The money in question was a contingency fund. Therefore it’s quite legitimate to go spending it on lunch at Kermadec as a contingency should Cin Cin be fully booked.

HTH

Perhaps you should read me closer then burt. I said that Hide’s attacks now look like dishonest partisan bs given his current silence, people that were taken it by it might not be just like him though. It depends on how they react to his hackery.

“Which is diabolical compared to their stand on principle when in opposition.”

It shows their stand back then was just bullshit burt. People that fell for it, should be just as vehement against ACT/National as they were against the last government. Probably more vehement.

As for whether or not those supporters are just hacks, pointing back to that last government when faced with criticisms of this one would not bode well, I should think, in this regard. (Even if they only do so to try and point out alleged hypocrisy in the critics.)

Such tactics only look hackish on the part of ACT voters. Afterall, who cares if so and so private citizen is a hypocrite? The point is the corruption of the leadership no? I should think that those supporters should be much more upset now about ACT who have betrayed them. But they seem to need prompting, which makes me doubt their sincerity. It’s sad. But you can see the bind I’m in. I can’t read minds so I have to judge based on behaviours.

“Perhaps Rodney, like Peters and his defenders actually, only has principles when in opposition?”

I’ve always thought that Hide was not much different to Peters. Neither of them are necessarily like their followers though.

Firstly I find it hard to take you seriously when you say the attacks against Winston-Secret-Trust-Peters were partisan. However I certainly agree that ACT are conspicuously quiet at this time.

I suspect the quietness at this time is the politicking. Which is diabolical compared to their stand on principle when in opposition.

Perhaps Rodney, like Peters and his defenders actually, only has principles when in opposition?

ACT seem comfortable in coalition with these guys, I’m a bit surprised. One would think that all the voters that were convinced to vote for them due to their highly principled campaign against Winston Peters would be very upset. Particularly those that felt that because Peters was in Coalition with Labour, then Labour was also just as guilty as he (if not more so), basing this argument on the idea that ignoring alleged corruption because of politics was itself corruption.

Hide has been conspicuous in his silence for some many months on a variety of issues. His campaign against the “Peters/Clark” government now looks like pure politic; lying to poorly informed, naive but well intentioned voters. He doesn’t give a shit about corruption if the corrupt are giving him power. Those principled voters must be really pissed. They should speak up about this, much more than about Labour/Peters, lest they look like partisan hacks.

Don’t you think?

I agree, this is a disgrace. These individuals, and Key by condoning it, are rorting the tax payers. But you know how this works rOb, how it’s always been done. Money is allocated to a task, the task is delivered and the spare money is just chucked onto some other task that has overrun. A big game of swings and roundabouts and no accountability for what is really going on.

Which when you look at it boils down to; Well that’s how it happens when it’s other peoples money and it’s the way it’s always been. The ref made a bad call saying the unspent money should be returned in this instance and this precedent will add significant administrative burden to all public funding bids now that a refund precedent has been set.

Ya think Key will just validate it?

captcha:FIXED

Sounds like Peter Davis urban legend to me.