The Donghua Liu letter – is that it?

Written By: - Date published: 3:50 pm, June 18th, 2014 - 324 comments
Categories: david cunliffe, election 2014, Politics - Tags:

I have been around at the Mt Albert electorate office over the last 25 years voluntarily helping them out with their balky computer gear many times.

So David Cunliffe is possibly wrong when he said that he dealt with Donghua Liu. A letter has mysteriously appeared at an exquisitely sensitive time. The letter asks for “an estimated period of time in which [Mr Liu] could expect a decision in his case”. There is no expression of support for Mr Liu’s application in the letter. From my knowledge it is the type of form letter that is sent out from electorate offices every day. I’ve seen them in jammed printers and stacked on electorate office desks in piles.

The letter was signed by him back in 2003 – more than 11 years ago. He was a busy backbencher with a large constituency workload. Dozens of similar letters would have been sent each week. The vast majority would have been prepared by his staff, shoved in front of him, and signed. In all likelihood he never met Donghua Liu.

I have been around at least scores of similar immigration interviews happening by staff and no MP in the 1990s and 200os. As far as I could see Helen Clark only ever got involved in immigration cases after they had the information back from exploratory letters to immigration, and when something appeared to be out of order. I don’t imagine the procedures were any different in neighbouring New Lynn.

Electorate MPs always have a great deal of trust in their electorate staff. They really don’t have any choice. They have competently handled thousands of individual constituency cases of which this looks like only one. In all likelihood David never met the guy, and only saw the form letter to sign.

cunliffe form letter to liu

 

What is interesting about this is the sequence of events that just shout that the National researchers found and gave this information to their patsies in the media and blogs.

That is why they have been running this story arc about Liu for the past week or so. David Cunliffe was asked yesterday if he had advocated on behalf of Mr Liu. He said no. I am quite sure that he would have forgotten about this letter which was written more than a decade ago. In any event there is no element of advocacy in it.

You have to admire the ability of the Government to sift through huge amounts of information, find little tidbits, seed questions for the media to ask and then drop information to reinforce a manufactured meme.

Not to mention that Cameron Slater, personal buddy of John Key, has been chortling over this for a month. I’d love to see the timelines of the patsy reporter at the Herald compared to the blabbermouth at Whaleoil.

The problem is that the big issues are being ignored. Perhaps that is the intent.

324 comments on “The Donghua Liu letter – is that it? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Craig Glen Eden 1
    18 June 2014 at 4:02 pm

    Excellant post Lyn.

  2. Blue 2
    18 June 2014 at 4:02 pm

    Yeah, that’s all. Any journalist would recognise that there is no smoking gun here and that they were being used. But the Herald doesn’t have any of those.

  3. Philj 3
    18 June 2014 at 4:02 pm

    xox
    +1 for Key’s spys.

  4. AmaKiwi 4
    18 June 2014 at 4:02 pm

    Lyn, I agree 100%.

    The letter only asks for Immigration to try to give an “estimated period of time in which he (Lui) could expect a decision in his case.” Cunliffe did NOT even hint that in his opinion Immigration should approve Lui’s application. He knew that is Immigration’s responsibility and MPs should not interfere.

    What concerns me is how effectively the Right has blown this into a front page issue, with John Armstrong trying to topple Cunliffe as leader and Bill English saying nothing Cunliffe says can be believed.

    I said it yesterday: It’s time we take the gloves off and smear the Right for their lies and corruption.

    How David handles this on tonight’s news will be critical.

  5. The Al1en 5
    18 June 2014 at 4:07 pm

    Best picture I’ve seen of Judith Collins for a while.

  6. One Anonymous Bloke 6
    18 June 2014 at 4:08 pm

    Lovely circular argument: Liu looks dodgy because of his alleged crime and association with Maurice Williamson, therefore Cunliffe looks tricky because he misspelled Liu’s name eleven years ago.

    Key of course conflates trust and perception, but he’s good at that.

  7. Wyndham, George 7
    18 June 2014 at 4:09 pm

    Remember there was a break-in at Cunliffe’s office.
    Is some sicko going through the hard-drive?

    Or is the dept of immigration handing over tit-bits to their political masters’ henchmen?

    • Anne 7.1
      18 June 2014 at 4:31 pm

      My immediate reaction too Wyndham, George.

      Be assured this is not the first time that Labour Electorate Offices have been broken into and material either stolen or photographed. It happened in the 1990s several times. I came to know the identity of the culprits but because there was no actual evidence available they got away with it.

      Labour cannot just brush it aside as a non-story. If there is any hint of unlawful activity occurring they must demand a police investigation.

      • Derek 7.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:03 pm

        Are you kidding me?? A police investigation for not remembering signing a letter 11 years ago that was pretty standard office fare?

        • lprent 7.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:20 pm

          No. If it’d been stolen from an electorate office then it is warranted.

          I actually suspect that someone has been telling reporters what to ask for after toiling through the files at the immigration department. In my view that definitely requires a investigation.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 7.2
      18 June 2014 at 4:42 pm

      Its from Immigration Service files as can be seen from OIA overlay

      • Anne 7.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:04 pm

        Okay. Have only just seen the letter. How many letters like that does Immigration receive per annum? 50.000? So that’s around 600,000 plus letters someone ‘innocently’ waded through? There’s been a conspiracy of some sort here and its no coincidence it surfaces while Key is in the US playing the statesman role.

        • Lanthanide 7.2.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:12 pm

          It would be reasonable to assume that immigration keep files on particular people. In which case it would be easy to look up Donghua Liu’s case and find anything related to it.

    • Stuart Munro 7.3
      18 June 2014 at 11:37 pm

      I’d bet on the letter coming from Liu’s side – the Gnats are very cosy there, & buying politicians is business as usual for them. The rules are very different here though – not a game the wise migrant will play.

  8. freedom 8
    18 June 2014 at 4:12 pm

    Observant people with an interest in reality would have noticed that at no time have any of these ‘journalists’ approached Mr Liu to ask if he has ever met with Mr Cunliffe? It is a simple question surely? Did he meet with Mr Cunliffe as asserted, or merely call the office and talk to a staffer?

    Same for the donations, if reality is really the focus, why not ask Mr Liu what he donated and when?

    (and of course none of this beat up would have anything to do with distracting the public from the scheduled OIA release exposing the foreign policy turn around that had been developed in secret http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10168029/NZ-reviews-peacekeeping )

  9. QMKIWI 9
    18 June 2014 at 4:14 pm

    You are completely missing the point. No one (who I have read) on the right or left is suggesting that Cunliffe’s letter was in any way inappropriate – he was just doing an MP’s job. The problem here is that Cunliffe has repeatedly denied ever even hearing about Liu, and now it turns out that this is untrue. So assuming he was not lying – which is what he claims – he now just looks inept, and untrustworthy not because of dishonesty but because of incompetence, which is in some ways worse. People like strong leaders, and have contempt for stumbling, sad, inept – read weak – ones. He’s now comes across as a bit of a Jonah on a boat – bad luck, and due to get thrown overboard.The worst part about this is the talk that this attack comes from within Labour itself – making it obvious that this sad party is completely unready to govern. I used to be a Labour voter, but this just shows that having the left in power right now would be a fragmented disaster. Meanwhile, Key consistently says smart, prudent things on Iraq, Team NZ, etc. No wonder the polls are the way they are.

    • lprent 9.1
      18 June 2014 at 4:20 pm

      The worst part about this is the talk that this attack comes from within Labour itself

      Unlikely. Who inside Labour would have been aware of a form letter written 11 years ago by a electorate staff member in New Lynn?

      This looks to me as being National’s research unit getting illegal access to immigration files and then telling a journalist what to OIA for.

      • Colonial Viper 9.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 4:58 pm

        Yep it’s almost certainly a parallel construction. Can someone find out how long it took for the OIA to be actioned?

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 5:08 pm

        Entities

        A couple of people asked me on twitter why I thought the David Cunliffe/Lui letter story came from the Nats instead of just being good hard reporting by the Herald journalist. I have a couple of reasons, but one of them is this comment on my blog from yesterday from a guy who helps Cameron Slater co-write WhaleOil:

        Within 24 hours the poll are going to be the least of David Cunliffes problems.
        Keep an eye on the herald website, we are about to see pledge card theft relegated to second place as the biggest labour funding scandal.

        Yeah, I think that proves that it came from the PMs office.

        • golf74 9.1.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 5:39 pm

          Has to be from the Nats. Hits like this often occur when John Key is overseas. I seem to recall a similar attack story breaking when Key was in the UK visiting the Queen at Balmoral.

          • Foreign Waka 9.1.2.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 7:54 pm

            The fact that there are doubts about the origins of the letter supported by the team labour washing its hands of its leader shows that the last thing NZ needs is a party unable to keep focus and create coherent policy. Imagine this kind of going on when your livelihood is at stake and you need to be sure of a secure stewardship. There are so many issues facing this country and there is no room for those carrier politicians that do not know what real people are experiencing, aka ABC… I would say that Cunliffe has the skills but having 1000 knives in ones back will make the job impossible. In other words, the labour Party (not Cunliffe) has sold the ordinary people of NZ down the river. The same will happen to them come election day.

          • bretto 9.1.2.1.2
            18 June 2014 at 8:00 pm

            Why on earth would the nats want to get rid of Cunliffe? He’s doing an excellent job for them without any help! I wouldn’t be surprised if JK were one of his secret donors.

            That Shane Jones bloke on the other hand…

        • Anne 9.1.2.2
          18 June 2014 at 8:28 pm

          Yeah, I think that proves that it came from the PMs office.

          Wonder how long its been sitting in that top drawer.

      • Anthony Bull 9.1.3
        18 June 2014 at 7:14 pm

        Take your tinfoil hat off – its obvious its the ABC lot behind this.

        The hypocrisy of those running this site is hilarious, and makes you look foolish.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2
      18 June 2014 at 4:23 pm

      It’s a well constructed narrative, that’s for sure.

      What lets you down is the signature line of the astroturfer: that you used to be a left voter. So, scab, how does it feel to be a scab?

      • QMKIWI 9.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 4:28 pm
        1. Growing up and changing your perspective doesn’t make you a scab.
        2. What’s an astroturfer?
        • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 4:32 pm

          By definition, siding with Tories makes you a scab, scab. Unless you’re lying about your previous allegiances that is, in which case you’re a Tory.

          Let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re telling the truth.

          I don’t help Google-challenged scabs.

          • QMKIWI 9.2.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 4:47 pm

            Since when is being an informed voter participating in a democracy about picking a side and sticking with it? Or are you one of those people who was for asset sales when Labour was for asset sales, and now you’re against asset sales now that Labour is against asset sales, and no doubt you’ll flip again when directed? Switch your brain on – democracy and critical thought isn’t about ‘allegiance’ to a particular party. You like Google? Try ‘Assenter’.

          • Mozz 9.2.1.1.2
            19 June 2014 at 12:30 am

            OAB,

            Grow up, the childish fuckwit. Labour is polling at sub 30% in the last many polls. By your logic, we should all hate that 70% for simply not agreeing.

            Idiot.

        • politikiwi 9.2.1.2
          18 June 2014 at 4:53 pm

          I wouldn’t bother with replying to these accusations about your character QMKIWI.

          I was once on the receiving end of OAB’s outlandish accusations (of being a right wing troll and a rascist among others). They never made any sense.

          I get the impression the chip on his shoulder is sizable. You can’t reason with that.

          • john 9.2.1.2.1
            18 June 2014 at 9:13 pm

            One Anonymous Bloke is an abusive stalker, just like Todd/Jackalman was (wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the same stalker).

            Whether someone is a domestic abuser, child abuser, internet abuser or street thug, the common denominator is that they’re usually someone totally frustrated with their own lives, and like to take that our on someone else.

            [lprent: Like me for instance? It could just mean that he finds you to be a complete dickhead. Just as I have in the past under different names.

            But there is no particular shame is realising that others think that you are a cretin without an ability to engage in debate. The trick is to learn to work on it…

            Because if you don’t start dealing with replies to your comments that you currently completely ignore, then I will probably class you as a fire-n-forget flame troll and you’ll lose your ability to comment here again.

            Just a warning since you have raised the questions about motivations. ]

            • john 9.2.1.2.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 1:10 am

              I’m quite happy to reply to all intelligent questions.

              Juvenile abuse that doesn’t even refer to the topic is not an intelligent question.

              You’re welcome to stick up for abusive stalkers, instead of political debate.

              It just depends if you want your site to be meaningless, or meaningful.

              • Colonial Viper …
                19 June 2014 at 1:18 am

                Oh fuck off John you boot licker of the 0.1% and all round sanctimonious prat.

                [lprent: That didn’t have a point. ]

              • framu …
                19 June 2014 at 1:00 pm

                “I’m quite happy to reply to all intelligent questions.”

                then why do you do a quick sidestep everytime you cant argue your way out?

        • Draco T Bastard 9.2.1.3
          18 June 2014 at 5:00 pm

          It’s amazing that so many people seem to think that coming to believe the overly simplified slogans of National = growing up.

    • Tracey 9.3
      18 June 2014 at 4:36 pm

      really? dishonest is ok. incompetence is not? I guess the right has to run such tripe on account t of their liar in chief. to be a leader you have to lie really well not get caught or when caught lie again to make it better. fucking boggles the mind.

      slater getting payback for the minister for oravida?

    • ianmac 9.4
      18 June 2014 at 4:37 pm

      The problem here is that Cunliffe has repeatedly denied ever even hearing about Liu, and now it turns out that this is untrue.
      No its not Qmkiwi. You should get a job at the Herald so you can continue to distort and misrepresent the true story.

    • Colonial Viper 9.5
      18 June 2014 at 5:00 pm

      Meanwhile, Key consistently says smart, prudent things on Iraq, Team NZ, etc.

      Honestly, what the fuck does Mr Key know about Iraq and sending our boys there to die for someone elses screwed up imperial adventure?

      • ghostwhowalksnz 9.5.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:20 pm

        Smart prudent things by Mr Key ??

        Not when he was in China, and declared war on North Korea

      • QMKIWI 9.5.2
        18 June 2014 at 5:36 pm

        He said we’re NOT sending troops. That’s the smart, prudent thing to do.

        • Foreign Waka 9.5.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 8:07 pm

          This is about sunni and shiite waring and it was pretty clear right from the start. Meanwhile Iran has cooperated with Britain and their embassy is getting the go ahead. Smart or just briefed on new developments. Meanwhile, in another circus tent the application for the security council is not be be followed as it needs a functioning army available at any time. World politics is not done in NZ, belief me.

      • Ant 9.5.3
        18 June 2014 at 5:50 pm

        After how many Kiwis died in Afghanistan for a Obama photo op…

  10. tsmithfield 10
    18 June 2014 at 4:17 pm

    The problem for Cunliffe is that I don’t think right or wrong matters anymore. It is all about perceptions now.

    This latest revelation combined with the dodgy donations and dinners Barker had in China that are coming to light all add up to a fairly terminal look, rightly or wrongly.

    • mickysavage 10.1
      18 June 2014 at 4:25 pm

      What reality does not matter? So the best smearers will always be the winners?

      • tsmithfield 10.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 4:27 pm

        Exactly. What would contributors here be saying if National was in this position?

        • lprent 10.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 4:31 pm

          Probably that it is a form letter.

          • tsmithfield 10.1.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 4:39 pm

            LOL.

            I think Cunliffe should resign. Not because of the latest revelations directly. But because of embarking on a campaign to attack the government without checking for skeletons in Labour’s own closet first.

            • ghostwhowalksnz 10.1.1.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 4:47 pm

              No closet, no skeleton.

              As for attacking the government, thats what oppositions do. There is a clue in the name

            • Enough is Enough 10.1.1.1.1.2
              18 June 2014 at 4:48 pm

              There in lies the problem

              The poster boy for Labour’s campaign of ‘cash for access’ is probably a former labour donor, and had the now Labour leader advocate for him in the past.

              If you are going to use these kind of attacks you need to ensure the evidence won’t bite you on the arse.

              • Colonial Viper …
                18 June 2014 at 5:02 pm

                The poster boy for Labour’s campaign of ‘cash for access’ is probably a former labour donor, and had the now Labour leader advocate for him in the past.

                Liu was a constituent. Electorate MP Cunliffe was writing to a government department seeking a clarification.

                Pretty straight forward – David Cunliffe was doing his job as an electorate MP, a concept the right wing is clearly struggling with.

                • SETI …
                  18 June 2014 at 5:43 pm

                  Liu wasn’t a constituent as he wasn’t a citizen or permanent resident.

                • Enough is Enough …
                  18 June 2014 at 5:56 pm

                  I am no right winger. I am not saying Cunliffe actions at the time were wrong. Far from it.

                  The fact is Cunliffe (probably innocently) has been set up and now looks like an imbecile. He wrote a letter on behalf of a guy who has been the centre of some attacks on the government. Attacks that were gaining traction. And now cannot be used.

                  A fucking big fail.

                  If you are going to highlight Joe Bloggs as a National donor and an example of their corrupt practices , then make fucking sure Joe Bloggs has never been near you.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    18 June 2014 at 6:00 pm

                    Pretty sure “Lui” isn’t a National Party member. Pretty sure the corrupt practices are Maurice’s, Judith’s, John’s and John’s.

                    Don’t let the fact that your head’s been cut off stop your legs from working whatever you do.

                  • lprent …
                    18 June 2014 at 8:47 pm

                    If you are going to highlight Joe Bloggs as a National donor and an example of their corrupt practices , then make fucking sure Joe Bloggs has never been near you.

                    Agreed. Definitely something to kick them about and improve. After the election.

                • Matthew Hooton …
                  18 June 2014 at 7:33 pm

                  Liu was not a constituent. He did not live in New Lynn.

                  • lprent …
                    18 June 2014 at 8:00 pm

                    I have no idea where he lived. I rather suspect that neither do you. However perhaps the question you should be asking is where did his agent live? That was who had contact with Cunliffes office.

                    Incidentally the only way for electorate staff to find out if he was a constituent would have been whatever address he gave for his client – which is likely to be his own – or even a P O Box. Sure they could have looked at the electoral roll, but even a person made a permanent resident requires several years before they can enroll and vote. This was an immigration matter…. Think it through.

                  • Gosman …
                    18 June 2014 at 8:28 pm

                    Do MP’s provide letters to anyone who asks for them regardless of where the person asking for them live then?

                  • Clemgeopin …
                    18 June 2014 at 10:10 pm

                    Are MPs not allowed to write and ask a question on behalf of a new immigrant, irrespective of where the immigrant lives?

                • Barnsley Bill …
                  18 June 2014 at 7:51 pm

                  Which electorate was he a constituent in? Your leader actually wised up and fudged the answer to that question tonight on Campbell live. The first time he has not fallen in head first when answering a question on this topic in over a week.

                  • lprent …
                    18 June 2014 at 8:05 pm

                    I believe I have already pointed the flaw in your argument out already. He was trying for immigrant status. He had no constituency.

                    Do you mean to say that you think he shouldn’t be helped by electorate offices? Please explain why?

                    Perhaps you know where he was living? If he wasn’t on the electoral roll, then you’d know more than the electorate office.

                    And BB – that was more of an order than a request. There seems to be a astroturf going on.

                    • Anne …
                      18 June 2014 at 8:12 pm

                      Within 24 hours the polls are going to be the least of David Cunliffes problems.
                      Keep an eye on the herald website, we are about to see pledge card theft relegated to second place as the biggest labour funding scandal.

                      Comment by Barnsley Bill — June 17, 2014 @ 10:21 am

                      Posted on Whale-Oil yesterday.

                      So now we know it came from Slater and the National Party Dirty Tricks Brigade – ie their Research Unit. Did John Key issue the directive for it to be published this week? You bet he would have…

                      The NZ Herald hand in glove with a lying sleaze bag.

                • Blue …
                  19 June 2014 at 5:54 am

                  So hes only guilty of helping a constituent?……….ok.

        • freedom 10.1.1.2
          18 June 2014 at 4:32 pm

          not much tsmithfield, probably because a MP doing MP stuff in the MP office is not news.

          but then again a National MP doing MP stuff in their MP office, that really would be news …
          in the same way Halley’s Comet is news every 76 years 🙂

      • Cancerman 10.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 4:38 pm

        Well Labour had been smearing Collins so you tell us if that tactic works?

        • Tracey 10.1.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 4:40 pm

          have you read the oia docs about collins trip to china?

          • Cancerman 10.1.2.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 5:07 pm

            Yes and there is no evidence anything happened other than associating with her husband colleague. Now something corrupt may have happened but until you have evidence it is a smear campaign. Thats the point I’m making. David Cunliffe may have had no association but just sign a stock letter. But he also might be ball deep with Chinese businessmen. National has no hard evidence. They are smearing as did Labour with Collins. If you want to start convicting people with no evidence go ahead but please give me notice as I would like to leave the country first.

            • Draco T Bastard 10.1.2.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 5:10 pm

              Yes and there is no evidence anything happened other than associating with her husband colleague.

              Wow, you missed the bit about Chinese officials and that she spent some time promoting her husbands business while acting as a minister?

              • Cancerman …
                18 June 2014 at 5:47 pm

                Wasn’t David Cunliffe a minister when this letter was written?

                • karol …
                  18 June 2014 at 6:06 pm

                  Sheesh – no Cunliffe wasn’t a minister at the time.

                  • Hayden …
                    18 June 2014 at 9:39 pm

                    And further, Donghua Liu wasn’t his husband.

                  • Cancerman …
                    18 June 2014 at 9:49 pm

                    He was a minister from 2002.

                    • lprent …
                      18 June 2014 at 9:56 pm

                      He was a minister from 2002.

                      Only if you are an uneducated idiot like yourself who is incapable of using google.

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cunliffe#Cabinet_minister
                      Associate Minister of Finance and Revenue also known as an apprentice from 2002-2005. He didn’t become a minister until after the 2005 election.

                      Incidentally that Cunliffe page still needs to be fixed up. Anyone here a known wikipedia editor. Parts of it are unreadable.

                    • Cancerman …
                      18 June 2014 at 10:15 pm

                      Minister of Communications and Information Technology. Uneducated idiot was it?

                    • lprent []
                      18 June 2014 at 10:45 pm

                      Yes you are an idiot and it is clear you can’t read accurately either.

                      Not the Minister for ICT then, from memory there was no such role at the time.
                      Spokesperson for ICT which is quite a different role and just in the party.

                      Ok here is a better list which may make it simplier for your poor stretched brain to grasp hold of.
                      (that wiki page is munted)

                      http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/mpp/mps/current/50MP30551/cunliffe-david
                      Hey I was wrong. He became a Minster of State (probably the current State Services) the following month after signing the letter for immigration. Again a bit of a training role as mostly it consists of the mandarins of the state services commission suggesting everything that the minister should do.

                      However for your training I have bolded that so you can identify it. I have also italicised the other past ministerial roles he has had. I hope these instructions aren’t too complex.

                      • Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Ministers of Finance, Commerce and Revenue: 15 August 2002 – 19 May 2003
                      • Minister of State: 19 May 2003 – 21 December 2004
                      • Associate Minister of Communications: 19 May 2003 – 21 December 2004
                      • Associate Minister of Finance: 19 May 2003 – 19 October 2005
                      • Associate Minister for Information Technology: 19 May 2003 – 21 December 2004
                      • Associate Minister of Revenue: 19 May 2003 – 19 October 2005
                      • Associate Minister for State Owned Enterprises: 21 December 2004 – 19 October 2005
                      • Minister of Communications: 21 December 2004 – 5 November 2008
                      • Minister for Information Technology: 21 December 2004 – 2 November 2007
                      • Associate Minister for Economic Development: 19 October 2005 – 5 November 2007
                      • Minister for Immigration: 19 October 2005 – 2 November 2007
                      • Minister of Health: 5 November 2007 – 18 November 2008
                      • Minister for Communications and Information Technology: 5 November 2007 – 18 November 2008

                      /sarc
                      Now wasn’t I nice to the poor intellectually challenged comedic straight man.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  18 June 2014 at 6:09 pm

                  Was he? I think had he been you’d be all over it like a Cabinet Club, and the fact that you’re asking the question instead merely demonstrates your bad faith.

            • Tracey 10.1.2.1.1.2
              18 June 2014 at 5:13 pm

              what about her misleading comments… popping in for a cuppa on way to airport. it was always a private dinner when docs show neither true.

              remember there is a cabinet manual holding her to

              “highest ethical standards”

            • Hayden 10.1.2.1.1.3
              18 June 2014 at 5:23 pm

              Did you miss the bit where she scheduled an event specifically to promote Oravida? And then lied about it?

              Look here:
              http://img.scoop.co.nz/media/pdfs/1405/020520141724330001.pdf (PDF)

              Go to page 83.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.2.2
          18 June 2014 at 4:42 pm

          So Cunliffe asking that “Lui” be provided with a timetable is the same as diverting Ministerial resources to benefit your party’s owner/donor who also happens to be your spouse.

          That’s some mighty fine false equivalence you’ve got going on there pardner. How about I offer you this pile of dogshit for it?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 10.2
      18 June 2014 at 4:25 pm

      Getting so desperate that you’re calling the election over already? 😆

    • Tracey 10.3
      18 June 2014 at 4:38 pm

      but the worse scenario has had no impact on nats. boggles the mind

    • ghostwhowalksnz 10.4
      18 June 2014 at 5:01 pm

      The dodgy donations line is absurd.

      Do we know who paid $50,000 for John Keys tie at an ‘auction’ at the Ocean City restaurant run by Pansy Wong in 2007.

      The amount doesnt appear in Nationals donation list at the time but would have have been washed through Nationals Waitemata Trust which did donate a large sum.

      As the use of Trusts and trust funds at the time was legal, there isnt anything dodgy, unless you want to look at all parties auctions of inconsequential items for ridiculous items

    • McFlock 10.5
      18 June 2014 at 5:33 pm

      You’re a tory.
      Of course you don’t think right or wrong matter.

      Frankly this beat up is just another case of praising with faint damnation.
      Was Barker travelling on the government dime to appear in advertising for a company his partner is a director of? Is that the best you moral-illiterates have?

  11. Tangled_up 11
    18 June 2014 at 4:19 pm

    The agenda based dishonesty around this is quite disappointing. It’s obvious to anyone looking at this objectively that this is a simple case of forgetting something trivial from 11 years ago. But no, it’s election year so let’s jump on the media train all the while knowing very well it’s a beat up.

  12. Rosie 12
    18 June 2014 at 4:23 pm

    In reference to this pathetically desperate manufactured non scandal, karol on Open Mike suggested it was a “storm in a tea cup”. Further on, Dimebag Russell says “pffftt, tomorrows fish and chip paper” (or words to that effect).

    I couldn’t agree more with that sentiment.

    How anyone could read any expression of advocacy into that letter is unbelievable, and ultimately makes them look like an idiot for doing so. If common sense prevailed such drama queen outrage should turn right back on them.

    Aside: David Cunliffe looks vaguely Kennedy-esque in that old photo on the letterhead.

  13. North 13
    18 June 2014 at 4:25 pm

    This effort by fool Armstrong makes it official. Armstrong…….the shameless shill-supreme for the National Party. Has he no conscience ? This needs the sternest response from Cunliffe personally with Armstrong personally called out and lambasted for the Tory propagandist bastard he is. It is utterly outrageous.

    Come along Brian Edwards. Can you pull yourself out of your dotage…….extricate yourself from your tight social embrace with bestie Boag…….call this shit for what it is ? No ? Too busy being a fucking matron along the waterfront ? Prove me wrong.

    • Anne 13.1
      18 June 2014 at 4:36 pm

      This needs the sternest response from Cunliffe…

      +1

    • ghostwhowalksnz 13.2
      18 June 2014 at 4:52 pm

      He has to out shrill the blogs, as its a National Party-NZ Herald joint production.

      Whats amusing is that Armstrong normally doesnt write stuff about the parliamentary fray, he waits a day or two to give his pieces a considered air.

      • karol 13.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:15 pm

        And now Tova O’Brien is joining the – will he resign? brigade. How much longer to we have to put up with all these Nat-supporting bunch of hive-mind journos?

    • phillip ure 13.3
      18 June 2014 at 5:31 pm

      i think armstrong can be deemed to have officially jumped the shark..with this one

      ..and edwards-the-elder did that predator-jump years and years ago..

    • gnomic 13.4
      18 June 2014 at 8:28 pm

      While the coupling of Brian and Boag is not a pretty sight, doesn’t the old buffer have something of a hospital pass at present, since his significant other has been ill? Anyway someone who refers to Boag as a ‘colleague’ has surely long since given up tilting at windmills. It will take much more than a few sardonic remarks from BE to bring Labour to power.

    • ffloyd 13.5
      18 June 2014 at 9:07 pm

      Had the feeling Armstrong had his stuff ready to go. Forewarned?

  14. infused 14
    18 June 2014 at 4:30 pm

    Fake letter. Cunliffe is smiling.

  15. Ad 15
    18 June 2014 at 4:39 pm

    I have known Cunliffe since before he was elected, and he is nothing if not a straight guy with huge care for good process. I am fully prepared to back him.

    • SpaceMonkey 15.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:25 pm

      I don’t know Cunliffe but I’d back him too. I can’t take this attempt at smearing him seriously. It is so lame, it has to be a joke. Especially the satire from John Armstrong about Cunliffe resigning! Haha! And did I read somebody claiming the ABC crowd having something to do with it? Good grief.

      Though as far as laugh-out-loud moments go in politics… it’s still not as good as Key’s WMDs claim. And conveniently, Key is out of town… so there’s physical separation for him. None of this crap will be sticking to him. Unreal.

      • anker 15.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:53 pm

        @AD 15 I don’t know Cunliffe either, but he has my 100% support. He has had nothing but crap from the media and I note on 6pm news ABC interviewed and didn’t give unconditional support.

        This will be a sad day if the caucus vote him out. Mana-interent may get my vote if that happens.

        You have to wonder about the timing of it with two days left before Caucus can no longer mount a coup.

  16. john 16
    18 June 2014 at 4:41 pm

    LPrest says “In any event there is no element of advocacy in it.”

    Only the totally naive and gullible would think a letter from and MP asking how long an immigration case would take, is not advocacy.

    If he is not trying to help Liu, then there is absolutely no point at all, in bothering to write the letter.

    Which misses the point anyway.

    It’s not a big deal that he helped Liu, or even that he lied or forgot about it.

    That would be no big deal, except for the fact that he’s been highly critical of others for doing the same thing.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 16.1
      18 June 2014 at 4:44 pm

      What same thing ? Writing letters or calling the police to manipulate the prosecution process ?

      • Colonial Viper 16.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 4:47 pm

        I think john means organising Ministerial meetings to help out with your partner’s business affairs in China.

      • Tracey 16.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 4:53 pm

        he means lying is not the problem the problem is pointing out other peoples lies when slater is a friend of one of the most recent liars

    • Ross 16.2
      18 June 2014 at 4:48 pm

      John

      You couldn’t be more wrong. Williamson resigned because he phoned police (about Liu) during a police investigation into Liu. That’s a no-no whatever your political hue. Then there’s Judith Collins promoting products sold by her hubby’s company. That’s a sackable offence and Collins should be gone.

      How you can compare Cunliffe with Collins or Williamson defies credibility.

      • Tracey 16.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 4:54 pm

        and liu was not in williamsons electorate was charged with violence on two women

    • One Anonymous Bloke 16.3
      18 June 2014 at 4:50 pm

      Because intervening in a police investigation is the same as doing your job as a local MP. Are you so stupid you can’t recognise how your gullibility opens all MPs and Cabinet Club members for the same treatment?

      You managed a comment earlier that avoided copying lines you’d been spoonfed, but I see you’ve reverted to type. The scum always floats on top, John.

  17. politikiwi 17
    18 June 2014 at 4:58 pm

    This isn’t a big deal (as lprent has so eloquently pointed out), but in the end it will probably mean another three years of National.

    sigh

    • srylands 17.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:00 pm

      “This isn’t a big deal”

      Yes well neither was the whole Judith Collins Chinese dinner thing. You reap what you sow buddy.

      • Colonial Viper 17.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:05 pm

        Setting up a Ministerial meeting to further your partner’s business in China is certainly a big deal. Didn’t see anyone asking Collins to resign though.

      • ghostwhowalksnz 17.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 5:05 pm

        The taxpayers were paying for her official trip, with her entourage. Her husband was a director of the company.

        Pansy Wong was booted from parliament for exactly the same thing

      • Tracey 17.1.3
        18 June 2014 at 5:17 pm

        someone needs the parking arm manually raise slylands. off you pop

  18. srylands 18
    18 June 2014 at 4:58 pm

    Philip Jackson posted this on the 3 news site. It is very funny.

    “Over $1m has been donated to the Mental Health Foundation to help cope with the expected influx of Left-leaning voters on September 21st after the Labour Party fails yet again to gain power.”

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Cunliffes-links-to-Liu/tabid/1607/articleID/349129/Default.aspx

    • ghostwhowalksnz 18.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:03 pm

      Dont you think Labour has dirt to dish on National between now and the eelction ?

      Watch this space

      • Colonial Viper 18.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:07 pm

        Yeah but that’s Thorndon Bubble thinking

        Dishing out dirt is the very last thing voters want to see from Labour, and if Labour heads down that track it will be falling for the REAL trap set by this National stunt.

        Where is the narrative around how Labour is going to change the nation???

        • Dave_1924 18.1.1.1
          19 June 2014 at 7:28 am

          I agree with you on this CV – voters are getting very tired of mud slinging.

          I would like to see Labour’s vision on where they want to take the Nation. And I would like to see it based on the founding message of the party – A Fair Day’s Pay for a Fair Days Work. That actually might get traction at the polls BUT only if its presented in a smart way.

          Cunliffe has appeared incompetent in this instance not because he advocated, in a very subtle way, for a constituent or potential constituent – But because he was so categorical in denying any knowledge. The Press Pack lead him and he wandered in without thinking.

          Clark would have seen that coming a mile off and avoided with a simple “my electoral office dealings with these routine matters every day, and I don’t have specific knowledge about this case. I’ll check and get back to you” Issue avoided – Time to move on….

          Raises questions of whether he can truly be in control and lead

          [And yes I have taken some delight in this incident on this site and others… purely because its biter bit for me.]

      • TheContrarian 18.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 9:12 pm

        “Dont you think Labour has dirt to dish on National between now and the eelction ?”

        Yeah but it is only dirty tricks when National do it. Otherwise, it’s it is a mix of JAQing off and Labour calling National.

        Come on, don’t be so naive – Labour and National have the same playbook.

    • TeWhareWhero 18.2
      18 June 2014 at 9:19 pm

      You’re easily amused.

  19. john 19
    18 June 2014 at 5:06 pm

    Cunliffe has been critical of people helping Liu, but we then find out he did so himself.

    Cunliffe has been critical of donations from Liu, but we then find out Labour took big donations from him too.

    Cunliffe has been critical of people for being wealthy, but he is wealthy.

    Cunliffe has been critical of coat tailing, but will work with Internet Mana if it makes him Prime Minister.

    Cunliffe has been critical of donations from lobbyists, but take them from lobbying unions.

    Cunliffe has been critical of memory loss, but he (like everyone) has it from time to time.

    Cunliffe has been critical of anonymous donations and secret trusts, WHILE running a secret trust to hide donations.

    If he’s going to be critical about something, he needs to make sure he’s not doing anything similar.

    • Cancerman 19.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:12 pm

      john’s post above post nails it and is how the ereral public are increasingly seeing David Cunliffe.

      1.- A Hypocrite – which everyone hates
      2. – So dumb that he attacks people for what he equally has done.

      Case closed. Will be interesting to see the next polls on him. Margin of error anyone?

      • john 19.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:30 pm

        Cunliffe comes across as aloof, arrogant, and hypocritical, which significantly weakens everything he says.

        He’s not a person the general public can picture as their PM, hence lower ratings for preferred PM than David Shearer who he replaced.

        Above, Ad says he’s a straight up guy – the problem is he doesn’t come across that way.

        Which is an issue for politicians. There’s a few I’ve disliked strongly from what I’ve seen of them, but in person they turned out to be really nice people and quite unlike their public persona.

        David Shearer seems really nice, but as leader came across as a continually angry man who had to make up complaints about everything.

        Phil Goff was an excellent and very capable foreign minister, but came across as very weak when leader (like Bill English).

        Cunliffe will never be the next left leaning PM. Labour need to find someone the public can believe in.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 19.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 5:44 pm

          John, a partisan hack, parrots mouldy rote-learned attack lines. Looks feeble, then whines like a cry-baby when treated with ridicule and contempt

        • ffloyd 19.1.1.2
          18 June 2014 at 9:15 pm

          Your Dictaphone skills are awesome!

      • lprent 19.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 9:01 pm

        Will be interesting to see the next polls on him. Margin of error anyone?

        Why would you think that personal popularity polls have any effect? All the evidence shows that they are meaningless.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 19.2
      18 June 2014 at 5:17 pm

      And still John relies on other people to write his lines for him, then runs away and avoids debate on the false assertions he squawks like a deluded parrot.

      A trust that is declared isn’t secret, by definition, you fucking idiot.

      Criticising people for pulling up the ladder is not criticism of wealth, fool.

      Asking questions for a constituent is not the same as trying to get a donor off charges, you partisan hack.

      Polly wanna cracker?

      • Once was Pete 19.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:24 pm

        I don’t know about others, but I might take more notice of some of your utterances if you weren’t so abusive. It just makes you look like a real angry plonker.

        • Colonial Viper 19.2.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 5:26 pm

          Fuck that, that’s MY role on The Standard 😈

        • McFlock 19.2.1.2
          18 June 2014 at 5:40 pm

          Personally I take more notice of the utterances of OAB than I do of the stercusian eructations of the unregenerate moron to whom he addressed his comment.

          • Once was Pete 19.2.1.2.1
            18 June 2014 at 6:26 pm

            Abuse is still abuse. I t lowers the tone and the standard of discussion.

            • Lanthanide 19.2.1.2.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 6:34 pm

              Depends if it’s warranted or not.

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                18 June 2014 at 6:43 pm

                I’m ambivalent. on the one hand it can be off-putting and counter-productive, on the other hand it can add an emotional hook to rational arguments, in this case rebuttals of well-rehearsed lines. This isn’t done for the Johns’ benefit.

                Still, thanks for the crit owP.

          • lprent 19.2.1.2.2
            18 June 2014 at 8:52 pm

            “stercusian eructations”

            Nice. I had to look the first one up AND figure out the latin suffix (it has been nearly 40 years since I did latin)

        • One Anonymous Bloke 19.2.1.3
          18 June 2014 at 5:49 pm

          OWP, you sensitive wee sausage.

        • Lanthanide 19.2.1.4
          18 June 2014 at 6:33 pm

          I find OAB’s abusiveness a little more frequent than is my liking, but I find it doesn’t detract from his comments. I can’t say the same about others here who have been more abusive/pointless.

      • Anne 19.2.2
        18 June 2014 at 6:18 pm

        For Christ’s sake ignore the neanderthal called john. He winds you all up and you can’t wait to oblige him by responding.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 19.2.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:22 pm

          Anne, it’s never too late to refine succinct rebuttals to the attack lines that will be regurgitated on social media in the weeks to come before the Johns get their new script.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 19.3
      18 June 2014 at 5:18 pm

      Did you type that all yourself ?

      It all ways shows when you make stuff up its a cut and paste

  20. Dumrse 20
    18 June 2014 at 5:14 pm

    David remembers Mr Lui very well and he wrote the letter so as not to jeopardise the $15K donation. He denied it all safe in the knowledge that there was an office agreement that there would be no file copies of the letter given the link to the $’s. However, he didn’t bank on an OIA request years down track. It’s a croc and it’s beginning to stink. Time to go David.

    And hanging up on Larry Williams interview ……. WTF is that about? The next question was just a patsy……..

    On on. Go David go.

    [lprent: A donation made in 2007 being jeopardised in 2003? Oh that is a just inane. Banned for 2 weeks for stupid trolling. I have already left notes on your later silliness. ]

    • ghostwhowalksnz 20.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:23 pm

      How silly , the $15000 bottle of wine was around 2007, same time National got $50,000 for John Keys tie from ‘who knows?’

      This letter is 2003.

      And unlike you, I have met Mr Liu, he is not particularly memorable. Cunliffe hasnt met him either

    • wtl 20.2
      18 June 2014 at 5:25 pm

      The donation came several years after the letter was written so your comment makes absolutely no sense .

      • SETI 20.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:52 pm

        Late payment for services rendered. No wonder they don’t want to know him. Four years to pay his debt.

    • Anne 20.3
      18 June 2014 at 7:06 pm

      Oh good news!! He hung up on f–wit Larry Williams – the most loud mouthed, ignorant and boorish ZB radio host of all time!!

  21. dimebag russell 21
    18 June 2014 at 5:19 pm

    fuck off yourself.
    what have you ever done dumshit.
    nothing except mouth off.

  22. karol 22
    18 June 2014 at 5:19 pm

    Great post, Lynn.

    I am disgusted about how the media is treating this – allowing the right wing smear merchants to spin, spin, spin….

    And all it really shows is how desperate Team key is to divert from more pressing issues.

    Slippery Key and his team use tricky methods to paint Cunliffe as the untrustworthy one.

    This government truly is the Ministry of (fabricated) Truth.

    • Dumrse 22.1
      18 June 2014 at 7:33 pm

      I’m not sure National or the Govt did this as there does not seem to be too much evidence of their participation. On the contrary it has David’s foot prints and DNA all over it.

      [lprent: Perhaps you’d care to explain your logic. Because that has all of the hallmarks of being a mindless astroturf slogan – which I don’t tolerate. Adding you to auto moderation to test that theory. ]

  23. Once was Pete 23
    18 June 2014 at 5:21 pm

    Sorry, but I can’t agree with this. If you are going to hold someone else to a standard (i.e. National) then you can expect to be held to the same standard yourself. Yes it was 11 years ago, but Liu is not a run of the mill electorate enquiry. He is a an immensely wealthy multi, multi millionaire who also contributed to Labour’s fund raising (as well as National’s). If that is not memorable, then I am not sure what is.
    I thought Williamson on balance probably should have resigned. I haven’t decided in my own mind if Cunliffe should resign, but you can’t fudge this- it is another serious gaffe. What it does show is that both Labour and National are probably equally grubby. Certainly, there is no moral high ground that Labour is able to take now (if there ever was).
    This is probably going to get much worse.

    • wtl 23.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:27 pm

      He is a an immensely wealthy multi, multi millionaire who also contributed to Labour’s fund raising (as well as National’s). If that is not memorable, then I am not sure what is.

      The donation to Labour came in 2007. The letter was written at 2003. Therefore, your comment would indicate that Liu would be memorable to Cunliffe because he can remember the future.

      • phillip ure 23.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:50 pm

        maybe ‘pete’..thinks cunnliffe can time-travel..?

        ..can forsee the future..

        ..what a numpty..!..heh..!

        • Once was Pete 23.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:23 pm

          You really should lay off the wacky backy a bit Phil, and really try and connect events. See response to wtl.

      • Once was Pete 23.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 6:21 pm

        No that doesn’t follow at all. The important event took place yesterday when David Cunliffe said he didn’t remember. In 2007 when the donation was made he should have connected with his 2003 letter of support. I repeat that writing a letter of a multi, multi is totally memorable regardless of how many for letters are written. Once he became a donor that should have reinforced that memory. But as I said, yes it was a long time ago, but nevertheless, it is a real stuff up.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 23.1.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:23 pm

          Um, Mr. Lui, remember?

        • Lanthanide 23.1.2.2
          18 June 2014 at 6:38 pm

          Cunliffe was a minister / electorate MP in 2007. Not party leader. Not party president. It was not his job in 2007 to know who was donating what.

        • lprent 23.1.2.3
          18 June 2014 at 8:43 pm

          I repeat that writing a letter of a multi, multi is totally memorable regardless of how many for letters are written.

          Huh? You are dreaming

          To a back-bench electorate MP with a active electorate organisation they aren’t. You’re extremely limited (<= $20k)in what you are allowed to spend in the electorate. The money is nowhere as important as getting good volunteers.

          Electorate MPs who get to ministerial level and are looking at getting the party ready for the next election are more interested. Even then they usually just pass the name on to the fundraiser people.

        • wtl 23.1.2.4
          18 June 2014 at 9:40 pm

          I repeat that writing a letter of a multi, multi is totally memorable regardless of how many for letters are written.

          Actually no. It would only be memorable if (1) Cunliffe knew that Liu was a “multi multi” at the time of writing the letter – there isn’t even any real evidence that the two met, as the request could have been handled by a staff member and (2) Cunliffe actually cared that Liu was a “multi multi”. Sure it is memorable for a typical Tory who only cares about $$$$ but it is not uncommon for normal people to view others as just people, regardless of how much their net worth is.

      • ffloyd 23.1.3
        18 June 2014 at 9:21 pm

        Lol!

  24. DH 24
    18 June 2014 at 5:33 pm

    I think it’s time we learnt just what it is some people have against David Cunliffe. There’s malice in their writing that’s palpable, it’s more than mere politics here. I’ve yet to read or hear anything about him that would justify the level of spite directed at him.

    I’ve never met the man and I have seen no reason to actively like or dislike him. What I have seen is a concerted effort to discredit Mr Cunliffe in the public eye and it is puzzling not to mention disconcerting.

    • McFlock 24.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:44 pm

      He’s a Labour Party leader.

      That’s enough for the bulk of it.

    • Tat Loo 24.2
      18 June 2014 at 6:31 pm

      I’ve met David Cunliffe several times, sat down with him for food and drink. He is a top guy, smart, personable and will make an outstanding PM, taking NZ from strength to strength.

      And the Right are fucking scared as to what that means for their BS sell out agenda.

      • Chooky 24.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:37 pm

        +100

      • karol 24.2.2
        18 June 2014 at 6:41 pm

        Exactly.

      • mickysavage 24.2.3
        18 June 2014 at 7:25 pm

        Agreed. They are so belligerent because they are so afraid …

      • Dumrse 24.2.4
        18 June 2014 at 7:41 pm

        You should stop pissing in his pocket, it makes you look like a wannabe politician.

        [lprent: Perhaps you should work on your insults. They are pretty humourless and rather piss-poor. We do expect a better standard. ]

        • Anne 24.2.4.1
          18 June 2014 at 7:48 pm

          I’m taking offence at this dumb ass called dumrse. Is that good enough for a ban?

          [lprent: No. However I take offense at him violating one of our policies it becomes a different matter. ]

    • Lanthanide 24.3
      18 June 2014 at 6:40 pm

      “I’ve yet to read or hear anything about him that would justify the level of spite directed at him.”

      He’s a competent politician who could admirably lead the country as PM and win the election, something Shearer never looked like he could do and what Phil Goff didn’t manage (personally I think if he’d stayed on, he could have).

      • Tat Loo 24.3.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:43 pm

        Agreed. I think Goff went too early as well.

        • felix 24.3.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 8:08 pm

          Yep and I said so at the time. I thought we’d learned from Graeme Henry not to change the coach after every world cup.

    • ffloyd 24.4
      18 June 2014 at 9:39 pm

      It’s exactly why they did to Shearer. They have no policies except Labour’s , key is looking bit worse for wear. All they have is key’s obsession to stay in power which his band of Incredible Invertebrates seem to embrace with mindless gusto, so all they can do is destroy the opposition with whatever means they have at their disposal, and key is in the perfect position to supply them with the ammo they need. Just look at how quickly Armstrong came out with his column stating that DC should resign. Fortunately for key (I never cut and run ) he was fortuitously out of the country, as is so often the case when big hits are let loose on Labour. Intriguing that the herald have printed everything out of context, in BIG headlines, LARGE photos of buyers accepting their auction wines which they have won. Nz herald is the lowest of the low. Even I can see what they are doing. Best thing to do with a boil is lance it. Imagine the pus that would come out of the herald.

  25. SpaceMonkey 25
    18 June 2014 at 5:35 pm

    Going to have to skip the 3 News tonight… the thought of Patrick Gower’s mug salivating over the story…

  26. bad12 26
    18 June 2014 at 5:35 pm

    Agree with LPrent’s on what goes on in the electorate offices of MP’s, there’s a couple of levels of people who work in them, the volunteers who take the appointments, answer the phones and then there’s the MP ‘and’ usually the MP’s private secretary,

    Anyone having a good look will realize that on a a busy day in the electoral office, mostly the MP has only the one part day to attend to stuff there, it is pot luck whether you get to commune with the MP or the Private Secretary,

    The letter signed by David Cunliffe would have been one of hundreds typed up for Him to sign on any given day and was probably in a pile that the secretary would have simply put in front of Him saying these are immigration matters, the next pile would have been local DHB matters and the next Housing matters, and on it would go,

    If Immigration were to have to produce a list of such letters there would be 10’s of 1000’s of them signed by 100’s of MP’s from across all parties in the Parliament,

    Of course National are going to unleash the tame press on the issue, i haven’t even bothered reading that old cadaver Armstrong’s piece in the Herald yet, i much prefer to muse on what it is exactly that keeps that piece of the walking dead from expiring in the half belief that He already has and a team of Herald ‘ghost’ writers have filled the position,

    Of course i have also having a quiet chuckle up my sleeve over the bites upon the bum being experienced by the politicians over the ”buy your way into New Zealand immigration policy” that has been favored by both major parties,

    Having failed to find on the ”most needed” categories for immigrants one where the description is ”corrupt arsehole” or ”corrupt arsehole who is bound to spread such corruption around” i am still amazed at just who our ”leaders” managed to let into the place…

    • Wayne 26.1
      18 June 2014 at 8:46 pm

      “Hundreds of letters any given day”. I don’t believe that. In fact David Cunliffe said 1200 letters on immigration over the last 12 years. Thats pretty much what I would expect. It is about 2 or 3 a week.

      And Lprent, they are not “form letters”, they are individual. They may follow a format, but MP’s are not dealing with so many immigration matters that it is all reduced to form filling.

      The problem here is less the forgetting, though it is not a good look just a day after the denials. As John Campbell pointed out tonight, it being seen to do much the same thing as the Nats after being so hypercritical about it.

      I must say when Labour was going on about donations etc a couple of months ago, I thought then that it was high risk strategy, given that I was pretty certain that Labour had been in much the same space (and I did post on that at the time). I put it down to desperation to lift the poll ratings.

      Over the years, the major parties have been a bit careful not to go on about each others donations too much, mostly because of the obvious risks of an own goal. In contrast the use and misuse of taxpayer funds through Parliamentary Services has been something of a free fire zone!

      • bad12 26.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:13 pm

        You can tho read right Wayne???, i am only inquiring about your skills at such to be sure it must be your skills in comprehension that are sadly lacking,

        It’s pretty much as i would expect of one of your ilk of course, having smelt what you believe to be blood you can’t have people not knee-jerking all across the floor with logical explanations of what is involved in a busy MP’s working day can you,

        Go back and have a re-read Wayne, at no time do i suggest that the 100’s of letters signed would have all been on immigration matters, far from it, i also point out that in the letter signing orgy would be letters on other matters, too many to mention i would suggest,

        i would suggest to you that a busy MP at best would speed read the gist of such letters befor signing them without bothering to look at who the letter pertained too,

        Doesn’t suit your little tale tho does it Wayne and you of all people know full well what LPrent is referring to when he writes ‘form letter’, it is a style of talking to a Government department where that department is fully aware that the MP is not trying to interfere in the day to day operations,

        Much the same form of letter would have been typed and sent to Immigration by MP’s secretaries from all the parties right across the political spectrum,

        You KNOW this yet here you are tonight spreading weasel words…

        • Wayne 26.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 9:24 pm

          The number of letters was not really the main point I was making. More in the final three paragraphs of the post..

          • bad12 26.1.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 9:32 pm

            Another dancer from pinhead to pinhead, is there a school somewhere that teaches you lot this as a debating tactic or does it come as part of the ‘Wing-nut’…

            • One Anonymous Bloke 26.1.1.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 8:36 am

              Well it’s a step to the right, and then a leap to the right,
              With your hands on your eyes,
              And your brain wound tight,
              Massive inequality,
              That drives you insane,
              Don’t do the Wingnut again.

      • Anne 26.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 9:30 pm

        Wayne, you’re as much a liar as John Key, Bill English and the the 3rd rate journos and reporters spreading this slander.

        An agent (probably) approaches David Cunliffe’s office 12 years ago. His electorate secretary handles the case as you know only too well would have happened because that’s what they are employed to do. Cunliffe signs the letter – along with a dozen or so other letters handed to him for a signature – 12 years ago. He doesn’t meet with Liu and probably never met the agent. Remember dear boy, Liu can’t speak a word of English so he definitely wouldn’t have handled the matter himself. And you jump on the band-wagon and attempt to infer that the revelation is equivalent to Banks, Williamson and Collins – because in reality that is exactly what you are inferring.

        And we know now it came out of Key’s top drawer courtesy of sleazy Cameron Slater and his band of bandits and thieves.

        So don’t bother to come on the high and mighty principled former National Party cabinet minister to us again.

        • Wayne 26.1.2.1
          19 June 2014 at 8:24 am

          Anne, you are missing my point.

          It is less about the facts of this particular case, and more about the general risk of the strategy. For either of the two major parties to attack the other side on donations is highly likely to blow back. After all they both get donations from all sorts of people.

          But for that person to be Donghua Liu was particularly embarrassing.

          Actually the whole fiasco demonstrates exactly your point, and those of several other posters. Much better to have the political debate on actual policy that affects New Zealanders.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 26.1.2.1.1
            19 June 2014 at 8:34 am

            So where are the National Party’s detailed policy proposals, Dr. Mapp? You remember I asked you to show us the “manifesto” you referred to recently?

            Your silence on the matter is revealing.

            • Colonial Viper 26.1.2.1.1.1
              19 June 2014 at 8:43 am

              Wayne is right though. Nothing puts off voters in an election year more than trying to win a campaign on mud slinging. And the NATs always pull it off better, partly because they have the MSM heavy artillery on side.

              Labour wins elections by winning hearts and minds, and by putting out gutsy, game changing policies and advocating for them unashamedly. (Left wing policies, in case I need to be clear, not right wing ones like raising the retirement age).

              It’s not been happening. The Christchurch Earthquake Insurance Court, that was an OK policy. 6/10. But those need to be coming out twice per week, speaking to different sectors of society individually, but as a whole the pattern will weave a complete narrative in the mind of the prospective left wing voter.

              • Colonial Viper …
                19 June 2014 at 8:52 am

                As a Leader, Cunliffe has to let his best come across in every media opportunity: determined, able, fiery when needed, always with a touch of humour and grounded earthiness. Speak directly to your own supporters not to those firmly in John Key’s camp!!!

                And healthy additional doses of soft media please.

          • Anne 26.1.2.1.2
            19 June 2014 at 8:52 am

            Oh no, Wayne, I’m not missing the point!

            Cunliffe and others were correct to strongly criticise Judith Collins, Maurice Williamson and John Banks for duplicitous behaviour and for their attempts to conceal their illicit and/or unlawful practices from the general public.

            David Cunliffe was set up by a bunch of lying, arseholes (of whom John Key is one) to paint a false picture of an indiscretion that never actually occurred. They are aided and abetted by an equally sleazy bunch of National Party acolytes and low grade gossip columnists who masquerade as journos and reporters.

            No Labour leader has had to put up with such a constant barrage of false accusations, distortions of the truth, and deliberate attempts to destroy them in such a mendacious and vindictive way.

            You and your fellow Tories think its Kosher to behave like that? It shows how low you are all prepared to go for personal political gain.

            Now I must fly…

  27. chris73 27
    18 June 2014 at 5:40 pm

    Theres some good polls on stuff if anyones interested:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10173411/David-Cunliffes-catastrophes

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/10172715/David-Cunliffe-advocated-for-Donghua-Liu

    I’m in two minds here, on the one hand Cunliffe resigning would be a coup for National but on the other we can have Labour on the back foot spending all their time defending the undefendable and less on policies

    Decisions decisions

    • karol 27.1
      18 June 2014 at 5:50 pm

      Resigning! What a joker. If Cunliffe should resign over this non-event, Collins and Key should have resigned long ago.

      Nats-WO-MSM linked smear machine working well, though. History will not be kind to that lot.

      • chris73 27.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 5:56 pm

        “If Cunliffe should resign over this non-event, Collins and Key should have resigned long ago.”

        • This isn’t a case of “ohh look teacher see what Judith and Johnny are doing” much as Labour would like it to be the perception is that Cunliffes either incompetent or a hypocrite

        Nats-WO-MSM linked smear machine working well, though. History will not be kind to that lot.

        • Its true National are better at it then Labour are but thats something for Labour to sort out
        • karol 27.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:09 pm

          Ummm.. actually, precedents count. What exactly is a resigning offence?
          And thanks for acknowledging the Nats are the leaders in dirty tricks.

          • chris73 27.1.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 6:12 pm

            Personally I don’t think he did anything wrong but the perception is hes a hypocrite so in my always humble opinion I think he should stay

            It’ll make the election a lot more interesting and amusing

            • karol 27.1.1.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 6:17 pm

              If the perception is that he’s a hypocrite, it’s because of the totally slanted reporting by a handful on MSM journos.

              • chris73 …
                18 June 2014 at 6:20 pm

                It doesn’t matter why or who it only matters that it is

                Something you on the left just don’t seem to grasp

                • felix …
                  18 June 2014 at 8:16 pm

                  Startling admissions from you today chris, re- your approval of dishonesty, smearing etc.

                  Perhaps the most interesting though is the one in the subtext: You and your boss are utterly shit-scared of Cunliffe.

                • emergency mike …
                  18 June 2014 at 9:31 pm

                  “It doesn’t matter why or who it only matters that it is

                  Something you on the left just don’t seem to grasp”

                  Which sums up the ethos of the psychopath: perception is reality.

                  It’s not that we don’t grasp it chris, it’s more that we are just not that good at being ruthless underhanded lying bastards. I think thats because we aren’t ruthless underhanded lying bastards.

                  And it might not matter to you me old witting or unwitting sock-puppet, but to some of us it does matter that this ancient history is being dredged up by cynical propaganda professionals when perhaps we have actual issues that affect actual people right now that we could be focused on in this election.

                  You seem to think that the election result is all that ‘matters’. That the right team wins, your team. So sit back and have a brew and be oh so amused if you like, but there are those of us who do give a fuck about the state our democracy. I wonder if that’s something you’re able to grasp.

          • ffloyd 27.1.1.1.2
            18 June 2014 at 9:43 pm

            Yay!

    • bad12 27.2
      18 June 2014 at 5:55 pm

      Lucky you chris73 the only real decision that you need make is whether to try gloves or sticky tape in an effort to not spread significant amounts of your DNA on the pavement when you attempt perambulation,

      A letter in 2003,
      A donation in 2007,

      You would spend many a long month joining the dots in between i would suggest…

      • chris73 27.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:01 pm

        Its not what hes done its what hes perceived to have done but don’t worry you’ll understand what it means when Nationals returned to power at the next election

        • Tat Loo 27.2.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:08 pm

          I see you’re working hard on building up the “perception”

          • chris73 27.2.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 6:23 pm

            Sure just like the left want to build up a perception of John Key the right want to build up a perception of Cunliffe, I just didn’t think Cunliffe would make it quite so easy

  28. James 28
    18 June 2014 at 6:03 pm

    Reading on twitter and some blogs there is a lot more to come out on this.

    I’m guessing none of it good for Labour and cunners.

  29. dimebag russell 29
    18 June 2014 at 6:03 pm

    shut up you moran.
    it was 2003 and a form letter from his staff.
    blowing it up is just typical national party flatulence

  30. fisiani 30
    18 June 2014 at 6:04 pm

    Tricky Tricky Tricky. He can run but he cannot hide. He can be rolled in just two days. Tick tock.
    Andrew Little needs to be in the top ten to get back in. Robertson wants the leadership in September. Little as place holder till September then Robertson after the defeat.

    • chris73 30.1
      18 June 2014 at 6:09 pm

      Wouldn’t it be better if Cunliffe stayed though, he and Labour would have to spend their time defending themselves rather then talking policy…

    • Rosie 30.2
      18 June 2014 at 6:13 pm

      🙄

    • john 30.3
      18 June 2014 at 6:25 pm

      The question is the timing of the hospital pass from Cunliffe.

      Should Robertson or Little accept it now, or after the election.

      And will Labour get more votes with Cunliffe gone than with him there?

      • chris73 30.3.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:35 pm

        I’d wait because you arn’t going to win and when you lose you’ll be turfed out so better to wait until after the election

    • Tautoko Viper 30.4
      18 June 2014 at 6:36 pm

      Dream on, Fizzi. The public will see this for what it is- a frantic beat-up by National and it will be forgotten by next week. Younger voters don’t even watch TV and this will pass them by. On a scale compared to John Key’s brain fades, this doesn’t even register. The louder the Tories howl, the more desperate they sound. LPrent has it right…”is that it?”

  31. Tat Loo 31
    18 June 2014 at 6:06 pm

    It’s time for key Labour caucus members to publicly back David Cunliffe on this issue

    Just witnessed a Facebook exchange between a friend of mine asking whether or not the ABCs are involved in today’s attacks on Cunliffe, and seeing 2 experienced Labour MPs respond quite unsatisfactorily.

    It’s high time that Labour’s senior front bench MPs step up to the camera and publicly back their Leader on this matter. What has taken them so long. That is, if they are united in wanting Labour to win this election.

    And that includes any and all of David Parker, Grant Robertson, Annette King and Jacinda Ardern.

    • Olwyn 31.1
      18 June 2014 at 6:34 pm

      +1000

    • Anne 31.2
      18 June 2014 at 6:35 pm

      Annette King did OK Tat. When approached by the TV reporter (early this afternoon) she hissed at them and walked away in obvious disgust. Said it all really but nobody took a blind bit of notice.

      God I hate those bastard reporters. They support the liars and cheats because they think there’s something in it for them. Most of them have never heard of the words honesty, decency and integrity. Cunliffe is all three and I hope he will never change.

      • chris73 31.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:39 pm

        King did exactly right by laughing it off as something silly but I thought Mallard showed his true colours, I’m biased because I think hes a horses ass but what did you think

      • Tat Loo 31.2.2
        18 June 2014 at 6:40 pm

        Glad to hear it Anne.

        I want to see that caucus explicitly back Cunliffe 100%, and then show it by getting back on the road to election day advocating for unequivocal change in our society.

        Show the MSM up for what it is – drama queens and gossip columnists.

        • karol 31.2.2.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:44 pm

          Well, if anything, this beat up has convinced me to get out there and do more volunteering – for the Greens, for a change of government.

          I’ve had enough of the dirty tricks of the born-to-rulers.

        • chris73 31.2.2.2
          18 June 2014 at 6:59 pm

          I want a full head of hair but I suspect thats more of a possibility then what you want

        • geoff 31.2.2.3
          18 June 2014 at 9:14 pm

          I don’t think the abc would be silly enough to try anything before or after the election (if the left lose), they’d get shat on by the unions and membership.

  32. Rosie 32
    18 June 2014 at 6:12 pm

    And how f’n typical is that of 3 News to show their allegiances to the Nat Govt! Tonight, a classic beat up that the 3 News crew followed hook line and sinker, and repeated like puppets

    Last night, the Kiwisaver policy relegated to the bottom of the news.

    Hows your bias there 3 News? Hopefully Campbell Live will demonstrate more professionalism and balance tonight when he interviews David Cunliffe.

    • karol 32.1
      18 June 2014 at 6:18 pm

      Yes, the whole beat up of questioning whether Cunliffe is about to be rolled – unbelievable!

      • chris73 32.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:25 pm

        Mallard wasn’t backing him when asked so its a fair question

        • karol 32.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:27 pm

          Well, if it’s the return of the ABCs, that’s a sad thing – for them to be so treacherous, and putting the future of the country at stake – it’s beyond my understanding.

          • Tat Loo 32.1.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 6:35 pm

            Looks to me like this may be the last dying gasp of the ABCs.

            Putting their self interest ahead of the interests of the nation. Ninety fucking days before an election.

            Simple way to prove me wrong is to stand shoulder to shoulder with Cunliffe and back him and Labour for the win, in the media.

            BTW its Labour Party final list selection this weekend…IMO there’s a bunch of MPs who need to win their electorate seats on their merits and be taken right off or right down that list in order to let new blood into Labour.

            • BM 32.1.1.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 6:58 pm

              Mate, they can’t stand the guy and that’s obvious to even the most dimwitted.

              For the longevity of the party, the left needs to lose this election.

              • karol …
                18 June 2014 at 7:03 pm

                Some of us have little time for the ABCs. For the future of the party, and the left generally, they should stand down.

                • BM …
                  18 June 2014 at 7:09 pm

                  Not going to happen.

                  Facts are the left are in no position to form the next government, it would be an utter disaster if they some how managed to get across the line.

                  Labour has to rebuild and rebuild completely if it wants to stay relevant in modern NZ.
                  National has set the standard and Labour has to either match it or die and lets be honest they’re currently on their death bed.

            • Tautoko Viper 32.1.1.1.1.2
              18 June 2014 at 7:00 pm

              Call me naïve but I just can’t believe that the ABC’s would sabotage Labour at this stage.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 32.1.2
        18 June 2014 at 6:28 pm

        They don’t like having the right to choose the leader snatched away from them.

      • Anne 32.1.3
        18 June 2014 at 6:41 pm

        They’re talking it up in the hope they can force it to happen. Traitorous barbarians!!

        Remember what they did in November 2012. Created a Cunliffe coup out of thin air and nearly killed the party off. Now they’re doing it again.

        • karol 32.1.3.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:47 pm

          Yes. I just tweeted Tova O’Brien about her manufacturing a leadership challenge.

          I am truly pissed off at the terrible state of our most prominent journalists.

          • Rosie 32.1.3.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 9:08 pm

            Good on you karol. The “leadership challenge” was bollocks.

            Don’t know if you remember me saying ages ago that Tova O’ Brien was was doing “practicum” during her journalism studies on Radio Active sometime around about 2010-11 on their breakfast show and the DJ had to educate her on how to pronounce names of political leaders and provide her with some history lessons on air. She just didn’t have grasp on local or international events at all.

            To me it sounds like she has been easily moulded into a puppet since those days. A young pliable mind fit for purpose.

    • srylands 32.2
      18 June 2014 at 6:29 pm

      “Hopefully Campbell Live will demonstrate more professionalism and balance tonight when he interviews David Cunliffe.”

      Are you taking the piss?

    • phillip ure 32.3
      18 June 2014 at 6:34 pm

      and their take/spin on the kiwisaver policy was that ‘low-paid workers will be ‘forced’..etc..etc..

      ..and their analysis of the owen glenn report was only on (the mis-judged/ill-thought-out) call for the burden of proof to be shifted to the accused..

      ..you’d think that was all was in that report..

      ..useless gibbering-monkeys…most of them..

      ..with the attention-spans of fucken goldfish..

      • Rosie 32.3.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:15 pm

        Yes, heard the term “forced” in regards to the TV3 reporting of Kiwisaver. RNZ also used the same word in their news yesterday.

        Lol phil, speaking of goldfish, there was at least an item on 3 news talking about the sensitivity, memory span and intelligence of fish, so maybe not fair to compare fish to 3 news reporters?

    • ffloyd 32.4
      18 June 2014 at 9:55 pm

      Rosie. Yeah, nah, that didn’t happen. Jc did an espiner.

  33. dimebag russell 33
    18 June 2014 at 6:25 pm

    I do say so. and I do say that the talking heads from TV1 are are stuffed in the head too. They cant do anything right. Plus they all have big heads. Are they all anorexics or is it just too many laxatives so the free sausage rolls dont add up around their fatheads.

  34. phillip ure 34
    18 June 2014 at 6:27 pm

    this is all a total beat-up..

    ..and is part of the smear-campaign that national/key will run in place of fighting on election policies..

    ..and it is a smear-campaign that will run right up to election-day..

    ..’cos key/national have no ideas..have no policies..

    ..so this will be their campaigning-tactic..

    ..and as for labour..the two people working with cunnlife..are very smart/clever/politically-astute individuals..

    ..and so for now..i am putting my trust in them timing it right for their poverty-busting policies releases..

    ..those policies that will be their only hope of getting any of those missing-million off the couch..

    ..and that internet/mana will be launching a massive-campaign to get that missing million votong for them..

    ..must only make the case for those poverty-ending policies all the stronger..

    ..the competition on the left is fierce this time out..

    ..and labour had better know that internet/mana are going to have some good policies..

    ..the greens are resonating with their ‘green’ tax cut policy..

    ..but i am sure those two people advising cunnliffe/running this campaign know that..

    ..and that we will see those policies..in their good time..

    ..if we don’t..labour are screwed…

    ..the greens and internet/mana will chew big lumps out of their support..

    ..but once again..i am sure those two people know that..

  35. Ad 35
    18 June 2014 at 6:30 pm

    If Mallard, King and Clark didn’t think we noticed their lack of support for Cunliffe when it mattered, oh yes we saw it.

    Anyone for Mallard as Speaker now?

    • phillip ure 35.1
      18 June 2014 at 6:38 pm

      i reckon kennedy graham from the greens wd b a kick-arse speaker..

      ..he would brook no shit..would run a tight ship..

      ..and he has that 100 metre death-stare…

      ..i can’t think of anyone better..

      ..and mallard..?..yeah..!..nah..!..eh..?…

      ..i’m already bored…

      ..and it’s nothing to do with being vegan..

      ..but i think we have all had more than enough mallard..

      ..for this life..

      • phillip ure 35.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:54 pm

        ..and if this storm in a teacup has highlighted the perfidy of the mallard/king/clark..for the rest of the party..

        ..national have done labour a favour..

    • chris73 35.2
      18 June 2014 at 6:42 pm

      I think King did pretty well by laughing off the question, Mallard though…

      • bad12 35.2.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:46 pm

        Mallard tho, ”David Cunliffe IS the leader of the Labour Party” seems pretty unequivocal to me…

        • chris73 35.2.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 6:51 pm

          “Do you have confidence in David Cunliffe”
          “David Cunliffe is the leader of the Labour Party”

          If only there was something else he could have said, something short but snappy, something that would put rumours of a coup to bed in a way that everyone would understand…naah can’t think of anything, can you?

          • bad12 35.2.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 7:16 pm

            i don’t have a fascination as to who is the leader of the Labour Party nor who or when the next leader of the Labour Party will become apparent,

            my current fascination is in the fact that an obvious idiot,(aka You),has shown the New Zealand education system has risen above the nearly impossible and given an obvious idiot,(You), an education which admittedly has only left you with a mechanical ability to type actual words but alas has not instilled in you the ability to critically think through the chain of events,

            Perhaps tho your genetically driven knee-jerk overcomes all…

            • chris73 35.2.1.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 7:26 pm

              Thats hurtful 🙂 Heres the thing though in spite of the polls showing how popular John Key, how popular National is and that National won the last two elections you still think that what goes on in this echo chamber represents what most of NZ thinks

              You may not want to accept it but more people in NZ think like me then you (when it comes to voting)

              • bad12 …
                18 June 2014 at 8:29 pm

                ‘Won’ by how many votes again chris73, the number would tend to suggest that what goes on ‘here’ is but an echo to a lesser or greater extent than what goes on in the minds of at least 45% of the population, and, on a day when National’s tide has sailed out on the sea of turds a damn sight more,

                So, what your ”most of NZ thinks” is just another piece of simpletons bullshit,(now you see why i am moved to deliver you the odd ‘ouch’ in an attempt to snap you out of such simpletons thinking),

                Doesn’t seem to have worked on you yet, but, such is my burden i will have to try a little harder,(sigh)…

                • chris73 …
                  18 June 2014 at 8:56 pm

                  It doesn’t matter by how many votes National won be it by one vote or a couple of thousand, what matters is winning power and gaining the treasury benches but if you want to pontificate on well so be it

                  So remind me again what party is currently in power?

                  • bad12 …
                    18 June 2014 at 9:23 pm

                    i don’t propose to sit here and play tic tac toe around a series of pinhead points you put up to play the game on chris73,

                    And why not you might well ask, the answer to that is outlined to you in my comments above, but to refresh, idiots like you are more fun to just spit at, hoick…

                    • chris73 …
                      18 June 2014 at 9:39 pm

                      I don’t think you quite get that you happen to be the idiot here…but thats ok if you’re happy I’m happy 🙂

                    • bad12 …
                      18 June 2014 at 9:45 pm

                      Yes you score as highly on the originality points meter as you do on the intelligence test chris, —0— is about the sum total of both…

                    • chris73 …
                      18 June 2014 at 9:56 pm

                      Don’t need to be original when I can say look at the scoreboard or in this case the polls even the polls from roy morgan

                  • ffloyd …
                    18 June 2014 at 10:00 pm

                    Chris73. Only because they had a dose of Epsom Salts. And we all know what they does to the system, don’t we?

                    • chris73 …
                      18 June 2014 at 10:02 pm

                      So what? National has the treasury benches and thats good so if they used a perfectly legal means of doing so well it just means they learned well from Labour supporting jim anderton

    • bad12 35.3
      18 June 2014 at 6:44 pm

      Trev would be quite a hoot as Speaker, a bit like watching Blackadder live…

      • phillip ure 35.3.1
        18 June 2014 at 6:57 pm

        what wd b more of ‘a hoot’..

        ..wd b seeing him walk out the exit door..

        ..he cd retire..and raise hydrangeas..or something..

        • bad12 35.3.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 7:05 pm

          Why exactly would you want to see Trev in particular take the plunge Phillip, most of the Labour Caucus i would suggest aint all that far different in their thinking than Mallard,

          Trev is just a bit more open in the ‘expression’ and the other’s are mostly a little behind in years on the clock and may still harbor the odd thought about social justice through a redistributive tax system,(but only the odd thought), which given a stint with the pinkies firmly wrapped around the levers of power, and a zillion little snippets of advice from Treasury clones,(of SSLands), will become a distant memory to be sniggered at as the musings of their immature youth…

          • phillip ure 35.3.1.1.1
            18 June 2014 at 7:09 pm

            see my comment 34…

            • bad12 35.3.1.1.1.1
              18 June 2014 at 7:23 pm

              So Clark just kept walking when questioned on Cunliffe’s leadership, King gave a laugh and a PFFT, and Mallard bluntly stated a number of times David Cunliffe IS the leader of the Labour Party,

              Hell i see absolute miles of perfidy in all of that, actually Phillip all’s i see in Your little joining of the dots there is an ability to make shit up just like chris73 does,

              Lolz where’s that infamous Labour Party sage Te Reo when you need Him, it was only yesterday that that one was telling me that the ABCer’s had been vanquished…

              • phillip ure …
                18 June 2014 at 7:36 pm

                i haven’t forgotten the relish with which they poor-bashed..

                ..how they stigmatised/ostracised sneered at those they were meant to help..

                ..i can’t forget how during ‘boom’-years..they just didn’t only not give a fuck about the poorest..

                ..and did nothing about the inequalities/third world diseases of poverty..

                ..for nine long fucken years..

                ..but it was the pure ayn randian of working for (some) families that was the tipping point..

                ..separating/favouring the ‘worthy’ families/children..over the ‘unworthy’ families/children..

                ..ayn rand on steroids..

                ..and funny story…!..the racism that underpins that neglect..

                ..’cos the fact is that one in six pakeha children live in poverty..

                ..and one in three maori/pasifika children live in poverty..

                ..and all of that is the shame of the mallards/kings/clarks etc etc..

                ..so nah..!..i haven’t forgotten..

      • lprent 35.3.2
        18 June 2014 at 8:29 pm

        I suspect he’d be a bit like me. Poacher turned gamekeeper. I used to drive moderators nuts a few decades ago.

  36. Clean_power 36
    18 June 2014 at 6:59 pm

    Surely, the ABC faction is working overtime. The dirty hands of King and Mallard are all over this.

    [lprent: That is an astroturfing assertion. Explain. Adding you to automoderation and looking for signs of intelligence. ]

  37. fisiani 37
    18 June 2014 at 7:08 pm

    Chance of Te Cunliffe as PM after today just 24%. Go on Standardistas. Make some easy money. Put your money where your keyboard is. Turn $24 into $100 in just 94 days. If you are confident that the coalition of the Far Left will get out the missing million why not invest and recoup. Read the post this is a non issue that will blow over in a few days. No one believes that Te Cunliffe is tricky and mendacious.

    • bad12 37.1
      18 June 2014 at 7:27 pm

      Pfft what a loser you are Fis, i can turn 50 bucks of potters mix into 14 and a half grand in 90 days,

      Your problem as evidenced by your comments is that you are small time in a big big way…

      • fisiani 37.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 8:40 pm

        Be a big man then turn $2300 into $10,000.

        • bad12 37.1.1.1
          18 June 2014 at 9:28 pm

          Mud has more intelligence than you Fis, tho i dare say there would be a lot more fun watching you splashed on a wall doing the slide than say watching mud do the same,

          Such a small mind in such a big big way, is it practiced or just a genetic disability…

  38. blue leopard 38
    18 June 2014 at 7:12 pm

    I suggest to all commenting here that they take a look at the thread: ‘NRT Shifted’ to find out what you are all being distracted from.

    National haven’t a chance of getting re-elected if the info in that thread becomes known far and wide.

  39. big bruv 39
    18 June 2014 at 7:22 pm

    What a fantastic day for the people of NZ. Any slim chance that Cunliffe had of ever being PM has now evaporated.

    Yes the media are all over this story and yes they might go harder on Cunliffe than need be but when that same media know just how arrogant and smug Cunliffe is you cannot blame the media for wanting to expose Cunliffe for what he actually is.

    So now Cunliffe is gone who is next?

  40. Clean_power 40
    18 June 2014 at 7:22 pm

    Just saw David Cunliffe on Campbell Live: very unconvincing and full of platitudes.
    The Labour Party leader must improve his performance or make way for someone more capable. Grant Robertson could be that man.

    • lprent 40.1
      18 June 2014 at 8:13 pm

      The Labour Party leader must improve his performance or make way for someone more capable. Grant Robertson could be that man.

      I think that is quite unlikely between now and the election.

      Personally if I see anyone trying to even move on leadership until after the election, I will spend a great deal of effort teaching them why it is a bad idea. I’m sure I will have a large number of helpers. If that destroys the parliamentary NZLP – well I made my peace with that in 2012 for exactly the stupidities that you are suggesting.

  41. McGrath 41
    18 June 2014 at 7:25 pm

    Regardless of whether you believe its a beat up/non-event etc, the fact remains that this is a very bad look for DC/Labour. What does Labour need to do to counter this?

  42. Chooky 42
    18 June 2014 at 7:28 pm

    Comparing Key to Cunliffe and John Armstrong’s demand that David resigns

    By Martyn Bradbury / June 18, 2014 /

    When Key forgot about owning shares in Tranzrail, John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key said he wouldn’t raise GST and then did, John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key forgot about how he voted on the drinking age, John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key forgot Solid Energy asked for a billion dollars, John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key forgot about being briefed about raid on Kim Dotcom, John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key forgot about a mysterious US jet and who was on it , John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key forgot about calling Ian Fletcher about the GCSB job , John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    When Key denied he had links with Cameron Slater and then admitted he did, John Armstrong didn’t call for Key to resign.
    But when Cunliffe forgets an 11 year old letter, John Armstrong demands Cunliffe resigns!

    • chris73 42.1
      18 June 2014 at 7:32 pm

      So what? Its not about whats fair and whats not its about winning the election and National are better at smearing then Labour

    • TheContrarian 42.2
      18 June 2014 at 9:22 pm

      Christ Chooky, have an idea of your own for once. You’re either parroting Bomber or parroting Phil Ure.

      My god man, get hold of yourself.

  43. Paul 43
    18 June 2014 at 7:30 pm

    Get rid of the neoliberal dinosaurs in the Labour Party.
    They are obstructing democracy in this country.
    Goff, Hipkins, King, Shearer, Mallard…clear out the lot of them.
    Their ilk have destroyed the Labour Party for 30 years.

    • bad12 43.1
      18 June 2014 at 8:51 pm

      That’s quite funny Paul, i see at least one in your shortlist who might fit the neo-lib straght-jacket, maybe two but Annette King a neo-lib i think not,

      Anette is the epitome of the modern Labour Party today, this i see as the Socialism of, for, and, by the middle class, and, i would suggest that the majority of the current Caucus would fit nicely into that description, along with most of the current candidates,

      One i see as a definite neo-lib is the Finance spokesperson David Parker, and, of course it would be dragging the post way too far off of its intended course to add my further thoughts surrounding what Parker is doing in that position…

  44. millsy 44
    18 June 2014 at 7:32 pm

    The letter seems pretty harmless to me. Just a guy who wanted to emigrate here wanting to follow up on his visa application so he can start a business.

    He probably had his shoved under his nose, signed it, and forgot about it the next day. Do you realistically expect people to remember every letter they signed over the past 10 years.

    The guy forgot.

    So what.

    its not the end of the world.

    Personally I think this pales in comparison to the financial abuse they want to inflict on the little people. Cameron Slater thinks that unions should be banned. I think thats pretty bad, but the media doesnt call him on it.

  45. Wreckingball 45
    18 June 2014 at 7:50 pm

    Cunliffe has been critical of people helping Liu, but we then find out he did so himself.

    Cunliffe has been critical of donations from Liu, but we then find out Labour took big donations from him too.

    Cunliffe has been critical of people for being wealthy, but he is wealthy.

    Cunliffe has been critical of coat tailing, but will work with Internet Mana if it makes him Prime Minister.

    Cunliffe has been critical of donations from lobbyists, but take them from lobbying unions.

    Cunliffe has been critical of memory loss, but he (like everyone) has it from time to time.

    Cunliffe has been critical of anonymous donations and secret trusts, WHILE running a secret trust to hide donations.

    If he’s going to be critical about something, he needs to make sure he’s not doing anything similar.

    Go on, try to rebut what John has said. It is undeniable. Don’t put down others if you cannot live up to the standards yourself Cunliffe.

    • Crunchtime 45.1
      19 June 2014 at 12:14 pm

      Not clear whether he helped Liu particularly. Liu was in his electorate, what has been found is a form letter that doesn’t even spell his name properly, one of hundreds of letters that all MPs send to immigration on the behalf of constituents.

      Not clear yet whether he took big donations and whether they were anonymous

      DC hasn’t been critical of people being wealthy for weath’s sake, wrong.

      IMP is not coat tailing. National’s “cup of tea” to get Act into Parliament IS coat tailing.

      Labour is in large part about unions, unions even get to vote for leader. Unions are not the same as profit-taking corporations You have no point here.

      DC’s memory loss is extremely minor compared to “Dunno” Key.

      He admitted the trust for donations was not a good look, it was considered standard practice at the time.

      This is all a beat-up by National, and by National’s parrots who run the papers and the news.

      What it does show is Labour needs to step up its PR/Marketing game or it’s in trouble. It can’t just remain quiet while shit gets made up about its leader.

  46. dimebag russell 46
    18 June 2014 at 8:22 pm

    its all a;lot of piffle put out by the national party.
    so what.
    Labour will win and hand national a defeat that it needs to restore deceny and equilibrium in the new zealand body politic.
    national is a party of slithering money grabbers and this is just another trick.

    • srylands 46.1
      18 June 2014 at 8:41 pm

      “Labour will win and hand national a defeat”

      You don’t seriously believe that is still happening in 2014? Because if you do really believe it there is a bookmaker in Alice Springs with deep pockets. A Labour win has just drifted from $3.80 40 $4.10. Just today :-).

      http://centrebet.com/#Sports/7145959

      So I am sure you will be hitting the home equity facility to make some serious money. No, because you really do not believe it.

      • bad12 46.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 8:55 pm

        You are as pathetically dense as Fis is SSLands, really is that the best you can do, encourage people to gamble like some tout outside the cheapest of strip-bars…

  47. dimebag russell 47
    18 June 2014 at 8:44 pm

    I dont give a shit about bookmakers.
    I care about this country and where national has taken it.
    The people will speak in September and national will be gone.

  48. Graham 48
    18 June 2014 at 9:04 pm

    The moral of story is when useing private citizens for polictal gain make sure they can’t fight back( mr Lui )
    John banks found out this when dealing with dot com
    Now david cunlife has found this out also
    The national party research unit was given some info
    They did a oia request
    Then gave the loaded gun to a journalist
    It’s their frigging job

  49. dimebag russell 49
    18 June 2014 at 9:10 pm

    I think they have something stuck to the bottom of their shoe.
    the national branch of the geheimestaspolizei.
    thats their speed.

    [lprent: sigh Please don’t godwin our site for no apparent reason. If you don’t have an argument, then just say so without using that old dumb crutch. ]

    • chris73 49.1
      18 June 2014 at 9:24 pm

      So Godwins Law took its sweet time getting here but get here it did

      [lprent: Thank you for the heads up. ]

      • bad12 49.1.1
        18 June 2014 at 9:40 pm

        ‘Godwins Law’ what a joke, some nazi who doesn’t want to be labeled as such dreams up a ”Law” which attempts to guilt trip people into not pointing out such niceties…

  50. TeWhareWhero 50
    18 June 2014 at 9:17 pm

    The aptly named Yahoo! NZ has a headline ‘Cunliffe skewered in Parliament’ – apparently government ministers are ‘revelling’ in the disclosure that DC ‘intervened’ in Liu’s residency application.

    So, no spin there – just the usual high journalistic standards. I know, sarcasm, lowest form of wit and all that…

  51. Clemgeopin 51
    18 June 2014 at 9:55 pm

    What irritated me MOST today was the gutless attitude of some of the cowardly so called ‘senior’ Labour MPs such as Mallard and Hipkins who did not have the courage or intelligence to stand by Cunliffe and give him unequivocal support and loyalty when quizzed by the media.
    These kind of bastards should be kicked out, ignored or relegated to the back bench as soon as possible.

    • Colonial Viper 51.1
      19 June 2014 at 12:01 am

      Well, talk to the peeps who are on the Moderating Committee, for starters.

      • Clemgeopin 51.1.1
        19 June 2014 at 1:03 am

        But what subsequently made me happier were

        (1) An excellent interview of Cunliffe by Paul Henry on TV3 night line at 10:30 pm

        (2) The excellent loyalty to Cunliffe shown by Jacinda Ardern on Backbenches tonight at 10:50pm.

        (3) An excellent intreview of Shearer by Paul Henry on TV3 night line at 10:30 pm.

  52. RedBaronCV 52
    18 June 2014 at 10:36 pm

    Are we in the moddle of a Roy Morgan survey period?

    I’d be very pleased if some parties came out against this rich migrant category. It has been nothing but trouble even though not many people come in under it. On a % basis the problems must be huge. And selling passports is just that. Look at the taxpayer money going into some of this crap.

  53. Plan B 53
    18 June 2014 at 11:22 pm

    where did the fundraiser photo come from? Not an OIA request

    • lprent 53.1
      18 June 2014 at 11:53 pm

      That is a good point. And yes since that was Liu’s partner it does make a good point that the photo may have come from Liu.

      However it’d still be quite unusual for him to know what the letter to immigration was or even if it was still in existence at immigration.

      What I can’t figure out is what Liu has to gain by leaking information that was so useful for the Nats and so clearly orchestrated by them (ie the hinting from Whaleoil that has been going on).

      On the other hand, there is Shane Jones, now beholden to his National masters and well known that he’d show up anywhere where there was free food and a place to talk, and especially a place to talk to someone with money. I wish we knew which auction that photo was at. I could then find out if Jones was there as well.

  54. jh 54
    19 June 2014 at 9:34 am

    Good Point LPrent!

  55. Crunchtime 55
    19 June 2014 at 10:26 am

    The Liu thing is a nonevent, it’s bullshit. There’s absolutely nothing in it, and what DC said: he never met him, never advocated for him – looks to me to be true.

    But it doesn’t look that way to most people, it seems.

    The Dom Post has turned it into a bloodbath and added a poll that looks like an utter disaster for Labour.

    Labour needs to step up their PR game BIG time.

  56. NZJester 56
    19 June 2014 at 1:19 pm

    People are saying that there is nothing big about this letter and that heads should not roll over it.
    I however do think maybe some heads should roll over this letter.
    What head you ask?
    Well information about this letter was obviously leaked to a few members of the press some time before the letter was officially made legally available to the public.
    Till legally released under the act, that must have still been a confidential government document and no one outside of government should know what was in it.
    If as I suspect the person leaked the information illegally they must have committed a crime by disclosing the still confidential document.

    Can anyone inform me about what the actual legal status of this letter was and if it was a crime to release information about it early?

  57. jjtamihere 57
    19 June 2014 at 6:10 pm

    Given the succession of favors Liu received from Labor politicians you would have to be incredibly naive to believe that Cunliffe was just acting in his normal duties towards a so-called ‘constituent’, or accept his Bill Clintonesque ‘I can’t recall’ when it comes to whether or not he met Liu in person.

    Labor politicians gave Liu a succession of favors, Liu gave Labor a succession of donations. National came to power, and the exact same thing happens. The real issue is not Cunliffes dishonesty, which really pales in comparison to Key and co, but the cash for favors endemic that this affair has exposed.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 57.1
      19 June 2014 at 6:37 pm

      Thus strengthening the case for public-only funding of political parties. Reality, meet liberal bias.

    • McFlock 57.2
      19 June 2014 at 6:49 pm

      “succession of favours”?

      It’s not like anyone used government funds to go on a promotional trip for the guy’s company.

Links to post