Today’s revelations in the Lengate scandal are so bizarre, that a script based on them would be rejected as unbelievable and implausible. But we have allegations of porn deals, women’s magazine deals, fake CVs and more.

The list of losers from this scandal continues to grow, and multiple reputations are being battered.

Today’s stories are:

1. The Herald on Sunday editorial which says Brown has questions to answer. The editorial is critical of many, especially Wewege. It concludes that Len Brown should resign if he did do anything to benefit Chuang while in, or seeking, a relationship with her.
2. A detailed backgrounder on how the story broke by Bevan Hurley who mainly Stephen Cook and Bevan Chuang, who it is fair to say don’t seem to like each other. Cook says Wewege turned up to their first meeting and tried to get them to run a story, which they initially declined to do. Cooks describes Wewege as a shadowy character.
3. A story where Palino denies he was part of a plan to force Brown to resign, saying “Suggestions now that I, an entrepreneur, TV personality and political novice, am somehow orchestrating some grand right-wing conspiracy to unseat Len after the election are so wrong and so absurd they do not stand up to even the remotest test of common sense”
4. An SST story by Tony Wall on claims by Stephen Cook that Bevan Chuang was interested in starring in a $25,000 competition called “New Zealand’s Next Top XXX model” and claims by Chuang that Cook wanted her to star in a porn movie re-enactment of her affair with Len Brown.
5. Colin Espiner also has a story quoting Palino where he states that Chuang had “never told him the full nature of her relationship with the mayor and only ever indicated she received persistent and unwanted propositions from the mayor”, and he claims on that basis he told her not to go public.
6. A story on Wewege’s CV, which it seems has more holes in it than the Leader of the Opposition’s! Among his many global achievements is the creation of a KwaMashu Township initiative, which it seems the Township has never heard of. Also revealed that a National Party activist warned the Palino camp off Wewege some time ago.
7. Kerre Woodham column, who mainly attacks Bevan Chuang, but also says Brown only has himself to blame.
8. Matt McCarten writes on both John Banks and Len Brown. He says he does not believe John Palino’s denials but says he does believe John Slater when he says he didn’t know. McCarten also focuses on Brown giving Chuang a work reference which would have helped her get  a job at the Auckland Art Gallery.
9. Renee Liang writes of her annoyance that Asians may be stereotyped by the sex scandal, and points out correctly that they’re all individuals, and humourously that they can’t all do kung fu!
10. Deborah Coddington notes few women politicians are involved in sex scandals (The New Yorker does list some though). She is critical of Chuang and Brown.

I think this whole affair is so sad. So many people involved have made grievous errors of judgments, especially the three central characters (it seems) of Chuang, Brown and Wewege.

Also worth noting that this scandal has now made CNN.

Aimee Gilliver at Stuff reports:

Cinema owners will benefit from the extended ban on parallel imports of movies, but in three years retailers will be able to sell a movie on DVD at the same time it is showing in cinemas, under new law.

The Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill passed its third reading in Parliament this week. It reduces the ban period on parallel importation of films for commercial use from nine months from the international release date to five months for the next three years.

The ban allows the New Zealand copyright holder of a film to control when retailers are allowed to access copies to provide to consumers – otherwise, a movie could be sold on DVD by a retailer who had imported it from a foreign right-holder at the same time it was being shown in cinemas here.

It was initially set to lapse on October 31 but has been extended for three years in a reduced form to give cinema owners time to adjust, and convert to digital exhibition. …

Blogger David Farrar said the difficulty in buying content legally has helped create a generation of people who download unauthorised copies because it is the only way they can view what they want to, when they want to, and in the form they want to.

“Ultimately New Zealanders want to be able to purchase movies the same day as they can read reviews about them online.

“Any law that makes it harder for New Zealanders to purchase movies legally is likely to be reasonably ineffectual as people won’t wait five months or nine months to be able to buy a copy for themselves.”

The three-year extension may prevent new business models emerging because it gave an exclusive period for movie theatres, Mr Farrar said.

“Many New Zealanders could well be happy to pay say $50 to view a movie at home the week it is released, but there is no legal way for them to do so.”

The three-year ban, with a shorter time period, is an advantage, Mr Farrar said.

“It gives movie theatres time to plan for an era where they’ll be competing with online delivery of content.

“Some may struggle, but some may adapt well to the competition and focus more on making going to the theatre part of a better experience and a fun night out.”

As I said, I think it would be great if we can buy content in the format we want it, when we want it.

The Herald reports:

John Palino met Len Brown’s former mistress for a late-night discussion in a Mission Bay car park the night after the mayoral election and just two days before the affair was made public.

Bevan Chuang claims Mr Palino’s camp raised the possibility that Mr Brown could be shamed into resigning the mayoralty.

When news of the scandal broke on Tuesday, Mr Palino denied any knowledge of the affair. But he met Ms Chuang on Sunday, October 13 – the day after the election.

The meeting, arranged by text message, happened shortly before 10pm in the carpark across from the Berkeley Cinema.

Ms Chuang told the Weekend Herald the meeting was to discuss whether Mr Brown might resign over the affair.

Last night, Mr Palino’s campaign manager, John Slater, confirmed a meeting had taken place, but said it was just a “general chit-chat”.

However, Ms Chuang claims she and Mr Palino discussed revealing to Mr Brown information about the affair and whether he might resign, claiming poor health. (He suffered a major heart attack in May 2008.) …

Mr Palino told Ms Chuang he did not believe a story would be published, she claimed.

She said they parted ways at around 11.30pm.

“John Palino and I walked towards his car and [he] indicated that we cannot be seen together,” she said.

In a statement to the Weekend Herald, the 32-year-old said she had met Mr Palino several times. They also met at the Espresso Workshop in Epsom on May 15 and at his campaign office in Ponsonby two weeks later.

Mr Palino has previously confirmed he met Ms Chuang during the election campaign, but when asked on Tuesday what he knew about the affair, he said he had no knowledge of it and that he did not know who was involved.

However, in her statement, Ms Chuang said that last Sunday afternoon, Mr Palino called her from a phone belonging to his fiancee, Rose Li, to ask if Ms Chuang was OK.

Later that afternoon, he sent a series of texts from his own phone to organise the meeting.

This meeting took place after the election, so Mr Palino wasn’t a potential beneficiary of affair (except that if Brown resigns he could stand again, but I suspect there would be many more candidates in a field without Brown), but his actions are extremely politically naive.

If I was a candidate for office, and someone who claimed to have an affair with my opponent wanted to meet me, I’d run screaming 100 miles in the other direction. No good can come of such a meeting, and in this case no good has come from it.

And asking to meet up, as reported, is even worse error of judgement.

This affair is damaging most (not all) of the people involved in it.

Mr Brown also denied claims by Ms Chuang that some hotels rooms he booked for the pair were offered free of charge.

In a written statement to the Weekend Herald, the mayor’s head of communications, Dan Lambert, said: “He was not offered, or has accepted, free hotel stays in connection to the relationship and paid the standard rate out of his own pocket.

“Any expenses he incurred in connection with this relationship, he has paid for out of his own pocket.”

One accepts their word of course. Having said that, Chuang was pretty specific and I don’t think she was saying he got freebies to damage him – she was trying to defend him against suggestions the Council may have paid. What would settle the matter is a denial from the hotels conerned.

In some good news from Brown, a scientific poll shows support for him not resigning:

The first scientific poll since details of the affair were revealed on Tuesday by his 32-year-old former mistress Bevan Chuang show 51 per cent of Aucklanders think Mr Brown should continue being the mayor and 39.5 per cent think he should resign.

Among those who voted for the 57-year-old Mr Brown at last Saturday’s election, just under 70 per cent said they would vote for him again if another election was held.

Nandan Modak, whose DigiPoll company conducted the survey, said the trend showed he would still be returned as Mayor of Auckland if a fresh election was held tomorrow.

In that event, Mr Brown would have 34 per cent support, his main right wing rival John Palino 19.5 per cent and another candidate 31.7 per cent.

Aucklanders’ view of Mr Brown’s affair was divided, with 62.7 per cent saying it reflected badly on his character.

John Armstrong delivers up a slap though:

His decision – or that of his minders – to make his one and only media appearance on TV3’s Campbell Live was deeply cynical and supremely arrogant. It amounted to another slap in the face for ratepayers who are entitled to expect accountability from their mayor and that he front accordingly.

Campbell did an acceptable job, but seemed more interested in the psychology driving Brown’s lapse of judgment and his fall from grace than the ramifications of the lapse.

Brown’s performance was astonishing. He veered close to blaming the media for being caught with his pants down. It was almost as if he was telling people off for watching. His apology sounded almost like an afterthought.

Confidence that he would get off the hook, rather than being contrite for what he had done, seemed to be the prevailing principle.

That confidence was misplaced. On Thursday, the revelation Brown had helped Chuang get a council-related job saw the moral compass swing 180 degrees against him.

I think that is the one thing which could still trip him up.

Fran O’Sullivan has an idea:

There should be a proper wide-ranging council inquiry into whether Brown abused rules by creating favours for Chuang.

Not simply an inquiry put in place by the chief executive.

Once the inquiry reports, Brown should stand down and call for another election where voters can either accept him or reject him in the knowledge they have all facts on the table.

I think there is a need for a full inquiry – not into the affair, but into any abuse of rules or favours done for Chuang. I don’t think a resignation is automatic –  think it depends on what the inquiry determines.

Brian Edwards writes in the Herald:

Brown’s problem today is perhaps less the disconnect between his previous, largely self-cultivated image of decency and high moral standards and the pictures these detailed revelations paint in the public mind. Such pictures are difficult to erase and they are corrosive.

The mayor’s only option now is to ride it out. Public figures are allowed only one mea culpa. Brown delivered his on Campbell Live and if it wasn’t the whole truth and nothing but the truth, he’s stuck with it. Further revelations, further apologies, further explanations and further endorsements from friends and family can only make things worse.

So my advice would be: keep calm, carry on and say nothing you’re not compelled to say under law. It’s largely out of your hands now.

One thing a life in media teaches you is that with time the public lose interest, their memory fades, mistakes and indiscretions are forgotten and some even forgiven.

The newly re-elected Mayor of Auckland’s best hope is that national amnesia sets in sooner rather than later.

I’m reminded of the old adage – people forgive but don’t forget.

Whale has a q and a here http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2013/10/rapid-fire-qa-len-brown-story#axzz2i6k4QURQ

Stuff reports:

No matter how much you want it, you’re unlikely to see a Calvin and Hobbes film.

Bill Watterson, who created the immensely popular comic strip about a boy and his tiger friend, has said that although he’s impressed with modern animated films from the likes of Pixar, he doesn’t see the need for a big-screen adaptation.

“The visual sophistication of Pixar blows me away, but I have zero interest in animating Calvin and Hobbes. If you’ve ever compared a film to a novel it’s based on, you know the novel gets bludgeoned. It’s inevitable, because different media have different strengths and needs, and when you make a movie, the movie’s needs get served. As a comic strip, Calvin and Hobbes works exactly the way I intended it to. There’s no upside for me in adapting it.” 

This makes me very sad.

I adore Calvin & Hobbes. Watterson is a genius for his ability to portray the world as Calvin sees it.

But he is probably right. The comic books are so perfect, that a movie just couldn’t capture that tension between the real world and Calvin’s world.

A foul column in the NZ Herald by Brian Rudman on John Slater.  It is just paragraphs of name calling and taunting. What a sad day for journalism.

People can have legitimate views on Cam Slater and his blogging style. But to attack John as a way to getting at Cameron is sad.

Cameron doesn’t take direction from anyone. Not his Dad. Not me. Definitely not National. Not his friends. Even Cactus Kate has limited persuasive success with Cameron. Cameron does what he thinks is right. You can love him or loathe him for it, but to use him to attack his father is pathetic.

On the topic of Brian Rudman, it is worth contrasting his steadfast defence of Len Brown with his pilloring of Richard Worth.

Rudman even complains that the Worth complainants didn’t go to the media!

Auckland Council has announced:

On the Great Barrier Island Local Board, the preliminary results had a tie for the fifth spot between Christina Spence and Nikki Watts on 208 votes each.

The final result is still tied with 220 votes each. The ballot will now be decided by lot under supervision of the New Zealand Police.

Graeme Edgeler may be able to find this, but I can’t find a provision in the Local Electoral Act or regulations that specify what happens in case of a tie (for FPP). It is specified for parliamentary elections, but I can’t find a local provision.

It would be nice to decide the result in true Great Barrier Island tradition. I’m thinking maybe a tree chopping contest. First to chop down three trees is elected?

Regardless a tied result is pretty rare and I suspect a lot of media will want to turn up for the Police draw. Not sure if it will be a coin toss, or drawing of lots.

Normally I call these posts winners and losers but in this case there are far more losers than winners. Let’s take them in approximate order.

Losers

1. Len Brown. May keep his job but not his credibility or dignity. If he holds on he is a lame duck Mayor who will face three years of people tittering about him at public events. No real chance  of winning a third term. Faces weeks or more of investigations into whether there was improper spending, his providing a reference to Chuang etc.
2. Luigi Wewege. Exposed as a liar, and someone who uses a romantic relationship to pressure his partner into political favours. Now a household name in a bad way. Political future is non-existent.
3. Bevan Chuang. She’s had her criminal history exposed, her love life, and her employment history, Worse, she did it all voluntarily with a giggling tape recording of her exploits with Brown, and a sworn affidavit. While she attracts a lot of sympathy as being somewhat naive, she also has no political future.
4. Jock Anderson. Fired as NBR Chief Reporter for writing an editorial supporting Brown keeping his job against alleged instructions for NBR to take a neutral line on the issue.
5. John Palino. Palino has done nothing wrong, and I do not believe for a second he knew anything of this. However the actions of Wewege have created a perception that will leave doubts with some. An unfortunate victim, who might have been Mayor if the affair had been exposed before the election.
6. The threatening texter. The person who sent the threatening text to Chuang pushed this issue into the open. A huge backfire. Will their identity be revealed, and who may they damage by association when it comes out?
7. The voters of Auckland. They have to wait three years (unless Brown resigns) to have their say on whether they found the behaviour acceptable.

Winners

1. Cameron Slater. As the Civilian points out Whale likes nothing more than page views and visits. He’s had 750,000 page views in two days. He not only broke the story, but covered himself by insisting on tape recordings and sworn affidavits. Cameron doesn’t want to be liked – he wants to be relevant, and this week he has set the news.
2. Cameron Brewer. Brewer wisely didn’t contest the 2013 Mayoral elections. He must now be a front-runner for 2016.
3. Penny Hulse. She doesn’t want the job, but if Brown resigns she is the most likely candidate for the left, and could well end up Mayor. Will depend who stands against her.

In terms of the story itself, the Herald reports:

Bevan Chuang is confident Len Brown will be cleared by a spending inquiry in the wake of their extra-marital affair, saying he paid for everything out of his own pocket.

However, she believed that some of the rooms he booked for the pair were offered free of charge by hotel managers. …

Ms Chuang said she met Mr Brown three times at the Langham, SkyCity Grand and Hilton hotels for sex after collecting the keys to the rooms from reception at the Town Hall.

A spokeswoman for the Hilton said the hotel would not give complimentary rooms to Mr Brown, while a spokeswoman for SkyCity Grand would not comment on guests for privacy reasons. A spokesman for the Langham did not return a phone message. …

The 32-year-old former mistress said: “He sometimes takes some time off and goes to hotel rooms, and quite a few times managers would tell him ‘it’s fine, 

it’s on us. We can organise somewhere private for you’.

“He often feels uncomfortable and wanted to go down and pay but usually the manager would [insist] ‘no no, it’s on us’.”

The rooms also came with antipasto food platters and nuts, she said.

Ms Chuang believed the rooms were offered free to Mr Brown so that he could “talk about” and “recommend it” for council patronage.

I think the only thing which might be worse than having had the Council pay for hotel rooms for the trysts with your mistress, was if the hotels were providing free rooms for the trysts. It’s like he’s the Prime Minister of Italy.

Just imagine if Sky City were providing free hotel rooms for Mayoral trysts, at the same time as Len Brown was backing the convention centre deal with them? Hard to argue that is not a public issue.

Mr Brown would check-in at the hotel himself and then arrange for a spare room key to be delivered back to the council in an envelope addressed to Ms Chuang.

Ms Chuang, who also speaks Cantonese and Mandarin, claimed Mr Brown used the mayoral car and driver to pick up and drop her off on two occasions when he took her to council dinners as his interpreter.

Again, hard to argue that this isn’t use of Council resources.

In another story the Herald reports:

Auckland Mayor Len Brown and council chief executive Doug McKay are refusing to answer key questions arising from the mayor’s extra-marital affair with Bevan Chuang, including whether he breached the council’s code of conduct.

The two most powerful figures at the council have stonewalled the Herald for two days on whether Mr Brown has broken council rules and what the rules are for council staff having sex in the workplace. …

Mr Brown and Mr McKay also refused to say if Ms Chuang had a council contract at the New Lynn market. She claimed to be paid $500 a week by the council as a co-ordinator at the market.

So if I have this right:

• Chuang was a Mayoral appointee to the Ethnic Panel – personally appointed and re-appointed by the Mayor
• Chuang gained a job at a Council CCO after the Mayor provided her with a glowing reference
• Chuang has a Council contract as a market co-ordinator

Again, makes it very hard to argue this is entirely a private matter.

The questions

Len Brown and council chief executive Doug McKay have yet to answer the following:

• Did [Mr Brown’s actions providing a reference for Bevan Chuang] comply with the Council Code of Conduct, including the Conflicts of Interest Policy and the guidelines of the Office of the Auditor-General?

• Did the mayor seek advice from the chief executive or the Office of the Auditor-General before deciding to provide a reference or act as a referee?

• Did the mayor provide any other references/act as a referee for Ms Chuang on other occasions?

• Has Ms Chuang been contracted by the council in any other capacity, including the New Lynn market?

• What are the rules around council staff having sex in the workplace?

Len’s now cancelled all appointments for two days in a row. The story will not go away until he fully fronts, and these questions are answered,

Does ACT have a future after its leader was committed to trial over his 2010 Mayoral election return?

Well firstly it depends on the outcome of the court case. If he loses, and is convicted, then his seat in Parliament is automatically vacated. That means a by-election in Epsom, and unless ACT stood an incredibly popular candidate (such as Cameron Brewer) then they would not win the by-election and be out of Parliament. I think that would be the end of the party, which would dissolve. That may create an opportunity for a new party in time, but probably not until 2017 at the earliest.

The fact the Solictor-General is looking at taking over the prosecution is somewhat ominous.

If Banks wins, then he remains in Parliament, and becomes a Minister again. However that does not mean plain sailing.

Banks defence is basically that he signed a legal declaration of his election expenses and donations, but didn’t read it. That may mean he legally didn’t willfully break the law, but it’s an awful look.  If his non-reading had occurred as a parliamentary candidate, that would be fatal. He is slightly saved by the fact that when he signed the return he though his political career was over. But regardless of timing, it looks bad. As I said previously, it is bad to be personally involved in receiving two donations and then sign a return saying he doesn’t know who his donors were. It may be legal (as Len’s trusts were), but is the public concerned just about legality?

Even if Banks wins, it is hard to see him winning Epsom again. Having said that ACT have won it three elections in a row, when almost no one thought they would or could.

If there is a by-election, then I would expect National to win it easily. Epsom voters are not going to vote for giving the Maori Party the balance of power or worse a Labour-Greens Government. Paul Goldsmith would become the MP for Epsom and Jo Hayes would become a List MP.

So I don’t see big issues for the Government before the general election, except for a possible distracting by-election campaign.

The bigger challenge is the next general election. National has five potential coalition partners, and none of them are ideal – and probably more than one of them will be needed. The five potential partners are:

1. ACT – very reliable in a voting sense and pushes National into areas most of its supporters want. But not likely to be back.
2. United Future – also a reliable and stable partner, even though more inclined to vote independently on non-core issues. But will Dunne stand again, and would he win?
3. Maori Party. They will be back with at least one seat, probably two. A third is possible – a list seat if they get over 2% party vote. However they have never had to choose between a National and Labour led Government. They could well choose to go with Labour. And if they do choose National, their policy demands could be unpopular.
4. Conservatives. It is hard to see them making 5% but they could well make 2.8% and get four seats if they win an electorate. If a new Auckland seat is in an area where they have some strong support, then the lak of an incumbent National MP could see centre-right tactical voting to get them in. The downside is that if this looks likely it might scare some socially liberal voters to Labour. Against that, most of the core issues for the Conservatives are conscience issues and not something likely to be part of any coalition agreement (except maybe to agree to no further law changes in certain areas). I can’t see any possibility of repealing same sex marriage, prostitution, abortion laws etc. Maybe the anti-smacking law could go as a policy victory for them?
5. NZ First. Winston hates John Key and wants utu on him, The jury is out on whether the bigger utu is to sack John Key or make him subservient to him. Either option is rather unpleasant to contemplate. But you can’t rule out a deal if a National-NZ First majority is possible and a centre-left Government is only possible if the Greens are part of it.

So National does have options if ACT goes, but they are not great options. But politics is the art of the possible!

Stuff reports:

Top lawyer Greg King took his life, depressed, burnt-out, and haunted by the dead from the cases he had known.

Coroner Garry Evans has released his findings into the death of King, 43, whose body was found on November 3, last year, in Dungarvan Rd, Newlands, Wellington, not far from his Mercedes car.

In the car was a typewritten note that began:

“To everyone: How can I explain the unexplainable?”

It said that after nearly 20 years as a defence lawyer he was burnt out, disillusioned and depressed.

“He says he is haunted by the dead from his numerous homicide cases and hates himself for what he has done,” Evans said.

“He says he has been genuinely torn between doing his job and his conscience, which keeps asking him ‘Is this really what you want to be doing?'”

I don’t think I could be a criminal defence attorney. I admire those who can, because it is vital defendants get fair trials and are only found guilty if there is no reasonable doubt. But I would personally struggle with defending those accused of certain vile crimes. I think I would struggle to cope, as Greg King obviously did. It is a mark of his humanity that just performing his role caused him such anguish (not to suggest those without such anguish are  inhumane).

In his finding, Evans mostly paraphrases the note in which King spoke of the experiences with criminals that had dulled his human senses and the victims of serious crime who affected him profoundly.

What a sad loss.

Milnes-King had told the coroner her husband had a massive breakdown in June, 2012, the night after delivering his closing address for Ewen Macdonald in the Scott Guy murder trial.

The trial had taken a substantial toll on him and his breakdown was the most intense she had seen, going on for hours whereas he would usually be able to pick himself up.

In a sense he is a further victim of that tragedy,

In the week before King’s death, The Dominion Post’s investigative reporter Phil Kitchin had approached King about an allegation from a disgruntled former client of irregularities in legal aid billing.

The Ministry of Justice, which administers legal aid, had found King’s legal aid bill for the client’s case had been “well within” the range of what was reasonable and to be expected but in King’s absence the investigation could not be taken further.

A senior police officer who investigated King’s death thought that, in King’s frame of mind at the time, the thought of a media circus over legal aid could have felt overwhelming, but Milnes-King thought her husband was unlikely to have been unduly worried by the allegations made against him.

I think it was probably a factor, but not a determinative factor. The Herald reports:

The police officer who investigated Mr King’s death, Detective Inspector Paul Basham, said he had investigated matters involving Dominion Post investigative reporter Phil Kitchin, who was looking into allegations made against Mr King by a former client.

The disgruntled client had alleged irregularities in legal aid billing.

But he said Ms Milnes-King believed her husband was unlikely to have been unduly bothered by the allegations, and there was no mention in the suicide note.

Kitchin gave evidence he had contacted Mr King on November 1, two days before Mr King was found dead, but described their conversation as “cordial, courteous, professional and polite”.

He told Mr King it was possible he would not publish a story.

What would be interesting to know is whether or not a story was written and was in the system, so to speak. But I think it is far to conclude that the inquiries by the Dominion Post were not a major factor, and were not improper. Of course it is all speculation, as we don’t know exactly what led to the sad decision, but the lack of any mention in the suicide note is influential.

Ms Milnes-King said her husband had helped a lot of individuals and organisations on a pro bono basis, and had a charitable spirit which saw him engaged with numerous groups.

“He represented clients for free and made many unpaid trips to the West Coast acting for the Pike River contractors who were left out of pocket after the tragedy.

“This is an extremely difficult time for our family. With the first anniversary of Greg’s death in a few weeks, we trust people fully understand and respect our need for private time.”

Sensible Sentencing Trust’s Garth McVicar said New Zealand had lost one of the greatest men he had the good fortune to meet.

“Greg gave his time willingly and freely to assist many of the families and victims within the wider Sensible Sentencing Trust family,” Mr McVicar said.

“Greg’s knowledge of the law, his passion for people from all walks of life and his drive to leave society better than he found it was unique and irreplaceable.’

Such a glowing tribute to a defence lawyer from the Sensible Sentencing Trust shows how special Greg King was.  The only good to come out of this will be more people confronting their depression and mental health issues at an early stage to avoid further situations like this.

I agree with this column by Trans-tasman:

Whatever one feels about the particulars of the show – and we’ll get to this shortly – let us be grateful for one thing: it has been a long time since regular interviews with senior politicians had an impact on political discourse. Certainly Campbell’s 7pm opposition on the state owned television channel is so fluffy and light it makes the Beatrix Potter stories look like Dostoyevsky.

But Campbell did rather let him- self down. Advocacy journalism has its place but when you invite the other side on to put their side, they need to be given space to do so. Campbell’s questions all started from the premise oil exploration is intrinsically the devil’s work and will always produce a Gulf of Mexico spill. He also let it get very personal – but then so did Bridges – even more so.

Unfortunately Campbell followed it up the next night with a cringingly sympathetic interview with disgraced Auckland Mayor Len Brown. While Bridges, who was there to defend a policy decision, was treated like a Mr Big of drug dealing; Brown, whose moral choices have caused huge hurt to people who love him, was treated like an innocent victim of some unfortunate accident.

Advocacy journalism can be done in a professional and dis- passionate way: indeed, to work, it has to be. When it becomes personal, it loses not only integrity but effectiveness.

I think this piece is fair. Simon Bridges did let it get personal and got too heated, but so did John Campbell. And Campbell was incredibly unbalanced who as Trans-tasman says treats oil companies as evil criminal syndicates. I have no problems with advocacy journalism, but don’t be surprised if people won’t go on their show if they think you’re not interested a balanced debate – just pilloring one side of the issue.

And the Len brown interview was disgracefully light. He avoided anything resembling a hard question, such as did Len Brown know who sent the threatening text to Chuang. It was like a NZ version of Oprah.

In a similar vein, Russell Brown has devoted an entire column to the Len Brown issue. Except in his 1,32 words on the issue he spends 1,181 words on the the so called centre-right people involved and just 51 words on the role of Len Brown. That is almost hysterically comical. The most Russell could muster was to say it was poor judgement to bonk at work and he can no longer play the family-man card!

Stuff reports:

Wellington Catholics will have to pray extra hard, with more than half the region’s churches left financially exposed to acts of God.

Faced with rocketing insurance premiums, the Catholic archdiocese of Wellington is planning to scrap natural disaster cover for most of its churches.

I would have thought no churches would have insurance for Acts of God. Surely they have faith that God will either leave them alone, or if he doe decide to smite their church, then it is divine will, and he’ll just be angry they have taken insurance against him!

The front page of the Australian yesterday was about how the former ALP President and union boss, Michael Williamson, took $600,000 in cash in 300 envelopes. The union movement in Australia is riddled with corruption as they have become so powerful. Worse they have control over many Labor MPs. This is one reason the decision by NZ Labour to give unions even more say in their party’s management is regrettable.

News.com.au reported:

Williamson admitted to using blank union cheques to pay $338,470 to his wife, Julieanne Williamson’s company CANME, between July 2006 and June 2009.

He never declared his connection to the business and there was nothing to show for Mrs Williamson’s work which could have been performed in-house for $40,000 a year.

Williamson had an employee say the work was approved at a union meeting before shredding meeting minutes and creating fake invoices claiming his wife worked 80 hours a week.

Williamson admitted taking $600,000 in cash kickbacks through Alfred Downing, the director of Access Focus – a supplier to the union, the facts said.

Williamson arranged for Access Focus to produce the quarterly HSU document with prices inflated by around 20-25 per cent.

Downing would pay the union’s procurement manager, Cheryl McMillan, and she gave cash to Williamson on at least 300 occasions, the facts said.

The union hierarchy allowed Williamson to take signed blank cheques, the facts said.

The vice president of the organisation “simply trusted … (Williamson) would use the blank cheques in the best interests of the union”, the facts said. “No cross checking … was ever done.”

Incredible. No accountability at all.

Another story looks at the politics:

Senior Government figures argue there is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to exploit public disgust over corrupt union officials and expose the entire movement to a royal commission.

They are keen to get cracking on draft terms of reference that would allow a high powered investigation into allegations of corruption across the union fraternity.

Such an investigation could potentially include members of the opposition – and damage Labor’s prospects at the next election.

No decisions have been taken – and Prime Minister Tony Abbott is yet to be convinced of the merits of such a probe.

But equally the exploits of Mr Williamson will aid the voices who want allegations of corruption thoroughly pursued.

Dubbed the “$1 million man” due to his extravagant lifestyle, Mr Williamson took nepotism to new heights, ensuring his family were looked after through union contracts and dodgy management practices.

There is also no doubt that his admission of guilt spreads beyond the HSU and its long-suffering members.

Williamson is the first of a number of political and union figures who are facing potential jail sentences or stiff financial penalties for their alleged misdemeanours.

There is no doubt there is a culture of corruption in several large powerful Australian trade unions.

Well this is a new one for me – a campaign winds up before it even launches, because it has had premature success.

As readers will know I have been advocating a trial of e-voting for local body elections for some time. A few months ago the Government agreed to a trial in 2016 and possible implementation in 2019. This was a welcome decision, but myself and other advocates thought it wasn’t ambitious enough and we decided to launch a campaign next week to try and speed things up. The aim was to use any by-elections as a trial and then get as many Councils as possible in 2016 committing to using e-voting.

Myself and Conor Roberts (ex Len Brown political advisor) were going to be co-spokepsersons (political balance to show not a partisan thing). We had three major city mayors on board, plus other prominent Mayors. We were all set to launch next Monday.

Then Chris Tremain yesterday announced:

Local Government  Minister Chris Tremain says he will be instructing a working party to explore what would be needed for online voting to be fully introduced in the next local  body elections.

Voter turnout at the 2013 election was the lowest ever recorded with a projected figure of around 40 per cent.  Final results will be confirmed by Local Government New Zealand on Thursday.

“Figures as far back as 1962 (see below) show voter turnout at local body elections are traditionally low but I am concerned that it is on a slow decline,” says Mr Tremain. 

“A large number of people work from smart phones and online voting is definitely the way of the future.  However there are risks involved in transferring to an online system, so it is important we clearly understand those risks before making any final decision.  Accessibility for all voters is a critical consideration in any move forward.

“The government has invested in online verification technology, RealMe, which will enable secure authentication of a person’s identity for online voting.

“The working party, which was announced before the recent local body elections, is being tasked with establishing the technical, financial, and security issues involved in online voting.  In addition I will now ask them to explore the possibility of having full online voting available at the next local body elections.  A condition of this must be that an opportunity exists for a significant trial before 2016. 

This is basically the outcome we were after, so we’ve decided there is no point in launching a campaign when we’ve already had premature success and got what we want! I wish we could take credit for it, but the credit goes to Chris Tremain for deciding to prioritise the trial. And it is important we do have a trial – there are security issues to be worked through etc.

“I will also be inviting the Justice and Electoral Committee, who conduct reviews of local and national elections, to investigate other initiatives that will lift voter turnout. 

“Part of this will be considering the confusion created by the single transferable voting system especially when voters are presented with two voting systems on the same voting papers. Another issue that has been raised, post the elections, has been the three week voting timeframe, so it would be timely to consider this as well.

“Online voting will give people more choice but on its own will not solve low voter turnout.”

It will not get people to vote who are not interested in voting. But it will make it easier for people who do want to vote, to vote. The postal system is slowly dying and the future for local body elections will either be ballot box voting or e-voting, or both.

The annoying thing with the campaign being over before it starts, is we don’t get to do the usual celebratory drinks 🙂

The Herald reports:

Auckland mayor Len Brown has confirmed he provided a reference for his ex-mistress to help her get a job at the council-run art gallery.

Bevan Chuang – with whom Mr Brown admitted to a two-year affair – received a reference from him when she successfully applied for a job at the gallery in August last year.

This was a year after she and Mr Brown started their affair.

This confirmation adds a new dimension. It is bad judgement to agree to be a referee to anyone you’re in a covert relationship with. But to agree to it, when they are applying for a job at an art gallery that is part of the Council you are the Mayor of is shockingly bad judgement.

Nick Smith resigned for providing a personal letter of support for Bronwyn Pullar, as that had a conflict of interest.  Nick’s letter wasn’t even advocating that she get compensation or a job – just stating how successful she was before her accident.

The mayor’s office is still considering questions from the Herald about how Mr Brown dealt with the issue in terms of the council’s code of conduct and conflict of interest policy.

Badly, I’d say.

I’d say it is inevitable that someone will file a complaint that Mayor Brown has not complied with the Council’s code of conduct and conflict of interest policy.

Providing a reference for your mistress for a job at an organisation that is part of the Auckland Council is incredibly dumb. He should have just said no.

Questions for Oral Answer

Questions to Ministers 2.00PM-3.00PM

1. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement yesterday that Hon John Banks is a “credible” and “trustworthy” individual?
2. METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Economic Development:Has Cabinet discussed delaying the passage of the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill until the Hon John Banks prosecution is resolved; if not, why not?
3. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Finance: What progress is the Government making with its multi-billion dollar infrastructure investment programme, as part of its wider plan to build a more productive and competitive economy?
4. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Dominion Post report that “Bill English was gushing about the NZ Super Fund yesterday” saying it was “one of the best-structured sovereign wealth funds in the world”?
5. MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received on the progress of the Government’s welfare reforms to date?
6. Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR to the Minister for Primary Industries: Does he stand by all his statements?
7. JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: When she said last month, “for every example that the member can give, I can give another 10 of people who are grateful for the help that they are getting” was she saying that it is acceptable that a large portion of people are not getting the help they are entitled to?
8. DENIS O’ROURKE to the Minister of Immigration: How many people are currently classified as unlawfully in New Zealand, and what steps, if any, has he taken to reduce that number?
9. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Conservation: When was he first informed by the Department of Conservation that they were considering contributing to any submission on the Tukituki Catchment Proposal that might include nitrogen and phosphorous management?
10. Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister of Health: What progress is the Government making on its Rheumatic Fever Programme?
11. Dr DAVID CLARK to the Minister for Small Business: What advice, if any, has he received on the impact of fraud, corruption and dishonesty on small business and what has he done about it?
12. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Corrections: What recent announcements has she made on improving the safety of Corrections staff?

Today Labour are asking five questions. These are about John Banks’ resignation as a Minister, the NZ Super Fund, The Ministry of Primary Industries, the Tukituki catchment proposal, and dishonesty in Small Business. The Greens are asking two questions today, these are about the Sky City Casino deal, and access to social welfare benefits. New Zealand First is asking about immigration.

Patsy of the day award goes to Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga for Question 10: What progress is the Government making on its Rheumatic Fever Programme?

Government Bills 3.00PM – 6.00PM

1.Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill – Committee Stage

2. Veterans’ Support Bill – First Reading

The Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister for ICT, Amy Adams.  This bill seeks to repeal and replace the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Act 2004 in order to ensure that interception obligations applying to the telecommunications industry are clear, do not impose unnecessary compliance costs, and are sufficiently flexible to respond to current and future operational needs and technological developments. It also seeks to require network operators to engage with the Government on network security matters, inform the Government of certain proposed decisions, courses of action, or changes in relation to an area of “specified security interest”, and work with the Government to apply any specific risk-based and proportionate security measures. David wrote about the bill earlier here.

The Veterans’ Support Bill is being introduced into the house by the Minister for Veterans Affairs, Michael Woodhouse. This bill gives effect to the recommendations of the Law Commission in its 2010 report recommending a new support scheme for veterans of military service to replace the War Pensions Act 1954.

3 News reports:

A prominent South Island union organiser has been sentenced to community detention for trying to sell methamphetamine.

Sharna Butcher, 36, was sentenced on a charge of conspiring to sell a Class A drug in the Christchurch District Court this afternoon.

The Unite Union South Island organiser requested name suppression, arguing the publication of her name would affect her employment, however the plea was ignored by Judge Paul Kellar.

Good.

Ms Butcher is well-known around the South Island, having both organised and attended several protests across this year. She attracted media attention in May after blocking the drive through to a McDonald’s restaurant in Dunedin while lobbying for better pay rates and guaranteed hours for workers.

She will not be able to leave her home between 7pm on Fridays and 7am on Mondays for the next four months.

Does being a convicted Class a drug dealer mean she won’t keep her job with UNITE, or do they not have a problem with that?

The Herald reports:

Canada has claimed Eleanor Catton as its own after she won the Man Booker prize yesterday.

Canadian media, which has reported widely on her success, noted Catton was born in Ontario.

The National Post described her as “the first Canadian author to win one of the world’s foremost literary awards in over a decade”. The paper’s review of the novel described it as stylistically “as solid as the brick it physically resembles”.

The Globe and Mail went with the more diplomatic “Canadian-born author”, and said: “Despite its length, there isn’t a sentence that feels weak or lazy, and by all objective criteria, The Luminaries is a remarkable accomplishment.”

Canadian-born is more correct than Canadian.

But we can’t take the moral high ground here. New Zealanders lead the world in claiming someone is a Kiwi because they may have been born here, lived here for a couple of years or even once made a fleeting visit and said something nice about us.

A hilarious interview by Salient co-editors with David Cunliffe:

Are you aware of the ‘Cats That Look Like David Cunliffe’ blog?

I am.

Why do so many cats look like you?

I think people have trawled the internet to find lots of cat photos that do, and it’s pretty funny.

So it’s misrepresentative of the wider cat population?

Yeah I think it’s unfair to cats.

Heh.

Stuff reports:

NZ First has shut down some of its social media pages following a complaint about the leader of the party’s youth wing.

NZ First Youth leader Curwen Rolinson posted on Facebook that the party’s board of directors had tabled and accepted a complaint against his ongoing membership.

The board tabled the complaint on Monday night. It will be heard after the party’s convention this weekend.

Rolinson has been a member of NZ First since 2009, and was elected to the board in 2012 for a two-year term.

His post also said he had shut down the NZ First and NZ First Youth Facebook pages on instruction from party leader, Winston Peters.

“Accordingly, Winston has ordered ALL NZF social media pages to 

be shut down till this complaint has been heard next Monday.”

The NZ First constitution provides the board will consider a member’s continuing membership of the party if the conduct of that person is “offensive, undesirable, inconsistent with the welfare and interest of the party, or contrary to the constitution”.

The board has the power to censure or fine, order compensation, suspend the member from some or all rights or privileges, or expel from the party.

Rolinson declined to discuss the nature of the complaint against him, but acknowledged there were screenshots of his comments circulating that indicated a complaint had been laid.

“But I would be rather remiss to comment on the accuracy of my own comments which have been screenshotted.”

He also said he would be rather remiss to comment on the screenshots, “but I am not actually criticising their validity.”

It is not the first time Rolinson has gone rogue on social media – he has previously commented offensively about a photo of Labour MP Jacinda Ardern pictured with a Young National member and also remarked on a post from NZ First MP Asenati Lole-Taylor which called the National Government’s reforms at the start of 2012 “[Social Development Minister Paula] Bennett’s Nazi welfare reform”.

Rolinson said he was not sure it was fair to compare National’s welfare reforms to the Nazis, because “Hitler, after all, had a stronger emphasis on job creation.”

Curwen does have a history of saying offensive stuff online, and it is not a total surprise that he has finally ended up in trouble over it. If he survives, it will be a lesson for him. I’m not aware of what has led to this specific complaint.

UPDATE: I understand the disciplinary proceedings may not just be about online behaviour.

UPDATE2: Been sent some screen shots from Facebook:

UPDATE2:: It seems part of this is over a complaint Curwen laid over another NZ First member, and the Director of Operations in the NZ First Leader’s Office. I’ve been forwarded an e-mail which was sent to the Parliamentary Service:

From: 
Sent: Thursday, 19 September 2013 2:30 p.m.
To: PS Customer Service; David Stevenson
Subject: C.V. falsification

 To whom it may concern,

I believe that an employee of the Parliamentary Service might have provided false or misleading information to the Service about his educational achievements.

Apirana Dawson tells people that he has a B.A. from Victoria University, yet his name does not appear on the Roll of Graduates. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/students/graduation/roll-of-graduates?firstname=&lastname=dawson

You may wish to check it out.

In confidence,

 

I have no knowledge of whether or not Api has claimed to be a graduate, or whether he is a graduate. But I am informed this was the basis of the complaint by Curwen to the NZ First Board against Api. The complaint was thrown out but I understand Api has resigned as a member of NZ First, yet remains Director of Operations in Winston’s office. 

The Herald has revealed that Bevan Chuang was also in an sporadic intimate relationship with Luigi Wewege, a member of Palino’s campaign team, as well as Len Brown and that Wewege has been pressuring her for months to reveal the affair with Brown.

Wewege has denied a relationship with Chuang, but text messages between then include:

Chuang: I absolutely undoubtedly love you. I just don’t know if you do

Wewege: Not true! You just make me sad sometimes …

Wewege: I literally work 24/7 and something small you know you can do change my life and you won’t do it! 🙁

All it is … is just a shrewd of evidence and I promise you are fully protected! Baby I have everything set up people are just waiting for you.

So close to less stressed Luigi who can lay in bed all weekend with Bevan!!!!!

Wewege has obviously lied to the media, unless those texts are fabricated – which I doubt.

Wewege is not my favourite person due to how he treated a close friend of mine, whom he also had a relationship with. His pressuring of Chuang reflects badly on him, as does his denial of a relationship with her. 

When news of the scandal broke on Tuesday, Mr Palino said he had no knowledge of the affair or who was involved. Later in the day he issued a statement saying he would not be commenting as it was a personal matter for Len Brown and his family to deal with.

Last night, Mr Palino said he also had no knowledge of an intimate relationship between Mr Wewege and Ms Chuang.

He said Mr Wewege, who mainly handled his social media, advertising and marketing, told him he was friends with Ms Chuang but he did not know about his social life. …

Cameron Slater told the Herald there was “no vast right wing conspiracy” and Ms Chuang approached him with the sex claims. He confirmed he also spoke with Mr Wewege but said he did not tell his father, Palino’s campaign manager John Slater, or Mr Palino.

“She came to me but I don’t know what went on with her and Luigi.”

Mr Slater said he would have published the story during the election if he had proof to back up her claims but Ms Chuang was reluctant to provide it.

“We couldn’t run the story without a sworn affidavit from her and the text messages.”

It’s ironic that Whale Oil demanded a higher level of proof than many in the media would have.

He said “everything went quiet” until he wrote a blog post on Tuesday last week urging readers to vote for Mr Palino with a vague reference to Mr Brown and “Asian beauties”.

“I got a threatening text, [Ms Chuang] got a text, my dad got a text. All from the same number.”

He also believed the website post forced Mr Brown to tell his wife about the affair and the threat convinced Ms Chuang to sign an affidavit and provide the text messages needed to run the story.

It will be interesting to find out who sent that threatening text, and what links (if any) they have to the Mayor. Their actions, caused the story to come out.

The Herald identified Ms Chuang as the mistress and yesterday she said she was sorry for the “hurt and pain” that the saga had caused.

“I was also brought up in a family where my father had an affair and I know how hard this will be for Len’s wife and three girls,” Ms Chuang said.

On that note, daughter Sam Brown, has written a statement on behalf of all three daughters backing her father as Mayor, and saying the issue of fidelity is a personal one. I  think everyone has huge sympathy for the Brown daughters (and wife) as it must be almost beyond comprehension to have to deal with such highly personal revelations.

However debate is starting on whether it is purely a personal matter. The Herald reports:

Questions remain about professional consequences for Mr Brown, after he admitted the affair, which was conducted during office hours and on council property.

Last night, councillor Dick Quax said the mayor’s affair was more than a personal situation.

“This is Len’s second indiscretion. The first one was with credit card spending at Manukau City,” he said. “For me now it comes back to an issue of trust, integrity and personal judgment and I think he has failed on this.”

I imagine media will be putting in LGOIMA requests for any expense claims from the Mayor> if there was any spending of ratepayer money on the affair, then that would become a more serious issue.

Last night, Mr Brown decided not to attend the youth development annual excellence awards at Government House in Auckland.

Understandable, but if the affair revelations means an inability to attend public functions for a period, that also raises issues of is it just personal.

Auckland University employment law expert Bill Hodge told the Herald he recalled a case from the mid-2000s where an employee at the old Auckland City Council was sacked for having sex on the job.

Mr Brown is not an employee of the council, he is an elected office holder so the same rules do not apply to him – making the situation “hypocritical”, said Dr Hodge.

“Prior to Len Brown becoming mayor and prior to becoming a super city [Auckland City Council] fired a security guard for a single incidence of having a sexual activity with another person on the job,” he said. “It’s a disparity of treatment that an employee gets fired, and did in fact, and it’s even [more] ironical that it was a security guard because apparently a security guard did find them [Mr Brown and Ms Chuang] at one point.”

Elected representatives are not employees of course.

Ultimately the public decide whether or not to sack a politician. If Brown stands again at the next election, then they’ll have that chance then to vote him in or out. There is certainly no constitutional reason for him to resign before then. The question is whether he wants to stay on, risking being a lame duck Mayor who will be the butt of jokes for the next three years.

The PM has refused to put the boot in:

Prime Minister John Key has refused to be drawn into the sex scandal surrounding Auckland Mayor Len Brown, saying: “Len’s got a job to do.” …

The Prime Minister did not directly address questions yesterday about whether the under-fire mayor had his unequivocal support, but said: “I intend to work with him as the Mayor of Auckland, and in the end my job is to work with elected officials and get the job done for Auckland.”

He said the publication of Mr Brown’s two-year affair with local board candidate Bevan Chuang was “a matter for Len Brown and his family”.

The sex scandal comes at a time when the National-led Government is working closely with Mr Brown and the Auckland Council to rapidly increase affordable housing in Auckland.

Mr Key did not believe the controversy would destabilise the council.

“From the Government’s point of view, we’re interested in the things that matter to Auckland, and that is certainly housing as is transport, and we’ll be talking to Len about those issues, not other issues.”

That’s a very decent attitude from the Prime Minister and is a huge contrast to how Labour MPs have reacted in similar circumstances. The then Labour leader (Phil Goff) actively pursued Richard Worth over similar allegations and demanded he resign etc because he allegedly had a romantic interest in a Labour Party candidate. Also Labour MPs helped reveal Don Brash’s alleged affair with taunts in the House prior to it being exposed.

For me I don’t think having an affair makes you unfit for office. It is a factor voters may take into account, but as I have said previously politicians are human, and an affair is not automatic grounds for resignation. The fact there were encounters on work property is poor judgement, but again not resignation material.

The issue which is more finely balanced is the fact Chuang was a member of a panel appointed by the Mayor, and any future reappointment was his decision. That is what people call a power imbalance. It would be like (for example) the Tourism Minister having an affair with a Tourism NZ Board member (whom he or she appoints).

UPDATE: The Herald editorial:

Len Brown is not the man Aucklanders thought he was when they elected him their mayor for a second term just last Saturday. His fall from grace has nothing to do with his performance in public life but the distinction between the public and private lives of a public figure is never clear cut. When private behaviour becomes public knowledge it cannot simply be washed from everyone’s mind.

The mayor will wear this embarrassment everywhere he appears and every time he speaks for the city. Eventually he might live it down but probably not – unless he begins to register achievements for Auckland that overshadow the tawdry affair revealed on Tuesday by the woman involved. 

Mr Brown thinks he can live it down and appeals to Aucklanders to retain confidence and trust in him. He is asking a great deal. Readers voting on the Herald website are declaring by a hefty margin they would prefer him to resign. Had those who voted for him in the past few weeks known what they know now, the election could have been very different. …

Some will say that honour requires him to find out, that it is not enough to appeal to Aucklanders to keep faith in him. The decent thing to do would be to resign and offer himself for the voters’ verdict. But that is a lot to ask of him. Decency can go unrecognised, particularly in these circumstances.

That is always an option – resign, but contest a by-election.

UPDATE: Stephen Cook has written at Whale Oil:

The Len Brown sex scandal has taken a dramatic new twist today with revelations the two-timing Auckland mayor used his influence to help the woman he was sleeping with get a job at the council-run art gallery.

Less than 72 hours after going public with details of her torrid two-year affair, 32-year-old Bevan Chuang has revealed Brown acted as a referee for her when she successfully applied for a job at the council-run art gallery back in August last year.  

This was more than a year after she and Brown – who earlier claimed Chuang had never been a council employee when in fact he’d endorsed her for a council job – began the affair that’s now threatening his future as Auckland mayor.

Chuang confirmed that after being shortlisted for the position, the art gallery manager rang Brown, who’d she’d listed as a referee, to ask whether she was a suitable candidate for the job.

Brown said she was, and off the back of that endorsement she was given the job.

“…I remember my manager was excited to be the first person in the gallery to have spoken to him (the mayor),” Chuang said.

If the allegations is correct that Brown acted as a referee for his mistress to get a job at the Council’s art gallery, then that is serious.