Garrett under fire again
August 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pm by David FarrarThe Dom Post reports:
The firebrand MP is in hot water again after claims that he challenged a Labour MP to “take this outside” during heated exchanges in a select committee. …
ACT leader Rodney Hide said he was not aware of the complaint, but dismissed the claims. “When the Labour Party says things, my experience is they’re not true.”
Rodney has a fair point, but it is also true David has taken a fair while to shall we say adjust to the way Parliament and MPs should operate. Not having been there, I have no idea what really happened.
Prime Minister John Key says if allegations against ACT MP David Garrett are true, Parliament should take a hard line in disciplining him.
That is a good attitude for the PM. I recall a previous PM who refused to comment in any way negatively about conduct of Government MPs not from her party. You gained the impression that if Winston has opened up with a machine gun on Lampton Quay, Helen’s response would be something along the lines of “Winston’s murdering of 87 civilians and three police officers on Lampton Quay was done in his capacity as an MP, not as a Minister and hence is an internal matter for NZ First to comment on. As Prime Minister I have no responsibility for what Mr Peters does as Leader of NZ First”
UPDATE: From NZPA:
ACT leader Rodney Hide says his MP David Garrett did not threaten a Labour MP.
Labour alleged Mr Garrett suggested he and Labour’s Clayton Cosgrove “take this outside” during an argument in a closed session of Parliament’s law and order select committee.
However, Mr Hide says he said “let’s just leave that outside”, meaning “let’s get on with the work.” …
Mr Hide told NZPA he was angry and accused Labour of making up allegations, laying complaints that would fail in order to get media attention; and abusing the process by making public details of a closed session of a parliamentary committee.
He said Labour leader Phil Goff had set a bad example by putting out partial stories to grab headlines.
“If they thought they had a case against David Garrett, and the allegation is a serious one, they would have done it properly, put it to the Speaker and shut up,” he said.
“If someone had threatened another MP in a way that was a breach of privilege it would be very serious indeed, and be sent off to the privileges committee to be handled properly. You wouldn’t be running off to the media.”
If the Speaker decided there was no case to answer Labour should apologise, Mr Hide said.
Rodney makes a good point – if you know your case is strong you don’t pursue it through the media.
August 7th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
David Garret is an unstable bully. My support and respect for the ACT party has reduced from his behaviour.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
A little too feisty and full of the importance of his own ideas for his own good. If he mallows a bit he could be a good MP.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Agreed nickb, get rid of him.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Who is next on ACT’s list?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
And then Key sensibly passed the responsibility on:
“In the end the management of the people in the Act Party is the responsibility of (leader) Rodney Hide and certainly from what I’ve seen in the past is he’s taken that responsibility seriously and acted promptly where he’s had information.”
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
@davidp
http://www.politics.org.nz/webapps/site/23106/88473/chat/politician.html?info_id=188147
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
IMO people like David Garret are detracting from the message of ACT’s core philosophy: limited government, low taxes and free markets, and have got them caught up in populist issues like law and order.
Can anyone really believe that the Act party voted for a budget that did not lower taxes?
Vote:With Rodney deep in work fixing Aucklands local government problems, the Act party seems to have lost its way and gone off message a bit, and having lunatics like Garrett in the paper instead of ACT pushing its own policy is IMO going to be a factor in whether ACT succumbs to “black widow syndrome”, e.g getting burnt at the next election for not being at the forefront of things.
August 7th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
What an effing prissy nation we are becoming. We are not in kindy anymore. Its not even as if any biffo actually occurred which is a pity in some ways – it might shown that there were a few males left with their testicles still intact.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
If this turns out to be true, then as both an ACT supporter and a member of the Sensible Sentencing Trust I will be deeply ashamed. It is not conduct becoming of an MP from our side of the House. We ought to leave such foolishness to the muppets of the Left.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
We all jumped on the Trevor Mallard vs Tau Henare bandwagon, and should be prepared to do the same if one of the good guys does it, perhaps even more so as the Right have always held themselves to far, far higher standards than the Left.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
andrei the point is we (in theory) pay our politicians to pass sensible laws for the good of the country, not carry on like juvenile little wankers in the school playground.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
I think he is up to about Strike 8 now.
And two complaints against Garrett in relation to Parliamentary Privilege within a week (the other one being the allegations he attempted to intimidate prison officer witnesses giving evidence). Is that an all time record for an MP?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
It might shown that there were a few males left with their testicles still intact.
But not their brains.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
I would still want to hear what Clayton “Punch’n'Grow” Cosgrove said to provoke Garrett’s outburst.
Afterall “provocation” is still (for the time being) a valid defence, is it not?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Why did Act get tangled up with the Sensible Sentencing Trust bunch? It’s not like it really helped their results – what are they polling at currently. 1%?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
While I favour speaking truth to political correctness, I also believe that the old school male attitudes like that of Garrett (including this latest incident and his water cooler remarks) are a throwback to caveman attitudes. It comes down to where on the continuum it is appropriate to be, and Garrett appears to be too close to the end of the scale. I can’t see how ACT can’t consider him a liability.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Toad, you have no standing in the blogosphere anymore after your frankly pathetic ‘attack’ on Whale. Your comments are irrelevant.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
If Garret really wanted to do Clayton in then all he had to do was say something like “At least my hair is real!”
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
nickb
Its darned good you put the in theory caveat on your comment.
Have we fallen through the looking glass or something? Just look at the way our elected representives are behaving right now, do I have to go through the litany of thoughroughly scandalous and disagreeable behavior we have discussed just this week on this blog?
And here we are getting on our high horses about a fellow who allegedly offered to take a disagreement outside.
Give me a break
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Classic – Take a bow Cerium
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
People normally come up with a “let’s take this outside” comment in repsonse to a personal insult or allegation. In this case I suspect that in rugby terms, Garret may be getting penalised for retaliating, not throwing the first “punch”. He will have to watch that if he wants to play for the full 80. Still – who wouldn’t want to punch that supercillious grin off Cosgrove’s face?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Anyone who plants one on Clayton Cosgrove can’t be all bad.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Lout, thug, yobbo, goon…
and Act Party MP.
What does it tell you?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Brian Smaller, that’s what Mallard said about Tau.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
village idiot: “What does it tell you?”
That your vocabulary reaches up to five letter words?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
It’s pronounced “adults”.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/2728529/ACT-MP-David-Garrett-Take-this-outside
Rodney Hide is right – Labour beating this up suggests the matter isn’t serious.
Given the Clayton Cosgrove is involved in this alleged threat of physical violence I would seriously suspend judgement as to truthfulness of what Labour is alleging.
Remember Mr Cosgrove is highly unreliable in regard to these sorts of matters.
As to evidence of Mr Cosgrove’s poor interpersonal skills, wasn’t an employment matter settled on his behalf by Parliamentary Services because of inappropriate behaviour towards an Executive Secretary.
Mr Cosgrove has a habit of being a bit of a hothead often his language is menacing even when he was a Minister. He often used to use the General Debate to attack Rodney Hide making all sorts of unsubstantiated claims.
Cosgrove used to hang around with both Samuels and Tamihere so he has long had a pre occupation with Rodney Hide and ACT.
David Garrett would be well advised to stay well clear and say nothing to Cosgrove; small man syndrome just looking for a fight.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
I was not sure what to think of Garrett, however, given that Toad and the rest of the watermelons hate him with a passion Garrett now has my full support.
Remember, while Garrett may have a strange way of going about things he does give a voice to what a large percentage of the public want to see happen, this and this alone is the reason the Greens and Toad dislike him.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
thuggery, buggery, loutish imbecility… garrrrrrrrrrrrrettttttttttt!
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
village idiot, it’s good to see someone bettering themselves.
BB, Garrett is pretty clueless but obviously he and Cosgrove deserve each other.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
intimidator, blusterer, swaggerer .. gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeetttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
bb – “he does give a voice to what a large percentage of the public want to see happen”
Are you suggesting that if a “large percentage” (1%?) of the public want to see Garrett knocking things into shape he should go for it?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
big bruv
Tying yourself to Garrett’s apron-strings will have people believing that bullies excite you.
Do they?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Let’s see Bruv – who DO you love?
Palin? Bush? Collins? Bennett? RANKIN???
A fine collection of bullies!
Are you a cheerleader?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Considering Labour’s behaviour recently and historically, I think there are very few Labour MP’s who don’t deserve a good kicking.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
idiot
I guess you must see him as a real threat as well given your juvenile attack on the man.
A lot of what Garrett stands for has strong support in the community, he wants us to be tougher on crime, tougher on dole bludgers, lower taxes and less government.
I can appreciate why a communist like Toad would attack him (while always avoiding the issues), the left want to denigrate the man to the extent that his message is no longer heard.
Of course this is the usual tactic of you duplicitous bastards, when you cannot argue against the policies of opposition parties you revert to attacking them personally.
As for “who I love”
Palin: Yes (but purely in a sexual mannner)
Bush: Nope, far better option than Al Gore and John Kerry but I am not a fan of the man.
Collins: YES…the next GREAT PM of New Zealand, Crusher will be our own Maggie Thatcher in time and when that happens I cannot wait to hear and read the bleating of bludgers like you and Phool.
Bennett: Nope, she is a lightweight and should be sacked.
Rankin: Yes, for no other reason than she pisses off everybody from the left.
Let me guess who you “love”, I would imagine it includes such proven liars as Clark, Gore, Clinton, Kerry, Bradford, Delahunty.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
bb: “…the left want to denigrate the man to the extent that his message is no longer heard.
Of course this is the usual tactic of you duplicitous bastards, when you cannot argue against the policies of opposition parties you revert to attacking them personally.”
You surely must be referring to duplicitous bastards across the political spectrum.
You mention that you back Garrett and Rankin because they piss off people on the left. Great way to judge people. Hitler more than pissed off people on the left, he eliminated them. Hate politics can be a dangerous thing.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Lets be honest he’s getting a bit embarassing for the ACT party.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
And I dont know if I agree that ACT project that they stand for those philosophies nickbm. ACT have continually campaigned with the hoardings: “ACT party – Getting tough on Crime” since well before Garrett was an MP.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
FFS!
What has happened to us when we start to think the actions of a normal bloke are strange?
Does that mean we would rather be lied to by that ginger prick Darren Hughes or the gutless John Key?, Garrett might be a bit rough around the edges but at least he is not a lying bastard like the other 119 of the pricks who sit in the house.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Chris Diack, good advice to David Garrett. He should stay well clear of Cosgrove, who is out of Garrett’s league and he will always come off second best. Besides, he has generated the sort of publicity for ACT that simply confirms a widespread public view of a bunch of ulta right wing bullies. Even the PM is now giving Garrett a ‘ticking off’.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
“he is not a lying bastard like the other 119 ”
Did he tell you that?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Who does Garrett think he is, Trevor Mallard?
It will be interesting how much fuss… aw heck, since when have Labour been consistent on these things?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
bb, I think wanting to plant one on Cosgrove is entirely normal.
But advocating for the 3 strikes law was too normal for an MP. An MP needs to be able to see past blind rage to practicalities of legislation and the 3 strikes law was a terrible misdirection that was never going to achieve its aims, would probably cause injustice and waste money, and would certainly waste the opportunity to convert public anger into measures that would be effective.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Murray- “Considering Labour’s behaviour recently and historically, I think there are very few Labour MP’s who don’t deserve a good kicking”
I find myself in agreement with you- admire Garrett’s red blooded approach.
“Let’s see Bruv – who DO you love?
Palin? Bush? Collins? Bennett? RANKIN???”
Palin- have her poster on my wall. Fantastic woman.
Bush- admire his guts to take on Islam terrorists. Not so keen on his big government conservatism.
Collins- crush the boy racers cars- yes to that one.
Bennett- breath of fresh air.
Rankin-agree with above- upsets the left and also good on being anti the anti smacking legislation.
Good to see some gutsy conservatives blogging today!
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Scott
Big Bruv will have looked at all of your sentences and pronounced them sensible!
Gutsy, re-blooded conservatives all! Hoorah! Tally-Ho Chaps!
And yet, there’s the musky smell of bullying here, that even Kiwiblog regulars can’t ignore.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Chris G – Lets be honest he’s getting a bit embarassing for the ACT party.
Yes Chris – I’d love to hear what Heather Roy thinks of her play-pen mate.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
big bruv, with 121 MPs not counting the speaker, who are the 3 or 4 ACT MPs who fall into your “lying bastards” category?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Rodney Hide. Sir Roger Douglas. Heather Roy. John Boscawen. What do these people have in common?
I’d suggest it’s the fact that, regardless of whether or not you agree with all their politics (or indeed any of their politics) you’d have to concede they have intellect, focus, purpose and a sense of gravitas necessary to be an MP. They speak and people want to listen – even if it’s just to engage and disagree.
Previous Act MPs have been the same – Richard Prebble and Ken Shirley come to mind. Even Owen Jennings.
I don’t know everyone lower down on the Act list but I know some. They too have similar qualities.
So what the hell is David Garrett doing amongst them and why was he ranked ahead of clearly superior candidates?
He is, to quote a TV catchphrase, the weakest link. It’s time Act said goodbye.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
I think it beggars belief to think Garret said ‘leave this outside’ when ‘take this outside’ is a very common turn of phrase, particularly for your garden variety barfly thug, which is what Garrett seems to be. His violent, bullying and intimidatory stance seems to be the very antithesis of what the Senseless Sentencing Trust seem to be all about. Is this the sort of clown who has helped develop their ideological and philosophical values. If Garret truly represents the face of the SST they should be resigned to obsolescence.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
John Boscawen, lamington atop his head, GRAVITAS!!! Oh Yeah baby!
Rodger Douglas, slopping and troughing in Parliamentary ‘priviledge’, GRAVITAS!!! Take me now!
Hide! Quick!
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
the guys a snapperhead.
anyway, Labour are making a big deal cause he threatened to hit him? they didnt think it was a big deal when mallard hit someone.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
So what the hell is David Garrett doing amongst them and why was he ranked ahead of clearly superior candidates?
That’s a very good question, there are a few Actors here – how did this happen?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
ACT should never have sold places on its list for support from Garrett’s Senseless Sentencing Trust. List MP’s should be assessed on merit or we get clowns like Garrett ‘purchasing’ seats in Parliament wiht the promise of their organisations support. Leave that crap to Labour and the unions.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Idiot
I find it hilarious that a Labour party apologist would have the hard neck to accuse anybody of being a bully, where have you been for the last nine years?
Did you speak up when Klark bullied anybody who dared speak out against her?, did you speak up when she bullied our media?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Hey the private prison industry that’s bankrolling the SST need to find some way to influence policy! Pity they chose such a “snapperhead” to do it with.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I’d get rid of him. I suspect he didn’t do whatever Clayton is suggesting he did, but I reckon it is 50/50 that Hide is going to regret defending him. As others have said, he is the weakest link. Key got rid of his weakest link when he chopped Worth. Hide needs to do the same.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Paul;
Clayton Cosgrove isn’t suggesting he did anything he his hiding behind the skirts of a little first termer list mp, Carmel Sepuloni, who is the one who told on him to the teacher er um I mean the the Speaker.
Pitiful really
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Idiot
Did you forget about Chris Carter when you wrote your 3.38pm post?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Yes, i think Hide will regret defending him. Rodney Hide defending Garrett has about all the sincerity of Judith Ablett-Kerr defending Weatherston. I though Rodney’s bullshit meter might be a little bit more fine tuned than it appears here.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Choosing candidates must usually be a gamble, they never know how they are going to perform until they get there. In the past parties tended to protect and hide the ones that didn’t cut the mustard. Key recognised Worth was a liability and cut him loose. Smart move.
Act should live up to their name.
Maybe all MPs should have a probationary period to see if they measure up in their new jobs, especially unelected (list) MPs who haven’t had to stand up to voter scrutiny. Three months is too short, three years can be too long to carry dead wood and loose cannons. Of course if parties self police then nothing needs to change apart from what happens in practice. Key has set the standard. It just needs to become standard practice.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
@ Cerium gosh Cerium that would be an excellent policy for ALL employees. Six months feels about right and if they don’t work out they can be dismissed without cause. Don’t really care that much about MPs though.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
“Scott
Big Bruv will have looked at all of your sentences and pronounced them sensible!
Gutsy, re-blooded conservatives all! Hoorah! Tally-Ho Chaps!
And yet, there’s the musky smell of bullying here, that even Kiwiblog regulars can’t ignore.”
And there is in you the perfumed aroma of superior ‘enlightened’ left wing liberalism that we know so well from the last 9 years of Labour.
Thankfully we have a different breed of politician in power in now- gutsy,sensible,conservative-who know a hawk from a handsaw.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
@ Greg – The current three months is fine generally, but it doesn’t apply to MPs and I think it’s a bit short for them, election, Christmas break, time to learn the ropes etc.
If an employee isn’t doing their job properly they shouldn’t have the job. Theoretically workers should have some protection – but most employment ends up coming down to good faith and good relationships anyway – exploitive employees tend to get the quality of staff they deserve.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
perhaps big bruv is suggesting that, because offering violence to solve problems, all our 120 MPs should just walk out on to the parliamentary lawn and take on each other outside?
Funny yes (bennett would take down a few), but Sensible?
Oh, and in select committee meetings too.
Who needs WWE or UFC on TV? I can stroll down to Big Bruvs “actions of a normal bloke” beehive.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Scott – count up how many people here agree with you – and prepare for disappointment!
Hide’s been screwed taking on this fool – and he’ll suffer (is suffering) accordingly.
As for Big Bruv’s warble, ‘there are others on the other side who are bullies’ – grow some testes man! You know Garrett is damaging your cause. Call for his expulsion, the way you do for Neville Key’s!
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Rex, why on earth is Rodney defending this fool Garrett? He is simply causing the party harm. You are right. He should cut him loose.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Chris, no-one is suggesting violence is the way to solve all problems. Just some.
Like some particularly obnoxious people. Occasionally.
Tom, your concern for ACT’s welfare is so touching.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
village idiot opines:
Ah I see. So by extension of your logic, if Garrett did clobber your mate Cosgrove it’d be the latter’s fault then, and it’d be Cosgrove, not Garrett, who looked the fool?
I’m sure at some point LSA (Labour Supporters Anonymous. Motto: “This week’s Higher Power: Phil Goff!”) will hold a seminar on “figuring out where your argument takes you”. Till then, breathe through the nose.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Chris G, this is just handbags at ten paces stuff. There was an item on the box a week or so ago about the South Korean parliament, shit these guys don’t even bother to take it outside, it’s a total free for all and not a ref in sight.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Yes, the lefts project to feminise New Zealands males appears to have succeeded if you read the comments on this blog.
Come on guys, you’ve all become metro-sexuals without realising it, wooses, wimps. Would all the real men we have left in NZ please stand up?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
ernesto, perhaps you and I move in different circles but the only time I have heard people say “take it outside” has been a requirement to stop wasting the time of a group in a meeting and “handle your disputes in your own time”
Now if he had said “Meet me behind the bikeshed after the meeting” he would definitely be calling him out.
I am staggered at the thinness of the Labour Party skin. They must be absolutely desperate to deflect attention away from their travel and housing rorts, and associations with PH Field esq.
Giving them oxygen with outrage only assists the prissy little prigs.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
nickb is not on to it at all. At the heart of ACT’s classical liberal principles on the role of govt is it’s prime duty to protect its citizens from the bad guys, whether external military threat or internal safety of streets, home and public places. So having a crime and justice focus at #5 position is entirely consistent with ACT philosophy and policy.
So now we’re down to style and experience issues, not issues of overall capability or policy focus.
This fuss up looks to be a Labour beat up pure and simple to relieve the Taito pressure and nickb et al happily joint-ventures with them. Leftyland will be delighted, they’re pretty scared at the way Garrett has taken apart their assumptions and untrenched beliefs about criminal justice practice. They also hate the way he is a lightning rod for the unabated public concern about recidivist crime, unrequited since the casting aside of the Norm Withers petition.
If Garrett was the loud and empty type as his detractors try to paint him I don’t think he would be getting the reactions or attention he does. The reality is that he is achieving some deep cut-through in a very very tough idealogical and intransigent political game. The oil-rig worker demeanor of this law honours graduate, who was raised tough in a tough Gisborne state housing community, naturally provides a convenient flame to attract the swarms of attacking moths.
I think David can improve his game, I’m not sure his detractors can improve theirs much beyond the current cheapshots.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
It took Rodney quite a while to come up with a fairly lame excuse.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
David: “ernesto, perhaps you and I move in different circles but the only time I have heard people say “take it outside” has been a requirement to stop wasting the time of a group in a meeting.
Perhaps your circles revolve a little too much around the office, work life balance and all that. David, you sound a little like… oh I know…. David Garrett… I think you are either a little too sheltered or being a little too insincere.
Anyway if you really are that sheltered, FYI, next time a drunken oaf at the pub says to you ‘do you wanna take this outside’ he doesn’t really mean ‘I’d like you to handle your disputes in your own time’. He’s about to clock you one.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
ernesto: The phrase I’ve usually heard is “take it offline”.
“Take it outside” usually refers to a cellphone and has a few expletives in it.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
A lame excuse?
Since when has “he did not say that” become a lame excuse?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I think “words to those effect” is a pretty lame excuse when the exact words used are the ones that require assessment. If Garrett can’t remember what he actually said, I would probably have to prefer someone who was sure.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Ok, just say they were both great red blooded old fashioned males and gone outside to sort out their differences? What would it have achieved other than to provide the media with another week of headlines? If one had come off second best there might have been a few red or yellow blooded males cheering from the sidelines.
But what would it have achieved?
There was a case nearly a hundred years ago where a dispute was “taken outside” and escalated to 16 million deaths. Red blooded male honour and pride can be a Great thing.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Alan: ““Take it outside” usually refers to a cellphone and has a few expletives in it.”
It sure doesn’t mean that in Tonga where Garrett says he learnt most of his social graces.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
ernesto, I bow to your Pacific experience. I haven’t conducted Board Meetings in Tonga.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Clearly the lefties that infest this blog are the same truth eveders as their esteemed leaders past. Scurrilous scumbags like the MSM.
Read on.
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/
Mr Garrett today sent a letter to Dr Smith which gave a detailed account of the exchange and said there was no way anything he said could be considered a threat.
He said he had voted with government members on the committee to block a motion which Mr Cosgrove supported.
“Mr Cosgrove then said something like: `What happened to the ACT Party’s commitment to openness and transparency? You are a lapdog of theirs, a lamb to the slaughter’.
“I replied: `Save your insults for outside the precincts of Parliament Mr Cosgrove’, or words to that effect.”
Mr Garrett told Dr Smith he categorically denied inviting Mr Cosgrove to “step outside, take this outside, or making any similar invitation to settle our disagreement violently”.
The ACT MP said his comment was intended to leave Mr Cosgrove in no doubt that while he might be protected by parliamentary privilege in the select committee room, he would not have that protection from potential legal action if he made defamatory remarks outside Parliament.
But of course the goonhead of the left won’t step outside and repeat himself for he won’t be able to get a taxpayer subsidy to pay his defamation bill, will he?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
The explanation from Rodney seems to make sense to me. Taking a look at the comments above sure looks like everyone had made up thier mind about Garrett anyway. Looks like you’ve fallen for a another Labour scam Kiwibloggers. You should know better.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Nigel7: “Looks like you’ve fallen for a another Labour scam Kiwibloggers. You should know better.”
I’m not so sure about that. While Worth might well have been a Labour scam, Garrett really does seem like a card-carrying nutbar who is just going to get worse and worse. He is going to end up being an endless distraction and disruption. Rodney, the Act Party and this Government have too much at stake to risk him demoralising and possibly destroying the minor coalition partner.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
what do people think..when they think of act..?
david “it’s how we do it in tonga!’ garrett…
..and roger “it’s my holiday..and you can pay for it!’ douglas..
woo-hoo..!
both need to be given the arse..
..and they could take hide with them..
..let heather ‘cleanskin’ roy get some other new/’clean’ list members..
..(and stay away from those sensible sentencing trust carpet-chewers..eh..?.
they seem to have anger/power-management issues..eh..?
..and that’s just for starters…)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Nigel7, you didn’t really think we were taking it seriously, did you?
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Only at the Standard.
Gratuitous advice to David Garrett
Posted by Trevor Mallard on August 7th, 2009
My experience is that inviting someone outside is not career enhancing with colleagues but goes down ok in large sections of the electorate depending on the invitee.
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
nickb is not on to it at all. At the heart of ACT’s classical liberal principles on the role of govt is it’s prime duty to protect its citizens from the bad guys, whether external military threat or internal safety of streets, home and public places. So having a crime and justice focus at #5 position is entirely consistent with ACT philosophy and policy.
Yes bruce, that is obvious, no one is denying it.
What I am saying is where is ACT putting any lead in National’s pencil on issues like tax cuts, reducing welfare dependency etc.
Nowhere, as far as I can see. All that is making the news is Rodney Hide’s solid efforts, and the efforts of their resident back bench monkey David Garrett
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
don’t forget roger ‘it’s my holiday..and you’ll pay for it!’ douglas..
..eh..?
we haven’t..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Completely agree with you there phil
Vote:August 7th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
“don’t forget roger ‘it’s my holiday..and you’ll pay for it!’ douglas..
..eh..?
we haven’t..”
what Phool? – you haven’t forgotten him, or you acknowledging any way you look at it you haven’t paid for it
Vote:August 8th, 2009 at 6:10 am
Rodneys use of a smart car over the last 5 odd years has more than balanced out Rogers travel expences with the taxpayer…..which are small change compared to some others I could mention…and as Roger saved the country from socialist ruin a bit of travel is the least we owe him.
Vote:August 8th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Yes well done to you all. Labour put out a press release about an ACT MP and you all take their word over ACTs. Don’t any of you remember the last few months when Labour attacked Nat MPs one by one?
Cosgrove is hardly a reputable source. But some of you seem to think it’s good enough.
Sure Garrett has hardly a glittered background, but since when does Kiwiblog readers take Labours word as gospel?
Vote: