Own goal!
August 28th, 2005 at 8:24 am by David FarrarThe SST has some leaked emails which show some ACT and BRT figures were giving advice to Don Brash on how to mount his leadership coup.
There is a massive irony is all this, as the rise of Don Brash has been seen as the biggest factor in the collapse of support for ACT. Ouch. Also the actual policy positions of National under Brash have been more towards the middle – almost no state assets sold, no housing NZ market rents, keeping the 39% tax rate etc.
A lot of people on the centre-right tend to take an interest in both ACT and National. Even though it is against National’s rules, I know many people who are or have been members of both.
When ACT had their leadership ballot last year, there were also Nats involved in at least one of the leadership campaigns.
A longer story with details of some of the emails is here.
I note the SST keeps using the term the “hard right” to describe some people. This just a silly term. Do they ever refer to left wign MPs as the “hard left”?
No tag for this post.
August 28th, 2005 at 8:29 am
A total sideshow. So … Roger Kerr sends Brash some emails? So … Brash answers them. Brash would answer emails from Karl Marx! Anyway, I thought Mathew Hooten was behind the Brash coup?
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 8:49 am
Rightkiwi:
And I guess the center-right bloggers who’ve been giving Brash unsolicited advice literally since the day he became leader also deserve VHRWC decoder rings. God, this campaign is beginning to take on an air of brain dead media walking… and I’m feeling a mood of folks from all sides of the political spectrum getting tired of dumbed-down ‘gotcha!’ non-stories like this.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 8:55 am
Of course Helen Clark didn’t talk to her mates in the CTU when she mounted her coup? Come on journos. Grow up and deal with real issues. Do you realise how stupid you make yourselves look?
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 9:10 am
Requiescat in pace
Helen Bain reads the last rites for a political party
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 10:22 am
Nationals stooge ACT would sell their own mother by the look of it! What about the hard working members, conned? Well this has certainly back fired on them, I have no pity.
Vote:And now they can’t figure out why National hasn’t thrown them a lifeline.
Well after all ACT’s is the party of the free market,
I say, Let Dog eat Dog!
August 28th, 2005 at 10:23 am
Isn’t the more interesting part of the story that it’s an internal National Party leak?
Cheers,
Vote:RB
August 28th, 2005 at 10:40 am
No, Russell the most interesting part of this story is that the SST is running with another story with no named sources – and a most conveniently timed one at that. One would think this is a pattern of behaviour that this paper would have gotten out of by now.
If she wrote “according to High Lord Mixyplituk of Mars, who is cocerned that his mind is being controled by Z-waves from Venus” I guess you’d take that at face value too.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 10:57 am
“No, Russell the most interesting part of this story is that the SST is running with another story with no named sources – and a most conveniently timed one at that. One would think this is a pattern of behaviour that this paper would have gotten out of by now.”
Craig, the HoS is leading with it too. I don’t think anything particularly startling is revealed in the leaked documents, but I’m struggling to see your point about there being “no named sources”. The story isn’t based on information from sources, but from emails and faxes that *all* have names on them.
Do you think the documents are fake? That Ruth Laugesen is lying when she says they were “leaked by a National Party source concerned at the influence of big business on the party”? Offer some evidence for your belief then.
Cheers,
Vote:RB
August 28th, 2005 at 10:59 am
heh heh..craig..c’mon..we all know national was ‘actified’ with the elevation of brash..
(check the media comments at the time..it was a classic centre vs right struggle…..and of course, it will go back there after the ritualised disembowellings they will get after the dismal election result)…cf. russells’ noting it’s a nat-leak…
so it’s not lord high whoever, craig..but the more prosaic ‘strewth’ and roger’i'll take my ball home’ grumpy..and assorted incubuii and acolytes..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 11:21 am
Russell wrote:
“Do you think the documents are fake? That Ruth Laugesen is lying when she says they were “leaked by a National Party source concerned at the influence of big business on the party”?
I reply:
Well, I don’t actually know unless Ruth decides to send me copies of these documents – because it’s utterly unthinkable that someone could forge an e-mail, isn’t it?
And, yes, I do have serious ethical problems with stories based entirely on anonymous sources. Why do journalists bother sourcing at all – because the reader has the right to assess the credibility and bias of those who make a statement.
And if the source for this story is really so “concerned” why won’t s/he reveal their identity, and how s/he had access to what I assume is Don Brash’s e-mail? Afraid Darth Brash will get ‘em in the magic Sith choke hold?
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 11:43 am
People do like to write themselves into history and play up their own bit part in the scheme of things. A number of factors lead to Don Brash taking over not least Bill English not giving the job of being leader his top priority (he had a young family), plus a number of odd man management decisions (he is quite inexperienced there and it showed), and other factors. But I would be the last person to want to discuss this history when there is a bigger fish to fry with the race wide open, though I guess it is Labour’s to lose and right now they are running a tight campaign (we know their image of unity is as fake as her photoshop image).
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 12:01 pm
Russell – the number of people who have authorised access to the Leader’s e-mail is (or was) incredibly small and beyond reproach.
Sometimes sources are blurred somewhat. It may still be someone connected to National, but perhaps they borrowed a laptop which had the email on it or something.
The suggestion this is a high level person who leaked it – I am 99.9999% certain it would not be the case.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 12:23 pm
Is the Brash email a leak from ACT sources?
…It has been reported that the leak was from National. I don’t believe this. Why would anyone in National want to run such a story three weeks prior to the election when things are looking like they are starting to overtake Labour? It may well be s…
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 1:49 pm
RB: It is irrelevant whether the documents are fake – I am sure they are genuine. But so what? Brash received some emails? Big deal. (The bigger issue is why Actoids were sending them, and what Kerr was doing getting involved in partisan politics. He is meant to lobby the govt of the day, not play party games.)
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 1:50 pm
“Russell – the number of people who have authorised access to the Leader’s e-mail is (or was) incredibly small and beyond reproach. Sometimes sources are blurred somewhat. It may still be someone connected to National, but perhaps they borrowed a laptop which had the email on it or something. The suggestion this is a high level person who leaked it – I am 99.9999% certain it would not be the case.”
I suspect you’re right (and that you have some idea who it might be), but I’d expect the Labour campaign to try and make hay with it. They’d be mugs not to.
Cheers,
Vote:RB
August 28th, 2005 at 2:12 pm
Russell Brown said: “Isn’t the more interesting part of the story that it’s an internal National Party leak”?
You’re spot on Russell. That IS the story. Why you would do that a few weeks from an election is beyond me. Goes to show the National Party is not so united as everyone thought.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 3:04 pm
Gooner:
Again, do you have access to Ruth Laughesen the rest of us don’t? Hell, if you really want to get in paranoid mode perhaps her anonymous source is really some disgruntled ACT-ivist who wants to share the pain.
But, once more, I guess we silly readers don’t deserve to judge the credibility and agenda of Ruth’s source for ourselves.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Fellers, you can argue til the cows come home but who, apart for seventeen or so ploggers and a few other political junkies really cares? I’m quite sure ordinary Joe voter doesn’t give a tuppeny whatsit whether Roger wrote to Rodney or Helen had a seance with Karl Marx. Maybe she did and that’s why she looks perrenially like a john dory.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 4:53 pm
Who’s the source? Nicky Hager?
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 5:03 pm
Essentially though, the only support Brash really needed was that within the National Party caucus. So therefore, what influence did the likes of Douglas, Kerr etc. have over the National MP’s in caucus? And secondly, what would figures such as Roger Kerr and Roger Douglas have against Gerry Brownlee, as the column of excerpts on the right-hand side would suggest?
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
Essentially though, the only support Brash really needed was that within the National Party caucus. So therefore, what influence did the likes of Douglas, Kerr etc. have over the National MP’s in caucus? And secondly, what would figures such as Roger Kerr and Roger Douglas have against Gerry Brownlee, as the column of excerpts on the right-hand side would suggest?
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 5:14 pm
This has to be the big yawn story of the campaign…
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 6:28 pm
Lindsay & Adolf:
Well, yes it is – but I really think there’s a wider and more serious ethical issue around the media running with stories based ENTIRELY on anonymous sources. As I said above (and RB didn’t bother to respond to), “Why do journalists bother sourcing at all – because the reader has the right to assess the credibility and bias of those who make a statement.”
With all due respect to the hacks and hackettes who read this blog, “just trust me” isn’t good enough.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 6:38 pm
“Well, yes it is – but I really think there’s a wider and more serious ethical issue around the media running with stories based ENTIRELY on anonymous sources. As I said above (and RB didn’t bother to respond to), “Why do journalists bother sourcing at all – because the reader has the right to assess the credibility and bias of those who make a statement.”"
But Craig, the story isn’t based on a statement by a source, it’s based on evidence: the emails and faxes that National and Act have acknowledged are genuine. There would not have been a story without them.
You can argue that they don’t show anything much at all, but I really can’t follow your argument about sources. Are you saying that everyone who ever leaks a document should turn up for a photo session? I think there would be a few Opposition MPs who wouldn’t like that …
Cheers,
Vote:RB
August 28th, 2005 at 7:21 pm
The story isn’t particularly interesting, but has substantial downsides in painting Brash as being hard right, when clearly the policies that he is advocating are very centrist.
A couple of potentials:
– ACT leaking – somehow hoping it will help to push down National’s vote, and thereby increase theirs. Doubt anyone would be that stupid.
– Someone who doesn’t want National to win with Brash at the helm – you’d have to be pretty bitter about something in order to screw the party over that much
I suppose the media should be reporting information like this when it comes to light, but it does seem a bit on the nose when some real scandals on the Labour side have been completely ignored.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 7:26 pm
I think the Labour Party has been sitting on this material for some time and released to the Labour Party broadsheet the SST. They had better come up with something better than this. Maybe they can, maybe they cannot.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 8:12 pm
Russell:
So why doesn’t the person who leaked them actually reveal their identity – and put themselves up to scrutiny? Especially when they’re ostensible “concerned” about covert influences on the National Party and its leader?
Let’s get real here for a moment – very few “anonymous” sources are brave whistleblowers revealing dark secrets essential to the public interest. They’re people who are using – and being used by, as often as not – the media to prosecute agendas, settle personal grudges and never seem to face much in the way of scrutiny and accountability.
If that doesn’t bother anyone, fine. I just hope, Russell, you never find yourself on the receiving end of a smear campaign launched by “sources close to Mr. Brown”.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 8:18 pm
Unless the source is an individual who is well known then I don’t see this going far.
Looks like a typical dirty election trick to me.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 8:21 pm
The SST gave more attention to the story than was necessary. The only influence that matters is that which influenced the National Caucus into replacing English with Brash.
Vote:I agree with PaulL that it does seem a bit on the nose for the SST. The story’s not balanced.
What have Brash and National actually done wrong here?
August 28th, 2005 at 8:55 pm
Brash, National & ACT have done nothing wrong whatsoever. The wrong has been committed by the person close to Brash who leaked the documents, whether now or two years ago.
Sorry Craig, as much as I think you’re a good guy (despite never having met you) the source clearly didn’t reveal him/herself because he/she works for the organisation he/she has tried to discredit.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 9:32 pm
A note on the use of anonymous sources: it’s quite legit, but should not be undertaken lightly. There’s three broad questions the journalist needs to answer: 1. Is the source is trustworthy (and, because they are requesting anonymity, the standard of proof needs to be higher than for a named source) ; 2. Can the informaitn be obtained some other way; and 3. is the story is of sufficient public interest.
The issue of whether they have an agenda is largely irrelevant, except in so far as it may affect the first question. All sources, named or unnamed, have an agenda. It’s a fact of life.
In this case, I’d suggest (1) and (2) are met for the SST story, but only part of the story meets (3).
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 9:32 pm
National culture is to surround itself with non threatening losers,so said the rabid dog’s right wing messiah,Roger Kerr (cur).Ok we all know that but we want names,team,y’know the ones that survived Cruella de Villes AKA La Bogue stop the rot campaign.Oh yes unlike good nazi stormtroopers these losers were the ones who were not prepared to go in and bayonet the wounded.ie those that did not survive the rabid rights assault on the sick the lame ,widows and deserted mothersetc etc.Goodness Ruth Richardson nearly got away with the cash registers in the hospitals.Imagine the funds that would have flowed into national party HQ.,once Gibbs and Fearnyhough and Hart et al had been given(at a discount) those cash cows.Ah well there is stiil schools and roads that a future tory-act cabal can reward their cronies with.Wake up Kiwis this Brash rooster is a trojan horse put up by a vicious bunch of cut throat robber baron’s to do their bidding.You have been warned.I thought this was what had happenned, Brash being a put up job,it is delicious having it proved.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 9:34 pm
National culture is to surround itself with non threatening losers,so said the rabid dog’s right wing messiah,Roger Kerr (cur).Ok we all know that but we want names,team,y’know the ones that survived Cruella de Villes AKA La Bogue stop the rot campaign.Oh yes unlike good nazi stormtroopers these losers were the ones who were not prepared to go in and bayonet the wounded.ie those that did not survive the rabid rights assault on the sick the lame ,widows and deserted mothersetc etc.Goodness Ruth Richardson nearly got away with the cash registers in the hospitals.Imagine the funds that would have flowed into national party HQ.,once Gibbs and Fearnyhough and Hart et al had been given(at a discount) those cash cows.Ah well there is stiil schools and roads that a future tory-act cabal can reward their cronies with.Wake up Kiwis this Brash rooster is a trojan horse put up by a vicious bunch of cut throat robber baron’s to do their bidding.You have been warned.I thought this was what had happenned, Brash being a put up job,it is delicious having it proved.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 10:49 pm
Red:
You know, that didn’t make any more sense the second time round. You also triggered Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies – please go to your room for a time out.
Vote:August 28th, 2005 at 11:03 pm
Who was the leak??
Vote:Vote in my poll at http://andrewfalloon.blogspot.com
August 29th, 2005 at 2:24 am
Adolf: surprising as it may be to people on the right, Douglas and Richardson’s Revolution was not universally popular, and their names are pure poison to a large sector of the electorate who are old enough to remember what they went through back then.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 2:53 am
as is the name helen clark…
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 6:47 am
Idiot/Savamt:
Thanks for being a patronising dork, youngling.
Hard as it may be for people on the left, we don’t all tell children that Ruth Richardson will eat them if they’re not good. BTW, I know one elderly woman who stopped voting Labour as soon as Helen Clark became leader – seems she couldn’t bring herself to vote for the woman who closed her local hospital while Health Minister.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 6:58 am
Sorry craig I credited you with more intelligence,what words didn’t you understand.?I don’t recall “dumb bastard ‘ being in there,then again if the cap fits.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 8:16 am
Obviously, the truth hurts Fred. Deal with it.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 9:48 am
Getting back to the subject matter at hand . . .
It’s interesting that all the emails that have been released deal with the period dating to the Brash coup. It’s likely that there’s loads of potentially embarrasing stuff in the opposition leaders e-mail (ditto for the PM), so why do the SST only have material dating back to this period?
The obvious answer (to me) is that some party apparatchik loyal to Bill English was given their notice shortly after the coup and decided to print out all of Brashs mail before they left. They’ve sat on it since then and released it at an embarrasing time for their ex-employer.
I imagine that person is still a member of the National Party (I find it unlikely that the SST would deliberately lie about their source) but no longer a terribly important or prominent player.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 12:46 pm
The word on the street is that Aaron Bhatnagar was involved. Just look at how much he hates ACT, they say.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 1:16 pm
Dim:
If that’s true, I’d suggest any Nat MP linked with this would have a better chance of getting elected leader of the Labour Party.
Anyway, seems like this is another one of those stories that just makes anyone outside the Molesworth Street Triangle yawn.
Vote:August 29th, 2005 at 1:21 pm
I highly doubt anyone at the MP level would have been involved. This has disgruntled underling written all over it.
Vote:August 30th, 2005 at 6:20 am
Heh Heh craig I want a hospital on the corner of my street too.Why can’t I have one,er actually I want a police station as well,and if I don’t get them I am certainly not going to vote national.
Vote:August 30th, 2005 at 6:55 am
Fred:
Sssh, Fred – you’ll only give ‘em ideas.
Vote: