Trotter joins the pay it back chorus
Chris Trotter yesterday joined the chorus of people saying Labour must pay back any money the Auditor-General finds was unauthorised.
Now this is a huge change for Trotter who just a couple of weeks agao was definiatly praising Labour for stealing the election, saying that breaking the law was a good decision if it kept National out of power.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Labour
September 25th, 2006 at 8:22 am
Trotter has repeated his call for Labour to repay the money on TVNZ’s breakfast programme, shortly after 7am.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Trotter is a loonie hack, his flip flip doesn’t suddenly make him the voice of reason, simply a poll driven loonie hack.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Reading his article though, he wants Labour to pay it back not because they are corrupt but because the only vehicle available to socialist for a government is heading down the gurgler.
These are self serving Chris Trotter crocodile tears.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:56 am
Trotter changed his tune because he could see the political damage it is causing. But it will take some time for him to live down his thesis that corruption is OK is it means re-electing a Labour Government.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:08 am
Typical warped Trotter logic – it’s National’s fault for mentioning Labour’s corruption, not Labour’s fault for being corrupt. He also echoes Clark’s absurd attempts to project that the AG is out to get Labour, talking about a “quarrel with Brady”. I practically fell off my chair laughing when I got to the bit where he desperately tries to soften Labour’s crash landing by setting up the notion that when they’re found guilty and have to pay it back, it won’t actually mean they did anything wrong: “No matter how implausible his findings, no matter how lacking in natural justice, if Brady instructs it to do so Labour must pay back the money.”
September 25th, 2006 at 9:48 am
DPF:
With all due respect, I still think Trotter and Hooten are in a race to secure a ‘most stupid column of the year’ Christmas bonus from the Sunday Smear-Whines.
This par. in particular gave me an attack of acid reflux (I’ve learned from experience to read the Sunday Smear-Whines on an empty stomach):
I would be as proud to help Labour find the money as I was to assist those 600 locked-out, now victorious, distribution workers. Because, in the end, it’s the same fight and we have got to keep on winning it.
WTF? I may be slightly to the right of Ghenghis Kahn, but something in me had to tip my hat to people who endured considerable – and genuine – hardship to stand up for themselves. People, needless to add, who would be very happy to receive the pay and perks of a Cabinet minister or Labour backbencher. Trotter may have realised he couldn’t continue quite so staunchly defending the indefensible, but he’s still the master of slimy moral equivalency.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:52 am
So if Helen & Co. pay back the stolen election, where will that leave the Darnton Vs Clark case?
Labour dips rapidly in the polls and staunch supports suddenly change their tune – In the words of mega brain Dr. Ideology “Wot’s the cunnection?”.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:55 am
Not much of a flip flop. It simply a case of political expediency and it remains all the fault of the corrosive Dr Brash.
I wonder if he has remembered the rampant use of the c-word by his Labour friends when they were in opposition?
September 25th, 2006 at 10:02 am
“I would be as proud to help Labour find the money as I was to assist those 600 locked-out, now victorious, distribution workers.”
The union was after a collective agreement and it didn’t get one. How is that victorious? Why do the left breathlessly claim any old result as some kind of victory? Get a grip Trotter.
September 25th, 2006 at 10:14 am
OK, some real news
RadioSocialism (and I can’t *wait* until John Key sells the frequencies out to Fox News!!) carries this on their web site:
NZ first will “pay it back”
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/latest/200609251005/nz_first_says_it_will_pay_back_election_funds_if_proven_to_be_in_wrong
so that leaves … only Labour
who know “paying it back” would be an instant admission they really were corrupt;
and who don’t have the money in any case;
frankly their chances of hanging on after a confience vote looks lower every day…
(And regarding “progressive” enterprises: well once Key is in, there won’t be any stupid collective bargaining or collective agreements
- so who cares what Trotter and other so-called “Unionistas” think anyway!)
September 25th, 2006 at 10:40 am
“No matter how implausible his findings, no matter how lacking in natural justice, if Brady instructs it to do so Labour must pay back the money.”
As GPT notes – I think Trotters position is that National has played Labour into a corner with one way out. Recognising a political rather than moral or legal reality.
Not as huge a turnaround as you make it sound like, DPF.
September 25th, 2006 at 10:58 am
I didn’t take Trotters calls this morning as an indication that he truly believed the money should be paid back.
I believed his opinions were being sung from the same song sheet as Clark’s, which leads me to think this guy’s had so many differing opinions on a single topic that anything he says isn’t worth listening to.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:26 am
Here is a snippet for Helen’s speech writers.
People, today I’m handing over a cheque for $800,000. Labour having said they would not pay back the money even if the A-G found it was inappropriately spent have seen the latest poll results and have done a u-turn. A lack of support for law change is because a vast right wing conspiracy has invaded Parliament. Just the other day I was out kissing babies and showing the country that Labour is about ordinary everyday people, not cancerous divisive people who want to treat all NZ people the same.
September 25th, 2006 at 11:41 am
Chris Trotter is the so called “reliable senior press gallery source” that Helen Clark refers to.She should refer to him as ‘labour party PR hack’.Trotter is having to face a reality that come the change of Government the prime minister will not be ringing anymore.He also said on EyE To EyE to Michelle Boag that the electorate would not buy into the corruption accusations.WRONG
September 25th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
I’m with Trotter, Labour should pay the money back, it’s reached the point now where arguing about it has become embarassing & they are undermining the independant authority of offices like the Attorney General & that’s when I say enough is enough personally.
I’m not sure I’ve seen a fortnight like this in my memory, the Muldoon/Lange handover currency debacle is up there, but neither Labour or National have come out of the last fortnight intact ( Labour worse than National as the polls indicate ).
It used to be so nice being able to claim NZ was corruption free & goverened with ( generally ) tact & diplomacy when overseas, one absolutely cannot say that anymore & for me that’s the saddest part of the last fortnight, kind of like a country losing it’s innocence.
P.S. Whilst I believe Labour should pay the money back, better clarity in the election spending criteria is obviously required for faith to be retained in our political system.
P.P.S I’d add a clause that any private ( non political party ) spending over say $100k has to publically declared & publically endorse that campaining ( with a carefully worded clause to avoid organisations helping individual candidates & using seperate accounting to avoid going over 100k ), I firmly believe as part of the democratic process the Brethern & others should have the right to campaign, but any organisation spending sums has to have that spending on public record & it must be clearly attributed, with severe punishments including the option of jail time for transgressors as really are poison to our electoral system.
September 25th, 2006 at 5:01 pm
Trotter might have realised he is to young for involuntary retirement. He has pinned his colours to the mast and it seems the war is not going his way.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:25 pm
I don’t know whether anyone missed it on TVNZ Breakfast this morning, but when the question was put to HC (by Henry), that she had stated that Labour would not pay back the money, she very quickly replied that it was Hodgson that made the remark (and not herself). Can anyone find and post the transcript? I thought her reply was a signal as to some softening on Labour’s position in this matter.
April 19th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
ethgy cklypuj ilag ltwxvyrq nvrwakc adjnxy rmez