Arses and Elbows

Written By: - Date published: 1:21 pm, June 19th, 2014 - 123 comments
Categories: bill english, john key, national/act government, same old national - Tags: , ,

So, the Deputy Prime Minister insists that no-one from the ruling National Party knew of an eleven year old letter from Labour’s David Cunliffe asking Immigration about time frames for decision making.

Meanwhile, the Prime Minister states he knew of the letter for some weeks.

Scandalously, some ministers from the ruling National Party have sought to use their positions to overtly influence immigration matters.

Meanwhile, David Cunliffe forgot he had ever signed a letter eleven years ago that simply asked Immigration about time frames for decision making.

In keeping with not knowing your arse from your elbow, the National Party and their cheerleaders confuse and equate all of the above in an accidental, and probably successful, attempt to cover themselves in shit.

Trust the National Party, peeps. They really know what they are doing.

123 comments on “Arses and Elbows ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Gosman 1
    19 June 2014 at 1:32 pm

    Bill English did not insist noone in National knew about the letter. He stated he wasn’t aware of anyone who knew about it.

    • freedom 1.1
      19 June 2014 at 1:47 pm

      English was not aware of what the PM said only a couple of hours earlier on the same station….??
      Tui time for Gosman

      • Gosman 1.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 2:02 pm

        So the alternative is he was well aware of what the PM stated and knowingly stated that he wasn’t even though it was obvious that he did. What would have been his reason for making a statement he knew could be shown to be inaccurate so easily?

        • Te Reo Putake 1.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 2:08 pm

          He’s a tory? Seriously, Gosman, do you really believe that Key had some interesting dirt on Cunliffe and didn’t mention that to English? While simultaneously expecting English to lead the charge on said dirt in his absence?

        • mickysavage 1.1.1.2
          19 June 2014 at 2:25 pm

          Hey Gossie

          Woodhouse has confirmed he had the letter on May 9 and then briefed the PM’s office on this. Do you really think that Blinglish did not know about it?

          Don’t you get the feeling the media has been manipulated?

          • the card 1.1.1.2.1
            19 June 2014 at 2:37 pm

            So the question becomes who forwarded the OIA in April ?

          • Gosman 1.1.1.2.2
            19 June 2014 at 3:51 pm

            Then that should be the Labour party’s counter attack line on this topic. Hammer Bill English for the blatant lie he told the media. Do you think that is the approach that Labour will take?

            • Anthony Bull 1.1.1.2.2.1
              19 June 2014 at 11:18 pm

              That is the worst thing they can do – it would make them look even more incompetent than they have already managed.

              The term ‘flogging a dead horse’ comes to mind.

            • framu 1.1.1.2.2.2
              20 June 2014 at 7:45 am

              “Do you think that is the approach that Labour will take?”

              do you think we havent seen you shift the goalposts like this a million times before?

          • Tracey 1.1.1.2.3
            19 June 2014 at 4:41 pm

            Come now mickey. Its obvious isnt it. This shows key doesnt trust his deputy. After judith collins he trusts no one who doesnt owe their existence to him. Thats why so many are gone from this govt under his watch. He has a private control siege mentality and a publuc smile.

            The smiling assassin. No proof needed cos thia all obviously adds up to crisis in nats cos their internal polling shoes more want a change of govt than will vote for nation.

            I expect to see this in the headlines tomorrow…

            Pm keeps depury in dark

            Pm lost trust in cabinet

          • Mike the Savage One 1.1.1.2.4
            19 June 2014 at 5:37 pm

            Radio New Zealand’s Checkpoint just reported that Woodhouse got the letter with other info on Liu separately from the PM’s Office. They clearly reported that Woodhouse said, that the PM’s staff obtained the copy of David Cunliffe’s letter earlier and independently!

            So this creates new questions needing answers, I suppose.

            • Mike the Savage One 1.1.1.2.4.1
              19 June 2014 at 6:13 pm

              Correction, TV3 reported, that Woodhouse got documents on Liu, including Cunliffe’s letter, about 2 weeks ago, and the PM’s Office got documents apparently 3 weeks ago, and Radio NZ may well have reported the same.

  2. Once was Tim 2
    19 June 2014 at 1:34 pm

    And if EVER there was evidence of the National Party not knowing its A from its E, it’d have to be Mr S Joyce’s brainwave in which he’s cobbled together conflicting functionality in government administration, and come up with a bugger’s muddle called MoBIE.
    Not even its own staff think it was a grand idea. I even had to feel sorry for its CEO and certain members of its management I just had dealings with.
    It’s a bit like a forced marriage of ARSES and ELBOWS

  3. Tiger Mountain 3
    19 June 2014 at 1:43 pm

    Quantum politics–the Liu letter existing simultaneously in both Key and Blinglish scenarios?

  4. Mike the Savage One 4
    19 June 2014 at 1:48 pm

    Is this what came to the surface yesterday perhaps simply nothing else by the result of some “papers” dropping out of John Key’s now infamous “top drawer”? Following past developments Key and his staff will have made sure they got all kinds of OIA accessible documents – and possibly others obtained in more “dubious” ways, to prepare for election 2014. They make sure that stuff implicating themselves is kept secret, but feed other material to media and right wing bloggers.

    It is indeed a strange coincidence, that such a letter signed by David Cunliffe from 11 years ago suddenly gets attention, and while they say it was as a result of the Herald’s OIA, perhaps a little “hint” was given to some APN Herald staff?

    NO wonder Key has shown himself to be so over confident as of recent, despite of Banks having to resign.

    Yes, I fear there will be more to come, and this election campaign will be the dirtiest this country has ever seen, make no doubt about it.

    Despite of all, Labour should have prepared better for such tactics to be used, and also should have prepared a better media strategy.

    • Kevin Welsh 4.1
      19 June 2014 at 3:38 pm

      How could they have been better prepared when “Cunliffe said his staff had been unable to find the letter, which was sent in 2003. Manual records were usually not kept for more than three years for privacy reasons. An electronic search had not found anything either.” (Stuff: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10178013/Labour-top-backs-David-Cunliffe)

      • Gosman 4.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 4:04 pm

        Put in an OIA request to get the same data that the a ministry actually found.

      • Mike the Savage One 4.1.2
        19 June 2014 at 5:48 pm

        Well, it always pays to keep certain backup files of sensitive correspondence, even beyond certain “usual” time frames. I am not sure what the Privacy Act allows, but I do not think that it is strictly forbidden to keep copies of such letters for longer, as one can argue, they may need to be kept for possible future reference, should legal or other questions arise.

        What I mean with “better prepared” is, to have a better media strategy, to be more on guard for surprise attacks, and to have a plan to follow, rather than be caught out and surprised.

        The letter was obtained by OIA from Immigration New Zealand, and Cunliffe did not go to Immigration NZ to check records, he had his staff look through old computer files, and some hard copy files. As certain old hard files had already been destroyed, nothing could be found, and apparently one copy was only kept in one staff member’s separate files, not accessed and found.

        If I was Cunliffe, I would have, before hammering at National and the government re Liu, and questions about donations and so forth, gone and sought info per OIA or Privacy Act request on correspondence with the man, from Immigration NZ. It does not sound and look very professional to sling around, and attack Williamson, Key and Collins, while having assisted migrants from a wealthy background himself, and simply “forgotten” about it. It was just a formal request to Immigration in that letter, but it is still considered as a low level form of advocacy.

        • lprent 4.1.2.1
          19 June 2014 at 10:07 pm

          Both OIA and Privacy requests usually take a while. Typically about 30 days minimum.

          That Jared Savage got his hands on them in 2 days is to say the least unusual. That David Cunliffe had 30 minutes warning before the file was sent was even more surprising. Usually permission would have to be sought from participants?

          Exactly how corrupt is Woodhouse or the immigration department?

          • NZ Femme 4.1.2.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 10:49 pm

            lprent, apparently Jared Savage sent his initial OIA request on May 8th. It was denied on June 16th, and he immediately refined his request, and resent it the same day. In those circumstances, is it still unusual to have a 2 day turn-around?

            According to Tim Murphy’s (Herald Editor) tweet, Woodhouse received the letter on May 9th – one day after Savage’s initial OIA request.

            https://twitter.com/tmurphyNZH/status/479449849452953600

            • lprent 4.1.2.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 11:24 pm

              That I don’t know. The first delay was pretty typical and short. I will ask Idiot/Savant because it does seem short.

              It’d be interesting OIA’ing the response back to Savage to find out if it contained instructions (implied or direct) about what to ask for.

          • Mike the Savage One 4.1.2.1.2
            19 June 2014 at 11:03 pm

            Yes, they take about 20 working days, which can be roughly 4 weeks or a month, that is “usually”. As I have done the odd one, they can take much longer though, often months, depending on what was asked.

            I presume that the media do at times get a bit of preferential treatment, but even they often have to wait and do not always get what they ask for.

            The circumstances in this case are very unusual indeed.

            Woodhouse cannot be trusted, the look on his face tells me, he is a man with agendas and secrets.

  5. Macro 5
    19 June 2014 at 2:01 pm

    Well it has to be what double Dipton says. I mean how could it not be. This is an honest man. A man who is above feathering his own nest at the expense of tax-payers. A man who would never stoop to lining the pockets of SCF “investors”, or distorting the facts, or misusing statistics for his own political advantage, or thinking of the voting public as “punters”. He is above all that. The PM however, well we know how shonkey he is! So obviously he has had another brain fade and forgot that he really only got the letter yesterday.

  6. Te Reo Putake 6
    19 June 2014 at 3:07 pm

    Gotta love Bill English!

    Yesterday: Nobody in National knew.
    This morning: The PM knew.
    This arvo: The Minister knew.

    Can’t wait for tomorrow.

    • Kiwiri 6.1
      19 June 2014 at 3:47 pm

      And Doctor Paul Hutchison took a look at Double Dipton’s elbow:

      • Rob 6.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 4:10 pm

        And yet TRP if only David Cunnliffe knew, none of this would have happened.

        • framu 6.1.1.1
          20 June 2014 at 8:13 am

          no – a completely different set of innuendo and rumor would have eminated from the PMs office

  7. Craig Glen Eden 7
    19 June 2014 at 3:11 pm

    John Key say’s he had the letter some weeks ago, English say’s he isnt aware of anyone in National having the letter till this week. HMMm so Key obviously does not trust English or the rest of his Party. Is this the start of Key’s dictatorship and has Key gone rogue?

  8. grumpy 8
    19 June 2014 at 3:22 pm

    Seems like the only guy who didn’t know about the letter was the one who wrote it.

    • Craig Glen Eden 8.1
      19 June 2014 at 3:29 pm

      So who knew a letter existed.? Who gave Woodhouse a copy of the letter weeks ago. When did the journalist do their Info request?

      • grumpy 8.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 3:33 pm

        Cunliffe knew the letter existed – and lied about it.

        • Te Reo Putake 8.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 3:56 pm

          Bullshit. If he knew about it, he would have said so, because the letter is completely innocuous.

          • grumpy 8.1.1.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 4:03 pm

            So he wrote the letter after meeting Liu and didn’t know about it? Was he sleepwalking?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 8.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 4:14 pm

              For one thing he wrote (probably just signed it but that makes him the author in my book cos he’s responsible for the contents) the letter asking that Mr. Lui (not Mr. Liu) be provided with a timetable.

              What makes you think they met, other than political expedience? He didn’t even know the guy’s name.

              • grumpy …
                19 June 2014 at 4:30 pm

                First sentence “I have been approached…”
                Can’t have been a phone call or even email as Liu didn’t speak English………
                Goes beyond belief that he would write a letter like that without even knowing or meeting the guy……and he seemed to know a lot about his business plans – eh?

                • Hayden …
                  19 June 2014 at 4:42 pm

                  Can’t have been a phone call or even email as Liu didn’t speak English………

                  So, they met in person and Liu waved his hands about until Cunliffe figured out what he was on about?

                  Are you retiring this persona soon or something?

            • Te Reo Putake 8.1.1.1.1.2
              19 June 2014 at 4:14 pm

              Who says he met Liu? Just you? If you have any evidence to show that, feel free to put your cards on the table. But even if he did, that doesn’t mean a hell of a lot. He’s an MP. He meets lots of people. I met a lot of people at the pub last Saturday night watching the AB’s, but I don’t recall all their names. I certainly would struggle to name people I may not even have met a decade ago, but your experience may differ.

              Btw, it’s a form letter. The kind of thing that gets bunged in front of MP’s all the time. Cunliffe didn’t write it, MP’s employ staff to do that for them in minor matters like this.

              • grumpy …
                19 June 2014 at 4:23 pm

                First sentance of his letter “I have been approached….”

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  19 June 2014 at 4:27 pm

                  Yes, Grumpy, because meeting someone is the only way you can approach them. Why just the other day, I approached a potential client through their secretary to see if we could set up a meeting…no, wait…

                  • grumpy …
                    19 June 2014 at 4:31 pm

                    Did their secretary speak English….?

                    • felix …
                      19 June 2014 at 5:31 pm

                      grumpy, has it dawned on you yet that you’re actually arguing that Liu met with Cunliffe and discussed immigration issues despite not speaking a word of English?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      19 June 2014 at 6:12 pm

                      Well, maybe Cunliffe conferenced in Rudd who knows Mandarin?

                    • Tracey …
                      20 June 2014 at 8:04 am

                      and john keys memory lapse, you agree they were all lies grumpy? Theres quite a few?

              • john …
                19 June 2014 at 4:37 pm

                When you have sentences in the letter detailing a list of companies Liu owns, the products they make, where they will be sold, and the time frame that they hope start up in, that’s hardly a form letter.

                • lprent …
                  19 June 2014 at 6:05 pm

                  Yes it is. That is a letter done on a word processor. Standard template letter, drop in a couple of extra bits as required.

            • freedom 8.1.1.1.1.3
              19 June 2014 at 4:15 pm

              I am troubled by the base level failure of comprehension being expressed by those waving Armstrong’s jockstrap. Forgoing the absurd and widely repeated declaration that the letter somehow actively endorses Liu’s application, there is no evidence or indeed any reason to imagine that Cunliffe met Liu, or does ‘made contact through an immigration agent’ mean something different on Planet Key?

            • Craig Glen Eden 8.1.1.1.1.4
              19 June 2014 at 4:18 pm

              No he didnt write the letter numpty a staff member did 11 years ago please keep up. Cunliffe wouldnt of had to meet with him because he would of meet with the staff member who wrote the letter.

              • grumpy …
                19 June 2014 at 4:24 pm

                so when he states “i have been approached…”, he was lying then too?

                • Hayden …
                  19 June 2014 at 4:29 pm

                  You do know “approached” has other meanings than simply walking up to something, don’t you?

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    19 June 2014 at 4:32 pm

                    When Grumpy approaches something he usually hits his head quite hard in consequence of which his memory isn’t that great.

                    • grumpy …
                      19 June 2014 at 4:34 pm

                      In your case, colliding with reality is particularly painful – eh?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      19 June 2014 at 4:36 pm

                      Which reality would that be? That this is well played by National? That it’s a bad look if you don’t scratch the surface? That that great big dent in the surface was the result of your last approach?

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  19 June 2014 at 4:30 pm

                  Only on Planet Grumpy. On Earth an approach can take a variety of forms, and a meeting is usually described as such.

                  • grumpy …
                    19 June 2014 at 4:32 pm

                    You forget Liu didn’t speak english so phone and writing is out – next?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      19 June 2014 at 4:34 pm

                      You banged your head again and forgot that the approach was made to Cunliffe’s office through a third party.

                    • framu …
                      20 June 2014 at 7:50 am

                      You forget Liu didn’t speak english so a face to face is out – next?

                    • Tracey …
                      20 June 2014 at 8:03 am

                      and john keys memory lapse, you agree they were all lies grumpy? Theres quite a few?

                • freedom …
                  19 June 2014 at 4:33 pm

                  “by an immigration agent “

                  • grumpy …
                    19 June 2014 at 4:35 pm

                    Nice try, but if that was so, we would know who he is by now.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      19 June 2014 at 4:38 pm

                      How, by making an approach? You’d just knock the poor guy unconscious.

                    • freedom …
                      19 June 2014 at 4:45 pm

                      so Liu, you remember him (?) the guy who a few months back needed an interpreter (and a government minister) because he could not talk with the Police, was able to negotiate immigration issues on his own back in 2003 ?
                      lmao

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      19 June 2014 at 5:27 pm

                      Nice one Freedom. Reality’s Liberal bias strikes again 🙂

                    • Tracey …
                      20 June 2014 at 8:03 am

                      and john keys memory lapse, you agree they were all lies grumpy? Theres quite a few?

                • Tracey …
                  20 June 2014 at 8:03 am

                  and john keys memory lapse, you agree they were all lies grumpy? Theres quite a few?

        • the card 8.1.1.2
          19 June 2014 at 3:58 pm

          Nah he may be gaffe prone but he’s not that stupid.

        • Tracey 8.1.1.3
          19 June 2014 at 4:45 pm

          and john keys memory lapse, you agree they were all lies grumpy? Theres quite a few?

        • Tracey 8.1.1.4
          20 June 2014 at 8:16 am

          and john keys memory lapse, you agree they were all lies grumpy? There’s quite a few?

      • the card 8.1.2
        19 June 2014 at 3:57 pm

        I’m pretty sure Ministers get copies of OIAs in relation to their portfolios.

        • john 8.1.2.1
          19 June 2014 at 4:08 pm

          Under the “no surprises” policy, the police said they had to let relevant ministers in the govt know what OIA information they were about to release in the Williamson/Liu case.

  9. john 9
    19 June 2014 at 3:44 pm

    The letter was only one of hundreds of documents on the Liu case, and of little value to National.

    That was until this week when Cunliffe denied ever helping Liu – several times.

    • freedom 9.1
      19 June 2014 at 4:06 pm

      ok john, your harping is getting really boring. In plain english..what special assistance are you imagining this letter represents? In what way does this letter help Liu, outside of that which is to be expected by any member of the public when asking for the help of any MP regardless of their party affiliation constituency position or personal wealth?

      • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 4:11 pm

        That isn’t how it works Freedom: the trick to repeating a lie is to keep repeating it, not to get bogged down in petty details.

        • freedom 9.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 4:21 pm

          At school I used to get kicked out of class for the same petty need for accuracy! If something is wrong, it’s wrong .. right? 🙂

          • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.1.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 4:33 pm

            No, that a lie repeated often enough becomes truth isn’t just the National Party manifesto, it’s been verified by scientific research too.

            They do it because it works.

            • freedom 9.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 4:38 pm

              yup… sad but true, the beat goes on
              power is reality and truth is for suckers

      • john 9.1.2
        19 June 2014 at 4:24 pm

        It’s blatantly obvious that by including the list of business interests, export information, and the time frame that they wanted to start exporting, that the letter from Cunliffe was a hurry up.

        Official Information documents show that at least one of the reasons Liu’s immigration application was slow was because the Department of Internal Affairs were investigating why he was on Interpols red list (along with investigations from two other government departments).

        However the letter itself would have been of little importance, if not for the fact that Cunliffe was highly critical of National helping Liu, then taking his money.

        Labour did the same thing, denied it, then got caught out on both counts.

        • freedom 9.1.2.1
          19 June 2014 at 4:29 pm

          john, I have some tartan paint I would like to sell you

        • Tracey 9.1.2.2
          19 June 2014 at 4:49 pm

          do you understand that williamson was interfering in a case of domestic violence against two people to which the offender later pleaded guilty? You think tgat is the same? Then you agree collins is a very bad woman who cannot possibly stay was minister of justice?

          Just trying to locate your shifting moral compass

          • john 9.1.2.2.1
            19 June 2014 at 5:05 pm

            I was away for the Williamson fiasco but that sounds much worse.

            In writing the letter to help Liu, it’s highly likely Cunliffe did nothing wrong.

            Where he’s gone wrong is attacking National for helping Liu and taking his money, when Labour had been helping Liu and taking his money.

            That’s hypocrisy, but what made it significantly worse was denying getting donations and (repeatedly) denying helping Liu, then immediately getting caught out on both counts.

            That would be like Cunliffe attacking Banks on taking anonymous donations, then getting caught with a secret trust taking anonymous donations. Oh that’s right. That happened..

            Ok, a better example. It would be like Kim Dotcom complaining about someone breaching his copyright.

            The point when Cunliffe now attacks National on these subjects, he’s seen by the public to have no credibility.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.2.2.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 5:21 pm

              Was Banks “attacked”* for taking anonymous donations? Or was he “attacked” for pretending they were anonymous? Perhaps you were away for that too.

              Or perhaps you’re just mendacious.

              Which is it, John? Is your comment mistaken, ignorant, or duplicitous?

              *by the Crown Solicitor, no less!

              • john …
                19 June 2014 at 5:35 pm

                Pretending they were anonymous, you mean like Cunliffe taking donations from his friend through his secret trust?

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  19 June 2014 at 5:39 pm

                  No, I mean was your comment just ignorant and sloppy, or was that a(nother) feeble attempt to advance a false narrative?

                  Either way it undermines your credibility, but I’d like you to choose whether I treat you with charity or hostility and contempt.

                  • john …
                    19 June 2014 at 5:50 pm

                    How you chose to regard it has absolutely no relevance to me.

                    I’m happy to debate ideas and issues, but if you prefer to debase your own argument and revert to personal abuse, that ‘s your choice.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      19 June 2014 at 5:52 pm

                      As is your choice to argue in bad faith.

                      PS: behave like a maggot and I reserve the right to call attention to your resemblance to the larval offspring of an insect.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      19 June 2014 at 5:54 pm

                      Oh fuck a voice pretending to be moderate and rational advocating for the radical and oligarchic and against the interests of his own neighbours. Meh.

                    • framu …
                      20 June 2014 at 7:55 am

                      theres that – “im so polite, but i will be a complete bullshit artist until someone tells me to get fucked so i can call them rude” tactic so favoured by the likes of srylands and friends

                • McFlock …
                  19 June 2014 at 5:50 pm

                  nah, like intentionally signing a document banks knew to be false, the criminal…

                • Tracey …
                  20 June 2014 at 8:08 am

                  which friend? One of the three he named or one of the two he returned money to?

                  Can you name the people who paid $5000 each to dine at Antonine’s to raise money for Mr key?.

                  so you are basically saying that Mr Cunliffe should not have held the right to account for their behaviour, their lies, their misleading parliament, in case he himself had written a letter 11 years ago, asking for a time frame for a decision from immigration, before the subject of the letter had given any money to Labour and without his wife being on the board of any of Mr Liu’s companies? That’s what you object so strongly to?

                  Do you have any children?

            • Delia 9.1.2.2.1.2
              20 June 2014 at 8:22 am

              There is no proof that any donations were taken. I am waiting for our Dear Leader to produce that evidence. So far he has not. Right now the National party looks stupid.

  10. grumpy 10
    19 June 2014 at 3:51 pm

    Clearly Key also has information on Liu’s donations to Labour (something Labour probably does not have). He probably also has information on Cunliffe’s secret donors. The leadup to this election is going to be gold, whoever thought it was smart to attack National over a glass of milk and donations from Liu was a genius.

    • Colonial Viper 10.1
      19 June 2014 at 4:29 pm

      Full spectrum internet surveillance is a handy capability to have.

    • Hayden 10.2
      19 June 2014 at 4:38 pm

      It wasn’t about a glass of milk, it was about using Ministerial travel and status to promote her husband’s company.

      Look here:
      http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1405/020520141724330001.pdf (PDF)

      Go to page 83 (85 in the PDF).

      Event

      Visit and tour of Oravida facilities

      Purpose

      To increase the profile of a successful importer and distributor of New Zealand products into China

      Actually, you probably know all that and choose to lie. Fair enough, I suppose.

  11. Gosman 11
    19 June 2014 at 4:02 pm

    It does raise the question if this letter came up as part of a routine OIA request to verify governmental abd parliamentarian interaction with Mr Liu why didn’t Mr Cunliffe ‘ s office request the same data BEFORE making attacks on National over their links to the man?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1
      19 June 2014 at 4:09 pm

      Because National have come under attack for the nature of those links, not the fact that they exist. A convenient error on your part.

      • Gosman 11.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 4:35 pm

        But why didn’t David Cunliffe’s office get this information?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 4:44 pm

          It’s a fools errand when the media will attack him for doing his job. I note the little dogs throwing microphones at him never accuse the lying Prime Minister of lying. “You lied” – show me the last time a journalist said that to Judith Collins or John Key or even the criminal Banks.

          • Gosman 11.1.1.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 5:02 pm

            Wah wah wah. Bitching about the horrid media doesn’t mean Cunliffe shouldn’t have done some more homework on this issue. Indeed it makes it more imperative that his team does so so he doesn’t get caught out by revelations such as yesterday’s.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 5:12 pm

              Actually Gos, it does. The media will attack Cunliffe at the behest of the National Party whether there is substance to the allegations or not. Homework is pointless when you’re under attack for going to work.

              In strategic terms, the National Party is lighting fires. The use of fire in warfare is risky, to put it mildly. When the wind changes you burn too.

              • Gosman …
                19 June 2014 at 5:15 pm

                Excellent. I would love that to become a Labour party mantra. “The media will attack us regardless so don’t bother about doing the homework on anything”.

    • grumpy 11.2
      19 June 2014 at 4:10 pm

      Jeez, Gosman, you don’t half state the obvious……

  12. JK 12
    19 June 2014 at 4:29 pm

    THIS is what should be plastered all over the media, and be of concern to NZ people and journalists
    – ShonKey and the USA Secretary of State John Kerry – putting nuclear power on the agenda.
    Much more important to NZ people than Cunliffe’s memory of 11 years ago.

    This is a quote from Stuff online –

    ” But one of the issues on Kerry’s agenda when he spoke to the gathering of Pacific leaders was a topic that used to be a thorn in the side of New Zealand-US relations – nuclear power.
     New Zealand’s refusal to distinguish between nuclear powered warships and those carrying nuclear weapons was at the heart of the decades-old Anzus bustup and freeze on US-NZ relations till the early 2000s.
     But Kerry was less interested in that dispute than in the benefits of nuclear power in the future – using a wide-ranging speech addressing climate change and ocean depletion to press the advantages of nuclear energy.
     Ignoring the traditional sensitivities on the issue, Kerry warned that nuclear energy was an inevitable response to the world’s climate change and pollution problems. “

  13. dimebag russell 13
    19 June 2014 at 4:40 pm

    so what did the letter say?

  14. Matthew Hooton 14
    19 June 2014 at 4:43 pm

    “Scandalously, some ministers from the ruling National Party have sought to use their positions to overtly influence immigration matters.”

    Hilarious. It was Labour who gave Liu residency one day before the 2005 election. And Labour that gave Bill Liu the same, against advice.

    And what is your problem with ministers “overtly” influencing immigration matters. The law allows them too (unfortunately). Would you prefer they influence immigration matters “covertly”??

    • redfred 14.1
      19 June 2014 at 4:56 pm

      It is the purchasing of influence that we are concerned about, and we are lacking the evidence that Cunliffe did that, no smoking gun, no donation, no nothing apart from an innocuous form letter, that was a simple request.

      No even in the same ball park as

      Minister Williamson trying to influence a police investigation.
      Minister Nick Smith trying to influence ACC payments for his lover

      These two should have been thrown out of parliament for this.

      Hardly worth mentioning when our Prime Minister lies about Golfing donations from Orivida
      Did we have John Amstrong squealing for Key resignation over this blatant lie?

      The stink over this mess is emanating from John Keys office

      • Anthony Bull 14.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 11:29 pm

        Williamson didn’t try to influence a police investigation.

        • Colonial Viper 14.1.1.1
          20 June 2014 at 12:05 am

          Really? So why did he call the police up about an active operational criminal matter?

        • Tracey 14.1.1.2
          20 June 2014 at 8:14 am

          So when he described him as welathy so they had better make sure they get their facts straight, he was just advising on operational matters? Oh wait, that would be for the Minister of Police? Oh wait, Ministers cant interfere in operational matters? Oh wait Williamson wasn’t Minister for Police, he was just the Cable Guy

    • Once was Tim 14.2
      19 June 2014 at 7:29 pm

      Quick question Matty Ho …. PR is something that can be more readily rescinded than citizenship? I’m only asking since you have a reputation of being the expert on everything and its dog. And I understand it’s especially easier if that PR status was granted under false pretenses.
      Ekshly, the more I think about it, you should be really really greatful that all those bleeding heart lefty bloody liberals aren’t really that much into revenge. Give it a year or two though, and who knows what might eventuate.

    • dimebag russell 14.3
      19 June 2014 at 7:31 pm

      if you know so much where did john keys get $80,000,000 from?

    • framu 14.4
      20 June 2014 at 7:57 am

      well they make a dogs breakfast of immigration cases and its the poor staff who cop the flak everytime it blows up in the media for start

    • Tracey 14.5
      20 June 2014 at 8:12 am

      by covertly do you mean like when Williamson phone the cops to give them a stern talking to on behalf of an accused domestic violence perpetrator?

      Or do you mean when the Minister of Justice pretended she just popped into Oravida on the way to the airport (in the opposite direction), despite it being part of her itinerary, her husband being on the Board, and her pretend private dinner being originally arranged by MFAT?

  15. redfred 15
    19 June 2014 at 5:10 pm

    http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/john-key-admits-keeping-dirt-file-labour-mps-5655555

    Prime Minister John Key has admitted he keeps a dirt file on Labour MPs in his top drawer.

    But the Prime Minister says he receives a lot of scandalous information.

    “I’ve had plenty of people who’ve rung me up with information about Labour MPs,” he said.

    “And I’ve done the same thing to every person that’s rung me. I’ve written it down, put it in my top drawer and kept it to myself. I’m just not interested in engaging in it.”

    Mr Key quipped that if he writes a book one day, people will find it “quite fascinating”.

    In this case kindly supplied by the NZ police

    • framu 15.1
      20 June 2014 at 8:00 am

      which is weird – we have the PM, FFS, basically admitting hes neck deep in the smears, and engaging in trial by gossip and how many journos call him out on acting like a character from mean girls?

  16. ffloyd 16
    20 June 2014 at 9:55 am

    Dogs seem to be featuring today! Has anyone seen Emerson in the herald today? Very funny and so true.

    [lprent: Thanks… Posted. ]