Which seems more likely?

109 comments on “Which seems more likely? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Julie 1

   9 September 2008 at 6:36 pm

   I’ve never been in a caucus of MPs, but don’t you usually gather in papers like that at the end, to avoid accidents?

   Any guesses on what the fourth policy is?
2. kisekiman 2

   9 September 2008 at 6:42 pm

   What is more likely? That Helen Clark had no idea that Mike Williams gave Owen Glenn the green light to give Winston his hundred grand bribe

   Or: Helen orchestrated the the whole sordid affair and is now desperately trying to distance herself from her obvious corruption.
3. Concerned of Tawa 3

   9 September 2008 at 6:43 pm

   “Any guesses on what the fourth policy is?”

   Keeping Owen Glenn quiet?

   Smearing Owen Glenn and pretending the Cash-for-Honours saga doesn’t exist?

   Keeping the stench of corruption from Helen and Mike Williams overpowering the rotting corpse of Winston First?

   So many questions indeed…
4. Lew 4

   9 September 2008 at 6:43 pm

   Or: neither.

   False dichotomies are easy, but the world usually isn’t that simple.

   Above goes for both the post and kisekiman’s comment above.

   L
5. imcheezy 5

   9 September 2008 at 6:48 pm

   Erm, the second one!

   By the way, is it just me or there a lovely big green banner-ad for Kiwibank over at Farrar’s at the moment?

   It’s our’s, you know!
6. Still raining but spring is in the air 6

   9 September 2008 at 6:51 pm

   So what happened? Did trevor get a a whole bunch together and is drip feeding them for effect? Whether they were leaked or not, I think he got a whole bunch. I don’t care whether he did or not, except on the news tonight he implied that this was not the case, yet it doesn’t make sense for someone to give it to him bit by bit. I just hope that it doesn’t backfire on labour as I am feeling quite positive again about our future.
7. Red Coward 7

   9 September 2008 at 7:51 pm

   [lprent: Bye dad]
8. East Wellington Superhero 8

   9 September 2008 at 7:02 pm

   So how does the great helmswoman and supermanager credibly claim she knew nothing about the NZF and Owen Glenn.

   You guys are stuffed.

   Goodnight nurse.
9. piggy 9

   9 September 2008 at 7:03 pm

   In the only election he contested as party leader, Bill English polled ~15% as preferred prime minister. One would have to be nuts to think he wants to go back to that, or desperate to find something else to talk about besides the whole Peters-Glenn-Labour scandal.
10. Steve Pierson 10

    9 September 2008 at 7:03 pm

    imcheezy. email kiwibank, send them some of the filthy material from Kiwiblog and ask if they want their brand associated with it.

    still raining, I think he would be being drip-fed it. Like the secret taper has done, dripfeed to control the pacing and maximise the desired outcomes… if they were just handed over as a block there would have been a risk of Mallard dropping them as one bloack and the opportunity being lost, dripfeeding eliminates that risk.

    Others. So, Williams knew in 2005 that he was asked whether giving money to NZF would be ok by Labour, so what? Do you think he tells the PM every conversation he has? Of course he doesn’t, she keeps seperate from donations.

    And Clark knew Glenn was saying he gave a donation in 2008 after she asked Glenn that there was a conflcit of evidence.. so what? she always said there was a conflict of evidence.
11. Steve Pierson 11

    9 September 2008 at 7:05 pm

    piggy. English has said he wants to be leader again. He didn’t want to give up the leadership when he lost it, he wanted it back when Brash left, and he expects to get it back someday. Why do you think he’s stuck around in Parliament?
12. Concerned of Tawa 12

    9 September 2008 at 7:08 pm

    Oh Dear, Owen Glenn on Campbell and he isn’t happy…

    Mike Williams on Owen’s boat in the South of France asking for more money, Helen calling four times in a day to Mike Williams on his yacht…

    So back to the question:

    “Which seems more likely?’
13. East Wellington Superhero 13

    9 September 2008 at 7:12 pm

    Actually Steve, English has publicly said he wouldn’t challenge Key, so are you suggesting he’s lying? That’s usually the preserve of Laabour ministers.

    English isn’t an idiot and knows that Key is a better front man in getting a National Govt in place.

    Your analysis, I think, is largely hogwash and is a distaction from the NZF/Glenn disgrace.
14. randal 14

    9 September 2008 at 7:14 pm

    eshilly jk declared owen glenn to be ‘in compos mentis’. what sort of latin is that?
15. vto 15

    9 September 2008 at 7:20 pm

    big money influence..

    secret trusts and undeclared donations..

    secret deals between parties..

    lack of transparency..

    partisan questioning by the select committee..

    the list goes on but no matter what, all the rhetoric around the time of the EFA was clearly just a hollow sham and lies through gritted teeth for the purpose of tilting the playing field.

    I have been waiting all year for some evidence to emerge supporting winston bjeikle-peterson’s version and for clark to show some backbone. It has never arrived. Now its september and it is still getting worse for Winston First and (borrowing d4j’s term) Liarbour.

    Didn’t these dumb-arse pricks in parliament ever listen to their parents? You know, honesty is the best policy.
16. Lew 16

    9 September 2008 at 7:20 pm

    EWS: yes, because he could say anything other than that and retain his job.

    It may come as a surprise to you that politicians (as with other people) sometimes say one thing and do another. In fact, One John Key did so, promising English his vote in a leadership battle, and then giving it to Brash. That’s the incident to which Steve refers.

    Now, you have to admit that even if it’s fairly speculative, it has to be a possibility, right? It can’t be completely ruled out?
    L
17. Johnty Rhodes 17

    9 September 2008 at 7:20 pm

    …Anyway you are just paid pawns writing what you are told to write, doing your job as they say, so you have to deny the truth.

    [Tane: And that’s Johnty banned for life, following his warning earlier today. None of us are paid to write here or directed to do so by anyone.]
18. johndoe 18

    9 September 2008 at 7:30 pm

    There’s no doubt Bill English would like to be PM (hey, who in politics wouldn’t?) – but the only door to that is at the end of a very successful six-to-nine year run as Government, during which he earns the nation’s trust and respect as deputy PM and finance minister. There’s zero chance he’d clobber his own hopes with this kind of infantile crap.
19. J Mex 19

    9 September 2008 at 7:37 pm

    What’s more likely, a National shadow minister sabotaging their own chance of being a minister or the Labour party protecting their own ministerial benches?

    Ummmmmmmmmmmm….

    You guys can’t have it both ways:

    – “National have a secret agenda!!!!!”

    – “National also have a secret agenda to sabotage their secret agenda!!!!!!!!!!!”
20. kisekiman 20

    9 September 2008 at 7:38 pm

    “So what, nothing to see here, move on”. Typical Officer Barbrady comments you can expect from the left when confronted with their own hypocrisy.

    You guys are saying you’re bored shitless by what has possibly been the one of the most explosive incidents in NZ politics in the last ten years but I would respectfully suggest you should be scared shitless as the proverbial is about to hit the fan.

    See ya, wouldn’t wanna be ya.
21. mike 21

    9 September 2008 at 7:40 pm

    Pathetic, the biggest breaking political story in years and the Standard have their heads in the stand
    In case you are unaware SP Mr Glen has just been on TV3 saying Mike Williams spent 2 days on his boat a few weeks ago begging for more money and HC phoned 4 times during his visit – these is the same dispicable bunch that have been smearing him as a confused old man. Some nice headlines on stuff too http://www.stuff.co.nz/4686800a6160.html “Winston Peters asked me for money and I told Labour all about it, expat billionaire Owen Glenn told Parliament’s privileges committee this afternoon”
22. mike 22

    9 September 2008 at 7:44 pm

    Pathetic, the biggest breaking political story in years and the Standard have their heads in the sand
    In case you are unaware SP Mr Glen has just been on TV3 saying Mike Williams spent 2 days on his boat a few weeks ago begging for more money and HC phoned 4 times during his visit – this is the same dispicable bunch that have been smearing him as a confused old man. Some nice headlines on stuff too http://www.stuff.co.nz/4686800a6160.html “Winston Peters asked me for money and I told Labour all about it, expat billionaire Owen Glenn told Parliament’s privileges committee this afternoon”
23. Johnty Rhodes 23

    9 September 2008 at 7:44 pm

    [Banned]
24. garth mcvicor 24

    9 September 2008 at 7:47 pm

    wheres the mention of the peters saga, and williams going cap in hand to owen on his boat.

    Hahahaahah
25. Brett Dale 25

    9 September 2008 at 7:52 pm

    Show us some evidence to support your theory, because thats all it is at the moment, you need actual hard data to back it up.
26. garth mcvicor 26

    9 September 2008 at 7:55 pm

    and what theory would that be?
27. vto 27

    9 September 2008 at 8:00 pm

    stuck in moderation. bah.

    anyhow, the holier than thou lot have clearly been ‘lying’ in the gutters.

    For the few good things this govt has done imo they simply have to go because of the stench of lying, hypocrisy, corruption, nastiness, arrogance and simple dishonesty. Throughout their tenure.

    Let the next lot in. To no doubt go and repeat all the same mistakes. What a sheer waste of our working lives having to support this crappola.
28. forgetaboutthelastone 28

    9 September 2008 at 8:04 pm

    garth mcvicor:

    See the topic of this post.

    Brett Dale:

    In the last week we’ve seen National’s environment, conservation, biofuels, and, now, research, science, and technology policies leaked from within National. The leakages have not just been to the Labour party but to TV3 as well. There’s your hard data. Now which seems more likely?
29. mike 29

    9 September 2008 at 8:04 pm

    After Fairbrother and Cullen insulted Glen again (and the publics intelligence) it makes for a great press conference with OG tomorrow … Spring is in the air
30. vto 30

    9 September 2008 at 8:11 pm

    big money influence..

    in bed with the americans, I mean the english, I mean the monacoans..

    secret trusts and undeclared donations..

    secret deals between parties..

    lack of transparency..

    partisan questioning by the select committee..

    the list goes on but no matter what, all the rhetoric around the time of the EFA was clearly just a hollow sham and lies through gritted teeth for the purpose of tilting the playing field.

    I have been waiting all year for some evidence to emerge supporting winston bjeikle-peterson’s version and for clark to show some backbone. It has never arrived. Now its september and it is still getting worse for Winston First and Labour.

    Didn’t these children in parliament ever listen to their parents? You know, honesty is the best policy.

    And how is Williams soliciting donations in London and Europe.. I thought that means policy written by the americans, I mean the English, I mean the Monacans. Oh lord knows, better ask Mallard ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

    They stink with the rotten odour of compulsive liars and hypocrites. Corrupted by power. Disgusting.
31. punch 31

    9 September 2008 at 9:13 pm

    [lprent: Bye dad]
32. mike 32

    9 September 2008 at 8:34 pm

    Is it just me or does anyone else find it sad (and ironic) that “Who wants to be a Millionaire NZ” has to be filmed in Aussie with expat kiwi’s?

    Oh well at least a swag will be coming home sooner after todays developments..
33. randal 33

    9 September 2008 at 8:34 pm

    this thread is the biggest argument I have ever read for remedial reading for adults and comprehension tests for blog posting. just as well we are a long way from anyone else otherwise they would be pissing themselves.if these people are representative of the nats or act then the country is in big trouble.
34. vto 34

    9 September 2008 at 8:41 pm

    randal – divert! divert! ha ha. sheesh its the way language is going so get with it man. This combined with your “Go Winnie” mantra lights you up. Go Winnie!
35. vto 35

    9 September 2008 at 8:42 pm

    See ya Owen, bring your boat next time.
36. kisekiman 36

    9 September 2008 at 8:44 pm

    You may not have noticed Randal but the country is already in big trouble and most of the world already pisses themselves at NZ’s expense. I don’t though, I feel like crying I’m that ashamed of the behaviour of our government politicians but maybe a remedial reading course might take my mind off it, thanks for the suggestion. BTW try using some capitals at the start of your sentences.
37. higherstandard 37

    9 September 2008 at 8:46 pm

    Best comment of the day definitely goes to Owen Glenn

    …Mr Glenn became frustrated about continual questions on whether he sure if it was Mr Peters he spoke to about the donation, he recognised his voice.

    Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen asked whether the person talked like Mr Peters usually did.

    Mr Glenn repeated that he was very sure.

    “I knew it wasn’t you Dr Cullen…you already had your $500,000.”
38. higherstandard 38

    9 September 2008 at 8:50 pm

    D4J stop impersonating Owen Glenn the man’s taken enough crap from the parliamentarians – we should at least treat him with some respect after he’s fronted with money for the business school, the Millennium institute and has shown parliament up for the den of vipers it is.
39. Concerned of Tawa 39

    9 September 2008 at 8:52 pm

    Owen is having a press conference tommorrow too.

    Better get the Bollinger on ice.

    Will he confirm that Clark/Williams asked him to buy the Maori Party with $250,000 to go with Labour and buy the election?

    Or is Tariana saving that until the end, to put the knife into Helen herself?
40. Nick C 40

    9 September 2008 at 8:53 pm

    Guys we shouldnt be talking about Owen Glenn talking to the select committee, even though like every news network is leading with it.

    Its just not news! How do I know this? The Standard havent done a post about it yet, therefore it isnt even worth talking about
41. Tane 41

    9 September 2008 at 9:00 pm

    It’s always amusing to see how incredibly interested the right is in what a bunch of people on a left-wing blog have to say. Good for the ratings though I guess…
42. Pascal's bookie 42

    9 September 2008 at 9:07 pm

    kisekiman

    I don’t though, I feel like crying I’m that ashamed of the behaviour of our government politicians…

    Just out of interest, which nation’s politicians would you be proud of? No cheating, they have to be a current mob that haven’t had their hides polished by the passing of time and state funerals. The Brits? The Yanks? The Aussies? The french, the Italians, the Russians, or the Japanese?

    Apart from the Aussies, (and only ’cause they haven’t had time) most current foreign govt’s get scandals that make our little parish pump gossip sessions laughable. We are talking about less than a million of our little dollars, no favours involved, crikey, no one even got their dick sucked.

    Which is not to say I approve, or think it’s not bad or whatever, I’m not defending anything here, but get some perspective if you want to start slagging the country off because of it.

    My captcha had one those fncking horrid American ‘z’ spellings. Bloody hegemonic bastards.
43. Inventory2 43

    9 September 2008 at 9:12 pm

    Tane – stop being a dork. Labour is in this mess up to its nostrils. But then you’re a Greenie aren’t you, so the whole left field is open top you. Open your eyes laddie, open your eyes….

    [Tane: Na, I just find it amusing to see you running around the blogosphere demanding answers from The Standard. Bro, I’ll let you in on a secret, I’ve never met Owen Glenn. Bumped into Helen once at a trade union function, can’t say I recall ever meeting Winston. Explain to me why I or anyone else here should have to write apologies or condemnations of any of these people as and when you demand them. Someone will probably post on this in due course, until then you can discuss the issue in our comments section or go elsewhere. We’re an opinion site, not a news service.]
44. East Wellington Superhero 44

    9 September 2008 at 9:18 pm

    It’s interesting to watch you because you’re so distorted and believe your own propaganda and can’t see you’re own hypocrisy. It’s a fascinated little vignette on the grotesque tapestry of the last 9 years.

    Seriously, for example, let’s all go back to last year before the EFA passed and see how you all took the moral high ground over big money etc etc. I mean how can anyone take you seriously now. How can anyone trust Clark or Cullen. John Key might be evasive and gaffe-prone but he’s not deceitful and untrustworthy when it comes to his commiments.

    No one can trust Labour now. You’re joke. Michael Joseph Savage, Bill Rowling, Kirk and Lange would all be ashamed of you and of Clark.

    Ashamed.

    And yet you persist in this charade.

    Fascinating.

    [Tane: Spare me the purple prose. I’ve always said big money and anonymous donations have no place in politics, and I think every other author on this site has said that too. The Glenn saga simply adds weight to that view. So where’s the hypocrisy?]
45. East Wellington Superhero 45

    9 September 2008 at 9:25 pm

    Blah blah blah
46. vto 46

    9 September 2008 at 9:25 pm

    Tane – I take an interest because the double standards so common to this govt (and most actually) seriously annoy me. And this whole scenario is the perfect example.

    What really gets me about this situation is the allegations levelled at other parties about “big money” foreign money” “shady deals” “secret trusts” etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc during the EFA fiasco were being repeated in almost perfect copy by those making the allegations at the time they were making the allegations! It is just plain ugly. Ugly ugly ugly. They stink. They have no decency, they are beneath contempt. And I resent the way these creeps hold such a sway over people in their lawmaking while their lies and corruption and deceipt run hard alongside.

    The laws the politicians make have a very heavy and direct effect on people’s lives. We have scum making laws to control us. They are not decent people – and this is backed up by Owen Glenn’s tv3 interview comment about his treatment by Clark and mallard etc at the business school opening. Simple indecent human behaviour.
47. East Wellington Superhero 47

    9 September 2008 at 9:33 pm

    vto,

    Do you remember Marion Hobbes’ comment at the Select Committee with regard to dodgy partisan aspects of the EFA. She said ‘Sorry, “that’s our kaupapa”.

    That’s fantastic. I will remember that for the rest of my political life as the perfect crystalisation or arrogance and ignorance.
48. vto 48

    9 September 2008 at 9:33 pm

    Oh and also Owen Glenn’s comment about not wanting to be in the trenches with any of them (clark cullen mallard peters) because they would push you out first. Very very telling.

    It just confirms so much about this govt’s participants.
49. forgetaboutthelastone 49

    9 September 2008 at 9:34 pm

    “John Key might be evasive and gaffe-prone but he’s not deceitful and untrustworthy when it comes to his commiments.”

    evasive = deceitful and untrustworthy – therefore John Key is deceitful and untrustworthy.

    Yes Key is gaffe-prone – an incompetent politician. Clark on the other hand has a long record of being a supremely competent politician.
50. Draco TB 50

    9 September 2008 at 9:34 pm

    Let the next lot in. To no doubt go and repeat all the same mistakes. What a sheer waste of our working lives having to support this crappola.

