Written By:
karol - Date published:
1:46 pm, September 23rd, 2013 - 220 comments
Categories: accountability, business, david cunliffe, democracy under attack, labour, radio, spin -
Tags:
I don’t usually comment on Matthew Hooton’s statements and commentaries. His behaviour on RNZ this morning, shouting down both Kathryn Ryan and Mike Williams offended my ideas about free speech, democracy and fairness. Hooton accused Cunliffe of lying, and no-one was given space to reply.
So I am adding my thoughts and the results of my (and others) google searches on the topic, in the interests of democratic debate.
Hooton’s claims beginng at about 9.42 of this podcast.
First Hooton talked about Andrea Vance’s claims about David Cunliffe’s CV:
David Cunliffe doesn’t quite tell the truth and Andre Vance …
Then, Hooton states,
He makes claims which simply don’t seem to stack up about his own career.
Then a bit later the main claim:
Except that whenever I do know something about the topic where he made his claims, I know that what he says is untrue. For example he told the Dominion that he had helped in the formation of Fonterra. Well as it happened I spent about 2 and a half years working on that particular project. There were negotiations in secret between Kiwi dairies and New Zealand Dairy group and the Dairy Board. All through 2000. And then we announced the Fonterra proposal in late 2001. And then there was the big parliamentary process and the farmers voted on it in 2001 and then the company was finally formed.
Anyway, according to David Cunliffe he helped with the formation of Fonterra when he was at the Boston Consultancy Group. Well that is obviously a lie because he was selected as the Labour, no it was a lie. The Labour Party. He was selected as a Labour Party candidate in 1998. He became an MP in 1999. He Fonterra proposal wasn’t even talked about.
This is what Cunliffe stated in the House in 2012 (h/t amirite):
And I was also a management consultant tasked with advising on the formation of Fonterra from Kiwi Cooperative Dairies and the New Zealand Dairy Group.
I have long taken an interest in this most crucial industry for the New Zealand economy and am proud to have been part of the Government that set up Fonterra in the first place.
And Cunliffe quoted in the Dominion Post 21 Sept 2013,
“I got to work in a dozen different industry sectors, helped with the split up of ECNZ [the Electricity Corporation], helped with the formation of Fonterra, …
Hooton’s claim rest on the claim that there was no work on the setting up of Fonterra before 1998/9.
Actually Cunliffe’s CV on wikipedia says he was with BCG 1995-1999.
An article on Scoop dated June 2001, says that the BCG had been working with the NZ Dairy industry on proposal advocating a merger of companies (h/t miravox):
The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) has worked with the industry for over ten years including jointly preparing the so-called McKinsey Report on Industry Structure, which recommended a single, integrated organisation as the best way to maximise the value for farmer shareholders. In addition, BCG has worked extensively with the marketing arm of the industry, both in the New Zealand Milk and NZMP businesses.
Further information on this BCG work that led up to the mergers of companies like NZ Dairy Company that resulted in the advent of Fonterra:
The key elements of success and failure in New Zealand Dairy, 2008.
In 1994, four dairy companies commissioned an Industry Efficiency Improvement Study (IEIS) carried out by the Boston Consulting Group. This study identified that if the then 15 co-operative merged in four, an efficiency gain of between NZ$190 million and NZ$253 million per annum (Graham, 1996) could be achieved. That would translate to an increase of nearly 12 per cent over the base payout to farmers which at that time was of NZ$ 2.90 per kilo of milk solids. In response to this opportunity a working team of NZDB and Dairy Company CEOs was formed to formulate how to capture the benefits identified by the IEIS. This became the Business Development Project (BDP) (Graham, 1998).
Management Science in the New Zealand Dairy Industry:
4.1 Mergers and Centralisation of Processing
In 1994, several dairy companies commissioned an Industry Efficiency Improvement Study (IEIS) carried out by the Boston Consulting Group. This resulted in the setting up of an industry committee to look at ways of capturing the efficiencies identified by the report, which called for a rationalisation of the then-15 co-operatives to only four co-op dairy companies. As a result, the committee initiated the Business Development Project (BDP).
So Mr Hooton, tell me where Cunliffe has lied about this?
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Hooton is getting desperate, more and more every week. The seriousness of Cunliffe’s challenge is flipping Hooton more and more over the edge, making him on the one hand more predictable, but on the other hand also more dangerously crazy, and liable to say and do stupid things (well, more stupid than normal, anyway).
Keep the popcorn handy, foks. The hilarity is only beginning. By November ’14, expect to see him flipping out Breitbart style on a kerbside near you.
He keeps repeating his lies on Twitter. The man has come straight out of Goebbels’ school of propaganda.
Actually his twitter feed betrays a considerable degree of bombastic unease IMHO.
Looks like Hooten has no idea about the future, so the best he can do is throw up distractions based on the past.
Tell us Matthew, what have you found out about John Key’s previous career activities?
[deleted]
[lprent: Diversion trolling – very stupid. One week ban. ]
Hit and run.
Hooton has exposed Radio NZ to significant legal risk. He won’t care – he’d probably sneer that the taxpayer can afford it – but the managers of RNZ might. In addition, he showed himself as completely without self control and incapable of following the STRONG directions of the host of the show he was on.
Surely we will see:
a) A correction and apology on the nine-to-noon politics section next week and
b) Hooton spending some time off air to cool off and consider if he wishes to continue with the politics spot on Mondays. If he does, he’s going to have to follows the rules laid down by RNZ.
Let’s see what the National leaning RNZ Board make of Hooten’s screw up. I think they will be less than pleased that he has put significant liability and risk on their shoulders.
I think that Hooton should be forced to spend a week wearing a sandwich board that reads “I am a prat”.
Only a week?
Lifetime sentence might be more appropriate in this case.
but if they ban hooton ‘forever’..
..who will mike williams have to ‘agree with’..?
.(.won’t someone think of the wlliams..?..
..oh..!..the humanity..!!..)
..phillip ure..
“A correction and apology on the nine-to-noon politics section”
Yeah, but he’s done what he wanted to do – it’s been said so ‘it must be true’. The general public often doesn’t have time to wait for long-delayed apologies.
This is epically funny. Such self immolation is always a decent spectacle.
Twitterwards ho!
David Cunliffe should sue the little son-of-a-bitch to within an inch of his life.
It is very unlikely to succeed. Read Margaret Pope’s discussion of the effect of the Lange vs Atkinson decision when applied to public interest as a starting point.
I’m not sure that it will apply in this case.
What is at stake here is not a matter of political opinion or a normative issue (e.g. whether Lange was a slacker as PM) or even a matter on which speculation is as good as we can do (e.g. Lange’s motives in his personal life).
Whether or not Cunliffe worked on the Fonterra matter for BCG is a publicly verifiable fact. It is not an evaluative matter, nor is it a speculative matter.
e.g. “John Key lied about working for Merrill Lynch” is different from “John Key lied about his motives for the asset sales”.
Labour needs to go after this dick and make it poisonous for the press to employ him.
The argument would be of if examining a politicians previous history and having an *opinion* on what it meant was in the public interest. Obviously it is.
The fact that Matthew failed to delve more deeply into the past than his own fallible recollections isn’t really at issue. That just makes Matthew look like a fool.
The eventual outcome of any proceeding would be a simple apology by Matthew in 6 months to a year. By which time his deliberate strawman will have fulfilled his purpose.
It is far better doing what karol just did – use some easily obtained facts in the public to undermine his argument right now, and highlight how shallow his recollection was.
Exactly. And it is a publicly verifiable fact that he can’t possibly have worked on the Fonterra matter. Unless he was moonlighting for the private sector while an MP.
Except that “helping with the formation of Fonterra” is vague enough to include pretty much anything that was done that resulted in the eventual creation of the company – including consultation that laid the groundwork.
After all, the first person who thought up the idea “helped with the formation of Fonterra”.
You’re just being silly.
“In 1994, four dairy companies commissioned an Industry Efficiency Improvement Study (IEIS) carried out by the Boston Consulting Group.”
AS Fonterra was formed in 2001. That would mean your timeline of (end of )1999 start point would have been impossible.
A lot of preliminary work went into this before they even had the final structure in place
Just because of your involvement in the communications side of things, after all the heavy lifting had been done, was only since 2000 , doesnt mean others werent working on major policy questions before this.
Theres a touch of ‘H fee’ desperation about your silly claims
That is what I remember.
It was quite big news around the business community at the time because having a number of coops wanting to conglomerate was so different to everything else at the time that it was reported on extensively. But the concept had been floated around for even longer than that.
By the look of it Matthew is hanging his hat on the period when some marketing or PR maniac picked a silly name for the company formed out of the work from the previous decade.
“By the look of it Matthew is hanging his hat on the period when some marketing or PR maniac picked a silly name for the company formed out of the work from the previous decade.”
Yep, and doesn’t that just sum up Matthew’s depth of understanding in general.
He probably thinks he’s being clever, too.
exactly what I thought. good to see.
If I remember Clark dissmissed Key as the least substantial leader she’d faced
Key said that Cunliffe was his 4th Labour leader
Key said In a Labour Government I lead
Cunliffe said The chairman of caucus (3 times I believe!)
And now an H-fee…quite early in the game too…
Well then, he’d have to be pretty stupid to publicly claim it then, wouldn’t he? Unbelievably stupid, almost.
😀
As Lynn notes, this wouldn’t succeed. There is the BSA though. Another option is to ignore it altogether. As Hooton gets more and more shrill, he starts sounding like a Birther or a Truther and marginalises himself.
No. Al Gore did that. This is pretty much out of the smear playbook directed at him.
[deleted]
[lprent: diversion trolling for which KK already picked up a ban from. Please don’t feed the monkey. ]
Hit and run, move onto the new smears before the last smear can be refuted…. Filthy stuff straight from the dirtiest playbooks.
I would delete and ban you for this post, if I could.
King Kong
What an amusing twerp you are. You keep to your standard of low blows with the excuse I suppose that it’s all tongue in cheek. I have a feeling that you’re a bit on the old side and unlikely to have much ability to learn and change. Never mind the Standard does nurse along some RWs like you who have nothing in their heads no vision for the better and aren’t on their barebones on the street so can fill their time sitting tapping with no more brain than a pigeon looking for crumbs.
Yes. Already been dealt with. Not news, Cunliffe has done loads of stuff for the community. Righties desperate and missing theIr target.
He volunteered for St Matthew’s in the City to do work at the Auckland City Mission, instead of volunteering for Auckland City Mission directly, and his CV wasn’t overtly clear on this point.
Oh noes!
Mon Dieu!
He’ll be signing paintings for charity next.
[lprent: I’ve already dumped king kong into a ban for trying that particular diversion. I have an itchy finger so people raising that should really do it in OpenMike as this post isn’t about that. ]
King Kong – Cunliffe delivered food parcels for St-Mathews-In-The-City, a church closely connected to the Auckland City Mission and the food parcels were delivered on behalf of the city mission.
And he was a budget advisor for the Wellington City Inner Mission. You rightwing trolls need to get your facts right.
Wellington City Mission don’t remember him? Probably forgot after he blew the budget like every other aspiring labour leader
I came on here to find out about the cabinet reshuffle and found this gem instead! I saw this article on David having to rewrite his CV and thought there must be an explanation. The truth is like gold you have to dig deep for it. Thanks Karol and all ‘The Standards’ support writers?
Maybe Hooters should check BLiP’s list of Key’s lies, just for comparison:
http://thestandard.org.nz/liar/#comment-685886
“Hooton’s claim rest on the claim that there was no work on the setting up of Fonterra before 1998/9.”
That’s exactly right. The Shipley government (which I worked for) was trying to do a government-led restructuring of the dairy industry. This failed. It was only when Helen Clark became prime minister in late 1999 that Fonterra-type negotiations began. It is totally false to say he “helped with the formation of Fonterra”.
You’ve been owned. Further attempts to extricate yourself will lead to increased hilarity.
[lprent: Using the owned/pwned stupidity here is likely to earn you a ban. I don’t like the stupid flamewars that result. You have been warned and should now take time to read the policy to find out what happens when people ignore warnings. ]
Matthew That pin head seems very small to dance on.
If someone does some research on a project, Hooten, which is then put on the backburner for whatever reason, and that project is later picked up and re-started, then that person can legitimately claim they worked on the foundation of that project.
Hooten et al will dig around and pick up any little tidbit they can find to smear Cunliffe with. Thanks Karol for being alert to this, and for so immediately getting onto to quashing it. Everyone who supports the Cunliffe-led Labour is going to have to be ultra-alert to these tactics from now on.
Anne yesterday eluded to similar tactics used by ACT supporters re Judith T. Most of those people are still around, and desperately searching for nasties to trip Cunliffe up with. Labour has, at last, got its winning team together and the Nats and ACT will be desperate to stop them – the next 14 months be sheer hell from that point of view.
The Television News took, amongst others, the angle that (despite her comprehensive community sector C.V) Poto Williams had only lived in the electorate for eight months.
JennyK
” yesterday eluded to similar tactics ” alluded (mentioned) you meant I think rather than eluded (escaped, dodged).
quite right, GreyW. No excuse !
Hi Jenny K.
I posted a couple more tid bits on the Judth Tizard post to further whet your appetite. You may not have seen it because the search function is unreliable at the moment.
It is? – I’ll look at later
Also lprent I couldn’t access Archives going through the months but am not sure about my settings etc at moment –
having trouble bringing up a full edit window.
Odd.
Ok the archive one is there. I’ll fix that this evening. It looks like something to do with the way that the categories are permalinked.
The “full edit window” – re-editing? If so then that was a problem with a minifier mangling the javascript.
I find the search worked okay in firefox (only tried it once though), but produces randomly dated comments when using chrome, if that’s any help
Thanks Anne (@ 11.3.3). Yep – I picked up on those tidbits. I’d forgotten (more like, tucked ’em away in my subconscious, that was awful stuff happening – lots of people burnt).
Are you saying that none of the concepts and models developed pre-1999 were directly used in the final formation of Fonterra?
The Shipley government failed in a lot of things in their mad 2 years.
Not surprised nothing happened- presumably in the legislative sense, as Shipley was predominately trying to avoid having parliament to sit at any costs.
Alamein Kopu didnt like turning up up to Parliament
Yep, I am. All the models pre change of govt where either two company or govt-led models. Fonterra was, as Helen Clark put it at the launch of the company, “industry-led, govt-facilitated”. That’s why it worked. Everything changed when Labour took office in 1999.
I dunno Matthew.
These peeps seem to think it was all part of one process, starting from the 2 company model:
Source: International Directory of Company Histories, Vol. 58. St. James Press, 2004.
Looks as if one of the chairmen had to resign before it could complete in 2001.
So to summarise Matt: Cunliffe may have done work on the dairy industry for BCG which did consultancy on this issue pre-1999 which may have been about moving towards a stronger NZ dairy entity in the world market or at least trying to get the best out of our strength in dairy, but in no way had anyone thought of the name Fonterra at that time.
Typical mindless RWNJ obsessed with names rather than work. But they do tend to be parasites interested in brands rather than being interested in how to be productive.
Matthew: You’re pushing shit uphill. Why not just concede you were out of order (big time), and that occasionally you’re prone to throwing little hissy fits!.
RNZ yet hasn’t shown its guts, and I’m wondering whether the hard word is being put on Colin Peacock and Co for the upcoming Sunday Media watch.
You’ve come damn close to blowing it – should have happened a long time ago given Rinny is just such a work-life balanced regular gal – but you even embarrassed her ffs!
Take some of your own past advice. – You got it wrong – best policy: front up and apologise – although I imagine that goes way beyond your capabilities that are too often hampered by your own ego and extremely small penis.
But then what would I know – after all ….. “You’re considerably richer than me”; “In the know”; “well-connected”; equipped with Divine Right; and not unlike that ‘only gay in the village’ – the only one that could have possibly got it all off the ground.
Please pass on my deepest sympathy to your wife too!
I want to record my thanks to Karol for yet another excellent post, well researched and up in a very short time.
I have already commented on OM on my disgust at Hooten’s performance this morning. I also agree with Sanctuary at 5 above that Hooten may well have exposed RNZ to legal risk – and that they should be considering whether they should continue with Hooten as a political commentator.
However, I hope that Cunliffe and his office see Karol’s post here and perhaps use it as the base* for a press release such as this one which I found on Scoop on Cunliffe’s community activities – but released in the ‘dead’ time of Sat afternoon.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1309/S00396.htm
* with some suitable ‘recognition’ of Karol’s work (as agreed with Karol)!
+1
Yes, great work Karol.
Who exactly is that creepy little man Hooton… never heard of him before I started reading this blog.
He appears to suffer from little willy syndrome.
“I feel like getting married, or committing suicide or subscribing to L’Illustration . Something desperate, you know…”
-Albert Camus.
Abe suggested, “when you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on it”.
Such a little child
To send to be a priestling…
Icy Poverty.
-Shiki- Haiku
I like the haiku, but what has it to do with Hooten?
There is no legal risk for RNZ because what I said is true.
Have you read karol’s post? Or is that rather too much truth to absorb?
It cut a rather large hole in your self-referential timeline.
Chux Multiwipe between rear cheeks.
Exactly. Karol, who had no involvement in the process at the time or no intimate knowledge of David Cunliffes career, has found some stuff on Google.
This makes her alot more credible than you Matthew.
It does. The credibility of Matthew’s statement lies in his time line. karol just blew that timeline out of the water by showing that BCG was involved in the dairy sector long long before Matthew was involved.
Isn’t the point that BCG was involved, it doesn’t inherently mean Cunliffe was involved in any way. I was involved in a company that developed software, it doesn’t mean I wrote it. If Hootens is wrong then, yes, all Cunliffe has to do is prove he himself is correct then sue him.
[lprent: Let me reprise my response to alwyn for essentially the same strawman argument.
And I’d add if you don’t like it, then you can sue… In the meantime you can share the same ban. ]
If you call someone a liar you had better be prepared to substantiate that lie. If not then your credibility takes a very serious hit if not cause a defamation case/slander.
If you are so sure Matthew, then write your accusation here on this site. I don’t expect that you are not that brave though.
No prob. David Cunliffe lied when he said he “helped with the formation of Fonterra”.
Only if you interpret that in the restrictive sense that you want to for the sake of convenience. But why would any sensible person want to do that?
Try again.
So the McKinsey report – worked on also by BCG, and presumably by Cunliffe, as the dates tie in nicely with his claims – and the work that went into it, had no influence whatsover on the structure and formation of Fonterra?
Perhaps you should go back to the pages of the NBR and re-read the articles about forming a large dairy company to compete internationally that started in at least the early 90’s. I remember those quite clearly. It was quite a thing around the business pages long before 2000.
Still I suppose that if you want to be a nitpicking idiot, then that a name “Fonterra” created much later when such a company was created by some silly marketing people (I still think it sounds like a company making truetype fonts) will probably let you off the hook.
But to me it just sounds like you’re trying to paste cowshit over a strawman.
I thought you and Hoots were mates, Lynn.
possibly in the same way ‘we’ are.
No Rogue Trooper. Ours is a very special bond, indeed.
that’s the advantages of local knowledge ; as my old lady used to say, “it’ll all come out in the wash… except for those bloody grass stains…expletives etc “. Timing is everything to being. (Heidegger Day tomorrow) 😀
No. I don’t think that we’ve never met. I’ve sent a few emails to him and I think even talked to him once on voice when he was trying to do something with Mike. Not that much different than hundreds of others here.
But he does have my cowshit detector running with this one…
Hi Matthew,
I presume, then, that you agree fully that John Key lied when he said, back in 2008, in relation to exactly how many shares he and his family owned in Tranzrail:
“Fifty thousand at the maximum point. Sometimes 25,000 sometimes 50,000,”?
If not, why not?
Karol’s question: “So Mr Hooton, tell me where Cunliffe has lied about this?”
Your answer, Matthew?
Here: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9193525/Naked-ambition-behind-Cunliffes-rise-to-top
That naked ambition headline comes from comments from Claire Robinson who said something this morning about King,Goff and Mallard being the “soul of the Labour Party” Her credibility is nil. She don’t know nuthin’ and Hooten thinks to quote her ! He needs his mind read.
So let me get this straight. Asked for proof, you quote a journalists second hand report? So your second position will be that any mistake is the the journalists fault? A loud mouth and a blame shifting coward, eh?
Jeeuz! When desperate, regurgitate an entire newspaper piece that contains a battery of negative nonsense. Of course, not that it could ever look like Andrea Vance deliberately misdirected or couched the quote between her own mistaken assumptions in that ‘oh so objective’ piece of writing?
What you have based your apparent bullshit on is the couching of, or context given to, a quote by a journalist – not the actual content of the quote by Cunliffe.
How’s the ice looking from down below?
Didnt Key have the same quote from an early age !
Matthew came across as a childish fool. Radio NZ needs better than this. Go to Radio Live Matthew. Can’t believe Bomber Bradbury got dumped from Jim Mora’s show when we have to listen to Matthew’s pathetic behaviour on a weekly basis.
Who listens to ‘F*** we’re good’? (See The Hollow Men) Not me anymore.
I heard the particular show and I don’t think it was so much what he said that was found offensive but the way he said it. His style is okay on his own programmes but when it comes to genteel RNZ it was way over the top. I like Bomber and enjoy his ramblings etc. but he should have toned himself down for that programme.
So you read that entire article – no doubt looking for something you could turn around – and the best smear you could come up with was this twaddle? You’d have been better off not even linking it and pretending you never checked back in here. Haha!
Does anyone take “Stuff(ed)” seriously. Yet another blatantly right wing blog. You’ll be quoting whale oil next….
Hooton appears to think that with constant repetition, a lie becomes the truth.
It ain’t so, bro.
It’s Luntz 101
http://bsa.govt.nz/complaints/making-a-complaint
Would someone like to post BLiP’s latest list of John Key lies (you know the real lies) for the boy Matthew?
I can’t locate it because the search function is suffering a bout of senility.
I’ve got this from 1 Sept on Key’s environmental protection failures and deceits.
http://thestandard.org.nz/far-environmental-protection-fallen/#comment-689826
“. . . as the litany of lies still spills from John Key, it must be asked: is the litany orchestrated?”
BLiP’s list from 22 April is here:
http://thestandard.org.nz/an-honest-man/
Hollow man hollow threats .
Hooton is this countries machiavelli you couldn’t pin anything on him like his leader He is an expert liar!
Machiavelli? that is a long shoe-lace to tie.
Hooten isn’t an expert liar, everything the evil baby lookalike says can easily be proven to be either out-right lies or political spin in 5 minutes of looking,
Karol has put up a good post here proving beyond doubt that David Cunliffe worked for the Boston consulting company in the years it was working as a consultant to the dairy industry directly advising on the merging of the dairy industry,
The problem suffered here is while that dribble of excrement having escaped once again from the sewer to create a stench upon a national stage has to be rebutted in doing so we simply give ‘its’ twisted ego the oxygen boost it craves,
Hooten is as much in the ‘bizz’ for the notoriety and ‘fame’ as He is the money and i would suggest at this late stage the former two of His needs far out-weigh the latter,
i approach the Hooten’s of this world soly from a perspective of openly abusing them, in Hooten’s case his ego is so totally self centered that he believes that He has the respect of ‘the left’ and it is this perception of ‘respect’ which has made Hooten ‘a figure’ within the political discourse,
It could be said to be counter-productive to the promotion of ‘the left’s’ ideals and aims to not approach Hooten on an intellectual basis but of course as soon as we do we then give Him that aura of respect which is un-earned,
Hooten is simply ‘a thug’ with a rich command of the English language and a streak of Rat-cunning a kilometer wide running up the yellow of His spine, spitting at, jeering, and abusing Him is the most efficacious means of countering His influence as doing so damages his self image of notoriety and fame…
ahhh, “respect of the left”? or too much caffeine today bad12
Nope Rogue, don’t become locked inside of a bubble and think that the Standard is ‘the left’, Hooten does His stuff out there in the big wide world as well as online,
Mike Williams is the perfect example of someone from ‘the left’, (ok debatable), who treats Hooten as something other than a paid shill of the Tories as much agreeing with Hooten as He does argue every point from the left’s perspective,
That’s Hooten’s best weapon, gaining agreement, and as was shown today it leaves those who treat Hooten with the slightest iota of respect speechless when He goes tropical…
Nope, my networks are in the real world too, and other forums, yet, thanks for the directions.
🙂
The “evil baby” is Farrar
When somebody starts a lie ie MH you can tell when they shift away from the topic ie stuff article that they are cornered!
Hooton you have painted yourself into a corner on this one.
The exclusive bretheren may come to your rescue though!
Hysterical Hooton ! The worst performance yet from the effete, shouty, entitled schoolboy.
Thank you Hooton. In one fell swoop – “Yes, we in the National Party ARE shitting ourselves about Cunliffe and the poll which refelected a majority belief that the PM doesn’t tell the truth. Wild projection is the only answer.”
Christ if this was melt-down (health warning) I’d hate to be Hooton in April/May next year – when Kim Dotcom’s excellent counsel Paul Davison QC lays out the proof perfect that ShonKey knew about KDC long before……….but repeatedly misled Parliament by saying otherwise.
Betcha Hooton the effete, shouty, entitled schoolboy immediately repaired cursing to the nearest private room and punched himself in the head several times for that display of madness. Certainly were I the bill payer I’d be a spot hoha.
What’s really funny/sad/pathetic about this is that Matthew’s entire claim to being any sort of authority on political matters is that he used to work for the govt back in the 90s. (Of course, he does have more recent relevant experience but he doesn’t like to talk about it in public because it has a bit of a “Hollow” ring to it.)
Regular observers will know this. He brings it up every week. Any time he wants to sound like he knows stuff, his go-to line is “well, when I was working for Jenny Shipley…” or similar and tell some largely irrelevant anecdote.
He does it so often it has become a point of mockery among those who work alongside him.
Now it turns out that even that slim veneer of knowledgeability is not to be trusted.
Cunliffe is on after four, with Duncan Garner.Without doubt Hooton!s slur, will one of the topics,as will his very positive new line up.
Matthew Hooten calls x a liar.
As honesty is so important to shooten could he explain all of mr keys lies since 2007 and publically state how appalled he is by them and him.
Seems the real “hoot” is the foolishness of this man’s comments. Rave on, no one’s convinced…..
Shame on you Andrea Vance, running with Hotton’s smear.
You’re not at News of the World now, Ms Vance!
Vance never really left…..
The Crosby-Textor National-ACT personality attack is known as the “Bellman Distraction” after the character in Lewis Carrol’s The Hunting of the Snark. The Bellman was convinced that having stated something palpably wrong was proven correct after stating it three times.
“Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What i tell you three times is true.”
This is obviously the Matthew Hooton, Cameron Woodlouse (Whale) and the John Key line on all statements to be made as they attempt to undermine David Cunliffe and any one supporting him.
One should remind Hooton et alia that the Snark turned out to be a more lethal creature than the Bellman desired… much to his regret.
Onto it! Irascible
Hooters has gone a stpe further and claims that Cunliffe lied about being in the PSA, about his Forest and Bird membership, about voluntary work etc etc….someone please give him an anti-rabies injection.
..how about an anti-arsehole lawsuit
All this whole episode does is prove that the Right are shitting bricks. End of story.
+1 @Kevin Welsh
@ Kevin Walsh
…in fact your comment was so excellent I thought I’d cut and paste it in response to an idiot further down the thread. Bit of a cheat but, really, why think up a new comment for these maniacs when there is a perfectly good one to cut and paste. 🙂
‘
As requested . . .
John Key’s Lies
. . . as always, link testing, squabbles, refutation, and/or additions always welcome. Some of the link might not appear. For some reason, linking back to The Standard doesn’t seem work too well.
That is just Brilliant!
+ 1,000,000,000,000
I love how the list just goes on… and on… and on. Well, not love per se, but you know what I mean.
Thank-you BLiP. 🙂
Well done, Blip! That is a nice impressive list that should be sent to every NZ voter sometime before the next election. I am thinking that someone wealthy such as NAT president, Good fellow (or Mr Kim.Com) may be happy to bank roll the costs involved for this worthy patriotic cause.
Blip theres a few examples in here you can use especially Number 1
The Smiling Assassin Series.
A series of lies and arrogance.
PART 1 – john key – INVESTMENTS, MONEY & MINING
PART 2 – john key – OIL INDUSTRY, NZ NAVY & GREENPEACE
PART 3 – john key – RIVERS, LAKES, POLLUTION & 1080
Part 4 – john key – NZ MINING
PART 5 – john key – ISRAEL, CHCH EARTHQUAKES, ZIONISM SECRETS
PART 6 – more john key – Cringe
PART 7 – Aotearoa is Not for Sale Hikoi
‘
Mmmmmm . . . delish. Thanks.
From the Vance article on Stuff timed/updated round 2.00 pm………http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9199149/Lobbyist-Cunliffe-claim-untrue
Shouty going off –
“David Cunliffe had nothing to do with the foundation of Fonterra.”
Cunliffe responding by tweet –
“Bollocks.”
Shouty retreating –
“Hooton conceded the firm [BCG] was involved in the early stages: “It is true that Boston Consulting had a supporting role.” He claims it is “deeply implausible” Cunliffe was involved.”
Far cry from liar. Seems like Shouty deliberately sought to exclude that period of time in his denunciation.
Patient Shouty is not a well man . Cunnliparanoiasis. Generally chronic but tending to acute in his case.
Excellent !
Yes. Signs of desperation. how can RNZ people continue to justify having someone in a slot that’s meant to be a debate between opposing sides, when he shouts down any attempt to respond to his smears?
Apart from being wrong, it was Hooton’s despicable shouty behaviour than really got my goat.
+1000
Shooten Up can play personality politics and the Nats can pretend they dont.
It’s amazing what you can buy today. Shooten Ups for sale to the highest bidder, self respect for sale.
Perhaps he had his retirement fund on Robertson for leader at ipredict?
I guess the test will be if any of the major MSM picks up and runs with this “story”. Being that they are in the pocket of big business, it wouldn’t surprise me.
So Cunliffe was either economical with the truth (again) or embellished his CV (again) and the MSM dutifully reported it (again)
Not a good rep to have in the lead up to an election
[lprent: It looks like Hooten was being economical with his definitions.
It appears that he thinks that Fonterra was created from his efforts alone, or at least only in the period that he was involved. The reality is that it took nearly a decade for the idea of a large dairy company to go from concept to fruition and a large number of people were involved. Hooten was merely at the tail end of that process when they came up with that silly name.
The hubris of this arrogant lie by Hooten is the issue. It is a pity that we cannot vote that cowshit artist out eh? ]
So
CunliffeHooton was either economical with the truth (again) or embellished hisCVaccusations and spin (again) and the MSM dutifully reported it (again)Not a good rep to have in the lead up to an election
FIFY
Though to be fair karol, it’s exactly the sort of rep that a sleazy spin merchant covets. It was so lamely transparent the way he tried oh so hard to squeeze the words lie, lies, lying, lied, liar in there as many times as possible.
All this whole episode does is prove that the Right are shitting bricks. End of story. ~ (Thanks Kevin)
The “rep” is all in your imaginary world.
Why do you eat baby kittens for breakfast? Why, Chris, why?
Why do you eat baby kittens for breakfast?
– For the extra calcium of course, doesn’t everyone?
I prefer puppies
“So Cunliffe was either economical with the truth (again) or embellished his CV (again) and…”
So you’re saying either Cunliffe bent the truth or Cunliffe bent the truth… that’s some convincing logic. Or maybe: OR Matthew Hooten, known BS artist for NAct, is just being his usual BS self.
See that’s the problem with being a known BS artist, even when you believe you’re telling the truth, who’s going to believe you?
“But… but…. but…” Poor Hooten, the hollowman who cried wolf.
Naah in this case its what the voting public believes though I don’t think its that bad I mean everyone embellishes their CV and people expect politicians to tell porkies
Cunliffe’ll want to be careful that his stretching the truth doesn’t reach critical mass though
[lprent: You mean Hooten don’t you? ]
“Cunliffe’ll want to be careful that his stretching the truth doesn’t reach critical mass though”
OR Hooten needs to be careful that his accusations don’t get him a lawsuit.
Besides, Cunliffe’s got a long way to go on the ‘stretching the truth’ front to get to John Key critical mass levels no?
“OR Hooten needs to be careful that his accusations don’t get him a lawsuit.”
– Hard to prove and even more publicity for Hooten
“Besides, Cunliffe’s got a long way to go on the ‘stretching the truth’ front to get to John Key critical mass levels no?”
– http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9192790/Cunliffe-to-refresh-online-CV
or
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9194599/Key-v-Cunliffe-What-the-personality-tests-reveal
Publishing the results of scientology type popular psychology bullshit tests is really desperate. In my experience, they’re responsible for more incompetents being promoted than hereditary ever was. Key outdoing Cunliffe in some aspects of this is hardly a recommendation for Key. Hooton would probably outdo even his master. Desperate stuff.
“- Hard to prove and even more publicity for Hooten”
Not the point, which was that repeating Hooten’s feeble smears like it’s a fact makes you look dumb. Publicity? Maybe you haven’t noticed but this one has blown up in Hooten’s face big time. Turns out there is such a thing as bad publicity.
“- http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9192790/Cunliffe-to-refresh-online-CV”
That’s your answer? Um yeah like said, a long, long way to go fall to Key’s current credibility rating.
“or
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9194599/Key-v-Cunliffe-What-the-personality-tests-reveal”
You mean this? –
1 = Disagree strongly
2 = Disagree moderately
3 = Disagree a little
4 = Neither agree nor disagree
5 = Agree a little
6 = Agree moderately
7 = Agree strongly
I see myself as:
1. _____ Extraverted, enthusiastic.
2. _____ Critical, quarrelsome.
3. _____ Dependable, self-disciplined.
4. _____ Anxious, easily upset.
5. _____ Open to new experiences, complex.
6. _____ Reserved, quiet.
7. _____ Sympathetic, warm.
8. _____ Disorganized, careless.
9. _____ Calm, emotionally stable.
10. _____ Conventional, uncreative.
Please. I could find you a tea leaf reader that says different.
Yeah, you probably believe rubbish like that…unbelievable.
To quote Dr House
“Everybody lies”
Methinks hoots’ main sin is in the frequency, degree, and insulting level of transparency, rather than simply the practise.
Funny how it never occurred to you that Shooten Up was making shit up
This is a classic move in the “game” of politics that Hooton admits he loves. It’s the old “Pawn Attacks King”.
The pawn (Matthew) is expendable, and can’t be destroyed anyway (because unlike the target of his attacks, he can’t get voted out). The Nats don’t need Key or Joyce or anyone in Parliament to do the dirty work. That’s what Hooton, Slater, Farrar & co are for. See “Plausible Deniability”.
Cunliffe – and his supporters – must resist getting sucked into the game i.e. using the King to attack the Pawn. That’s what the Right want. Hooton’s smear will be given legs by some in the media (not all, not even most). Already Duncan Garner and Bill Ralston have used the old “sue if not true” line …. a tired old tactic.
But this is only the beginning, and the closer Labour get to power then the more the dirt will fly. They can’t react to every smear, because there wouldn’t be enough courts in the land to sue every time they do this.
Ultimately the voters are far more interested in what Cunliffe/Labour have to offer their real lives, and so that must remain the focus … see Hooton’s diversion for what it is, coz there’s going to be a lot more of it.
(Edit – Karol’s post is excellent. Rebut with facts.)
Thanks, gobsmacked.
The whole treatment of politics as a “game” has become way to prominent in contemporary politics for my liking. And the right particularly do that. They seem uninterested in whether it means the exclusion of so many struggling Kiwis. It’s what turns a lot of people off politics, and makes them feel no-one is representing their issues.
I have also noticed that many NAct MPs use the same strategy that Hooton used today: talking or shouting over the opposition so that only their own narrative/lines get heard. This particularity happens a lot during TV and radio debates around election time. And the hosts/chairs and MSM journos don’t ever really seem to call the NActs on it.
It’s not the behaviour of people who support democracy and democratic debate.
Yes, but we would expect RNZ to have higher standards and not allow itself to facilitate Right Wing spin. Katherine Ryan tried to shut Matthew Hooten down but he refused, so I hope they take action. Hooten lacks the professionalism required for the 9 to Noon spot…
A little quiz for a bit of distraction. Who said this in October 2011, about the left’s a(alleged) focus on hating John Key.
Matthew Hooton, what a bloody clown.
You should all stop letting yourself get distracted by the court jester, which is all he is, as you well know.
Yes its obvious hes setting the agenda, also kind of overshadowing the announcement of the new line up as well…
lolz nah not even.
Storm in a bedpan. Of interest to a couple of thousand people, all of whom – yourself included – already know exactly what Hooton is.
Hooton’s story, as far as I can make out, is that yes, Cunliffe might have been in on the BCG’s work in the 90′s which recommended a single seller, but the National govt of the time was fucking useless so it all fell over. Then Cunliffe was elected to parliament and the single seller model, which was completely different from anything BCG even thought of, got through under the new government.
Little Hoot
(with apologies to Hardie Gramatky and children everywhere)
Little Hoot was just a nutjob
Just a happy little rightwing nutjob
And he comes from a line of nutjobs filthy & vile
And it seems that Little Hoot
always craved to give a toot
As he tried to produce spin in Crosby’s style
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
When there’s shit to be flung
He won’t leave Whale alone in dung
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
Now Little Hoot yearned to be the Right’s star
which just won’t happen writing solely at NBR
So he decided then and there
as he aspires to Farrar’s chair
That he’d try to be best spinner of trash he could be
Now when National Radio needs rightwing rant
Or other media blinkered cant
Little Hoot pops up like some RWNJ savant
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
When there’s bull to be spun
He hungers to be National’s number one
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
Now he’s threshing all around
Since Cunliffe’s come to town
In political seas he’s being tossed and tossed and tossed
And his heart is filled with fear
For he knows the end is near
And as the polls begin to turn Little Hoot sees all will be lost
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
When there’s smears to be had
He’s like Textor’s little lad
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
What a shame
What a shame
The Public’s sussed your little game
Won’t you ever grow up Little Hoot?
Very good!
Yep! Toot Toot!
Well, it seems Hooton’s move was badly over-played and so it’s failed.
A review of media outlets, through Google, Twitter and good old TV/radio tells us that … virtually nobody gives a damn.
Coverage of Cunliffe/Labour today – 90% reshuffle, 10% Hooton and Key. So, largely positive.
But if Cunliffe had taken the bait, then the coverage would have been 90% “Cunliffe says “I am not a liar”. Negative.
Good judgement. Good result.
Of course Hooton will respond by pushing this even more, but he’s already gone nuclear much too soon, so only self-destruction remains. Silly boy.
And every time he pushes the ‘Cunliffe is a liar’ button we’ll just publish BLiP’s latest list.
After not much pondering, I have come to the conclusion that Hooton is an attention whore.
Whoring is a relatively honest profession, especially when compared to the type of work Matthew of Exeltium gets up to.
chris everyone doesnt lie in their cv. or as you so hootenesquely put it, embellish.
karol et al, complaint to broadcasting authority?
Shooten up doesnt care about the truth and where are all the nats decrying the personal attacks. if Shooten up had a problem with the PMs litany of lies he would have some credibility.
Cunliffe either worked any precursor to fonterra or he didnt, but doesnt Shooten up have some obligation to do some, or any research first, if he actually cared about the truth?
if i were cunliffe its mckinsey i would be distancing myself from.
Hooton re-righting history again.
Fonterra was his idea now, forming a monopoly run along socialist lines then shouting from the rooftop, ‘look at me aren’t I smart’ he just cracks me up.
Hollow Hooten and his feeble smears, what a waste of perfectly good oxygen. On publicly funded radio no less.
We need better wingnuts.
[deleted]
[lprent: you are currently banned. See http://thestandard.org.nz/hooton-please-apologise/#comment-700738 ]
[deleted]
[lprent: You are still banned – doubling up for an extra two weeks.
It is also off the topic of this post and diversion trolling. Add a week for each. I guess you still haven’t read the policy.
I don’t expect to see back before the 24th of October. Otherwise I double the whole lot up again and add extra on top, ]
Geee you Righties must be shitting your daks to be reaching like this. Remind me again what Key did with his Tranzrail shares, and whether or not he manipulated the NZ dollar as a forex trader and hurt the country?
Silent ‘T’ is a liar – he can’t help himself, he’s been caught out before. How you can defend this “tosspot” beggars belief, but there you are! I can only think therefore, the contributors thus far are either gullible, blind & deaf or as dumb as a sack of hammers. I can’t wait for the next sitting of Parliament the Nats will be rubbing their hands with glee and, all lining up to have a crack at him.
[lprent: Or it could be that you are simply a gullible dickhead. The rest of your mindless comments would tend to support that. But I’d suggest that you read the policy closely before attacking authors. This is your warning. ]
Hi Wayne ( the other one)
Which hand is your callous on?
Lol, your mothers!
Rob, only had one mum and she died over 20 years ago, so if you are right that makes it even worse
Silent T(revor) is just keeping his head down, and has nothing to do with this discussion.
I watched Question Time today – didn’t see Silent T(rev) and no-one mentioned him. Robust questioning from opposition MPs though lead by Cunliffe – renewed vigour in holding the government to account.
And even right leaning Pundits like Garner & F O’sullivan have tweeted that they reckon Hooton went to far & think Cunliffe was more credible. Hooton’s credibility took a hit yesterday.
Wayne (ado), please keep up -not doing your credibility much good, being so behind & off target.
I was under the impression that “Silent T” was Cunliffe
Are you sure? I assumed they were waffling about Trevor as well. That is who I’ve been watching for.
Well I thought Wayne (the diff. one) was referring to Cunliffe too.
Lets have a row about it. 😈
What would Wane the other know? He is a pale imitation of another
That’s weird, I’ve been assuming it refers to either John Key or John Banks.
You know, short for “Silent Tea”.
Why would it be David Cunliffe? That doesn’t make any sense.
You know perfectly well why David Cun liffe!!!!!!!!!!
Silent Tea. lols.
😀
pst, Anne. We know. But we prefer the other meanings.
Moderation what what what?
s—-t t–. Moderation. Bad words. Naughty felix.
You talk about defending a “tosspot” yet seemingly support John Key? Blinkers perhaps or just outright fucktardism?
Isn’t it odd that your comments are deemed unacceptable to the moderators, yet far worse ones are permitted because they support the politics of this blog. Free speech rules on the left. Not.
[lprent: I believe I have already told you to read the policy. Evidently that is something that you are too much of a stupid idiot to do. Otherwise you’d know that there is a darwin award for doing personal attacks on authors.
You will note the absence of such attacks from the ‘left’. For demonstration of pig ignorant stupidity, we have to rely on arrogant shitheads like yourself who do not read the site rules. ]
LOL VAGINA, amirite? Tee hee naughty bits.
Bomber bradbury gets bannedfor tellingthe truth!
By RNZ Hooten gets away with a lie and doesn’t get any sanction.
+1 Tricledrown
I thought he was kicked off the panel for being a bit of a wally.
Your point still stands though either way.
I got a prompt and reasonable reply to an email I sent to Radio NZ. In it, I’m told that Hooten’s repeated allegations were unacceptable and this has been made clear to him.
So not sacked, but very much on the naughty step.
what a clown
Yep the guy is a spanner.
He put himself right on the line yesterday. He was supposed to divert the media away from the Labour reshuffle but he failed to put the work in because he’s a lazy bastard who tries to get everything done on the piss at the last minute with no effort and still charge top dollar.
His last desperate shot was to go “full retard”. He ended up putting himself in legal jeopardy, as well as risking one of his jobs, and yet he still utterly failed to make even the tiniest dent in Labour’s good news story.
Didn’t anyone tell him why you never go full retard?
lol
got to admit having a soft spot for that movie 🙂
Why would a clown put himself on the line like that? It’s just a quick jab is what it is.
going with the clown motif, the best option is to throw the pie into the straight guy’s face. But if you can’t, take a prat fall into the pie stand. Even if the straight guy doesn’t get hit by the cream, people will still remember him standing next to the table when it fell over.
Unless you make such a spectacular pratfall that all people remember is you being a prat, and can’t remember who was standing beside you.
clowns are as clowns doo
hooton all covered in doggy poo
vto he’s always in spin cycle so he will just fling it on some one else!
Damn that’s a good analogy. Fark.
then he will consider he succeeeded and pick up his cheque
He may well think that, but ultimately he made himself the story instead of his target and that’s a monumental fail.
His egomaniacal defensiveness suggests that in his rotting black heart he knows he fucked up.
As they say “explaining is losing” and boy is he doing a lot of explaining at the moment. This story could blow silent “T”s credibility completely out of the water. Fresh evidence coming to light would suggest “T” has lied and is still lying. Another “Road Show” coming up to select yet another leader?
[lprent: Read the policy. You look like a particularly stupid kind of a troll. Canned phrases and no intelligence. Have a week off the site to read the word because I think that you will probably need it when you don’t have Slaters hands up your arse typing for you.. ]
Helpful hint to “natsway” … you look slightly less stupid if you don’t come on here immediately after W.Oil has blogged and Judith Collins has tweeted, telling you exactly what to do. So try and make it look as if you have your own brain.
More desperation, more dirt, we’re laughing. Keep it up, please.
the silent t business is right up there with the smearing of Clark. Nats show true misogynist colours. Everything boils down to genitalia if this truly reflects middle new zealand then its a sad and puerile middle nz.
interesting, gs.
So does that put hooton & Vance in the WO & Collins camp?
Your misogynist use of sly references to vaginas as some kind of dirty thing, isn’t funny and does no credit to your politics, Natsway – but I guess that’s the Natz way.
The problem for the Natz is that Hooton’s attempted smear is becoming the story and the joke, rather than the smear itself.
So keep up your dodgy ways and keep stressing all you own goals.
As they say “explaining is losing” and boy is he doing a lot of explaining at the moment.
hahhahhah – citation needed of all Cunliffe’s explanations on this CV issue? Mostly I see a lot of jokes, one or two brief facts that quickly derail these clumsy smear attempts – and if you look up thread you’ll see it’s Hooton that’s put in the position of trying to explain his clumsy smear attempt,…. and losing.
You NActs certainly are on the back foot these days.
yup all that boyish giggling about being able to say cun* without actually saying it. Collins Tolley and any other woman they have in their strategy meetings must cringe…
Oh how they laughed when it was first coined.
NZ’s own sniggering schoolyard T-Party – all sneer and failed smears.
Yes, Natsway, it is always some dirty smear, some little tit bit for the future with the National party. At least David Cunliffe does not use smears politically. They talked about Mike W going to Sydney well you lot in your – d e s p e r a t i o n – are running rings around anything he ever did.
All a bit too little, too late, I’m afraid. The damage is already done.
Link please, shit head.
….a very banned shit spinner at that
Thanks , bl – sent to moderation.