Comments on: Goff knew back in November 2008

By: Whafe

Whafe — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 07:51:48 +0000

Mr Goff as pooped in his own nest big time, the lefties should get rid of him now if they wish to progress to not looking like a bunch of brain doners…..

He is an embarrassment to be called the leader of the opposition…..

By: Craig Ranapia

Craig Ranapia — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 07:45:14 +0000

OGM:

Nah, just pulling your chain — and to be perfectly honest, I’ve been known to confuse imply and infer myself. Law of nature.

By: Ferdinand

Ferdinand — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 07:28:27 +0000

If we’re going to be pedantic about deny and refute then I should point out that Goff inferred nothing as inference is an action of the listener, not the speaker.

By: Oscars Grouchy Mum

Oscars Grouchy Mum — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 07:15:42 +0000

Sorry Craig – grammar was never my strong point.

By: Craig Ranapia

Craig Ranapia — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 07:08:13 +0000

Oscars Grouchy Mum :

He didn’t “infer” any such thing, he flat out called Key a liar. (Though, I guess I shouldn’t be too harsh because Key — and everyone else — apparently doesn’t know the difference between deny and refute.)

Sonic:

I don’t know about you, but I don’t actually want the Prime Minister’s Office investigating allegations of workplace sexual harassment because someone else tipped him a “gentlemanly” wink. I believe the State Services Commission and/or Ministerial/Parliamentary Service is not only entirely competent, but absolutely politically independent.

By: Oscars Grouchy Mum

Oscars Grouchy Mum — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:08:50 +0000

Heard Goff on Newstalk ZB – inferred Key was a liar.

Nice.

By: Viking2

Viking2 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:57:26 +0000

Now if we are going to sack every hetro male from cabinet for shagging some one other than who they are married then there are a few incumbents that need to out their hands up.
If we are looking at cabinets past on either side of the the divide then there are one hell of a lot more that transgressed.
If we are looking at the other sexes then the last nine years of party time would make a newspaper full of stories.
If we are looking at favours for sexual favours then the last lot have a long list.
If we are considering Cabinet Ministers at a loose end after a lot of netball games then there is another chap who would be at the top of the list.
Provided that you say a few hail Mary’s and toss some coin in the plate, Don’t really care cause you like this sort of thing, are Maori where it’s share and share alike, green with a couple of tokes to help dull the pain or from university where liberal rights are fundamental, its ok. Just don’t make publicity.
There is a lot more bullshit to this than meets the eye and Cactus is absolutely right. I would guess the lady made a fuss when her husband found them out. Saving face is more important than a bit on the side.

By: trout

trout — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:30:12 +0000

Hey guys we are seeing Parliamentary priviledge used to destroy a man. The first female complainant’s statement (unsigned and with the name erased) has been tabled in Parliament by Phil Goff and is now being quoted in the Press as if it were true, and Worth has no recourse to defamation to defend himself. No doubt Worth is a buffoon- the ‘Danny Crane’ of the National party – but this abuse of priviledge has more serious implications than go beyond Worth. The man is being put in the stocks woithout trial purely for some political advantage.
PS Key is not going to meet the complainant but will have his lackey meet her to establish if she has evidence. We know she hasn’t. John Key has an unfortunate tendency to make off the cuff decisions and have to draw back from them later – lack of political smarts I guess.

By: Bevan

Bevan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:09:27 +0000

I agree that perhaps I am prejudging Worth’s behavior. Maybe nothing happened and both women are dreaming it all up. Blah blah blah

OMG, you are nimrod NO ONE IS DEFENDING RICHARD WORTH.

Seriously, I know you wish us righties were following the Clark method. I guess it pisses you off that now it prooves the Nats have more morals than Labour and that righties wont defend someone for the sake of it… You’ll just need to get over it.

By: RightNow

RightNow — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:08:14 +0000

mickey, Key referred to the incident Goff talked to him about, but didn’t give the details of it. Goff since saw fit to bring the details to light, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10576544

By: radvad

radvad — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:59:55 +0000

Apparently the alleged criminal event occurred in March. If Goff had contacted Key earlier it is possible Worth might have moderated his behaviour and an alleged crime could have been avoided.

By: mickysavage

mickysavage — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:55:47 +0000

“Goff has opened the door on this, the allegations are public”

No he did not. Key did.

Source is at http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10576273

Goff’s behaviour has been exemplary. The right wing should be grateful.

By: RightNow

RightNow — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:50:49 +0000

mickey – the rush to judgement is more accurately a line from the infamous Duke La crosse team scandal in which Nifong the DA actively went on a witch hunt for his own political gain in the face of overwhelming evidence that the accused were actually innocent and the accuser was a drugged out stripper with very loose morals. We should keep digging into the similarities actually, so far you are most likely to be cast as one of the faculty who pre-judged the accused because they were all rich and white and the accuser was neither. Goff is looking good for the Nifong role too.

By: RightNow

RightNow — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:43:33 +0000

FFS – Goff has opened the door on this, the allegations are public. Possibly the woman’s identity might remain a secret but I doubt it. To clear the matter up will require scrutiny of text messages (which will still be archived with the phone company) and phone logs to see if it was one-way or reciprocal. She (and Goff) has made accusations, let’s see the proof. It could turn out that she has been leading him on for the purpose of trying to get a job, or even that this is an outright set-up. It stinks too much – it will likely turn into another h-fee for Labour.

By: djg

djg — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:43:30 +0000

Why did Goff wait until the contact had stopped for 3 months before he contacted Key to ask for the contact to stop ?

By: mickysavage

mickysavage — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:24:48 +0000

I agree that perhaps I am prejudging Worth’s behavior. Maybe nothing happened and both women are dreaming it all up.

But Worth has not denied the texting or phone calls. Publicly all he has said is that he has done nothing criminal and that there has been a “rush to judgment”. Using the OJ Simpson line is not a good look.

Perhaps he should be given the opportunity to respond specifically as (gosh) whaleoil has proposed at http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/content/so-many-question-about-5th-march

(This is the first time I have ever agreed with Whale!)

Perhaps also this should have been the first thing that Key should have done once Goff did the entirely decent thing of tipping him off.

By: Nookin

Nookin — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:24:24 +0000

Captain Crab
I think Worth is saying that he may be a schmuck but he is not a criminal schmuck

By: Paul Williams

Paul Williams — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:22:06 +0000

That’s easily the weakest attempt to reverse spin an issue I’ve seen from you David.

By: Bevan

Bevan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:17:15 +0000

Glad to see we’re refocussing on what really matters – the hypocrisy of last year’s Labour gummint, not what Worth may or may not have done wrong in the present!

Ratbiter, like you said we are discussing what may or may not have happened. This very much has a lot to do with how the previous goverment acted when faced with a similar accusation. The same ministers and supporters who screamed ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ or ‘waste of the PM’s time’ are displaying a great level of hypocrisy when they are critical of Key and National’s handling of this issue.

By: Danyl Mclauchlan

Danyl Mclauchlan — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:17:00 +0000

Details are still a bit hazy but it sounds as if Key’s Chief of Staff is the person who dropped the ball. Goff approached Key off the record – which is appropriate – Key delegated to his Chief of Staff Wayne Eagleson(Key does have a country to run) and the Chief of Staff failed to go back to Goff to get more information and satisfied himself with Worth’s denial. Eagleson then went back to Goff and gave him the impression that Worth had been dealt with, which doesn’t seem to have been the case.

There has been a perception for a while that the government has strong political leadership and great media management but no internal coordination and no one making sure it all pulls together; no Heather Simpson in other words. Maybe Eagleson is actually doing a great job and the problem lies elsewhere but it looks to me as if both Goff and Key did everything right but that the PM was let down by a staff member whose competence was already under question.