    So, what you’re saying here, vto, is that we need a new political system because the Liberal Democrat model that we’re using is massively corrupt?
51. mike 51

    9 September 2008 at 9:40 pm

    “Clark on the other hand has a long record of being a supremely competent politician.”

    If she had not mislead the public for most of this year and come clean she may well have been remembered that way.
52. Anita 52

    9 September 2008 at 9:41 pm

    Back on topic for a moment… I find it hard to believe that Bill English would be doing this. He shouldn’t want to destablise Key until after the election.
53. East Wellington Superhero 53

    9 September 2008 at 9:42 pm

    So, thestandard editor/moderator, is there going to be a blog on the Owen Glenn story?
    Are you going to have the guts to do one – you know, to reassure the faithful folk that support Labour?

    [Tane: EWS, I’d expect better research from you of all people. There is no editor or moderator on this site. People post on what they like and only as they have the time. We’re an opinion site, not a news service. Having said that, I imagine someone will write something at some stage, and it may or may not be nice to Labour or NZ First. Oh, and your constantly abusive tone is not welcome here. We do this because we enjoy it, not to be spend our evenings answering stupid questions from National Party activists.]
54. vto 54

    9 September 2008 at 9:43 pm

    Draco, more sheer frustration and anger at human’s nature at times. You know, the old truism about power corrupting. It seems to have been proven again. Which should be anything but surprising.

    So no need for a new system, more just tweaking around the edges to, over time, weed out the risks of this aspect of human nature being allowed to flourish in our system again. All systems the same when it comes to this core aspect of humanity.

    Having now blamed it all on some generic human genome type problem, the individual people involved must still without doubt take responsibility for this type of breach of society’s standards. Especially given their position.
55. Anita 55

    9 September 2008 at 9:47 pm

    Can I put in a vote (in this completely non-voting space, but y’know what I mean) for a single post titled “Put Winston Peters, Owen Glenn and NZ First stuff here” so that I don’t have to read around it everywhere else?

    Yeah I know, that’s not the point but… 🙂
56. vto 56

    9 September 2008 at 9:48 pm

    And just some more 2c before I bung some corks in my ears to stop the steam wooshing out..

    Clark had better not have the nerve to suggest this fiasco points to the need for the compulsory funding of political parties by the people. Death knell sounding if so.
57. Brett Dale 57

    9 September 2008 at 9:50 pm

    Tane:

    Its always interesting and funny to see what the left are up too?
58. Tane 58

    9 September 2008 at 9:55 pm

    Anita, there’s no point. Just let them get it out of their system.
59. Robinsod 59

    9 September 2008 at 9:56 pm

    Hey brett you retard – are you still shopping that house boy line around?

    Super Hero – I see you’ve turned up to gloat after being too scared to comment here for ages. That’s the problem with you righties – you’re easily excited – it only ever leads to disappointment…

    Oh and super hero – you are a true disappointment.
60. punch 60

    9 September 2008 at 9:58 pm

    Mr Glenn gonged the witch smack in the head!
61. vto 61

    9 September 2008 at 10:00 pm

    Tane, the whole thing doesn’t seem to concern you at all? Jaded? Cynical? Commonplace?

    Just trying to get a feel for the sort of thing you would find unacceptable, because this doesn’t seem to do it for you.
62. forgetaboutthelastone 62

    9 September 2008 at 10:00 pm

    vto –

    “this fiasco points to the need for the compulsory funding of political parties by the people.”

    She hinted at that last week – i thought she would go further with it. You might be best served to keep those corks in your ears.
63. Anita 63

    9 September 2008 at 10:01 pm

    Tane,

    I know, but I want a filter 🙂

    I want to write a comment about how National released two policies today because they think Labour’s got them, which relates to various conversations in comments today. But I can’t find the comments cos of the accretion of off topic slime.

    So… I will start here I guess 🙂

    National <a href=”http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2008/09/09/12437374e9c3″released Housing and Building and construction early, claiming they were forced to because they believe Labour has them.

    So, my questions are:

    1) If they were right, why didn’t Mallard release those instead of Research, Science and Tech?

    2) National has clearly made a guess about what’s out there. If they’re right it was a good play, but if they are wrong and Labour releases something else they’ve blown their whole story about a single bundle being lost. They must be very sure. Does this mean they’ve found the leak?
64. Dean 64

    9 September 2008 at 10:02 pm

    “Tane: Spare me the purple prose. I’ve always said big money and anonymous donations have no place in politics, and I think every other author on this site has said that too. The Glenn saga simply adds weight to that view. So where’s the hypocrisy?”

    Tane, with all due respect, I think it’s because everybody knows that if it was a National government defending Peters you’d be calling them out for what they were.

    It’s also why people love to hate Bryce Edwards – he might be “left” but he’s prepared to be truthful when it comes to things like this.

    There’s no point denying it. The puzzling thing is why you do.

    “Clinging to power is all that motivates this dangerous and desperate government” comes to mind. It’s just a shame that you can’t admit that, just as it was true back then, so it is right now. Of course, you can hide behind the process involved with MMP and minority governments, but a flip flop is still a flip flop, no matter how people vote.

    [Tane: Dean, it’s not a National Government defending Peters. It’s a Labour Government saying it’ll let the process run its course before making a decision. I think that’s fair enough, and I’m not going to defend Winston Peters, nor do I think Clark should. Don’t even start me on Bryce Edwards.]
65. Anita 65

    9 September 2008 at 10:03 pm

    3) Why didn’t National do it over the weekend? I assume that means they thought Labour only have Env and Conservation, but why would they think that if they genuinely believed that a single bundle was lost and they knew what was in it?
66. Anita 66

    9 September 2008 at 10:04 pm

    lprent,

    Any chance of preview until edit comes back?

    [lprent: I’ll try to find some time… ]
67. Tane 67

    9 September 2008 at 10:04 pm

    Vto. Bro I haven’t really followed it. The whole saga peaked far too early for me. Looks like Winston’s a crook, there’s some confusion about what Mike Williams knew or something. The rest I’m not really informed enough to talk about.
68. Brett Dale 68

    9 September 2008 at 10:07 pm

    Robinsod:

    Name calling, classy, although thats slightly better than Tane’s lame attempt to brush off the Peter’s saga has a non story.
69. Robinsod 69

    9 September 2008 at 10:09 pm

    It’s also why people love to hate Bryce Edwards – he might be “left’ but he’s prepared to be truthful when it comes to things like this.

    People hate Bryce because he is a dick. And a boring dick at that. Trust me – you don’t want to be cornered at a party by this guy…

    edit: Brett – you wouldn’t know classy if it bit you on the arse. Because you are a moron. As for the peters “saga”? Just because you wish it doesn’t make it true. If it did you would be popular, handsome and rich…
70. vto 70

    9 September 2008 at 10:11 pm

    Tane but its such a big deal, how can you not follow it, reflecting as it does on this govts main participants.

    anyway, I’m off to bed with corks jammed in ears. and then off to the boondox for several daze to fill me belly with mullions of tiny whitebait fishes. yum
71. Robinsod 71

    9 September 2008 at 10:14 pm

    Yo – vto! – Good stuff bro but make sure you put the golden ones back – they’re too rare to be scoffing in a fritter…
72. r0b 72

    9 September 2008 at 10:18 pm

    Just trying to get a feel for the sort of thing you would find unacceptable, because this doesn’t seem to do it for you.

    Well speaking only for myself vto, here’s a few things I find unacceptable.

    (1) Trying to rort an election by colluding with a third party campaign which breaches electoral finance law, then lying about it to the public. The public seem to agree, because Brash lost his job for this.

    (2) Lying to the public about what you intend to do if you win the election, concealing your true hard right agenda behind a bland Labour-lite facade. The public seem to agree, considering the hit National has taken since the secret agenda tapes.

    (3) Concealing the identity of donors to the party (who should by the intent of the law be publicly listed) behind shell trusts, and possibly selling out to these secret donors aspects of your policy (eg National’s policy relating to insurance, as per The Hollow Men). The public don’t seem to have woken up to that one in a big way yet, but one good thing to come out of this NZF mess is that now they just might…

    But anyway, I haven’t seen such an orgiastic frenzy of right wing indignation here since the last time we had a good “who are The Standard” witch hunt. All very edifying I’m sure. I’m going to go take a walk in the fresh air, deliver some pamphlets. Tally ho.
73. killinginthenameof 73

    9 September 2008 at 10:20 pm

    far out you lot are coming across desperate. You wouldnt think you lot had such a big lead in the polls, unless you suspect something we dont?

    but yeah I think the whole two factions thing is fairly plausable. Billy Boy English (east wellington super hero’s catholic idol, hey buddy, hows tracking down the rest of those kiddy fidlers going?) but who else, up to 6 people isnt it?

    Then theres the opposing faction, “No Brash, No Cash” et al

    interesting times!
74. vto 74

    9 September 2008 at 10:21 pm

    ya ya mr sod. saw a very rare weird one once that was really black with frilly red rooster-type mane things around its head. the weirdo rare ones always stick out so will gently return to the h2o. later.
75. randal 75

    9 September 2008 at 10:35 pm

    +staying on topic…is it an implant or is it a rug…which is more likely?
76. Bill 76

    9 September 2008 at 10:46 pm

    So the middle classes who dominate our parliament are not to be trusted in the trenches. Really?

    And they can be (or even tend to be) slimy, smarmy and disloyal?

    OMG how revelatory that you shouldn’t trust them as far as you can throw them. C’mon! Nobody from outside the middle class has ever thought otherwise.

    This stramash is being propagated by ‘holier than thou’ middle class hypocrisy in the media and some delusional shite that our political masters are somehow honourable.

    It’s all bollox.

    The only question should be which party has the most preferred policies and which party is more liable to stick closer to their professed policies.
77. Gooner 77

    9 September 2008 at 11:03 pm

    Helen Clark knew because she is the self-proclaimed Chief Political Strategist of the Labour Party. How would the Chief Political Strategist not know of a Chief Political Strategy?
78. Brett Dale 78

    9 September 2008 at 11:07 pm

    Robinsod:

    I wouldn’t know classy? Yet you call me a retard.

    By the way, last election I split my vote between Labour and New Zealand first.
79. Brett Dale 79

    9 September 2008 at 11:08 pm

    Robinsod:

    Two out of three anit bad.
80. Matthew Pilott 80

    9 September 2008 at 11:10 pm

    To stick with off topic (sorry Anita!) what is it that Labour has done that is so bad? No one is even attempting to say what, just spewing rhetoric. All this “Stench of Corruption”, “Hypocricy” and so on.

    I’ll tell you what has got me riled about it: Clark seemed to have a good idea (I’ll only say that it is not certain) that Glenn had donated to NZF, and possibly (but even more unclear) that Peters had asked. Actually, the latter I’m not sure about – maybe she knew about the donation, but not until her conversation with Glenn did she have any definite word – a conversation Glenn generously mentioned as “Private and Confidential”; as I have stated before, a good reason for Clark to have kept her peace.

    So – Clark had evidence Peters was lying, none of it concrete, yet she did not call him on it. This was to avoid the present storm and keep the coalition together, and it seems to me she could have possibly acted to ensure Winston did not lie earlier. So that’s bad management, but Peters is not a Labour MP. I suppose she could have acted on her suspicions and sacked him, but I don’t know if that was a genuine option – this is because I can’t tell if she’d have had enough concrete evidence to have acted without risking getting it awfully wrong.

    I guess that’s an open invitation for people to paint a different picture, but try and be specific, if you will indulge me.

    Labour’s treatment of Glenn has also been a shocker. Not the ‘confused’ comment – I listened to the whole exchange and Cullen was merely saying that Glenn himself had presented conflicting accounts of what happened (stating there were different destinations for the dnation). But his questioning today of Glenn as to whether he was on the phone to Peters was a bridge too far – trying to discredit him in an adversarial fashion pissed me right off. Perhaps there’s something about the Privileges Committee process that makes that behaviour the norm but I don’t think so. Cullen sure got his back, though, but following on from a few other efforts to run distraction around the situation, I’m pretty disgusted.

    That, though, is an issue for Labour. If they want to antagonise and alienate a donor, they will suffer the consequences – but again, it’s not a hanging offence. Frankly, they should have stayed away because the whole thing is an NZF problem and they should have stayed right out of it.

    Thought I’d write this to spare Tane the inane inquisition – you guys from the right are blowing it up. It was one short story on the news tonight, equal in length to the leaks. Just because it riles you up, don’t expect the same from others, and don’t go about demanding comments from people here, or criticising a lack thereof. Makes you look like, well I won’t say what I think, but it’s pretty stupid behaviour.

    If you don’t believe me, a look at stuff right now and it’s the second of four headlines. It’s a half-frontpage story on the Herald next to the All Blacks which isn’t big (especially from them), no mention on 3 until you get to the news page, and TVNZ leads with the leak story. Makes all you lot look like you need to pause for breath! No doubt it will lead the broadsheet, but have some perspective.

    BTW none of them mention Labour at all, and even in the stories there is very limited content – three brief mentions all up. Honestly, outside of a few of you, it’s not likely to be that bad for Labour. What I put above is my understanding of it and I have followed what was going on with reasonable interest. I’m not impartial, but I’m not a nutty lynch-mob participant either. I may be wrong about the final impact, but I’m not saying that because of where my support lies – throughout it has been a media vs Winston issue and it will most likely remain as such.
81. Jared 81

    9 September 2008 at 11:32 pm

    So when is The Standard, the fine bastion of non partisan political discussion and comment going to be remarking on Owen Glenn’s latest admissions? The left love to chastise the National Party and the right at the slight whiff of a conspiracy, but when systematic corruption by the left is uncovered, The Standard stays silent. Charming.
82. Jared 82

    9 September 2008 at 11:40 pm

    Oh come off it Matthew. This whole debacle smacks of incompetence and hypocrisy considering how critical the left and Labour have typically been on this sort of behaviour on the right. Remember the Exclusive Brethren debacle? And you are trying to suggest that the Labour Party who according to Owen Glenn knew about the donations and up until recently were soliciting even more donations from Glenn are innocent? Isn’t it ironic that a bill, the EFA, brought in to counter so called undertable political funding hits those who fought the hardest for it, and not the National Party which it was ultimately intended to hit? You know as well as I do, if this was involving any party from the Right then this would be front page news with Helen Clark herself calling for John Key and Rodney Hide to resign and hand themselves in for a public flogging.
83. Dean 83

    10 September 2008 at 12:03 am

    “[Tane: Dean, it’s not a National Government defending Peters. It’s a Labour Government saying it’ll let the process run its course before making a decision. I think that’s fair enough, and I’m not going to defend Winston Peters, nor do I think Clark should. Don’t even start me on Bryce Edwards.]”

    Tane, don’t pretend if it was National in Labour’s place that you’d be insisting that due process was the correct course of action.

    You know you wouldn’t. Come on, man. It’s ok to admit you’re biased. It’s not like anyone thinks youre going to agree with anything Fox news churns out, and it’s not likely you’re going to agree with pretty much anything Rodney Hide says.

    You’re firmly in the left camp, and that’s cool – you admit and and do a really good job of debating against the right. It’s just ludicrous to pretend that you’d have the same opinion if it was National.
84. Dean 84

    10 September 2008 at 12:11 am

    “People hate Bryce because he is a dick. And a boring dick at that. Trust me – you don’t want to be cornered at a party by this guy ”

    Yes, it must be bloody horrible speaking with someone from the left who doesn’t think the EFA was a brilliant idea.
85. T-Rex 85

    10 September 2008 at 12:47 am

    Jared you silly cock, your reply evidences exactly what Matt was talking about. Especially this:

    Isn’t it ironic that a bill, the EFA, brought in to counter so called undertable political funding hits those who fought the hardest for it

    Not as ironic as how something so complex as a computer has made it so simple for idiots to publicise garbage. Do you mean Labour? Precisely how are they in violation of the EFA here? I think perhaps you should go away until you have the vaguest clue of what you are talking about.

    Do you mean this?:

    Owen Glenn, acknowledged supporter and long time donor to the Labour party appears to have been asked for, and made, donations to the Labour party. SCANDAL!

    Matt – thanks. You said what I’ve been meaning to write but couldn’t motivate myself to.

    I think Labour has been fairly rude in their treatment of a major donor, and that’ll be bad for a) their wallets and b) their profiles, but that’s about it. I can’t say I’m impressed with Clarks conduct, but what else was she supposed to do? On the one hand she has the word of a major donor – on the other hand she has the very publicly and prominently stated word of the foreign minister who, despite being a slippery prick and probably going to get what’s coming to him (By the way Randal, do you realise that every time you say “go winnie” you sound like you’re a three year old cheering an A.A.Milne book?), has persuaded 130,000 NZ citizens (shudder) that he deserves to have “right honourable” in front of his name. In a clash of credibilities like that, with no definitive evidence either way, I think think there was little more she could do than what she did – namely wait for due process to clarify the conflict.

    So when I actually think about it, all I can really find to say is that Labour should have been a fair bit more considerate of Glenn considering his past contributions, and Winston should (and probably will) go down in flames. Here’s hoping. Bye Winnie!

    This bitching about “hypocrisy” is just pathetic. Oh my god the government is more critical of the oppositions conduct than of it’s own, quick, call batman! The government doesn’t need to be critical of it’s own conduct – that’s what the opposition party is for. To those clambering up on the hypocrisy pedestal – isn’t it equally hypocritical of National to be criticising Labour at this point? Answer: yes. So what?

    Ok, I’m bored again. Basically when you cut away the crap floating around this whole issue comes back to Winston being crooked and incredibly brazen, which is yesterdays (well, yester1996’s) news to anyone with half a brain (I’m looking at those 130,000 of you as I say this). He should go down, Labour should apologize to Glenn and hope he keeps donating in the future (though I’m not sure if he still can as an overseas resident – or is he still NZ?), and people should go back to asking questions about issues that actually mean a damn outside the incredibly narrow circle of what qualifies as “the beltway” in NZ.

    —

    VTO – I find Winstons behaviour totally unacceptable. He is a liar and a sneak and I’d really love it if he’s done something sufficiently wrong to wind up in jail. That would make me put on my happy face.

    The rest of them more or less retain my usual level of esteem for politicians, which is to say “generally very low”. I’ve disliked Mallard for a long time, and while I admire Cullen it wouldn’t surprise me if he’s been pretty rude – wouldn’t be the first time.

    Personally I think if people are trying to decide, based on this event, who they want in parliament; once again their eyes should be drawn to the girl standing on the wharf. Vote Green, and get some more adults in the beehive.
86. Draco TB 86

    10 September 2008 at 12:57 am

    …if this was involving any party from the Right…

    It does involve a party from the right – NZ First. It doesn’t involve any party to the left except insofar as that one is in coalition with the party from the right that is involved.

    Yes, it’s possible that the PM could have handled the whole affair better but I think you’ll find that out of date rules and conventions got in the way. You’ve got to remember that this is the first time that this type of conduct has come up in a MMP environment in NZ. Even though we’ve had MMP for 15 years we’re still getting used to the whole concept and we don’t have the experience yet to handle all situations. Hopefully this fiasco will result in better rules being implemented.
87. Jared 87

    10 September 2008 at 1:09 am

    I meant NZ First you pillock. As per usual, jumping the gun and assuming I meant Labour. To put it further in perspective what you have is a case of Labour needing NZ First’s support and unwilling to risk their support by being overly critical. I never said nor implied that Labour had breached the EFA either. Morally and Ethically however, her and Labour’s actions have been a disaster. Soliciting even more donations?
88. T-Rex 88

    10 September 2008 at 1:21 am

    Sweet of you to clarify that Jared, thanks. Sweet, and fairly overdue considering that at no point in your rant above did you mention NZ first – but did mention Labour twice. Both times critically. Including in the sentence immediately before the one where you make reference to “those who fought hardest” etc.

    So actually you did, by association and omission of clarification, imply that Labour had been “hit the hardest” by the EFA. Quite falsely.

    As per usual twisting the facts and crying like a wittle bubby when the foul is called.

    Morally and Ethically however, her and Labour’s actions have been a disaster. Soliciting even more donations?

    Soliciting donations – Oh noes!!!! I don’t know what you think “soliciting donations” means, because you obviously don’t think it means “asking for money” (which is all it does mean) because if you knew that you’d acknowledge that it is legal, ethical, moral, and completely commonplace amongst political parties. Did you think it all came from cakestalls?

    You should probably write to Greenpeace, Amnesty International, CCF, Red Cross, World Vision, WWF etc and tell them they’re all immoral and unethical.
89. Jared 89

    10 September 2008 at 1:31 am

    I think it is fairly obvious to anyone who even reads the back page of the newspaper that NZ First was the only party implicated in EFA breaches in this instance, so implying that what I said suggested Labour had fallen foul of the EFA is plain ludicrous, and to be honest, a straw mans argument.

    Considering the current circumstances surrounding Owen Glenn’s political donations, Labour and Helen’s goal of forming a campaign based on honesty and trust, to seek donations in that manner, and in the current light is yes, I believe, immoral and unethical. In the same respect that if National was to solicit the Exclusive Brethren for donations after the fall out. Also, isn’t the aim of the EFA and Labour’s to improve transparency of political donations to prevent any unfair advantages?
90. kisekiman 90

    10 September 2008 at 1:31 am

    The EFA, heralded as the ultimate weapon against anonymous big money influence in our elections by Labour and it’s supporters and which has since been criticised by the Electoral Commission as having a “chilling effect” on public participation, contained specific provisions designed NOT to exclude big money donor Owen Glenn who without doubt fits Cullen’s description of a “rich prick”.

    Looks like they needn’t have gone to the effort as I doubt he’ll be contributing much now so good luck with tapping into the grass roots support base for your fund raising this election. I’m sure the grafters will see Labour as a party of transparency and integrity and dig deep.
91. T-Rex 91

    10 September 2008 at 1:51 am

    This whole debacle smacks of incompetence and hypocrisy considering how critical the left and Labour have typically been on this sort of behaviour on the right. Remember the Exclusive Brethren debacle? And you are trying to suggest that the Labour Party who according to Owen Glenn knew about the donations and up until recently were soliciting even more donations from Glenn are innocent? Isn’t it ironic that a bill, the EFA, brought in to counter so called undertable political funding hits those who fought the hardest for it…

    Don’t blame me for your lousy phrasing, I’m not the one who wrote it. If you think my selective highlight above misrepresents what you wrote then please, elaborate, and explain how you pointed to NZ First and are not trying to smear labour by association.

    OH! Now I see it!

    This whole debacle smacks of incompeteNce and hypocriSy considering how critical the lEft and Labour have typically bEen on this sort of behaviour on the right. Remember the Exclusive Brethren debacle? And you are trying to suggest that the Labour Party who according to Owen Glenn knew about the donations and up until recently were soliciting even more donations from Glenn are innocent? Isn’t it ironic that a bill, the EFA, brought in to counter so called undertable political Funding hits those who fought the hardest for it, and not the National Party which it was ultimately intended to hit?

    Sorry man, missed it the first time through, my bad. That’s what happens when you spell Z phonetically.

    —

    It’s not unethical at all you munter, he’s an acknowledged major donor. You clearly fall into the previously mentioned category of people who don’t understand the difference between undisclosed secret donations (by special interest groups with a barrow to push) and openly disclosed donations.

    “Also, isn’t the aim of the EFA and Labour’s to improve transparency of political donations to prevent any unfair advantages?” – Yes, which is why they would have had to disclose any donation they have or do get from Glenn, and why the subterfuge you’re protesting is a load of crap. You wanted Labour to announce they were trying to get donations from Glenn? Yeah, that’s newsworthy…
92. T-Rex 92

    10 September 2008 at 1:55 am

    “big money donor Owen Glenn who without doubt fits Cullen’s description of a “rich prick'”

    No, actually, he doesn’t. You see, you can tell “rich pricks”. Find a group of rich people, and look for the pricks. They’re the “rich pricks”. Other’s in the group are just rich.

    Pricks can be characterised by many things, among them a sentiment that cynical attacks on a nations currency leading to economic collapse and suffering are a perfectly reasonable way to make money because hey – it’s a market.
93. T-Rex 93

    10 September 2008 at 1:58 am

    More examples.

    Michael Fay – Rich Prick

    Gareth Morgan – Rich

    David Richwhite – Rich Prick

    Stephen Tindall – Rich

    You can also tell rich pricks apart from rich people because pricks tend to appear to have no friends. This is an illusion created by the fact that no one actually likes them.
94. max 94

    10 September 2008 at 8:10 am

    T-Rex.

    Shame Labour have screwed Owen Glenn over.

    Nice one labour. Shame about the morals.
95. Phil 95

    10 September 2008 at 8:15 am

    ‘-rex,

    So, the collapse of the economy is all the fault of John Key and his trading mates, and nothing to do with the economic shambles left behinsd by our last true left wing PM, Sir Robert?

    Your fantasy world must be a nice place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there.
96. Dom 96

    10 September 2008 at 8:28 am

    T-Rex, Tindall got rich by screwing workers and suppliers to the wall on wages/prices. So how is he not a rick prick?
97. Stephen 97

    10 September 2008 at 8:46 am

    John Key said the fourth policy is most probably Health. On Breakfast this morning.
98. Billy 98

    10 September 2008 at 8:50 am

    I propose to post on topic. Not always. Just now.

    It just doesn’t make sense that Bill English is planning to roll John Key when they have the best chance at forming a government since 1993.

    And if Trevor has access to all of National’s really dirty secrets, how come he isn’t releasing all of that sectret agenda stuff you guys talk about all the time. Could it be because there isn’t a secret agenda? Nah, that’s probably not it.
99. r0b 99

    10 September 2008 at 9:00 am

    I propose to post on topic. Not always. Just now.

    I just don’t know what the world is coming to, I really don’t.

    And if Trevor has access to all of National’s really dirty secrets

    No one says he does. Trevor has access to whatever the Nat leaker drops on his desk.

    how come he isn’t releasing all of that sectret agenda stuff you guys talk about all the time. Could it be because there isn’t a secret agenda?

    The secret agenda won’t be written down Billy. It will be known to most, and told to the party faithful at their gatherings, to help them swallow the Labour lite facade that National needs to adopt to make themselves (deceitfully) electable.
100. T-rex 100

     10 September 2008 at 9:11 am

     Phil – our economy has not collapsed. Go and look out the window. See people going to work, and getting paid, and having relatively easy access to credit, and not starving, and having functional state services (police, health, welfare, education) etc? That’s how you can tell.

     Compare it to… ohhh… say Thailand in the late 90’s.
101. T-rex 101

     10 September 2008 at 9:20 am

     Dom:

     I’m no fan of the warehouse. The difference is one of degree. Oh, and also http://www.tindall.org.nz/.

     Maybe Tindall IS a prick – I don’t know the guy, couldn’t tell you. But he doesn’t seem like one to me.
102. lukas 102

     10 September 2008 at 9:23 am

     functional state services (police, health, welfare, education)

     Bah… there goes the morning coffee!!

     Remind me, the report out early this week saying (as a result of a cruddy health system) how many people would die?
103. Matthew Pilott 103

     10 September 2008 at 9:25 am

     T-rex – thanks for jumping in. I should know better than to write something like that before going to bed. Given our history of writing the same thing at the same time, it’s fortunate you didn’t bash out a marathon post saying the same thing as mine!

     Still, I was genuinely interested in hearing what Labour had done wrong, specifically, as opposed to “you were against secret trusts and now you are vaguely associated with one somehow, though I will neglect to specify how” sort of comments.

     Labour has properly decleared their donations, so there’s nothing wrong with them trying to get further donations – apart from the fact that they’ve bagged the man they’re asking for money from – but that’s labour’s problem, not anyone else’s. Well apart from Glenn, unfortunately.
104. mike 104

     10 September 2008 at 9:32 am

     ..And still no post on the Peters/Clark/Glen fiasco. What a joke

     [mike. if you want a post on a certain topic within a certina timeframe, go write your own blog. There is a post on Peters now. SP]
105. Dom 105

     10 September 2008 at 9:48 am

     T-Rex – Point taken – he gives money away. I question so-called charity from these rich guys when they’ve made that money by treating their workers badly – I would love to see the Warehouse provide better conditions of employment. Of course, unlike a charity that isn’t tax deductible…

     As for the Owen Glenn situation – it’s actually nice to have a site without his face all over it.
106. Felix 106

     10 September 2008 at 9:49 am

     Billy I tend to agree about English. Why would he be doing this before the election? If he wants to roll Key for the job he’s got to get him into the job first, surely?

     Just doesn’t add up. Then again I’ve never been much of a chess player.

     p.s. this thread must be what whaleoils’s blog would look like if anyone went there.
107. Vanilla Eis 107

     10 September 2008 at 9:50 am

     mike: these people have jobs. They’re not paid bloggers, and they post on what interests them. I guess when HC fires Peters they will find the political implications interesting and will blog about it. Until then, please, hold your breath.
108. J Mex 108

     10 September 2008 at 9:57 am

     “..And still no post on the Peters/Clark/Glen fiasco. What a joke”

     That is not news! And certainly not of interest to the broader labour movement. National’s difficulties with their policy release are of primary interest, but that stuff about coalition partner and Foreign Affairs minister Winston and electoral funding and possible/probable lies in parliament and to the privileges committee are just a media beat-up!

     Would be interesting to see Steve do a post on, “What is more likely” relating to the Owen Glenn testimony vs the Fairbrother/Cullen hypothesis of Wayne Peters having Winston’s phone and impersonating him.

     [Insert Lyn comments about Standard contributors posting about what they want, when thy want…etc etc etc]
109. r0b 109

     10 September 2008 at 10:02 am

     Hey J Mex, you could go and help Mike start his blog, and you two funsters could post whatever you want whenever you want. Knock yourselves out. Please.

     In the mean time, the thread you were looking for is here:
     http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=2988

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS