Questions over ‘no surprises’ policy

Audrey Young writes Peters’ case highlights an abuse of the ‘no surprises’ policy

No story with Winston Peters at the centre of it was ever going to be a one-day wonder.

And it just got a whole lot more serious.

There are disturbing and unanswered questions about his superannuation overpayment, whether you think he is the victim of a media beat-up, or are not willing to accept his assurance it was an error without proof.

The Government is now at the centre of the controversy after an admission by Social Development Minister Anne Tolley to the Herald.

She said she was told on August 15 by an official about MSD’s private meeting with Peters and what the subject of the meeting was – well after the meeting, well after he had paid back the money.

She was technically told under the “no surprises” policy, in which the public service chiefs and SOE boards forewarn ministers of issues that could suddenly become news and which will require their response. The “and” is important.

The fact that Tolley is unwilling to discuss the issue any further because it is a private matter is evidence enough that she should not have been told in the first place.

It is an abuse of the no-surprises policy. No minister should have been privy to that sort of information any more than the Health Minister should receive reports on any hip replacement operation Peters might have.

If Tolley had no expectation of receiving such information, she should say so publicly and conclude that the ministry’s decision was a misjudgment.

If she doesn’t, it is safe to assume that she and ministers have created an expectation they should get information like that.

This on it’s own is an important issue.

But, especially with Peters on the warpath, there are possible serious repercussions in the short term.

What Tolley did with the information is not yet clear, nor how far up the chain it went and whether National’s black ops guys are back in business.

But the very fact it was fed to the Beehive will cause suspicion by Peters that National leaked the information to discredit him.

It was obvious that some suspicion would fall on National. So if someone in National is responsible for the leak it would have been very stupid – stupid isn’t uncommon when politics gets dirty.

If National are found to be responsible, or even just widely perceived to have probably been involved, it could be very damaging for their election chances, and for their chances of negotiating a coalition with Winston Peters.

Other possibilities shouldn’t be ruled out. Because it was predictable that National would be implicated they could have been set up here.

I don’t think Winston has has embarrassed himself.

Who would do that? Who has been gunning for National and English for months?

Yesterday morning on Whale Oil Face of the Day:

But what you have here is one of Bill English’s failed hit jobs.  Leaked via Tolley, the NZ Herald has tried to make it stick.

Don’t you love election time?

Oh, and it’s not dirty politics if they don’t use blogs.

That’s an accusation yesterday that it was “leaked via Tolley”. Even if it was someone seems to have leaked that information to Whale Oil. They could just have easily leaked straight to Whale Oil.

And being unable to resist bragging Whale oil has more today: “The Herald can reveal” something Whaleoil published yesterday

It was leaked to “the media” days after it was “leaked to Whaleoil”.   We sat on it for the weekend, but first thing Monday morning, we wrote…

…what I have quoted above.

And as we know about the New Zealand Herald, first they will take the leak and make it a story and then they make the leaker a story.  Two stories for the price of one, especially when the first hit fails.  Winston ends up being the victim here instead of the villain.

God what a bunch of amateurs on the 9th floor.  Especially Eagleson.  You’d think he’d have learned a thing or two back in the day.   It seems not.

Now they are all running for cover and doing Sgt Shultz impressions.  And you know what I always say:  It’s not the original offence, it’s the cover-up that gets you.   

Anne Tolley will have been told she’ll be looked after if things get too bad.   You see, it’s never the likes of Eagleson or English that will go down for this.  Releasing private MSD information on a political opponent is a career ending move.  And Tolley was told to do it.

Whenever John Key phoned he always made sure that I was to know that if Wayne called me that he was for all intents and purposes the same as Key… He would say “When Wayne speaks he speaks for me”.

So now Tolley has been told to hang in there.  She’ll be ok.  Just  look how that worked out for Jason Ede and Todd Barclay.

She has this morning to throw Eagleson under the bus and save her career.   Doubt she will have the smarts to do it.

Bill English is causing a lot of stress inside National.  As I predicted he is effing up the unlosable election and loyalty becomes paper-thin once people feel their own jobs are on the line.

If I knew about this before the Herald did, just think about how unhappy the people around Bill must be.

Of course, I decided to sit on it for a bit.   No point helping Bill out.  He’s too busy working his way into opposition.  Attacking Winston Peters like this has all but assured a Labour/NZ First government.

And I say this without a trace of smugness or satisfaction:  you all didn’t believe me.  You thought it was personal.  I told you Bill English is exactly what you are seeing now.  He was the wrong man for the job.   And I will not vote for National while he is in charge of it.   The man is not capable of being a party leader.

His real problem is that he’s lost the confidence of his team.  I knew days before the Herald knew.  And the Herald was leaked to as well.   These are the hallmarks of a power structure crumbling and falling to dust.

Whale Oil claims it was leaked to them first and they did nothing with it. That seems out of character going by past attention seeking.

They could be right, they could have been informed before anyone else, did nothing about it and waited to let it all turn to custard, then claim bragging rights afterwards.

If so then National deserves to be dumped in disgrace.

But at this stage I would prefer to keep an open mind on who is responsible.

What is most credible?

That National would blatantly abuse privacy in a political hit job knowing the spotlight would be on them, and knowing there was a huge political risk?

Or that Whale Oil would bring down the Government they have openly been trying to undermine and destroy for years – pretty much since National cut Cameron Slater loose after Dirty Politics broke during the last election campaign.

Slater has been noticeably out of the political loop for a long time, but suddenly he claims to know everything that has happened and everyone responsible.

That flashes some warning lights to me. he has a habit of throwing around incriminating and false claims.

There’s certainly dirty politics going on here. What’s not so clear is who is actually responsible.

There is a lot to clear up here. One that could do with clarification – Tolley is MSD. Peters claims that the leak came from IRD.

Leave a comment

81 Comments

  1. Oh look:

    Pete mod
    I can’t vote for this level of incompetence. I’m backing off my two ticks Blue and going to NZ FIrst.

    https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2017/08/herald-can-reveal-something-whaleoil-published-yesterday/#comment-3491238599

    Reply
  2. Whale Oil have lost it.
    Their hatred of the nats and the slavish attention to Peters party is sick inducing.

    Reply
    • Paying off legal debts and forcing Nats to regroup to the right.

      Which one is the bonus?

      Hilarious that the captain there had been touting a certain Minister played a certain lucrative game as the bombshell. Out of touch much. #outsidethetent

      Grrrr

      Reply
  3. IRD. Hmmmmm looking for Dunne’s very knowing tweet/reply at Politwoops – anyone.

    Reply
  4. Corky

     /  August 29, 2017

    If it’s proven National had a hand in this smear, the next government will be Labour/NZ1st, with the Greens offering confidence and supply should they get back in.

    If I remember correctly, I believe Winston and Bill have some history going back to the Bolger/Shipley era.

    Reply
  5. High Flying Duck

     /  August 29, 2017

    If it does turn out to be a National hit, they deserve every drop in poll numbers they get, due to both the stupidity and nastiness of the leak and the incompetence in which it was perpetrated.
    I’ll keep an open mind for now, as it seems almost too blindingly obvious where it came from, and WO are not exactly impartial observers when it comes to all things Bill English.
    Notwithstanding this, Peters still has some questions to answer, although at this stage unless there is more to come there doesn’t seem to be so much a scandal as a damp squib.

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  August 29, 2017

      If Peters was fiddling the system. the Privacy Act will probably be his saviour. Although why he would want to rort the system for an extra $18 per week is beyond me. Hell, that would barely buy a tot of fine malt.

      Reply
      • Brown

         /  August 29, 2017

        He would rort the system for a dollar because that’s his style. This affair leads me to two conclusions. Politicians and their hacks are fundamentally dishonest and dumb. I haven’t voted in the last couple of elections and this is why. The rest of you can vote for idiots and then complain but I’m of a view that it’s perfectly reasonable to look at the options, wonder how it ever got this bad and abstain from endorsing dumb and useless bastards.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  August 29, 2017

          Christ. Another vote-bludger. Leaving it to others to carry the can. How come this blog gets the vote-bludgers.

          Reply
    • duperez

       /  August 29, 2017

      In the order of events who has questions to answer first?
      Peter Dunne? Minister of MSD Tolley?
      Minister of Revenue (IRD) Judith Collins?

      Well, there’s a name you don’t see much of these days.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  August 29, 2017

        Things may change for Collins under new National leadership. National may develope its own ”sisterhood.”

        Reply
      • High Flying Duck

         /  August 29, 2017

        Judith Collins has said tax matters are not covered by No Surprises and she received no briefings on it at all, so she’s probably clear.
        Tolley was briefed, Paula Bennet was Briefed, The PM Chief of Staff Wayne Eagleson was briefed.As far as I know Tolley and Bennett have denied the leak originating from them. Eagleson has not been asked.
        Lloyd Burr intimated the leak came from IRD when he spoke to WP.
        I’m sure it will come out one way or another.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  August 29, 2017

          why would Bennett be briefed?

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  August 29, 2017

            Paula Bennett
            Get in touch
            If you’d like to get in touch, please email me at
            p.bennett@ministers.govt.nz for Ministerial enquiries, or paula.bennettmp@parliament.govt.nz for Electorate enquiries.
            …………
            Might be time for a horse’s other end to go straight to the horse’s mouth?
            Why not give it a go, Bolboy? Put your money where your mouth is?
            Report back?

            Reply
          • High Flying Duck

             /  August 29, 2017

            She’s Minister for State Services.
            Her bridging was ‘ high level ‘ to did with how it wee handled by MSD rather than specific details apparently.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              so that fits the criteria for the ‘no surprises ‘ policy!MSD is the source is it?

            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              this is incriminating IMO….

              ‘Bennett said she was expecting to be asked which is why she volunteered the info. She confirmed she discussed it with Anne Tolley because she was aware the MSD minister also knew. But she says she did not discuss it with any other ministers or staff. ‘

            • High Flying Duck

               /  August 29, 2017

              Nobody in govt knew about this until MSD briefed them on it, so it’s not a planned hit.
              If National ministers were briefed then leaked it I hope they get turfed. They would thoroughly deserve it.
              I would need to see evidence before judging though as it is just as likely if not more to have been a MSD staffer who didn’t realise how bad what they were doing was.

            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              Bennett is not at MSD,yet she says she knew Tolley knew,and also that she(Bennett)would be asked.How do you explain that?

            • I presume that when they were informed they were also told which other ministers had been informed. I don’t see any problem with that. It kinda makes sense.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  August 29, 2017

              B, I bet you got really frustrated doing join the dots pictures when you were younger because you always came up with something different to everyone else…

            • Blazer

               /  August 30, 2017

              @HFD….funnily enough my feathered fiend,I have learned that …’if it walks like a duck,quacks like a duck…it is a….duck..’

            • Blazer

               /  August 30, 2017

              @PG…makes sense….’but whatever you do..don’t tell Bill English!After all he’s only the…P.M!!..Bol.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  August 30, 2017

              Why then when you see the duck walking, quacking creature do you consistently come up with a wild goose?

  6. Blazer

     /  August 29, 2017

    no surprises here….’ it is safe to assume that she and ministers have created an expectation they should get information like that.’Natz black ops in overdrive.

    Reply
    • duperez

       /  August 29, 2017

      The smaller problem is getting the information or the expectation of that. A bigger problem is the expectation of the information being kept confidential. The biggest problem is corruption.

      Pedants will argue and debate the term, but at the moment, with what we know at 8.50 it’s corruption.

      Reply
      • High Flying Duck

         /  August 29, 2017

        At the moment 13:00 it’s only vague accusation.
        There is no evidence of where the leak came from.
        It could be self-promotion, underhanded journalism, disgruntled employee, carelessly left document, or Government interference.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  August 29, 2017

          ‘carelessly left document, ‘…that may come in handy..the type of rationale a la the dog ate my homework,that I’m sure this administration would have no hesitation in…using.

          Reply
  7. PDB

     /  August 29, 2017

    Slater hates English & has come out pro-Winston so the English govt leaked info about Winston to Slater?? That fails the sniff test. Slater was suggesting the story would be about Paula Bennett before the Winston story broke.

    All we are seeing is Whale Oil trying to make this a hit on English (who he hates) in order to turn back to Winston some of his readers who were heading back to vote National due to Ardern becoming Labour leader & Winston’s increasing socialist agenda.

    I think Dunne, Willie and the like thought the story was about Bennett, not Winston, so had no prior knowledge.

    And who really gains the most from Winston being knocked down a peg or two?

    *National need more than a few extra % from NZL First to govern alone,especially with Dunne gone. Leaking sensitive info like this would be fraught with danger. NZL First voters in the main are for changing the govt.
    *The Greens, after losing so much support, would like to see NZL First suffer the same fate making them more relevant if they do get over 5%.
    *Labour likely did a hit job on the Greens by getting further info on Turei so have form. It perhaps shows Ardern’s ‘positive campaign’ is simply a front for underhand tactics.
    *Winston is unlikely to have outed himself.

    It’s just as likely a left-leaning public service person (god knows there are plenty of them) leaked the info rather than Tolley. Best time to leak the info would be right after Tolley was officially informed of Winston’s issue.

    Reply
    • Motives:

      Greens – needed finally by Labour after decades in cold.
      Nats – suicide – at 40-45%, nothing says anything but requires a partner. Dunne gone. Maori P and DS only bring in 4 at most. 3 more likely
      Labour – suicide – depending very much on Jacindamania to keep momentum to govern under Greens MOU. NZ First needed.
      NZ FIRST – hardly likely, but who knows
      United Future – peeved to be out on his ear. Hated by Peters, probably mutual. Has form

      Outside operatives. Govt staffer goes direct to news. Supplies anonymously. Party operative gone rogue?

      Reply
    • PDB

       /  August 29, 2017

      Slater has added another post;

      “But were there others in the know? ACT leader David Seymour had earlier referred to Peters as a “charismatic crook” on the The Nation’s multi-party leaders debate.
      Yes, very suspicious that David Seymour threw that out just a day before the story broke.”

      I’m sure Winston was well known as ‘charismatic’ and a ‘crook’ well before this news broke.

      “Former Inland Revenue Minister Peter Dunne had tweeted after Peters’ statement came out “Lets see how the superannuation overpayment story looks 24 hours from now” – which was cryptic, but could be read as meaning he knew more, though Dunne now insists that was not the case.”

      Tweeting after the story broke doesn’t mean he had any prior knowledge of anything? Again I think he had heard the rumours going around of a Bennett story breaking on Monday, which didn’t come to pass.

      Reply
      • Yes, I left ACT off my motives list. There’s a lot of mutual hatred within the minor parties. If it was discovered DS is behind it I’d be annoyed but still cast my absent Epsom vote for him.

        Thanks PDB for quoting the tweet. This is the one I was looking for on Dunne’s page and at Politwoops.

        ” “Former Inland Revenue Minister Peter Dunne had tweeted after Peters’ statement came out “Let’s see how the superannuation overpayment story looks 24 hours from now” – which was cryptic, but could be read as meaning he knew more, though Dunne now insists that was not the case.”

        If I was in Scotland Yard, I’d be looking at the Minor Parties/staffers first. Can’t see any reason a Minister or Shadow would have a motive other than Nat/Labour self destruction or a wily ‘frame their counterparts’ scenario.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  August 29, 2017

          yes you are trying to run interference for the Natz scandalous lack of principles and morality by concocting implausible scenarios….now we have a known ‘leaker’ joining the fray….’Paula Bennett was also told by SSC about Peters’ pension overpayments. Was told alone – and says she didn’t tell anyone else.’…..Gods honour!Bol.

          Reply
          • PDB

             /  August 29, 2017

            You are so gullible Blazer……..as desperate as Peter’s in trying to turn the story around. Where’s the proof?

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              proof that Bennett is a liar.?..starter…’she was caught on camera saying she never heard of Cabinet Club despite attending many’.Key taught them the protocol…first deny,then lie,then keep …lying.

            • If one was being charitable one would call it a peculiar case of confirmation bias.

            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              the Right own…’peculiar’….your hero Rees-Mogg a good example.

            • Gezza

               /  August 29, 2017

              Different coloured avatars Blazer. Two devices, or two different email addys?

            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              @Gezza take it up with Pete,if it really…worries you.

            • Gezza

               /  August 29, 2017

              @ Blazer – why would I bother Pete, who respects posters’ privacy & integrity, even if that might be questionable – with a simple enuf enquiry that someone too embarrassed to say who they’ll be voting for could easily answer themselves?

        • PDB

           /  August 29, 2017

          If Slater/MSM is questioning Dunne’s prior knowledge they should be questioning this guy, but of course it doesn’t fit the narrative;

          And who was the only political figure tweeting on the Saturday that they knew of an upcoming ‘scandal’ before Peter’s was ousted?

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  August 29, 2017

            WJ was expecting Bombers reveal to hog the headlines.

            Reply
            • PDB

               /  August 29, 2017

              Ha ha! You mean to say Willie thought Bomber Bradbury’s non-story (that no one cares about) would be such a scandal Maggie Barry’s would be freaking out!

              Please, enough of your nonsense.

            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              @PDB…he was not the only one….Martin Bradbury…thought it would…too.

            • PDB

               /  August 29, 2017

              Hate to break it to you Blazer but……………Martyn Bradbury is an idiot. Not deserving of the police illegally obtaining his bank records but an idiot nonetheless.

            • Blazer

               /  August 29, 2017

              @PDB ..Police are meant to be apolitical.National have turned them into their own personal …goon squad.

      • Blazer

         /  August 29, 2017

        Slater has categorically blamed Tolley….

        Reply
      • Andrew

         /  August 29, 2017

        “Yes, very suspicious that David Seymour threw that out just a day before the story broke”

        Hardly … there is no love lost between these two lately and let’s be honest, Winston is a “charismatic crook”.

        Reply
  8. Revel

     /  August 29, 2017

    The only Dirty Politics here is that Lusk and Whaleoil are so obviously in Winston’s back pocket it is not funny. How would Whaleoil have known about this before the media if it was not Winston who gave him the heads up or one of his friendly Ministerial mates?

    The leak came either from the IRD or MSD. Both run by Whaleoil friendly Ministers in Collins and Tolley. Is he saying his own Ministers leaked it? I am confused.

    Reply
  9. Trevors_elbow

     /  August 29, 2017

    Who benefits? Not National.

    2 serious options:

    Aunty H, and her minions, paw prints are all over the current Labour campaign…. and she had a highly effective and loyal set of journos working for her…….

    Weakening NZ First while smearing the Nats is a nice piece of work

    Second option is Winnie did himself to gain the spotlight back as the Jacinda glow fanned by fawning media over shadowed him…..

    The Nats doing this is improbable…

    The fact Blazer is pointing at them gives serious credence to it not being National leaking the story….

    Reply
    • Brown

       /  August 29, 2017

      Those scenarios have a ring of credibility around them but assumes that egos didn’t overpower acting ethically and sensibly.

      Reply
    • Blazer

       /  August 29, 2017

      some people…don’t know their arse from their…elbow.

      Reply
  10. Andrew

     /  August 29, 2017

    I don’t think National would be stupid enough to poke Winston like this. If it was them, then they absolutely deserve to loose the election. There is no way that any Nat would dare leaking anything to the Whale after the shit storm that was last years election. Cam is just a massive irrelevant blowhard these days and is bitter and twisted that the Nats stopped talking to him.

    Personally, i think it is more likely to be a Green friendly supporter wanting to knock Winston down a peg or two after his comments on Metiria and her eventual resignation. Definitely seems like payback to me.

    Reply
  11. Sunny

     /  August 29, 2017

    I can’t believe the focus on the leak has overshadowed the actual issue. Did Mr Peters misrepresent his relationship to receive his government funding. Because he received an increased amount for many years. Which is the exact situation Meteria was in. He could absolutely clear this up by showing the part of the documentation where he declares whehter he was in a relationship, and the makeup of his household : whether he lived alone or with a partner, or other .

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  August 29, 2017

      the leaker is certainly the…issue.Anything else has been resolved.

      Reply
    • duperez

       /  August 29, 2017

      Did Mr Peters misrepresent his relationship to receive his government funding? Write to MSD and ask them. If they tell you to mind your own business they’re right. If they tell you it would be illegal for them to share information about clients they would probably be right.

      He could clear it up up by showing the documentation? Who to? You? The world? MSD?

      I presume you were not one of the people backing the non-release of information in the Clutha-Southland events.

      Reply
  12. Patzcuaro

     /  August 29, 2017

    Does it just come down to how men and women look at relationships. I’ve no idea what Peters put on his pension application form but Jan Trotman was sure that she was in a relationship when she came to make her application.

    Reply
  13. Tipene

     /  August 29, 2017

    The original application for Superannuation would have been filled in and authorised in front of a WINZ CM and then immediately scanned into the MSD CSM system as a part of the live appointment process on site at WINZ.

    For privacy reasons, same day scanning application forms in real time is mandatory, and the original form is then immediately placed in a secure destruction bin post-scanning. There are several of these bins located around WINZ offices.

    So, whatever was declared on the original application form COULD NOT have been altered, as it was in digital format. It could ONLY have been altered by Peters prior to scanning, and then initialled by Peters prior to scanning.

    Whatever is on the original scanned document in the WINZ CSM system is a true and clear record of what Peters’s declared at the time.

    Peters simply has to go into a local WINZ office, request a printout of the original application form, present it to the media – and job done clearing his name.

    What triggered the anomaly was most likely a data match in the WINZ SWIFFT system when it went to reconcile bank accounts when Trotman applied for her Superannuation, because its’s likely Trotman & Peters have a shared bank account.

    SWIFFT scans client files when the same bank account is registered by a new applicant for payments to be received by same.

    Which leaves two possibilities:

    Peters signed of on the wrong amount for himself at time of application, or someone in WINZ Central processing made a data entry error – a big one.

    Reply
    • Revel

       /  August 29, 2017

      You also have to confirm your relationship status every couple of years with them don’t you?

      Reply
  14. Ray

     /  August 29, 2017

    Latest theory is it was a green leaning person at IRD in retaliation for Metira Turei problems.
    Read it on Twitter so must be true😳

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  August 29, 2017

      hey Ray this from Slater….’Once a government starts spying on political enemies, and that is what this is, then we are in big trouble.’……just reeks of…sincerity.

      Reply
    • PDB

       /  August 29, 2017

      Reply
      • PDB

         /  August 29, 2017

        If you actually think about this (beyond some on here however) it does make sense – a Greens supporter pissed off when Turei had to resign due to welfare fraud leaks information to the MSM showing she isn’t the only one in parliament to commit such fraud (whether Winston deliberately did so or not).

        Reply
        • PDB

           /  August 29, 2017

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  August 29, 2017

            current…diversion…you mean.

            Reply
            • duperez

               /  August 29, 2017

              And if you actually think about this …

              If you actually think about this it makes perfect sense that supporters, propagandists and crusaders would come up with tactics to take the attention off anyone they favour being under suspicion of nefarious and illegal behaviour.

              Rewriting the narrative for the similar minded apostles to spread the message is to be expected.

              The irony is that on a day this site carried a thread about the toxicity on the Kiwiblog site its owner David Farrar is quoted on here.

              While the language of his contribution here may be more moderate than that of many of the contributors to his site, I think there is fair reason to suspect that his quote on here has a more sinister motive and evil intent.

            • PDB

               /  August 30, 2017

              “I think there is fair reason to suspect that his quote on here has a more sinister motive and evil intent.”

              You obviously see monsters in the shadows then – he voices an opinion that is as valid as anyone else’s.

              The irony is you obviously think National leaked it when that would always backfire on them & they actually need Winston to govern post election – doesn’t make sense.

  15. duperez

     /  August 29, 2017

    In direct relation to what Farrar said:

    He has no idea who leaked it so he casts suspicion on someone. He finds a handy scapegoat.

    He knows who had the information. He knows the PM said the leak didn’t come from the Beehive. He knows the PM is sometimes a stranger to the truth. He knows the PM is on the back foot in the election build-up.

    He is on the back foot himself. He is in a desperate fight. And political desperadoes will stoop to absolutely anything.

    Reply
    • PDB

       /  August 30, 2017

      “He has no idea who leaked it so he casts suspicion on someone.”

      So you have proof of National leaking it?

      Or are you also a ‘desperado that will stoop to absolutely anything” in order to blame the party you don’t support?

      Reply
      • duperez

         /  August 30, 2017

        Your responses shows the desperation. I’m not trying to work out whether suspicion being on National annoys and upsets you because you’d hate, out of some moral sense, to think they’d do such a thing out, that they’d do something so poorly and that they’d be suspected, because of the thought that at ‘headquarters’ they’d be so desperate or the idea that they’d been caught out doing something dirty,.

        The bits, “He knows the PM is on the back foot in the election build-up. He is on the back foot himself. He is in a desperate fight” are subjective. Are the other bits in the analysis factual?

        Analogy: David Farrar is in a crowd of people. Someone farts. His mate right alongside side him heard it and smelled it. The others in his immediate vicinity hear it and smell it. And Farrar points his finger right across the throng to someone quite some distance away saying “The guy in the green hat did it. I know he eats lots of beans.”

        Reply
        • High Flying Duck

           /  August 30, 2017

          The only bad smell is coming from Winston, who handily has WO in his pocket to throw out his party lines.
          According to Winston It was definitely an IRD leak (a crime no less!!) until it wasn’t because it was National who has said they were out to get him! Both accusations have zero evidence. And apparently despite knowing it was National it will not affect his ability to form a Government with them after the election because he puts the country above personal politics.
          The media are going hard out saying National were the only ones who could gain from this, but it is a desperately long bow to say that given the nature of the election campaign and where the polling is at.
          You would have to assume that the party with the highest % in the polls has thrown a hail Mary dirty politics ploy on the day of it’s own election campaign launch to overshadow the announcement of one of its major election policies.
          As I’ve posted before, if they did it they should be turfed for both duplicitousness and abject stupidity.
          But it doesn’t pass the sniff test at first look.

          Reply
        • PDB

           /  August 30, 2017

          “Your responses shows the desperation.”

          Desperation in what exactly? In pointing out that we have as much evidence that National leaked Winston’s personal info than any other person or group i.e. none. The two ministers were told as part of their jobs and didn’t request the information – so hard to say this definitely points to them being the leakers.

          At this stage Farrar’s opinion is as relevant as anybody else’s. Farrar also only voiced this opinion in a tweet responding to Hooton, not as a post on Kiwiblog.

          You are getting confused in your obvious dislike of Farrar and want to fully blame National for leaking the info even though you have zero evidence of this. As HFD mentions above if National did leak the info they deserve all they get but I find it hard to believe that the party the left calls the ‘masters of dirty politics’ would then do something so dumb/obvious for no apparent payoff considering they are miles off governing alone with support of ACT. The Maori party have already suggested they’d rather prop up a Labour govt (now possible with Little out of the picture) so no guarantee of help there either.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  August 30, 2017

            didn’t request the information…thats right..they didn’t say…trawl through Peters private records and find some dirt and let us know….their loyal sycophants took it for..granted.

            Reply
            • PDB

               /  August 30, 2017

              Considering Winston’s error only came to light when his partner went to claim her benefit and named Winston as her live-in partner your post is like all your others – nonsense.

  1. Around and About – Peters Pension | The Inquiring Mind

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s