McCarten calls for Mallard to go
October 28th, 2007 at 1:15 pm by David FarrarIt’s interesting to see the commentators on this one. Winston Peters and Bill Ralson are effectively defending Mallard and saying no big thing, while Matt McCarten is saying he must be dumped. McCarten makes some salient points:
All the tut-tutting over this melee by their fellow MPs – and even the Prime Minister – is a bit disingenuous. After all, Mallard has been used – for over a decade now – as their resident pitbull to intimidate Labour’s enemies.
In recent times, Mallard has been used to deal to Labour’s opponents. The difference this time is that when Mallard was dished up some of his own medicine, he couldn’t handle it, lost his cool and physically retaliated.
The end came when Mallard called out the name of Brash’s alleged mistress. Brash was unnerved by Mallard’s hectoring. This whole affair ultimately resulted in Brash being dumped as leader and undermined his personal reputation and ended his political career.
At the time, the Labour Party was gloating over the success of Mallard’s taunts and behaviour.
Indeed. Clark, Cullen and co sat there smiling and smirking as Mallard and Benson-Pope did to Brash, what Henare did to Mallard.
This is probably the most serious assault that has ever occurred in Parliament. The media, in years gone by, referred to instances such as Jim Bolger throwing a pen in the chamber, Winston grabbing the arm of John Banks, or even Mallard flicking Bob Clarkson with a manila folder.
Indeed. The Banks/Peters issue went to Privileges Committee and was for a much much less serious incident.
Recently, we have the House overwhelmingly passing a law outlawing the smacking of kids under any provocation, and on the other, we have a Government minister hitting a member of the Opposition in a fit of rage.
That’s why Clark doesn’t have any choice but to dump Mallard. Otherwise, the taunt of “hypocrite” would rightfully stick on her.
I’m not actually in the Mallard must be sacked camp. If the demotion is significant (loses front bench spot, loses significant portfolios) I think that is enough.
Related posts:
- McCarten picks English as Politician of the Year
- McCarten on a Labour-led Cabinet
- Smart Goff
- The Mallard scolding
October 28th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
I have been tempted all through this to just go so what? It seems stupid to make a big deal out of it.
But when you look at the “anti-violence” campaigns Labour has initiated and if you consider that if two managers in my place of work took a swing and carried on like that they would at least get a written warning and be required to go through some fairly strong monitoring and probably be refereed to some kind of counselling to work through their issues and I do not work in a trendy, PC workplace – just a normal office you have to ask yourself if it is one rule for all of us and one rule for them?
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Indeed when Hide made a privileges complaint she cited Hide’s oppostion to the anti-smacking legislation saying he was the hypocrite. So if she does nothing to Mallard she will end up eating those words. John Key is keeping his powder dry and will no doubt make a comment once she has dealt with Mallard. If she makes a token demotion saying that was punishment, that implies that Mallard was merely doing “perk” jobs especially Sport. It is hovering between demotion and temporary removal until after the 2008 election. Possibly making him Chair FEC. If Cullen later next year becomes Speaker then Mallard can be brought back then. We await her decision.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
Key is keeping his powder dry
Vote:I think the silence from that “nice” Mr key is not because he is keeping his powder dry.
Is because when he does “fire” he shots him self in the foot
October 28th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
should be shoots
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
For those who missed it, what I said down at Freedom of Thought:
Are you a FUCKING RETARD or what? Go cheese grater dildo your ass you dumb bitch… Fuck if I was at that press conference I’d have beaten the shit out of you. Although I guess I shouldn’t be surprised considering you fucking Lefties have no fucking idea on how to debate logic. AT ALL. Opportunistic bitch.
For those who don’t know what the fuck I’m talking about, here’s the press release: Ruth says Rodney Hide is a hypocrite because he voted against the smacking bill and called Labour hypocritical for voting for it and then putting up with Mallard’s punch. I mean like, what the fuck? It’d be the equivalent of me saying to a politician who was against across the board tax cuts: “you are a hypocrite because you said you were against tax cuts, yet you support tax cuts for MPs only”. Then he fucking replies with: “I thought you were in favour of tax cuts, so how hypocritical it is for you to tell me I am a hypocrite for wanting tax cuts for myself”.
ARGH. I can’t get over how fucking stupid she is. Words cannot describe the level of offence I wish to express against her.
[DPF: 50 demerits for obvious reasons]
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Here was my opinion though:
He used to be my least favourite MP, but now that he has given Tau an uppercut my respect for him has grown hundredfold : D
Henare deserves it, if anyone’s ever seen him in Parliament he just doesn’t know how to shut the fuck up when other people are talking. What exactly is people’s problem with Mallard fucking another woman anyway? Good for him. And good on Don Brash for cheating on his wife too, he ought to if he’s not a Christian, it’s not like it’s against the law.
Violence is the solution, people!
(It’s not the same without the youtube video so check it out – http://jesuscrux.blogspot.com/2007/10/trevor-is-mallard.html – it’s awesome)
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
Sunday Star Times -
A Wellington mother says her family has been left traumatised by new anti-smacking laws, after her son’s school reported her to Child, Youth and Family for smacking him on the hand.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Yvette – sounds like this woman’s had a couple of complaints against laid her. First from the school, then from the neighbours. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a lot more to this story than the paper’s letting on.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Yeah, and considering the toxic waste dump Ralston left behind at TVNZ, I’d take any advice on leadership from that quarter with a couple of pounds of salt.
And if I hear bullshit like this again, I’m going to scream:
Widdums. Let’s recap: How the hell did Steve Maharey hold his shit together when his wife – and the mother of children – was losing her second round with cancer? Because he’s a real, live grown-up?
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
<blockquote>I’m not actually in the Mallard must be sacked camp. If the demotion is significant (loses front bench spot, loses significant portfolios) I think that is enough.</blockquote>
OK, DPF… and what is the position of Curia Market Research Ltd on stressed-out employees assaulting co-workers or clients who piss them off?
[DPF: I prefer they don't assault clients, as we may lose their business then. If a staffer assaulted another staffer I would probably sack them, but it would depend on circumstances and to some degree the views of the person sacked. The number one priority is to have staff feel safe.]
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Interesting though, if Mallard had the kind of stuff that we might desire in a natural leader, he would have by now offered his resignation, at least from his portfolio and given Clark, and the public an opportunity to pronounce some kind of fairly-achieved verdict.
He might even have gained some sympathy, instead of hiding behind the contortions of his apologists who appear to descend to new lows of hypocracy on a daily basis, rather than admit the obvious – it was a shameful exhibition and unworthy of a Minister of the Crown.
Instead, as is the way with many of the Labour politicians of late, Mallard will just hang on by his fingernails, continuing to embarrass his Party, until he is physically prized off the ledge.
The calibre of these politicians is shocking, they set a very low bar for the young to aspire to.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
I never thought I’d agree with McCarten, but I do on this issue. One law for all, whoever and wherever. Bye Trev…….
Vote:G
October 28th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
PS Grant don;t forget that McCarten is arranger and fixer for John Tamihere, and JT hates Mallard and has been callign for his head on Radio live all week!!
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Hi Lee, wasn’t aware of that but, still, it makes no difference. This is the party that is promoting the “It’s not OK……. ” program, and Mallard is a senior member of that party. If he stays, that just tells a lot of people that the whole thing has no substance. To me, what Clark does regarding this will either prove that I’m right about her being a contemptible hypocrite, or give me cause to reconsider. I bet she puts power before principle as she always has in the past.
Vote:G
October 28th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Is it April fools day, I really had to laugh. Does McCarten or anyone else seriously believe calling Dear Leader a hypocrite would make one bit of difference to the old cow. This would be like shit off a ducks back to her on the 9th floor.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Stan
“And good on Don Brash for cheating on his wife too, he ought to if he’s not a Christian, it’s not like it’s against the law.”
I wonder if Brash’s wife would agree.
Vote:You sound more like a fruitcake with every post.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
radvad – my first comment was moderated, otherwise you’d be able to see it in context. Check out my blog if you really think I’m not being sarcastic most of the time : P
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
The thing that p’s me off is – of course Mallard is genuinely sorry and contrite! He realised he was about to lose his job! Just how much of his job remains to be seen, but I would think his regret wasn’t popping Henare at all, it was the consequences of that.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
I’d like to punch them both. They’re both twats.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Side Show Bob:
Do you mean a mallard’s back?
I’m interested to know what the possible outcomes of the Privileges Committee are. A slap on the hand for Mallard? What is the most extreme punishment posible in these circumstances?
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Stan
Vote:I go by what I see here and it is not very impressive.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
His inability to handle pressure, and to totally lose it under stress should surely rule him out for most portfolios especially Defence, the criminality aspect disqualifies him for Police, Justice, Corrections. The role model requirements render him unsuitable for Sport and Education. The loss of self control indicates that Financial disciplines might be jeopardised if placed in those portfolios. Perhaps associate Maori or Pacific Island Affairs might suit his qualities, otherwise it might be best to place him next to Benson-Pope who could be his role model on how to maintain control under pressure. Maybe he could start up a North Island branch of Southern Kinx.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
I’ve changed my mind about Mallard.
Vote:He should stay.
Having successfully kneecapped himself he is perfectly fitted to play the part of a “lame duck” minister in a “lame duck” administration and be a constant reminder to the breathtaking hypocrisy of the Clark regime.
Leave him on the front bench, where every day NZers can get a good look at the person that tells parents they can’t smack little Freddy’s hand after he nearly touches a stove element, but who didn’t think twice about inviting an opposition MP “outside” and punching him in the face and wrestling him to the ground in the precincts of the House of Representatives.
October 28th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Mallard would be rubbish as Minister of Defence – New Zealand doesn’t have ‘First Strike’ capabilities…
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
radvad – that’s ‘cos you’re taking it seriously, fool
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Lee:
Are you saying we should have a Minister of Benign Strategic Environment instead? I actually see a use for Mallard: chief apologist for Parliament’s annual Fight for Supremacy tournament. Yes, it’s a shameless rip-take off the Fight for Life event that, so far, only Bill English has been game enough to play.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
See ya Trev. Thanks for leaving New Zealand grassroots sport in the shit. As for the apology, it would be about as believable as any tax cut promises Cullen has made in the past…
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
You only get to see labour types true colours when their hefty masks fall in moments of uncontrolled kiddy-style excitement.
Mallard’s “punch to tau’s head”.
Cullen’s “we won you lost, eat that”.
Benson-pope’s “twitching nose”.
Clark’s “cancerous”
etc etc etc. They are quite a nasty lot and have been from the start, as seen by the envious hiking of the top tax rate the moment they walked in the door (and now to the violence as Mallard walks out the door). They have some hateful bones in them.
Vote:October 28th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
vto
There was a superb drama about the evangelical zeal of ‘New Labour’ in the UK throughout the early 90′s and the chief protagonists ended up finding a photograph of themselves when they started out as idealistic young things ready to put the world to rights, compared to what they had become.
This is what you have here in NZ. The Labour movement dream is over, long live the dream.
Vote:October 29th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Best part about all this for me (apart from an MP getting a smack) is that it happened around the same time as the Govt announced a couple of hundred grand upgrade for Parliamentary security. More money down the drain then….
Vote: