- Date published:
11:37 am, May 14th, 2013 - 115 comments
Categories: kremlinology, national - Tags: aaron gilmore, cameron slater, simon lusk, utu
Aaron Gilmore has promised ‘utu’, or reciprocation, against a select band of National insiders including Cameron Slater and Andrew Riches. But what does Slater have to do with Riches? The link is National’s dirty campaigner, Simon Lusk, who regularly works with Slater. The word is that Aaron Gilmore was part of Lusk’s stable of candidates in 2008 and 2011. But Gilmore earned his wrath after refusing to pay a fee for the unsuccessful 2011 campaign.
Meanwhile, Riches has apparently become a Lusk/Slater acolyte, and is being lined up himself as a National candidate next year.
With that context, the motives behind the events that we’ve seen become a little more clear.
For instance, its always been odd that Riches’ letter of apology to the waiter (based on a description of events that still differs significantly from Gilmore’s) became public. It’s clear that the bar and the waiter weren’t behind the publication – they refused all publicity and no copy of the apology has emerged. Riches, on the other hand, was quick into the media playing the principled man. Its said that Riches didn’t publicise the existence of the apology. If he didn’t leak the existence of the letter, did it come from Lusk’s camp?
And what was up with the way that Gilmore was given enough rope to hang himself? That was a professional job. It was only after Gilmore had given an account to Key that his texts to Riches, which apparently contradict that account, came out. Key was then forced into a position where he had to get Gilmore out. And Slater pounced on that immediately. It was Slater who first called for Gilmore to resign.
Why did Riches do that? Why did he release the texts and why did he wait until the perfect moment from the point of view of Gilmore’s internal enemies? This wasn’t the behaviour of a well-intentioned amateur – it was someone who knew exactly what they were doing, and it was an integrated part of a larger campaign.
Following that, the dirt started coming, but how much of it came from the 9th floor and how much from Slater/Lusk? Certainly, it was Joyce who approved the quick release of the OIA from Gilmore’s time at MBIE. But it was Slater who darkly warned that personal information detrimental to Gilmore’s relationship would come out if he didn’t resign.
It was notable that Lusk delivered the coup de grace and finally got Gilmore to resign. What did he say to him to make him change his mind? Its clear that Key isn’t pleased with Lusk’s involvement in the affair – he rated Lusk -1 out of 10 as an influence within the party.
The next round of this is set to be the emergence of Riches as a National Party candidate in Christchurch next year.
Now, this picture is based on info we’ve received. It can’t be independently verified – that’s the nature of these things. It’ll be interesting to see what emerges from Gilmore’s speech this afternoon.
Maybe John Key can shed some further light. Other sources tell us that a senior advisor in his office was drinking with Gilmore that night (she was one of ‘the girls’ that Riches refers to in the texts). If there was a fracas, Key surely knew of it the next day and thought it of little note before he made a speech to the conference the next day in which he praised Gilmore….
“he’s not blessed with a lot of courage” (is Aaron Gilmore)- Cameron Slater.
It would appear Gilmore has been on the receiving end of “utu”; silly wide boy.
seems utu is going all around the whole stinky place courtesy of everyone. No wonder they all smell bad as the reciprocity is bringing all of their actions out into the sunlight, and all of it is smelly.
too much reciprocity methinks.
perhaps utu needs to be qualified with that other ancient principle of turning the other cheek …
No group turns on their own like a crossed Tory dog.
In reality Gilmour has done nothing wrong. Yet they have thrown him out.
Gilmour will return serve today with a loaded grenade. This is going to be explosive and enormous. He will not go quietly.
With the advantage of Parliamentary privilige he will let rip on his party and let all those dirty secrets out.
Everything that we have suspected will be exposed today. Don’t expect Key to front any cameras in the next 24 hours as he will have some explaining to do about donations, selections and relationships with the corporate elite.
Popcorn and coke time indeed…
Yep; gotta machine the Uptown Girl, chores. and take a pew.
hardly likely… more like the payoff cheque he was promised is ‘slow arriving’ so he promised an early Guy Fawkes to hurry it along.
Very likely the same result for Pansey Wong, ‘pay me to walk and Ill be gone by lunchtime’. Cultural differences meant she was not likely to raise a fuss and patiently wait for the cash
But they managed to force his resignation when he was apparently prepared to dig in.Whatever the threats or promises were that managed to make him go, they still hang over his head.
I suspect that despite his initial bluster, he’ll think twice before dropping any bombshells in the House. He’s obviously impulse-driven with inadequacy issues, but he’s had a night to sleep on it.
Might be rules around what can be said in a personal statement too.
“In reality Gilmour has done nothing wrong. Yet they have thrown him out.”
So threatening to sack waiters and big noting whilst drunk is acceptable behaviour to you now.
Prime Minister didn’t think it was worth investigating.
So that makes it right in your value set , eh Pascal . What a sell out .
“No group turns on their own like a crossed Tory dog.”
– Well apart from lefties that is
Does Slater truly believe he can lay claim to any moral high ground?
I dont believe for a minute his farewell speech will not have been vetteed first. He got applause from Nat caucus so that rather suggests he is going to aim at someone they collectively despise, or he is going to say what they want to hear.
Why didn’t he just say he didn’t recall? Isntt hat what his leader has learned? Behaviour flows top down and the irony, oh the irony, of slater and key pronouncing on gilmores lack of standards on a purely moral issue is astounding.
If you replace “I dont recall” with “I know but I wont look good if I say”, how different is it from what Gilmore did?
I was interested to hear Key say in one breath he knew nothing about (Lusk???) and in the next say he rated him a -1 out of 10. How do you rate someone you know nothing about?
When will the Press Gallery start challenging Keys postulations on Gilmores behaviour with his own… afterall, unlike Banks, Gilmore broke some kind of moral code, not legal…. yet banks stays and gilmore goes.
Utu is a Māori concept of reciprocation, or balance.
To retain mana, both friendly and unfriendly actions require an appropriate response – hence utu covers both the reciprocation of kind deeds, and the seeking of revenge. In contemporary usage, the word is also used to mean ‘cost’, in the sense of monetary value.
utu1. (verb) (-ngia,-a) to repay, pay, make a response, avenge, reply.
Utua ai au e rima herengi i te wiki (HP 1991:26). / I was paid five shillings per week.
2. (noun) revenge, cost, price, wage, fee, payment, salary, reciprocity – an important concept concerned with the maintenance of balance and harmony in relationships between individuals and groups and order within Māori society, whether through gift exchange or as a result of hostilities between groups. It is closely linked to mana and includes reciprocation of kind deeds as well as revenge. While particular actions required a response, it was not necessary to apply utu immediately. The general principles that underlie utu are the obligations that exist between individuals and groups. If social relations are disturbed, utu is a means of restoring balance. Gift exchange, a major component of utu, created reciprocal obligations on the parties involved and established permanent and personal relationships. Traditionally utu between individuals and groups tended to escalate. Just as feasts were likely to increase in grandeur as an exchange relationship developed over time, so could reciprocal acts of vengeance intensify. Utu was not necessarily applied to the author of the affront, but affected the whole group. Thus utu could be gained through a victory over a group where only the most tenuous of links connected the source of the affront with the target of the utu. Any deleterious external influence could weaken the psychological state of the individual or group, but utu could reassert control over the influences and restore self-esteem and social standing. Suicide could even reassert control by demonstrating that one had control over one’s fate, and was a way of gaining utu against a spouse or relative where direct retaliation was not possible. Such indirect utu often featured within kin groups.
He mea peita anō hoki e ia, ā he utu tika tāna utu i tono ai mō āna mahi (TW 28/8/1875:170). / They were also painted by him and the price he asked was right for his work.
(Te Kākano Textbook (Ed. 2): 48;) See also utu ā-hāora.
Sheesh. Where’s the page 3 girl?
I find myself hoping Gilmore has some dirt to dish, but it is probably just bluster.
RAdio NZ says the Mr Gilmore would seek leave to speak at the end of Question Time today. Wonder if National MPs will stay in the Chamber?
Of course not – they’ll run like hell (reminiscent of one or two Ozzie Tory politicians a few months back trying to get out of the way before their ‘supposed’ principles held are called to account).
Don’t pin your hopes on Gilmore to deliver though.
Me thinks that you ascribe too much weight to both Slater and Lusk (no pun intended). If the PM rated Lusk -1 on a scale of 1-10 I suspect that he would be rating Slater -1,000. I really don’t think that these two are capable of running so successful a hit on Gilmore. A further flaw in your argument is believing that anyone would pay Lusk anything to run a campaign – or is this meant to be humour?.
His client list is right there on his website.
Given the reticence of this govt to come forth with OIA information AND that the Gilmore issue was an employment one and therefore cofnidential, it strikes me this bit of dirt was released by a Minister (indirectly of course).
It was released by MoBIE I believe. But it would have had to be cleared by the Minister.
Lusk ran Louise Upston’s campaign in 2008. Don’t know about 2011. She’s chief whip now and has been ‘escorting’ Gilmore for the past week. I’m sure she knows something.
Who were the two Nat MPs sharing a belly laugh with Gilmore on his first day back int he House last week?
Colin King, Kaikoura, was one. King is of course the MP for the area covering Hanmer, and the hotel worker in the Heritage hotel would be a constituent of his.
What time is he speaking …approximately?
After Question time – between 3pm and 3:15pm.
Has he been seen practicing his ‘mere’ ?
do do do do ……. you can almost hear a pin drop across the political junkie sphere as the final countdown begins to the most anticipated parliamentary speech in recent times.
better be worth it
iT WILL BE A TONGUE DOWN THE BACK OF THE TROUSERS OF KEY, HIS POLICIES AND NATIONAL’S GREATNESS FOR nz….
A superb reach-around.
On the basis of the information in Eddie’s post, I’d say any Utu will be focused on Lusk, Slater, Riches, etc.
Yawn. Gilmore needs to look up the meaning of utu.
Bought off ? You betcha.
Who wrote the speech?
So it’s all over. Gilmore leaves with humility and gets the last laugh thus depriving the media circus of their big story
Now that’s what I call Utu
Although the shyster in chief was looking rather squeamish when Gilmore began his speech.
Hardly humility. he’s tried to be humble without success… is today the day he actually accepted he was to blame, unlike every other time he has opened his mouth on this? He’s learnt to play the game, and National greased his palm under threat of being bad mouthed. I doubt number 57 on the list has much dit on anyone.
Bit more class the Charlie Shovel, then again this is National, so you’d expect that.
Actually I’d expect the complete opposite. What I did expect however is that you’d turn up and act like a tool and true to form, you haven’t let me down.
Brilliant departure speech,
perhaps even good enough for a return to parliament at a later date.
It was a very good speech. However, the way he read it, without real heart, but reading it off quickly, looked to me like it was wholly, or partially written by someone else.
The only bit delivered with feeling was the end bit when he said farewell – genuine upset at having to leave the House.
Upset at losing his plumb job… Sadly it’s oft the case that people are sorry they got caught more than they are sorry for what they did.
“I was a dick. I’ve done a lot of dickish things actually. Really a lot. That’s just me. No excuses. The media was really mean to me. Poor me. I could say some shit about some people, but I’m too awesome. Poor me. This really sucks for me. Thanks to John Key and stuff. This really sucks. Poor me.” Sits down and starts full body blubbering as the cognitive dissonance of “I’m master of the universe” and “I’m resigning for being a dick” kicks in.
I did feel a tiny bit sorry for him actually. But as many others have pointed out, it wasn’t so much the getting drunk and being a dick that did him in, it was the failure to immediately front up and the subsequent changing stories. But hey, he was only following John Key’s never-take-responsibility-for-anything example.
Even if this was some sort of internal backstabbing Lusk/Slater/Riches stitch-up, I can’t feel that much sympathy for anyone who climbs on the NAct waka.
“Meanwhile, Riches has apparently become a Lusk/Slater acolyte, and is being lined up himself as a National candidate next year.”
This makes sense. Slater was adamantly stoking up Andrew Riches as being a reliable source from very early on when the Gilmore affair broke. In fact, he made a point of mentioning that he knew Riches personally. Are they building up a potential Lusk-loyal candidate in case Crusher doesn’t manage to secure the leadership?
Overpromise and underdeliver (or not deliver). How very typical of Aaron Gilmore.
sorry, I don’t know who that is…
Gilmore’s exit speech was one of mea culpa “gone with a whimper not a bang” with no seeking of “utu” on anyone but the journalists who kept “hounding” him.
The Slater-Lusk manipulated speculation that he would give vent in a spleenic fashion appears to have been part of the beat up to add to the scene around his disappearance from the Christchurch political scene and, perhaps boost their own self importance within the Nactional Party.
so rather than exact a form of utu he turned the other cheek
well well well
reciprocity has no time limit and it often takes time to formulate the correct response – but I’m pretty sure I’m being very overlly generous to assume that from gilmore. The fact is utu had absolutely nothing to do with anything around this – it is just a word that has been misused.
Point of order: Stuff is calling the speech a “valedictory” speech. Gilmore sought leave to make a personal statement of 4-5 minutes “in lieu of any further valedictory speech”.
Not a great recommendation for return to the House. Leaving in disgrace with a mea culpa.
“He said he must be prepared to forgive those who said unkind words about him” stuff.co.nz
How very magnanimous of him… I dont think he sought the forgiveness of the waiter did her? At least not until after the despicable press had “hounded” him. This guy has learned nothing. Like most Nats what he will have learned is to develop selective memory about events to avoid actually lying.
There are lies of commission, and lies of omission. Lies they still are, though. Selective memory with the intent to deceive is an example of a lie of omission. (I knew my Catholic upbringing had some usefulness still.)
Gilmore’s point was that in order to be forgiven by those he has harmed, he must also forgive those who have harmed him. That might avoid any charge of hypocrisy, but I’m not actually sure that you can make trade-offs like that. I should forgive those who have harmed me, because that is the charitable and good thing to do as it frees both me and my victim, not do it because I have to do that in order to be forgiven.
It seems that of the five stages of grief that he alluded to, he is still caught up in bargaining.
He is right to be grieving though- loss of reputation and job are serious matters. The person who was threatened with losing his job, and called a ‘dickhead’ also would know something of that loss. Gilmore’s apology and final actions might go some ways towards comforting his victim, and allowing his victim a chance to experience some liberation of his feelings.
Nah, his talk about forgiving those who had harmed him was about not being cast out of the network.
Five Stages of Grief, in two weeks? Whatever! anti-climax. soul-searching still to come; not one for pity I am, yet…
The National Party needs more people like this.
Maybe they should choose future candidates by a drinking competition followed by competitive masturbation.
I think they already do, it’s just no one tells… until now
Are you suggesting that Sergeant Jones and Corporal Mallard apply to become Torys ?
If you sleep with dogs, you get up with fleas
Wow, how lacklusture can you get. Must be a flat feeling. I thought Gilmore was going to be fired up and name names and show it to the nats.
I guess you guys on the left, feel like the dumbasses who thought Donald Trump little press conference was going to be a game changer in the USA Presidential election.
lol it was you that said that or are you so dim you’ve forgotten already. What a joke you are – you just scored an(other) own goal – go back to your TV mate you are embarrassing yourself.
please marty, all you guys wanted fireworks, your leader shearer bought the popcorn and all you got was that, like I said, you must be feeling like the repugs when Trump said he had a big announcement that would be a game changer.
Yeah Gilmore turned out to be all talk and no walk, just another full of shit narcissist. He didn’t dish the dirt like he said he would on his way out the door for being a dickhead. Sad, but not a big surprise really Brett. I’m sure ‘da left’ will recover from this blow with the passage of time.
Wait, isn’t that a National MP sobbing like a child in the house?
lol nice one mike
No brett you are wrong – we wanted the truth to balance out the books. You wanted blood which is why you went into the ‘violence’ mumble. I know you think you are onto a good one with the trump thing but please believe me – you aren’t, rethink that line mate it’s letting you down.
So why did your man shearer say he is bringing popcorn. Worst possible result for Labour today. Your feeling like trumpy supporters today.
You feel like a Donald Trump supporter… These are not the droids you are looking for… This is terrible for Labour…
Nah. It turns out you don’t have Jedi powers Brett. Weally nice try though.
This Bread is so Stale it’s got mould on it.
Brett: “I guess you guys on the left….”
So you deny being a right winger, but you’re not “on the left” so just where do you fit in Brett?
perhaps hes a pete georgian reasonable centrist?
Independent, Im no ideologist.
I’m not sure I believe you. Do you spend time on right wing blogs talking in critical tones about “you right wing guys this and you righties that”? Because that’s your modus operandi here a lot of the time. Are you sure you’re being honest?
The thing I hate more than anything on earth are hypocrites, and I believe blogs like the standard and some of the posters at the hand mirror, are the mirror image of Faux News.
For some reason, the NZ left handles itself like the USA right.
I hate it, but Im fascinated by people or bloggers who do this.
Fascinating. Do go on..
Shall I give you a prompt by suggesting that, if I follow your drift, although you are “no ideologist”, you somehow feel more “morally aligned” with the “NZ right”, because the “NZ left” are (all) hypocrites who mirror the hypocrisy of the “American right”??
“The thing I hate more than anything on earth are hypocrites”
always picked you for a self hater brett
So did Shearer end up sitting there with popcorn?
Very disappointing for him, huh.
If so, he wouldn’t be the first NZer disappointed by big promises from a nact politician.
Even if he is disappointed he’s too stupid to recognise his comment made him look petty and now stupid.
Never thought I’d say this, but Gilmore has just shown more spine than John Key ever has or likely ever will. Key did not even have the human decency, let alone spine, to look at Gilmore when he spoke. I wonder fucking why. John Key is a spineless turd of the highest order.
Described by Selwyn Manning on Citizen A as:
The most feeble prime minister he has seen in his life-time
Gotta love Shakespeare.
IF you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream – and not make dreams your master;
If you can think – and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
‘ Or walk with Kings – nor lose the common touch,
if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And – which is more – you’ll be a Man, my son!
Where is the horse gone, where the young rider?
Where now the giver of gifts? Where are the seats at the feasting gone?
Where are the merry sounds in the hall? Alas, the bright goblet!
Alas, the knight and his hauberk! Alas, the glory of the king!
How that hour has departed, dark under the shadow of night, as had it never been!
The Wanderer is an old Anglo Saxon elegy for a young warrior exiled for an unspecified offence. I thought it resonated somehow. Especially the part where his loss of favour with the king is lamented.
Just got John Banks mail out. In bright letters in blue it says
My God I laughed and laughed.
*wipes tears from eyes”. Would upload but don’t know how
That is good. Seriously he should get some sort of Tui award for this. This just jumped into my head:
Banks PA: “The mail out went out yesterday boss.”
Banks: “Excellent. Let’s have a look then… PRINCIPLES?! What the f*ck is this?!”
PA: “That’s what you said you wanted!”
Banks: “I was wasted on K2 at the time! It seemed funny then but… Sh*t.”
PA: “You signed off on it.”
Banks: “Jez f*cking christmas you know I never read anything I sign, only idiots do that… I guess I’ll just have to go with it. Principles… yeah I can do that… principles… f*******ck.”
LOL – that would be a good skit on our non-existent political satire show on telly
I think you are all missing something. In the house a ” personal statement ” is not allowed to be a bagging fest of anyone and Gilmore had been told by the Speaker that if he mentioned any names or alluded to same he would be shut down and thrown out. I think the ” utu” will come in print somewhere. Pity, I was hoping it wouldn’t be so. However I do think he has been treated appallingly by the Nats, talk about sending a message. Now you see how Johnny boy rolls!
Well he was being retarded. Lied, lied, lied then threatened.
Watching Aaron Gilmore today was like watching “The Omen”. The diabolical cleverness of the National Party apparatus.
If you have money to burn you can buy cleverness Linz.
Bad idea is bad.
Well you have to give it to Gilmore, he fronted. At least he didn’t give his farewell speech with his pants round his ankles sprinting away from a house of disrepute.
How is Annette by the way?
If there had ever been anything controversial in Gilmore’s speech, we would never have heard it.
It only took one MP from either side of the house to object and Gilmore would have been not allowed to get to his feet.
On this basis I can guarantee that Gilmore’s last public utterance as an MP was carefully vetted and approved.
Why did Shearer add his two pence worth?
He doesn’t get it, does he? All he did was lower himself with the popcorn and coke bit.
The media had done its job and he should have remained apart from it.
Show some nous and dignity David. FFS.
Where/when did Shearer make these comments logie?
They were reported in stuff.co and online herald when I was looking about 4.30 pm. And the only clip of DS shown on TVOne 6 pm news was him beaming and saying Labour would be bringing along their coke and popcorn and were looking forward to hearing what Gilmore had to say.
I pray with his every tv appearance for any sign of dignity and relevance but he has made me an atheist.
It’s not possible to refer to dignity and AG in the same sentence, let alone context. There was no dignity in what AG has said, done or continued to try and weasel out of. DS was simply reinforcing that very simple message. Completely appropriate in my view.
I’d agree, if DS, with a camera shoved in his face, had simply said we look forward to hearing what he has to say. Instead, he gets captured gloating, making the kind of kick in the guts, smart arse remark Key does, and of course that’s all they show. Sorry, I think that’s just dumb.
Perhaps you don’t understand. This is politics, not some sort of civilised discourse about morals, behaviour or anything particularly esoteric.
Also, he wasn’t captured he was asked for a comment – I’m sure if he has said something plain and boring you would have been among the first to complain…..you need to let go of the fact that he is the LP leader and you don’t like it….we all get it.
Did you know him well then?
Mr Shearer reminds me off dear old Field Marshall Hague.
Private Baldrick, it may have been Haig, it was in 1917
Im willing to give AG the benefit of the doubt here. The guy probably decided that he had made a fool of himself enough time already, and decided to bow out gracefully. Either that, he he was told by his caucus no funny business.