Additionally, you have to remember that it’s people of Eddie’s mentallity who fawn over the works of Hagar and/or Wishart – who see conspiracy at every turn, and think that because a politician had lunch in the same cafe as Graham Norton, they must be part of the rabid homosexual conspiracy. Or, perhaps they got in a cab vacated by a BAT executive, and are therefore part of an evil corporate plan to give cancer to babies.

I’m willing to bet all the cash in my pockets, against all the cash in Eddie’s, that this is one step sideways from interviewing the keyboard.

Key’s line was that is was against the public interest for him to tell the reason – that was a lie.

This is not a new issue. The speaker said on 17 June:

Mr SPEAKER: I thank honourable members, because this is an issue that I accept is not absolutely black and white. But, in fact, when the Hon Trevor Mallard was recounting Speakers’ rulings or briefings on the matter, he overlooked the one by Speaker Wilson just last year, which is Speaker’s ruling 162/4. It actually gets into the issue of matters of public interest versus privacy as well, and there are issues to be covered there.

http://www.parliament.nz/mi-NZ/PB/Business/QOA/d/2/6/49HansQ_20090617_00000010-10-Dr-Richard-Worth-Confidence.htm

The decision of Mr Key not to discuss further his lack of confidence was always about respecting Dr Worth’s right to privacy, which is a legitimate reason in the cabinet manual not to release information.

Can you show where people here are asking for “gory details”?

You do understand the issue, Tim. Why are you pretending you don’t?

You’ve got a slippery way with words that Key himself would be proud of.

If there had been police charges then it might become a public interest story. There weren’t. In the end all we have is rather shoddy allegations put forward by Mr Goff on the one hand, and a complainant whose story wasn’t sufficiently strong for the police to investigate further.

I don’t know Dr Worth, but as he’s not an MP anymore I don’t think you or anybody else has the right to go rifling through his bottom drawer with some hokum excuse of “public interest”. There is no public interest in knowing about Dr Worth’s private life any more than there is public interest in knowing about yours.

“Now that Worth’s gone from Parliament for good, it seems that there is no real fear of this being the case but Key has decided that as a private citizen Worth is entitled to his privacy ”

That was here at the standard quoting an article from Tracey Watkins.

Privacy was the major consideration why Mr Key didn’t go into further details about Dr Worth. It seems that the only people who want to know the gory details are the commenters on here.

But, what the hell, I’ll bite.

Tim, pray tell: how would Key confirming that the reason he lost confidence in Worth was that Worth is an adulterer be an invasion of Worth’s privacy given that his adultery is already public knowledge?