Golriz Ghahraman cops more criticism for inaccurate claims

Green MP Golriz Ghahraman has attracted attention in the past for making questionable claims. She was in the firing line again today over this tweet:

That states: Golriz Ghahraman is the Green Party’s defence spokesperson

I think it’s questionable that she ‘holds the Defence portfolio’. She seems unclear on proper Parliamentary job descriptions.

Oxford: portfolio – the position and duties of a Minister or Secretary of State.

She is Green spokesperson for Defence. She isn’t a minister, nor an associate minister.

And she isn’t the first woman to be defence spokesperson.

Ghahraman has responded to this:

No woman has held the portfolio as full spokesperson (as far as the Parliamentary Library records confirm. Associates aren’t full spokes persons. I had no idea it was a thing before being contacted about it tbh. But there you go).

But again, she isn’t a minister or an associate minister. She can’t even claim to be shadow minister 9not a common term in New Zealand) – that is Opposition MP Mark Mitchell (National’s Spokesperson for defence).

And she isn’t the first female spokesperson for defence either – @GraemeEdgeler :

No-one is disputing Heather was Associate Minister of Defence. Golriz was disputing that Heather Roy was ACT’s (full) defence spokesperson. Golriz is wrong. There is a single 2005 press release from ACT listing Heather as ACT’s Defence Spokesman. That resolves the claim.

Ghahraman is getting a reputation for not being a particularly solid MP. She is floundering online.

34 Comments

  1. Gezza

     /  July 11, 2018

    Golriz Ghahraman is a twit. A child with a law degree. How in God’s name did she ever get elected? What the hell went wrong here?

    • Grimm

       /  July 11, 2018

      On the list. Genda quotas, diversity, yada yada.

    • NOEL

       /  July 12, 2018

      She the one that protests at the 5EYE’s site and probably bitches when she is not included in the intel briefs.

  2. Alan Wilkinson

     /  July 11, 2018

    Golriz proves you don’t have to be the first defence spokeswoman to be clueless.

  3. Geoffrey Monks

     /  July 11, 2018

    Has this trivial twit said anything anywhere about how she views NZ should be defended?

    • David

       /  July 11, 2018

      With good intentions and wind chimes.

      • Corky

         /  July 11, 2018

        Hanging from a armed waka with an outboard motor. Hell, that would scare anyone off.

      • Geoffrey Monks

         /  July 11, 2018

        Phew, that’s all right then!

  4. Corky

     /  July 11, 2018

    This women is sail-bike material. She needs to change tack.

  5. Ray

     /  July 11, 2018

    Well the fact that she represented these killer creeps is on her CV.
    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/betraying-justice-for-rwandas-genocide-survivors

    • colin rippey

       /  July 11, 2018

      I could handle the [deleted, over the top expressive] being a part of a defence team for genocide defendants but the selfies with the evil bastard grind my machinery. She is no moreor less a self-serving socialist hypocrite (don’t get me started on her experiences being bombed in Tehran!)

      • I agree about the being part of a defence team. It’s a legal rights issue, not a moral one. Innocent until proved guilty and all that.

        But the selfies with the genocide practioner were revolting. Imagine someone doing this at the Nuremberg Trials or with Pol Pot’s mass murderers. It was incredibly unprofessional and inappropriate.

        She deserves to be censured over this false claim. How on earth did she think that she’d get away with claiming to be the Minister of Defence (or implying that she was) ?

        If she is so ignorant that she doesn’t know the difference, what on earth is she doing in Parliament ? Or did she think that other people wouldn’t know.

        I can’t see what her being female has to do with anything, anyway.

    • Blazer

       /  July 12, 2018

      thats not fair Ray.
      You know even the most heinous criminals are given defence lawyers.

      • Grimm

         /  July 12, 2018

        Except that she originally pitched it as being part of the prosecution.

        • Blazer

           /  July 12, 2018

          a trial is a prosecution.

          • Grimm

             /  July 12, 2018

            Can’t have been easy, looking at all those photos and videos of people with their arms, legs and heads cut off with machetes, and then turning up with fresh lippy everyday to defend those weilding the machetes.

  6. sorethumb

     /  July 11, 2018

    Which side is she on?

  7. Traveller

     /  July 12, 2018

    She’s at best an obfuscator. She has a serious problem with the truth and her flattering CV owed nothing to fact and the more she says the more we see an unashamed narcissistic ego in overdrive.

    She should get the boot,but won’t !

    • Blazer

       /  July 12, 2018

      give her a chance she’s very young and not hardened to political expediency…yet.

      • A major problem with her is she keeps making the same mistakes – in this case exactly the same false claim.

        Inexperience is forgiveable, but a failure to learn from basic mistakes is more of a problem.

  8. Geoffrey

     /  July 12, 2018

    To Kitty… Maybe she would not be in the House if a gender issue had not been a factor. When selection (for anything) is constrained by a restrictive demographic there will always be the opportunity for availability, and not credibility, to detract from the optimum. But hey, maybe she (they :-)) were the best anyway.

    • She seemed all right at the time, I suppose, but she is very immature for a woman of almost 40. I didn’t know that she was 37.

      She almost seems not to have thought that Kiwis read Twitter and would know that she doesn’t have a portfolio in anything and that she is not only not the first woman to be Minister of Defence, she is not a Minister of anything.

      She has been really ridiculed, with people making ridiculous claims about themselves.

      • Gezza

         /  July 12, 2018

        Immature is the word all right. She comes across as having the intellectual & emotional grunt of a 15 year old girl at a pyjama party.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  July 12, 2018

          Insulting to teenagers at pyjama parties ! 😀 😀 😀

          Seriously, it’s extraordinary that she would claim to be the Minister of Defence, and an MP can’t claim not to know what it means to have a portfolio. It has to have been an attempt at misleading people.

          Even if she was the minister, two other women have been there before her, as Associate Ministers, anyway. Is she stupid and ill-informed, or does she think that other people are ?

          • Gezza

             /  July 12, 2018

            Yes I agree with you & I don’t mean to just be slinging an unconsidered grumpy old man insult at her be ause of her youth. As you say, she’s 37. Quite by accident I found the clip of her maiden speech in Parliament, looking for a Parliamentary Question, not long after she delivered it. So I just watched it out of interest.

            God what an eye opener. It was so utterly vacuous. It’s one thing to be young & idealistic, & have someone older, like me, listening think “Ok, you just need to experience a bit more of life, because I used to think like that about some things too but life experience, & simple observation, have tempered my views”.

            But this speech was just “silly girl” stuff. She’s in her thirties. She sounded like a really dipsy, very young, teenage girl. I remember thinking how the heck did you get a law degree & it made me realise you can be academically bright but still emotionally childish.

            • Gezza

               /  July 12, 2018

              🙄 * here’s the missing c from because. 😠

            • It didn’t sound like a grumpy old man, I know what you mean; that goofy,girly act wears thin when someone’s hitting 40.

              It was a huge surprise that she’s old enough to be the mother of a teenager when she acts like one herself and tries to look like one. I wondered why the Greens had chosen someone so young and immature…but at 37, she should be acting like an adult, not a teenage girl. Oops, teenage woman.

            • I googled the speech….I had forgotten what twaddle it was. Talk about PC bum-crawling; now I remember why I didn’t watch it all at the time. For a lawyer, she has a very unimpressive voice.

              I don’t believe for one moment that people have been as vile to her as she made out, especially as she wasn’t in government then.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  July 13, 2018

              (eyeroll) She makes the dizziest 15 year old look like a mature adult.

  9. Richard

     /  July 12, 2018

    Another useless import lecturing us on how to live our lives

  1. Golriz Ghahraman cops more criticism for inaccurate claims — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition