Luxon Tells The World Andrew Bayly Lied

Written By: - Date published: 10:24 pm, October 21st, 2024 - 48 comments
Categories: Christopher Luxon, national, same old national - Tags:

This is an excerpt from the Mountain Tui substack post

In today’s press conference, Christopher Luxon re-affirmed his government’s commitment to bringing back the live animal export ban: claiming that National will do it to a “gold standard”.

Heard of that term before?

Well lobbyists spent $1m to help with the National-ACT-NZF reversal of Labour’s ban and the marketing term “gold standard” was key to its campaign.

RNZ:

…Livestock Export New Zealand (LENZ) will spend $366,000 on a “trust and understanding” campaign, $100,000 on media training advocates and nearly $200,000 creating a “gold standard” for animal welfare.

LENZ says it will also spend $160,000 on “political lobbying and legal fees”.

“It is vital that the industry help to fund a sustained communications programme to influence public opinion ahead of the ban being included with a reinstatement bill,” it says.

The LENZ document says the group Save Animals From Exploitation (SAFE) will be a formidable opponent…

ACT MP Andrew Hoggard, former president of Federated Farmers and now Associate Minister of Agriculture, has the responsibility of reintroducing the trade.

Conversely, Australia voted this year to ban all live sheep exports.

Elsewhere in the press conference, Simeon Brown postured about Wellington Council, saying he was still “considering all options” without being willing to expand on any – and talking up roads – i.e. no surprises there.

But the highlight – and well reported – is Chris Luxon defending Minister Andrew Bayly for telling a factory worker who stayed back at work to “f*ck off”, and repeatedly call him a loser while forming the L sign with his fingers.

(Well reported in most places except NZME. Newstalk ZB instead today pleads: “Has the Andrew Bayly-bashing gone too far? ZB senior political correspondent Barry Soper says the media’s going too hard in criticising Minister Bayly.”

I’m sure I will find Soper pleading for Golriz as well after she admitted her mistake, and got summarily convicted and her career destroyed. I’ll hold)

Last week Bayly denied he said “F*ck off” and wondered why the complainant took offence – “It was only for a few minutes,” he opined – in a disturbing display of abuser code language.

Bayly:

I had a brief interaction with a person for a matter of a few minutes.

And out of that, he’s taken great offence. So I have apologised to him unreservedly.

There was no intention to offend him….

[Did you tell him to F off?]

I don’t believe I used that word at all.

Does Mr Bayly not realise that a few minutes is enough when being subject to what he did, let alone his recorded denials do not reconcile with the version the marketing Prime Minister sold NZ today?

Instead, according to Luxon, Bayly feels “genuine contrition”.

When the journalist pointed out Bayly didn’t even try to reach out to the worker to apologise at all, until well after the news blew up, and instead only apologised to the business, Luxon again affirmed Bayly was sorry – according to Luxon.

Media:

Is it a genuine apology though if he hasn’t accepted, if he disputes some of the facts, like he’s disputing that he swore at the guy, he wouldn’t even be kind of drawn on whether he used the loser word.

So if he’s disputing some of the facts, how much of a genuine apology is it?

Luxon:

..[He] clearly got this horribly wrong, you’ve caused hurt and insult to somebody. I expect a fulsome apology to them which he did and he also fulsomely apologised to me and reassured me it wouldn’t happen again.

And that’s the standards that I expect.

Media:

His first apology wasn’t directly to the worker.

It was to the business in which he mentioned the worker and sort of apologised for causing it…

Luxon:

Oh look, I can tell you in my conversations with him on Friday morning,

he clearly understood he had got that very, very wrong.

Luxon’s video is self explanatory – and so is Bayly’s interview last week – I have juxtaposed it in the clip above to show how starkly different Luxon’s account and Bayly’s is.

I won’t belabour the obvious –

But will note Luxon defended him with an iron ear – not hearing what he was being told, uninterested in anything but maintaining his storyline, and clearly advised to take the wind out of this story.

It’s like watching a morally vacuous individual at play – one who is certain of his own moral rectitude – but doesn’t seem to care what is truly right and wrong, and what is true versus what he can spin as true. And all Luxon really did too was show up Bayly for the liar he is after Bayly’s denials last week.

What a sad, vacuous time we live in.

It was good the complainant had witnesses – or I wouldn’t want to think about how they would have been treated and portrayed by this right wing government.

For example, I thought about this 74 year old protestor who David Seymour called a liar and assaulter after he told media he was manhandled for protesting peacefully at an ACT event.

PS

Seems the complainant sent his email to a number of political parties, including National seeking a response – and despite it reaching inboxes – including Labour’s Carmel Sepuloni, it was later marked as spam and physically wiped from the mailboxes.

Luxon claimed today “he wasn’t aware” – of course – and Garry Brownlee refused to comment.

RNZ –

Labour leader Chris Hipkins told media on Monday afternoon he had contacted the Speaker because it “ultimately draws into question exactly how an email can be received and withdrawn again”.

“It does seem somewhat strange that an email can be received, read, and then disappear from their inbox.”

The Prime Minister’s office says it was not responsible…

48 comments on “Luxon Tells The World Andrew Bayly Lied ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Mike the Lefty 1
    22 October 2024 at 5:25 am

    What I can't understand is how someone in Bayly's position could possibly imagine that calling someone a "loser" could somehow be taken as "light-hearted".

    "Loser" is something that even close friends would hesitate to say to each other. They might call the other "twit', "nong" or even "f…wit" because these at least do have a slightly light-hearted connotation but "loser" doesn't. It is an insult term that is far darker than it may first appear and it has no redeeming features.

    So how on earth could Bayly justify calling someone who he had only met briefly and didn't know a "loser"?

    It is a sackable offence for a crown minister? Well, yes or no or neither really, but one thing is apparent – Luxon's lack of leadership of his cabinet is getting him into trouble and I don't think this will be the last time we see this.

  2. tc 2
    22 October 2024 at 6:30 am

    Compare this to how aaron gilmore got treated.

    Mr Bayly could be a rural 'untouchable' to keep that voting block onside.

    Luxon could've and indeed should've put him on the naughty step for awhile but we get this instead.

  3. David 3
    22 October 2024 at 7:20 am

    I may be wrong, I doubt Bayly would have deliberately been that rude to someone while on the job. I’ve met MP’s and Ministers at work site visits, they have all been friendly and genuinely interested in what the business is doing. David Lange had a great sense of humour and timing so he could get away with it. At his age, Bayly should probably stick to lame dad jokes. But this is now getting blown out of proportion and is embarrassing.

    • Morrissey 3.1
      22 October 2024 at 9:13 am

      Lange exhibited neither "a great sense of humour" nor "timing" when, during his regrettable tenure as Minister of Education, he told some female teachers to "piss off" when they protested his Business Roundtable-led attacks on the teaching profession.

      • Patricia Bremner 3.1.1
        22 October 2024 at 9:36 am

        True, but we are discussing Luxon's lack of Leadership, not Lange's petulance.

        The worker was put in an invidious position by his boss and the Minister.

        We are on about it as no one other than Bayly has denied it happened.

        Now the PM has those present give their reports, it appears Bayly did this. Perhaps he did "forget" because he was drunk?

        It was unprofessional crass and cruel however it happened, and finally someone has warned Luxon of the optics of it.

        Also ‘He took offence’ is victim blaming.

        • Mountain Tui 3.1.1.1
          22 October 2024 at 9:23 pm

          Patricia –

          Bayly admitted everything today in Parliament. I think they really want this story to die.

          I agree that his version last week was victim blaming and the RNZ interview was all that – "it was only a few minutes" "they took offence" etc.

      • David 3.1.2
        22 October 2024 at 9:47 am

        Yeah back in about 1987-88 I remember a student teacher complaining that they couldn’t afford a designer shirt which cost $80.00 (approximately $150 in today’s money) Lange suggested they shop at Farmers…

        If you are going to be a dickhead towards others, you shouldn’t have a cry when they bite back at you. As a rule I will very quickly push back at when someone oversteps my boundaries.

        As for the Bayly incident, none of us were there and I haven’t heard any independent reports of the incident. It’s very likely to be one of those awkward situations where one person makes a lame attempt at humour, and the recipient takes it as the other person being rude

        • Mac1 3.1.2.1
          22 October 2024 at 10:16 am

          Yes, David, I remember the designer shirt. I had a laugh about this at the time with the visiting Geoffrey Palmer, saying the local Labour candidate was a clothing store owner who could have sold the student teacher a business shirt for far less.

    • Mountain Tui 3.2
      22 October 2024 at 10:54 am

      So you are denying the account that Luxon already admitted – and said Bayly admitted to him – was "hurtful" and painful and "horribly wrong?"

      The only reason they went that far i.e. admission is because there were witnesses.

      • David 3.2.1
        22 October 2024 at 12:39 pm

        I’m not denying anything. It sounds like one of those incidents where person A says something, maybe as an awkward joke, person B understands what was said was intended as an insult. It’s seems very odd to me that any cabinet minister would deliberately insult an employee on an official worksite visit, especially when accompanied by an opposition MP, I could be wrong, but this seems unusual behaviour. Unless we have other instances of bad behaviour from Bayly then this issue is done & dusted. I’ve had to deal with this sort of behaviour or complaints in the workplace, it mostly comes down to different communication style and genuine misunderstanding. Unless you’re without sin yourself, maybe just give it a rest.

        • Mountain Tui 3.2.1.1
          22 October 2024 at 1:15 pm

          "then this issue is done & dusted"

          On the contrary it deserves every bit of scrutiny especially when Bayly denies the words, and actions.

          This is a simple matter of accountabililty – and there is no denying what he said or did.

          As Luxon says Bayly knows he made a "horrible mistake" and "hurt" others.

          And there is no excusing this – and it's very important when you consider this action, to consider it visually and peripherally.

          A grown man in a suit telling you you are a loser multiple times in front of your manager and others, laughing about it, forming an "L" sign with his fingers and taking those to his forehead.

          Then telling him to fuck off with a wine.

          After all this goes down, in those very uncomfortable minutes, he returns to try to get you to the bar – twice.

          This is an open and shut case of misconduct on the workplace, and his denials make it much worse.

          If this was any employee they would be stood down immediately.

          • David 3.2.1.1.1
            22 October 2024 at 2:58 pm

            Oh for Gods’s sake. This is a reason why I never apologise or explain my actions. Some people want or need to believe the worst in another person, it’s pointless discussing things with people like this. It’s similar to mud wrestling with a pig, you both get dirty, & only the pig enjoys it.

            To the best of my knowledge, there are no other people coming out to support the accusations. Until that happens this is a matter of he said/she said. If Baily is a dickhead, he will probably do something stupid again, and then he’ll get a throughly deserved spanking.

            As I said previously, the most likely scenario is that Bayly made a absolutely awkward attempt at humour, the recipient takes offence as he misunderstood what Bayly was meaning. This is a daily occurrence for grown adults, just smile and wave… of course if this is a reoccurring pattern of behaviour that is a different issue. But I don’t think we are at that point.

            • Mountain Tui 3.2.1.1.1.1
              22 October 2024 at 3:08 pm

              Ah yes it was very funny – point taken. Not.

              Look. I agree – it's a very simple situation.

              The guy got found out and the few that want to defend him are welcome to – that's the great thing about all this.

              Enjoy!

        • observer 3.2.1.2
          22 October 2024 at 1:22 pm

          But the key point is that an apology cannot at the same time be a denial.

          "I am truly sorry for what I said but I didn't say it" … doesn't work. And that is where Luxon/Bayly have left it.

          The political play is obvious, they are simply waiting for it to go away and it probably will, but that doesn't make it look any better.

        • Mike the Lefty 3.2.1.3
          22 October 2024 at 3:20 pm

          What you are saying David is another form of "nothing to see here, move on…" which is a familiar National Party response to anything embarrassing on their side.

          Not what the NACTs had in mind when persecuting Julie Anne Genter several months ago. They weren't in any mind to move on.

          But when it happens to them…..well! that's different eh?

        • observer 3.2.1.4
          22 October 2024 at 5:28 pm

          especially when accompanied by an opposition MP

          Who was that? I haven't seen any mention of such an MP in the reporting of the incident.

      • Incognito 3.2.2
        22 October 2024 at 7:09 pm

        I may be wrong. That comment @ 3 could have been viewed as an attempt to divert by an apologist shill. As such, it was moderately successful because weak-minded lazy ones responded to the whataboutery offered, which could easily have derailed things, as intended.

  4. thinker 4
    22 October 2024 at 7:20 am

    Yes, his performance is way below what Luxon expects of an MP, but Luxon has confidence in him.

    Says more for Luxon than Bayly, IMHO.

    And both seem wedded to the 11 October apology, which was to the boss, not the insulted person, thereby augmenting the elitism.

    I wonder if Bayly told Luxon to f*ck off home and called him a loser to score points with his peer group, Luxon would be so dismissive.

  5. Graeme 5
    22 October 2024 at 8:30 am

    When this first happened my thoughts were 'oh, things are a bit stressed in the Nat caucus right now'.

    Also this happened on Licensed Premises, both Sale of Liquor and Excise Acts, when you're on these premises just assume that you're on camera, general premises views and personal with audio on cellar door staff. Some wineries this is quite overt, others a bit more discrete, but it's there to moderate, and manage, the behaviour of their entitled prat clientele.

    • Matiri 5.1
      22 October 2024 at 9:42 am

      There was another Nat MP present, Stuart Smith the MP for this electorate.

      • Mac1 5.1.1
        22 October 2024 at 10:21 am

        Stuart Smith, MP for Kaikoura, has not been asked about his version of events by the media. Perhaps they could suggest that he might take over the disgraced Minister Bayly's portfolio…..

  6. Morrissey 6
    22 October 2024 at 9:05 am

    "And that’s the standards that I expect."

  7. Rodel 7
    22 October 2024 at 9:09 am

    'I made a light hearted comment and he took offence. So he was the one at fault.

    That's dumbspin Andrew. We are not convinced.

    • Anne 7.1
      22 October 2024 at 11:05 am

      Not only dumb but the Govt. response is starting to look suspect:

      There was a 'hitch' involving Parliamentary IT which meant neither Labour's leader or deputy leader saw the worker's letter on Friday. There was an address typo which explains the Hipkins hitch, but Sepuloni's copy, which was initially seen by a staffer, had been deleted before she got a chance to read it – supposedly because it had been deemed by IT as spam. (?)

      Hipkins explains what actually happened [ignore Luxon's attempt to brush it aside as a misunderstanding] and has now requested the speaker investigate the matter:

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/christopher-luxon-and-chris-hipkins-on-complaints-against-andrew-bayly/7MRJDF7TGNQLMUXPJSAZKQJEYA/

      • Anne 7.1.1
        22 October 2024 at 2:49 pm

        The latest:

        Christopher Luxon on Tuesday morning said his office had looked into the issue and claimed Labour was being “conspiratorial”.

        “I have no idea what they are talking about, we’ve got no reference for that, no understanding of that,” Luxon said”

        So, because his office doesn’t know what happened then it’s just Hipkins being conspiratorial?

        As Hipkins says in the accompanying video words to the effect:

        “We were being asked by the media on Friday to comment, but we couldn’t comment because we couldn’t find the letter.”

        When I tried to include the link it had gone and replaced by this link with a change of emphasis and the Hipkins stand-up interview dropped. How convenient.

        https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/minister-andrew-bayly-maintains-he-wasnt-drunk-when-he-insulted-worker/XF24ZSUTWVBZJPX5ZPMSZGBBS4/

    • Mike the Lefty 7.2
      22 October 2024 at 3:21 pm

      It is called victim blaming.

      Classic bully behaviour and for those who wish to hush it all up.

      I know, I had it myself at high school and it has had negative effects on my life ever since.

      • thinker 7.2.1
        22 October 2024 at 6:29 pm

        I was being bullied at high school, went to the Dean to ask him to sort it out. Dean told me "We encourage boys to sort out their differences between themselves", to which I answered "Right Then I will…" and he went all frothy at me as if I was making trouble.

        Now THERE was a loser, IMHO…

        You’re right, Mike, how these things stay with you. But I guess you turned out ok too.

  8. mpledger 8
    22 October 2024 at 10:46 am

    It all sounds like the …

    The Narcissist's Prayer

    That didn't happen. _______________________(I didn't call him a fuckwit)
    And if it did, it wasn't that bad. ____________(I had a brief interaction)
    And if it was, that's not a big deal. _________(They were light-hearted comments)
    And if it is, that's not my fault. _____________(he's taken great offence)
    And if it was, I didn't mean it. ______________(There was no intention to offend him)
    And if I did, you deserved it. _________________ . . .

    ~~~~~~~~~~

  9. powerman 9
    22 October 2024 at 4:46 pm

    Another "Don't you know who I am" moment following a convivial wine-tasting session. Andrew is the loser big time.

    • Muttonbird 9.2
      22 October 2024 at 5:23 pm

      It's quite similar to the Aaron Gilmore incident. While Bayley didn't threaten the worker's job with his or the PM's power, he did abuse the worker and is a much higher ranked MP and also in cabinet. Key pressure Gilmore to resign, Luxton has dithered like an idiot.

      Questions are now being asked (Arena Williams in Parliament) if he had been drinking at engagements during the day which included a winery and beer garden. He denies it.

      If this goes on and Bayley needs tone removed Luxton will need more ammunition than what has been provided and acted upon. Proof of alcohol consumption might be it. I'm sure Bayley's handlers are getting a thorough going over right about now.

      To me Bayley, being a National Party politician, looks like an absolute wanker (they all do), but aside from that he also looks like a very heavy drinker.

  10. Dennis Frank 10
    22 October 2024 at 7:55 pm

    I was intrigued by the PM's demeanour in that clip on the tv news tonight that showed him trying to make light of the situation. It was as though he knew he was coming across as unconvincing even while doing so. Such behaviour is the opposite of a strong leader.

    Bayly's admission re the loser tag & sign is partial honesty but to what effect? Signal to all that he'll never be a cabinet minister? That he's operating at the mental level of a high school adolescent? Yes to both, I suspect. Self-sabotage, yet he's probably too clueless to realise that yet. No explanation as to what provoked such hostility to the employee either, that I've noticed so far. Blame privacy law as usual I suppose…

    • Muttonbird 10.1
      22 October 2024 at 9:48 pm

      Why would there have needed to be provocation? Are National party cabinet ministers not capable of vindictively flying off the handle all on their own?

  11. Kat 11
    22 October 2024 at 8:23 pm

    So who is this Bayly chap anyway…….really…… what are his credentials for being an MP……he appears to be of similar ilk to the other parliamentary seat warmers that have caused a stink in the fish pond lately………

    But then as the saying goes……. a fish rots from the head down……..

  12. adam 12
    22 October 2024 at 10:07 pm

    Class war.

    More of the same old, same old.

    • Anne 12.1
      22 October 2024 at 11:08 pm

      Yes. They don't have the self awareness to recognise that their behaviour indicates how insecure they really feel in their own skin.

  13. powerman 13
    23 October 2024 at 7:00 am

    Most workplaces have a drug and alcohol random testing regime, might it be time for Parliament to have such a policy? There seems to be a need in the House or when representing the House or party. Drunk in charge of a country was a statement made by a former MP about the House.

  14. Mac1 14
    24 October 2024 at 9:41 am

    " I expect a fulsome apology to them which he did and he also fulsomely apologised to me and reassured me it wouldn’t happen again."

    Luxon on Bayly's apology, above in the post.

    There's a letter in today's The Press congratulating Luxon for "his courage in describing Andrew Bayly's "loser' apology as "fulsome"".

    The letter writer quoted the Oxford Dictionary saying that 'fulsome' means "too generous in praising or thanking someone, or in saying that you are sorry, so that you do not sound sincere."

    The Merriam-Webster dictionary says " A phrase like "a fulsome apology" is likely to be ambiguous: some may think it means "a complete apology," while others may think it means "an effusive, excessive, or insincere apology."

    Luxon being ‘ambiguous’?

    • Drowsy M. Kram 14.1
      24 October 2024 at 12:49 pm

      There's a letter in today's The Press congratulating Luxon for "his courage in describing Andrew Bayly's "loser' apology as "fulsome"".

      Luxon's ‘brave’ description of Bayly's 'loser' apology will fulsome of the people… wink

      • Mac1 14.1.1
        24 October 2024 at 4:04 pm

        for all of the time, but not all of the people all the time…… hopefully.

        A better explanation for Bayly's conduct is the 'aspergers syndrome ' defence proposed by Farrar as reported by Muttonbird at #6 on Daily Review 23/10.24.

        It actually seems to tick a lot of the boxes and certainly explains his behaviour when I visited him with a constituent for her support- inappropriate (not sexual, I must add) and unaware that it was so.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.