More quotes in support of Field

A comment had me go read the Hansard of what Labour said in Parliament *after* the Ingram Report was released. Again, this is what they said after such a damning report had come out.

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister): Dr Ingram found that no conflict existed, or appeared to exist, between Mr Field’s private interests and the use of his influence as a Minister. The report does imply errors of judgment in respect of Mr Field’s MP role, and those issues are being addressed by the Labour Party leadership and whips.

Note no mention of unethical or immoral here. In fact it is all just an error of judgement.

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: Mr Brownlee, of course, leads this debate for another reason. Nobody will ever be able to accuse him of overexertion on behalf of his constituents. After all, the fundamental fault Mr Field committed was to work too hard on behalf of the many, many hundreds of people who come to his electorate office on immigration matters.

Here Dr Cullen says the “fundamental” fault was working too hard for constituents.

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: This inquiry has gone on for a long, long time. It has cost a lot of money. National Party members forgot the lines in the opening speech. They want the inquiry to go on longer and to cost even more money. They want another inquiry, because National likes commissions of inquiry, as Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith PhD said. He says: “Let us spend more taxpayers’ money and we’ll get to the bottom of things.” Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith likes to get to the bottom of things in life. Well, we say to National members that these matters can be put behind us in this respect. This report is now in the public arena. Does it conclude what Mr Brownlee says it does? No, it does not.

Dr Cullen gets nasty, rejects a proper inquiry and says it is all behind us now and time to move on.

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: So Mr Field has some matters to work through with the Labour leadership and the Labour whips. But he works incredibly hard on behalf of his constituents. He has people coming to him from all over Auckland for assistance, not just in immigration cases but in many other cases. He works harder on those matters than I suspect the entire National Party caucus does on constituency cases. If that is what he is guilty of, then I am sure he is happy to plead guilty to working hard on behalf of his constituents.

And again he proclaims Mr Field to be a model MP,

RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour): So the conclusion of the inquiry is that it was a very satisfactory inquiry. There is no evidence to doubt what Mr Field says. The overall conclusion is that we have a member of Parliament who works very hard and very diligently, and who cooperated fully with the inquiry

Russell backs field 100% and says the diligent MP cooperated fully with the inquiry. Never mind that Ingram basically said he did not believe him.

RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour): This is a report that Mr Field can wave around as a tribute to his integrity, and it suggests he will continue to be a profitable and good member of the House.

And this is the clincher – Mr Fairbrother claimed the Ingram Report is a tribute to Field’s integrity.

Did a single Labour MP publicly express concern over what Field had done? No. They defended him.