Key people

50 comments on “Key people ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Adrian 1

   29 March 2012 at 10:09 pm

   God, this is FUN !!!

   [Tone it down. Gloating is ugly regardless of where it’s coming from..>RL]
   • burt 1.1

     29 March 2012 at 10:15 pm

     It was fun doing it to the Labour muppets as well – well that’s unless you were busy defending the indefensible like the blue team are starting to do now.
     • Colonial Viper 1.1.1

       30 March 2012 at 12:43 am

       oh burt turns out you’re one of those sad sack fair weather political friends. How shit of you.
       • ghostwhowalksnz 1.1.1.1

         30 March 2012 at 8:35 am

         Not its the mock palazzo in Parnell.
         The layout fits the aerial photos, the tennis court will be behind the photographer. With the pool house to one side.
         The place should never have got a code of compliance when it was built. In fact it may still not have one.
2. Blighty 2

   29 March 2012 at 10:18 pm

   Unrelated but there’s no way that Key’s pool is legal. Where’s the fencing? A pool fence must be present in a residential pool, it must enclose only the pool and related facilities (ie not the patio) and, if it includes the wall of a building as part of the fence ,that wall must not have doors unless they are self-locking.
   • Clashman 2.1

     29 March 2012 at 10:24 pm

     The Hawaiian pad perhaps?
     • ghostwhowalksnz 2.1.1

       30 March 2012 at 8:50 am

       oops , see above
   • mac1 2.2

     29 March 2012 at 10:31 pm

     “It’s not a pool! It’s a reservoir for water to fight fires and for irrigation for the… ah …. farm, ekshully. Yeah, those two grape vines out the back……. Look, it’s got to be a put up photoshop job, right. I mean, look at the picture. Who would wear their watch while swimming in the pool?”
   • Hami Shearlie 2.3

     29 March 2012 at 10:32 pm

     Blighty, the fence IS there! It’s just invisible, like the integrity of the Nats! So rivetting on the news at the moment, it’s like a huge bomb exploding over the Nats, but it’s in super-slow motion. Labour knows something else too, I saw Trev smiling when he said he wondered how Judith Collins would feel next week re her legal action against him and Andrew Little? Wonder what Ducky knows?
   • Tc 2.4

     29 March 2012 at 10:42 pm

     Yes but he’s got an opinion that says its legal orbits an old picture before the rule came in.

     Running Air NZ geez that’s a scary thought talk about the born to rule set with no regard for any actual ability at operating an airline.
     • ianmac 2.4.1

       29 March 2012 at 11:21 pm

       I’m damned if I can find anything that could be construed as defamatory in Trevor’s interview. No wonder Judith is refusing to elaborate. Weird.
   • David C 2.5

     30 March 2012 at 10:36 am

     You can alarm the pool or have a cover that can be walked on. Expensive alternatives but legal.
     • ghostwhowalksnz 2.5.1

       30 March 2012 at 11:49 am

       Spa pools can have locked covers but not pools !
       This part may provide an out.
       “Buildings, for example, a wall of the house, may form part of the fencing if it complies with the Act. But if the wall of the house has a door into the house, the door will need to be self-locking.”

       There may be a fence behind the photographer
3. Ad 3

   29 March 2012 at 10:43 pm

   Collins/Slater/Smith vs Key/Boag/Goldsmith is the caucus war where all can see who has the best troops still standing at the end.

   This is Collins means of ascent – not THE moment but the moment that cuts the steps into the ice – and Key’s explicit and unequivocal blessing today means he recognizes her power and can do nothing until the Police and Privacy investigations report back.

   Joyce has figured out he is no match for her and is content being the Minister of The Deal. He is the Cullen-like figure, except quieter and more commercial and potentially with a more powerful legacy.

   With English forgotten, Parata is the loser because she knows she simply doesn’t have the capacity to as Richard III said “to smile, and murder while I smile”. Brownlee is the biggest loser, firstly he has burnt his goodwill with Key making him apologize to the Finns while in Korea, and secondly because Christchurch, the House, and Transport were too much. Local Government is a responsibility with a bad grief-to-reward ratio. It means stuff all, but you cant whip Mayors, they control the regions, and many regional Councillors are National donors and members and potential candidates. Brownlee is death by burial.

   Key will use the ACC-related reports to explicitly cut Boag off, require Collins to cut Slater off internally, and Key then will use the Budget as a re-launch the government as love-fest. He has plenty of public goodwill to burn through before he is remotely threatened i.e. in total co-opt Collins and Cabinet back.

   But not even the Budget will be enough icing to cover this scale of tectonic cracking.
   • Ad 3.1

     29 March 2012 at 11:04 pm

     Sorry Key/Boag/Goodfellow. Apologies.
4. Georgecom 4

   29 March 2012 at 11:08 pm

   A war with the old and powerful or inadvertently opening a can of worms?

   Maybe a bit of both.

   Collins is certainly feeling the pressure. If everything was above board and the Government (or at least Collins) was on firm ground it would be wise simply to take a firm line and stick with it knowing the public would side with you. Collins isn’t. The simple referral to litigation indicates she is feeling pressure, either the comments are a little close to home for her, or its essential for some future game plan to keep her image intact and clean, or some other reason.

   This may have started as a succession plan by Collins. Take out Boag et al. However Nick Smith also got taken out. I can’t actually see how that would have been part of Collins direct strategy, if she has one. It doesn’t pay to piss people off and create scores that need settling if you want to rise to the top. Taking out the opposition money men is one thing that smacks of a bit of warfare. But taking out a colleague and having a sharp knife foreever hovering over your back smacks of a can of worms opening before her eyes, if Collins did initially orchestrate things in her (seeming)favour.
   • Colonial Viper 4.1

     29 March 2012 at 11:33 pm

     But Key giving Collins full backing for her defamation action? What’s that about? Whether she wins or loses the cases its going to be drawn out and inconvenient.

     He already has an exit plan in place for when Collins starts looking like a liability (could be pretty damn soon). What is it?
     • Colonial Viper 4.1.1

       30 March 2012 at 12:00 am

       It probably goes along the lines of

       “My support for Judith was based on her outstanding track record and the explicit assurances she gave me around this issue. Regrettably, and much to my personal disappointment, revelations over the last 24 hours have shown that there has been much more to this issue than I had been led to believe by her. At 19:30 tonight, I called her and asked for her resignation from all the portfolios she holds, which I can confirm that I now have. New Zealanders have a right to demand the highest levels of integrity and performance from my Cabinet, and that is the same expectation that I have. The NZ public can rest assured that the National Government is one which takes issues of Ministerial responsibility and accountability with the utmost seriousness.

       That is all.”

       Good for a 2 point boost for ShonKey, I reckon.
     • Carol 4.1.2

       30 March 2012 at 7:20 am

       I wouldn’t call it Key’s “full backing” for the defamation action. Key is reported as having “not discouraged her”:

       http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6663545/Taxpayer-likely-to-get-Collins-lawsuit-bill

       But Ms Collins was backed by Prime Minister John Key, who said he had not discouraged her from taking legal action.

       “She feels very strongly that people have said things about her that aren’t correct and she’s well within her rights to take action against that,” Mr Key said.

       He’s standing back and letting her do it on her own intiative. So if it blows up in her face, Key has already distanced himself a little from her actions.
   • Jackal 4.2

     29 March 2012 at 11:47 pm

     I think there may have been some initial scheming going on, but they are all definitely just reacting now… and very badly in the case of Collins. I mean threatening a defamation case? Please!
     • Kotahi Tane Huna 4.2.1

       30 March 2012 at 7:34 am

       SNAFU not conspiracy, I agree.

       At the moment I’m thinking two possibilities

       1. Collins passed hard copy to Key and he or his staff leaked it.

       2. Boag or Pullar leaked it.

       If 2. is correct, Mallard and Little et al have egg on face (Labour look nasty, etc), so why bother suing them?

       If 1. is correct, now everyone can refuse to answer questions.

       I’m going with 1. at 80%

       Unless it’s some third thing – an actual spy/mole, sneaking around offices after lights out maybe? lol

       PS: speculation is entertaining, but not half as entertaining as just sitting back and watching them all run around like that 🙂
5. Eduardo Kawak 5

   30 March 2012 at 12:35 am

   I always wondered why Key wanted to build a cycleway.
6. JamesGeorge 6

   30 March 2012 at 12:38 am

   If this did begin as a whirl by Collins to knock out Key’s first support team

   while securing her own position; the most likely reason is naked self interest

   having persuaded Collins that Key’s need to fulfil the demands of his backers was

   too dangerous.
   Insisting on all of the ‘reforms’ ranging from the introduction of Charter Schools

   to floogin off all our sustainable energy sources is grinding down the once huge

   lead.
   Collins prolly had no parrt of the deals that brought in the funding for the 2011

   campaign so as far as she is concerned keeping those deals is all bad news with

   little or no upside.
   If she can chase some of the original architects of the deals outta the shop she

   will have a much better chance of persuading jonkey to take his foot off the

   pedal. No Boag around to remind jonkey of the promises made, might be all key

   needs to give a “see my fellow kiwis we do listen to you” speech and pull back on

   some of the neo-liberal lunacy.

   Collins and any other careerists pols have just gotten to observe up close what

   happens to ambitious pols whose run was left too late. The fate of Phil Goff is

   bound to have many of the careerists thinking hard about their strategy for ruling

   The World New Zealand.

   Imagine if Collins goes does that make the next cab off the rank Paula Bennett,

   queen of the Kelston superette?

   No! no! come back Collins – all is forgiven.

   Nah I didn’t really mean that – still it does give ya pause eh!
7. Carol 7

   30 March 2012 at 7:28 am

   IrishBill said:

   several of the people named in the Sovereign insurance letter as being part of Bronwyn Pullar’s support team are also people that were critical in bringing John Key into the National party when he returned to New Zealand and in grooming him for leadership.

   Actually Cameron’s dad, John Slater, brought Key into the Nats. But under his watch Key was unsuccessful in getting Key into parliament. Then Boag rolled Slater as Nat Party prez. Under Boag’s watch Key became an MP for Helensville.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/john-key-the-unauthorised-biography/news/article.cfm?c_id=1502247&objectid=10523287

   And it seems that getting Helensville was a messy business that must have upset a few Nats:

   The battle to win the National candidacy for the Helensville electorate has gone down as one of the messiest scraps in the party’s history. In the process, long-serving MP Brian Neeson was cast aside, loyal party members felt they were ridden over roughshod, and there were accusations of rule-breaking.
   • Puddleglum 7.1

     30 March 2012 at 2:10 pm

     Yes, and I think Nicky Hager (‘Hollow Men’) goes into the details of the remarkable process of ‘turning around’ the delegates in the electorate from Neeson (who was well-liked and widely supported) to Key – done in record time, too. 
8. RichWhite&Fey 8

   30 March 2012 at 7:32 am

   I hope the script writing course at Toi Whakaari is taking note.

   This would make a great reality TV show.

   Whose move is it next ?
9. Sanctuary 9

   30 March 2012 at 7:48 am

   It is hilarious that Cameron Slater, of no identifiable achievements or reputation beyond his fathers name and his political patronage, is so viciously railing against and attacking Bronwyn Pullar – a woman of no readily identifiable achievements and reputation beyond her friends and political patronage.

   Coming up next: Takapuna Grammar old boy accuses AGS old boy of cronyism.
   • mickysavage 9.1

     30 March 2012 at 7:54 am

     There must be deeply worried National Party operatives wondering what they are going to do with Slater.  The trouble with using a wrecking ball for a blogger is that if they get out of control the damage can be completely indiscriminate.
     • Pascal's bookie 9.1.1

       30 March 2012 at 7:59 am

       Slater’s useful coz he’ll say anything, and he’s not worth suing.

       It’s interesting that the last nights leak fit so perfectly into his narrative about Boag.
       • mickysavage 9.1.1.1

         30 March 2012 at 8:08 am

         Aye PB and he has admitted meeting Pullar and receiving emails from her.  He also knew about the Sovereign payout.  I wonder if he had a copy of the Sovereign letter?
         • Pascal's bookie 9.1.1.1.1

           30 March 2012 at 8:11 am

           Don’t know, don’t care.

           but he doesn’t get called “a useful tool” by media pundits for nothing.

           Who cares what a hammer might think?
     • ghostwhowalksnz 9.1.2

       30 March 2012 at 8:39 am

       he has had his own well known battles with an insurance company over disability payments. But in his case he went ballistic and threatened a fight to the finish but it appears to have ended with a whimper , as expected.
     • RobertM 9.1.3

       2 April 2012 at 12:03 pm

       Capitalism is creative destruction. High class journalism or even comedy is basically destructive, an acceptance that much of the modern media’s role is to be a strong opposition. Unfortunately in NZ the anachronistic idea exists it is somewhow the media’s role is to assist the government to govern and not to expose its incompetence and inertia.
       At their peak British comics like Peter Cook and outlets like Private Eye were brilliantly destructive and did immense damage to the MacMillan and Alex Holme governments. But MacMillan had the courage to go to the Cook, Dudley, Millar shows sit in the frontrow in 1963 and eyeball them. Here the politician or some ordinary idiot would just call the cops and say it was immoral outrage.
       Obviously media freedom and radical political action is easier the larger the society, because in large socities and cities it is far more difficult for an ignorant and almost always wrong ordinary people to effective oppose, given the opposing force of ten of millions of intelligent people and annonyminity and individualism of a large society. You probably need to be as populated as the UK for radical change. It is always easier in Japan and Germany and in Russia or the US letting obsolete cities like Detroit disingergrate is easy. So size matters more than the political system.
   • Deb 9.2

     30 March 2012 at 11:27 am

     Ms Pullar is hardly presenting as a sainted victim in all this. It could be argued that interested parties could pursue her under S252 of the Crimes Act, with respect to the notification she is getting as to when her correspondence to ACC is being viewed and by whom.

     ‘Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years who intentionally accesses, directly or indirectly, any computer system without authorisation, knowing that he or she is not authorised to access that computer system, or being reckless as to whether or not he or she is authorised to access that computer system.’

     If software has been introduced by Pullar and as a result unauthorised receipts are being forwarded from ACC’s system, that sounds to me like “access”.
10. Tiger Mountain 10

    30 March 2012 at 8:47 am

    Bronwyn Pullar, Michelle Boag’s gal pal, at one stage at least may have had more ‘pull’ than a Fort St masseuse going by the impressive number of nat luminaries in the Sovereign letter. Quite an extraordinary line up going in to bat for one party member.
    • ghostwhowalksnz 10.1

      30 March 2012 at 8:57 am

      Its referred to as ” Nationals Nomenklatura”.
      • Tiger Mountain 10.1.1

        30 March 2012 at 9:03 am

        fair enough comparison ghost, certainly patronage going on, but membership of the original Nomenklatura was not always a good thing for peoples careers or longevity….
    • Frida 10.2

      30 March 2012 at 11:27 am

      yeah I really want to know what’s so special about her that she manages to get all these venal Tories lining up to help her LOL.

      It also amuses me greatly, as it did with Whaleoil, that these RWNJs are so “anti-bludgers” until they’re in need of assistance themselves….

      bank bailouts anyone??

      It would be funny if it wasn’t so goddamn pathetic and damaging to NZ.
11. ak 11

    30 March 2012 at 10:33 am

    Nerrida – gimmee everything ya got on family connections Joyce Slater and Lusk ASAP, oh and crossref Garrett perp Radioworks canwest. STAT doll gotta run
12. the sprout 12

    30 March 2012 at 10:41 am

    What i would like to know and what seems to have been overlooked, is whether pullar received the acc client file in pure error, or was that error manufactured by her national party buddies to help strengthen her bargaining hand against acc?
    • ghostwhowalksnz 12.1

      30 March 2012 at 11:51 am

      Conspiracy ? You seem to have lost all sense of reality about this.
13. captain hook 13

    30 March 2012 at 11:01 am

    it looks very much like the final days.
    Key and his credibility and goodwill have just about run out.
    • SukieDamson 13.1

      30 March 2012 at 12:26 pm

      one for the believers amongst us
14. tsmithfield 14

    30 March 2012 at 12:14 pm

    Well, according to Pullar, it looks like Key is off the hook on this one.
    • Colonial Viper 14.1

      30 March 2012 at 12:23 pm

      False declaration by Pullar to an insurance company then? That’s helpful to know.
      • tsmithfield 14.1.1

        30 March 2012 at 12:36 pm

        She actually explains all that if you read the whole article.
    • Pascal's bookie 14.2

      30 March 2012 at 12:26 pm

      Pretty odd development for them saying it was her that leaked it I reckon.
      • Carol 14.2.1

        30 March 2012 at 2:30 pm

        Well, I reckon it definitely puts Pullar and Boag in the Key camp… or vice versa. So Collins can’t count on Key acting in her interests. And it indicates it was someone in the Collins camp who leaked the Sovereign letter.
    • Puddleglum 14.3

      30 March 2012 at 2:20 pm

      The problem with trying to get someone off the hook is that you often end up inserting another hook somewhere else if you’re not careful.

      Tangled webs and all that. 
    • Edos 14.4

      30 March 2012 at 2:43 pm

      Yeah, Pullar using his name as a threat to Sovereign “people who were aware of my dispute with the insurer, and who the insurer may encounter in the course of their business” – just sounds fine and dandy, eh?

      Cronyism in the Nats.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS