Well done Gordon

September 24th, 2008 at 7:50 am by David Farrar

It is worth noting that also played a very useful role in the decision to censure Peters.

Gordon filed the Privileges Complaint that Peters got caught on. Rodney filed one relating to payment of a debt while Gordon’s was on receiving gift. And in the end it ws Gordon’s complaint that held up.

Now I suspect that even if Gordon’s complaint had not gone in, the would still have have made the findings they did, as even if the original complaint was under one section of the rules of the Register, they would not ignore a breach under a different rule.

But regardless worth noting Gordon’s useful role in this.

Tags: ,

21 Responses to “Well done Gordon”

  1. Wolverine (11 comments) says:

    Definitely more useful than all those ’05 intake backbench National MPs that have achieved fuck all this entire Parliamentary term. Like John Key they had no balls to file any complaint (or speak out at all) until it was certain Peters was fucked. Had it not been for this scandal the Nats would have been more than happy to suck his cock post election regardless of NZF’s policies. Power over principle as usual.

    [DPF: 20 demerits for suck his cock.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,824 comments) says:

    Whatever takes Winston down.

    Added bonus, the complaint helps take Hels down as well.

    The Lefties can all have a good cry over the loss of power. Ha ha.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    OECD rank 22 kiwi (777)

    An upgrade of the beast.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. SeaJay (20 comments) says:

    But regardless worth noting Gordon’s useful role in this………….in this Witch-hunt? Public Stoning? Electioneering Merry go round? Partisan Dog-fight? Move on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. democracymum (660 comments) says:

    I watched Gordon Copeland at the debate earlier in the year.
    Prior to seeing him in action my opinion of him had been pretty low.
    But he is an accomplished debater, and a compelling speaker.
    I was quite impressed. I listened to his speech again yesterday
    it was reasoned and again well delivered.
    He deserves a second look.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Andrew (61 comments) says:

    I heard Copeland had written an autobiography – does anyone know where you can get a copy??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Neil (577 comments) says:

    Gordon Copland is I think one of the good guys in parliament. At times he appears over enthusiastic but he has kept himself out of the “stay in parliament” and self preservation mode.
    I wrote to Gordon during the Overseas Investment Act when he had to support Labor. To his credit he involved himself with me in debate pro and con. Sure, he has since sent personal publicity, however he tried.
    I don’t like Copland’s social stands, abortion rights, but they are not the top priorities.
    He won’t be back as I see a huge swing to National, minor fringe groups will be swept aside.
    The biggest disappointment at that time of the OIA was National’s Craig Foss who never had the decency to acknowlege my letter. Harawira never replied, apparently he only replies to the tangata whenua !!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Ross Miller (1,686 comments) says:

    Wolverine (11) Vote: 2 12 Says: …. that’s a real ‘classy posting’. So you have the hots for a Party defector who only got into Parliament by way of the UF List and didn’t have the moral courage to resign when his version of the going got tough.

    As for your comment “power over principle”. It’s your Labour Party thats sucking up to Winston stupid …. duh

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Interesting comments re Copeland…….presumably he will shortly join the ranks of honourable people who AREN’T in Parliament any more…….while the crooks retain their prevalence…….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Mr Dennis (348 comments) says:

    Certainly interesting comments on Copeland, far as I can tell he does seem a good guy. It is a shame he and Baldock chose to leave the Family Party negotiations and go their own way to form a fringe party with no hope of gaining any seats, division like this has been the bane of conservative politics ever since the Christian Democrats formed in 1995 (in competition with Christian Heritage) and the infighting started. In the meantime the socialists have got the Alliance, then the Greens, in while the conservative parties have floundered because everyone can’t agree who to get behind.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Ross Miller (1,686 comments) says:

    I suspect that many are up with this but for those who are not … you will have noticed a whole new raft of Labour supporting bloggers recently. On this thread alone Wolverine and SeaJay … all recruited by and paid for out of Beehive (read taxpayer) funds.

    Pretty usual come election time. Some call it mediajacking. Others just jacking off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Rex Widerstrom (5,343 comments) says:

    Ross… if you’re right, then based on the quality of those contributions – let alone their complete and utter ineffectiveness at advancing an alternative perspective which might convince an undecided voter who’d stumbled in here – then I suspect a demand for a refund, accompanied by a dismissal notice, is already in the post.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. PhilBest (5,120 comments) says:

    Mr Dennis; THIS is my alternative angle on how Christian and “family” movements are ever going to get anywhere, just posted on another thread….

    “….. it shows just how blindly loyal these longtime Labour Voters are, seeing it is obvious that the Labour Government of 1966, the one of 1984, and the one of 1999-present, bear almost no resemblance to each other. Want to get free market reforms? Do it through the vehicle of the Labour Party(Roger Douglas). Want radical Feminism and the demise of “patriarchy” and the traditional family? Do it through the vehicle of the Labour Party(Helen Clark).

    Bob Jones was right when he said recently that the social decline would need to be arrested by a reformed Labour Party, as the Nats just plain don’t get the blind loyalty from the greater number of Kiwis that would allow them to make any radical changes to anything. The “Family Party” types and the “Kiwi Party” and so on, need to change their longterm tactics. If the feminazis and the gays can do it, so can you – infiltrate and take over the Labour Party. It’s not just your best hope, its your only hope. And you will never have a better opportunity than in the immediately “post-Helen” era. Time to take Labour back to representing the WORKING, Mum-and-Dad family…….”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Mr Dennis (348 comments) says:

    PhilBest, you are right that we need to have Christians in the major parties. But in practice they find it difficult to actually have their vote count, because they are generally whipped to follow the party line. I completely agree with you however that we need Christians in these parties. But there already are Christians in both Labour and National.

    In addition to taking over Labour, the “feminazis and the gays” as you put it have got in a more radical minor party, the Green party. I see politics as a seesaw. Labour and National are in the middle, fairly close together. The Greens are off on the left end. However much weight you put in the centre of the seesaw (Labour and National), the seesaw will still tip left as long as the Greens are there.

    There are two ways of levelling the seesaw (I am not wanting to tip it hard right in moral terms, just bring it back to a middle ground we can all live with). Either you get another party on the right end of the seesaw (morally) to balance out the Greens. Or you get rid of the Greens. Without doing either one of those, it would take a lot of conservatives in Labour and National to balance them out, and frankly you would struggle to get enough in there and it would take a long time to do. But Labour and the Greens are implementing bad policies now, we need to act now, and we cannot wait for a new generation to work up through Labour’s ranks and depose Clark and co.

    The best way we have to level the seesaw this election under MMP is to get someone on the other end. In my opinion, the Family Party is the best party to do that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. GJ (329 comments) says:

    PhilBest: You are correct in what you say, however I want to touch on another aspect which I believe is very relevant to this election.
    Labour has managed to achieve greater changes simply because they have always been prepared to work in with others to achieve their agenda. They have not tried to do it all at once, but chipped away a little here and there, never losing site of their long term goal.

    National on the other hand (and I am a National fan) has tended to show an arrogance about there approach, giving the impression “it is our way or the highway!” They continually strive to govern alone which presents two dangers for them.

    (a) The support they are currently getting would fade rapidly after the elections simply because their policies don’t reflect the current diversity of their current support base. (Made up of a lot simply sick of labour)

    (b) By not recognizing other minor parties that they could work effectively with they will appear to be a one man band and I think the results will prove that NZ is not ready for that yet. Why do you think that Labour, Greens, Progressive, UF & NZF are making it so clear that they can work together?

    I have said it before, but I will repeat it here. National needs to think smarter if they want to govern long term. They should encourage their supporters to vote strategically. Obviously let Hyde (Act) win Epsom. However they should seriously consider letting Adams (Family Party) win East Coast Bays (He got around 6000 votes last time by memory) and Filipina (Family Party) win Mangere.

    This way they are only giving up electorates and not party votes.

    They could then govern with Act and the Family Party and have a close representation of what the majority of New Zealanders are looking for.

    My concern is that if they continue to try and work it alone. I hate to say it again. (I said it in the last election) that they have a real danger of either missing out or having to work with a combination that would stifle them.

    Our great Nation does not have the time at hand for that to happen. We need serious restoration of foundational core principle for success now!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Vinick (217 comments) says:

    “I have said it before, but I will repeat it here. National needs to think smarter if they want to govern long term. They should encourage their supporters to vote strategically. Obviously let Hyde (Act) win Epsom. However they should seriously consider letting Adams (Family Party) win East Coast Bays (He got around 6000 votes last time by memory) and Filipina (Family Party) win Mangere.”

    Other partioes need to get into Parliament on their own merits – like ACT did in 2005, defeating a National Party intent on holding the seat. Besides GJ, I don’t see how National can let your man win Mangere…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. GJ (329 comments) says:

    Vinick: I agree whole heartily with you that other parties do need to get in on their own merits. However with the current constraints of the EFA and the total focus of the media on parties in parliament, it becomes a huge mountain for the newer parties to climb. It most certainly is not a level playing field!

    In Mangere it would be wise for National to encourage their supporters to give their electorate vote to Filipaina from the Family Party to help him win. National would still receive their party vote.

    This will be a closely contended electorate and in my opinion it would be to Nationals advantage to have The Family Party win this seat. National has everything to gain and absolutely nothing to lose.

    Likewise in East Coast Bays with McCully so high on their list, only campaign for the party vote as then they would have another win win situation like Epsom where they get the party vote PLUS an MP that they can work with.

    Surely this makes sense and beats sitting on the opposition benches!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. clintheine (1,570 comments) says:

    As a member of ACT I would be very annoyed if National simply stood aside and gave seats away, and most Nats would agree that they are no the type of party to give rival parties one of their seats. It would also make their local organisations feel worthless. But National are really bad at doing the MMP thing, so can see where you guys are coming from.

    The Nats did everything they could to blank out ACT last time, and lavished praise and love on NZF and United… both flakey parties that had policies that were hardly going to inspire Nats to centre right greatness… and look what happened there?! :)

    We should be able to win on our own merits and apply some commonsense to this. ACT will win Epsom, so we should give ACT our party votes to ensure their influence is higher. As soon as another minor party looks likely to win then we should support them too…. but highly unlikely this election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Mr Dennis (348 comments) says:

    Wait till we have official polls for Mangere before concluding that clintheine. I suspect you will be pleasantly surprised.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. GJ (329 comments) says:

    Clintheine: Generally I think we are both on the same page. I think if you watch Mangere closely you will see that the Family Party has an extremely good chance of taking that seat.

    Just as Act was in Epsom, they have been on the ground working extremely hard. They are visible and very well organized. According to their web site they have door knocked the entire electorate four times this year. That is commitment.

    I think we would both agree it would be great if they make it, they are certainly trying. Just look at the simplicity of their billboards that are going up around Auckland at the moment. A very simple and straight forward message. I don’t think we have seen a new minor party work this hard for a very long time.

    I wish you, Act and Rodney well with your campaign. His effort this year has been outstanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Turpin (342 comments) says:

    Come on Guys
    lets all give our party votes to ACT.
    At least they have some principles.
    Imagine if ACT got 10+% of the Party vote, now that would keep John Boy on his toes.
    and possibly honest.
    Whadaya think?

    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.