Keep digging

June 14th, 2013 at 3:14 pm by David Farrar

Oh dear. is just making it worse for him and .

First we have this interview in Stuff:

Today Shearer admitted that the MPs accepting the hospitality looked bad.

“I would have said, this is pretty unwise guys, given what we know,” Shearer said, adding that he believed the MPs had learned their lesson.

So Shearer is saying his office didn’t even know the MPs were attending?

But Shearer denied the situation undermined Labour’s arguments against the terms of the convention centre deal.

The invitation was “obviously a gift, on one level it is a perk of the job”, he said, adding that his MPs went to a large number of events which they would probably prefer not to.

Oh my God. Now he is arguing that the poor Labour MPs didn’t event want to attend. It was just their duty to go. How awful – getting to see an All Black test from a corporate box with free food and alcohol.

Shearer had gone into the box to speak to someone he knew was there, whom he declined to name. He would not explain how he knew the person was in the box.

He said he did not know his colleagues were being hosted by SkyCity until he got there. 

So Shearer was popping into the box to see some one else? And no one had told him Labour MPs were there. I think Shearer is fundamentally an honest person so is telling the truth. But it says volumes about their internal communications.

Also Whale has audio from Radio Live where David Shearer says, well listen to it yourself and try and work it out.

Tags: , ,

45 Responses to “Keep digging”

  1. BeaB (2,125 comments) says:

    You almost feel sorry for the poor sod.

    Labour adopted a stupid position on the convention deal, clearly nobody really opposes it except to take a poke at John Key, and then these senior MP’s left him looking stupid, weak and out of the loop. You have to think it was deliberate as all of them know better.

    He was so pathetic, confused and rambling on the radio it is hard to see how he ever faced down those warlords.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    They seem to have been too intent on perks to think this through (the Labour MPs) – but surely Sky City would have known the possible consequences. Especially if they also invited people who would be likely to do something about it.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. BeaB (2,125 comments) says:

    I’d have loved to see Goff telling the Sky City execs how he disapproved of the deal – with a crayfish canape in one hand and a glass of Moet in the other.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    “I think Shearer is fundamentally an honest person so is telling the truth. But it says volumes about their internal communications.

    I think you are right. I think they have adopted him as leader in an attempt to put off the ultimate shit fight between Gay Grant, the David that looks like Father Mulcahy from MASH and the David with the “T” missing from his name! :)

    All/Either of those three will be far more dishonest than the current David! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Rich Prick (1,705 comments) says:

    Hold on. Are we now to believe the underlings got invites but not the Boss? And what an amazing co-incidence the Boss just happens to stop by on the night.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. RRM (9,933 comments) says:

    I wonder who invited the Labour MPs to the Sky City box?

    Sky City perhaps??

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Are you suggesting that MRP may invite David and Russel to the first concrete pour at their next power station RRM? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. jaba (2,143 comments) says:

    when I heard the interview this morning while having a cup of tea in bed, I almost choked on it .. Please fight to stay as Labour Leader Dave, we need you.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Ross Miller (1,704 comments) says:

    Give the poor guy a break. I have it on good authority that he was looking for the Sky TV box, got lost and misread the sign …
    mumblef**k, mumblef**k, mumblef**k.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Monty (978 comments) says:

    Shearer is either lying or is very dim, or maybe Labour is so disfunctional / factionalised that no one is talking to anyone else. FFS excluding Shearer there are 11% of his MPs in attendance. There is no way he did not know the senior MPs including Annette and Goff and Cosgrove were in the Sky Corporate box. That is in my opinion a barefaced lie. He went to the box to see his Fellow MPs . I don’t know how many people fit into a box, but the ones as Wellington cater for about 15 from memory. This whole episode just reeks of lies and coverups by Labour

    Best comment was from the queen of Twitter, Judith who proudly noted that she was in the neighbouring Air NZ box. She looked over and saw Clayton. She reckons his face dropped like a bomb when he realised he had just been caught with his pants down in a compromising poison. Clayton knew he was about to be owned.

    Love it. I wonder if the Labour MPs will turn up at the rugby in Christchurch this weekend?

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. edhunter (547 comments) says:

    To be fair I think he was saying this one of the good gigs his MP’s get invited to as opposed to one they’d perfer not to.
    But other than that keep digging, just make sure you stop shy of China would hate to have a direct tunnel link between the 2 countries.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. jaba (2,143 comments) says:

    I wonder why Trev was .. strange for him to miss out on a free ticket to something especially rugby

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Another new girlfriend from the Braille Institute do you think jaba? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Oh my God. Now he is arguing that the poor Labour MPs didn’t event want to attend. It was just their duty to go. How awful – getting to see an All Black test from a corporate box with free food and alcohol.

    Much as it pains me to defend Shearer DPF, I think that the point he made in the Lush interview was that the SkyCity invite was indeed a perk when compared to the normal round of meetings etc that MP’s get invited to. That’s how I interpreted it anyway.

    But it does not change the appalling lack of judgment shown by these five MP’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Johnboy (16,651 comments) says:

    Gee KS. You are far too nice. If KB was Dad’s Army you would be Sergeant Arthur Wilson! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    It’s actually bloody cruel listening to this poor bastard…if he was a racehorse, the vet would have been called to put him down long ago. Are they really that bereft of talent? Or talent that wont scare the horses? (To mix the metaphors a bit…)

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. JC (958 comments) says:

    “But it does not change the appalling lack of judgment shown by these five MP’s.”

    But it isn’t lack of judgement.. they knew exactly how it would look and they didn’t care.. and they haven’t cared for a long time.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. slightlyrighty (2,475 comments) says:

    The fact is, politicians who were true to their principles would not have attended.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    Slighty: Quite right. Shearer is correct in so far as MP’s are literally drowned in invitations to this function or that. You select the ones you go to and turn down the rest. It is also true that sometimes you accept invitations to things that you would rather not go to, but that’s pretty rare.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Bad__Cat (140 comments) says:

    Don’t be cruel! He was just looking for his old friend Rufus Paynter.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. s.russell (1,642 comments) says:

    So… he was there for a secret meeting with an un-named person, in a corporate box…

    Oh, and by the way all the other people there are corrupt because they ate a sausage roll. Except for the Labour MPs, they are immune. And that John Key! He ate lunch with some people. Corruption! Corruption! Corruption! But I didn’t eat anything, I just had secret conversations. That makes me pure.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. trout (939 comments) says:

    ‘I did not inhale’.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. tristanb (1,127 comments) says:

    I think Shearer is fundamentally an honest person so is telling the truth.

    What evidence do you have that this is the case? To me, he actually seems pretty untrustworthy. Just because someone’s a bad liar doesn’t make that person honest.

    He reminds me of a young child, or the dumb kid in school, making about some ridiculous excuse on the spot denying something he clearly did. Same thing with Chase Bank account.

    People would be ripping into him if he was Trevor Mallard or Helen Clark, but Shearer seems to get a free pass just because he’s a bumbling idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    tristanb>People would be ripping into him if he was Trevor Mallard or Helen Clark

    Mallard would have been there. But he probably sold his ticket to a teenage girl on Trademe.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Whaleoil (767 comments) says:

    I think someone needs to teach Shearer how to count…he says twice he has 34 MPs…he doesn’t…unless he is still counting Parekura and himself

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    Regardless of Labour’s fuck-up, the SkyCity deals is still a dirty one.

    Get over it guys, and debate the substance (which us selling legislation to the only corporate bidder in the market).

    Rightly, or wrongly, SkyCity have a legislated monopoly. How does that sit with the libertarians, or even the common or garden Nat supporters on KB defending the dirty deal?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Yep, despite the obvious “Like OMG! Like, girlfriend have you heard this amazing gossip? Like OMG!” nature of the poster and the comments here, the following is still not hypocrisy:

    “Hi Everyone, We’ve got rid of lots of pokies with this Government. Eew, look, it’s SkyCity. Hey SkyCity, wanna buy some pokies? We’ll sell you the law at a really low price. Bargin basement deals, can get something drafted and signed really quickly for the right price”

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    @itstricky,

    Really??

    Ok, so how many children suffered so that Goff, King, Cosgrove and Fa’foi could feast and drink on Sky City’s dime last Saturday?

    Nice to see that solidarity remains an enduring value of the Left…

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Ok, so how many children suffered so that Goff, King, Cosgrove and Fa’foi could feast and drink on Sky City’s dime last Saturday?

    Que?

    The trade off was done. The allowed more pokies for the convention centre. They adjusted the law. And then they said “Don’t worry everyone, we’ve reduced pokie use over the past few years we’ve been in Government so it’s okay”

    That hypocrisy will be overlooked by this forum, for sure.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    Let’s face it itstricky – if the Labour MP’s concerned (and con you believe there were FIVE of them?) had front-footed it, the issue would have died a natural death by Monday. Now a week on, the only reason that it’s still an issue is because Labour has handled it so abysmally. And yet they want to manage the country’s finances? Give me strength!

    And as for the number of pokies nationwide; it will continue to decrease, albeit at a slower rate. Interestingly though, there were more pokies under Clark’s govt than under any other NZ government.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Pete George (23,591 comments) says:

    There will be a few people keeping an eye out for who goes to the test in Christchurch tonight. It’s Cosgrove’s home town so if he goes there shouldn’t be flights and accommodation involved.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    My God, how ugly the face of National desperation is.

    If John Key is a sure win in the next election, why is so much time and energy spent in promoting things like this?

    Could it be that the ‘sure thing’, is in fact a ‘maybe thing’ and so the desperate attempts to belittle anything and everything any of the opposition do, whilst avoiding similar examples from the ‘dream team’, in the hope that the ‘swinging voters’, who will actually decide the winners in the next election, will be disgusted enough to vote against them, and for national?

    Fact is, this type of crap is coming very close to doing to the opposite. Maybe you guys don’t read the normal non political blogs out there, but the continued focus on these types of pathetic issues is being noted, and its starting to make the ‘swingers’ feel a little tetchy about it all. Continue and you risk coming across as the bullies – and we all know what that will do to the vote.

    The Sky City deal is a foul one, many Kiwis think so – the fact that some Labour MP’s had drinks in the Skycity box at a rugby match is not going disguise the stink that surrounds the deal. No matter how hard you try.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    If it’s such a “foul” deal Judith, how come Helen Clark was happy to applaud SkyCity’s first convention centre at its opening a few years back when the premise underlining it was much the same as this one.

    At the end of the day, New Zealand will be getting an international-quality convention centre at no cost to the taxpayer. There will be jobs created in the construction phase, and ongoing jobs, and New Zealand will see an influx of tourism.

    Rotary International has its world conference in Sydney next year with around 15,000 Rotarians likely to attend. Can you imagine the benefit to New Zealand’s economy if there was a facility in New Zealand that could host a conference like that?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    KS – in mentioning HC and previous Governments twice it sounds like you are trying to justify the current Government’s hypocrisy just like those Labourites in the corporate box – try not to accidentally double back on yourself…
    Remember this is about hypocrisy that does not get mentioned. Pretty sure HC would have got slated by this blog back then too.. JK? No way he’s infallable… Of course

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    Que?

    Very simple itstricky. Where do you think the money comes from that enables Sky City to have a corporate box at the rugby?

    Why from people gambling of course.

    So the Labour MPs were quite happy to dine and drink off the proceeds from the poor families and children whom that had decried were to be victimized by the Convention Centre deal allowing some additional machines for Sky City.

    Hypocrisy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    And so what? Now you’re playing the victim card. None of that has anything to do with the fact that the hypocrisy over the Government’s trading of gambling law for money will go unreported but this event is being treated like some sort of revelation by the host. You can almost read the OMG girlfriend! Guess who was kissing who behind the bikesheds. Like Judith said above – desperate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    Now you’re playing the victim card.

    No, I’m not. I’m saying that Labour played the victim card in their opposition to the Conference Centre deal and then went and stuffed their faces and supped from the profits of that same gambling.

    They are hypocrites.

    The deal itself is an astoundingly good one. It makes sense for Auckand. While Sky City will have a few extra machines, the total number will still be declining. Labour talked up the risks – over hyped them I would say – and were then hoist with their own petard.

    They are woeful. In so many ways.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    But you still haven’t told me whether trumpeting how many pokies you’ve got rid of and doing a deal to allow more in a corporate hand-off is hypocritical? Especially so when you actually adjust the law to do so?

    No?

    Of course, your version of a hypocritical act depends on who the perp. is, right?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    itstricky,

    Given the total number of pokies will still be reduced, I fail to see where you can claim hypocrisy. After all, what National is doing is effectively redistributing resources – something the Left should understand well.

    National is quite clear that allowing Sky City additional machines, in the overall context of the benefits of the Conference Centre build and operations, is acceptable. It so happens that total numbers will still reduce.

    Talking about hypocrisy being defined by the perps, wasn’t it Labour who thought that allowing Sky City more machines under their govt in the early 00’s was better than ok, but it is somehow wrong under National?

    That’s a Labour [/facepalm]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    National is quite clear that allowing Sky City additional machines, in the overall context of the benefits of the Conference Centre build and operations, is acceptable

    So, let’s repeat this again:

    Trumpeting how many pokies you’ve got rid of whilst simultaneously doing a deal with a corporate and changing the law to allow more pokies is NOT hypocritical, right?

    Talking about hypocrisy being defined by the perps, wasn’t it Labour who thought that allowing Sky City more machines under their govt in the early 00′s was better than ok, but it is somehow wrong under National?

    I’m not defending Labour, apart from suggesting that all of DPFs post on this subject are Woman’s Day material and show (as Judith implied) how desperate National are getting.

    I am taking note, however, as I did with Keeping Stock above, how you are quick to point the finger back to Labour again. With the statement above you seem to be suggesting:

    That if Labour visit SkyCity – it’s wrong
    That if Labour allow more pokies – it’s wrong
    That if National allow more pokies – that’s okay

    Two wrongs make right, a?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    itstricky,

    I’m not claiming that Labour’s decision to allow more pokies for a conference centre in the early 00’s was wrong. Quite the opposite – it would appear to have been a sound commercial idea.

    What I am saying is wrong is for the same party, including a number of the same caucus, to criticize National for doing what they had done themselves – that is hypocrisy.

    On the pokie numbers – it is not hypocrisy to allow one operator to have more machines and to applaud a reduction in machines when the total numbers across all operators are still fewer.

    Labour opposition on this has been an ‘epic fail’ – both by reason and action. They have presented themselves as complete hypocrites.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. expat (4,050 comments) says:

    You forgot complete tools.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    On the pokie numbers – it is not hypocrisy to allow one operator to have more machines and to applaud a reduction in machines when the total numbers across all operators are still fewer.

    So… most dictionaries I’ve looked at suggest “saying one thing and doing another” as an example of the common definition of hypocrisy.

    With that in mind, I would term:

    Trumpeting how many pokies you’ve got rid of whilst simultaneously doing a deal with a corporate and changing the law to increase the number of pokies

    as hypocrisy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    itstricky,

    Applauding a reduction in total number of machines is not hypocrisy if the total is reducing. A change in the distribution of numbers across the operators, while the total number is still reducing, is not hypocrisy.

    That is doing exactly what you are saying

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. itstricky (1,851 comments) says:

    Stop tryimg to confound with tye whole ‘across operators’ thing.
    1250 machines. I get rid of 250 during the previous year. Look at me everybody, I am a star doing good in the world. Now, Sky City Wanna buy the law? I can give you 250 machines if you like?

    What is your definition of that behaviour if not hypocrisy?

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