Darren Hughes resigns

Written By: - Date published: 5:50 pm, March 25th, 2011 - 204 comments
Categories: accountability, labour - Tags:

Darren Hughes has resigned as an MP

Labour leader Phil Goff has announced that Darren Hughes is resigning as an MP.

The move comes after two days of speculation following a complaint made against Hughes.

Goff said: “It is just too difficult for him to carry out his parliamentary duties and his duties as member of parliament.”

Hughes met with Goff today and they “both agreed it was best course of action”.

Goff said he still accepted Hughes’ word that he had done nothing wrong, but “the judgement that has to be made is a judgement to be made by the police”.

This is still the subject of a police investigation. Any comments which are prejudicial or defamatory will be deleted.

204 comments on “Darren Hughes resigns ”

  • Comments are now closed

    • Carol 1.1
      25 March 2011 at 5:41 pm

      Andrew Little was just on RNZ talking Hughes possible replacement. He was hinting that Louisa Wall at #6 was the next most likely. She’s the first on the list that will be standing in the coming election. The previous 5 have to consider if they want to disrupt their lives for 6 months.

      • Inventory2 1.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 6:49 pm

        Does the list presented to the public to make its decision from carry no weight? If Labour pushes five potential MP’s aside to get Louisa Wall in eight months early, it will be a bigger abuse of MMP than what the Greens did in 2008 to parachute Russel Norman in. Surely, Labour has some sort of obligation to pick from the list as it was published pre-election, even if they don’t like what they get.

        PS Captcha = FAULTS – hmmmmm

        • Alwyn 1.1.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 8:29 pm

          My understanding of the process is that the Labour party don’t really have any say in the matter.
          As I read it the Electoral Office ask the party if the person on the list is still a member of the party. I don’t think they would dare lie about that and it would be pretty hard to kick all the ones you don’t want out in a hurry.
          Look how hard it was to try and expel Chris Carter.
          If they are still in the party the Electoral then go to the person themselves and ask THEM if the will take the seat.
          Thhe party has very little it can do. They can only try and persuade the people on the list to say no. They can’t force them.

    • markus 1.2
      26 March 2011 at 2:50 am

      My thoughts on this matter are entirely inconsequential.

  2. Santi 2
    25 March 2011 at 5:50 pm

    Do I feel sorry for [deleted – and take a week off. — r0b] Hughes? Not at all.

  4. Colonial Viper 4
    25 March 2011 at 5:53 pm

    Not a good look. And not good for Labour. Hope Hughes is OK and is getting support. He deserves a thoroughly fair process and police investigation.

    • higherstandard 4.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:10 pm

      What about the complainant ?

      • Lanthanide 4.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 6:30 pm

        The complainant hasn’t had their career ruined. We don’t know how justified their complaint is at this point, either, so it’s difficult to offer any sympathy for them.

        • Herodotus 4.1.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 6:40 pm

          “The complainant hasn’t had their career ruined….so it’s difficult to offer any sympathy for them.”
          – How do you know how the complainant is coping and what damage may have resulted. Taken back from your attitude, this makes The Sensible Sentancing Trust /Garth Vickers look like new born puppies compared to your Bull Mastiff attitude. Perhaps La you are positioning for a place in Act on as their extreme right canditate.

          • Pascal's bookie 4.1.1.1.1
            25 March 2011 at 6:52 pm

            I haven’t seen anyone here attacking the complainant. Go and check the Worth threads, here or at KB, and read what was being said to get an actually interesting comparison. From memory most lefties were saying that Worth deserved due process, and that the complainants interests and wishes came ahead of whatever fantasy notions right wingers had about how she should be behaving.

            • Herodotus 4.1.1.1.1.1
              25 March 2011 at 7:10 pm

              PB I was referring to the perodic tables comment above mine. Nothing I referred to was concerning Worth, so read Lants comment 😉

          • deemac 4.1.1.1.2
            25 March 2011 at 10:48 pm

            “How do you know the complainant is coping?” Because that was what was reported in the media, where it was reported he was at uni as usual and not distressed. Your concern would be touching if I thought for a moment it was genuine.

            • McFlock 4.1.1.1.2.1
              26 March 2011 at 12:09 am

              Actually, it’s a fair comment – even if the media report the complainant is throwing a party, there is often a fine line distinguishing between “truth”, “stuff a reporter made up”, “complainant putting a brave face on it”, and “bullshit rumour going around campus”

              As someone said below, “innocent until proven guilty counts for both parties”.
              Rule of thumb: if thecomplaint is proved, and proved to be of a serious incident, would a normal person feel like a prick if they’d said XYZ? I think that L’s comment would be a bit dickish in that situation. On the other hand it could be correct – but would that be by luck or by design?

              • Lanthanide …
                26 March 2011 at 1:36 am

                I said what I said based on the information presently available: we have no idea if his complaint is legitimate or if he over-reacted or made a bad decisions and is now trying to blame it on Darren. We just don’t know. So, I cannot feel any sympathy for him.

                On the other hand we know that it has cost Darren his career so far. If it turns out the complaint is substantiated and Darren has a case to answer for, my sympathies will shift.

                • Gus …
                  26 March 2011 at 5:05 am

                  I disagree Lanthanide, what we know at present is that a 32 y.o Professional Politician thought it was appropriate to have a sexual encounter with an 18 y.o following a bout of drinking and is paying the professional price of their poor judgement.

                  Of the two persons involved only one deserves any sympathy and its not Darren.

                  • Kevin Welsh …
                    26 March 2011 at 8:48 am

                    So what exactly is inappropriate about that situation Gus? Sounds to me like plenty of Saturday nights I have had in the past and it didn’t cost me my job.

                    If it was a male-female situation, would it have been different?

                    • Gus …
                      26 March 2011 at 11:03 am

                      Kevin if your job was as high profile and under as much public scrutiny as Darren’s then I would argue that your behavior was as equally inappropriate. At the end of the day Darren would have know if has actions became public that they were likely to cause embarrassment to not only himself, but also his leader and party.

                      The fact it was a Male:Male encounter has no bearing on the inappropriateness of the situation as far as I’m concerned.

                    • felix …
                      26 March 2011 at 12:27 pm

                      “if has actions became public”

                      Which specific actions are you referring to though Gus?

                      ‘Cos we don’t know what happened yet, right?

                      Sounds to me like you’re making either a moral judgement about mps drinking, socialising with plebs, or fucking.

                      Can you be specific about what he’s done wrong without all the lofty talk and vague references to unstated standards?

                • McFlock …
                  26 March 2011 at 6:54 pm

                  It’s one thing to suspend judgement on an incident, but (in the absence of any impartial knowledge one way or the other) if someone makes a complaint they deserve at least as much sympathy as the person about whom they are complaining.

            • Herodotus 4.1.1.1.2.2
              26 March 2011 at 10:39 am

              deemac – there are some things above politics & the left/middle/right. All this support for DH is great and much of the defense based of innocient until proven guilty. Does that mean that the complainent does not get support until there is a case proven?
              We all under stress cope diffferently some on the surface portray that I’m all right but that can mean that other coping mechanisms move in , in some cases substance abuse, change of behaviour etc.
              And you know nothing of me: beliefs, experiences etc so just becasuse I fall have an apparent political bias does not mean that automatically I have no empathy with either party in this sorry case, there will be no winners here.

      • ianmac 4.1.2
        25 March 2011 at 7:38 pm

        The complainant might have blotted his own book. He might be a very good chap and is very interested in politics. But imagine if he popped up as a candidate/official for the National Party or sought support from Labour or any other party? Er no thanks mate. Except the Act Party might accept him. I repeat that I mean no disrespect to the complainant but if the tide ran out for Darren in an unproven complaint it is likely the tide would also take the complainant too.

  5. Dale 5
    25 March 2011 at 5:57 pm

    Im gona miss DH in the house. He was very well liked by all sides. His witty banter with Steven Joyce was just great. Hope you can come back sometime Darren.Gonna miss you mate!

  6. simon 6
    25 March 2011 at 6:01 pm

    A naked man waves down a police car. Allegations of a sexual nature are made. Police get a warrant and search the home an MP shares with the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The MP quits. What a sad and sorry week.

    • higherstandard 6.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:12 pm

      I agree Simon and following that I get to see a clip on the news of of schoolgirl being beaten unconcious by another schoolgirl in Wanganui which made me feel like vomiting – fuck some people in this country need a kick up the arse.

      • Murray 6.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 6:43 pm

        I agree HS its about time Schools were made responsible for the care and protection of kids in their care.
        If this happened in the workplace the employer would get hit with a hefty fine for failing to provide a safe workplace.
        Fining the schools in these instances may help to focus their attention on the problem more them they seem to at present.

        • higherstandard 6.1.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 6:50 pm

          I agree Murray – I’d also hope the thug responsible is charged with assault and attempted manslaughter.

        • Virginia Anderson 6.1.1.2
          28 March 2011 at 1:54 pm

          What a load of rubbish expecting the schools to once again pick up the slack for bad parenting.

          If children who bully are not taught by their parents to be respectful of others rights or if they do not witness their parents respecting the rights of others by the time they start school then why is it such a surprise that they become bulllies?

          And for the parents of the victims of bullies – let your kids scrape their knees and resolve their own conflicts in the sandpit without overly protecting them when they are very young. Give them the skills to feel confident in situations of conflict. Bullies do not pick on confident children with good self esteem.

          Punishing the schools for this is like bombing the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

      • Tiger Mountain 6.1.2
        26 March 2011 at 12:33 am

        yes, lets “stomp out violence”-idiot (said idiot being HS above).

        • higherstandard 6.1.2.1
          26 March 2011 at 9:55 am

          yes lets have a family group conference and employ another 100,000 coucillors to offer their sage advice and all have a big cuddle that’ll work.

          • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.1.1
            26 March 2011 at 9:57 am

            10,000 off the unemployment queues, adding needed support resource to help the hundreds of thousands of distressed individuals out there take the next positive steps with their lives.

            This is something which will help build the social and community fabric of NZ.

            Sounds good to me mate.

      • df 6.1.3
        26 March 2011 at 6:33 am

        “Kick up the arse”…I don’t think you are offering a higher standard there, you sound like some of those people that make you feel like vomiting.

      • Leftie Westie 6.1.4
        28 March 2011 at 1:58 pm

        Agree HS that some people are fucked up. Deal to the parents of the bullies – make them accountable for their poor parenting and fine them. Maybe the same way they fine parents for their kids truanting.

        • Colonial Viper 6.1.4.1
          28 March 2011 at 2:10 pm

          Explain to me how fining someone improves their parenting skills?

          Explain to me how you are going to know if poor parenting is a major factor in any specific instance of bullying?

          Explain to me how punishing the parents is going to help parents love their child more?

          Now I do think that encouraging and facilitating good parenting is crucial. But in this instance relying on fines is just stupid.

          • Leftie Westie 6.1.4.1.1
            30 March 2011 at 12:58 pm

            “Explain to me how fining someone improves their parenting skills?
            Gives parents an incentive to keep kids better socialised.

            “…Explain to me how you are going to know if poor parenting is a major factor in any specific instance of bullying?”
            As a previous secondary school teacher and dean in a large secondary school it became very clear that the parents of the students who were doing the bullying had not set out clear boundaries for their kids early in their lives. They either encouraged their children with a dog eat dog mentality or they refused to acknowledge their childs role in the bullying.

            “Explain to me how punishing the parents is going to help parents love their child more?”
            Good parenting classes helps parents to understand that setting boundaries for acceptable social behaviour is another way that we love our children.

            To quote VA
            “If children who bully are not taught by their parents to be respectful of others rights or if they do not witness their parents respecting the rights of others by the time they start school then why is it such a surprise that they become bulllies?

            And for the parents of the victims of bullies – let your kids scrape their knees and resolve their own conflicts in the sandpit without overly protecting them when they are very young. Give them the skills to feel confident in situations of conflict. Bullies do not pick on confident children with good self esteem.

            Punishing the schools for this is like bombing the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.”

  7. Bob Stanforth 7
    25 March 2011 at 6:03 pm

    Wow, another flipflop Phil In moment. Resigned, not accepted; resigned again, whoops, will change my mind and accept it. Not bad for less than 12 hours.

    Leadership of the first water. And he sat on it for three weeks – not two, three – and did nothing. But that’s OK, different standard, right?

    I give Goff 48 hours, tops, if his SC has any nuts whatsoever.

    Bring it. Popcorn at the ready.

    • Sam 7.1
      25 March 2011 at 10:32 pm

      It is not BBQ season yet.
      John Key wants to keep Phil as leader of Labour, means he will be a shoe-in on Nov 26! Why can other Labourites not see that.

      And Darren Hughes has taken himself, the only plausible alternative to Phil, out of the equation!

    • deemac 7.2
      25 March 2011 at 10:51 pm

      well BS (nice initials!) Goff’s attitude has been more consistent than Key’s when dealing with Wong. But then Key knew he would get an easy ride from our “neutral” MSM.

      • PeteG 7.2.1
        25 March 2011 at 11:11 pm

        The MSM is never neutral when there’s the possibility of a good scandal or political exit.

        Everyone grizzles about MSM unfairness, the right as much as the left.

  8. William joyce 8
    25 March 2011 at 6:03 pm

    Not sure that DH has been well advised. If he is innocent of *whatever* then the question is if the party and he can survive.
    He was not fulfilling any of his previous jobs so they are not hindered.
    While it is being considered by the Police it is not a distraction to the business of the party. And shame on National if they make it an issue.
    If the Police finds there is case to answer then he can resign then.
    If the Police find there was no case to answer then WTF. Back to business.
    As for DH’s reputation – he has good political capital and this is something he can out live. It’s not like we live in the days of Moyle & Muldoon – surely!?

    While it’s problematic this is over-reaction.
    Bad call Goff – you’ve handed the pinhead righties an own goal

    • higherstandard 8.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:19 pm

      “While it’s problematic this is over-reaction.”

      nah fuckit I’ve had enough – have we got to the stage in this country that it’s OK for a senior 32 year old MP to go out on the piss and take an 18 year old back to the deputy leader of the oppositions digs ?

      Because I personally think that’s a fucking disgrace.

      • felix 8.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 6:32 pm

        Meh, I don’t know. 16 year olds can fuck and 18 year olds can drink. What you describe there doesn’t sound like that big a deal.

      • Lanthanide 8.1.2
        25 March 2011 at 6:32 pm

        Plenty of 32 year olds hook up with 18 year olds all the time. I don’t really see a problem with it.

      • Colonial Viper 8.1.3
        25 March 2011 at 6:34 pm

        have we got to the stage in this country that it’s OK for a senior 32 year old MP to go out on the piss and take an 18 year old back to the deputy leader of the oppositions digs ?

        Because I personally think that’s a fucking disgrace.

        You’re completely right it would’ve been been better if Hughes had rented a hotel room.

        • Gus 8.1.3.1
          26 March 2011 at 5:14 am

          Apart from not involving the Deputy Leader or her property how would have renting a hotel room made this situation any better?

          • Colonial Viper 8.1.3.1.1
            26 March 2011 at 5:25 am

            Hmmmmmm you just ruled out including two things which would have made the situation better o_O

            • Gus 8.1.3.1.1.1
              26 March 2011 at 8:30 am

              I think it would have made it cleaner but it wouldn’t have made it significantly better.

              To date the media has focussed on Kings involvement from the point of view of her leadership role not the fact the event occurred at her property.

              • felix …
                26 March 2011 at 9:02 am

                Sex is just so… icky, isn’t it Gus?

                Dirty, dirty sex. Bad sex.

                • Gus …
                  26 March 2011 at 12:04 pm

                  Actually Felix sex if bloody great and before you make the accusation I don’t care if you’re into Guys, Girls, Whips, Chains, Petrol Driven toys that need to be kick started to get going, as long as what ever you do in the privacy of your bedroom is between consenting adults I don’t care what it is that floats your boat.

                  The actions in isolation are largely immaterial however taken in context of Darren’s role as a Senior Member of Parliament that is when they become inappropriate.

                  • felix …
                    26 March 2011 at 12:22 pm

                    So any sexual relation between consenting adults involving a member of parliament is inappropriate?

                    Or only if there’s drinking involved?

                    Just trying to find out where your line is, you haven’t made it very clear yet.

                    • Gus …
                      26 March 2011 at 12:44 pm

                      Its very simple, Any action that if made public will lead to you, your leader or your party being embarrassed by it then its inappropriate.

                    • felix …
                      26 March 2011 at 5:59 pm

                      Ah, so it is a subjective moral judgement on your part then.

                      I thought as much.

        • RobertM 8.1.3.2
          27 March 2011 at 9:26 pm

          The head of British intelligence in late 1930’s Palestine < Orde Wingate brought a staggeringly beautiful and intelligent 16 year old wife with him. Those old British Colonels wondered why Wingate was always naked when they visted. The young General Danesh knew and frequently visited. Surely they just respected the prime age of attraction. But Mr Hughes is clearly early middle aged and running to seed. How could he have imagined that he wouldn't have to pay in cash or postion.
          After Profumo and Chapaquadick politics seems to have been ruined for intelligent men. Christine said Profumo was just a fuck of convinience. But I admire Keeler and EMK.

      • William joyce 8.1.4
        25 March 2011 at 6:35 pm

        HS – read the comment and don’t just react. It was about the resignation not the events of the night. Your arguments…
        Change in social mores….I don’t know where you have been living but this has always been part of our society so there is no change there.
        Age difference….many heteros have relationships between 32 year olds and 18 year olds so nothing unusual there – probably not wise for a man in his position but not a “disgrace”
        Who owns the house and their status in society is irrelevant – it was his dwelling as well and as long as the rules of the house condoned it then it’s none of our business.

        The events of the night surround around criminality and the wisdom of the actions.
        “I personally think that’s a fucking disgrace.” – certainly your right to make that value judgement but it would require more than your or my opinion to determine if society finds it unacceptable.

        • Gus 8.1.4.1
          26 March 2011 at 5:29 am

          I agree William, that if we were looking at these events as simply two members of the public going back to one of their homes (or a hotel etc) then unless there is criminal behavior involved this is a non story.

          However we’re not dealing with two simple members of the public. We are dealing with a Senior Member of Parliament who has worked towards his current role since his teenage years who picked somebody up an intoxicated person and took them home to their Deputy Leader’s place. The complete lack of judgment on their behalf is mind blowing and HS is correct in labeling these actions as a disgrace.

      • pollywog 8.1.5
        25 March 2011 at 6:39 pm

        i think SCORE !!!

        dude’s single, the other is a consenting adult, it’s his digs too, age aint nuthin’ but a number…

        what’s ya fuckin problem ?

        you not getting any at all ???

      • higherstandard 8.1.6
        25 March 2011 at 6:45 pm

        Fuck if you lot are representative of the NZ public this country is buggered.

        • pollywog 8.1.6.1
          25 March 2011 at 6:50 pm

          it’s a new generation of tolerance and acceptance out here cuz…

          …and if the countries buggered it’s not ‘cos of anything our generation did

          so you can take all those hypocritical standards you hold dear and bugger off…

          • higherstandard 8.1.6.1.1
            25 March 2011 at 6:56 pm

            What hypocritical standards are those ?

            oh and by the way even if in jest you previous comment is a sign that your social conscious is well fucked up

            • higherstandard 8.1.6.1.1.1
              25 March 2011 at 7:15 pm

              edit ‘conscience’ too much vino

            • pollywog 8.1.6.1.1.2
              25 March 2011 at 7:24 pm

              So whats your beef ? That the other guy was 18, but if he was 32 also, it would be OK ?

              …judging people by sexist, ageist and homophobic standards, rather than criminal actions, is hypocritical, cos i bet given the chance, you’d root an 18 yr old if you thought you could get away with it.

              hell…i s’pose you’d just pay for it cos it’s legal and so no worries about judgement. What the other half doesn’t know won’t hurt her eh ?

              as for my social conscience, sure it’s fucked up but at least i got one. You better get used to the fact that theres gonna be, if there already isn’t, a hell of alot more out here like me than you…

              …deal with it

              eh fuck it. I don’t argue with drunks in real life and now that i know you’re sloshed…it’s game over.

              You win teh internet…enjoy!!!

              • higherstandard …
                25 March 2011 at 7:28 pm

                “judging people by sexist, ageist and homophobic standards rather than criminal actions is hypocritical cos i bet”

                Where did I do that ?

                I’ll show you where you did it……..

                ‘i think SCORE !!!

                dude’s single, the other is a consenting adult, it’s his digs too, age aint nuthin’ but a number…’

              • Gus …
                26 March 2011 at 5:48 am

                Pollywog, If you take any single aspect of this story (age, intoxication, public position, sexuality, choice of destination etc) if judge it singly they are from a press and public perspective non-story to minor stories at best. None of them a career ending however when they all thrown together in a single event the overwhelming lack of judgement that Darren has demonstrated make it a absolute disgrace for which he had to go, which has only been compounded by the fact the Leadership has let it drag out over the past 3 weeks.

                • Kevin Welsh …
                  26 March 2011 at 8:55 am

                  Get of yer fucking high horse Gus. Even collectively, none of those criteria are a reason for someone to lose their job.

                  • Gus …
                    26 March 2011 at 12:14 pm

                    Clearly they are Kevin or otherwise Hughes wouldn’t have felt it was appropriate to offer his resignation when the Police first started investigating, or again on Thursday or a third time yesterday.

                    The bigger issue is what sort of leadership do we currently have in the Labour party which lack the principles and moral courage to do what is so clear to even the alleged offender this incident.

      • prism 8.1.7
        25 March 2011 at 7:25 pm

        Why is it a disgrace hs? Both people are adults. It is legal to have an intimate sexual relationship with an 18 year old. Only if they don’t agree is it illegal. I don’t know which situation applies to this case and it seems that nobody else does either. What is a f…ing disgrace is the way that the gossip-mongers have gathered round the honeypot to surmise the story.

        18 year old NZ girls have long been past their first sexual experience and boys probably also, although anxiety about their sexual behaviour is less than for girls because of the unfortunate pregnancies that arise. New Zealanders are known for their early sexual experience.

        • higherstandard 8.1.7.1
          25 March 2011 at 7:31 pm

          “New Zealanders are known for their early sexual experience.”

          Oh well that makes it OK then, what the fuck it’s open season then – senior constables, business managers, HODs at universities get stuck in don’t worry about the differences in positional power and life experience get stuck in………. what a sick bunch of fuckers this blog has attracted.

          • pollywog 8.1.7.1.1
            25 March 2011 at 7:44 pm

            oh fucking please. It’s always been open season.

            …dunno what world you think we live in, but it’s not the enlightened, moral, holier than thou one you think it is

            get real.

          • Colonial Viper 8.1.7.1.2
            25 March 2011 at 7:45 pm

            Get a frakin grip

            Prince Charles was in his thirties when he married Diana (who was 20) and no one accused him of “differences in positional power” and other PC bullshit

            Your politically correct hypocrisy makes me sick you loser.

            • higherstandard 8.1.7.1.2.1
              25 March 2011 at 7:56 pm

              So I guess you’re happy with Clint Rikards’ vile behaviour in Rotorua too ?

              • Colonial Viper …
                25 March 2011 at 8:20 pm

                Rickards was charged and at this stage the coppers have done nothing similar with Hughes since no indication of criminality is evident. Yet, if at all.

                Whoops your example has just been shown to be irrelevant.

                • Descendant Of Smith …
                  26 March 2011 at 5:46 am

                  And wasn’t Rickards found not to have been present at the time because he had his leg in plaster – that seemed to me to be quite an obvious problem for the prosecution when the complainant had not noticed this at the time the offense occurred.

                  Anyway I can find a hundred businessman over the years who’ve bedded their young staff at the Christmas office party, picked someone up in the pub, traded their wife in for a new model, had a mistress on the side. Many of them have been quite religious as well – as I’ve observed over the years it’s one rule for the rich and the powerful and another rule for the working class.

                  The well off can sow their wild oats – the working class have to be monogamous.

                  Yet another example of right-wing Victorian morals trying to be foisted on everyone else. Yet another branch of the DPB’s are slappers brigade. You wouldn’t know a moral position if it hit you in the head.

                  Your moral position about the age of men is a white Euro-centric one anyway. Many island cultures had a practice of the elder chiefs having many wives – not because they were dirty old men but because older men were less fertile and it meant that the population was kept down. The last thing an island population needed was the population outgrowing the resources.

                  Of course today lonely old white men take advantage of those cultural mores in those countries and by also taking those young girls as brides.

                  As you pontificate over facts you don’t know wouldn’t the moral position to take would be to shut up, let the police do their investigation and let justice take it’s course.

                  Hah instead you’re here lecturing about morals when you don’t really have any yourself – or at best selective ones.

          • Marty G 8.1.7.1.3
            25 March 2011 at 7:55 pm

            come on, hs. you’re basically saying that an MP having sex with a non-mp is wrong in and of itself because of ‘power differential’. if knocking boots with a younger member of the public were a sacking offence for an mp you would have to boot out half national’s front bench for starters.

            hughes has gone, that’s the political side done. for him at least. it looks like the leadership’s handling is going to have repercussions.

            as to whether Hughes was wrong in whatever happened, well we’ll see what the police say. obviously the moral test might be tighter than the legal test but we’ll still need to know the facts.

            • higherstandard 8.1.7.1.3.1
              25 March 2011 at 7:59 pm

              Marty if other MPs behave like this they should be gone – I don’t give a fuck which side of the political fence they come from – they are public servants charged with representing the public and I demand better behaviour than this.

              Goof should have said on day one this is not the standard of behaviour I expect from members of the Labour party he’s gone.

              • pollywog …
                25 March 2011 at 8:15 pm

                i can see what type of drunk you are…sanctimonious and unrepentant

                ugly !!!

              • deemac …
                25 March 2011 at 10:56 pm

                what is actually disgraceful is you and others speculating about a case that (a) you do not know the facts of (b) is sub judice. You have no way of knowing whether what happened was “disgraceful” or whatever. But that won’t stop you pontificating about it, will it?

              • Kevin Welsh …
                26 March 2011 at 8:59 am

                So, what exactly is the ‘behaviour’, that you are expecting a higher standard of HS?

      • M 8.1.8
        25 March 2011 at 8:16 pm

        Would the same outrage apply for a heterosexual couple? I know a couple where the age gap is 18 years and it really is their own business. What next, short guys can’t date tall women?

        There are also some possibilities in this situation such as the complainant is a plant or the complainant was experimenting and maybe changed his mind thinking better of it later.

        Darren was my MP and I have met with him on several occasions and he was always personable, unfailingly polite and modest; perhaps he has made a error in judgement because like all of us he is human and therefore flawed.

    • ianmac 8.2
      25 March 2011 at 7:41 pm

      It is faintly possible that should there be a very favourable outcome by the police, Darren could be re-instated. Maybe.

      • Anita 8.2.1
        25 March 2011 at 9:14 pm

        You can’t be reinstated from resigning from Parliament.

        You can run in the next election and be re-elected, but you can’t unresign from Parliament – no backsies for MPs 🙂

        • Marty G 8.2.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 9:37 pm

          Hey anita, not a reply directly to you. Commenting on iphone is a bit of a pain.

          Hughes could go on the list and get back in. BUT his behaviour would have to pass both a legal and moral test. He would be hard to lose the only job he’s qualified for if it turns out he didn’t do wrong.

          On the question of whether it would have been different had it been a woman. On one hand, there wouldn’t have been the salacious element of outing a nominally closeted mp. On the other, the perception of abuse of power would have been stronger.

          I do think it’s important we remember that sexual contact between an mp and an 18 year old isn’t wrong in itself, it comes down to the actual facts of what happened.

  9. Jared 9
    25 March 2011 at 6:10 pm

    How come when Richard Worth was under police investigation comments weren’t moderated, yet in Darrens case its some how different?

    • William joyce 9.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:14 pm

      Check out other threads – this now old accusation has been asked and answered. Time to do some thinking for yourself!

    • r0b 9.2
      25 March 2011 at 6:15 pm

      Both cases were moderated, we’re just making more of an issue of it in this case. RWNJs come here to attack the Left. If you could see some of the vile garbage that we block and delete you would have your answer.

    • deemac 9.3
      26 March 2011 at 11:50 am

      it was John Key who decided Worth should go without due process, not The Standard!

  10. burt 10
    25 March 2011 at 6:19 pm

    [No speculation about prosecution thanks burt. — r0b]

  11. Anthony C 11
    25 March 2011 at 6:24 pm

    Regardless of innocence or guilt this would be politically tough for a heterosexual MP – gay and in an election year…..no chance for survival.

    • pollywog 11.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:35 pm

      and why is that ?

      • QoT 11.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 8:23 pm

        NZ society is a lot more “understanding” of older heterosexual men being indiscreet with younger women. See also the constant victim-blaming (well she must have WANTED it to happen, why do she go to that place and say that thing and keep that text) around the Richard Worth case, which hasn’t been repeated for Hughes so far as I’ve seen.

        • Marty G 11.1.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 10:23 pm

          That’s also because you haven’t got right wing arseholes trying to defend hughes as there were defending worth. Instead, the bigots are busying themselves with homophobia.

          • Gus 11.1.1.1.1
            26 March 2011 at 6:03 am

            Marty I’m not sure which blogs/news sources you’re reading but from what I’m reading out there, there are just as many lefties defending Hughes as there were on Righties defending Worth and as for the homophobic commentary you refer to, the bulk of the seems to be originating from the left not the right in this case.

            While was interesting is the analysis the mydelogy has done comparing who left vs right blogs have reported the Worth and Hughes affairs.

            http://mydeology.co.nz/2011/03/maybe-im-not-so-reasonable-after-all/

  12. Lanthanide 12
    25 March 2011 at 6:29 pm

    I really wish I’d signed up for ipredict and bought into the Tizard pool. I don’t expect she’ll actually make it into parliament, but the stock’s up by 29% and I’d have been quite happy with that as a return :/

    • Bright Red 12.1
      25 March 2011 at 7:16 pm

      or, if one were really on to it, one would have realised that the chumps in the market would bid up her price when news of the resignation started to leak. then sold when the market peaked and gone negative when little made it clear wall is being lined up….

      … that’s paying for dinner tonight.

  13. pollywog 13
    25 March 2011 at 6:32 pm

    jeez…talk about an overeaction

    i woulda thought the days when politics is governed by media speculation were long gone. when are those dumbasses gonna learn that media spin does not equal public opinion ?

    i’m sure most of us couldn’t give a shit about Darren’s private life, only how it impacts his ability to do his job and from what i can tell, that hasn’t been compromised

    if ,as i am inclined to believe, he hasn’t done anything wrong, then Goff shoulda stood by his man, played the whole thing down and called the medias bluff aaaaaaages ago

    ‘cos this doesnt seem to be about Darren anymore, but Goff’s lack of a pair in making a call and sticking to it

    • William joyce 13.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:44 pm

      I don’t think it’s a case of growing a pair – they are sitting in a jar on his desk so he can remember the days he had them – before the loaned them to Helen.

    • M 13.2
      25 March 2011 at 8:18 pm

      ‘i’m sure most of us couldn’t give a shit about Darren’s private life, only how it impacts his ability to do his job and from what i can tell, that hasn’t been compromised’

      Hear, hear Polly.

      • pollywog 13.2.1
        25 March 2011 at 8:41 pm

        eh !

        Goff said.

        But events of the last few days have made it ”increasingly clear” it is impossible for him to carry out his duties. “He needs to focus on clearing his name.”

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4809631/MP-Darren-Hughes-resigns-following-scandal

        the events of the last few days have been exactly the same as the events of the last few weeks, since he has known of them and as it relates to events on the night in question

        only thing changed is his opinion, as the media and public at large have become aware of the police investigation, but no one seems to be judging Hughes except Goff by accepting his resignation now.

        if Goff truly believed Hughes, it should be business as usual and fuck the haters.

        as is, it just shows how lacking in good judgment, and testicular fortitude to stand by that judgment, Goff is.

  14. bobo 14
    25 March 2011 at 6:43 pm

    Sorry to see Hughes go but I guess it was inevitable while the investigation goes on, so will Tizzard take his seat?

    • Lanthanide 14.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:47 pm

      If she wants to.

      It’s ultimately her decision, although she can be leaned on so that she makes the “right” one for the party (and if she went against the party’s wishes, she wouldn’t be too popular).

      • Gus 14.1.1
        26 March 2011 at 6:09 am

        Personally after the way she has been treated, if I was Tizard I would be wouldn’t be giving the party’s wishes too much consideration.

    • William joyce 14.2
      25 March 2011 at 6:48 pm

      Yes, she’s out the back – they’ve taken the wine bottle out of her hand and plying her with coffee and a bit of lippy.

    • kriswgtn 14.3
      25 March 2011 at 6:56 pm

      Doesnt seem likely

      But a senior Labour Party source is claiming that the next five people on Labour’s list, including Tizard, “will not be on the list” for the general election and therefore may not want to disrupt their lives to sit in the house for such a short time.

      http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/2/article_10149.php

  15. Pascal's bookie 15
    25 March 2011 at 6:46 pm

    Jeez, the old right wing lizard brain sure to comes to the fore when they get excited eh?

    Goodness me, haven’t seen such a flurry of little angerspurts since they won the election.

    • William joyce 15.1
      25 March 2011 at 6:50 pm

      One doesn’t want to be too arrogant when one encounters the knuckle-dragging unevolved – besides my mum said it was rude to point, no matter how much they froth at the mouth.

  16. bobo 16
    25 March 2011 at 7:00 pm

    Maggie Barry has offered to replace him if they have a seat going..

  17. kriswgtn 17
    25 March 2011 at 7:04 pm

    Now it seems theyre planning to get rid of Goff
    And

    Scoop understands that when the Parker cabal finally decides to make its move, Annette King will also be rolled from her deputy leadership position.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1103/S00251/hughes-resigns-as-mp-cabal-rising-to-replace-goff.htm

    about time

    • PeteG 17.1
      25 March 2011 at 7:27 pm

      Phew. Someone has been fed a lot of detail there.

    • ianmac 17.2
      25 March 2011 at 7:46 pm

      This might be a bad time for Parker to take over given the closeness off the Election and the apparent state of the pols.

      • PeteG 17.2.1
        25 March 2011 at 7:54 pm

        I don’t think there will ever be an easy time but I think now the sooner the better, make a fresh start at a rebuild. Otherwise they are just delaying when they can start to do that.

        • Colonial Viper 17.2.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 7:58 pm

          Why oh why would we take the advice of a Closet Righty on this matter?

          It’s going to be tough – though not impossible – for LAB to win this election. For better or worse, NZ voters tend to give new Governments the benefit of the doubt and a second term.

          Does Parker really want the first impression of his supposed new leadership of LAB to be a loss at the polls.

      • Gus 17.2.2
        26 March 2011 at 6:20 am

        I agree however I think the last paragraph in that article is bang on. If Parker waits until after the election he risks being sidelined by Little, while if he acts now as long he can show some sort of improvement on the current polling numbers then regardless of the results in November he is likely to be able to hold onto the leadership role.

  18. ridge83 18
    25 March 2011 at 7:27 pm

    a sorry state of affairs, time to roll Goff, well overdue

  19. gobsmacked 19
    25 March 2011 at 7:33 pm

    It’s very sad.

    Bush, Blair and Howard didn’t resign for their crimes. Darren Hughes has resigned for no crime, and not yet even a charge.

    Priorities, eh.

    • Colonial Viper 19.1
      25 March 2011 at 8:00 pm

      The Left are way too soft and conscientious on this stuff. Just shrug it off like a Righty and keep going.

      “The police are investigating the matter, until their findings are released its business as usual, next please”

  20. PeteG 20
    25 March 2011 at 7:44 pm

    This doesn’t seem to have been noticed or sunk in.

    Cabal Rising To Replace Goff

    Scoop can confirm Phil Goff’s leadership has been in question since it was revealed he knew about the complaint made to Police two week’s ago. The alleged incident is said to have occurred at Labour deputy leader Annette King’s home, where Darren Hughes was a border.

    Labour insiders have told Scoop that Hughes offered Goff his resignation weeks ago, after confiding in his leader that he was under Police investigation. The fact that Goff didn’t accept it then has caused stress amongst Labour caucus members.

    Scoop has also learnt that indeed a cabal representing a group within caucus is counting numbers against Goff.

    Maryan Street and Ruth Dyson are representing a cabal that is seeking support for David Parker to replace Goff. And rumours that Helen Clark and her strong-arm strategist Heather Simpson have been consulted appear to have some substance.

    Today, Scoop understands Parker has the numbers to roll Goff. He does have the support of the majority of the Labour caucus. But Scoop also understands the cabal will not make its move to roll the leader until Goff absorbs full responsibility for his handling of the Hughes affair.

    Also, Labour’s caucus will not be meeting this coming week, leaving little opportunity for a formal leadership vote to be put.

    While Parker has Street and Dyson counting the numbers, Goff is left undefended. Hughes was his chief whip, he would normally go bidding for the leader. But with him out of the picture it is left to Stevie Chadwick who does not have the clout to stave off a leadership coup.

    The earliest this situation can be put to bed is when caucus meets in over one week’s time. That is unless a crisis meeting is called with all Labour Mps returning to Wellington to vote.

    Scoop understands that when the Parker cabal finally decides to make its move, Annette King will also be rolled from her deputy leadership position.

    Also, Parker realises that if he wishes to aspire to the Labour Party leadership, then it is now or never. Should he wait until next term, it is likely caucus would support Andrew Little, the current Labour Party president (presuming he wins a seat at this year’s election).

    • Colonial Viper 20.1
      25 March 2011 at 7:52 pm

      What’s the reputation and credibility of Manning’s recent work?

      And how would Manning know anything of Street and Dyson’s intent?

      • PeteG 20.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 7:55 pm

        I don’t see how that sort of detail could be made up. I think it’s most likely Goff has quite deliberately been given something to consider over the weekend.

        • Colonial Viper 20.1.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 8:04 pm

          Goff is not going to go willingly, if indeed anything happens. Next week is a major lobbying week.

          We’ll see the signs if discussions start going pear shaped.

          There are a few honest brokers within LAB who will be busy in the next few days sorting this out.

    • burt 20.2
      26 March 2011 at 12:27 am

      I can hear my Grandmother now, oh look a choice between that nice young man from Dunedin and that rowdy student union protester. My Grandfather would be saying shit a choice between that liquidated property developer and the life long battler for the working man. I love a good Labour shit fight, always public, brutal, opinionated and bloody.

  21. Policy Parrot 21
    25 March 2011 at 7:45 pm

    Absolutely terrible. I’ve met Darren, and as far as I could see, is a top bloke. Unfortunately, this whole thing was threatening to distract the caucus during a crucial period before the election. I’m sure Darren believes that Labour being returned to power in November is far more important than his own personal political future.

    Of course you can’t comment on what happened on the night, as only a few people will know exactly what happened (I’m as much in the light as anyone else) – however I will say this – I hope it that this is not simply another Jevan Goulter – another starstruck student lashing out because they didn’t get what they wanted.

    • ianmac 21.1
      25 March 2011 at 7:48 pm

      If the naked man was the complainant he did not get naked unwillingly.

      • Marty G 21.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 7:50 pm

        let’s not speculate eh?

      • higherstandard 21.1.2
        25 March 2011 at 8:05 pm

        Jesus Christ that’s the same kind of apologist bullshit that was used against Louise Nicholas, you people are utter filth.

        • QoT 21.1.2.1
          25 March 2011 at 9:04 pm

          Argh shit you know things are fucked up when I completely agree with hs.

          • rosy 21.1.2.1.1
            25 March 2011 at 9:15 pm

            Seconded. But yeah, it’s blaming the 18-year-old. Innocent to proven guilty goes for both.

        • prism 21.1.2.2
          25 March 2011 at 9:07 pm

          Oh hs save getting in a lather to having a shower where you can wash off the vestiges of any utter filth that may have stuck to you.

        • Puddleglum 21.1.2.3
          25 March 2011 at 9:29 pm

          ‘you people’?

          What? People who comment on The Standard? Or, people (in general but who may not be reading your comment) who speculate on the willingness of the complainant? Which would be a strange use of the phrase ‘you people’ on a blog aimed at people with a particular political sympathy. Unless your aim was simply to discredit those with that particular sympathy.

      • IrishBill 21.1.3
        25 March 2011 at 8:56 pm

        Bullshit. There have been several victim-blaming comments up on this thread. I think some people need to take a long hard look at themselves.

        If these comments continue I will free up some time for self-refection though the magic of banning.

        • ianmac 21.1.3.1
          25 March 2011 at 9:08 pm

          I sure didn’t mean any disrespect to the naked man if the reaction was against my comment. As an abstract thought I just wondered why a man would be running down the street naked. If it offends I withdraw and apologise.

          • Uroskin 21.1.3.1.1
            31 March 2011 at 1:15 pm

            “Labour MP Darren Hughes resigned from Parliament yesterday as witness reports emerged of a distressed, naked man on the street near Mr Hughes’ Wellington home on the night a youth complained to police about an incident of a sexual nature.”

            Note the coy reporting, the vagueness of the words ‘distress’ (does it mean he lost his hardon?); a ‘youth’ (the guy in question is 18, of legal sexual and drinking age); ‘incident of a sexual nature’ (this could cover anything from fumbled flashing to naked mud wrestling)

            “One witness told 3 News a flustered man, matching a description of the complainant, was near the Mt Victoria tunnel around 5 o’clock on the morning in question.
            “He was standing there with one hand over his private parts and the other hand with his thumb out, hitch-hiking,” the witness said.
            “I thought, ‘Oh boy, the husband’s come home and it’s a quick exit’.”

            That is quite an astute witness report, with details of place, poise and motivation all vividly described. Earlier reports say the (presumably fully clothed) youth and the MP had been going out drinking around Wellington and ended up at Annette King’s house where Mr Hughes boards.
            Since the police have not issued any further information, it’s time to speculate on what should be investigated:
            – why did the youth wait until 5am before deciding it was a good idea to make a quick getaway?
            – if you’re at someone’s house naked, one can safely presume you are there willingly for a party of a sexual nature;
            – I can understand distress could be caused by the sight of carrot-coloured pubes (Mr Hughes is a ginga) but one should get over that as soon as possible in life;
            – we have all walked the Walk of Shame after a night of disappointing hookups (especially at age 18), but that is really no reason to leave your clothes on the floor. Moving on means not leaving baggage behind.
            – Wellington at 5am is not really a place for naturist games when a stiff southerly is blowing. No wonder he only needed one hand to cover his privates.

            [it’s best not to try to extrapolate details out of what has been in the media. Might end up looking silly later. – Eddie]

  22. U 4 United 22
    25 March 2011 at 8:02 pm

    Add to that the wimpy Leader’s lies and obfuscations…a sorry week for a sorry gaggle of losers!

  23. Irascible 23
    25 March 2011 at 8:36 pm

    I see the shades of Muldoon hanging over this case.
    I suspect that NACT has opened the history books to find new clothes for Key to wear for November 2011 and found the pages on Colin Moyle and decided to play the deck.

    • Bob Stanforth 23.1
      25 March 2011 at 8:47 pm

      That’s right, has to be a right wing conspiracy doesn’t it.

      So sadly pathetic. Flail and blame others. Nice to see someone who doesnt blame others – Hughes – fall on his sword and do the right thing and not blame anyone else.

      • Colonial Viper 23.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 8:57 pm

        So you’re saying that National is pure as the driven snow, and they are not going to take political advantage of the Hughes situation behind the scenes?

        Good to know.

        • Gus 23.1.1.1
          26 March 2011 at 6:30 am

          Actually in this case Viper I think we could learn a very good lesson from National, “Keep your mouth shut about the other guys internal issues”.

          You look at the number of comments that they have made about Hughes vs the number we made about Worth. Those comments that have been made are pretty much neutral to positive while we went on the attack with Worth. The end result has been is the National is coming out of this case looking pretty professional while our leaders has had to back peddle and apologises for his earlier comments making him look weak.

          • felix 23.1.1.1.1
            26 March 2011 at 9:18 am

            “We”

            HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

            Fuck off Gus you’re not fooling anyone.

            • Gus 23.1.1.1.1.1
              26 March 2011 at 12:21 pm

              You first Felix, I don’t care who or what you think I am but I know my voting history.

              • felix …
                26 March 2011 at 12:30 pm

                Hey dickhead, I’m not the one claiming allegiances. You’re transparent and absurd.

                • Gus …
                  26 March 2011 at 1:05 pm

                  Felix reading your comments I can’t help but think of the quote “If you can’t answer a man’s arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names”.

                  I think it is very appropriate for you. Have a nice day.

                  • felix …
                    26 March 2011 at 6:17 pm

                    Answer your arguments?

                    I asked you several straight questions this morning. If you’d given straight answers I probably wouldn’t have become so bored with you.

    • RobertM 23.2
      27 March 2011 at 7:52 pm

      Possibly. It has all the hallmarks of Acts dirty tricks. The Act youth brigade anyone. Hughes as a shadow minister and one of Clarks loyal acolytes was an obvious target.
      Nevertheless, Hughes was not joe citizen, a.n.other or a journalist, but a major figure, dunk in the lowest bar in Courtney Place at 2am. Lower than the teashop or the mermaid bar. Much lower.
      Course I am a hypocrite, to a degree.
      I am not joe 90 or robM.

      • Colonial Viper 23.2.1
        28 March 2011 at 2:14 pm

        Which bar was this? I might have to pay a visit next time I swing by Courtney Place.

    • Nemesis 23.3
      29 March 2011 at 9:14 pm

      “I see the shades of Muldoon hanging over this case.
      I suspect that NACT has opened the history books to find new clothes for Key to wear for November 2011 and found the pages on Colin Moyle and decided to play the deck.”

      That is beyond pathetic.To think you refer to right wingers as “nutjobs” and yet you are so blinded by your own hatred you can post crap like that.

      • Mac1 23.3.1
        29 March 2011 at 9:30 pm

        Nemesis, I can give you chapter and verse of Muldoon’s homophobia at a public meeting which I attended in 1975.

        • Nemesis 23.3.1.1
          29 March 2011 at 10:49 pm

          No doubt you’re right, he was an nasty little man .However I very much doubt the poison dwarf had anything at all to do with Hughes making a fool of himself here.What with him being dead and all.

          Doesn’t change the fact that what Irascable said was odious in the extreme, I’d be interested in sseing his posts around the Worth saga.

          Btw, are you sure you want the other posters here knowing you used to go to Muldoons public meetings?

  24. SPC 24
    25 March 2011 at 9:01 pm

    My take

    1. Goff needed to distinguish between Ministers under police investigation – immediately suspended from duties and MP’s suspended when the matter becomes public. That is if he was to live with his earlier position on Worth. Epic fail. It looked like he was flip flopping, for partisan reasons.

    2. Once a position was taken stick with it – the MP’s position remaining unchanged until police completed their investigation. Epic fail. It looked as if he was flip flopping, when placed under pressure he would sacrifice those of his team.

    Goff looked like someone who would have to resign on election night if the party loses.

    However it’s not as clear as that, or is it?

    Hughes role as chief whip meant Goff was vulnerable to power plays as soon as he was suspended and thus the insinuations that sharks sensed an opportunity. So what is it, is this story a right wing smear to divide Labour and prepare the way for the budget spin unimpeded, or is there some truth to it?

    If the ultimate responsibility for the sacrifice of Hughes is due to the plotters conniving, then more than one faction is going to get dealt to by the time this is finished.

    When the judgment of Hughes after a few, compared to the sober calculations of his seniors is the least of the worries, then the party has to improve its game.

  25. Zarchoff 25
    25 March 2011 at 9:10 pm

    “I see the shades of Muldoon hanging over this case.
    I suspect that NACT has opened the history books to find new clothes for Key to wear for November 2011 and found the pages on Colin Moyle and decided to play the deck.”

    Yep sounds plausible to me. And I’m sure that was Don Brash on the Grassy Knoll. And didn’t Rodney Hide live in Scotland around the time of the Lockerbie bombing.

    Oh yeah it’s all National and ACTs fault and nothing to do with Darren Hughes being an idiot.

    • felix 25.1
      25 March 2011 at 9:55 pm

      Hate to burst your bubble but neither the Lockerbie bombing nor the Kennedy assassination were accidents, and they weren’t caused by Kennedy and Pan Am being idiots.

      So yeah, it doesn’t really work as a bit. You might want to rewrite it with some better examples.

  26. HC 26
    25 March 2011 at 9:26 pm

    All this does the Labour Party NO good! Darren Hughes was one of the most promising MPs that Labour had. That is also why Phil Goff hesitated too make a hard decision earlier. Who knows what happened, it may have been some folly in a somewhat intoxicated state? This is though the last thing Labour needs. We have a useless government and Labour has to deal with nonsensical issues around Chris Carter, Shane Jones and now Darren Hughes.

    It appears once again that power and privileges go to the head of some, which leads them to thoughtless actions, albeit trivial.

    The media and public are harsh on such matters, and the persons affected should not live under any illusion that this may change.

    So I can only appeal to Labour MPs to bloody well get their acts together, concentrate on some real policies and work on offering a real alternative to the clowns that run the beehive and country at present.

    With the idiotic things and lack of competence coming from Key and consorts it should be an easy opportunity to use. The present Labour leadership does not even get it and manage to take advantage of this. This is poor and appalling.

    Maybe there are also too many “careerists” in their ranks, not really having much integrity with the people they are meant to represent?

    It is a wake-up call for Labour now, few months are left until the election, and whatever will happen, it seems the only chance Labour will have is to go into a coalition with a number of small parties that will actually be able to benefit from this dismal state of affairs in NZ politics.

    Maybe Winston is just around the corner and will surprise all?

  27. big bruv 27
    25 March 2011 at 9:29 pm

    ha ha ha ha..what a great day!

    • HC 27.1
      25 March 2011 at 9:42 pm

      Subversive Nat Act supporter?!

      • felix 27.1.1
        25 March 2011 at 10:00 pm

        Nah, he used to love Labour until they started hanging around with unionists. Now he’s apolitical, but wants Labour to be a strong opposition and hold Key to account.

        And if you believe that, you’re probably him.

        • HC 27.1.1.1
          25 March 2011 at 10:05 pm

          I am NOT HIM, and I am glad that I am not. I have traditionally supported Labour, but there have been too many things happening that proved to me that Labour were too busy trying to appeal to voters on the so-called “middle ground”, rather than stick to principles. I would support Labour again once they prove that they have returned to their roots and principles!

          • Colonial Viper 27.1.1.1.1
            25 March 2011 at 10:11 pm

            The last time you were a Labour voter Holyaoke was running.

            • HC 27.1.1.1.1.1
              25 March 2011 at 10:23 pm

              Ha – you are amusing me. I voted Labour in in 1999. Then I left the country a year later, only to return 2005. I was told about an economic “boom” and 4 % growth per annum by friends, so I thought NZ finally got on track and offered employment and more. The reality soon set in. It was a once off growth year. Housing boom with exorbitant real estate prices and also growing rental costs, inflation growing higher and destroying real wage gains, no increase in benefits and so forth soon made me wake up. Labour betrayed the working class and beneficiaries. That is why Annette King loves to put up smoke screen arguments. I know bloody well what I am talking about, mate! I approached her re issues, she was not offering much advice and help after all. So I have the right to judge. We need a new party on the left and get rid of the red tinted National Party!

  28. kriswgtn 28
    25 March 2011 at 9:56 pm

    The future MP in charge of corrections
    > dik

  29. RobM 29
    25 March 2011 at 10:02 pm

    Not I, [borderline – deleted. — r0b]
    Will learn the trick of beating the right here.

  30. Sookie 30
    25 March 2011 at 11:24 pm

    I think this is all terribly sad and has a definite whiff of the gay bash about it, regardless of whether the complaint is justified or not. It disgusts me. Salacious, lip smacking, rabid homophobia is pathetic, but Goff has dug Labour’s black hole a little deeper with his bungling. He should have laid the whole thing bare two weeks ago, it would have taken a lot of the OMGZ scandal out of it. I guess we’re stuck with those grey bastards for another 3 years. Hello, Australia…

    • HC 30.1
      25 March 2011 at 11:39 pm

      You got it! This is the disease of NZ we are facing. Political correctness gone wild, no true democracy any more, a merry go round between the two larger parties and dismantling of public broadcasting and more contributing to total brainwashing and dumbing down of the population. No wonder Hackett the bungy inventor and promoter lives in France, no wonder thousand s of Kiwis live in UK, Germany and other parts of Europe, no wonder half a million have left to go to Aus. This country is soold out, corrupted and left in the hands of imbeciles to govern the remaining lemmings, that is the bloody sad reality. If I win Lotto tomorrow I WILL BE OUT OF HERE FOR GOOD!

      • Sookie 30.1.1
        26 March 2011 at 12:02 am

        I came back to NZ in 2007, and I have regretted it many times since then. Fortunately I don’t need the Lotto to GTFO when I choose. Its home, but it drives me bananas, the small town, unambitious, redneck cowpoke mentality. Speaking of bananas…yes. Aunty Helen-hating Burt, I am for real.

    • burt 30.2
      25 March 2011 at 11:50 pm

      Gay bashing… you for real?

      I do agree though that Goff has poked himself into a corner. Given the bagging given to Key & Worth by many Labour faithful I’m surprised they aren’t all calling for Goff to resign as well…

      Goff has broken a long standing Labour tradition though, he has admitted he was wrong over what he said about Key & Worth. This for me restores some faith in Labour as being the working mans party, it’s suddenly stopped acting like the academic elite.

      • weizguy 30.2.1
        26 March 2011 at 1:22 am

        “Gay bashing… you for real?”

        Absolutely – The media in this country has gone the way of reality TV. It’s been heading that way for some time, but this really was the last straw for me. The country is going to hell in a handbasket, and there’s very little investigation, suddenly this happens, and they’re falling all over themselves to be investigative journalists.

        The Homosexual angle is just extra meat for the scandal.

        • Gus 30.2.1.1
          26 March 2011 at 6:37 am

          Sure you have the usual bigots (from all political persuasions) using the Homosexual nature of this event to advance their prejudices however I disagree that the media is gay bashing or using it advance an angle. If so please provide links.

  31. lprent 31
    25 March 2011 at 11:51 pm

    I have a post work drink, go to have dinner and see a film with Lyn and this all happens…

    I thought it would be a quiet Friday? I see that the moderation has been going on, I will have a look tomorrow if there is any debris that needs removing.

    • burt 31.1
      26 March 2011 at 12:08 am

      lprent

      If you grant me temporary moderation rights I’ll watch the thread for you tonight, go get some rest.

      • HC 31.1.1
        26 March 2011 at 12:21 am

        We do not need ’emporary moderation rights’, no matter how much you feel to be right. We are facing the challenge of challenges, that is the down trodden, the beneficiaries, the low income earners, so what luxury is this to talk about like this? Time has been spent on too many trivial issues, on personality issues and so forth. We do NOT need personalities, we NEED programs, policies, honesty and a decided stand for worker’s, human’s and beneficiary rights. If that is not at the heart of the Labour Party, then you will be lost for good and dig your grave deep to fit in all the no hopers that have to go in there. MJS woulds turn in his bloody grave when he would see what goes on now!!!

      • felix 31.1.2
        26 March 2011 at 1:02 am

        Will there be retrospective banning, burt? 🙂

  32. gingas united 32
    26 March 2011 at 9:13 am

    Darren was foolish to be caught, but what did he do? A light petting is hardly the crime of the century. Will be interesting to see what the Police make of it all though.

    • chris73 32.1
      26 March 2011 at 3:30 pm

      I don’t know about you but for me light petting doesn’t normally involve getting naked (but then I live a pretty shletered life)

  33. Blue 33
    26 March 2011 at 1:51 pm

    I have no problem with a 32 yr old man being with an 18 year old man, but I imagine if this encounter was consensual and above board in the mind of the complainant, then the Police wouldn’t be involved. Hence this is something to investigate fully. Let the due process happen rather than get all pink and hysterical. I think that if it were a complaint made by an 18 year old woman the hysteria would be even louder from the left. Or would more excuses be made?

Links to post