Espiner on the Vote

September 24th, 2008 at 6:37 pm by David Farrar

I missed an update Colin Espiner did on the vote yesterday. It is worth repeating in full:

Labour and NZ First voted against the motion to censure, but every other party in Parliament – including independents Philip Field and Gordon Copeland – voted in favour, so the motion passed comfortably.

This was a relief, as it meant Labour and Winston Peters failed to pervert the cause of justice and will of the majority despite the most underhand of tactics. As I’ve said below in this post, Labour’s attempt to politicise the committee and discredit its findings was shameful – amongst the worst things the party has done in the past nine years, in my opinion.

That is really strong language, but justified. This is why lifelong Labour voters are saying they can stomach no more. You had the Attorney-General of New Zealand repeating Winston’s conspiracy theories about how Owen Glenn was coached by his Fay Richwhite supplied lawyer. Yes, seriously. I will blog the Hansard when it is available.

As for Peters, his utter lack of contrition, humility, and failure to show even the slightest respect for the judgment of his peers was nauseous. He has become a parody – a caricature of belligerence, contempt, hubris, and narcissism. His address to Parliament last night was ugly, brutal, and sad. The shame of it all is that if just 5% of New Zealanders either believe him or feel sorry enough to vote for him he will be back triumphant.

It was ugly. There was not even a small fraction of contrition from Winston. Quite the opposite. As MPs such as Russel Norman were making dignified serious to the point speeches, Peters was barracking them almost non stop. It was an insight into how truly ugly this man is. Muldoon was benign by comparison.

Labour have chosen to put all their eggs in with Winston. There is no less deserving person. It wasn’t even that Peters has no respect for the judgment of his peers. He has no respect for anyone but himself. He does not accept in any way he is bound by rules or accountability or obligations. Sadly this is partly because has freed him from all the normal Ministerial obligations such as telling the truth, disclosing interests, following the Cabinet Manual.

Tags: , , , ,

44 Responses to “Espiner on the Vote”

  1. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    He does not accept in any way he is bound by rules or accountability or obligations. Sadly this is partly because Helen Clark has freed him from all the normal Ministerial obligations such as telling the truth, disclosing interests, following the Cabinet Manual.

    Thought it was worth repeating.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Lindsay Addie (1,458 comments) says:

    Surely to God there are some Labour MP’s who are have serious disquiet about how Clark is handling her Poodle? Someone should ask Goff what he really thinks about this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Fisiani (1,031 comments) says:

    Get a copy of Absolute Power by Ian Wishart. Read it. Understand that there is nothing that Helen Clark will not stoop to do for the sake of power. Spend every waking moment focused on how to actively get her out of office and then properly prosecuted. Campaign hard.
    Talk door by door. Spend just one hour each evening campaigning. You will feel like a freedom fighter.
    If God forbid they get a 4th term do you really think this blog will be allowed to exist in its current format? Do You believe there will be a free press?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. metcalph (1,428 comments) says:

    Colin’s condemnation is quite strong considering that four or so years ago his political commentary (as opposed to his reporting) in the Press was on the order of Helen can do nothing wrong etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    “Do You believe there will be a free press?” – I agree, Mathew Hooton is as paranoid as Chris Trotter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. peanut (139 comments) says:

    Having just seen Peters on “Cambell Live”, I have come to the conclusion that he is an absolute nutter. He makes no sense and has told so many lies that he no longer knows the truth.

    I have read “Absolute Power” and totally agree with you Fisiana.

    According to some, the digging up of John Key’s share portfolio was funded by us. Will that money be declared? No, don’t think so. TVNZ ought to be ashamed of their reporting of this and should be hounding Clark as to why she won’t sack Peters. They are in her pocket, like many other govt depts.

    I knew this govt was corrupt, but each day it gets worse. And I, too, wonder if we will be allowed to vote them out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. radvad (754 comments) says:

    If Peters had taken his medicine like a man then Labour would have won this week hands down. The abiding memory from the week would have been Key’s stuff up but Peters carrying on like the sad malignant narcissist he is has made Key and Tranz Rail shares a distant memory.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Heard the poodles sound bites on the Larry Williams show tonight, where he was being questioned about threats to the Maori party should they not vote in the poodles favor. Seriously this man needs help, prehaps he hasn’t been keeping up his distemper shots. It was actually quite funny but you would have to ask yourself why would I want to vote for this lunatic.

    As for the free press, if Dear Leader and the poodle party pull the rabbit out of the hat and win then they will believe they can do what ever they like and who would blame them. The sad thing is they would do what they like and who would be around to stop them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    DPF said: Peters was barracking them almost non stop. It was an insight into how truly ugly this man is. Muldoon was benign by comparison.

    I wouldn’t go that far DPF. Muldoon was an extremely vicious and nasty politician. Peters has modeled himself on Muldoon, but Peters has never gone as far as fabricating and releasing an SIS list of “subversives”, which is what Muldoon did in 1981. Still, I agree, Peters is down in the sewer with Muldoon’s ghost.

    I think the thing you Nats should be worried about is that Key is rapidly descending down the man[or person, to keep my feminist friends happy]hole to join Peters and Muldoon in the sewer.

    DPF, you have praised Russel Norman for his stand for integrity and honesty on the Privileges Commitee and for his speech in Parliament in response to its findings re Peters.

    But can you accept that to get a Government with honesty and integrity, we need a big Party Vote Green to ensure the Greens are in Government and that political corruption (or even the suspicion of it) is put to an end.

    [DPF: Muldoon went further because he had the power to do so as Prime Minister. If Peters had ever made that office I am sure he would have been many times worse.

    As for voting Greens, I am still awaiting their pre-election statement on what they will do. At this stage they have not ruled out supporting a Labour-NZ First Government.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Charlie Tan (255 comments) says:

    Surely that’s “pervert the COURSE of justice”? Where do we get these journos from?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. kevin_mcm (152 comments) says:

    Toad, you forget that the Greens voted in favour of the Electroral Finance Act, despite widespread condemnation and their own knowledge that it was flawed legislation – does not leave them with much integrity

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. calendar girl (1,215 comments) says:

    Peters on TV1’s “Close-Up” this evening was – as usual – the threatening, bullying diversion exponent of NZ politics.

    The shamefulness of his performance was matched (almost!) by the inadequacy of Mark Sainsbury, cowered into a standard of tentative gibberish that even Peters could handle comfortably.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Ed Snack (1,848 comments) says:

    David, sigh, you simply don’t get it. Anything, repeat after me, ANYTHING, is not just acceptable but morally required if it is necessary (or thought to be necessary) to prevent John Key and the VRWC from selling NZ’s entire population into slavery, which is what would happen if they gained power. Get into the leftoid mindset and it all becomes clear, crime is defined by the ends, not the means, and the right IS EVIL !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. petal (705 comments) says:

    Heh. On one of the Sky kids channels the following joke is told

    “What do you call a dog that just had a shower?”

    The answer is

    A Shampoodle.

    It just struck me that’s also the answer to

    “Who is Winton Peters?”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. GPT1 (2,116 comments) says:

    I can only imagine that Peters is hoping that if he behaves badly enough for long enough the public will just assume its all just politicians being silly and get bored of the whole thing.

    Frankly, I’m bored of the whole thing as well but if Clark won’t act like a Prime Minister the story is going to keep going.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Inventory2 (10,290 comments) says:

    Espiner’s blog this afternoon is even better – it made me go and look up a dictionary to find out what “mendacity” means.

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2008/09/mendacity-from-winston-peters.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..If God forbid they get a 4th term do you really think this blog will be allowed to exist in its current format? Do You believe there will be a free press?.”

    (maybe a cup of tea..and a wee lie down..?..fisi..?..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. peanut (139 comments) says:

    There is an ‘Old Version’ and a ‘Modern Version’ … Two different

    versions & two different morals!

    OLD VERSION:

    The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his

    house and laying up supplies for the winter.

    The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays

    the summer away. ** **Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

    The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

    MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

    MODERN VERSION:

    The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his

    house and laying up supplies for the winter.

    The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays

    the summer away.

    Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and

    demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed

    while others are cold and starving.

    TV1, TV3 and Maori TV show up to provide pictures of the shivering

    grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a

    table filled with food. New Zealand is stunned by the sharp contrast.

    How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper

    is allowed to suffer so?

    Kermit the Frog appears on Good Morning with the grasshopper, and

    everybody cries when they sing, ‘It’s Not Easy Being Green.’

    Sue Bradford stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where

    the news stations film the group singing, ‘We shall overcome.’ Gordon

    Copeland then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the

    grasshopper’s sake.

    Michael Cullen exclaims in an interview with John Campbell that the ant

    has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an

    immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share as the ant

    is too much of a ‘Rich Prick.’

    Finally, the Labour Party drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper

    Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

    The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green

    bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is

    confiscated by the government.

    Winston gets his old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a

    defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of

    judges that Helen appointed from a list of single-parent welfare

    recipients.

    The ant loses the case.

    The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of

    the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which just happens

    to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around him because he doesn’t

    maintain it.

    The ant has disappeared in the snow.

    The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house,

    now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once

    peaceful neighborhood.

    MORAL OF THE STORY: Be VERY careful how you vote in 2008!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Put it away (2,878 comments) says:

    Excellent stuff. When’s the next poll out ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Michaels (1,318 comments) says:

    Nice peanut :)
    Seen it before somewhere, but still good ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Paul Marsden (995 comments) says:

    Peter’s is going to be waddling in his own doo-doos, for a time to come yet. Everybody knows this, including the PM. Everybody is also now bored and fed-up with the matter, but what we’re really fed-up with, is the PM failing to act against Peters. She also knows that she is now going to become the centre of attention as to why she won’t cut him lose and of course, this is the bigger story by far. To lance the boil of disrepute that these two indviduals are now bringing upon NZ (and fellow MP’s), the MSM now have an urgent duty-of-care to NZ society, to dig deep and shed some light as to what really is going on between these two, that keeps them so closely bonded.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Southern Raider (1,809 comments) says:

    If this election is about trust then she needs to spill the beans on her marriage, LAX and Halgley Park.

    If its good enough for Key to come clean and apologise it should be good enough for Ms Trust.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Michaels (1,318 comments) says:

    Now Southern Raider don’t tell me you’re after a spankin too????
    Shouldn’t Chairman Clark just come clean that either she or Williams said to OG to give the money to Winnie the C**T?
    That I think would be a good place to start.
    Once she does this, the rest will flow ever so easily off her shoulders, kind of therapy for her.
    Winnie however is past therapy, just twist another whiskey cap on the good ol tax payer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Paul Marsden (995 comments) says:

    BTW..Note to TVNZ. Get rid of Sainsbury (Close-Up) or, you’re gonna keep losing viewers to TV3 by the thousand’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    Southern Raider said If its good enough for Key to come clean and apologise it should be good enough for Ms Trust.

    The problem is he didn’t. He obfuscated, and then told another lie this morning about everyting being in the public domain, when it clearly was not.

    The rats are in the cellar, and I’m afraid JK has climbed down almost as many stairs to join them now as Winston has.

    There is insufficient time for another Privileges Committee hearing, but I suspect Key would be down with Peters and the rats if there were – deliberately misleading Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Southern Raider (1,809 comments) says:

    Did anyone else pick up on the ex Dunedin cop in Wisharts book making the papers in the weekend for dishonest behaviour?

    With Helen and the rest of her Gestapo removed from power after the election will their be a huge out pouring of truth?

    Could be like the truth and reconcillation committee in SA after Mandela took over.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Southern Raider (1,809 comments) says:

    Toad don’t kid yourself. He owned the shares before their was a privaleges committee and did the decent thing and sold them off.

    Don’t try and make yourself even more dishonest than you nomally are by trying to put Key on the same level as Klark or Winnie.

    When has Klark ever apologised for anything?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Michaels (1,318 comments) says:

    TOAD!!!!!
    I suggest you run back to the forest’s pond before you get squashed and drag the rest of your friends into the fuckin smelly swamp with you.
    DORK!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    toad: “Peters has never gone as far as fabricating and releasing an SIS list of “subversives”

    No but he’s done something just as bad. I was fairly young when Muldoon was in power and may be wrong but I’ve always been under the impression that he never attacked those who weren’t capable of defending themselves. Peters and also Clark have. Peters with the SFO CEO and Clark with the drivers of her speeding convoy.

    Neither party is/was capable of defending themselves on an equal basis. This was the last straw for me with both Peters and Clark.

    Leadership demands certain qualities one of them being respect for subordinates. If you don’t have that quality then IMO you don’t even deserve to lead the school crossing guard let alone the country.

    What I don’t understand toad, is when it’s so obvious all of the Greens have extremely high standards of personal integrity, you people hardly ever call Clark on even the obviously bad things.

    Many people don’t meet that standard. You’ll find them in every boardroom. That’s no excuse and we should absolutely not tolerate that in our NZ CEO. They have to be bigger than that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    Southern Raider: Key apologised for making a mistake. That could be okay, we all make them.

    I’ve got to admit myself to the same one Minister David Parker made with his return to MED re whether one of his companies had held an AGM. Just trying to shortcut bureaucracy, but technically unlawful.

    But my error, like Parker’s, was an honest mistake.

    I could have accepted John Key’s was too, until he started lying about it, and got sprung. First time by Fran Mold, and second time by me.

    Telling lies, especially about their personal finances, is not a good look for any politician.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. reid (16,290 comments) says:

    toad, how can you see the Key story as anything but a beatup?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Southern Raider (1,809 comments) says:

    Toad so when Labour forged the document that got Parkers job back that was okay?

    I wonder what the punishment in a normal country would be for using a Govt letterhead to make a false document.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Michaels (1,318 comments) says:

    TOAD!!!!!
    Go buy a Tom Thumb, stick it firmly up your arse and ask someone to light it for you!!!
    Oh no you can’t…… It’s fuckwits like you that want to ban them!!!

    hmmmm, and maybe the spca would get upset, but we have a good defence…..
    your a fuckwit!!! I can see a Judge believing that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    Southern Raider said: Toad so when Labour forged the document that got Parkers job back that was okay

    I don’t know what you are talking about SR, Give me a link.

    What I did was, because the other shareholder in my company was overseas, phoned her and asked if it wsa okay for me to sign the return off for the Companies Office. Now that was not strictly an AGM of the company, so I was legally wrong to do it.

    But I was not trying to hide anything. I think David Parker was in a similar situation – just avoiding bureaucracy and inadvertenty doing something that failed to comply with legal requirements.

    What Peters and Key have done is in a completely different league. When the unlawfulness of what they have done has been drawn to their attention, they have obfuscated and lied, in both cases repeatedly.

    We all make mistakes, and some of us cut corners (as both David Parker and I did) to avoid bureacracy.

    Blatant lying to cover your arse when you have done something like this – or things far worse, like your electoral donation returns or issues relating to your shareholdng in a company you have – is another, and massively more significant, matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Turlough (18 comments) says:

    Perhaps the most telling revelation about Labour’s self-proclaimed untainted attitude to the Privileges Committee vote, was from Parekura Horomia this afternoon, when he said, in reply to Pita Sharples, that Labour were going to “support Winston Peters….he is one of our elder statesmen”, or words to that effect.

    This is a clear admission that Labour had pre-determined to support Peters regardless, and that whatever evidence was presented to the committee was irrelevant to their determination to do so.

    It all gets back to why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. polemic (460 comments) says:

    I agree it all gets back to why,

    WHY ??

    WHY ??

    A vote for Winston = a vote for Labour = a vote for corruption.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. PaulL (5,965 comments) says:

    Toad, I don’t at all accept that Key was blatantly lying. The underlying “crime” was a nothing – his trust had shares, he instructed them to sell them. He was a junior opposition politician with no inside information at the time. When asked about a specific parcel of shares, he gave information about them. He didn’t give information about another parcel of shares that he owned 5 years ago via a trust that he didn’t actively manage himself.

    Sorry, you’re trying for a beatup, and you’re trying to draw an equivalence so you can drag Key down with Peters. It just isn’t the same though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. burt (8,232 comments) says:

    Turlough

    Why? What Key said – Labour are Donkey deep in this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. emmess (1,427 comments) says:

    Toad, if JK is in the shitter over this then your co-leader should be too

    http://wellingtonhive.blogspot.com/2008/09/wednesday-riddle.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. slightlyrighty (2,471 comments) says:

    The question is, why is Clark supporting Peters in spite of ALL evidence pointing to the conclusion that this man is not fit to hold a ministerial warrant? The obvious follow up question is why is Mr Baubles so close to Labour?

    The questions surrounding the basis of the relationship between Winston and Clark, and what he knows, has led to some conjecture on the part of many, with some known facts pointing to a conclusion with far repercussions. There are those who know the truth, others who know some of the truth, and others like myself who can only guess at the facts behind the circumstances.

    If the truth is as some suspect, and the circumstances do tend to lend some credence to those suspicions, then the reason Winston continues to hold his warrant is simply that the Prime Minister is being Blackmailed. If we are to apply Occams Razor, then in the absence of any other reasonable explanation, this is what we have left.

    Hell of a basis for a democratically elected government then isn’t it? That is why, despite your own beliefs as to the morality or otherwise of the rumoured behaviour, the truth must be made to see the light of day. Helen wants to campaign on truth, let her do so.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. GNZ (228 comments) says:

    National needs to turn that debate around. If labour keeps on message and keeps saying “you cant trust key” the public might be left with that impression despite the fact that “you cant trust Helen” seems to be an easier sell.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Bandycoot (29 comments) says:

    Slightlyrighty – she said she was going to campaign on trust not truth – biiiiiiig difference. And you sure as hell haven’t had a lot of truth out of this corrupt bunch of crooks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. slightlyrighty (2,471 comments) says:

    Bandicoot. Could you trust a government that is possibly being held together on the basis of Blackmail?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. PhilBest (5,121 comments) says:

    toad (494) Vote: 0 11 Says:

    September 24th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
    “Southern Raider said: Toad so when Labour forged the document that got Parkers job back that was okay

    I don’t know what you are talking about SR, Give me a link.”

    I can’t find it online, but there are several references on blogs to the fact that the book “Absolute Power” raises this point.

    Toad, on the subject of politicians with vested interests, how do you Greenies feel about your beloved Al Gore making millions out of his holdings in Carbon Credit trading brokerages and the like?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.