The attack on Auckland’s Democracy

Written By: - Date published: 9:06 am, October 16th, 2013 - 172 comments
Categories: auckland supercity, blogs, democracy under attack - Tags: ,

len-brown

OK Len has been a silly boy.  He is not the first middle aged man to do something really stupid and he will not be the last.  I hope that his family recover and wish them all aroha to deal with a situation that is bad enough when it is private but devastating when it is so public.

I also hope that he rehabilitates himself.  A lame duck mayor is the last thing that Auckland needs.  He has been able to get this Government to do the right thing even though it does not want to do this and I hope that Len continues with his efforts.  Many of us are disturbed at the treatment of MUNZ on the ports of Auckland and insistent that Auckland should impose a living wage, but Len has achieved a great deal of good and it is vital that he continues to do so.

The timing of this announcement and the source are interesting.

As to the source well Cameron is obviously not a catholic.  Because otherwise he would realise that he who is not without sin should not cast the first stone.  And given that his father was John Pallino’s campaign manager you have to wonder if Cameron just wants to make sure that the truth is out there or if he wants to upset the democratic choice of all of Auckland.  I am sure that the latter is his motivation.

Despite their denials I would be astounded if they have not had this information for a while.  If outing of the truth is their only motivation then why wait until now?

Instead they release this information in the small window of time between the close of the polls and the announcement of the final result.  It is clear from the initial result that Len was going to coast home.  Maybe they are hoping that he will resign and they can have a second go at it.

This is hugely distracting.  Instead of us having a Mayor forming a Council that will take the City forward we are into a bout of pantie sniffing.

The response of the Council will be interesting.  I am sure that the right will stage a Bill Clinton type attempted impeachment process under the Council’s code of conduct for elected members.  The trouble is that the code of itself contains no real teeth but I am sure it will be used to at least try and undermine Len’s authority.

Cameron Slater has shown beyond doubt that he is part of the New Zealand version of the Tea Party.  Nothing matters but winning.  And if you have to trash democratic decisions and the future of the country’s largest city then so be it.

172 comments on “The attack on Auckland’s Democracy ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tom Gould 1
    16 October 2013 at 9:21 am

    Palino is making no comment? Very convenient. Will the MSM ask him the obvious questions? The utter hypocrisy in the nasty venal right and parts of the MSM is simply breath-taking. As for the right-wing lynch mob pseudo-impeachment censure, Len should just vote for the motion. Next. Other than that, he should get on with the job he was elected to do.

    • Tracey 1.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:26 am

      Like Banks, and Key before him,,, they have underlings do the bad stuff so they can say “I never did that” “I never saw that” “I never knew that.”

      IF he knew nothing of it the least he can do is say he doesn’t or does agree with it, but feels sympathy for Mr Brown’s wife and family who are collateral damage in this.

  2. BM 2
    16 October 2013 at 9:28 am

    Despite their denials I would be astounded if they have not had this information for a while. If outing of the truth is their only motivation then why wait until now?

    Because he didn’t get a sign affidavit until yesterday, I’m surprised you didn’t know that.

    • mickysavage 2.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:30 am

      The affidavit may have been signed yesterday but are you suggesting that they did not have the information until then?

      • karol 2.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 9:33 am

        SleazeOil has been reported as saying he first got the information about a month ago.

      • BM 2.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 9:33 am

        Yes, but until he got her to sign an affidavit he wasn’t going to put his arse on the line was he.

        If he went public and then she backed out, he’d have been toast.

        Slater is not dumb.

        • Colonial Viper 2.1.2.1
          16 October 2013 at 9:36 am

          Yep. Better that she becomes political toast.

        • Tracey 2.1.2.2
          16 October 2013 at 9:38 am

          “his arse on the line”

          Play fair BM, I will struggle to get THAT image out of my mind today without poking my eyes out with a fork.

        • mickysavage 2.1.2.3
          16 October 2013 at 9:41 am

          Are you saying BM that she would not sign the affidavit until yesterday or that Slater only asked for it yesterday? I agree the affidavit is important but I don’t accept that it was only available yesterday. After all you only have to look at the pressure that Stephen Cook had applied to victims in the past to realise that he is prepared to go to extremes to get stories.

          • Seti 2.1.2.3.1
            16 October 2013 at 9:57 am

            You think she would have provided all these lurid details knowing they would be made public after being elected to the Albert-Eden board? Her position would have been as untenable as Brown’s is.
            Cook may have had a story but denials from both sides would have killed it before it got going.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 2.1.2.4
          16 October 2013 at 9:46 am

          Thats absurd . He would have run with what he had.

          No he wants Brown as Mayor now, it suits his close friends Banks ( a comeback) or Williamson to run next time

        • Rodel 2.1.2.5
          17 October 2013 at 11:44 pm

          Yes he is

    • Colonial Viper 2.2
      16 October 2013 at 9:32 am

      That’s simply a fact, not a reason. The reasons would be: she was also running in the elections. And Palino is very closely connected with the matter through his campaign manager, Slater’s Dad. Also they knew that Brown would get voted in anyway, despite their smears.

  3. Zorr 3
    16 October 2013 at 9:30 am

    I don’t see anything in that code of conduct that says “the mayor shall not have consensual sex with another private citizen who is not his wife” – this really would be grasping at straws for the right because what does Len’s private life have to do with his ability to perform the duties of his office?

    All aboard the bandwagon!

    • mickysavage 3.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:37 am

      I hope they do not do it because it will create an almighty circus for months if it gets off the ground. But clause 5.2 states that “Members have a duty to act honestly and with integrity at all times” and I can imagine some claiming that this has been breached.

    • fender 3.2
      16 October 2013 at 9:39 am

      +1

      But they can’t “trust him now” apparently.

      Len must have told certain people he would only screw his wife.

    • infused 3.3
      16 October 2013 at 10:27 am

      It’s not private life when he was busted busting a nut within the council walls, is it?

      He’s made his private life public. I don’t get why none of you seem to be able to grasp that.

      • lprent 3.3.1
        16 October 2013 at 10:37 am

        He’s made his private life public.

        Ah no. Whats her name and the hypocritical panty-sniffer Cameron Slater did that.

        By the way, I think I should start running a series of the posts on the sex life of Whaleoil. Apparently it isn’t all blowup dolls.

        • Tiger Mountain 3.3.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 12:06 pm

          Len may well be an amateur compared to Banksie party central in the back seat of the Bentley. And please pedants don’t accuse me of making stuff up given Banksies memory blackouts over his plus sized ex buddy KDC.

          There are so many possible scenarios, but a political angle is the hot trail given Whalespews Dad’s involvement in the Pallino campaign and Bevan’s candidacy for a board.

          • Can’t beat Len in the electoral contest-no worries undermine him after.

        • fender 3.3.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 12:32 pm

          Not sure I could stomach the details about what he does with those pig hunting trophies, LP.

        • David H 3.3.1.3
          16 October 2013 at 2:17 pm

          If you do run with that sort of story can you please put a ‘Not before morning coffee’ sort of warning on it.

        • Murray Olsen 3.3.1.4
          16 October 2013 at 11:57 pm

          The problem is that any publicity to do with any sort of sex would raise Blubber Boy’s esteem in the eyes of his fan club. Whether he’s rogering a bloody dead rabbit or irrumating a prickly pear, it’s more than most of them would be getting. And if it did go bad, he’s expendable anyway. Lusk and Collins can roll out some other semi literate moron to keep the show on the road. What is needed is the extermination of the social relations that use his sort of crap as their first line of defence. That means much deeper changes than can be brought about by exposing the sick fantasies and actual events in the sex life of a piece of something that would have to evolve to become pond scum.

    • cricklewood 3.4
      16 October 2013 at 11:50 am

      It does most likely mention behaviors that bring the office into disrepute, having a play in council premises apperently crosses the line Council recently fired an employee for the same in toilet stall a year or two back the desicision was upheld in the empolyment court…
      I suspect that is what will trip him up in the end don’t think anyone would give a shit if it all happened in his own time on private proerty….

  4. karol 4
    16 October 2013 at 9:34 am

    Well said Micky. I am disgusted that the MSM is taking SleazeOil’s smears so seriously.

  5. Philgwellington Wellington 5
    16 October 2013 at 9:34 am

    Can you please tell me exactly what is so precious about Aucklands democracy, when it is being trashed in Hawkes Bay
    And with the Ruataniwha Dam,
    Canterbury with the dictatorship
    of the appointed Regional and Council, Christchurch rebuild
    Fletcher Con, etc. Democracy is so yesterday. You are now under increasing control by your elected ‘representatives’. What to do?..

    • karol 5.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:45 am

      Actually, the SleazeOil smear campaign is just another way the right are trying to undermine democracy. The things you list above are other ways they have been trying.

      And we could be in for more of the same in the run-up to next year’s parliamentary elections.

      • infused 5.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 10:29 am

        Len Brown undermined himself. It’s pretty damm simple Karol.

        • lprent 5.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 10:34 am

          Not “simple”. I couldn’t give a damn where politicians put their genitals if they’re doing it with consenting adults. What I’m interested in is just if they are doing their job and not trying to directly lie (which was the Richard Worth problem). Can’t see what this has to do with running Auckland city.

          I’m just surprised that you are such a furious gossip? Read a lot of celebrity magazines as well do you?

      • David H 5.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 2:25 pm

        Except that it’s all over the front pages, and pushing important stories out of the limelight. Puddin Bennet must have run out of things to Hammer us Beneficiaries with.

  6. karol 6
    16 October 2013 at 9:38 am

    And the TVNZ report has commentators from left and right saying Brown should stay mayor, and that there looks to be a political motive behind SleazeOil’s release of information.

    Interesting that the report says this:

    Simon Wilson told Seven Sharp he thinks the timing of the revelation was deliberate.

    He said the woman in question was a political opponent of Mr Brown, as she was a local board candidate for the Communities and Residents ticket, which means the National Party in Auckland.

    “I understand she was also a member of John Palino’s campaign team. And she doesn’t get elected.

    “It’s hard to imagine that she would have acted completely alone on this.”

    Mr Wilson also pointed out that John Slater, who is the father of the blogger who released the information, was John Palino’s “manager or adviser”.

    “Clearly this has been released with a political motive.”

    My bold.

    Sheesh!

  7. swan 7
    16 October 2013 at 9:38 am

    Hang on what are you guys going on about. He had sex on council premises with one on his own appointees. And that has been made public. An attack on democracy???? Get over yourselves

    • karol 7.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:43 am

      with one on his own appointees
      citation needed.

      Flailing around there, swan. The media tide is turning in favour of Brown. The political motives of the smearmongers are now under the spotlight. They can’t win a democratic vote on policy, so try some dirty smear tricks – fail.

      • swan 7.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 9:48 am

        Here karol see link below. Hopefully you accept its veracity it is from the RWNJ Tim Watkin. Im not doing the flailing. I dont care about this much. (Although my apolitical wife now thinks he is cretin.) I was just calling out the hysterics of calling this an attack on democracy!!

        http://pundit.co.nz/content/len-brown-sex-lies-and-mandates

        • Tracey 7.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 9:56 am

          “The initial story on WhaleOil said the affair was with a “council employee”, which is a bit of a stretch. As one of 12 on the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel she is a representative rather than a staff member. If she had been a staff member the issue would have been much worse for Brown, because employment law would have come down on him like a tonne of bricks.”

          and

          “”The Local Government Act required the Mayor of Auckland to appoint the Panel no later than 31 March 2011.The Panel was established and appointed by the Mayor of Auckland following a three-stage selection process…” It goes on:”The Panel operates up to 1 November 2013. However, the decision tocontinue or re-establish the panel in the same or modified form is within thepower of the Mayor’s authority.”

          So Chuang – a perfectly pleasant woman I met earlier this year – was the mayor’s own appointee (even if the recommendations came from a selection committee). Worse, he has the power to re-appoint her – or not – in the next two to three weeks. “

          • Huginn 7.1.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 10:10 am

            From the Herald:

            ‘Ms Chuang . . . was appointed to the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel in March 2011. The mayor is legally responsible for appointing the board.

            [However] Mr Brown appointed councillor Richard Northey to interview and hire panellists, including Ms Chuang. Mr Northey said she “interviewed well” and there was no reason she would have met Mr Brown at that stage. ‘

        • karol 7.1.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 10:05 am

          Veracity? yes I read it last night. It’s an opinion, and in the end, Watkins states he’s more worried about Banks maintaining office than Len Brown.

          And this is Tim Watkin’s later piece, published late last night or early this morning, after the post you linked to:

          “The unwritten rule re politics & sex: Does the Len Brown story write a new rule”

          Yet New Zealand journalists have been pretty consistent in staying well away from that line. Many a known infidelity has gone unreported, or so I’ve been told. I’d feel pretty confident in saying that includes relationships where, as with Len Brown, some form of power abuse has been in play.
          […]
          Cameron Slater and Stephen Cook, well, their work speaks for itself. And it’s often been vulgar or worse in my view. While they’ve clearly got this one mostly right, they’ve got other stories and judgments wrong in the past, in some cases at great cost. That being said, journalists and bloggers (the latter’s kindest description I can give those two) aren’t standing for public office so can be as judgmental and hypocritical as they like. They can simply publish and be damned. Fair enough.

          But I fear the crossing of a line here. And I fear that these two retrobates are the ones to cross it. I don’t want to reward them or to work in an industry where they set the tone. I don’t want the lowest common denominators in the media to be able to establish themselves as society’s moral arbiters. I don’t want them to be encouraged to find new ways to titilate for the sake of it and thereby lower the public’s view of the media any more than it already has been. Further, do we really want to open our leaders to this new level of scrutiny? That would be something new. And if so, there must surely be MPs tonight sleeping very uneasily indeed.

          One point that stands out in today’s blog is the detail; the unnecessary, salacious, vicious detail. No credible journalist would have gone into such explicit depth about the sexual acts. Even if the story is of public interest, the explicit material is not and can only hurt the family more. It’s clearly calculated to do maximum political damage regardless of the human cost, because readers will fixate on the demeaning, cheap specifics and Brown can’t respond to them, can’t even deny any that might be untrue, because he has to lie in the bed he made for himself.

          None of that is decent, it’s just cruel.
          Look at the comparison with John Banks and the comment made by Kim Dotcom in court today:
          […]
          Do we really demand the resignation of a man who cheats on his wife while a man [Banks] who allegedly says such things wins national office and become a minister of the Crown?
          The Brown revelation hurts him. But its longer-term legacy could be the rewriting of a rule, a re-writing that has taken place due to political gamesmanship and without any sense of consensus within the industry or society at large.

          You are just trying to run SleazeOil’s nasty smear campaign and maintain it has some credibility. It’s just dirty tactics by people who have lost in a democratic vote. I hear the level of detail revealed on SleazeOil’s site is unnecessarily nasty and salacious.

          Shame on you all. You do democracy no service.

          • swan 7.1.1.2.1
            16 October 2013 at 10:12 am

            No I’m not. I dont care about his smear campaign. And agree it is dirty stuff.

            You questioned a fact I asserted and I backed it up.

            But for petes sake none of that makes this an attack on democracy!!

            • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.2.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 1:32 pm

              But for petes sake none of that makes this an attack on democracy!!

              The timing and demands for resignation indicate otherwise.

  8. Puckish Rogue 8
    16 October 2013 at 9:46 am

    He can’t be trusted with a credit card, he can’t be trusted with attractive women but hey its an attack on democracy…ever consider that maybe 2 minute noodle Brown bought this all on himself through his own actions?

    Naah much easier to blame the right then look at your own failings

    • ghostwhowalksnz 8.1
      16 October 2013 at 9:53 am

      Of course its his own failings !

      Have you seen the track record of London Mayor Boris Johnson

      “In 2004, British newspapers reported that Johnson had had a four-year affair with Petronella Wyatt.”

      Johnson committed a “minor technical breach of the code of conduct” in failing “to formally disclose his relationship with unpaid City Hall adviser Helen Macintyre

      … became a trainee reporter for The Times. Within a year, he was sacked for falsifying a quotation from his godfather,

      In 1995, a recording of a telephone conversation was made public revealing a plot by a friend to physically assault a News of the World journalist…. I think he got a medal for that !!

    • framu 8.2
      16 October 2013 at 9:54 am

      you and swan are talking about the act – the post is talking about how, when and why we found out

      they – arent – the – same – thing

      You both need to look beyond the headline

      note: im not supporting brown or his actions here, just pointing out your both missing the point of the post

      • swan 8.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 9:57 am

        OK I am not trying to focus on the act. Of course it is no secret that Whale oil is a politically partisan blogger and would have hoped that airing this causes damage to Brown. Yeah muck raking and all that. But going from that to “attack on democracy” is the hysterical leap I am calling into question.

        • Tracey 8.2.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 9:59 am

          IF using this act to try and change the outcome of an election is not about democracy what is it?

          • swan 8.2.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 10:09 am

            It is playing the game – albeit dirty. This is politics. Dish dirt on opponents – call for resignations – call into question integrity character. Not saying its pleasant or desirable, but it is just poilitics.

            An attack on democracy would be electoral fraud or perhaps making up lies in an election campaign or gerrymandering, or something like that…

            You can see the difference, right? If this is an attack on democracy then the virtually the entire political process in NZ is an attack on democracy!

            The point is – the people will decide and judge him on this (i.e. democracy). And no one is forcing him to resign (and it doesnt look like he will).

        • framu 8.2.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 10:05 am

          fair enough – i also wouldnt call the outing of lengate in and of itself as an attack on democracy

          But i would call the fact of whos doing it, why, and what the objectives could be, add up to something far worse than public interest journalism.

          (But i would probably say that regarding anything the professional shit stirrers in and around the auckland council come up with)

    • fender 8.3
      16 October 2013 at 9:56 am

      “…..can’t be trusted with attractive women….”

      So there’s more than just this one woman he’s been frisky with is there? Or is this woman the only attractive one in Auckland?

    • Tracey 8.4
      16 October 2013 at 9:58 am

      Cant be trusted with a credit card also includes Brownlee and Heatley…

      Liars include Smith and Key…

      You have no moral high ground to beat your chest on Puck… unless I have missed your posts railing against these guys and banks…

  9. George D 9
    16 October 2013 at 9:57 am

    I disagree with MickySavage.

    One thing the left knows is that nobody succeeds alone. That’s especially true in politics.

    His electoral success has been due to the support of the Labour Party, the unions, the volunteers and supporters, the people of South Auckland. And his family.

    Len needs to humble himself and remember who got him to where he is today. Without them he’s just a smart man with a nice smile.

  10. Sanctuary 10
    16 October 2013 at 10:04 am

    Looks increasingly like Len Brown fell for a calculated, old-fashioned honey trap that would make the KGB smile.

    • Tracey 10.1
      16 October 2013 at 10:06 am

      Yet she is saying that he dumped her and it made her feel like a “prostitute”. She felt she was treated poorly and so perhaps she wanted to lash out. Slater called her naive, and was happy to exploit that.

      • karol 10.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 10:42 am

        Now I’m confused. I seem to recall earlier reports did say Brown ended the affair, but this NZ Herald article reports that Chuang claims she ended it.

        Ms Chuang said she did not find Mr Brown attractive but found his power and influence “intoxicating” and compared herself to Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton’s mistress.

        She later ended the affair after starting a new relationship.

        • Bob 10.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 11:11 am

          From my reading og the information I believe that:
          1) Around January she became involved in a relationship and with another person and she then ended the affair with Brown.
          2) The relationship with the “third party” ended at some point and the affair with Brown resumed
          3) The affair ended a second time just before Brown launched his re-election campaign (Jun/Jul)

          Hope that helps.

        • Tracey 10.1.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 3:59 pm

          Yes, I read a report where she said she felt like a poorly paid prostitute after he dumped her.

    • Puckish Rogue 10.2
      16 October 2013 at 12:04 pm

      Helluva honey trap to run it for two years…maybe hes just a dirty old man

  11. djp 11
    16 October 2013 at 10:12 am

    Wow, shedding light on a polictical candidate is now an “attack on Aucklands Democracy”. Are you serious?

    • Colonial Viper 11.1
      16 October 2013 at 10:17 am

      Trying to throw the results of an election with private life sexual gutterpress is an attack on democracy.

    • karol 11.2
      16 October 2013 at 10:20 am

      Yes. Do you seriously think a lot of Kiwis really are taken in by SleazeOil’s smear campaign? If you know anything about politics in NZ and how it is usually reported on, it is a politically motivated smear in the face of losing a democratic vote.

      I think Brown did far worse in not supporting the Ports Of Auckland workers. That really shows where his politics are at. The light has been shed on his personal life. There are many politicians in NZ past and present, left and right, that are guilty of similar sexual (mis) conduct.

      SleazeOil doesn’t shed light, he smears slime and creates politically-motivated diversions. He and his fellow sewer rats have no respect for democracy.

      • DavidW 11.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 10:53 am

        How can it be a smear when Len has admitted it all? All kinda reminds one of Mike Williams trooping off to Melbourne to find dirt on John Key and making sure that the media knew where he was and what he was doing. Inferences were then drawn that there was something to find. Turns out to be nothing – That’s a smear.

        • karol 11.2.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 11:09 am

          A smear is being done by trying to make more of Brown’s sexual encounters than they are. It’s just throwing a lot of mud around.

          • grumpy 11.2.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 11:42 am

            No problem with Len indulging in a bit of extracurricular nooky with an attractive young chick…..but she claims he gave her the clap (which, if true indicates more about Len’s off field pursuits than we thought)….and threatened her (shades of Aaron Gilmore, who didn’t actually – as far as we know- shag the waiter).

            • Colonial Viper 11.2.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 12:09 pm

              ….and threatened her (shades of Aaron Gilmore, who didn’t actually – as far as we know- shag the waiter).

              Threats? You mean the anon txts? Who knows if they came from Slater’s mates or whoever else might’ve known about the issue for the last several months.

              • grumpy …
                16 October 2013 at 12:18 pm

                No idea – but that’s what is claimed. There will be more to come out on this.
                As always, it’s not the initial act that tips them over – it’s the lies and coverup afterwards.
                Good move getting Campbell and Rudman on board though.

        • framu 11.2.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 11:12 am

          from memory that little smear was wrongly attributed to Williams

          yes he was over there – but he wasnt the only one, and he wasnt the one who supplied the story

  12. Pascal's bookie 12
    16 October 2013 at 10:15 am

    The GOPification wing of the National Party shows its hand.

    Judith Collins may lead the party one day, but National won’t win an election with her at the helm.

  13. Sanctuary 13
    16 October 2013 at 10:22 am

    What will the French be thinking? They must be puzzling at the obsessions of the Anglo-Saxons…

    “…At Mitterrand’s funeral in Jarnac, his wife Danielle (centre, with white scarf), to the right their son Jean-Christophe, then Mitterrand’s daughter (out of wedlock) Mazarine, her mother Anne Pingeot (Mitterrand’s mistress, standing a step back, with black hat), and then Mitterrand’s other son by Danielle, Gilbert, 11 January 1996.

    http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/files/2010/04/mitterrand-funeral-351×250-custom.jpg

  14. infused 14
    16 October 2013 at 10:25 am

    The way you lot are portraying this is fucking hilarious.

    Len has done no wrong.

    Jesus.

    [lprent: Do you have a point? Apart from religion. ]

    • Tracey 14.1
      16 October 2013 at 10:28 am

      you and CV in agreement at last 😉

      Selective reading infused? Some of this lot think he has done wrong… me, Allen, vto and others…

      • infused 14.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 10:35 am

        I’ve only skim read, but it did seem that way.

        • karol 14.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 10:47 am

          I have repeatedly said, Brown has hurt his family. I don’t like his philandering. But his bigger failing, IMO is his failure to support the Ports of Auckland workers. But even knowing his political flaws, and that he is too centrist fro my liking, I voted for him last week. This is because the alternative (Palino or Slater’s favoured one Brewer) are far worse.

          And I rate SleazeOil’s smear mongering as a tactic to bring down Brown, as far worse than anything Brown’s done. SleazeOil and his sewer rats thumb their noses at democracy.

          • infused 14.1.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 10:59 am

            How has he smeared him lol? This is all len browns doing. If he kept his junk in his pants you wouldn’t have this issue, would you?

            • framu 14.1.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2013 at 11:14 am

              i see youve changed tack from accusing people here of supporting lens philandering

              • infused …
                16 October 2013 at 11:24 am

                I don’t need to really. It’s all written here in black and white.

                • framu …
                  16 October 2013 at 11:33 am

                  if you dont need to – why did you do it?

                  as you said – its all there in black and white

                  ahem

                  – “The way you lot are portraying this is fucking hilarious. Len has done no wrong.”

                  can you point out where “you lot” are supporting browns carry on?

                  then for follow up points – can you point out where youve changed tack?

                  it all there – it shouldnt be that hard

                  so youve made a statement, shifted your position, then when called on it your response is “i dont need to”?

                  your not even making sense

            • felix 14.1.1.1.1.2
              16 October 2013 at 11:17 am

              Why do you think you get a say in what Len Brown does with his junk?

              Fuck off, busybody.

      • Colonial Viper 14.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 11:49 am

        Selective reading infused? Some of this lot think he has done wrong… me, Allen, vto and others…

        Whoah Tracey…yes Brown has done wrong morally…but no, this is a private matter and nothing to do with his ability or job as Mayor UNLESS it can be shown that he has been lavishing Council money, trips, gifts, career promises etc on the woman.

    • infused 14.2
      16 October 2013 at 11:12 am

      religion? couldn’t care less. My point is, this isn’t his private life like a lot of people saying. You choose to bang someone on council property, cheat on your wife and get caught out, tough shit. He’s a public figure, he should know better. Now he has to deal with it.

      • felix 14.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 11:19 am

        And why do you think you get a say in whether he cheats on his wife?

        • infused 14.2.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 11:25 am

          If he cheats on his wife, he’s hardly trust worthy to be Mayor is he? or are you that fucking simple I need to spell this out for you.

          [lprent: Let me spell it out for you. None of your comments today have any content. FFS you haven’t even managed to write a coherent explanation about why you feel outraged. That is despite several people asking you why you appear to do so.

          Conclusion – they look like trolling. 4 week ban. ]

          • fender 14.2.1.1.1
            16 October 2013 at 11:34 am

            Oh yeah, being unfaithful to ones wife means you are an untrustworthy criminal in every area of your life.

            Bit like those busybodies who think if someone smokes pot they are involved in the criminal underworld 24/7.

          • infused 14.2.1.1.2
            16 October 2013 at 11:45 am

            Why do I need to be outraged? I never said I was. I’m countering these two stupid arguments:

            1) It’s his private life, stay out
            2) He should say as Mayor

            • Colonial Viper 14.2.1.1.2.1
              16 October 2013 at 12:12 pm

              So you want all city/district councillors, mayors, MPs, judges, etc out of office if they have had extramarital affairs? On what basis?

          • Draco T Bastard 14.2.1.1.3
            16 October 2013 at 3:26 pm

            I remember reading an account a woman wrote of an affair she had. She started it when she was 19 with her boss and it lasted 10+ years. In that time she went to the boss’s home for dinner several times a year, became friends with the wife and remained friends with her after the death of the husband. She also got married.

            Was the man “cheating on his wife”? Not as far as I can make out. He still loved her, cared for her and supported her. Same, I believe, can be said of Len Brown.

            As I said earlier, the problem isn’t the extra-marital affair but societies damaging attitudes about sex which, thankfully, happen to be changing.

            • Tracey 14.2.1.1.3.1
              16 October 2013 at 4:06 pm

              “the problem isn’t the extra-marital affair but societies damaging attitudes about sex which, thankfully, happen to be changing.”

              That will explain why Len told his wife… oh that’s right when he got a whiff it would be made public.

              I know a guy who had a drunken night with a woman, went home the next day and told his wife. Rough times and then they went away for ten days to get time to work it out. Still working it out.

              please dont compare Len Brown to this man… they have more than one point of difference.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                16 October 2013 at 5:02 pm

                Monogamy seems to be a learned behaviour not a natural one. It is this learned behaviour and society frowning on people who are promiscuous that caused Len Brown not to tell not, IMO, that he was doing anything wrong.

          • Tracey 14.2.1.1.4
            16 October 2013 at 4:02 pm

            what if you lie from 2007 to 2013, are you fit to be PM?

  16. JLLJames 16
    16 October 2013 at 10:50 am

    Surely this affair is pertinent information for the electorate given Len has been indulging in his infidelity during the time when he was meant to be doing his job. If this was in the private sector you would be dismissed.

    Try and hold everyone to the same standard rather than twist the facts every time. Only then will the Standard become a source of Reliable, Relevant, and Accurate information.

    • gobsmacked 16.1
      16 October 2013 at 11:39 am

      Try and hold everyone to the same standard rather than twist the facts every time.

      OK, so let’s hold everyone – your word – to that same standard.

      Today, all government Ministers must answer this question:

      “Have you ever been unfaithful to a partner, while you have been a government Minister?”

      According to you, anyone who says “Yes” must resign. Anyone who says “No” and is lying, must resign.

      Is that really what you want to happen? If not, why not?

      Think about it.

    • Colonial Viper 16.2
      16 October 2013 at 11:43 am

      If this was in the private sector you would be dismissed.

      Bullshit. Please name 3 NZ company General Managers, CEOs or corporate board Directors who were dismissed because of extramarital affairs.

      Bet you can’t even name one, because it hardly ever happens.

  17. Curtis 17
    16 October 2013 at 11:24 am

    Len Brown said he spoke to his wife last week about his affair. Perhaps she came out with this because she is heart broken? Not because of any political agenda.

    • framu 17.1
      16 October 2013 at 11:35 am

      to believe that youve got to ignore a hell of alot

      occams razor, past performance, known players and all that

  18. karol 18
    16 October 2013 at 11:28 am

    Brian Rudman asks, “what century do the Slaters think they are living in?”

    The Slater family failed to defeat Len Brown by masterminding John Palino’s campaign in last week’s mayoral election, so now we have a dirty blow beneath the belt.

    Former National Party president and Palino campaign manager John Slater couldn’t topple the Mayor fairly, now his son, Cameron, is trying to humiliate him out of office.

    Cameron Slater seems to have forgotten what century he’s living in. Marital infidelity is hardly a sacking offence in this day and age. The sleazy and infuriated out-pourings of the discarded mistress on his website might have shocked his grandparents’ generation, but today it’s more likely to raise little more than the odd snigger, and feelings of sympathy for Mr Brown’s family. What his Labour Party friends might think of him sleeping with a class enemy – a dreaded Citrat – is another matter.

    • grumpy 18.1
      16 October 2013 at 11:47 am

      Don’t think Rudman or Campbell’s die in a ditch efforts are very helpful to Len. They just highlight the fact that neither want to mention the clap or the threats. Rogue Trooper’s comment yesterday that “this is going to end badly” was very appropriate.

      • Colonial Viper 18.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 12:31 pm

        Brown now has to move on and get on with the business of getting the new City Council together, and getting the business done for Auckland.

        He does and this personal life sexual shit fight in the media will be history in 72 hours.

  19. finbar 19
    16 October 2013 at 11:42 am

    The facts according to Len.Yes i have been having a affair.

  20. gobsmacked 20
    16 October 2013 at 11:53 am

    Len Brown went to strip clubs! Disgusting pervert! He MUST resign!

    Oh sorry, that was John Key who did that, and more than once, by his own admission. So he’s got to go.

    We can play this “Race to the Sleazy Bottom” all day. But there’s a reason why National MPs – especially male ones – aren’t clamouring for Brown to go.

    Some of those up on the high horse might want to ask themselves why.

  21. Enough is Enough 21
    16 October 2013 at 12:06 pm

    Fairly hystirical title to this post.

    He’s been busy rooting some junior for a couple of years in his office. That is news. Always has been always will be. Just depends what side of the political fence the dirty rooter is sitting on as to whether you get offended by it being news.

    If it was Banks we just swap today’s Kiwiblog comments with the lot in here.

    Best way to show the Blob up is to ignore him. He will be smirkining at this post and ticking it up as a success. If we all put our heads down and get back to work he will have noone to play with.

  22. Rogue Trooper 22
    16 October 2013 at 12:13 pm

    Hear from RNZ Midday Report that Quax and some other Blue Ducks are calling for him to resign, followed by issues now raised amongst the Pasifika communities and the appropriateness of his Matai status. hmmm, still not going to end well.

  23. Sanctuary 23
    16 October 2013 at 12:17 pm

    As an aside, sad to see what an arsehole John Minto is being over this. No wonder he no one ever votes for him, when given the chance he is just a skinnier version of Slater.

    • grumpy 23.1
      16 October 2013 at 12:19 pm

      …very astute. Takes some people a while…..

    • tinfoilhat 23.2
      16 October 2013 at 3:57 pm

      Bullshit !

      John is taking the principled position of asking that those who voted for Brown should be given the chance to either endorse him again or not now that they have more information about the man’s character both at and away from work.

    • Murray Olsen 23.3
      17 October 2013 at 12:24 am

      I think John is wrong on this issue, but nowhere near as wrong as you are in comparing him to WhaleSpew. It is possible to be principled and wrong, like John is here.

  24. Rob 24
    16 October 2013 at 12:24 pm

    An attack on democracy, really, amazing how you politicise and shift the blame on a low blow to his wife and kids. Good job , you must be really proud how intellectualise this shit away.

    He is lucky it didnt come out prior to the election, people down here are gutted by what he has done to himself and his family that are part of teh community. He has got a lot of ground to recover.

    If the election was happening now, the big Sth Akl support base that he has so enjoyed, based on Christian and family values would not be so supportive.

    I think its pretty clear that a few consistant Standard commentators do not care, as you guys put it “where elected officials put their genitals”. But down in the somewhat more real world, infidelity and the affect upon families and communities is treated a little more seriously.

    This guy has seriously let a lot of people down and as of yesterday does not have the same degree of trust and love with his community and just before you leap in to rip into me , I actually voted for him.

    • Colonial Viper 24.1
      16 October 2013 at 12:29 pm

      I think your Right Wing traction is slipping. Seems like NZers don’t like Slater’s prurient approach to NZ politics.

      • Rob 24.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 12:34 pm

        what right wing traction, you really don’t get it do you.

        • framu 24.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 12:47 pm

          its amazing that you cant distinguish between the act, the politically motivated response, and what the response is hoping to achieve.

          as gobsmacked points out below

    • gobsmacked 24.2
      16 October 2013 at 12:32 pm

      Criticising Brown for his behaviour is not an attack on democracy.

      Removing him from his elected office is an attack on democracy.

      Chalk, cheese.

      • Rob 24.2.1
        16 October 2013 at 12:43 pm

        So , no elected official can held to account for their behaviours is that what you are saying?

        • karol 24.2.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 12:49 pm

          No one is saying that. I’m very pleased to see John Banks being held to account in the courts for his political actions.

          Many here have been critical of Len Brown failing to support the Ports of Auckland workers.

        • gobsmacked 24.2.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 12:53 pm

          No.

          I guess we have different views on “held to account”. I think having sex with an intern was wrong, but slaughtering thousands of Iraqis was vastly worse. So Bush should have been impeached, not Clinton.

          Banks has not (yet) been held to account for breaking the law, and lying repeatedly, while Brown has not broken any law. Which mayoral “sin” is greater?

          I’m happy with my moral compass, yours is up to you.

          Above all, I don’t take my moral instructions from the immoral bloggers and panty-sniffers like Slater. If they win, we ALL lose.

          • Rob 24.2.1.2.1
            16 October 2013 at 1:40 pm

            No

            You can always point in almost all situations to other examples that are worse or more extreme or whatever, of course there are some terrible incidencies created by elected officials, this is why they need to be scutinised.

            If that makes you feel better about your moral compass good one, dont judge mine by it.

            Anyway , another supposed good guy is exposed for what he has done, hopefully they cabn pull through.

      • Rob 24.2.2
        16 October 2013 at 12:48 pm

        You know, I don’t he will resign.

        At the next election I would certainly be considering things differently.

    • lprent 24.3
      16 October 2013 at 1:34 pm

      …I actually voted for him…

      So did I, so did a lot of us.

      However (here is the important thing), we didn’t vote for his sex life. We didn’t vote on whatever way he was an upright citizen.

      We voted on his policies. So what is different today rather than when we voted sometime over the last few weeks? Sex, family and the like isn’t something that I even look at in a politician. That is the realm of prurient panty-sniffers like yourself.

      • Rob 24.3.1
        16 October 2013 at 1:46 pm

        Top marks on the Lprent scale for name calling. Doesn’t take you long really does it.

        To some people, not you I realise this, do vote on the character of the person as well as their policies. Character is important in people, maybe this has always been your issue.

        You know the amount of references you have made about panty sniffing really makes you out to be an expert in the matter.

        • Rogue Trooper 24.3.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 1:59 pm

          sorry Lynn, couldn’t help it, gotta 😀

        • lprent 24.3.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 2:04 pm

          It is merely my plain-spoken description of someone that is far far too concerned about the intimate details of someone else’s life. If I’d been “name-calling” then I’d have been far more robust in my description than ‘prurient panty-sniffer’. If you don’t like it then don’t act like you deserve that description of your behaviour. I really can’t be bothered figuring out a polite shorthand way of describing a inane and obsessive fetish for gossip.

          Besides, using a robust description gets more of an amusing reaction from fools who are more concerned with appearances, politeness and manners than they are of reality. The type of crazies who’d figure out how to ignore things like genocide, rape, murder, or whatever by wrapping a “polite” label around their hypocrisy.

          If you’re relying on “character”, then I’d question *where* you could assess that from. The media just have the opinions of others, who in turn you have to try and figure out their character. Quite simply you’re making an assessment on the PR ability of the candidate and their campaign team.

          “Character” is something you could do in a small town. It is nigh well impossible in city of 1.4 million odd.

          • Rogue Trooper 24.3.1.2.1
            16 October 2013 at 2:46 pm

            from “The type of crazies…to odd” is very well put Lynn.

          • Rob 24.3.1.2.2
            16 October 2013 at 2:47 pm

            Auckland is actually a small town on a global scale. I have assessed his ‘character’ from his raft of meetings , statements made by himeself about himself and his regard to his family , how he has acted with his family in public, need I go on.

      • grumpy 24.3.2
        16 October 2013 at 2:34 pm

        I suspect most people bought the package. A “nice guy”. Someone who could be trusted to keep his word and promises to the voters.

      • tinfoilhat 24.3.3
        16 October 2013 at 4:00 pm

        “We voted on his policies. So what is different today rather than when we voted sometime over the last few weeks? Sex, family and the like isn’t something that I even look at in a politician. That is the realm of prurient panty-sniffers like yourself.”

        What an arrogant idiot you are, perhaps just perhaps some of the other voters do take into account sex, family and the like as well as policies when voting. Does that make them idiots and prurient pant-sniffers ?

  25. LynnW 25
    16 October 2013 at 12:25 pm

    This makes me question Brown’s common sense and judgement. He deserves to be called a ‘dick head’ because anyone with his brain engaged would have seen that the woman in question is a determined self-publicist who wanted a political career.

    She’s also a bit of a hypocrite. She wrote this on her blog – about the qualities she wants in a partner:

    “Trustworthiness. When I share my secrets or personal life with someone, I won’t tolerate them being thrown back in my face or aired publicly. I need to know that I can trust my partner to never do this.”

    Whilst I would normally side with the woman in cases like this, I have to place her complaint about being made to feel like a prostitute alongside the fact that she was happy to have sex stark naked with a married man in the Council HQ.

    As to the texts she received being ‘lewd’ – adolescent perhaps – and the ‘threat’ sounded more like good advice.

    • Rob 25.1
      16 October 2013 at 2:06 pm

      Oh well thats cleared it up, he is a dick head because of who he did it with , not because he did it. Real classy Lynn.

      I bet his wife & family can rest easy now knowing that only thing he did wrong was that he was giving it to a girl from the other side.

      • grumpy 25.1.1
        16 October 2013 at 2:37 pm

        Cripes this thread is certainly an insight into left wing philosophy.
        “It’s not what is done but who is doing it” or “it’s only bad when the Right do it” bullshit.

        • framu 25.1.1.1
          16 October 2013 at 2:53 pm

          is this thread saying either of those things?

          or is there some severe comprehension issues floating about?

          i do see a lot of “jesus that was dumb of brown – but lets examine the motives of his opponents” but very little, bordering on none of – “cool – cheating on your wife. Thats right on!”

        • gobsmacked 25.1.1.2
          16 October 2013 at 3:03 pm

          Wrong, Grumpy.

          What we’re trying to do is establish the ground rules. For all, regardless of party. But every time we ask, you “righties” run away from the question.

          So, one more time – should all Ministers and MPs who have had affairs, now resign?

          Yes or no?

          • Rob 25.1.1.2.1
            16 October 2013 at 3:24 pm

            Ok I’ll engage. I dont think that people should resign as a result of affairs.

            If an issue like this does get out into the public , then people will cast their votes and form their views accordingly, and those people outed will have to live with what they have done. If you promote yourself as being a Christian person in a marriage and faithful to your family and courting a fairly conservative community who hold these same values, then this community will view you differently after the affair, and I suppose this comes down to honesty and integrity.

            I suppose another issue with these sorts of things is the persons capability to recognise bad sitauations. People elected (or for that matter hold) positions of responsibility, they do need to be smart and aware. Its obvious that they are probably offered tempting situations almost daily, be it bribes, corruption, sex whatever. Of course just because they choose to have an affair does not mean they are doing other dodgy things, however it is that loss of trust and belief in that this elected person can make wise decisions on a repeated basis that is broken.

      • LynnW 25.1.2
        16 October 2013 at 4:02 pm

        Glad you think my post was classy Rob. I try not to disappoint.

        You go ahead and put your own spin on things but the fact is Brown did something a load of people do or would do given the chance – and he did it with someone who was self centred / opportunistic / politically motivated/ naive (take your pick) and who chose to make it public via a right-wing blogger and to provide said blogger with a load of salacious details.

        I happen to think that, given such a monumental lapse of judgement, Brown should resign – but let’s not lose sight of the fact that his family will be hurt not just because he had an affair, but because of the way it was revealed.

        She’s a woman, not a girl; she courts publicity; has political ambitions and, while the far greater fault is his, she clearly didn’t care about Brown’s family during the affair nor did she care about the effects on them of the way she CHOSE to reveal it.

    • Murray Olsen 25.2
      17 October 2013 at 12:29 am

      Did she actually complain about being treated like a prostitute? What I read suggested that she was complaining about not being treated like one, i.e. she had no material gain to show for it at the end.

  26. captain hook 26
    16 October 2013 at 1:44 pm

    look cameron slater is a piece of shit.
    all it proves is that Len Borwn has the cojones and he will get a third term.
    dig?

  27. The Lone Haranguer 27
    16 October 2013 at 2:37 pm

    I suspect that the young lady in question went to Slater as a woman scorned, then figured she didnt want to verify stuff as she had an election to win.

    When she lost, and when Len Brown won, then she was happy to sign the affidavit and sell him down the river.

    This country decided a generation ago, that what happens in people bedrooms is not the business of the State. But for some reason, I dont recall that standard being kept when Richard Worth was caught with his pants down, and many on the left wanted his goolies on a plate. They got his head instead.

    For the sake of Mr Browns wife and kids, we should leave them alone.

  28. TheContrarian 28
    16 October 2013 at 2:58 pm

    If you have are going to have an affair be prepared to get caught.
    If you are a public official having an affair be prepared to caught and have it get very ugly and very public so try and keep it in your pants – at least until you leave office.

    As to whether or not he is now unqualified to hold office or should resign my opinion is neither but that is the choice of the people he represents.

    • TheContrarian 28.1
      16 October 2013 at 4:29 pm

      “As to whether or not he is now unqualified to hold office or should resign my opinion is neither”

      Errr, what I mean to say is he shouldn’t resign and he is still qualified. That sentence read weird.

  29. jaymam 29
    16 October 2013 at 3:11 pm

    The National and ACT parties seemed happy to have Brash as leader no matter what he did in his private life.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10401658

    ‘The “other woman” in National leader Don Brash’s alleged affair has spoken for the first time of the “traumatic” impact of the allegations..'”

  30. on the fence 30
    16 October 2013 at 4:21 pm

    Hi Guys

    Im all keen for not focusing on what Len does in his personal life. If he wants to have an affair thats all well and good (I dont wanna know nor do I have a right to know). However when the private life starts impacting on what he does in the Office is what concerns me. Many allegations have been made around him ummm having happy time in the office while talking to his mistress on the phone. Plus the whole meeting room sex allegation was stated by the mistress. Its all one sided however (as she is the one detailing the specifics here) but should Len Brown be held accountable for acting unprofessionally in the office? Im not saying he should resign but surely it warrants an investigation? In any other job just insinuating the above would be a major issue. Should it be investigated based on the above? How does one be held accountable in the position of Mayor if it was true?