Russell Brown on Nick and Katherine
March 27th, 2004 at 5:44 pm by David FarrarRussell Brown has pointed out that in the family court case which sparked the Nick Smith contempt charge, one has not heard the cousin’s side of the story, and that family court has to often decide very hard cases.
I think Russell has missed a hugely significant point though, which makes this different to normal family court cases. Most cases are between the two parents of a child, and yes they are often very difficult and messy.
But this was between both parents on one side, and a cousin who was a temporary care-giver. Unless there is concern for the safety of the child (and there has never been any suggestion of this), then this should not even be a debatable issue. Surely, surely, the starting point for any decision is that a child should be with their parents, unless this would place them at risk. This is hardly controversial. If one takes the decision in this case to an extreme you could have nannies claim custody of kids they look after because they spend more time with the kids.
Russell also blogs later in the week that MP Katherine Rich should “get a life” for demanding that Ruth Dyson resign as a Minister over calling her an “irresponsible tart”.
The only problem is she did no such thing. She has only asked for a proper apology, which even Russell admits should have been given. The headline of the Press article linked to by Russell states “Katherine Rich has called on the Christchurch MP to relinquish her portfolio” but you will note there is no quote from Katherine stating this.
It should be noted that resigning from one portfolio is not at all the same as resigning as a Minister. But in this case even that wasn’t called for. A journalist asked Katherine if Dyson should resign as Women’s Affairs Minister and the response I understand was along the lines of how she would have to decide if her comments were compatible with keeping the portfolio.
So I’m still somewhat perplexed at how Russell criticises Katherine more than Dyson, despite Dyson being the one who called her an “irresponsible tart”. I can only imagine the fury and condemnation that would have happened if the situation was reversed. I mean for example Gerry Brownless responding to a taunt from John Tamihere was so bad it was making the country being “flushed down the toilet?“
No tag for this post.
March 28th, 2004 at 5:48 pm
Michael Laws had an interesting, if not typically banal, take on the entire incident. He takes the piss out of the carefully cultivated intelligent but demure, intense but beautiful image Katherine Rich has created for herself and then goes on to say:
“Preening herself [Rich] in front of the camera, trying to make both Ruth and CYFS look like unfeeling, unthinking prats. Not unnaturally, our Ruth snapped….So it came out – sotto voce but out nonetheless. Irresponsible tart. Sorry, but I’m on Ruth’s side”.
Isn’t this the type of pure “common-sense” the United Future Party are pursuing….or was that NZ First?
Vote:March 28th, 2004 at 8:30 pm
I should warn that nothing is more likely to convince me something is wrong than quoting Michael Laws in support of it.
I love how Laws, and presumably you, think you can judge someone you have never even met. I have to laugh at the claim of a “carefully cultivated intelligent but demure, intense but beautiful image Katherine Rich has created for herself”
I have known Katherine since before she was an MP. You get what you see. Yes she is intelligent and beautiful (not so sure about demure!) but that is nothing to do with carefully cultivating an image.
Vote:March 28th, 2004 at 8:55 pm
“if not typically banal”
No – I’m also not one of Laws’ strongest fans! I said his take was “interesting”, not necessarily informative.
For more ways Katherine Rich is turning herself into a media commodity, see: Sunday – Life and Review. “National’s pin-up girl on unplanned pregnancy and motherhood in the House”. She’s glamorously dripping in 1920′s flare.
It occurs to me National will rely on the slick presentation of their policies in the upcoming 2005 election, focussing on their saleability and not their suitability. Sound and fury signifying nothing sort of stuff……
Vote:March 28th, 2004 at 9:08 pm
Good to see we agree on Laws. Ask Jordan Carter about my past with regard to Laws!!
Katherine got asked to take part in the SST profile. You can’t blame an MP for agreeing if a newspaper wishes to profile her and take some nice photos.
If one suggests that Katherine goes out and tries to trade on her good looks, it simply isn’t true. In fact Katherine has worked extremely hard to be judged on her ability, as it would have been very easy for people to pigeon hole her as a ditsy blond who got in on her looks. Again nothing could be further from the truth but it has been an interesting irony that being attractive and looking so youthful has actually IMO worked more against her, than helped her.
Vote:March 29th, 2004 at 2:11 am
Rob –
I wonder if this is the same Michael Laws I heard opining that Dyson wouldn’t have called another woman a tart in the first place if she wasn’t so ugly? Oy vey…
And I find it a little bizarre of you to sneer at Katherine Rich for a headline and lead she would have had no part in. I’d suggest you take that up with editor Cate Brett, who seems determined to continue the SST’s descent into being a tabloid in all but format.
Vote:March 29th, 2004 at 1:44 pm
You’re both correct when you say Rich wouldn’t have had editorial control over the photographs used on the cover of Sunday Review, and the headlines that trumpeted the story….however, Rich would have enough media savvy to see from what angle the report was going to be written, and could have therefore spoken to Brett (or the editor of the Sunday Review, Jo McCarroll) to ensure she wasn
Vote:August 5th, 2004 at 2:20 pm
“Don’t tell me I’m burning the candle at both ends — tell me where to
Vote:get more wax!!”
lipitor
October 17th, 2004 at 4:06 pm
Microsoft DNS service terminates abnormally when it recieves a response
Vote:to a DNS query that was never made. Fix Information: Run your DNS
service on a different platform.
— BugTraq
buy cialis cheap cialisDo not handicap your children by making their lives easy.
– Robert Heinlein
cialis cialis onlineMicrosoft DNS service terminates abnormally when it recieves a response
to a DNS query that was never made. Fix Information: Run your DNS
service on a different platform.
— BugTraq