Goff keeps digging
July 26th, 2011 at 1:00 pm by David FarrarPeople will think this is whack Phil Goff day. I’d rather blog on something else, but he keeps digging. His arrogance and refusal to admit black is black is beyond belief. Let us look at the transcript of Goff with Larry Williams:
LARRY WILLIAMS: All right. Prime Minister, I think, says if it is an act of global terrorism but anyway, let’s go on to other things. The Israelis, the Prime Minister said his understanding from director SIS, Warren Tucker, that you were briefed and it seems that you were.
PHIL GOFF: No, I wasn’t briefed. He said that I’d received the same document that he had received. I saw no document. There were three documents. I have seen none of them. Briefed is not a description that I would give.
He is effectively calling the SIS Director a liar. Just because one may or may not have received written reports, is not the same as denying you have been briefed. An oral briefing is a briefing. Warren Tucker has said he orally briefed Phil Goff, and Goff’s only response is he doesn’t remember it. That does not mean he was not briefed.
Goff said he was unaware of the issue. He was wrong. The SIS Director had at a minimum orally briefed him. What is Phil Goff incapable of acknowledging he was wrong? Does he think it will make voters like him more?
LARRY WILLIAMS: Tucker’s an honourable guy, isn’t he? Were you given the papers or not?
PHIL GOFF: No, I wasn’t given the papers and nor – nor will Warren Tucker say that I definitely received those papers. I would have recalled reading the paper had I been given it. I was not given it.
From my recollection of working in both a Prime Minister’s Office and an Opposition Leader’s Office, the SIS don’t tend to leave copies of their papers behind. Generally you are given it to read, and then sign it, and give it back.
But regardless of whether Goff was given a copy of a paper to read, he was orally briefed on the Israelis. He simply forgot or didn’t pay attention.
Related posts:
- Goff still can not admit he is wrong
- Goff on Larry Williams
- The key difference
- Not even PSA backs Goff
July 26th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
Jellimeat.
Vote:Thats what Goff is Dogtucker.Just embarrassing really.Hes talking to to Chamber of commerce here in Blenheim on Thursday,Im looking forward to it.
July 26th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
It’s almost inevitable that Warren Tucker will be forced to confirm or deny Goff’s version of events. I can’t see that Goff has left him any option. It’s not about Key any more, it’s now about Goff’s ‘recollection’.
Vote:If Warren Tucker has a copy of the papers with Goff’s initials on (proving he read them) then that leaves two options: Goff is lying, or Goff’s memory is unreliable. Either option should be terminal for an opposition party leader.
If Tucker doesn’t have any proof that Goff read the papers then it boils down to a ‘he said, he said’ situation. That sort of situation, if it can’t be proven definitively which one of them is correct, will leave suspicion hanging over both of them.
Goff is already in the crapper over this, the question is whether he’ll take Warren Tucker down with him.
July 26th, 2011 at 1:24 pm
I have read enough spy novels to know that Tucker would not be the Director of SIS unless he was VERY good at covering his butt and I hope Tucker has the paperwork to prove Goof a fool.
One or other has to go!
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
The obvious conclusion is that the affair was a non event of no consequence and not worthy of recall, until Political opportunism rendered it so.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
I don’t think Tucker is able to say anything about the matter at all. He is in a position where all he can say is “no commment”.
Vote:Goff knows that and is relying on it. He knows that Tucker is not in a position to publicly comment on anything that Goff says.
I am beginning to wonder though about Phil’s state of mind. Could he possibly be suffering from early-onset dementia? The number of times he says one thing and then another, different, thing makes me wonder whether he dosn’t really remember anything very clearly.
July 26th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
He is in too deep now. The PM is much more skillful. When he realises he is in a hole, John Key simply fronts up apologises (aw shucks I was wrong, sorry) and moves on. Goff cannot do this. Its too late now. You should do the aw shucks stuff within a news cycle. Look everyone stuffs up, even journalists, best correct it asap. Some Journalists will persist and persist over the original mistake but those journalists are not very bright. And it should be relatively easy to expose that.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 1:36 pm
It’s been a game of whack-a-Goof for months now
His remaining supporters consist of those who would vote for a red rosette wearing goat if it stood for Labour in Mt Roskill. For the rest of us there’s nothing he can do to redeem himself.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
What would Helen have done in this situation? (if it were Key doing the denying) I suggest H2 would have summoned Mr. Tucker and demanded to see the initialed briefing paper. And then set the dogs loose.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Good, more free entertainment from Labour. I must go down to the popcorn truck again some time soon.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 1:44 pm
The problem for Phil is that he made a great fuss about John Key not remembering such a supposedly significant event but then the same event became too trivial for him to remember. Worse he has denigrated a senior public servant, demanded in a rather peremptory manner for a leader of the opposition that the public servant answer to him and still is not prepared to come clean (his favourite admonition to Key) when it becomes clear his is the stuff up.
Vote:If it’s not early onset dementia then it’s plain ineptitude but when the Left can still maintain Helen Clark kept us out of Iraq even though she sent the army in in 2003, the first year of the war, and only National bows the knee to business when Wikileaks told us she and Cullen were prepared to put our young men and women into a war to protect Fonterra, then perhaps it’s yet another element in their world of deceit.
I cannot believe Goff, Mallard, King etc are so bereft of any kind of moral fibre that they can play these duplicitous games – and the media let them get away with it. They are simply not fit to govern.
July 26th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
It was a supremely silly issue to try to attack the Government/PM on.
Should have stuck to talking about the fairness of a CGT. So disappointing.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Beab
“The problem for Phil is that he made a great fuss about John Key not remembering such a supposedly significant event but then the same event became too trivial for him to remember. ”
Exactly.
Is it too early for nominations in the fuckwit of the year award?
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 2:37 pm
This whole exercise was designed to rain on Prime Minister Key’s parade in Washington.
Vote:It has instead turned into a farce of olympian proportions with the object of derision being Mr Goff.
Hardly what was intended.
July 26th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
Labour know they have screwed the pooch on this one, hence the lack of posting on Red Alert on this matter.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
I’m still convinced that Phil got the two events-de-jour mixed up, and thought that the SIS man told him that Darren Hughes had taken a drunken Israeli backpacker/spy to Annette house for a game of swiss-ball…
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Looks like not only is Goff still digging, Maryan Street is handing him the shovel.
From REDALERT
Maryan Street says:
Vote:July 25, 2011 at 9:24 pm
@battleheed – quite the contrary. Phil wasn’t briefed by Key, by Tucker or anybody from Tucker’s office. He would have remembered even a buried note about possible Israeli passport fraud – he was at the centre of the last episode after all. Key didn’t brief him; the Parliamentary select committee wasn’t briefed; Tucker said someone in his office would have briefed him – it didn’t happen. So perhaps it’s not Key’s fault that Phil wasn’t briefed, but it is Key’s fault that he thinks he can carelessly wing these things in public. That’s not adequate leadership.
July 26th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Goff was offered a way out by the Director of the SIS Tucker when he said it was mentioned in passing at the regular briefing in March. But noooo, Goff didn’t take that hint. I suspect the briefing was more substantial than that but Goff has to cover his remarks with the media. Rather than do the aw shucks stuff using the formula of the Director Tucker, Goff tries and tries to shaft everyone with HIS error. Goff is a dishonest creep and that is becoming quite obvious. Take file notes of any meeting with Goff thats for sure. Prick.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
It seems Maryan Street is another ‘one’.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
DPF, please show me where Goff has called Key or Williams a ‘liar’ over this.
Not implied or suggested but actually said the word ‘liar’.
[DPF: You need to get new glasses. Nowhere have I said in this post that Goff called Key or Williams a liar]
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
YWD – DPF states he is “effectively calling him a liar ”
Vote:Not too hard to understand now, is it?
July 26th, 2011 at 3:33 pm
double d, you’re expecting to much from YesWeLie. Note that DPF actually said “He is effectively calling the SIS Director a liar” – nothing in the reference to Key or Williams.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
@double d – ‘liar’ is a very strong term, two people seeing events in a slightly different way does not mean one thinks the other is necessarily a ‘liar’.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:42 pm
[DPF: You need to get new glasses. Nowhere have I said in this post that Goff called Key or Williams a liar]
Thanks but my eye sight is pretty good and I don’t need glasses.
If Goff has not used the word ‘liar’ then why are you implying that he called him a ‘liar’?
[DPF: You do need glasses. I said he implied Tucker was lying - not Key or Williams]
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
So what then? He is accusing the SIS Director of remembering something that didnt happen? Thats a damn sight worse!
It is so ridiculous an accusation (that the Director recalled an entire briefing that never took place), that the only other alternative explanation ought to be assumed.
If you think this is a false dichotomy then present what you think a 3rd alternative would be.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
[DPF: You do need glasses. I said he implied Tucker was lying - not Key or Williams]
OK then, same question, Goff didn’t call anyone a liar over this why you implying he did?
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
YesWeDid, reading your interchange with DPF is one of the funniest things I have read in a long time. Are you really Phil Goff under a cover name?
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
@Kimble – I think Goff’s idea of ‘a briefing’ and the SIS Directors idea of ‘a briefing’ are at odds. I don’t think that means Goff is calling him a liar.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 3:59 pm
IMPLIED
“I said he implied Tucker was lying…”
EFFECTIVELY
“He is effectively calling the SIS Director a liar. ”
Do you know the meaning of these two words?
So your alternative is that the Director (whose job it is to brief people on very serious things) does not have a proper understanding of what constitutes a briefing? In which case, Goff would be calling the Director incompetent, and incapable of fulfilling the most basic role his position requires.
Or are you saying Goff is admitting he is too stupid to realise he is being briefed?
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
YWD
Warren Tucker has said he orally briefed Phil Goff.
PHIL GOFF: No, I wasn’t briefed… Briefed is not a description that I would give.
Put simply Phil is playing a rather naive semantic charade – this is a favourite game of the Labour Party – imply something then deny furiously that it can be taken that way. You’d know this game from The Stranded, where it’s played daily, especially when banning bloggers with dissenting opinions to the leftards that infect that site.
Goof has thrown the shit about – he dissed Key and he dissed Tucker – but all he’s achieved is to dump himself knee-deep deep in his own mess.
If it sounds like a lie, and it talks like a liar…
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 4:05 pm
Kimble – I would suggest that what the SIS director thinks was ‘a briefing’ about the events was not what Goff understand as ‘a briefing’, so at best a misunderstanding.
However, given that initially Key didn’t seem to know a lot about what had happened I would suggest the SIS did a pretty poor job of advising the relevant people of the necessary information.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
I reckon that it shows that there was not very much substance to the story. Good on the Southland Times for breaking it; but it clearly was of little import if it was casually mentioned to Goff, who promptly forgot about it, and clearly Key didn’t remember too much about it when first asked.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Or the reasonable explanation is that there was no issue, the kids were only backpackers and Fred Tulett, bless him, must have had a brain explosion. So nobody would remember a briefing that said there was no issue, especially if the big issue was a senior Labour MP scaring a teenager out of his wits and his clothes so he ran naked into the street.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
As of 5.30 today, still no apology from Ms Street.
I wonder if people would be more inclined to consider voting for Labour if they occasionally demonstrated some integrity or some principles, but it seems to be something of a stretch for them!
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Hang on, so you ARE claiming that the SIS Director is incompetent? Is that also what Goff is saying? Do you speak for him? Because Goff has said NOTHING about the quality of the briefing or even that he was spoken to. Nothing about differing memories, or simple misunderstanings.
The event itself is a non-story. Goff is adamant that it was a big thing and that he wasnt briefed about it. And thats a serious claim.
By all other accounts the SIS did a fine job with their briefings. Its Goff that has the problem.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 6:00 pm
This is vaguely familiar of the ‘Af-Gaffe’ that spelled the end of Bill English as leader of the National Party. Who has Cunliffe and Parker sent around to canvas? Four months is twice as long as Mike Moore’s “one night stand”.
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
It seems likely to me that the SIS assessed the incident of the Israelis as rather minor, probably a non-event , and ‘flicked’ their report on it past Phil Goff at his 8 weekly briefing, along with reports of other minor incidents, and maybe some reports on incidents they assessed as more than minor. The latter would most likely have been more memorable to Goff and we could all forgive him not remembering every minor security report, especially since these briefings are more protocol than practical.
Vote:I’m sure the PM would get more than 2 hours every 8 weeks for briefings, so it’s reasonable that he got a more thorough briefing, and I’d be surprised if it’s not been like that for previous governments also.
The initial thrust of the attack on Key was based on the premise that the backpackers were spies. Key fluffed his initial response a bit, using ‘national security interests’ as his reason for not talking about it. He’d have been better to say he didn’t know all the details and would make a statement later. Anyway, he apologised for that and I don’t see it as an issue.
The issue that remains is that Labour’s attack on Key (and this has signs of being orchestrated) was based on a false premise. The premise that the backpackers were up to mischief.
Our intelligence service has said there was no substance to that, and I see no reason to disbelieve that. Even the story that they were out of the country in 12 hours turns out to be false, as I understand the claim of 5 passports for one guy is too.
Why did Labour choose to attack Key on this issue? Because he was meeting Obama. Not hard to see the red-head has green eyes.
Now they’re caught with no premise to continue the attack, but instead of dropping it with a simple apology from Goff, they’re determined to pursue a line of attack on Key, even if it means maligning a decent civil servant.
This is no different from their last term in government. This is why they lost the trust of the electorate.
July 26th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Where is the post from Street, seems to have gone from red alert now she has been humiliate by goffs behaviour
Vote:July 26th, 2011 at 11:21 pm
It’s all speculation.
But we don’t know what Goff was told, or whether Tucker even mentioned the word “Israel” in this “briefing”. It’s quite possible that Goff didn’t have any reason to think anything was up, and the nature of the briefing (if any) may not have given him any reason to inquire further.
Vote:http://www.imperatorfish.com/2011/07/how-well-does-he-burn.html
July 27th, 2011 at 1:14 am
Goodness me, Hasn’t Maryann Street’s tone changed in the last couple of days!
Maryan Street says:
July 26, 2011 at 9:22 pm
@insumnatio – imply not infer already! Not semantics – simply two recollected versions of the same event. I don’t imagine I had your vote in the first place. But if my error was in saying that Tucker had said someone from his office had briefed Phil, and that assertion turned out to be an error, then I apologise. I generally try to get my facts right and I thought the source of that suggestion was reliable because their other detail had been. This drum has been well and truly beaten now. Time to move on.
So now it’s a beaten drum, and it’s time to move on, is it?
Vote:July 27th, 2011 at 5:34 am
29%
bye bye Goff
bye bye Labour
Vote:July 27th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Key should’ve briefed Goff. Key had more info and should’ve given that info to Goff. Key was made to look silly from the beginning because he said he wouldn’t release info to the public in the national interest.
Vote:July 27th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
ross.
Key would agree with you that he could have handled things better, but it is not Key’s job to brief the leader of the opposition on these matters.
It would appear that Tucker briefed Goff in a manner appropriate with the seriousness of the issue, and Goff has fallen for the breathless and incorrect reporting of the issue in the Southland Times.
Vote:July 27th, 2011 at 2:49 pm
ross But it was Phil Goff who looked silliest at the end while Key came out looking reasonable and sensible.
Vote:Sadly, it also looks as though Goff and his crowd are not above manipulating the truth, to put it kindly.
And they want my vote? I can excuse honest mistakes but I can’t stand liars.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:00 am
fail goff
please keep him as labour leader, i can’t think of any other incompetent labour MPs even remotely as entertaining.
/beg
Vote: