Written By: James Henderson - Date published: 11:59 am, March 30th, 2012 - 56 comments
Categories: Judith Collins, national - Tags: cameron slater, civil war, Michelle Boag, simon lusk, trevor mallard
Within minutes of Simon Lusk’s name being linked to the leaking of the Boag email, a message came through on the tip line – Slater is going feral over Lusk’s name being mentioned. And well he might, Lusk is Cameron Slater’s meal ticket. After a stunned silence on Whaleoil for a few hours – Slater/Lusk were back with all the dirt they could sling.
Trevor Mallard was Slater/Lusk’s primary target (I’m using the names conjointly because they both use the Whaleoil pseudonym and who can be bothered sorting one from the other). I’m sure that having the same old material thrown at him again isn’t going to worry Mallard in the slightest. Slater even appeared on TV in sunglasses (to hide bloodshot eyes maybe?) to accuse Labour of being the ‘nasty’ party (oh the irony). Well, I’m pretty sure it feels nasty to have his little empire crumbling around him.
The lashing out at Boag continued as well. Slater/Lusk know they are in a civil war, and they know that unless they pull out all the stops, they’re sure to be on the losing side. It’s a sharp contrast to Farrar, who is obviously completely out of the loop on this fight and has taken a bland pro-National line. For Slater, there’s the personal element that Boag rolled his dad as party president – in a party that is all about elitism and personal power, that’s a scar that doesn’t fade.
Of course, all the ferocity of Slater/Lusk’s response since Lusk was named tells you that a nerve has been hit.
Wiser heads, like Farrar, will be counselling to bring the fight back behind closed doors. But Collins would have to make some kind of admission of fault over the leaks for that to happen though. And Slater just isn’t going to listen. Civil war holds no fears for him – he’s been smearing potential National candidates for a fee with Lusk for a while now. But that makes him a huge liability to the rest of the party. The question now is, what can they do about it?
[Note: If you're wondering about the basis for saying Slater/Lusk are paid to run campaigns for National party nominations, which frequently involve smearing other National nominees, check out this from Whaleoil:
Some boneheads in the Auckland region hierarchy have been putting about that candidates should not pay for advice or pay for strategy. They are as prissy and as puritanical as the old amateur era rugby people and need to stop this silliness. Laughably the main proponents of this argument are people who earn a living by charging for their services themselves.
If you want to be a National candidate there is a very small group of talented, experienced professionals who will greatly enhance your chances of winning. Yes they will cost, but who else won’t you pay – your lawyer, your accountant, your printer, your speech coach, the petrol station for the gas to get to delegate meetings? Professional advice costs money all over town, why not in politics?
What I can’t understand is why paying for someone who gives you the best chance of a long career in politics is wrong or unethical or whatever else the buggers muddle in Auckland seem to think is reason for not engaging professionals. Aspiring candidates should call the tip line if they want introductions to competent political advisors.
Blog readers are well aware of my views on people who behave unethically, and the best way to out them is to publish information. I realise pride is a sin, but I’m feeling just a little bit proud that I have contributed so meaningfully to the selection of a really good candidate and future National MP. I am also proud that National know that they cannot cover up skullduggery in the party. The tipline callers are many and varied and the truth will out.
- and if that was written by Slater, I'll eat my hat]