The Lusk fixation

April 17th, 2012 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Labour seem to have an obsession with . has been blogging on him for over a year, and then in a rush of blood to his head (or somewhere) decided he was the secret leaker in the ACC saga. Never mind that the ACC Minister hasn’t spoken to him once in the past year.

As Trevor’s defamation defence will be based on proving his wild theories had a semblence of credibility, he set his assistant defence counsel to work. Chippie filed no less than 259 written questions to Ministers on Mr Lusk. Putting aside the cost to the taxpayer of their paranoia, his fishing expedition was very wide. He asked every single portfolio Minister the following:

Has he or his representatives had any written communication with Simon Lusk within the last six months in his Ministerial capacity; if so, on which date or dates and what was the nature of the communication?

Has he or his representatives had any oral discussions with Simon Lusk within the last six months in his Ministerial capacity; if so, on which date or dates and what was the nature of the discussion or discussions?

Has he or his representatives met with Simon Lusk within the last six months in his Ministerial capacity; if so, on which date or dates and what was the nature of the discussion or discussions?

One or two Ministers are yet to reply, but from what I can see 100% of the responses are “No”. So Trevor’s defence strategy is looking pretty shaky.

Plus anyone who knows Simon knows that at this time of year the last thing he worries about is politics. His main activity is being out on a grassy knoll with a high powered rifle looking for venison to go in the freezer.

Tags: , , ,

16 Responses to “The Lusk fixation”

  1. david (2,194 comments) says:

    The stonking big loophole in the twat’s questions is in the qualification “…. in his ministerial capacity; ….”
    I’ll bet Ms Collins, Ms Perata, Ms Bennett, Ms Tolley, et al find that a bunch of laughs
    Besides they could all be having a weekly Friday night knees-up with Mr Lusk and as long as no discussion touched on the Minister’s portfolio responsibility, the answers can be legitimately “NO”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Nick R (522 comments) says:

    Well, it might be a problem for Mallard’s defence strategy, if he had been sued. But he hasn’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Keeping Stock (9,380 comments) says:

    Just wondering; did Trevor Mallard ever provide conclusive proof of the existance of the “American bag-man”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > from what I can see 100% of the responses are “No”.

    That confirms it then. If MPs say something, it must be true and correct.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > at this time of year the last thing he worries about is politics

    But the questions refer to the previous 6 months, not this time of the year. Strange you didn’t pick up on that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. RRM (10,099 comments) says:

    Judith: “I will see you in court”

    [no papers filed]

    Judith 4 days later: “I want an apology now and we will forget it”

    [no reply from Mallard or Little]

    [Judith has a word with her leader John]

    Judith: “ok I want an apology by this thursday” – stamps her foot –

    …………to be continued.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Pete George (23,798 comments) says:

    RRM – yep, that could be about as bad as Mallard trying to play his side of it out in the media.

    But Collins is happy for him to keep exposing himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Mark (1,502 comments) says:

    “One or two Ministers are yet to reply, but from what I can see 100% of the responses are “No”. So Trevor’s defence strategy is looking pretty shaky.”

    David exactly is Mallard being asked to defend? Collins has not filed suit yet and given the charade that this has become one wonders whether she will.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Leaping Jimmy (16,699 comments) says:

    Yes, to RRM, Mark, Nick and other dissemblers. It’s a lot more fun watching the sword of Damacles dangle. Once it falls the spectacle’s over and everyone moves onto the next act in the saga. But what’s the hurry? Aren’t you guys enjoying it as much as the rest of us are? After all, who wouldn’t be? What fun.

    Popcorn?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Nick R (522 comments) says:

    @ Leaping Jimmy. Yep – loving it. Popcorn at the ready.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. davidp (3,585 comments) says:

    >Chippie filed no less than 259 written questions to Ministers on Mr Lusk.

    My understanding is that if Collins chooses to sue the two Labour Party liars then she will pay her own legal costs. But this looks like Labour are using their official opposition privileges to perform legal discovery for their personal defence. That is clearly corrupt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Falafulu Fisi (2,141 comments) says:

    Its time to check whether Trevor Mallard thinks that Mr. Lusk is a hottie.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Mark (1,502 comments) says:

    Leaping Jimmy you are of course presuming that Collins has a case. Frankly it is a pathetic side show from both Mallard and Little and Collins that in the end will cost the tax payer. As I recall and I am sure to be corrected in a howl of protest should I be wrong that Collins is only paying for her on legal costs in respect of Mallard and Little and that the lucky taxpayer picks up the tab on the RNZ suit.

    I thought Collins had more to get on with

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. thedavincimode (6,890 comments) says:

    Fala

    Beat me to it. My immediate response was to wonder if there weren’t a few homoerotic overtones at play here. Classic story line straight out of Criminal Minds.

    Edit: or undertones – whatever.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. thedavincimode (6,890 comments) says:

    Fala

    …could it be that Lusk has executed the stunning funky lizard move (or whatever it was that you executed so effectively the other night) at the last Xmas party and word of this has reached the gutter dweller’s ears – thereby arousing his curiosity and more?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Liberal Minded Kiwi (1,495 comments) says:

    Is this going to be important at the next election?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote