Hard News: The sphere of influence
204 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 9 Newer→ Last
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
I should add that my previous mention is on the assumption that Collins stays the course. On the other hand, if they make her walk the plank, the current administration's raison d'etre will be greatly de-fanged. Or the Collins loyalists might otherwise stage a mutiny.
-
merc, in reply to
What I meant was, if not why not? This sort of corruption, like Maurice's should not have to wait for the whim of teflon John...we should have an office that can prosecute such things...oh wait.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I’d say it’s because Collins is too big to fail for them. If she sinks to Watergate-level depths, the others will quite possibly be dragged down with her.
My sense is that the majority of the party is furious with her, but her Auckland luvvies continue to love her strong. There's potentially a bloodbath in it, one would think, or at least a few desertions.
-
Nah, Key has just given her a few days off to "de-stress", the poor dear. What a limpdick.
-
merc,
There should be a trial.
-
well not quite "gone by tea-time" - more like taking garden leave to avoid question time
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
There should be a trial.
The almost-certain complaint to the Privileges Committee for misleading the House repeatedly will suffice, no?
She's lied long, loud, and consistently, and she's done so to Key, to the media, to the voters and, most unforgivably (as far as MPs are concerned), in answering questions in the House.
With it being seen as nearly a foregone conclusion that Carter will grant a snap debate on Williamson when the House sits again tomorrow, it would provide for some doubly devastating footage if there were also to be clips of Cunliffe asking in his sweetest tones "Does the Prime Minister have confidence in all his ministers?"
-
Sacha, in reply to
to avoid question time
apparently she has to attend those tomorrow and Wednesday before her relaxing time off. Guess the PM's department will be coaching her to avoid saying anything.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
She’s lied long, loud, and consistently, and she’s done so to Key, to the media, to the voters and, most unforgivably (as far as MPs are concerned), in answering questions in the House.
On the basis of what’s just aired on Checkpoint – Key attributing a different meaning to a crucial OIA email than any sensible reader would – the decision has been made to enable her lying. This is disgraceful.
They're clearly hoping the Budget news will swamp the story when Collins comes back. If I were the Opposition, I’d be quietly timing the next gotcha for the day of her return.
If Rob Salmond is right, Collins' own colleagues have been phoning journalists with material.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
I’ve seen him alienate an entire audience in the course of a speech.
Commies to start with obviously.
Probably bussed in and promised hard liquor...
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
I share your condiments...
...it’s a network of influence drowned in the gravy of entitlement.
Now you're cooking with gas!
better get a room over at the Feed blog......is this thing on ?
hello?
<click>
-
It shouldn't be at all surprising that he and his Cabinet will wish to govern in accordance with established corporate boardroom practice.
And established boardroom practice - especially in some of the more dysfunctional corporations in this country - is that boards eventually start indulging in the worst forms of group-think, where every question becomes a loyalty test. That's the Key/Collins problem right there ... they're interpreting every question from the media not as a request for information and viewpoint, but through a lens of "are you for us or against us?" Which is why attacking Bradford makes some semblance of sense to them.
-
Amanda Wreckonwith, in reply to
“are you for us or against us?
Which brings us to the constant refrain of '... minister X was invited to appear but declined the invitation'. Does anyone keep a tally of the stats for these non appearances? Could make interesting reading.
National MP's always seem to be available for RadioLive/NewstalkZB but strangely, are increasingly preoccupied when RNZ National are on the blower.Time for a sidebar running total Russell?
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
If Rob Salmond is right, Collins’ own colleagues have been phoning journalists with material.
Which suggests that she might actually be crucified by the Privileges Committee. It'll be a close-run thing, with National+Act being five members of 11. If Winston and Tariana sided with Labour+Green it'd be six-to-five, but if even one of the National Party members voted against her it'd be all over no matter which way Tariana flipped.
-
I'm guessing the Auckland support base has a strong overlap with the crowd who got really confused about why the Len Brown story turned the way it did, and why is everybody talking about Wewege?
-
cathy holloway, in reply to
What National MPs seem to miss is govt isn't a business and being good at one will not make you good at the other - if only many voters understood this too
couldn't agree more. the last thing we need is for the country to be run as a business.
business is all and only about making a profit. government should be there to provide services to the people. much like amateur and non-profit organisations, the focus is totally different. sure they need to be prudent in their management of money but profit does not come into it.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
It’s not exaggerating to describe it as some sort of House Un-New Zealand Activities Committee.
It’s not only exaggerating spectacularly on the basis of a cursory examination of the historical record, but seriously unhelpful. There’s more than enough solid grounds to criticize Collins on, without red-lining the hyperbole.
If Rob Salmond is right, Collins’ own colleagues have been phoning journalists with material.
With all due respect, I'll take that with a grain of the same salt I sprinkle on WhaleOil's sources in Labour's caucus.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
So no, I don’t think it’s a straightforward policies-for-cash deal, it’s a network of influence drowned in the gravy of entitlement.
OK, Labour & Greens folks – I’m going to fucking double dog dare y’all to use every opportunity you have to challenge your respective leadership to hold a joint press conference announcing that a rock solid bottom line for the first hundred days of the next Labour-Greens government will be legislation to:
1) Strengthen the Register of Pecuniary Interests, including independent control and real penalties for playing fast and loose with the rules.
2) Registration for lobbyists – all of them, whether the unions like it or not – and full public disclosure of their interactions with all politicians and civil servants.
3) Stronger reporting/public disclosure of hospitality, and a whole less fucking cuteness around sitting in corporate boxes and pretending politics is never discussed.
-
Sure thing Craig,
I’d say that the Greens have already put their money where their mouth is on that score – at least with things like the Kedgely-Walker members bill, despite its shortcomings.
Labour however is a different story. There’s a deep cultural inertia within caucus with historically minimal oversight from party membership. It’s no surprise then that they play the parliamentary funding game by the established rules and resist change.
I for one was left spewing at how senior Labour leadership jumped at the chance to accept Sky City hospitality last year. It showed how entrenched the compromised culture is within the caucus. No one involved seemed in the least self aware of how they had actively undermined the values they tried to espouse in the house re:sky city casino.
The schism in the leadership vote late last year between members and MPs reinforced to me how out of step with the party membership the Labour caucus has become.
I’m all for addressing the increasing funding inequality – its a direct result of wider societal inequality. Oravida’s latest $30000 donation was more than a 40hr/wk minimum-wage earner will get in a year. Our political system being beholden to a small pool of wealthy elites should be something that outrages all but the 1%.
But it’ll take a lot of external pressure to get Labour to shift on this. Not impossible – just look at the selection of Cunliffe to leadership which would have been unthinkable without constitutional change. Just saying that to any transparent shift in funding or lobbying there’ll be an awful lot of resistance from within the parliamentary wing.
-
I so despise the false play for sympathy - giving her a wee break my arse – she knows the game – and plays more viciously than most – remember David Benson Pope and her calling him a “pervert”, the media frenzy that resulted and the harm that caused.
There are good grounds for Key to sack her – maybe a resignation by mid week – likely she has been sent away to prepare the speech.
I hope she stays – she could bring the govt down – she is more likely to turn the polls and reveal the true nature of this government than any of the opposition parties – with the exception of Winston (I jest).
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
If Rob Salmond is right, Collins’ own colleagues have been phoning journalists with material.
With all due respect, I’ll take that with a grain of the same salt I sprinkle on WhaleOil’s sources in Labour’s caucus.
It's not exactly news that she's polarising amongst her colleagues. Remember the Bill English email about her in The Hollow Men? And it does seem fairly well established that she and Joyce are associated with rival factions.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
OK, Labour & Greens folks – I’m going to fucking double dog dare y’all to use every opportunity you have to challenge your respective leadership to hold a joint press conference announcing that a rock solid bottom line for the first hundred days of the next Labour-Greens government will be legislation to:
Not one of which would impact significantly on the Collins case. There are already strong conventions around ministerial conflicts and misleading the House -- they're simply being flouted at the moment.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Not one of which would impact significantly on the Collins case.
No, but I'm pretty sure words like "sleaze" and "corruption" are going to be flung across the chamber with undisguised glee today, and as soon as there's no political points to be scored it's quietly back to the status quo. And while "strong conventions" are all very nice, I'm beginning to wonder if we need something akin to the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption -- established by legislation introduced by Liberal Premier Nick Greiner in 1989, as part of the anti-corruption platform he ran on. (And which triggered his resignation three years later, ironically enough.)
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
I'm beginning to wonder if we need something akin to the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption -- established by legislation introduced by Liberal Premier Nick Greiner in 1989, as part of the anti-corruption platform he ran on. (And which triggered his resignation three years later, ironically enough.)
That I believe followed in the wake of the Fitzgerald Inquiry into QLD police corruption and Sir Joh's (mis)use of the local bobbies as his personal goon squad.
-
The Chinese Border Official was there…
….but left (with takeawheys)for Judith ’Justice, just is…' Collins!
(from one JC to another)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.