 12
    18 June 2014 at 9:22 pm

    They’re very very afraid of David Cunliffe.

    • karol 12.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:31 pm

      One thing’s for sure, if Cunliffe survives everything the Nats, ABCs and the MSM have thrown at him, he’ll be a helluva PM.

      Key, on the other hand, was just anointed the chosen one by the Nats and the sheep-ish journos, and never really had to stand up to very much MSM-supported mud slinging .

      • geoff 12.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:33 pm

        Yep it’s been a bit of a baptism by fire for Cunliffe, but as a vicar’s son I’d say he’s pretty used to baptisms by now.

      • chris73 12.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 9:34 pm

        Key, on the other hand, was just anointed the chosen one by the Nats and the sheep-ish journos, and never really had to stand up to very much MSM-supported mud slinging .

        • to be fair Labour tried but failed miserably
        • Kiwiri 12.1.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 9:38 pm

          I heard tonight the Nats team are dining out.
          Not because they are celebrating.
          But because they are without their kitchen sink that they ripped out and threw at the leader on the other side of the House.

          • Cancerman 12.1.2.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 10:08 pm

            Please get rid of Mr Cunliffe, please, please, please. We are so scared of him and want a fair fight. We cower every policy annoucement he heralds with a voice like the voice of a God and the clarity of a fine diamond.

            [lprent: I’m sure that isn’t your real opinion, which is what this site is meant to foster. Use a /sarc at the end of the sarcasm if you don’t want me to start taking you literally and deciding you are too dumb to survive here. ]

        • karol 12.1.2.2
          18 June 2014 at 9:40 pm

          The whole point is, that Labour doesn’t get the same kind of MSM support that the Nats get, and doesn’t make a mission out of well-oiled (heh) and well-funded smear campaigns.

          • chris73 12.1.2.2.1
            18 June 2014 at 9:47 pm

            The whole point is, that Labour doesn’t get the same kind of MSM support that the Nats get

            • its funny but talk to anyone on the right and they’d say the msm bends to the left

            and doesn’t make a mission out of well-oiled (heh) and well-funded smear campaigns.

            • are you serious or is this a wind up?
            • Tracey 12.1.2.2.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 9:03 am

              can you point me to the newspaper and television articles which called for key to resign when

              He lied about who recommended iain fletcher to head the gcsb, saying it was rennie when documents show key recommended him and agreed to contact him

              He lied about the bmws during the worst of the recession on about four different occassions

              When he said scf people were paid out because of labour, when it was bill english renewed their guarantee against treasury advice

              When he said mr shu of oravida won him in an auction for charity. The national party received 50k from mr shu

              Please link to the tv or newspaper calling for bennett to resign when she lied and said she didnt know what the cabinet club was.

          • geoff 12.1.2.2.2
            18 June 2014 at 9:49 pm

            I was fairly surprised at that John Armstong piece. I don’t usually put too much stock in the ‘right-wing journos’ meme but it was kinda hard not to with that one.

      • grumpy 12.1.3
        19 June 2014 at 12:16 pm

        Yep, he’s shown a great aptitude for the job so far….

  13. Old Tony 13
    18 June 2014 at 9:27 pm

    You guys are delusional. Your approach to the current state of NZ politics is akin to Hitler in the closing days of WW2. While National may not govern alone and the Left may run them close, the Labour Party itself is in deep trouble. Moving phantom divisions and finding the missing 800,000 are similar, as are taking comfort from National’s imagined fear and the Nazis celebrations when Roosevelt died. Nothing has changed for you folks….

    And you are missing the point about all this. Actually John Campbell got close. Its not about whether the Tories’ brand of minor scandal is worse or better than the Left’s brand of minor scandal. Its really about the fact that if you throw it around you need to be absolutely clear you are not open to similar accusations. People won’t remember the detail but they will remember that really that lot is no different from the present lot – ipso facto moral equivalence at best and hypocrisy at worst.

    And if DC goes on TV proclaiming his sincerity etc etc all he does his set himself up for greater damage to his credibility the next time something similar comes up.

    [lprent: sigh Please don’t godwin our site for no apparent reason. If you don’t have an argument, then just say so without using that old dumb crutch. ]

    • geoff 13.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:37 pm

      And Old Tory godwins the post. Thanks, mate.

      Funny how most of the RWNJs usually claim never to have watched ‘commie’ Campbell and yet tonight they’re suddenly all lifelong fans.

    • karol 13.2
      18 June 2014 at 9:37 pm

      H1tler? Seriously? Could you have chosen a less relevant parallel?

      Cunliffe explained well to Campbell, that he hasn’t done anything similar to things he’s criticised the Nats for.

      False equivalence.

      • Gosman 13.2.1
        19 June 2014 at 7:39 am

        You object to a Godwin now??? Pretty sure there have been multiple occasions where National gets compared to Nazis where I don’t see you objecting.

        • lprent 13.2.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 8:59 am

          I do when I see them in two separate posts within a short time frame. I then expect an outbreak of godwins and move to stop the trend.

          Of course talking about godwins is a godwin as well…

    • Gosman 13.3
      19 June 2014 at 7:14 am

      While I don’t agree with the Godwin myself it does raise some pertinent points about Labour supporters wishful thinking in relation to the state of the party at the moment. What is indisputable is that since David Cunliffe took over the leadership the support for Labour or even the wider left bloc has not increased and his personal ratings are lower than his predecessor. Why did Labour choose him again?

  14. Bill 14
    18 June 2014 at 9:32 pm

    Look, according to that Herald-Digi poll, when the undecideds are added back into the numbers, the gap is 8% while over 12% of people are undecided. And as I’m getting tired of pointing out, most of that 12% will be undecided between one or the other parties comprising the left bloc – (no choice on the right) – rather than between left and right.

    I don’t like some of the shit Labour is rolling out and am getting a bit tired of pieces like Salmonds (that’s twice he’s taken a negative swipe recently), but from where I sit, the left is in even if Labour only polls 30% since most of that 12% will go to the Greens or IMP.

    • felix 14.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:42 pm

      Yep, and the PM’s office knows it.

    • Ennui 14.2
      19 June 2014 at 9:21 am

      Good comment Bill: my take is very simple, Labour down matters fekk all. Its the combined Left that is important, and given the variance in Polls and margins for error its anybodies election. Yes, national are scared, they should be.

      What I suspect might surprise National is the amount of last elections non voters who actually turn up. Labour needs to mobilise Pasifica, and the Inet party grab a chunk of the non voting youngsters. Then the greysters voting Winston. I am certain the Polls get bugger all representative sample of these groups. Given that scenario the Right will have to win 51%.

  15. fisiani 15
    18 June 2014 at 9:41 pm

    mmmmm Tricky Cunliffe v’s Honest John Key. Labour will spend the next week being asked why Te Cunliffe claimed he never knew the guy, never declared his donation and never told the truth. 93 days to go. National are really really scared of Te Cunliffe. Yeah right!

    • bad12 15.1
      18 June 2014 at 10:05 pm

      Brilliantly delusional Fis, even for you ”honest john” must have had to have been typed through gales of laughter,

      There is one constant when it comes to Slippery the prime minister, and that is that He and the Truth are far from having any knowledge of each other…

    • Lanthanide 15.2
      18 June 2014 at 10:09 pm

      🙄

    • North 15.3
      19 June 2014 at 7:07 am

      Dear FizzyAnus……..I read someone calling “Apaia Rose” recently. Do I take it correctly you’re one of those much mocked, laughing-stock-in-Apia, fia palagi ? You do come across as one.

    • Tracey 15.4
      19 June 2014 at 9:05 am

      can you point me to the newspaper and television articles which called for key to resign when

      He lied about who recommended iain fletcher to head the gcsb, saying it was rennie when documents show key recommended him and agreed to contact him

      He lied about the bmws during the worst of the recession on about four different occassions

      When he said scf people were paid out because of labour, when it was bill english renewed their guarantee against treasury advice

      When he said mr shu of oravida won him in an auction for charity. The national party received 50k from mr shu

      Please link to the tv or newspaper calling for bennett to resign when she lied and said she didnt know what the cabinet club was.

    • thatguynz 15.5
      19 June 2014 at 2:13 pm

      Who is “Honest John Key”? I’m assuming you know a different John Key from the lying cretin that for now is “leading” the country?

  16. starboard 16
    18 June 2014 at 9:57 pm

    But wait. Clark and Williams tried to smear Key with the “H bomb” , which was a crock , oh but that’s different…

    • framu 16.1
      19 June 2014 at 12:47 pm

      the funny thing with that one was the story came out because the journos went to aussie as well – williams was pulled into the story, not the genesis of it

  17. Once was Pete 17
    18 June 2014 at 9:59 pm

    For heavens sake wake up. Cunliffe is going to almost hand the election to National. I just cant believe that you are serious in your contention that National are scared of David Cunliffe. To say that he is accident prone is an understatement. His policy announcements have been sloppy, his memory selective, and he has shown real ability to put his foot in his mouth. Someone on this blog claimed he has an IQ of 160 – well I just wish he would use some of this intelligence. No point in having a Lamborghini and leaving it parked in the garage!
    It doesn’t matter how this came out. The fact is it did. Thats politics. And there is enough substance in this, for it to be a real concern. Wishing wont make it go away.
    Blaming those who ‘found’ the letter just wont deflect the attention from Cunliffe.

    • geoff 17.1
      18 June 2014 at 10:06 pm

      If they’re not concerned that Cunliffe is a threat then why did they feel the need to pursue such a feeble smear attempt?
      The National party have got an incredibly well resourced ‘research unit’ and the best they can come up with is a standard form letter from 11 years ago??? Truly lame.

      As I said, this really does say much more about National’s head-space than it does about Cunliffe.

    • lprent 17.2
      18 June 2014 at 10:14 pm

      To say that he is accident prone is an understatement. His policy announcements have been sloppy, his memory selective, and he has shown real ability to put his foot in his mouth.

      Oh I agree. He’ll learn to be more circumspect. However I really don’t expect much better from someone who has been in the role for less than a year, never been through an election campaign as a leader, and never been a deputy leader.

      But I wandered through all of this watching Helen Clark in the 3 years prior to the 1996 election (and the 3 years prior to that as deputy). It is a hard role when you have 3-6 years to prepare. Imagine how much harder it is with less than one.

      This will help to remove some of the puppy fat.

  18. Cancerman 18
    18 June 2014 at 9:59 pm

    What does it matter if Donghua Lui is still donating to the National Party? This would only be an issue if a law has been broken. Is that what you are suggesting?

    • bad12 18.1
      18 June 2014 at 10:13 pm

      You see no hypocrisy in attempting to beat on David Cunliffe for the Labour Party,(given that Cunliffe is highly unlikely to have knowledge of who individual donors to the Party are), having been given donations by Liu in 2003,

      And,

      While.attempting to beat upon Cunliffe for donations made to the Labour Party 11 years ago, today National collecting donations off of the same person,

      What’s it like to have been born without the guidance of a moral compass???…

      • lprent 18.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 10:17 pm

        You mean donations made 7 years ago?

        2003 = form letter to immigration
        2007 = purchase of a book at auction for large amount of money

        • bad12 18.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 10:36 pm

          Thanks LPrent i stand corrected, must be time to rest my fingers, i got that particular chain of events right in a previous comment tonight but failed here…

        • Tracey 18.1.1.2
          19 June 2014 at 9:11 am

          exactly.

          No suggestion he wrote the letter cos of a donation.

          To sum up, his crime is to not have remembered the letter, or lied about having written it because his party is holding national to account for tgeir dishonesty and granting favours to people after they have donated, because apparently if you are dishonest and never hold anyone to account for theirs, your dishonesty is acceptable.

          I think that is the mind boggling illogic being employed here. None more so than by armstrong who eulogised banks after being found guilty of electoral fraud which he shows no remorse for.

  19. Charlieboy 19
    18 June 2014 at 10:06 pm

    I knew things would be rough this election but this National party slick “Gotcha”is a beauty, right out of the Nixon play book. Who put Aaron Savage on to this eleven year old letter,man these Tories are smooth operators. In fact be afraid, they are desperate for a third term, and as yet their agenda has not been revealed. The tactic with DC has been to never let him settle,hit him,hit him and hit him again.
    The result of this well constructed dirty trick may well be three more years of John Key. Think hard on that. That is something to be truly afraid of.

  20. Te Reo Putake 20
    18 June 2014 at 10:07 pm

    Well, for mine, the telling factor is Key’s absence. National know this has the potential to make Cunliffe stronger, particularly as Kiwis love backing the underdog. I hope one lesson is learned by the leadership of the NZLP; turn the other cheek and stick to the positive. Policy wins elections, dirt doesn’t.

    • geoff 20.1
      18 June 2014 at 10:18 pm

      Policy wins elections, dirt doesn’t.

      Yep and National have fuck all policy.

      Publically that is. Privately I think they’ve probably got some seriously ugly shit planned and I think they’ll be doing their best to avoid talking about it.

      Anyway, Key looks best in the polls when he’s at a distance from the punters.
      National of course know that when it gets down to the debates that the public gets a close-up reminder of just exactly what it is that Key stands for.

      • Colonial Viper 20.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 10:34 pm

        Yep and National have fuck all policy.

        But it’s got to be about much more than policy. For Labour it must be about an alternative narrative, a different vision of NZ.

        And for gawds sakes it has to be about a Leader who is articulate, accessible and comfortable, 90% of the time and 10% of the time makes the hard core compelling case for a different, fairer NZ with fist thumping on the interview table staring the interviewer down

        • geoff 20.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 10:44 pm

          The strongest media spots I have seen from Cunliffe have probably been some of the interviews he has done in the last few months on The Nation and Q+A.

          When he’s good, he’s very good. There’s no-one else in the caucus who can match him on a good day.

        • Tracey 20.1.1.2
          19 June 2014 at 9:14 am

          and who no matter what he is asked brings the conversation back to a single key,message or policy.

          Did he apologise for deflecting from the heart rending stories of the glenn report?

          That kind of thing

  21. tsmithfield 21
    18 June 2014 at 10:15 pm

    Why assume it is National behind this? The leaks appear to be coming from someone with deep knowledge of the inner workings of the Labour Party. I wonder who in Labour has most to gain if Cunliffe falls.

    • geoff 21.1
      18 June 2014 at 10:20 pm

      Why assume it is National behind this?

      Because of what I wrote in the post.
      Try reading it.

      • karol 21.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 10:25 pm

        Yep. The person most likely to know/remember about that letter written by Cunliffe in 2003, is Liu. And Liu is propbably really pissed at Labour for stirring things up about him – doesn’t make Liu look all that good. And Liu has been most close to the Nats – certainly in recent years.

    • lprent 21.2
      18 June 2014 at 10:31 pm

      Ah no. There is absolutely no way that a letter sent from a electorate office to immigration without a copy going elsewhere can wind up anywhere else inside Labour. Electorate offices don’t share much information between themselves or anyone else. The Parliamentary Service rules are pretty damn tight.

      DC’s electorate staff have been there a hell of a long time. I very much doubt that they even have the file there anymore because they usually destroy records after 7 years or so.

      This had to came from someone snooping around the immigration records. The only other place would have been from Liu or his agent.

      • karol 21.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 10:37 pm

        I’m pretty sure Cunliffe said on Campbell Live tonight that they didn’t have records going back that far.

      • Ant 21.2.2
        18 June 2014 at 10:43 pm

        How do people access these records, is there a manager at Immigration New Zealand in the pocket of National, or can a staffer just pitch up and start trawling through people’s files?

        • Colonial Viper 21.2.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 11:07 pm

          As someone else has pointed out; Liu himself would have clearly known that Cunliffe’s office had sent a letter.

          BUT ALSO in the Williamson row, the PM’s office would have (no doubt improperly) trawled through Liu’s file in minute detail getting background…and may have found the letter then.

      • john 21.2.3
        18 June 2014 at 11:06 pm

        Journalists have been digging into Liu’s immigration status for weeks, and coming up with more and more info.

        If they were doing official information requests about Lui’s immigration applications, then it was only a matter of time before Cunliffe’s letter came out.

        • Colonial Viper 21.2.3.1
          18 June 2014 at 11:08 pm

          Meh, the PM’s Office would have reviewed Liu’s file in detail during the Williamson debacle.

        • lprent 21.2.3.2
          18 June 2014 at 11:16 pm

          You can’t just ask for the whole of someone’s immigration file in a OIA. You have to ask for specific information.

          Someone told them exactly what to ask for. It’d have been impossible to guess from the outside that of the electorate office, Liu, Liu’s agent, or immigration what to ask for because who’d guess that he would have gone to the New Lynn electorate office.

          Now I don’t think it’d be Liu or his agent just simply because there is no particular reason for him to get embroiled in this mess. I suspect we’ll eventually find that it was the Minister or their staff who looked at it Michael Woodhouse or his associate Nikki Kaye.

          Say wasn’t it Michael Woodhouse getting questioned about his involvement with Mr Liu a few weeks ago? Oh I wonder if he has read the file eh?

          • Ed 21.2.3.2.1
            18 June 2014 at 11:51 pm

            Is it possible to identify the person who asked for the record, and what their request was?

            The Herald refer to a “party source” – was that the National Party?

            Cunliffe has said that paper copies are routinely destroyed – so the only copy is likely to be held in the Immigration file where the OIA request resulted in it being found – and the only people other than immigration staff likely to have searched through that file would have to be staff of the immigration minister.

            Since the letter shows there was no advocacy, it does seem that the Herald are merely reprinting copy from their National “friends” – including the phoney polls (at least one of
            which has selective problems recording votes . . .

            Some tricks are dirtier than others – this does smell of rancid whale oil

          • john 21.2.3.2.2
            19 June 2014 at 12:08 am

            lprent says “You can’t just ask for the whole of someone’s immigration file in a OIA. ”

            Wrong. Not only can you. But it has already been done.

            A list of over 200 documents on the Liu case was given out two years ago under the OIA, with what they were, and who sent them.

            Not all documents were supplied, or fully supplied, but a large number on the list were.

            So a folders and folders of Liu documents have been around for a long time. (you can download one set here)
            https://www.hightail.com/download/QlVpYnV3Q3RsMHp2WnRVag

            Perhaps the difference is that it is only in the last few days that David Cunfliffe said he had nothing to do with it, which meant a certain document suddenly took on an importance it didn’t have previously.

            • McFlock 21.2.3.2.2.1
              19 June 2014 at 12:28 am

              and yet the file you linked to didn’t, for whatever reason, contain the letter from 2003.

              Obviously not within the bounds of that particular request, I guess. Maybe the requester didn’t know exactly how to phrase the question so it included a pro forma letter from an electorate MP?

              Unless I missed the letter with Cunliffe’s face on it. Did I?

              • lprent …
                19 June 2014 at 12:43 am

                Nope 2005-2008 onwards. My guess is that there are several files.

              • john …
                19 June 2014 at 12:46 am

                I’m not saying Cunliffes letter is in that folder. It may not even be in that request.

                There’s a number of links because there’s so many documents, and that was just one set. All it shows is that hundreds of Liu immigration documents have been around for at least a couple of years.

                In addition the Herald has made other OIA requests about the case.

                I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s more to come out on this yet.

                • McFlock …
                  19 June 2014 at 1:01 am

                  Your link shows a number of things.

                  It doesn’t show the list of documents, or that the public even knew about this unspectacular letter prior to the current smear campaign, however.

            • Colonial Viper 21.2.3.2.2.2
              19 June 2014 at 12:29 am

              Oh now you’re in trouble.

              What’s the bet that the Cunliffe document isn’t in those original OIA releases and someone had to go fishing for it specially with a separate OIA once they heard it might be there.

            • lprent 21.2.3.2.2.3
              19 June 2014 at 12:53 am

              Looking at this file (do you have the links to 1.pdf and 3.pdf?) the thing that occurred to me is that while usually you can’t get OIA’s for whole swathes like this, you can if you are the person the file is about and you do it under a privacy act request (I’ll need to check that).

              At present, this rather looks to me like a file released to Liu. There are repeated requests from his lawyers Forest Harrison for information that would be in this file under a privacy act request and repeated refusals.

              Perhaps the difference is that it is only in the last few days that David Cunliffe said he had nothing to do with it, which meant a certain document suddenly took on an importance it didn’t have previously.

              Yes. Interesting how that question came up in the house just then isn’t it. So it just happened to make that document interesting.

              BTW: Who does this dumpbox belong to?

              • john …
                19 June 2014 at 1:18 am

                I didn’t recognise the name but it wasn’t Liu or his lawyers by the look of it.

                I’ll find out more tomorrow if I have time and can be bothered coming back to the endless abuse from some here (and if I don’t get banned).

                [lprent: The abuse is something that I can’t do much about except in specific cases – it comes under “robust debate” in the policy. I already warned about the only thing I’d noticed with your comment pattern yesterday where you were moving on and not looking at replies, and it looks like you have corrected it. That you actually got a warning indicates that I value your comments. I tend to be more abrupt for people who don’t add value to the debate on the site. Can’t see any reason why I’d be banning you. ]

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  19 June 2014 at 8:26 am

                  Don’t bother: someone else has already said everything you’ll say anyway.

                • Molly …
                  19 June 2014 at 8:39 am

                  First Iain MacLean that comes up on LinkedIn is an interesting possibility if it is him. Based in Wellington/Wairarapa and involved in Public Relations and Communications. But I do think that it would be a newbie’s mistake to use your own name on an account like this that may be released at some point to the public, even if you do give ambiguous names to the files.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                19 June 2014 at 8:25 am

                Funny. Ian McLean was the MP for Tarawera before being replaced by Max (this will mean lower power prices) Bradford.

                Also the name of the Green candidate for Tauranga and a Wellington based “communications advisor”.

                And yes, the timing is revealing.

          • geoff 21.2.3.2.3
            19 June 2014 at 4:03 pm

            Nice one, Lynn you were absolutely correct it was Michael Woodhouse.

            http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/247597/english-changes-answer-over-liu-letter

            However on Thursday afternoon, Mr English told reporters the letter had been sent to Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse some time ago as part of information he received from the Immigration Service after Mr Williamson’s resignation.

    • Tracey 21.3
      19 June 2014 at 9:16 am

      you dont think it, the letter, was on lius immigration file looked at by the govt? You didnt think collins and her supporters, slater, would strike back for labour to have the affront to hold her to the highest ethical standards required by the cabinet manual.

  22. dimebag russell 22
    18 June 2014 at 10:23 pm

    it doesn’t matter.
    the public sees through all this crap that the national party are serving up.
    National is very afraid because all the cosy little deals and payoffs and patronage are about to go down the dunny.
    and good riddance to all of the slimy crew.
    and as for JOhn Key he is scared in case whaleboil farts and stinks out the whole show completely.

    • Tracey 22.1
      19 June 2014 at 9:22 am

      Well, the right constantly tell us that the public dont like smear attacks…

  23. Mary 23
    18 June 2014 at 10:57 pm

    That photo of key and slater together says it all. Surely the left needs to make hay this election from that unholy alliance.

    • Colonial Viper 23.1
      18 June 2014 at 11:04 pm

      Well not really, the vast majority of NZers have no idea who Slater is and they do not care.

      Labour need to come back with all guns firing – but not with dirt – with passion and commitment and positivity to change the nation and to unashamedly and unreservedly advantage the bottom 90% of its people.

      • Mary 23.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 11:29 pm

        I don’t disagree but it’s not a matter of one or the other. The slater/lusk/farrar/crosby textor et al scum bag modus operandi needs to be exposed. A lot of people mightn’t know who the individuals involved are but that wholly disingenuous behavour needs to be exposed somehow.

  24. gnomic 24
    19 June 2014 at 12:34 am

    Does the Labour Party really exist — and if so, does it want to win the impending election? Ninety days before the poll I have just had to search on the web to find out the identity of the Labour candidate for Hamilton East. Meanwhile the face of the idiot current National MP beams out across major thoroughfares from large billboards, alongside the countenance of the smirking weasel. A week ago there were four pages of Bennett as a wrap around one of the suburban newspapers.

    “They’re bloody hopeless, the Labour Party. They don’t deserve to be the government . . . they’ve got no chance.” Mitch Harris on Radio Live 18 June 2014

    Please someone; convince me Mitch is wrong.

  25. infused 25
    19 June 2014 at 1:35 am

    LOL

    soo many posts.

    It’s you lot that are worried.

  26. jaymam 26
    19 June 2014 at 5:17 am

    I can’t believe that anyone in the Labour caucus would even consider a leadership challenge.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11276826

  27. Matthew Hooton 27
    19 June 2014 at 5:37 am

    Yes, I expect National is just terrified of Cunliffe: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10174778/Poll-shows-Labours-support-plummeting
    (Although I don’t personally think these numbers are credible.)

    • Gosman 27.1
      19 June 2014 at 7:06 am

      No but they do at least show that National support is consistent around the 50 percent mark which is where they were at the last election. 3 years of a second term and the opposition haven’t really budged this level.

      • weka 27.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 7:14 am

        Apart from the polls that showed the left could win the election 🙄

        • Gosman 27.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 7:52 am

          Problem for the left is we shouldn’t even be having this debate. After the last election I had pretty much resigned myself to the fact that the left would win the next election. The margin of victory in 2011 was minuscule. Yet here we are 3 years later and National is still polling around the 50 percent mark. That is almost unprecedented.

    • weka 27.2
      19 June 2014 at 7:14 am

      “(Although I don’t personally think these numbers are credible.)”

      But National does? What’s your point again? That National aren’t really afraid of Cunliffe because of some stats that aren’t credible?

      • chris73 27.2.1
        19 June 2014 at 7:26 am

        🙂

      • srylands 27.2.2
        19 June 2014 at 7:32 am

        The point he is making is that the headline of this post is absurd. National candidates around the risk point on the List will, if they are religious folk, be praying that the current Labour Leader stays right where he is until 20 September.

        You can spin this latest disaster how you want. Personally I couldn’t care less about Chinese immigrants and the (stupid) electoral laws. The whole thing is a nothing. But it was the same thing with Judith. It was about NOTHING.

        Now you reap what you sow. You and your fellow travelers here are not just bitter relics. You are hypocritical bitter relics of the worst kind. And you are about to be swept aside.

        • weka 27.2.2.1
          19 June 2014 at 8:27 am

          Yes, we know you don’t like the left. But apart from that do you have any actual argument? Cunliffe forgot something from long ago, and then made a mistake in the media. But really, it’s such a miniscule thing when compared to, well anything really. Geoff’s point is if DC isn’t a threat, why all the effort to make a mountain out of a molehill to give DC shit?

        • Tracey 27.2.2.2
          19 June 2014 at 9:29 am

          perhaps you should just create a byline for yourself to paste to every post…

          I have no moral compass, i am guided by the market.

          It will give you more time to lift the barrier arm at The Terrace

        • Tracey 27.2.2.3
          19 June 2014 at 10:27 am

          yeah yeah we all know you are for sale to the highest bidder.

      • Matthew Hooton 27.2.3
        19 June 2014 at 5:23 pm

        My point is that National MPs tend to believe these polls so that, far from being afraid of Cunliffe, they want him to stay in the job, because they don’t rate him at all.
        But I think the polls overestimate National’s support so I am not so sanguine.

    • lprent 27.3
      19 June 2014 at 9:02 am

      Although I don’t personally think these numbers are credible.

      Who does? But we’ll get a pile of journos talking as if they are.

      • Anne 27.3.1
        19 June 2014 at 6:43 pm

        The journos of today don’t have a complete brain between them. You only have to study the TV journos to appreciate it. They stand there staring at an inanimate object talking absolute bollocks without so much as a blink of the eyelid. It’s because they are parroting a predetermined meme and they wouldn’t have a clue if it bore any relationship to reality. You would have to be a screw loose to do it nearly every day of your life and not sink under the weight of embarrassment and remorse.

        • Colonial Viper 27.3.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 6:46 pm

          Rigorous thought and insightful analysis challenging given narratives and the structures of power?

          Pah, so over-rated. Getting to wine and dine within 20m of Key and Kerry is where it’s at.

        • lprent 27.3.1.2
          19 June 2014 at 6:55 pm

          I haven’t seen much broadcast TV for the last two years. I haven’t missed it.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 27.3.1.2.1
            19 June 2014 at 7:12 pm

            The only reason to watch is to see what they don’t want to talk about, then talk about it. A tiresome chore at the best of times. Perhaps Bomber can be persuaded to do it.

    • Tracey 27.4
      19 June 2014 at 9:23 am

      can you point me to the newspaper and television articles which called for key to resign when

      He lied about who recommended iain fletcher to head the gcsb, saying it was rennie when documents show key recommended him and agreed to contact him

      He lied about the bmws during the worst of the recession on about four different occassions

      When he said scf people were paid out because of labour, when it was bill english renewed their guarantee against treasury advice

      When he said mr shu of oravida won him in an auction for charity. The national party received 50k from mr shu

      Please link to the tv or newspaper calling for bennett to resign when she lied and said she didnt know what the cabinet club was.

  28. irascible 28
    19 June 2014 at 7:32 am

    When it comes to getting coverage of Labour Party activity in some electorates the stanndard response from the editors of the suburban papers s “we decide what the news is… as far as we’re concerned the only news about the Labour Party is if it concerns David Cunliffe… anything else will be reported only if there is space left after paid advertorial.”
    Censorship by ability to pay for coverage??

  29. Hami Shearlie 29
    19 June 2014 at 7:41 am

    I can’t decide what David Cunliffe’s crime is supposed to be – sending a letter 11 years ago AKA doing his job, or not having a photographic memory. I wish someone would spell out exactly what he is being accused of and would that person please tell us about every single piece of paper they have signed in the last 11 years!

    • Gosman 29.1
      19 June 2014 at 7:55 am

      His crime is not having a competent team supporting him so he can make attacks on National over their links to potentially dodgy people without it coming back to bite him.

      • Colonial Viper 29.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 8:09 am

        more like a crime of not keeping around 11 year old hard drives full of routine and unremarkable paperwork.

        And this is the best that National can do to distract the electorate from their utter lack of ideas and imagination.

        • Gosman 29.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 8:58 am

          Apparently they did keep the archive. They just didn’t check it.

          • Lanthanide 29.1.1.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 9:28 am

            No, Cunliffe stated last night on Campbell Live that they did check their records, but that their records do not go back 11 years for privacy reasons – they get destroyed.

            Obviously the government keeps everything, and that’s where the letter came from.

            • Dave_1924 29.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 9:56 am

              I saw on one of the news sites they had now found the letter in a retired electoral office workers files…….. I’ll post the link if I can find it.

            • Dave_1924 29.1.1.1.1.2
              19 June 2014 at 10:01 am

              Here you go – on RadioLive saying the found it….as reported by the NZ Hearald….

              “Mr Cunliffe, whose party on Monday said it had no record of a $15,000 donation from Liu which was also revealed by the Herald this week, said neither he nor his staff could recall the letter. It was one of thousands he’d written for constituents, and he did not recall meeting Liu. He later said he had asked his electorate office staff to check whether they had any record of the letter.

              “It was on file it turns out,” he told RadioLive. It was discovered in the electronic records of a now-retired staff member.

              “To the best of my knowledge that letter came through my office and an immigration agent on his behalf.” ”

              http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11276826

              • Tracey …
                19 June 2014 at 10:20 am

                so, the letter didnt get leaked from there then.

                Letter wasnt written in return for donation

                Cunliffes wife isnt a director of a liu company

                But apparently cunliffe should resign because his electorate office couldnt find the letter, thats what gosman is saying… Cos the right xant make it about honesty, cos they know that sinks them…

                Remember collins and bennetts lies, misleading are covered by the cabinet manuals requiement for “highest ethical standards”but cunliffe should resign and is tricky. This last verdict from no less a comedian than double dipton and renewal of scf guarantee…bill english… But he doesnt need to resign.no siree, not even for pretending chchch rebuild will cost less so he can claim a surplus, or turning a grant into an interest free loan to create a surplus.

                Nope, cunliffe needs to resign

                Oh an liu is applying for a discharge without conviction for domestic violence

          • Anne 29.1.1.1.2
            19 June 2014 at 6:57 pm

            It was eventually found on a retired staff member’s hard drive. Sure I heard that on an RNZ news item this afternoon.

            It does indicate they went to extraordinary lengths to try and locate the letter and should be given plaudits for that. They won’t get any of course with our current bunch of self serving media bastards.

    • Blue 29.2
      19 June 2014 at 9:27 am

      The Nats and the Herald were trying to make it look like he’s a liar. But given the weakness of their case they’ve had to resort to calling him a hypocrite instead.

  30. RRM 30
    19 June 2014 at 8:31 am

    Listen to yourselves!

    Cunliffe gets caught red handed in the same dodgy dealings he’s pointed the finger at the Nats for, for ages….

    And your reaction? Somehow it’s a smear??!? Really?

    This right here is the reason Labour just polled 23%.

    It seems timely to say something about chickens coming home to roost.

    • Colonial Viper 30.1
      19 June 2014 at 8:37 am

      What’s dodgy is the NATs having to rely on a routine, unremarkable 11 year old letter which shows that Cunliffe was simply doing his job as an electorate MP.

    • framu 30.2
      19 June 2014 at 12:54 pm

      the two cases arent the same

      one involves a letter written 11 years ago, when cunliffe was a junior MP that was written by a staffer for a very mundane and ordinary information request. The person in question bought something at an auction

      the other involves a minister perverting the course of justice for someone who donates rather large sums of money directly to the party

      please tell me how the two cases are the same – and not what the media say about it – address the actual cases

  31. Gosman 31
    19 June 2014 at 8:37 am

    It is his sloppy background checking that is really under question here. If you choose to go after National over links to potentially dodgy business people make damn sure you don’t have any links at all to the same said business people or if you do make it clear up front before going on the attack. Undisciplined does not even start to describe David Cunliffe’s office.

    • lprent 31.1
      19 June 2014 at 8:44 am

      11 years ago and now apparently only stored in a backup file.

      Yeah right. The Nats did a pretty damn good job on this. It is a pity that they didn’t expend this kind of energy to running the government for the benefit of everyone rather than just for themselves.

      • Intrinsicvalue 31.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 8:49 am

        Explaining is losing. Sorry, but that’s the way the public see it. Under normal circumstances this would just be an old letter that could be explained away, but given Labour’s attacks on ‘cash for access’ etc etc, this smells, and in politics that’s all that matters.

        • lprent 31.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 9:22 am

          Unfortunately I suspect you are correct.

          Fortunately the effect diminishes closer to the election as people start to ponder where to cast their vote.

          This is why National managed a bare majority last election with two coalition parties (who probably won’t be there this time) despite managing to run a nearly perfect campaign.

          • Liam Hehir 31.1.1.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 10:02 am

            I don’t know if it was a [nearly] perfect campaign. I would say that the Tea Pot tapes caused lasting damage right in at the death. Especially since the controversy was centred on what was or wasn’t said about Winston Peters.

            And an anti-MMP campaign that for some reason chose to focus on the NZF leader didn’t help National either.

            • BM 31.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 10:05 am

              And the Rena ending up on the rocks had quite a a large impact as well.

              I’d say if those two events hadn’t of happened, National would have got over 50%.

            • lprent 31.1.1.1.1.2
              19 June 2014 at 10:42 am

              The teapot tape thing happened as support was already shifting away from National. The stated preferences of voters changes quite a lot as the election becomes nigh.

              What I think happened in 2011 was the closer to the election it got, the more that the unpolled undecided decided (ie the ones who said “No I’m not interested” to pollsters).

              • Liam Hehir …
                19 June 2014 at 11:14 am

                Well, I guess we can never know for sure. However, I would say that the combination of the fact that asset sales were genuinely unpopular, coupled with the resurrection of Winston Peters as a vocal opponent of the program always presented a danger.

                That made the cup of tea recordings a serious blunder. And as that story ramped up fairly close to polling day, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s effect wasn’t fully captured by the polls.

                Without asset sales, I don’t think so many feint-hearted National voters are going to be vulnerable. I agree today’s poll is certainly an outlier, but I wouldn’t be surprised if National scores much closer than its polling average in the last election.

                Anyway, we will see on September 20, I guess – and then one side or the other is going to have to swallow some comfortable truths.

                • lprent …
                  19 June 2014 at 11:24 am

                  The problem for National is that they have to announce some kind of policies over the next 3 months or look like they have nothing to offer NZ, and I can’t think anything that they’d like to do that won’t put voters off like asset sales did. Plus they have a serious hole in their real budget. The one that doesn’t include accounting tricks like removing half a billion dollars from the Christchurch rebuild, changing expenditure to ‘loans’, and so on.

                  • Liam Hehir …
                    19 June 2014 at 11:42 am

                    I agree that having a visible plan opens you to attack. I wouldn’t be surprised, therefore, if we have a campaign where National announce few major policies outside a “stay the course” type theme. I don’t many voting but not particularly political Kiwis would particularly object to a campaign like that either.

                    Look, I am not one of those people who thinks Labour is in mortal danger. I also think that would be bad for the country. I remember what 2002 was like. It’s almost certain that the conditions will become favourable to Labour again. I would predict that when that happens, it will be on the back of a relatively formless, time-for-a-change strategy.

                    That’s just my view – invariably tainted by my own biases and predilections no doubt.

                    We will just have to see.

                    • lprent …
                      19 June 2014 at 1:36 pm

                      Problem for National is that that if they run on nothing win and then do something that didn’t campaign on. Then it will be repudiated after the electorate throws them out

                      We already have politicians being regarded as being less trustworthy than sex workers. There are few rungs below that in the occupational ladder. That is largely the legacy that National will leave behind if they get 9 years on the basis of unsignalled policy.

                    • Liam Hehir …
                      19 June 2014 at 2:54 pm

                      That’s true – provided what they do is quite unpopular or radical with non-political voters. If they scrapped the minimum wage, for example, or introduced a flat tax of 17%.

                      But I don’t think they’ll do anything radical. In some ways it’s sad that politics isn’t really about ideas or big policies. With time, however, I’m getting reconcilled to the idea that politics is really downstream from the culture. It’s unrealistic to expect politicians to “create demand” for policies by “making the case” for them.

                      Like Milton Friedman said, if the rest of us make it politically profitable for politicians to favour certain attitudes then they’ll come around to them soon enough.

      • Gosman 31.1.2
        19 June 2014 at 8:57 am

        Trouble is the majority of voters tend to disagree with you at the moment. Still election should be closer than the recent polls so it will be tight. So long as Cunliffe tightens up his team to avoid any further gaffes such as this one.

        • Roflcopter 31.1.2.1
          19 June 2014 at 9:13 am

          Unfortunately there’s going to be hundreds of thousands of $$$… oops, I mean reasons, why further gaffes are going to come up soon.

          • grumpy 31.1.2.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 9:30 am

            Correct, if, as lprent suggested earlier, this letter came from Liu himself, and he has no reason to thank Labour for dragging him into this, then you can bet he has provided National with records for every cent he has given Labour.
            The letter is only the beginning. Lesson is all about glass houses and stones…………..

            • Tracey 31.1.2.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 9:49 am

              yesterday, imo, was all about the right shutting down discourse on honesty in politics. Thereby making it a non topic, a non issue. Acceptable. Why? Because they are vulnerable where telling the truth is concerned.

              What a sad state of affairs all round

  32. evnz 32
    19 June 2014 at 9:24 am

    I was really impressed by Cunliffe’s performance on Campbell live. I thought he would be on the back foot, but he really took it to John and made it clear how petty this letter thing is and even managed a smile. To me he won.

  33. dimebag russell 33
    19 June 2014 at 9:27 am

    of course National are afraid of David Cunliffe. They know he is a new broom and new brooms sweep clean. time to rid the country of things like opaula beenit and heka paratai. They have been clinging to the money tree for too long now and taken too much.

    • Gosman 33.1
      19 June 2014 at 9:58 am

      How would they be swept clean even if Labour won the Treasury benches? Is it Labour party policy to exile people that differ from them politically?

  34. Bob 34
    19 June 2014 at 9:40 am

    Firstly, hahahaha, yeah, National are really afraid of a guy that can’t keep his foot out of his mouth!
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10173411/David-Cunliffes-catastrophes

    Secondly, Barnsley Bill has responded on Dimpost:
    http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/entities/
    “I DO NOT WRITE FOR WHALEOIL.
    I have had very little to do with Cam since Truth imploded. I have written three posts at No Minister in the last 12 months and spend my days lazing in the Bay of Islands attempting to grow an enormous stomach while watching what is left of my hair move from my head to my nose.

    The left are in full blame the messenger mode without even understanding that they are being undone from within.
    In the last two hours I have seen three ridunculous theories put about over this story. All of them wrong.

    1.It is the Nats, WhaleOil, Right wing media. Why would any of them want to roll the worst performing leader since Clark. Leaving him in place to bumble his way to 25% is the only sensible tactic for the right. Jared Savage has been nothing short of disastrous for a few National people, they are hardly likely to be feeding him.
    2. It is ABC. Bollocks. Those clowns could not organise a bum rape in a barrack room. This has been delivered in a clinical manner completely beyond the fool Mallard
    3. A shadowy conspiracy because the letter should not have been released without the subjects permission. Seriously, is that the defense line? Pathetic, calling uncle because it is not fair?

    You need to look at others for blame in this debacle (other than Cunliffe himself of course because liars lie. Repeatedly as it turns out)
    I believe this starts and ends in New York on behalf of Grant Robertson. They have made a decision to sacrifice this election and take care of all family business in one final meltdown. They can then rebuild without pesky distractions like Kim Dotcom, Laila Harre and probably Hone Harawira as well.
    Look to Chris Carter, ask whether this character was actually living in Cunliffes electorate. Start asking questions about the China trip, like who else went, what did they do, who paid.
    This is much bigger than the Shane Jones citizenship scandal (and with the amount of skeletons in his closet he would be mental to try and take Cunliffe down, Labour know where all Jones pressure points are and he is keeping his gob firmly shut).
    Somebody will find the hundreds of thousands in donations from people who at the time of donating were not even permanent residents.
    Rant ends

    Comment by Barnsley Bill — June 18, 2014 @ 5:35 pm”

    • Tracey 34.1
      19 June 2014 at 9:53 am

      that says far more about barnsley bill than anyone in labour. Especially number two. What a vile and vitriolic person. Oh wait. Cameron slater is vile and vindictive. He was always going to strike back for the awfulness done exposing collins lack of ethics wasnt he, but not so as to cost her a cabinet seat?.

      • Anne 34.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 7:51 pm

        I note he even tries to bring Helen Clark into it.

        I also note he hasn’t repudiated the fact he had prior knowledge of the story before it appeared…

        Reads like a desperate cover story to me.

  35. dimebag russell 35
    19 June 2014 at 9:44 am

    what a crummy little diatribe full of piffle and weird nonsense.
    If you werent afraid then you wouldnt write this impenatrable crap.

    • Gosman 35.1
      19 June 2014 at 9:56 am

      Is this directed to the author of this piece? If so I think it is a bit harsh on poor Geoff. He is obviously well meaning if not slightly overly hopeful.

      • dimebag russell 35.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 6:27 pm

        no its directed at you gosman. you are nothing but a computer programme anyway.

  36. Delia 36
    19 June 2014 at 9:45 am

    It has Johnboy written all over it. Don’t let the bastards get you down Cunliffe.

  37. Colonial Viper 37
    19 June 2014 at 10:08 am

    Get on the NZ Herald Poll RIGHT NOW and vote Cunliffe UP

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11276826

    • Bob 37.1
      19 June 2014 at 10:27 am

      Thanks CV, I jumped on and gave my backing to DC, I don’t want him going anywhere before the election!

    • weka 37.2
      19 June 2014 at 10:33 am

      Done.

      Can’t believe how far out of proportion this is being blown.

      • Colonial Viper 37.2.1
        19 June 2014 at 4:32 pm

        The Righties run these operations real slick. And it would be a mistake to think they don’t have a follow up planned for sometime in the next month.

        Labour have to fire back with soft media around Cunliffe, and taking firm gutsy stances on bold innovative policy which will differentiate them from National.

        No bullshit dirt dishing though, it’s gotta be gutsy but positive stuff.

  38. Graham 38
    19 June 2014 at 10:13 am

    Great that poll will mean something

  39. dimebag russell 39
    19 June 2014 at 11:27 am

    No gosman. it was directed at you and the other tory lickspittles who write pompous pieces of bullshit that upon reading turn out to mean nothing and just waste peoples time.
    like you.

  40. Naki man 40
    19 June 2014 at 1:17 pm

    Wow 63 per cent of people think Cunners should step down.

  41. RRM 41
    19 June 2014 at 1:31 pm

    Question for The Rt. Honourable Mr Cunliffe:

    Does he stand by all his statements regarding Mr Donghua Liu?

    • redfred 41.1
      19 June 2014 at 1:50 pm

      Im sure he does, otherwise he would need to remember signing a letter 11 years ago.

  42. reason 42
    19 June 2014 at 3:36 pm

    Is it just me who see’s this topic playing into straight into Winston Peter’s hands ?.

    There is the impression of wealthy bent Asians throwing money at our politicians and then getting all sorts of favors ……………………. and I’d expect Winston to flog the arse out of it.

  43. small thing 43
    19 June 2014 at 5:15 pm

    John Armstrong’s biased &leading piece yesterday as if it were fact
    Protecting da Fuhrer while he is not able to keep an eye on the opposition as he has to spend time shoring up to his overseas masters in relation to the plan for future after he steals another election
    A one seat wonder to go with his rock star economy give me a break
    Crash and burn the usual story with most rockbands

  44. Whatever next? 44
    19 June 2014 at 10:05 pm

    What a relief to read a rational discussion about the media reports over 24hrs.
    Media acting like sheep being herded into a pen, baaaaaing loudly all the way

  45. Lorraine 45
    20 June 2014 at 12:11 am

    Yeah this sticks like a sewer of national muck mining. I don’t see much wrong with the letter. Given it is 11 years old and what has that got to do with what is going on with the national party and their MPs being bought by this businessman.
    It made me sick to see Collins grinning like a cheshire cat on the TV this morning. This letter is innocent in comparison her and Williamson’s knowingly being corrupted these chinese business owners who need really to be thrown out of NZ and told never to set foot here again. I think Williamson was a patsy for this corrupt chinese manipulator who is having a serious effect on NZ politics. He doesn’t live here, probably doesn’t pay tax here, and he can’t even be bothered learning the language that is commonly spoken here. I believe that Cunliffe has never set eyes on him. It was related to a immigration agent’s request to look into this so I believe it is likely that Cunliffe never met him.
    It is shocking how the media behave too. When did journalists stop being rational and become like a pack of pitbull dogs in a dog fighting ring, dribbling at the mouth in a lust for blood. It sickens me to see this and it is happening more and more often. Balance and reason has gone out the window for nutcase emotive irrational inquisition. It seems the only thing that gets these inquisitors going is the chance torment someone. They hound the person with the same question over and over again. What actual research do they do. I really think nothing. Journalism does not exist when it comes to these tv personalities any more. They are so biased and narrow minded and their style of interviewing is so unbalanced and subjective that I now turn off any tv personality with this bloodthirsty style and look to listen to some who have still have a scrap of journalistic tendency left. Maybe all of those ones have retired. Now they ones left have all adopted the Paul Henry style of interviewing. Maybe we should ban tv personalities talking on politics. We may get better government from it. I think they are trying to influence voters choices too much with their ridiculously emotive behaviour.

  46. Davethebroken 46
    20 June 2014 at 1:36 pm

    It’s good and proper to support your leader at this time (just wish his caucus team would as well), but seriously…. you have to be joking.

Links to post