web analytics

It’s not OK, resign

Written By: - Date published: 5:23 am, August 26th, 2009 - 75 comments
Categories: law and "order" - Tags:

The judgment in the case of ‘high-profile political figure’ involved in a domestic violence dispute has come back.

Cameron Slater has published parts of the judgment, which declines to issue a protection order because the couple are no longer together but does hold that his actions did “amount to domestic violence in the form of psychological abuse”. The judgment also declined to give him the right to evict the wife from the matrimonial property.

Given that he has been found in court of law to be engaging in domestic violence I don’t see how he can continue in his current position.

[There is a suppression order in place, please refrain from giving information that could identify the political figure involved. ]

75 comments on “It’s not OK, resign”

  1. Ron 1

    [Deleted. There is a suppression order in place, please refrain from giving information that could identify the political figure involved. ]

  2. infused 2

    Got a link? I got no idea what you’re talking about…

  3. The Voice of Reason 3

    Bit late isn’t it? [Deleted] . Or does the suppresion order only apply to everyone but him?

  4. Tim Ellis 4

    Interesting post, Eddie.

    The person concerned hasn’t been convicted of anything. There are precedents of members of parliament receiving actual convictions, and remaining in parliament. Ruth Dyson is a case that come to mind.

    • toad 4.1

      She was forced to resign as a Minister though Tim. And I don’t think having a glass of wine too many before driving is quite in the same league as giving your partner the bash – an error of judgment rather than a deliberate act of violence.

      • Tim Ellis 4.1.1

        I don’t think you know enough about the case toad to conclude that the person concerned gave their partner the bash.

        • toad 4.1.1.1

          Nor do I Tim – my mistake. From what I understand the abuse was primarily psychological rather than physical, but that doesn’t provide any greater excuse – still deliberate and ongoing domestic violence rather than a momentary error of judgment. From the Dom Post report last week, it was disputed whether there was physical violence

    • The Voice of Reason 4.2

      The person concerned is [Deleted], Tim and Ruth Dyson had the guts to immediately inform her boss, accept the legal and professional punishments and apologise for her mistake.

      Any chance of this git doing the same? I suspect you’re in a position to know the answer.

      • Tim Ellis 4.2.1

        No TVOR, I’m not in a position to know the answer. If this person is not an MP then they are not primarily responsible to the public. As far as I know there are no legal punishments for a finding of actions that amount to domestic violence. Their is a legal punishment if the police can establish a case in court, though, which will lead to a conviction, but there is no conviction here.

        • ghostwhowalks 4.2.1.1

          There has been a judicial hearing to decide the facts. Its the same thing.

          And anyway not all cases in the courts are prosecuted by the police or crown prosecutors. Theres the SPCA, the various crown agencies and so .

          Even the solicitor general can refer a matter to the court like when Nick Smith was convicted of witness tampering and Smith was also involved in an employment dispute where the judge found his evidence less than truth full ( much the same as the two high court judges, who used judicial speak for ‘big fat lies’)

          • Tim Ellis 4.2.1.1.1

            No, it’s not the same thing ghost. A domestic violence conviction has penalties against the perpetrator. Unless a private prosecution, it requires a police investigation. It’s not a “he said, she said” finding as in a family court.

            The judges in the Smith case were certainly critical of Dr Smith’s testimony as I recall, ghost, but I don’t know if any leader of the national party has ever defended his actions in that case. Unlike, for example, the way Ms Clark and Dr Cullen defended Mr Field after the Ingram Report came out, which noted that Mr Field’s testimony was unreliable, or in your speak, “big fat lies”.

    • vto 4.3

      Yes Tim, and Trevor Mallard.

      The 100%blown hypocrisy on here never ceases to amaze me.

      Its humourous in its complete lack of cred.

      Show some spine and principle Eddie – call on Mallard and Dyson to resign. Or remain spineless and unprincipled.

      • Eddie 4.3.1

        Mallard lost he portfolios. Remember?

        So did Dyson.

        Down the memory hole, eh?

      • vto 4.3.2

        No Eddie, not down the memory hole.

        Losing portfolios – ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, such a fine and principled stand. What a joke.

        You call on this is simple bare hypocrisy.

      • Quoth the Raven 4.3.3

        You’d have to call Gerry Brownlee to resign as well seeing as he actually been convicted of assault.

    • Eddie 4.4

      It’s the nature of these events that would be regarded as more serious than say a speeding fine

  5. Tim Ellis 5

    While you’re at it Eddie you might call for the resignation of Trevor Mallard as an MP, who pleaded guilty to a charge of fighting in court.

    • Eddie 5.1

      two grown male idiots on equal terms having a slap fight vs a man engaging in domestic violence.

      And that idiot lost his portfolios… remember?

      • Tim Ellis 5.1.1

        Mr Mallard remained an MP. He remained a Cabinet Minister. He lost one of his portfolios and was sin-binned to the middle bench.

        I don’t think Mr Mallard’s actions amounted to very serious behaviour, and without knowing the detail of this other case Eddie I don’t think you can conclude that there was ongoing serious [self-edited before somebody else does].

        People make mistakes in the heat of the moment, as Mr Mallard and Ms Dyson did, and as no doubt many others will continue to do. You would have to be part of a very perfect outfit indeed Eddie to call for a standard of political accountability from your opponents that you can’t uphold yourself.

        • Eddie 5.1.1.1

          Rather than trying to avoid the issue tim, are you really ok with this person continuing in their position given they have been involved in domestic violence? Regardless of which party they may or may not be involved in (and I believe you are still playing ignorant in that regard, which makes your kneejerk defence of him all the odder)

          • Tim Ellis 5.1.1.1.1

            Like pretty much everybody commenting here Eddie I suspect everyone knows who the party is. I am not playing ignorant about who the party is. I am just not making any reference to it due to the suppression order in place. I have been much more cautious in this regard than you have been in commenting on this issue.

            I haven’t read the family court judgement and I don’t know what it says about domestic violence. Generally speaking if somebody in public life is convicted of or admits to a serious crime then yes I believe they should be removed from their position.

            There are however degrees of violence, and I have no idea where this fits on the spectrum and I suspect you have no idea either. Mr Mallard was convicted of fighting, which is of a lesser degree than assault, and a lesser degree again than serious assault. It is still however a conviction for violence.

            I don’t know if the police is investigating this case but the supposed “domestic violence” as you’ve described it wasn’t even of a degree that led to a protection order. If this person should be removed from office based on a non-conviction for a degree of violence that we know nothing about, then by rights you should be trying to hound Mr Mallard out of political office for his conviction for fighting.

            On the issue of you trying to distinguish between the Mallard case and this one by saying Mr Mallard’s case was two idiots having a scrap, that is sophistry. Only Mr Mallard was charged. Only Mr Mallard was convicted in a court. If you want to apply one standard to this other political figure, you should think about how your new standard might apply to Mr Mallard.

            • r0b 5.1.1.1.1.1

              Only Mr Mallard was charged. Only Mr Mallard was convicted in a court.

              Mallard was convicted of “fighting in a public place”. Brownlee was convicted of assault. Your point?

            • Tim Ellis 5.1.1.1.1.2

              Wrong r0b. Mr Brownlee didn’t receive a criminal conviction.

            • George D 5.1.1.1.1.3

              Brownlee and Mallard should both have resigned.

              The author of this post, and the commenters here are saying this man should resign. Rightly. It’s not acceptable. IT’S NOT OK.

              Hypocrisy from the people saying the unnamed man should resign, and now hypocrisy from Tim Ellis, defending Brownlee.

          • r0b 5.1.1.1.2

            Mr Brownlee didn’t receive a criminal conviction.

            You may be technically correct Tim (I am not a lawyer), in which case I apologise to Mr Brownlee for perpetuating misinformation. However, he lost a civil case, and was fined, and the judge described it as assault.

            Gerry Brownlee MP Ordered To Pay $8500 For Assault

            In the District Court at Auckland Native Forest Action campaigner Neil Able has been awarded $8500 in damages against National MP Gerry Brownlee for being manhandled out of a National Party meeting.

            The judge said Mr Brownlee’s assault did not warrant “exemplary’ damages of $60,000 sought by Able.

            So once again, what is the point of this “they did it too” nonsense when it comes to evaluating the case currently being discussed?

            • Tim Ellis 5.1.1.1.2.1

              r0b, you demand absolute precision from other commenters in the words they choose. If I had described the same situation you would have called me a liar. I don’t descend to your tactics.

              However, have you got a quote in which Mr Brownlee’s actions were termed an “assault” by the judge? Or are you just quoting what the Herald said? Have you read the judgement? Does the judge actually say Mr Brownlee “assaulted” the protester? Can you say whether the standard of proof for a criminal conviction is of the same level as the standard of proof in a civil case?

              Mr Brownlee was not convicted of a criminal offence. Some time back Mr Mallard got very annoyed when I referred to him being convicted of assault when in fact he had been convicted of as you say “fighting in a public place”. I know these things are important to the people concerned and I apologised to Mr Mallard at the time for my imprecision.

              In the Brownlee case, Mr Brownlee was found in the civil prosecution to have used excessive and unnecessary force. Like you I’m not a lawyer but I doubt that meets the criminal test of an assault, because the Police refused to prosecute.

            • r0b 5.1.1.1.2.2

              r0b, you demand absolute precision from other commenters in the words they choose.

              No, but I do call you out on your most obvious lies.

              I don’t descend to your tactics.

              That’s because I don’t tell lies Tim. If you want to talk “tactics” I do find your personal insults and attacks on me a bit tedious.

              Turns out on this occasion I was not wrong anyway. I said Brownlee was “convicted”, and indeed he was. Not a “criminal conviction” (your words), but it was a civil conviction.

              However, have you got a quote in which Mr Brownlee’s actions were termed an “assault’ by the judge? Or are you just quoting what the Herald said?

              I am content to accept Scoop’s reporting of the facts Tim. If you wish to dispute them it’s up to you. Knock yourself out big fellah. You could start here ‘Humbled’ MP accepts ruling on assault case

            • Tim Ellis 5.1.1.1.2.3

              I don’t think there’s any such thing as a civil conviction r0b, I stand to be corrected by any actual lawyers here, but you said he had an assault conviction, which by your terminology is a lie.

            • r0b 5.1.1.1.2.4

              I don’t think there’s any such thing as a civil conviction r0b

              A little bit of Google would save you some embarrassment Tim.

              Civil conviction exists in legal definition: “CONVICTION, practice. A condemnation. In its most extensive sense this word signifies the giving judgment against a defendant, whether criminal or civil.”

              It is used in New Zealand law: “Forfeiture of pay on civil conviction (1) If a member of the Armed Forces is convicted of an offence by a civil court, the member forfeits…”

              It is used in the NZ media: “Pratt died a day after prosecutors dropped criminal charges against him stemming from a 2007 civil conviction for price-fixing….”

              which by your terminology is a lie

              Go on Tim, surprise me with an apology.

  6. vto 6

    actually eddie, why dont you follow the heading of your mate Marty in the thread below…

    “If you believe in it, put something on the line”

    You obviously don’t Eddie. Spineless

    • Eddie 6.1

      What do you want me to put on the line?

    • Pascal's bookie 6.2

      So where is your spine situated here v? (Tim too)

      Should s/he stay or should s/he go now?

      Perhaps the leader of the party in question should follow the lead set by John Key in the Worth affair.

      In that case, Worth was driven from parliament. We were not permitted to know Key’s reasons but many National supporters said that that was fine. The standard was clear they said. Some said that the standard set was adultery.

      What labour did, in cases that may or not be equivalent is not at all relevant. What bloggers said or did not say, or whether bloggers are hypocrits, is even less so I should think.

      • Tim Ellis 6.2.1

        PB, to answer your question, if the person involved is convicted of a criminal offence, or if there is an ongoing public scandal about this person that prevents this person from reasonably doing their job, or if their actions otherwise cause a loss of confidence by their colleagues, then yes this person should go.

        The first leg isn’t satisfied. The second leg isn’t satisfied yet, but if the scandal continues, then I think it will be impossible for this person to do their job. I don’t know what goes on in the minds of this person’s colleagues, but if that is satisfied then they should go.

        I would say that standard should broadly apply to all political figures, with whatever the charges or allegations are. In Dr Worth’s case, he wasn’t convicted or even charged with a criminal offence so the first leg wasn’t satisfied. There was an ongoing scandal around him that was preventing him from doing his job properly, so the second leg was satisfied. His actions did cause a loss of confidence by his colleagues. I don’t doubt that hsi decision to resign was the appropriate one.

        • Pascal's bookie 6.2.1.1

          I’m unenlightened as to whether you personally think this person should go though Tim. Which was the question. Obviously if it’s impossible for them to do their job then they will go. Tautologies work that way.

          Unless you mean as you appear to be saying, that your standard is that as long as you can keep something quiet, then do whatever you want. The only reason to resign or be stood down in your view is the ‘scandal’.

          Would that be a fair approximation of your comment?

          • Tim Ellis 6.2.1.1.1

            No that isn’t a fair approximation PB.

            I don’t think the standard has been met yet for this person to be forced to resign. If any further scandal emerges for much longer, then I think it will be impossible for this person to do their job, and at that point this person should resign, but not yet.

            I didn’t say that a scandal is a reason for somebody to resign. I gave three elements to resignation, none of which in my view has yet been met.

            I didn’t suggest that as long as you can keep something quiet you should keep your job. In my view keeping material information quiet from your colleagues goes to the issue of confidence. Dr Worth as you will recall fail that test.

            • The Voice of Reason 6.2.1.1.1.1

              So he hasn’t met the Worth test yet, whatever that is. Presumably Worth did something worse than spousal abuse, but I guess we’ll never know, eh. Unless [self deleted] rates abuse within the marriage as less offensive than dalliances outside of it.

            • Tim Ellis 6.2.1.1.1.2

              TVOR I don’t know what part of my explanation you’re finding difficult to follow. Clearly this person hasn’t met the Worth test. Dr Worth was at the center of a prolonged scandal that prevented him from doing his job. That alone should be reason for removal. Dr Worth lost the confidence of his colleagues, presumably because he withheld material information. That satisfies the third part of the test. There isn’t evidence that this other person has withheld material information.

              Like the person involved here, Dr Worth wasn’t convicted of a serious crime, but in my view that should only be one of the three issues to consider.

            • Armchair Critic 6.2.1.1.1.3

              It would help things along if that nice Mr Key would explain what the Worth test is.

            • Pascal's bookie 6.2.1.1.1.4

              “I didn’t say that a scandal is a reason for somebody to resign”

              Sure you did:

              “If any further scandal emerges for much longer, then I think it will be impossible for this person to do their job, and at that point this person should resign”

              In any case, all you’ve given me is descriptions of how it is that people come to resign. Their position becomes untenable in some way or another. That’s a tautology.

              What you appear to be saying is that Tim Ellis thinks people should resign when their position becomes untenable, and not before. How do we know their position is untenable? Why, they resign! This person has not resigned, so theu shouldn’t resign yet. Awesome.

              We don’t know what test Worth failed. Key refuses to tell us.

            • Tim Ellis 6.2.1.1.1.5

              PB I think I’ve been pretty clear on this. It’s not a tautology. If there is a prolonged scandal around a person then it is self-evident that the person cannot reasonably perform their job properly. In that situation they should resign.

              If a person is convicted of a serious criminal offence, they should resign.

              If a person loses the confidence of their colleagues, because that person has withheld important information, breached their trust, continuously surrounds themselves in scandal or is convicted of a criminal offence, they should resign.

              I don’t believe that this person has met either of those tests. I would say the person is not far off the first element, is nowhere near the second element, and I have no idea how much confidence this person’s colleagues have in this person.

        • ghostwhowalks 6.2.1.2

          Nick Smith was convicted of witness/complainant tampering and by two High Court judges

      • vto 6.2.2

        P’s B “where’s my spine?”. Whether he goes or not isn’t the issue I raised. The issue was consistency across all parts of the spectrum when it comes to the standard required for resignation.

        If one goes, others should go. If one does not, others should not.

        • Pascal's bookie 6.2.2.1

          yeah I get that. You think so and so’s a hypocrite. I don’t find those discussions of much use,( it’s just attcking the messenger, a logical fallacy mostly used for distraction) so that’s why I raised the other question.

          Do you think they should go or stay? If you don’t want to answer that’s fair enough. But y’know, people might draw unwarranted conclusions, the wankers.

          • vto 6.2.2.1.1

            Oh ok then, I will try and answer the question.. with MPs and Cabinet folk there is a very high standard. If convicted of a crime then they must resign in my opinion. It is not right that Mallard is still there.

            With party officials the standard is somewhat different. It is not a public office and the decision must lie with the organisation itself. Of course that organisation will take into account primarily the public interest and the effect it will have on the organisation. Quite a different thing to MPs etc.

            In this case there is apparently no conviction and so natural justice suggests there should be no resignation. However, the position within the party is such that smoke and fire and perception are cruelly linked and it would almost certainly be untenable to stay and he should probably go. But that is to do with matters other than the offence itself – the ‘scandal’ if you like, as TE pointed out before. But I don’t know enough of the details.

            There we go. I have probably gone and exposed myself to some argument or downfall somewhere in that now…

  7. Geo 7

    This man is a thorn in the side of ALL NZers.How can we have a [Deleted] that says its serious about domestic violence and yet endorses a man who it has been found ,has abused his wife.The suppression order ,in this case ,is a joke.Why has it been applied?To protect whom? [Deleted] needs to bring this issue to an end .Here we are discussing s59 surrounding a debate about “smacking” when we have a person who has been endorsed ,while at the same time crossing the line in a far greater way than “lightly smacking” for correction.

  8. lprent 8

    It has been fascinating to me that the line from the right over this has been the childish one of saying you did it as well. That wasn’t what they were saying in opposition, where the standard was some arbitary level of natural justice that they were screaming for. Peters in particular comes to mind as the lynch mob of the right got particularly ugly.

    Sometimes I prefer the simple idiocies of Whale to the hypocricies of his more literate bretheren

    • Tim Ellis 8.1

      lprent,

      The right is not a machine. It is not a bot. It is composed of people with a range of different views etc etc.

      I wasn’t saying anything in opposition. Please don’t apply to me individually stereotypes that you have formed in your own mind.

    • vto 8.2

      lprent, my line is not “you did it too so it is ok”, my line is that calls for different standards depending on whether “your side” is in power or not is simple clear hypocrisy and not worth shit. And Eddie’s post is an example perfect.

      Politics ay? No wonder they who partake rank so lowly ..

      • vto 8.2.1

        And the nats seem to be doing the exact same at the mo’ as the new post re Rodney boundaries in the super city. See, that is a much better post because it applies a consistent standard across Standard calls. Be consistent and principled and not malleable.

        • vto 8.2.1.1

          one more thing – it is just fine and dandy being able to make these calls for consistency and principles from the safety of a blog. I would hate to be personally involved. Ta for the opportunity to rant and rave from my pulpit lprent.

      • Maynard J 8.2.2

        vto, your line is pretty simplistic. You are saying that to have consistency, you must apply the same punishment to different behavious/convictions/ crimes (or whatever happens to be the issue du jour).

        I think I will entitle such a call as “pulling a reverse Kelston” herewith.

  9. outofbed 9

    There’s always scuttlebutt in politics

    • The Voice of Reason 9.1

      It might just be my hearing letting me down, but didn’t Key actually say ‘there’s always scuttlebug in politics’?

  10. The Voice of Reason 10

    What really annoys me is that the suppresion order is there to protect the victim, but in this case the abuser is hiding behind it and can’t be named, even though his supporters can go on TV and back him to the hilt.

    Hiding behind the law to protect the unforgiveable. What a crock. Still, being a gutless, pandering bully probably makes him ideal for his current job. No wonder he hasn’t been sacked.

    • Tim Ellis 10.1

      TVOR, I understand that the assumption in the family court is that information identifying any of the people involved is suppressed.

      • The Voice of Reason 10.1.1

        Yes, to protect the victims, Tim. Not as a shield for bullies. The man, if that is what he is, should go. No defence, no argument, no job.

  11. ak 11

    Interesting thread. So domestic violence is a less culpable behaviour than excess breath alcohol or male skirmishing.

    And “you did it too” is no excuse – except when you did… ah.. something similar also.

    Furniture scholars everywhere welcome yet another fascinating glimpse into the inventive mentality of dining-room tables.

  12. RedLogix 12

    @Tim

    If, hypothetically that is, this person had been involved in PHYSICAL spousal abuse, then the legal system would have been able to quite readily charge and convict. In that case, according to your logic, he would have most definitely had to resign.

    However the person we are talking about has technically wriggled off the hook because a Judge has declared his abuse to be PSYCHOLOGICAL in nature, and our legal system is largely impotent to convict in the face of this kind of noxious behaviour.

    But just because someone escapes an actual conviction, (as did Dr Worth), does not mean that he is still a fit person to hold a senior leadership role. We all know that some behaviour is simply not acceptable, even if it falls short of a conviction.

    From my perspective, a pattern of sustained psychological abuse, (as distinct from a brief emotional outburst under some nasty provocation, and very real personal pressures as with Trevor Mallard), abuse that has been identified and condemmed by a Family Court Judge… should be giving his colleagues very real pause for thought.

    Tha fact that it apparently hasn’t, is another matter for deep concern as well.

    • Tim Ellis 12.1

      But just because someone escapes an actual conviction, (as did Dr Worth), does not mean that he is still a fit person to hold a senior leadership role. We all know that some behaviour is simply not acceptable, even if it falls short of a conviction.

      I agree RL that there is some behaviour that is unacceptable. How do we know if somebody is engaging in behaviour or conduct that is unacceptable? If we allow judgements to be made on unpublished, suppressed marital dispute findings from a family court to define how public figures conduct themselves, then shouldn’t we take the appropriate step and record the conduct of all politicians and public figures and then form that judgement?

      I imagine that many divorces involve one party or both alleging psychological abuse or believing that one party is not a very nice person. Would you like us to run the same ruler of moral behaviour across all politicians, just because you want to apply it to this person?

      I don’t think that’s practical. All we can go on in my view is whether there is a criminal conviction for a serious offence, whether there is a scandal that carries on to the point that the person cannot do their job for an extended period of time, and whether that person has lost the support, trust and confidence of their colleagues.

      • Draco T Bastard 12.1.1

        If it isn’t illegal therefore it must be right?

      • RedLogix 12.1.2

        if we allow judgements to be made on unpublished, suppressed marital dispute findings from a family court to define how public figures conduct themselves,

        I may be wrong here, but the events here seem to have gotten a somewhat beyond that, beyond mere hearsay and scuttlebutt. The Family Court Judge seems to have left not too much room for doubt.

  13. outofbed 13

    It might just be my hearing letting me down, but didn’t Key actually say ‘there’s always scuttlebug in politics’?,

    yes key did say that

    • The Voice of Reason 13.1

      Cheers, OOB. There’ll probably be a book in it eventually … John Key’s Adventures With English perhaps?

      I think from now on in I’ll refer to the abuser as the Scuttlebug. Seems apt.

  14. outofbed 14

    Surely linking to that has nothing to do with the suppression order?
    people could just google “scuttlebug in politics”
    that’s just stupid

  15. Anita 15

    Separate from the morality of keeping him around, it’s worth thinking about the politics.

    Has the political party with which he is associated made the call that the political damage that this story will do is outweighed by the good he will do the party? If so, they must think he’s really worth something, as the middle class female vote was pretty highly contested at the last election and this will eat away at it.

    The other option, I guess, is that they figured in the political cost of removing him and found that would do them more damage than keeping him on.

    The political calculations in this interest me, what is making it worth keeping him on?

    • Tim Ellis 15.1

      I think your main point is right, Anita. Whether somebody stays on is always a line call about whether their skills and abilities are outweighed by the political liabilities of keeping them on.

      Different leaders apply different tests to different people in their team, about all sorts of things: what the punishment is and whether they’re redeemed. Some politicians seem to be able to get away with much more than others.

      • The Voice of Reason 15.1.1

        And in this case serial shagging is trumped by spousal abuse. Contrast your man’s response to this coward’s behaviour to Kevin Rudd’s response to a similar coward over the ditch yesterday. Empathy with the victim, contempt for the aggressor.

        Leadership there, spinelessness here. And you wonder why I call him Mr Floppy.

        • Rex Widerstrom 15.1.1.1

          Sorry TVOR but I wouldn’t go holding up Rudd a bastion against bullying and abuse if I were you. Yes, he was all empathy for the victim yesterday – she was one of his female MPs.

          However when it’s one of his female MPs who does the bullying:
          – kicking a much younger opponent, while they were on the ground, during a “friendly” soccer match.
          – verbally abusing restaurant staff over a prolonged period, including trying to misuse her position as an MP to gain preference and to intimidate.
          – telling a Liberal MP she thought the latter’s unborn baby would turn out to be “a demon” (which she denied, and narrowly escaped a privileges finding for misleading Parliament)
          – is now in a mess over $600k in questionable payments to a soccer team

          …he tut-tuts and “orders” her to take anger management when clearly she should have been stood down.

          It’s all about the expendiency TVOR, never the principle.

          • The Voice of Reason 15.1.1.1.1

            Glad you didn’t mention Rudd’s own hissy fit on that plane a few months back, Rex!

            But the point I was making is that he is actually talking the talk and walking the walk. $40 million is going into the new anti violence campaign in Oz.

            And here? Bugger all.

            Rudd says incidents of domestic abuse against women are cowardly acts by men and have no place in modern Australia.

            And here?

            Key says … [self deleted again in case a total shit whose name and job we all know gets outed]

  16. Tim Ellis 16

    Yet again TVOR you’re proving your name is a misnomer.

  17. Rex Widerstrom 17

    I’m confused.

    IIRC according to sections of the media there were repeated incidents of door kicking and other property damage, yelling (of threats?) and suchlike.

    These are surely criminal offences worthy of attention outside of the protection order framework? Criminal damage, disturbing the peace and so on.

    I assume the person subject to such behaviour called the Police? So where are the charges?

    And I’m further confused because since when was “the couple are no longer together” grounds for refusing a protection order? I’m in the midst of a case in which a girl is applying for an order against a man who she allowed to buy her a few drinks and drive her home, then unwisely tolerated him appearing unannounced at her door to “drive her to uni” and bought her ridiculous gifts (a laptop, a DSLR camera) which she returned won’t take “no” for an answer.

    They were never “together”, yet the Magistrate is considering granting the order because clearly she needs protection.

    The whole thing seems utterly bizarre from a police / judicial perspective.

  18. Swampy 18

    We can already assume he is not a member of any party you would support otherwise you wouldn’t have spent so much effort on attacking him in this blog.

    Put another record on.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Govt releases funding to support South Canterbury
    A medium-scale adverse event has been declared for the South Canterbury district, which will see up to $50,000 in funding made available to support farming communities which have been significantly affected by recent heavy rain and flooding in the area, says Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor. “Two weeks of solid rain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    12 hours ago
  • Govt pledges next steps on plastic waste
    The Government will phase out more single-use plastics following the success of its single-use plastic bag ban earlier this year and the release today of a pivotal report for dealing with waste. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has welcomed the Rethinking Plastics in Aotearoa New Zealandreport, released by her Chief Science Advisor ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    17 hours ago
  • International student enrolments grow in universities and the regions
    International education continues to thrive as the Government focuses on quality over quantity, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. The tuition revenue from international education increased to $1.16 billion last year with the average tuition fee per student increasing by $960. The total number of international students enrolled in New Zealand ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • DHB leadership renewed and strengthened
    Health Minister Dr David Clark says new appointments to DHBs represent a significant changing of the guard, with 13 new chairs including four Māori chairs. Today 76 appointments have been announced to complement elected board members, as well as eight elected members appointed as either chair or deputy chair.  Four ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Tabuteau to advance New Zealand’s trade and political interests with European partners
    Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Fletcher Tabuteau, is travelling to Germany, Poland, Austria, and Spain next week to bolster New Zealand’s political and trade relationships in Europe. While in Spain, Mr Tabuteau will represent New Zealand at the 14th Asia-Europe (ASEM) Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Madrid. “New Zealand strongly supports ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Statement from the Prime Minister on Kris Faafoi
    “I’ve spoken to Minister Faafoi, who has apologised for his poor handling of this issue,” Jacinda Ardern said. “I have confidence in Kris as a hardworking and effective Minister, but this should have been dealt with in a much clearer manner, and I’ve made my views on that very clear ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Tonga-New Zealand Joint Ministerial Forum
    Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters met with Tongan Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pohiva Tu'i'onetoa in Wellington today. The pair signed a Statement of Partnership setting out joint priorities for cooperation out to 2023.  “We welcomed Prime Minister Tu'i'onetoa on his first visit to New Zealand as Prime Minister. Tonga ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Shooting in Kurow
    The Minister of Police Stuart Nash says his sympathies are with the family of a man who died after being shot by Police in Kurow. “Initial reports are that Police were called by a family member to help the man who was threatening to harm himself,” Mr Nash says. “However ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Govt supports Southland farmers in sustainability
    Healthier waterways, better productivity and farmer wellbeing are front and centre in a new project involving more than 1000 Southland farmers and growers. Minister of Agriculture Damien O’Connor today announced that the Thriving Southland Change and Innovation Project is the first region-wide extension programme supported by the $229 million Sustainable ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Flood of support for Top of the South catchment
    Work to look after nature and restore freshwater quality in Te Hoiere/Pelorus River catchment is getting a significant boost, thanks to new Government funding support Minister for Conservation Eugenie Sage announced in Canvastown today. “Every New Zealander should be able to swim in their local river without getting sick, and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Eight Queen’s Counsel appointed under new criterion
    Eight Queen’s Counsel have been appointed under a process that includes the new criterion of a commitment to improving access to justice, Attorney-General David Parker announced today. “The new criterion was included this year. It emphasises that excellence and leadership in the profession can be seen through a wider, community ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Major expansion for Wellington’s Onslow College
    Onslow College in Wellington will get 20 new classrooms for more than 400 students, Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced today. The much-needed investment will relieve growth pressure the school has been experiencing for some time. Seven existing classrooms which have deteriorated over time will also be replaced, bringing the total ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Talented young Kiwis awarded PM’s Scholarships to Asia and Latin America
    More than 250 young New Zealanders will add international experience to their education, thanks to the latest Prime Minister’s Scholarships for Asia (PMSA) and Latin America (PMSLA), Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced today. This round of scholarships supports 252 recent graduates or current students to undertake study, research or internships ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Government to improve competitiveness and transparency in the retail fuel market
    Consumers will benefit from a more competitive, transparent retail fuel market as a result of changes the Government will be making in response to the findings of the Commerce Commission’s study of the fuel sector. “We accept the Commission’s findings and, as the Prime Minister has said, we’re ready to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • More cancer medicines for more people
    Five new cancer medicines have now been funded this year, meaning thousands of people have more treatment options PHARMAC has today announced that it has approved two new medicines for funding – fulvestrant for breast cancer and olaparib for ovarian cancer. This follows earlier decisions on advanced lung cancer treatment alectinib, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Government acts to sort out electoral ‘coin toss’ problem
    The Minister of Local Government, Hon Nanaia Mahuta says the Government will consider making changes to local electoral legislation before the 2022 elections to fix the problems that have arisen where elections are settled by a coin toss.  The Minister says the recount process in the Murupara- Galatea ward at ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • NZ to Join IMO Convention to Reduce Ship Emissions
    New Zealand will sign up to new international maritime regulations to reduce ship emissions and lift air quality around ports and harbours, Associate Transport Minister Julie Anne Genter announced today. Subject to completion of the Parliamentary treaty examination process, New Zealand will sign up to Annex VI of MARPOL, an ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Bill to empower urban development projects
    New legislation to transform our urban areas and create sustainable, inclusive and thriving communities will tomorrow be introduced to Parliament, Urban Development Minister Phil Twyford said. “The Urban Development Bill gives Kāinga Ora-Homes and Communities the tools it needs to partner with councils, communities, mana whenua and private developers to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Early Learning Action Plan to kickstart long term change
    Today’s launch of He taonga te Tamaiti: Every child a taonga: The Early Learning Action Plan 2019-2029 provides the foundation for long-lasting changes to early learning, Education Minister Chris Hipkins says.   “Early learning will be one of the Government’s top education priorities going into 2020,” Chris Hipkins said.   ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Climate change lens on major Government decisions
    Major decisions made by the Government will now be considered under a climate change lens, Minister for Climate Change James Shaw announced today. “Cabinet routinely considers the effects of its decisions on human rights, the Treaty of Waitangi, rural communities, the disability community, and gender – now climate change will ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • New Tertiary Education Commission Board announced
    Education Minister Chris Hipkins today announced the appointment of Māori education specialist Dr Wayne Ngata and Business NZ head Kirk Hope to the Board of the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC). Dr Alastair MacCormick has been reappointed for another term. “Wayne Ngata, Kirk Hope and Alastair MacCormick bring a great deal ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Next phase of Pike River recovery underway in time for Christmas
    The next phase of the Pike River Re-entry project is underway, Minister Responsible for Pike River Re-entry Andrew Little says. “Fresh air will be pumped into the Pike River Mine drift this week, following acceptance of the plan for re-entry beyond the 170m barrier by New Zealand’s independent health and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Insurance contracts to become easier to understand and fairer for consumers
    New Zealand consumers will have greater certainty about their insurance cover when they need to make claims as a result of proposed government changes. “Insurance is vitally important in supporting consumers and businesses to be financially resilient when unexpected events happen,” Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs Kris Faafoi said. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • A new opportunity for Ngāpuhi collective and regional negotiations
    The Crown is providing an opportunity for the hapu of Ngāpuhi to rebuild its framework from the ground up for collective negotiations to deal with its historical Treaty claims, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Andrew Little and Minister for Māori Development Nanaia Mahuta announced today. The Crown is also ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Referendums Framework Bill passes third reading
    A Bill enabling referendums to be held with the 2020 General Election has passed its third reading. Justice Minister Andrew Little says the Act is important for upholding the integrity of New Zealand’s electoral process. “The Government has committed to holding a referendum on legalising recreational cannabis at the next ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Referendums website and initial cannabis Bill launched
    The first release of public information on the two referendums to be held at next year’s General Election was made today with an informative new Government website going live. Additionally, the draft Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill has been released, showing the strict controls on cannabis that will apply if ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Government to ban foreign donations
    The Government is taking action to protect New Zealand from foreign interference in our elections by banning foreign donations to political parties and candidates, Justice Minister Andrew Little announced today. Legislation will be introduced to Parliament this afternoon and passed under urgency. “There’s no need for anyone other than New ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Governments and tech converge to strengthen joint response to online terror events
    Governments and tech companies are holding a two-day workshop, hosted by YouTube/Google in Wellington, to test the Christchurch Call Shared Crisis Response Protocol. The workshop aims to refine and strengthen the response in the event of a terrorist attack with online implications. Companies, governments, civil society experts and NGOs will ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Cancer Control Agency to drive improved care
    The new independent Cancer Control Agency has formally opened today, delivering on the Government’s plan to improve cancer care in New Zealand.         Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Minister of Health David Clark marked the occasion by announcing the membership of the Advisory Council that will be supporting ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Supporting small business to prosper
    Small businesses who deal with government departments are set to be paid faster and have improved cash flow as a result, under a new strategy released today. The Government is backing recommendations from the Small Business Council (SBC) and has agreed to implement three initiatives immediately to support business and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Bill has biggest education changes in decades
    The Education and Training Bill 2019, introduced in Parliament today, proposes the biggest education changes in decades and is an important step towards improving success for all our learners, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. “The Bill’s rewrite of education legislation is long overdue. Indeed one Education Act, parts of which ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Bali Democracy Forum to focus on democracy and inclusivity
    Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio will travel to Bali to represent New Zealand at the 12th Bali Democracy Forum that will be held on the 5-6 December. “The Forum is a valuable opportunity for Asia-Pacific countries to share experiences and best practice in building home-grown democracy and fostering ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Innovative technology and tools to better manage freedom camping
    A package of new and expanded technology and other tools will encourage responsible camping and help communities and local councils better manage freedom camping this summer, Tourism Minister Kelvin Davis announced today. “Our Government has been investing to improve the freedom camping experience for everyone because we want to support ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Improving wellbeing by understanding our genes
    The government is laying the groundwork to understanding our genes – work that can help us tackle some of our biggest health challenges, like heart disease and diabetes, says Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods. $4.7 million has been invested in the Genomics Aotearoa Rakeiora programme. The programme will ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Government investing to future proof school property
    Nearly every state schools will receive a capital injection next year valued at $693 per student to bring forward urgent school property improvements, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced today.  The one-off cash injection is the first project to be announced from the Government’s infrastructure package ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Infrastructure investments to be brought forward
    The Government has decided to bring forward major investments in New Zealand’s infrastructure to future proof the economy. “Cabinet has agreed to a significant boost to infrastructure investment. I have directed the Treasury to help bring together a package of projects that can be brought into the Government’s short and ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Future-proofing New Zealand
    It is a great pleasure to be with you today in Whanganui. Like the Prime Minister I grew up with the TV clip of Selwyn Toogood booming “What do you say Whanganui, the money or the bag?” to an unsuspecting ‘It’s in the Bag’ audience. For those under the age ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • New Zealand’s newest Great Walk, the Paparoa track opened – an asset for the West Coast
    New Zealand’s newest Great Walk, the Paparoa Track, was officially opened in Blackball today by the Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage alongside the family members of the Pike 29 and Ngāti Waewae.  Local mayors and MP for the West Coast Hon Damien O’Connor were also in attendance. “Paparoa National Park ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • P-8A Poseidon base works commence
    Minister of Defence Ron Mark turned the first sod of earth on the infrastructure works for the new P-8A Poseidon fleet at RNZAF Base Ohakea today. “The Coalition Government’s investment in Ohakea will ensure the Royal New Zealand Air Force can manage, maintain and task the new fleet efficiently ahead ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Launch of the National Emergency Management Agency
    Civil Defence Minister Hon Peeni Henare today announced the establishment of the new National Emergency Management Agency from 1 December 2019.  The National Emergency Management Agency will replace the Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management. It will be an autonomous departmental agency, hosted by the Department of the Prime ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago