Kiwiblog

A copy of the teapot tape has been placed online, and the link e-mailed to a huge number of people from an anon e-mail address.

There are a very small number of people who have that file. Bradley Ambrose and the senior staff of the Herald on Sunday and TV3. Will any of them be brave enough to admit they did it? I will say I don’t think it is anyone from the Herald on Sunday. To be fair to them, they didn’t publish the tape originally, and it was TV3 that turned it into a daily circus.

I said before the election it was inevitable it would come out at some stage.

The recording is on You Tube (uploaded by 2Johns2Cups), plus two other locations. I’m not providing a direct link due to the questionable legality, but I do not believe saying where it has been published (as I have done) makes me a publisher, anymore than when newspapers reported Whale Oil had broken a suppression order (which sent everyone off to his site).

The irony is that the recording is quite benign, as the PM has said. The media beat this up into a nonsense, that just lowered their standing with most New Zealanders.

Hopefully this release will mean that we can all move on now, except of course we await the Police decision on the legality of making the recording.

Please do not post a direct link in the comments.

A hilarious column by Sean Plunket in Metro on the National-ACT negotiations after the election. Worth getting Metro just to read the whole thing. Some extracts:

Banks: Golly it was close, wasn’t it? Great to be back in Parliament as a National… oh, sorry… Act MP. No, no tea, thanks Prime Minister. Anyway boss, what am I here for?”

“So what is it you want Banksy?” queries Key.  “I know you are going to drive a bloody hard bargain, mate”

“Not really,” says Banks. Then adds quizzically, “What do I want?”

“You are one wily old fox, aren’t you, Banksy? Pulling the old I-don’t-know-what-I-want-trick, when I know and you know that you want charter schools.”

“Charter whats?” says Banks.

“Charter schools, Einstein. You know schools where we can blow away the national curriculum, give those pinko teachers the boot and say it’s all in the cause of improving outcomes for kids like you and me who climbed their way to the top despite a failing state education system.”

“Sounds good, Leader. We’ll take it”

One can’t be sure that isn’t how it went, which is what makes it so funny. Then he carries on:

Banks moves towards the door. “If there is nothing else, I’ve got an optician’s appointment to replace those silly glassses.”

“You’ve got me again Banksy!” says Key as he mimes being shot through the heart and falling dead. “The old that’s-all-I-want-and-I’m-on-my-way-trick! You weren’t really just going to walk out the door without even asking for a departmental spending freeze that would require any minister wanting a budget increase to have it approved by Parliament?”

“Yes I was, actually” Banks looks increasingly confused.

“Okay, you can stop twisting my arm now, Banksy. It’s yours.”

And the conclusion:

“I’m happy with that. Is there anything else I want?”

“Oh, there are a couple of other issues you’ll be wanting to hold my feet to the fire on, but why not just sign the agreement here and I’ll get Steven Joyce to fill in the details.”

“Righto, boss. I’ll see you in a couple of years, then.”

Plunket must have been in the room

Sent to me by e-mail. Very well done.

John Hartevelt blogs:

It’s right that New Zealanders discuss and debate who should be conferred the top awards. The media should lead the discussion and the PM and his ministerial colleagues on the adjudicating committee ought to take heed.

Oh I see. It is the role of the media to lead the discussion on who gets knighted, and it is the role of the Prime Minister to tale heed.

I’m gob-smacked.

As to why Key mentioned Richie McCaw had indicated he thought a knighthood was premature, it’s simple.

If McCaw wasn’t included when the honours are announced, then the media focus would all be on him missing out, rather than on those who gained the honours. So Key gets it out early that Richie has said he doesn’t think it is appropriate while he is still playing (a stance I agree with), and that means when the honours come out, the focus will be on those who do get one.

The full list is here. I’ve summarised the changes in the table below.

The brand new Cabinet Minister is Amy Adams, the third of the 2008 intake to make it after Joyce and Parata. She is joined by Craig Foss and Nathan Guy who were Ministers outside Cabinet.

Three new Ministers outside Cabinet are Chris Tremain, Jo Goodhew and Chester Borrows. They are all from the class of 2005, and I suspect that is a signal from the PM that all future Ministers will now come from the 2008 and 2011 intakes.

The cabinet rankings are more symbolic than a reflection of actual power. For example last term Joyce and McCully were on the second row, but both are very influential. However the symbolism is important to a degree.

Parata moves up 13 places which is a huge vote of confidence in her, and Joyce moves up 10. Paula Bennett also moves up seven spots and Jonathan Coleman up four.

A significant reshuffle in terms of portfolios. Brownlee is freed up to keep working on Christchurch, but gets Transport.

Joyce’s role with Economic Development and Science and Innovation will be at the heart of National’s second term agenda.

Collins gets Justice, so expect to see further reforms.

Tony Ryall gets to be the Minister who sells off minority stakes in SOEs as he did such a good job of it last time. He keeps Health of course.

The move of Parata to Education is inspired – Hekia will champion measures to improve the lot of the 20% who are failing – many of whom are Maori.

Tolley gets Police and Corrections. Her experiences with the NZEI and NZPF will stand her in good stead for these portfolios!

Coleman gets Defence, which is handy as he has Devonport Naval Base in his electorate.

Amy Adams gets Comms/ICT, which will fit in quite well with having Internal Affairs also.

Tremain and Goodhew become Ministers as expected, and they are joined by Chester Borrows who should make a good Courts Minister as a former cop and former lawyer – knows both sides!

Worth noting that 10 portfolios have been disestablished or incorporated into other portfolios.

This is from this morning as the PM visited a manufacturer. I’m not sure what caused the grimace but I am told it led to much hilarity.

Anyway makes a good caption contest. As always they should be funny, not nasty.

Stuff reports:

A Palmerston North man was serious when he spoke of becoming a suicide bomber in order to assassinate the prime minister and his wife in a Lower Hutt steak house, a court has ruled.

Keith William Mabey, 22, was found guilty in Palmerston North District Court yesterday of threatening to kill John Key after explaining his assassination plot to a Corrections Department psychologist. …

“He said John Key was not running the country properly and … was attempting to poison everyone, so he needed to kill him to stop it.”

Mr Colhoun said Mabey told him he had researched bomb-making on the internet and had successfully tested some homemade gun powder and a detonator.

He planned to modify a stab-proof vest with pockets of dynamite.

I wonder if Mabey was also an “undecided” worm panelists for the debate last night

In May, Police Minister Judith Collins said “serious threats” had been made against Mr Key after it was revealed the Diplomatic Protection Squad had blown its budget by $800,000 in 2009-10.

Labour claimed Mr Key was using a squad entourage to make him look important.

One of the many things they’ll never apologise for.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key has refused to answer reporter’s questions about the ‘tea tapes’ and stormed out of a press conference in Wellington.

National had dug its heels in over the publication of the recording, with Key saing he cannot remember if he suggested NZ First supporters are dying out.

I can understand the frustration that for four days media have been writing stories on the illegally recorded conversation, but if the Stuff report is correct, this will just keep it in the news even longer. Yes it would be nice if the media actually reported on policies and how France is about to get downgraded due to its history of deficits and debt – but one has to accept the media as they are, not how we would like them to be.

The suggested comments about NZ First are of course correct. Peters gets very little support from younger New Zealanders, and hence his potential voting base does shrink every election. I doubt there isn’t a political reporter in the country who hasn’t said something similar in a private conversation.

Worth noting that it was not a press conference, but a media stand-up after talking to Federated Farmers on trade, and announcing National’s trade policy. The defence will be that as there were no more questions about trade, the PM left, but the media will report it in the most sensational terms.

UPDATE: TV3 video is here. I’m not sure one can describe it as storming out, but predict nevertheless that is how every outlet will report it. That doesn’t mean I think it was a good idea, because the media reaction was predictable.

I wonder if all those on the left who have railed against TV3 and Mediaworks time after time as being “brought off” by the Government might have the good grace to say they were wrong, considering the role of TV3 in keeping this issue alive.

UPDATE2: Looking at the TV news last night TVNZ did a balanced report on the issue, while TV3 hyped it up as their lead item, and probably will do the same tonight. There comes a point where you wonder how many days in a row they will continue with their campaign.

This is David Cameron endorsing a vote against AV in the Uk referendum. Whale wants John Key to do the same here, but in terms of our referendum.

Jon Johansson takes the other approach. he blogs:

I was staggered to hear on television Prime Minister John Key say that although he was “not entirely unhappy” with MMP, he intended to vote for change. The PM said while he likes proportionality, he “slightly prefers the characteristics of Supplementary Member (SM)”.

I think Jon’s post is a massive over-reaction. The PM was asked a question and he answered it. He said over a year ago his preference was SM, so this is no revelation or surprise.

We have a Prime Minister who wishes to vote to turn back progress for women participating in parliamentary politics, and a Prime Minister who in defiance of our dramatically changing demographics prefers not to facilitate Asian New Zealanders, Pacifika New Zealanders, or other ethnic Kiwis participating in their own democracy.

Jon is absolutely entitled to his view of John Key, but he is being rather hysterical in his tone, and is overlooking the fact that with 30 List MPs, one can still have plenty of female, Asian, and Pacific representation. It is not minorities that get disadvantaged by SM, rather it is minor parties (or parties that do not win electorate seats).

Jon’s rant is a perfect example of what I have said many times with this debate. Supporters of MMP hysterically denounce anyone who disagrees with them as anti-democratic, when in fact all five electoral systems on offer are perfectly democratic. I do not include Sandra Grey from the Campaign fro MMP in my criticism – I have found her to be very upfront about acknowledging that all systems have strengths and weaknesses, and it depends on what you value most.

If I was a woman I’d be very unhappy that my Prime Minister, one who has seemed to make MMP work rather effortlessly, has decided to favour an electoral system that will make it harder for me or my daughters or grand-daughters to pursue a political career. If I was an Asian or Pacifika Kiwi I’d be concerned that the Prime Minister wants to limit my and my children’s ambitions in the expansion of his own.

I am also, apart from being a political scientist, an ordinary citizen and I am appalled my Prime Minister supports a system that will make my vote less equal than it is now under MMP.

I think Jon makes it very clear how he will be voting. Further Jon is all but advocating people not to vote National. He is in danger of being more of a political activist than a political scientist.

I should point out here that I will  not be voting for SM in Part B of the referendum. I’ll blog in a few days on how I am voting on both parts and why. What I object to is the extremists who condemn people for daring to say they support SM or FPP or any of the five systems. My advice to Jon is to take in a few deep breaths and relax.

I don’t seem to recall Jon objecting so strongly when Phil Goff and Metiria Turei stated their preferences. In fact they have both been far far more vocal than Key on their preference.

The SST reports:

Artist Sam Mahon has painted a picture of John Key as a corpse and made it part of an interactive game on his website called, “Who Killed John Key?”

Mahon, who calls himself a socialist, says he hopes the image “will simply make people curious”. He wants to “put a bunch of ‘Key crimes’ on to one ring,” he told the Sunday Star-Times.

“The thing about this man is that he seems to be able to lie to the public straight-faced knowing that given a month or three the promises he makes will be forgotten. Success in politics seems to depend on the public having a very short memory.”

The painting shows Key’s body slumped against a wall in an alley with a rifled wallet beside him. A half-empty wine bottle, a rat and a half-eaten apple are among the detritus nearby.

Sam Mahon is a socialist and he hates John Key. So he gets his jollies by imagining him killed, and paints a picture of it. I’m sorry but that is seriously fucked up. Even worse, he turns it into an online game, where he gives out prizes for those taking part.

If an artist had done a picture of Helen Clark shot dead, he or she would have been condemned for encouraging violence and hate crimes.

Mahon in his hatred of Key, overlooks that he has children who should not have to see Mahon’s artistic ejaculation of their father dead in an alleyway.

And Labour have the nerve to complain about Key having the DPS with him so often, when this sort of shit is done.

Ironically, Mahon’s hatred will probably backfire on him. The public don’t like this sort of shit.

UPDATE: Trevor Mallard blogs:

I’m generally in favour of a pretty liberal interpretation of what it is appropriate for media to cover. But a game that is based on killing the PM is not.

The Herald on Sunday reports:

The freelance cameraman who made the recording, whom the paper has agreed not to name, said the recording had been made accidentally after he was stopped by Key’s security staff from recovering the recording device. It transmitted the recording to the camera operator’s equipment but he did not discover until later.

This story is somewhat implausible. If the cameraman had said “I need to recover my recorder”, I have little doubt he would have been able to do so. I am also somewhat suspicious of the claim that he did not realise it was transmitting.

The recording, which was made unintentionally, according to the man who made it, contains fascinating insights into how Key thinks the next Parliament will shape up after the election.

We have chosen not to publish exact details of the conversation, as it was supposed to be in private, and Key last night refused to waive privacy considerations.

This is the correct decision, as it was obtained illegally. The freelance cameraman broke the law, whether intentionally or not,  and should have destroyed the recording, rather than given it to the HoS.

Right-wing blogger David Farrar also supported release if the recording revealed hypocrisy. “If there is something which is contradicted by what they say publicly, it makes the public interest argument.”

I should out this comment in its full context. I said the recording should not be published unless it revealed massive wrongdoing. I further compared it to being on the same scale as the UK phone tapping (albeit further down the scale). When pressed further on what would constitute massive wrongdoing, I gave the example of hypocrisy. I also said that for it to make the “public interest” argument, that is a different threshold to “the public would be interested”.

The fact the HoS has not published it, suggests it is merely interesting, rather than in the public interest.

The recording, which was made unintentionally, according to the man who made it, contains fascinating insights into how Key thinks the next Parliament will shape up after the election.

Well speculating on election outcomes is not exactly a crime. I suspect every MP has conversations like that several times a day.

The Herald reports:

While the most eagerly awaited conversation of the election was taking place, a mystery person may have been secretly listening.

A recording device was found on the Newmarket cafe table where National leader John Key showed his endorsement of Act’s Epsom candidate, John Banks, by sitting down to a cup of tea.

When their conversation at Urban Cafe finished, a man claiming to be a freelance reporter for the Herald collected the device, which was in a small, dark bag beside the pair.

The Herald had no freelancers at the meeting. …

It is illegal to record a private conversation without consent.

So all we know at this stage about the person who did it is they are a criminal, and a liar.

It brings back memories of what happened in 2008, with covert taping also. In that case the person responsible had ties to both Labour and Greens.

History has a way of repeating itself.

Tracy Watkins writes:

Remember the American bag man? The H-bomb? Labour has so far tried shock jock policy (raising the retirement age); taking the moral high ground in the policy debate (a capital gains tax), and gone back to tried and true policies with sweeteners in the form of generous welfare payments, union-friendly law changes and a rise in the minimum wage. But with the polls still showing Labour adrift at below 30 per cent, expect the campaign to turn personal in the final two weeks. Phil Goff has already signalled that is the direction Labour is headed by labelling Mr Key a liar over GST, attacking him over his Hawaiian holiday home, capitalising on his perceived weakness – which is to appear smug – and attacking his credibility.

Since Mr Key became National leader, Labour has also sought to get up various stories, including that Mr Key’s blind trust was a sham; questioning whether he made a false declaration in relation to his electoral address; seeking to link the Government’s BMW contract to National Party donations and a Parnell neighbour of Mr Key’s; and accusing him of mis-stating the number of TranzRail shares he owned.

Last, but not least, was the H-bomb in the 2008 campaign – Labour’s attempt to link Mr Key to a 1980s financial scandal, which exploded in its face after it emerged that it had mistaken someone else’s signature for Mr Key’s. So far this campaign, Mr Goff has tried to avoid a full-frontal personal attack, but the closer to the election we get, the more direct we can expect the attacks to be.

The burning question is whether Labour will follow past form and try to drop a bomb in the final week of the campaign. The advantage of doing it that close to the election date, of course, is you don’t have to prove it till after the polls have closed. The disadvantage is that voters punish negative campaigns.

And of course such proof will never eventuate.

It is becoming obvious that the last two weeks of the campaign are going to be non stop attacks on John Key. 3 News reports:

Labour leader Phil Goff says United States President Barack Obama is a great leader whereas Prime Minister John Key is a poor leader despite both nations having high unemployment and receiving credit downgrades since both leaders took office.

Unemployment in New Zealand has doubled and our credit rating has been downgraded twice by Standard and Poors since 2008.  

The United States’ unemployment has also doubled since before the global financial crisis and they have received a credit downgrade too.

Mr Goff told Firstline this morning that President Obama and Mr Key are incomparable because they inherited different fiscal situations.

The moment John Key revealed yes he had been punched, and named his school era attacker, I knew there would be a media manhunt for the other party, and so behold the Herald reports:

A man who punched John Key in a schoolyard spat almost 40 years ago says he was “done over” by the Prime Minister in a game of padder tennis.

Mr Key yesterday outed Greg Buzzard in a light-hearted interview for hitting him at Christchurch’s Cobham Intermediate and said he still hadn’t forgiven him.

Mr Buzzard said he didn’t remember throwing a punch, but still recalls a dodgy umpiring decision by Mr Key which cost him his place on the court.

“It wouldn’t surprise me if I did [punch him],” Mr Buzzard, 49, told the Weekend Herald.

“We were really competitive at school. While we might have respected each other I wouldn’t have necessarily said we got on that well.”

Mr Buzzard, a competitive table tennis player, recalls the future prime minister making the wrong call against him when Mr Key was next in line to take the court.

“He definitely called it out when it wasn’t. I’ll never forgive him for scamming me at padder tennis. I got done over by him.”

I expect Red Alert to seize on this story as proof that Key can’t be trusted, and that someone who scammed at padder tennis could well do the H-Fee.

Stuff reports:

Eh, by gum, Coronation Street is returning to primetime, after an about face by TVNZ.

After suffering a serious backlash by outraged fans, TVNZ is moving the British soap back to its primetime slot.

After being diced and sauteed by angry oldies, TVNZ has put it in the place of MasterChef Australia, to screen at 7.30pm on consecutive Thursdays and Fridays, starting next week.

It has been only a few weeks since TVNZ moved Coronation Street to the earlier time of 5.25pm.

And yes I am taking the piss.

I can’t embed it, but go to Stuff and look at the video of Key and Goff doing the bloke test. Parts are very amusing. A summary of parts of it:

Running late and out of clean underwear

Key – don’t wear any, who can tell under the suit
Goff – on occasion has washed his own in a basin

Thrown a punch or been hit

Key – yes and names the kid at intermediate school who punched him and says still not forgiven him.
Goff – at a punching bag but admits yes in younger days

Who drives and navigates – you or wife

Key – I drive, Bronagh navigates and is always too late telling me to change lanes
Goff – A Navman has kept his marriage going

Ever done a yardglass

Key – yes, and offers the extra info that he spewed
Goff – no, protested strongly at son’s 21st when he did one.Not in favour of drinking to get drunk

Song you sing in the bath

Key – opponents claim “Oh lord, it’s hard to be humble” but actually Singing in the Rain
Goff – no song at all if anyone is at home

Ever shot a living creature

Key – yes as a youngster shot some rabbits on a farm
Goff – yes as a small farmer. Shoots rabbits to stop them over-running

Best SAS wilderness survival tip

Key – If caught in snow, you have to clear a bit out and get down to the grass as it is warmer there
Goff – Never try to keep up with the SAS!

BBQ secret

Key – don’t turn the steak until the juices of the blood move up and only turn once
Goff – enjoy steak on bbq, marinating it

Can you change a tyre

Key – yes
Goff – Not done in last couple of decades as easier for shop, but done in past

Do you tell wife if she cuts her hair short and you hate it

Key – no
Goff – no

Tui or Otago Pinot Noir

Key – Tuis (a claim met with some scepticism by the journos)
Goff – Tuis when hay making, Otago PN when at social functions

Very amusing. Good on them for taking part. Some will get sniffy but it is only five minutes out of a day.

Incidentally my answers would be:

Running late and out of clean underwear – turn them inside out

Thrown a punch or been hit – thrown a punch at university and been in a fight when I got mugged

Who drives and navigates – I drive, Noelle (my TomTom) navigates

Ever done a yardglass – yes, at university. No spew.

Song you sing in the bath – In the Navy

Ever shot a living creature – no

Best SAS wilderness survival tip – dribble if caught in snow avalanche, to work out what way is up and down

BBQ secret – pipis are great to bbq

Can you change a tyre – yes, but easier to call AA

Do you tell girlfriend if she cuts her hair short and you hate it – I am not suicidal

Tui or Otago Pinot Noir – definitely the Pinot

Brian Edwards writes that he believes Phil Goff will do very well in the televised debates, the first of which is tonight.

I agree. Key should certainly hold his own, as he did in 2008, but these debates should see Goff perform at least equally as well, if not better.

Goff has been in Parliament for close to 30 years. He can recite facts and figures about what happened to unemployment in 1989, the impact of market rents in 1995, power prices in the 2000s etc. Key only entered Parliament in 2002.

Goff was a Minister for nine years in the last Government, and he was rarely rattled in the House. His debating skills are second to none.

Where Goff can struggle is with empathy, coming across as a “normal bloke” rather than a professional politician who is always negative. But he and his staff have spent the last two and a bit years making him less robotic, and I have no doubt he will get that balance right tonight of criticising the Government’s record, and promoting their own policies. so that he is seen more positively by New Zealanders than previously. Key is already a known quantity.

Debates are huge opportunities for Opposition Leaders. For the first time they are being framed as the alternate Prime Minister. unless something goes badly wrong, my expectation is Goff will get a bounce from the debate tonight. The question is not so much whether he will get a bounce, but how big that bounce will be.

An unusual media strategy from Labour’s Campaign Spokesman Grant Robertson:

I think that everyone can see that John Key is an extremely popular Prime Minister …

I hope Grant keeps on talking about how Key is so popular, and what he is implying about his own leader.

Hawkes Bay Today reports:

Hawke’s Bay apple producer Apollo made a cheeky but tasteful offer to Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard for the Rugby World Cup semifinal between the All Blacks and Wallabies.

Apollo’s director, Bruce Beaton, packed a carton of New Zealand Queen apples and asked Napier MP Chris Tremain to transport the fruit to Prime Minister John Key’s house in Auckland at the weekend.

“The idea was that if Julia was over watching the rugby with John in Auckland, she could have a tasty New Zealand apple to munch after the game,” Mr Beaton said.

She wasn’t there, but hopefully the apples will get to her in Australia.

The Broadcasting Standards Authority has just released its decision on their complaints against the PM hosting a non-political hour of talkback on Radio Live.

They have rejected Labour’s complaint on every ground argued, and their conclusion was:

Our opinion therefore is that even if this programme were held to be an election programme, which we do not consider it was, it would not have breached any of the standards raised by the complainant.

So the BSA has said that in their view it was not an election programme, but even if it was it breached no standard. This suggests that the Electoral Commission are unlikely to find it was an election programme also, unless they radically depart from the BSA’s reasonings.

The real winner in all of this is Mediaworks. They have a tiny listenership, and if Labour had not whined about the one hour show, would have passed without much notice. But thanks to their complaints Mediaworks and Radio Live have had two weeks of publicity about it.

The decision is embedded below.

Radio Works 14 Oct

Well Hone’s party is certainly turning out to be a diverse one. Claire Trevett at NZ Herald reports:

The Mana Party’s new candidate for Tamaki Makaurau is a Ratana Church minister who once praised Prime Minister John Key as “a person who should be admired” – and still thinks Mr Key has done a good job.

Kereama Pene was confirmed as Mana’s candidate in the Tamaki Makaurau seat currently held by the Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples.

Last year, while welcoming Labour leader Phil Goff to the annual Ratana celebrations, Mr Pene praised Mr Key as “a brilliant speaker” and “a person who should be admired”.

Yesterday, Mr Pene said he stood by his comments about the PM.

“We’re in a recession right now, and I’ve got to think like the rest of the country that he has done a pretty good job.”

But it isn’t just John Key he praises.

Asked what Mana leader Hone Harawira would think of his view, given that he had walked away from the Maori Party because of his dislike of National, Mr Pene said: “National is actually the group that have done most of the great things for Maoridom over the last 20 years. You’ve got to give praise where it’s due.”

He said the Treaty settlements process, the Waitangi Tribunal and kohanga reo were all implemented under National.

All true.

Danya Levy at Stuff reports:

A row has erupted over comments the Prime Minister made as a man tried to throw himself over a railing in Parliament today.

There were gasps from MPs as the man, heard muttering about injustices, tried to launch himself from the public gallery into the debating chamber below.

As security guards, a solicitor and diplomatic protection squad officers tried to drag the man back over the bannister, Labour says John Key cried across the house “shame on Labour”.

As the speaker shouted for silence, Labour MPs, including deputy leader Annette King, were spitting, calling out “scumbag” repeatedly towards the National benches. …

Wading into the war of words, senior Labour MP David Cunliffe said Key had tried to turn the incident into a political event.

“He said ‘you should be ashamed of yourself, that’s down to you guys’, meaning Labour.”

Cunliffe said the comment was inappropriate because the man might have been attempting to commit suicide.

“To turn that into a political event shows a personality trait that most people don’t often see of the prime minister and it brought the House into disrepute.

“It’s a very low point in the House.”

But a spokeswoman for Key said Labour had the wrong end of the stick.

In a short email, they said: “The Prime Minister’s comments following the incident were a reflection on the Labour Party’s continued criticism of his DPS security detail – which included criticism of his being accompanied inside the parliamentary complex.  It should be noted a DPS member was involved in restraining the member of the public.”

I’ve got three thoughts on this.

My first is that it was a pretty horrific incident for all MPs. You could see how stunned many MPs were. The madman could have killed himself if he landed badly. He also could have seriously injured anyone he landed on, and finally he could also have posed a threat to the subjects of his ire. It would be a shame if NZ had to end up with barriers from the gallery, as in other countries.

The second is that no party or MP is responsible for the actions of a demented protester. Anyone who suggests an MP or party is to blame, is wrong.

The third point is around security. Phil Goff was unwise to attack the level of protection the PM has, as he did in May. Even more unwise to have claimed he would not have the DPS in Parliament, as it was a DPS officer who helped restrain the demented one. Likewise we have had Trevor Mallard claim Key has the DPS in Parliament just to carry his water bottle to the gym. Sure in this case the protester was more likely to hurt a Labour MP as he was on their side of the House, he could just as easily have gone to the other side. And his grudge seemed to clearly be with Government Ministers, as he mentioned both Bennett and Key by name it seems.

No one can know, except the PM, what he meant by his comments. I suspect those on the left will interpret them in the worst light, and those on the right in the most charitable. Labour may wish to reflect that regardless of what the motivation was, if they hadn’t made such idiots of themselves over the issue of security for the PM, then he wouldn’t have that as an “excuse”.

And it was not just once or twice. By my account Labour have criticised the PMs use of the DPS on a dozen or so occasions. Mallard and Hipkins have blogged on it, Goff has commented on it, Cosgrove has asked oral questions on it and Pete Hodgson has asked written questions about it.  They’ve had a co-ordinated campaign suggesting the PM doesn’t really have any threats, and trying to portray his protection detail as being about his ego. With that in mind, one can understand his reaction if a guy yelling his name tries to jump into the debating chamber.

It’s a bit unfortunate that the House will end tomorrow on a bit of a sour note. Because despite everything I think there has been less rancour in the House than previous Parliaments.

Derek Cheng reports:

Their opponents are calling it desperate opportunism, but the Labour Party insists their black billboards are nothing more than a clever way to show support for the All Blacks.

One can show support by blogging about the team. Spending a large proportion of your limited campaign budget on billboards about the All Blacks is about politics, not sports.

About 40 billboards around Auckland and Wellington have recently popped up with white lettering on a black background: “When things look black, we’re at our best.”

Below that in red letters is: “Go the boys.”

The billboard has been mocked on right-wing blogsite Kiwiblog as desperate, and Labour’s campaign spokesman Grant Robertson was not shy about the link to the national rugby team.

“There’s multiple layers of meaning. We want to show some support for the All Blacks.”

The message was not meant to convey that Labour was close to toast this election, he said. “We’re facing a significant challenge. We recognise that. We think we can win.

“People shouldn’t be reading deeply into the tea leaves … We’re showing support for the All Blacks while having a light-hearted poke at ourselves at the same time. …

The billboards were put up within hours of being conceived, but Mr Robertson did not have the exact cost of the billboards.

Labour are trying to have you believe that this was almost done on a whim. First of all I seriously doubt any billboards were up within hours of being conceived. I’ve stuck billboards up and you need to generally get artwork in days in advance so skins can be produced, and then dried off. And then after that specialists have to put the billboards up.

As for the costs, the minimum tends to be $2,000 a month. Some sites can get close to $5,000 a month. And ballpark production costs are $1,000 per board to produce the skin and stick it up. So those 40 billboards would have costed Labour around $120,000. So they have spent $120,000 not on promoting their key messages or policies, but in trying to associate themselves with the All Blacks.

Prime Minister John Key’s DJ shows are likely to come under close scrutiny after Labour complaints to the Electoral Commission about a radio segment he hosted last week.

Mr Key hosted an hour-long programme on RadioLive on Friday. It included interviews with a number of celebrities including Sir Peter Jackson and Richie McCaw.

During the show, Mr Key told listeners the hour was an “election-free zone”, and spent the time discussing issues ranging from his cat to Coronation St.

At the time, a spokeswoman for the PM said the station had stipulated the hour had to be free of politics, after advice from the Electoral Commission that political content could breach election rules.

However, the Labour Party is arguing that his stint still broke the rules and yesterday lodged complaints with the Electoral Commission and the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

The PM went out of his way to refuse to talk politics on the show, specifically to avoid it being an election programme.

I actually think Radio Live should have given Phil Goff a one hour show also. Never mind that no one would call in!

UPDATE: The media story referred to billboards. Trevor Mallard has pointed out they are hoardings not billboards. In that case, my cost and time estimates are not correct. Billboards are 18 (and up to 60) square metres in size and are printed on special skins. They need to be put up by specialist crews. A hoarding or yard sign of up to three square metres and is on corflute and get erected on temporary structures or attached to fences.

The terms “billboard” and “hoarding” should not be interchangeable!