A smart decision
April 3rd, 2012 at 9:00 am by David FarrarJohn Hartevelt at Stuff reports:
ACC Minister Judith Collins will continue defamation action against two Labour MPs and Radio NZ – but she will not use taxpayer cash to fund it.
Collins this afternoon said the alleged defamation against her last week had occurred in relation to her carrying out duties as Minister for ACC.
She wrote to Labour MPs Andrew Little and Trevor Mallard threatening legal action, but they had not responded.
“Even though I am fully entitled to do so, I have not asked Cabinet for funding,” Collins said.
“I trust that Mr Mallard and Mr Little are prepared to fund their own defence.”
Both MPs have indicated they would pay for their own defence in any legal proceedings.
Collins said Radio NZ had responded to her letter last week but they too still faced legal action.
“There would be no cost and no case to answer if Mr Mallard, Mr Little and Radio New Zealand told the truth and presented their evidence,” Collins said.
If there was any evidence I suspect we would have seen it by now.
A very smart decision not to obtain crown funding. All the focus would have gone onto that issue, rather than the merits of the case.
Also in such tight fiscal times, the Government would face questions about how it can afford to fund a lawsuit, but not xxxxx.
Related posts:
- Collins taking defamation action against Mallard, Little and Radio NZ
- What happened to the claims this would never go to court?
- Mallard and Little fold
- Trevor goes undercover
April 3rd, 2012 at 9:07 am
And because she is prepared to put her own money up suggests she really is serious, so an early resolution is made more possible. I am still doubtful there is a defamation because the allegation is so trivial, annoying yes but not really reputation breaking stuff. Good on her. I would not like to cross Judith Collins and it would not be difficult to cross her. But I cannot think of anything she has done I have disagreed with.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:09 am
And Shearer appears to be betting his leadership on this, backing away from his shortlived “I want a new kind of politics” and backing the Labour attack at any cost MPs Mallard and Little.
Shearer has effectively nailed his colours to the Mallard mast. If Mallard falls, Shearer will struggle not to go down with him.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:12 am
Collins has put a brave face on this, but she shot off with this action before looking at whether she could be funded to take it. Perhaps she has realised that her colleagues are not very keen on this dragging on.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:13 am
Collins is a senior lawyer Milkenmild she would have thought this through, certainly more than you.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:16 am
I wouldn’t mind betting Collins has taken carefully considered aim at an over arrogant target. It’s not the sort of thing politicians like her would do on a whim.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:17 am
“Also in such tight fiscal times, the Government would face questions about how it can afford to fund a lawsuit, but not xxxxx.”
And yet same government still funds Radio NZ.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:27 am
Quite so Pete; and Mallard has, after all, a not-inconsiderable history of making unsubstantiated allegations and smears. Has he ever substantiated the claim about the “American bagman”? His attacks on Erin Leigh were grave enough that the Supreme Court smoothed the path for her to sue him if she wished.
I think that will will be a not-inconsiderable body of the electorate which is delighted that Judith Collins is putting her own money where her mouth is, and that Trevor Mallard is going to have to pay to put up or shut up. And David Shearer may well regret his unqualified support for Mallard and Andrew Little.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:30 am
Many seem vague as to what the defamatory statements made by Mallard and Little actually are, apparently because to report them is to further the action.
Vote:So can anyone confirm that the issue is in fact something that was first said under Parliamentarian privilege and that as such is recorded in Hansard?
April 3rd, 2012 at 9:34 am
Keeping Stock – agreed. It’s par for the course for Mallard. Interesting that Little has chosen to try and make a mark with this.
But it’s a major reversal for Shearer. I’m surprised he seems to be pinning his leadership on this and on the Mallard approach. Sure Mallard may be responsible for Shearer winning the leadership, but I’d hoped Shearer would be strong to define his own path. Seems not.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:49 am
A bit like a game of poker, who’s bullshitting who. Hope Collins takes these lefty windbags to the cleaners.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 9:52 am
I have $5 that says JK offered Crusher money to take it on. And another $5 that Crusher thanked him, said no, and they both agreed that hoisting two petards such as Little and the Duck would be well worth the sport.
Cant wait
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 10:03 am
I’m guessing this will be just like teapot saga. Never make it to court.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 10:09 am
aah..!..hmmoo..yr one really cracked me up..
fact/reality check for you:..
..strip away the spin and you have key telling collins there was no way he was going to wear the backwash from funding this frivolity…
..and so collins has been hung out to dry..
..and it is now a matter of ‘face’ for collins..
..plus with a long parliamentary break coming up..collins is hoping to shut this down in the media…
..and collins..in her continued threat..is just posturing…
..(words are cheap..etc..)
..and once again hoping to see it out/close it down…
..(you should get/ask for a special loyalty-patch there..hmmo..)
phillip ure@whoar.co.nz
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 10:35 am
Pete you’re as perceptive as ever. Collins is screwed either way, back down and she looks weak, keep going and she’s never going to hear the end of it, even if she wins. Dumbest.Move.Ever.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 10:57 am
“hmmokrightitis”
I bet $5 you will not use your own name and repeat you allegation.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 10:59 am
somewhatthoughtful, here’s something to think about.
First, Collins versus Mallard + Little. Collins has a reputation of being no nonsense, Mallard has a reputation for repeat nonsense, Little has amassd little credibility. An ongoing comparison may not look so good for the vindictive guys there.
More important – what if Collins loses on defamation? She has still highlighted the Mallard attack approach and will have made Labour more cautious with that as well, despite any attempts at bravado. She will have forced Mallard to front up with facts or look a dick.
At worst if Collins is embarrassed and resigns (I think that’s looking unlikely unless for once Mallard really does have some damning evidence), that’s a loss to National but not too damaging.
If Mallard loses that’s a major hit to the core of Labour’s attack squad. And a major hit to the person who put Shearer in as leader.
And it risks dashing any hopes Little had of becoming next leader.
And this all leaves Labour with Cunliffe as leader?
I don’t think Collins is anywhere near as limited in intellect as Mallard+Shearer.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 11:17 am
The interesting question to ask is where is the outrage, and what is it over? What calamity has driven her to take things to the High Court? She is after all a political figure who seems happy to be known as ‘crusher.’ Difficult to see much momentum coming from this, particularly in a climate where at the moment every man and his dog is leaking or being accused of leaking.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:01 pm
[citation needed]
Were you there? Did you have a bug in the office? Was it picked up by someone’s spyware? How is this a fact?
/I know, I know, feeding the troll, sorry.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:06 pm
Nostalgia-NZ: Are you a moron? Mallard has basically called Judith Collins a liar.
You cannot do that under cover of parliamentary privilege and you certainly cannot do it on Radio NZ and get away with it if you cannot substantiate your story.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:09 pm
Um, I always understood that in defamation the person suing had to prove that the claim was false, not the other way around. Mallard, Little and Radio NZ might not have to provide any evidence at all…
[DPF: No the plaintiff must prove they said it and it is defamatory, and the defendant must prove it is true, or try another defence]
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:18 pm
“She is after all a political figure who seems happy to be known as ‘crusher.’ ”
Oh, and she expressed her approval where?
mm
Vote:If Mallard and Little advance positive defences (truth, honest opinion..) then they must establish the defences. The Plaintiff only needs to prove the statements, who made them and that they were defamatory. If the Plaintiff gets that far then the defendants must prove any positive defences. A plaintiff does not have to disprove an allegation.
April 3rd, 2012 at 12:27 pm
mikenmild, get back to your public service job and stop trying to be a pseudo-lawyer. We know you are at work because that’s where you do your prolific posting on kiwiblog from.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:29 pm
> If there was any evidence I suspect we would have seen it by now.
Really? I note that Collins hasn’t served the relevant papers to those whom she alleges have defamed her. One wonders what is taking her so long. One also wonders why she won’t answer questions about Pullar’s breach of privacy, why a copy of the Boag email was printed out and who had access to it. For someone who wants evidence, Ms Collins is remarkably reticent at providing evidence herself.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Wow, Chuck Bird: “I bet $5 you will not use your own name and repeat you allegation”
Allegation? You seriously need to get laid compadre, lighten up
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Thanks for correcting me. smttc, I’m at home if that’s okay with you.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:38 pm
> I don’t think Collins is anywhere near as limited in intellect as Mallard+Shearer.
Well, you would say that, Pete.
Maybe you don’t know her too well. She has happily spent thousands of taxpayers’ dollars on petrol for her taxpayer funded car, on top of the chauffeur limo she has at her beck and call. She has no remorse or regret at milking the system. Recession, what recession? And she is not terribly bright, judging by her comments around the video surveillance of the Urewera accused.
http://www.medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=505
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:41 pm
ross69 – maybe she’s taking her time to do as thorough job as possible. And/or maybe she’s watching with interest how Mallard and Little react. Like:
Interesting indeed. And they seem a bit touchy at The Standard, trying to talk up civil war again to create a perception out there where no one really cares.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:41 pm
But tvb said she was a ‘senior lawyer’, ross.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:44 pm
smttc
So will the pleadings be that Mallard ‘basically called’ Collins a liar? And in the context of several people calling each others liars inside and outside Parliament over who is leaking what in a saga which the public might never know the full story on, a Minister who seems to enjoy a nick name of ‘crusher’ is damaged by reputation, if the suit is successful, to what monetary extent in your opinion?
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 12:56 pm
> And they seem a bit touchy at The Standard
They are always touchy towards YOU over there.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 1:07 pm
ross69: It should be -
“They are always touchy over there.”
There, fixed it for you.
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 2:43 pm
Good for her. I hope she takes them to the cleaners.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 5:59 pm
I’ve got a $5-er for the Crusher Attack Dog Legal Fund. Where do I send it?
Vote:April 3rd, 2012 at 7:25 pm
Nostalgia-NZ, at no point did I infer or suggest Ms Collins was after monetary compensation. In my view, that may be a bridge too far. But she will certainly be after a declaration that Mallard and Little have defamed her.
Vote: