Key and Peters best buddies?

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, August 4th, 2010 - 58 comments
Categories: dpf, john key, national, nz first - Tags:

I don’t like Winston Peters and I don’t like his narrow minded nasty opportunistic racism. I think Parliament is better off without him and his kind (of which there are far too many in National and ACT). On the other hand, however, I also don’t like the extraordinarily vicious and deceitful campaign that the right wing attack poodles ran against Peters in 2008. They painted him as a minor satan for “crimes” that National and ACT were (and still are) every bit as guilty of themselves.

So it was amusing yesterday to see that whole cynical, hysterical campaign so casually repudiated by John Key, who is happy to consider working with Peters if NZF is back in Parliament after the election. As reported for example here:

Key hints at NZ First deal if Peters stands

Prime Minister John Key yesterday indicated National might consider working with NZ First should leader Winston Peters make good on his pledge to stand at the next election.

or here:

Key does not rule out working with NZ First

Prime Minister John Key has not ruled out working with New Zealand First in the future. The latest Roy Morgan poll put NZ First at 4.5 percent, almost enough to get the party back into Parliament without any electorate seats. … Mr Key said today he would decide whether he would work with NZ First leader Winston Peters when he announced whether he was running or not.

This seems like a huge miscalculation by Key. Not only has he added legitimacy to the re-animation of this political zombie, but he has also cut the legs completely out from under the right’s whole 2008 “Winston is the devil” campaign. That giant sucking sound you hear? That’s DPF’s head imploding. How stupid does he look now? Let’s review some greatest hits:

What the hell will I blog on, now that Winston’s gone

I had three goals for tonight. In order they were:
1 Winston gone

National incidentially never ruled Peters out on the basis he had broken the law. They ruled him out on the basis he could not be trusted, and I doubt any intelligent person could really claim he can be.

Once again I stress, that Helen Clark is saying she has no problems working with Winston again. She is unconcerned that he is a serial liar. She is unconcerned that her Government’s decision making may be tainted by a cash for policy scandal. She just says it is nothing to do with her and if Winston makes it back she will have him as a Minister again.

But surely they can see it is time for Clark to go, when even after the Meurant revelations she is saying she would have ‘no difficulty’ workign with Peters. That is almost condoning his activities.

Now remember that not only has Helen Clark not sacked Winston for any of his multiple misdeeds to date, she has explicitly said she will have him back in Government if NZ First makes it. … Are there any people of conscience left on the left who think that putting Peters back into power would be a betrayal of everything they have railed against when it comes to money and politics? If so, how can you be voting Labour? … John Key has ruled out Peters in Government. No ifs and no buts.

Audrey Young reports on how the posibility of National and NZ First working together has gone beyond the point of no return. This is a good thing. Also one has to amused at Winston’s claim he doesn’t know if he can trust Key any more. That’s like Jim Jones saying he is worried about the cleanliness of the grape juice. Mind you he may have a point he can’t trust Key to cover up for him, as Helen did.

And so on, you get the picture. Now that Key has repudiated this whole narrative, doesn’t it look like exactly what it is – the hysterical rantings of a deceitful campaign?

58 comments on “Key and Peters best buddies? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Cnr Joe 1
    4 August 2010 at 8:05 am

    its 2010 – I wanna SEE His head exploding

  2. Lew 2
    4 August 2010 at 8:05 am

    Couldn’t agree more, r0b. This is a margin call for Goff (my views on which way it should go are well documented), but should be an absolute no-brainer for Key. Failing to immediately strike a “nothing’s changed” pose does more to feed the meme that Key says what his present audience wants to hear than anything the opposition has done lately.

    I suspect that a sniff of Michael Laws being involved is what’s caused the hesitation. Key would dearly love to be able to put the disgruntled suburban redneck vote in his back pocket, and Laws would permit him to do so. That would pretty much sew his campaign up.

    L

  3. ghostwhowalksnz 3
    4 August 2010 at 8:06 am

    “That giant sucking sound you hear? That’s DPF’s head imploding”
    Hardly, when DPF has faced criminal charges for his political activities when working for National, he knows its time to turn off the vitriol tap and will willingly oblige

  4. Jenny 4
    4 August 2010 at 8:27 am

    If given a choice Peters will always go with the right. This is his background.

    A deal with Labour?

    Only as a fall back position, and depending on the cushiness of the proffered position.

    If Peters is ever in the position of King maker again, it will be to return a National government.

    • Tigger 4.1
      4 August 2010 at 9:31 am

      Agreed, that’s more likely – but could they maintain a relationship? Doubtful. Or at least questionable…

  5. dave 5
    4 August 2010 at 8:29 am

    ” might consider” and ” not rule out” does not mean ” best buddies?” any more than “not so anonymous letter” plus ” two months sick leave” equals ” expulsion?” . As much as some may consider it looks that way. Its not a given.

  6. mickysavage 6
    4 August 2010 at 8:43 am

    Remember this is MMP. National appears to be heading down to the mid to low 40s in the opinion polls.

    Act will be toast, and I cannot see the Maori Party getting any more seats.

    National will need a viable coalition partner to get over the line next time.

    NZ first is it.

    Stand by as Crosby Textor attempt to rewrite history all in the name of retaining power.

    • Lew 6.1
      4 August 2010 at 8:46 am

      ACT will be toast? National are throwing Epsom again. I’d be shocked if Rodney doesn’t win it.

      L

      • loota 6.1.1
        4 August 2010 at 8:56 am

        MS I like your optimism since I too am waiting a long day for National to start coming up in the polls @ 42%, 43%, 44% on a regular basis.

        But the wind hasn’t shifted yet.

      • Gooner 6.1.2
        4 August 2010 at 8:57 am

        The people of Epsom have a choice between Hone harawira as minister of Maori Affairs, Winston Peters as the same minister or Rodney as their MP and a minister.

        Simple stuff.

        Ha ha, captcha is toast.

      • mickysavage 6.1.3
        4 August 2010 at 9:00 am

        Hide may be there but he may be the only ACToid left.

        • Gosman 6.1.3.1
          4 August 2010 at 9:13 am

          ACT has always drifted along the 1 to 2 1/2 percent mark between elections over the past few election cycles. They tend to firm up closer to election day as aspects of Naional’s support feel they can safely support ACT without stuffing up National.

          I’d be very surprised if they didn’t get at least a couple of MP’s back.

          • jcuknz 6.1.3.1.1
            4 August 2010 at 10:05 am

            It is difficult for people to face facts in the midst of political skirmishing but that there are only a few people in the country willing to practice and support common sense. This has been ACT’s problem from day one despite hopes or ambitions of 15%. Some may be thankful for that. 🙂

            • Pete 6.1.3.1.1.1
              4 August 2010 at 11:11 am

              Unfortunately, common sense is subjective. I’m with Lew on this one, they’ll be back – as much as I want to see the back of them for good.

        • sean14 6.1.3.2
          6 August 2010 at 9:50 pm

          So ACT aren’t toast. Make up your mind.

      • Guess Work 6.1.4
        4 August 2010 at 9:45 am

        The word on high from Nationals pollsters is that Act and Rortney are in terrible shit in Epsom. It is only John Key that is keeping Hyde afloat. If the rot sets in he will be goneburger by lunchtime. Hydes slimeball Chris Diak is also working for Banks, talk about an inside job.

  7. Thomas Beagle 7
    4 August 2010 at 8:45 am

    To answer your final question : no.

    Key was right to reject Winston Peters in 2008 and Helen Clark was wrong not to.

    This flip-flop doesn’t make Key wrong in 2008, it just shows that once you’re in power, you’ll do anything to stay there.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 7.1
      4 August 2010 at 8:51 am

      T B your argument has you biting your own tail.
      Key cant be right to want to stay in power and Clark be wrong to want to stay in power

      • Lew 7.1.1
        4 August 2010 at 9:02 am

        The determinant of “right”ness in Thomas’ formulation isn’t “staying in power” — it’s “siding with Winston Peters”. His statement is perfectly consistent, because he argues that siding against Winston is wrong regardless of whether it resulted in retaining power.

        L

        • Thomas Beagle 7.1.1.1
          4 August 2010 at 9:24 am

          Lew’s interpretation is correct. I’m saying that Key is wrong to deal with Winston Peters now and it makes him look like a flip-flopper on what he himself had framed as a matter of integrity.

          In 2008, Key’s rejection of Peters and NZ First allowed him to appear principled, while Clark’s willingness to deal with him reinforced the impression that Labour would do anything, no matter how unsavoury, to cling on to power. Therefore this situation reinforced a good narrative for the Nats and a negative one for Labour.

          The current situation is also useful for narrative building – but this time it’s a gift for anyone running against Key and the National Party (obviously this is hypothetical as no such group exists).

          It seems to me that the anti-Nat story that is steadily growing is that they have no principles and no plan, so they’re prepared to change their mind on anything because they never really believed it in the first place. Changing their mind on Winston Peters will help build that impression.

  8. Reality Check 8
    4 August 2010 at 9:11 am

    Oh how we have short memories….once upon a time Labour said that they wouldn’t work with the Maori Party (Last Cab off the rank or something like that), then they changed their mind when they wanted to hold on to power as well.

    Don’t throw stones in a glass house!!

    FYI, I hope Wintson DOESNT get back in. i agree with your statement:

    “I don’t like Winston Peters and I don’t like his narrow minded nasty opportunistic racism. I think Parliament is better off without him and his kind”.

    • ZB 8.1
      4 August 2010 at 10:43 am

      Peters was attacked by the right wing media because they could count, ACT won less votes than NZF and formed a minority government with National because Peters was abused relentlessly. Key’s govt would have been still born had not the Maori party joined them! So the whole Peters is death notion is just flak. Peters is a ball, kick around time again.

      Stop buying into the far-right government language, that some how its moderate. Labour sucks but National suck and destroys the economy! How hard is it for the left to kick National? Its simple, when Clark was in power we had a wonderful economy, so WTF happened to Labour when Key says Labour are bad for the economy! The economy tanks when National came to power, its National that wanted to keep digging, and did and now have had to raise GST to pay for their hopeless management of the economy. Geez where the hell are the Labour heavy hitters?

      We are all paying more in the pocket because of National economic incompetence! Your wallet hurts, thats’ National for you.

      Now National and the right wing TVNZ media want to revile, sorry revive, Peters. If Peters had any sense he would stay dead and do the right a mortal injury, as they did him at the last election. Let see if Peters is really a political animal or alternatively really stands by the economy and stays off the platform. Sit it out Peters let National stew, screw the right wing media right back they ran you off, stay off when they need you back! or are you some bitch for the right???

      National can’t win, so Labour are despoiling the whole framing that ‘Labour can’t win’ but doing it over well before the election so even the dirty tricks of rightwing framing can’t work. Go figure in some respects Labour has got its act together, by sacrificing Carter and undermining Nationals election lies, deflowering the turd blossoms before they bloom. So Labour gets a B, National a F. National clearly are desperate if they looking for a political storm machine to cloud the next election and hide their inferior leadership, policies and handling of the nation by welcoming Peters back into the game.

      • Alwyn 8.1.1
        4 August 2010 at 5:30 pm

        After reading the first paragraph of this comment I began to wonder which of us is living in a parallel universe.
        National 58 Plus ACT 5 (even ignoring Peter Dunne) comes to 63 seats out of a parliament of 122.
        How does this turn into a “minority” government and how would it have been “still-born” without the Maori party?
        I then go on to read the last paragraph the “National cannot win”. The polls don’t seem, unfortunately, to agree with you.
        I realise that we need to try and show a belief in winning but it is totally stupid to refuse to recognise reality. On that at least Chris Carter is correct although he has displayed a pretty stupid way of showing it.

        • ZB 8.1.1.1
          5 August 2010 at 10:57 am

          I understand you are living in a parallel universe and want clarification as to which universe is stupidier.
          The left wing Maori party was asked into the rightwing ACT-National 63 seat majority because Key was feeling nice, or as I understand it, ACT had less votes than NZF who got more votes and no seats. So the farce of a minority NAT-ACT government was averted. Now I may not live in your dumber universe, but in my universe a goverment elected by a proprotional system that doesn’t have a majority of the votes is a bitter joke that would have left them on the back foot for three years. Exactly how would you fathom any of the right wing changes have gone down? Key needed the Maori party because the government would have a minority of the votes and remind everyone of why we moved to a proportional system in the first place.

          National cannot win on my reckoning, simple add GST, SuperCity and ETS, along with a list of other policies back firing because of lack of common sense, like the crime levy! Now paid for by taxpayers because someone realize that criminals don’t have a lot of money and are inclined not to pay fines anyway. Then remind people why they voted out Labour, shower heads and energy saving light bulbs!

          So get out of your alternative universe fast, you simple are being misled to believe that National are doing you a favor, they have not, we are worse off under National, and will continue to get worse off. Under Labour we had growth, we had growing employment, we had a list of positives that weren’t spin. It simple shocking that so many people in NZ trust National, where’s your evidence? More prisons? Prisons cost money, and humanity has not changed for millions of years, we still have the same proportion of miscreats we always did, so where are we manufacturing all these extra criminals from and who is getting paid to create them, and why as a taxpayer am I putting people in jail for crimes other countries find cheaper and quicker ways to reahabitate?

          National are nasty stupid fraks. Get over you blinkered view that somehow they are moderates.
          North of $50,000 for people Key, and north of $50 for the rest minus $50+ more GST, Levies, inflation.
          Nothing Key has done is fair and balanced, Key is a lying pack of shate.

  9. Nick C 9
    4 August 2010 at 9:11 am

    Look I know this is a partisan blog, but Labour has absolutely no credibility when it comes to dealing with Winston. Zero. Zip. Nil.

    • brooklyn08 9.1
      4 August 2010 at 9:39 am

      Gosh, that may be true; but Labour haven’t previously ruled out dealing with Peters; whereas National has.

      • Reality Check 9.1.1
        4 August 2010 at 9:44 am

        @brooklyn08

        They may not have ruled out working with Peters…but as i stated above they ruled out working with the Maori Party….but now they have changed their minds.

        All parties will do it ALL parties. this is what MMP is about, working with parties to form a government.

        • The Voice of Reason 9.1.1.1
          4 August 2010 at 10:01 am

          I don’t think Labour ruled out working with the MP in the explicit way, National did with NZ First. Last cab off the rank is deliberately insulting, but doesn’t mean no deal under any circumstamces. Given that the MP was a new party, formed as a split from Labour and very anti-Helen, it’s no surprise that the then Labour leader didn’t really want to cuddle up, but I’d say the door was at least slightly ajar. More so now, as time passes and hopefully so does Turia.

          • Lanthanide 9.1.1.1.1
            4 August 2010 at 1:02 pm

            I agree. Last cab of the rank had more to do with MP being anti-Labour than Labour being anti-MP.

          • burt 9.1.1.1.2
            4 August 2010 at 1:36 pm

            I don’t think Labour ruled out working with the MP in the explicit way,

            No that would be far to risky for a party that wants to be all things to all people all of the time. Popularity rules while the economy goes to hell. Saw it in 1990 and again in 2008 yet still people think they actually stand for anything other than their own best interests of gaining power.

            • Draco T Bastard 9.1.1.1.2.1
              5 August 2010 at 1:02 am

              You talking about NACT there burt? They are, after all, the only ones that resemble your description.

  10. tc 10
    4 August 2010 at 9:50 am

    This is classic finance trader tactics which work well in politics….hedge your bets/ moving forward/ history is to be learnt from not repeated/ flexible pragmatic approach/ whatever gets the most return on investment etc etc

    In todays society where the attention span is measured in the life of your latest gadget (about 6 months) they’ll get away with it….hell they got away with all the BS till now so can’t see it changing.

    Noble sentiments in the post but morality and principles aren’t part of the NACT strategy…..power at any price just chuck more onto the payback list.

  11. tsmithfield 11
    4 August 2010 at 10:22 am

    Key is absolutely correct not to rule out working with NZ First.

    We don’t know if Peters will stand. Or if he does, what position he will hold in the party. It might well be possible for there to be a NZ First structure that Key with which Key can work without violating the stance he took in the previous election, even if Peters is still in the mix.

    Personally, I think it would be tactically astute for him to rule out working with NZ First again if Peters is still leader.

  12. gobsmacked 12
    4 August 2010 at 11:46 am

    I agree with Lew, and the general point that this is wrong in principle and dumb tactically as well.

    It feeds one of Key’s “negatives” – the perception that he’s weak, leads from the rear. Ruling out Winston is 2008 was designed to counter that, and it worked for him.

    Now he just looks feeble. You’re around 50%, and you’re nervously looking over your shoulder at a guy who hasn’t even made 5%, in a single opinion poll? That’s pretty pathetic.

    (and to repeat my personal view: NZ politics is better off without Peters, and that goes for Lhaws, x 100).

  13. burt 13
    4 August 2010 at 12:52 pm

    So National are now in the same camp as Labour working toward power at any cost. I agree that National now look as lacking in principle as Labour have for the last decade. Shame that we don’t even have one of the major parties worth voting for.

    • felix 13.1
      4 August 2010 at 1:53 pm

      In bizzarro world maybe.

      Meanwhile back in reality Labour haven’t pulled a u-turn on working with Peters – National have.

      What were the words Key used again? Something about trust, wasn’t it?

    • burt 13.2
      4 August 2010 at 2:54 pm

      What a dork. National bad for doing a u-turn, Labour good for not having any position. People like you encourage wishy-washy BS from our politicians.

      • felix 13.2.1
        4 August 2010 at 4:07 pm

        Where did I say anything about Labour being “good for not having any position” burt?

        You made a false equivalence between the respective positions of Nat and Lab and I pointed it out. Lay off the weed, burt, it’s rotting what’s left of your tiny little mind.

  14. Pat 14
    4 August 2010 at 1:38 pm

    What is a shame is that all political parties have left the Grey constituents in a vacumn for 2 years. They lost their champion, and there was an opportunity for a new champion to fill the void. This is furtive ground that should have been mined by National or Labour, and they should have assigned a red-blooded male with a semblance of charisma for the task. Labour could have used Anderton, National I’m not sure – maybe John Carter.

  15. jbanks 15
    4 August 2010 at 1:41 pm

    It’s a great political move from Key. If working with Peters is a deal breaker for voters then where are they going to go?

    • gobsmacked 15.1
      4 August 2010 at 1:52 pm

      Breaking news: Key has categorically ruled out Peters.

      “It’s a great political move from Key”, says jbanks.

      Update: Key has refused to rule out Peters.

      “It’s a great political move from Key”, says jbanks.

      Latest update: Key has appeared at a Grey Power meeting, kissed Winston Peters (with tongue), and declared him “The Nation’s Greatest Statesman, Ever”, and appointed him Finance Minister.

      “It’s a great political move from Key, says jbanks.

      etc, etc

      • jbanks 15.1.1
        4 August 2010 at 2:04 pm

        Yep. I agree. He does have great political timing. Unlike Labour who made their move at the wrong time (election 2008) oops.

  16. Adrian 16
    4 August 2010 at 2:14 pm

    Phil Twyford should stand in Epsom because if he does National will have to put in a candidate as Phil can win it., Winnie won’t be able to resist running against the Yellow Dog and also because it’s the only electorate that TVNZ and TV3 can afford to cover as the crews can get the free bus there.

  17. marsman 17
    4 August 2010 at 3:10 pm

    Winstone Peters did do some good things whilst in Parliament. For example :
    The ‘Wine-box’ enquiry exposed the shady dealings of the money-men.
    He was by all accounts a very good Minister of Foreign Affairs.
    He also recognised that many of our elder citizens are not as able as most other citizens to afford mobility, hence free buses etc. in off-peak hours for the elderly.
    IF there is any chance that his returning to Parliament MAY possibly mean an end to the current Miss-Administration ,then ????

  18. Rex Widerstrom 18
    4 August 2010 at 5:15 pm

    I also don’t like the extraordinarily vicious and deceitful campaign that the right wing attack poodles ran against Peters in 2008. They painted him as a minor satan for “crimes’ that National and ACT were (and still are) every bit as guilty of themselves.

    At the risk of being seen to mimic another commenter’s likely response: WOOF 😛

    I don’t know about my fellow canine conspirators but I became involved in that campaign because it became evident that he was behaving as a hypocritical fibbing scroat just as he had in 1996 when I also campaigned against him.

    I don’t much like anybody’s use of blind trusts etc and have long supported a campaign donations regime which is utterly and completely transparent (you donate over, say, $100, you’re named), which some here criticised as too extreme. I think NACT should “open the books”, as should every other party.

    But at least NACT were honest about their lack of transparency. Winston, as usual, painted himself the paragon of propriety while behaving like an absolute s**t, surrounded by the the sycophantic and supported by the deluded.

    • r0b 18.1
      4 August 2010 at 9:26 pm

      But at least NACT were honest about their lack of transparency

      Sorry, as saving graces go, it just doesn’t do it for me. When it comes to liars I prefer the ham fisted bumbling of Peters to the smooth facade of the National machine.

  19. BLiP 19
    4 August 2010 at 5:42 pm

    You know, having been disenfranchised by the Green’s MoU, and ignored by Labour in relation to GE in particular and food safety in general, New Zealand First isn’t a bad option really. There’s something about putting Peters back in the Beehive that appeals to my anarchic tendencies. I’ll probably wimp out on election day and just spoil the ballot paper, but between now and then I’ll be telling the pollsters its Winnie For Me.

    • Outofbed 19.1
      4 August 2010 at 11:18 pm

      “disenfranchised by the Green’s MoU’
      Home insulation anyone? The Greens will work with anyone to help get key environmental and social justice policies implemented
      Does this mean the Green Party would coalesce with National party ?
      No chance, none, zilch, not a fucking chance in hell
      I am sorry You haven’t been disenfranchised by the Green’s MoU in any way shape or form
      You have disenfranchised yourself which must hurt 😉

  20. DS 20
    4 August 2010 at 10:09 pm

    I’m not going to vote for him, but I’d be quite happy if he got back into Parliament. We don’t have enough characters in the house any more.

    This isn’t strictly for entertainment purposes either. Having someone unpredictable puts the fear of God into all those slickly managed PR MPs. Peters vs Bennett or Peters vs Tolley would be comedy gold.

  21. jaymam 21
    5 August 2010 at 5:26 pm

    “That’s DPF’s head imploding. How stupid does he look now?”
    It could be an improvement!
    Here’s a couple of unretouched pics that DPF himself has posted:
    http://i34.tinypic.com/344qv5t.jpg

Links to post