Timeline around Slater’s stroke

This is  reference post.

It became obvious about the end of October that there had been a significant change at Whale Oil – after multiple posts a day under the author ‘Cameron Slater’ they suddenly stopped. There have been no posts since.

There was no explanation at all until ‘Whaleoil staff’ advised  on on January 21, 2019 at 8:00am in ‘Where the hell is Cam?’:

The eagle eyed amongst you have no doubt spotted that Cam has not written any posts for Whaleoil or Incite Politics for some time. In fact, Cam has been absent since October but, for various reasons that will become clear, we opted not to make any announcement till we were ready. That time has now come.

In late October Cam had to go to hospital by ambulance not once but twice. After being discharged from his first stay in hospital he had to be readmitted due to complications. Cam suffered a serious stroke that left him partially paralysed down his right side and totally paralysed in his right arm including his hand and fingers as well as severe impairment in higher order functioning and moderate speech impairment. Prior to this event Cam was perfectly fit and healthy with no predisposing stroke risk factors. Doctors have concluded that the cause of the stroke was entirely due to stress.

There will be no other public announcement or comment regarding Cam’s health other than to say that he is approaching his recovery with typical determination (some would say obsession) and a never-give-up attitude.

Progress is being made, but it is very long and very hard. Cam cannot concentrate, read or take phone calls for more than ten or fifteen minutes a day. He cannot cope with loud noises, background noises or being interrupted and he certainly does not have the ability to form complex thought structures. The vision in Cam’s right eye has also been affected.

However, it would be untrue to pretend that we don’t need your help. Much as it pains us to ask others for help, we have concluded that we must ask for your assistance in helping Cam pay the huge legal bills he has incurred as a result of having to defend himself from the lawfare of his enemies.

Please help us to help Cam with his recovery by supporting our efforts to minimise further stress which could prove fatal to him.

This raised quite a few questions and speculation, especially since Friday when a court judgment was released, as repoted by NZ herald who had obtained the judgment: Whaleoil blogger Cameron Slater loses defamation case

Whaleoil blogger Cameron Slater has lost one of the country’s longest running defamation cases after failing to put up any credible defence.

The judgment made public today saw Justice Paul Davison find in Blomfield’s favour, ruling out a defence from Slater after long delays and failures to meet legal requirements to defend a claim of defamation.

Slater has taken the judgment to the Court of Appeal. There is yet to be a ruling on what the loss will cost Slater.

The case against Slater and his company, Social Media Consultants Ltd, focused on nine blog posts on the Whaleoil website over a month in mid-2012.

It saw claims by Blomfield the blog posts were a deliberate attack orchestrated by a former business partner Warren Powell and associates after a falling out in their Hells Pizza business.

The new judgment came after a defamation hearing due to start on October 8 was adjourned when Slater and lawyers arrived at court without a proper defence.

In total, Slater had entered or attempted to enter five statements of defence over the course of the case which all failed to meet the legal requirements for attempted defences of truth and of honest opinion.

Those defences required the blogger to either present the source of details he claimed as fact to show they were true, or to show statements had been made as opinion based on facts which were known at the time of publication.

Davison said Slater had been “afforded considerable leniency” to meet deadlines and get a proper defence before the court.

There had been “indulgence” to allow Slater to change his defence with one High Court judge even providing the blogger guidance as to how to prepare for the defamation hearing.

Davison said Slater’s attempts to change his defence and to introduce new pleadings was rightly seen as “a last-minute attempt to prevent the (Blomfield’s) claim from being heard and determined by the court”.

He said it was possible to see delay as Slater’s objective when seeking court hearings on issues such as a security for costs.

Davison said the statement of defence Slater had arrived with when the trial was due to start failed to identify the facts which would have been used to prove his blog posts were true.

Instead, large piles of evidence had been pointed to which, in a number of cases, relied on “a third party’s allegations about the plaintiff”.

And instead of providing a defence of honest opinion, Slater’s court filings instead repeated his inadequate defence of truth.

Davison said it wasn’t necessary to rule on the merits of the case because of the legal, technical flaws in Slater’s attempted defence.

“However, in my view the documents relied on by the defendants do not provide cogent support for the propositions and conclusions they seek to draw from them in relation to the defences of truth and honest opinion, or the bad reputation of the plaintiff.”

The judgment recorded Slater had made claims in a blog post which included saying the “Blomfield files” would expose “drugs, fraud, extortion, bullying, corruption, collusion, compromises, perjury, deception, (and) hydraulic-ing”.

Davison said Slater’s defence “fell well short” of providing facts which supported the accusations printed.

As indicated the court hearing was in October, before Slater had his stroke.

The REASONS JUDGMENT OF PAUL DAVISON J [Re application by defendants to file fourth and fifth amended affirmative statement of defence, security for costs and admissibility of evidence] shows:

Hearing: 26 September, 8, 10, 11, 12 October 2018

Judgment: 26 October 2018

So presumably Slater received the judgment the Friday before having his stroke.

The last post by ‘Cameron Slater’, Bring peace to the world by buying our ham, was on October 30, 2018 at 10:05am.

There was a political post just prior to that – A year into this government and at least one commentator thinks they’ve done jack all – on October 30, 2018 at 9:30am that quoted what looks like a NZ Herald opinion by David Cormack that doesn’t have a link.

Prior to that Nice sentiment but aid isn’t where it is at was posted at October 30, 2018 at 9:00am which links to an RNZ article ‘The days of treating you as pests are over’ from 4:01 pm on 29 October 2018.

That could have been scheduled any time after 4:01 pm on Monday 29th.

A comment was posted by Slater at 9:25 pm Monday 29th:

So it appears that Slater had his stroke some time between then and the end of October (the Wednesday).

There have been no more posts under Slater’s name since then at all.

There have been a number of comments since then starting with this one:

That could have been posted by someone else. Whale Oil gave no indication that Slater could have been incapacitated for two and a half months.

No indication there that there there was any problem (apart from the sudden cessation of posts).

So it seems that several days after having had a stroke Slater is commenting again. and the comments have continued since then. Including:

Whats wrong with lambchop, roast and cutlet for names?

Apart from chips and mashed potato, is there anything made from plants that tastes good? Asking for the daughter who was perplexed as to who would even consider buying plant-based mince.

Instead they will go down the path, well worn, twice over, of Bill English.

He back Amy Adams and has been advocating strongly in her favour. But a man who wont stand by his mates isn’t leadership quality.

They always poll the leader. They already know how tits he is.

I wonder if they will stop the Greens writing about GE. It is now scientific fact that GE is safe, yet the Greens constantly push their own denialism on GE.

Except she is a terrible bully, though not as bad as Paula Bennett.

They were posted through November and the last one on 1 December 2018. On 3 December and following:

She, amongst others in parliament, is well known as a terrible boss. Staff turnover is the indicator. Paula Bennett has one of the worst, but for some reason she is never touched. Barry has more than those in media, and it is somewhat strange that the nats are sticking by her when her sackings involved Parliamentary Services intervention and they were never involved in the much highlighted JLR staffing issues. Surely Bridges should at least be asking her to spend some time on the back bench like he was going to do with JLR?

Saying the others do it too never worked in the kindergarten sandpit , what makes you think it will work now?

Ignore all that and focus on the illegal work. Yes he is a mincing pooftah with a silly moustache and is soft, but what he says is illegal regarding party work.

So why did he decide to walk out at 0800 meeting yesterday?

Really? So the 1996 election never happened and the member for Rakaia was never elected.

Wrong, that was Jim Bolger.

She was elected as the MP for Rakaia. Jim Bolger was elected as MP for Taranaki-King Country in 1996. No one is ever elected as PM. They are selected as leader of their party and nothing else.

You cant tell me that had Bill English remained as prime minister that he wouldnt have signed, of course he would have. The globalist influence of McCully would have endured.

9 December 2018:

Really? immeasurable damage? Fortunately stats show otherwise. WO never supported Peters, but I did personally. I am glad I did because now Bill English is gone and I’m still here. I am not some toady to any political party, and will never be again. The fact that you think I should have toadied up to a Bill English led National party despite the animus shown to me by the party show that you don’t understand either me or my personal belief structure.

And:

The use of terms like old prick and old crook implies that other politicians are inherently honest. They aren’t. Bill English in particular, who was aided and abetted over the years by Michelle Boag and Murray McCully, amongst others.

Again you us a superlative, un fathomable, that shows a lack of perception your part. Even Blind Freddy know the old political saw “the enemy of my enemy s my friend”. See, that wasn’t that hard to perceive was it?

What you also fail to perceive is that politics isn’t a zero sum, winner takes all game. It is a common failing though of dyed in the wool, blinkered National party supporters.

Politics is the art of the possible, it is about finding pathways to victory and National’s continued adherence to zero sum and winner takes all mean they may well spend an awful long time in opposition. That would be good thing. Until they change, their (and yours) continued arrogance dooms them.

More:

Most atheists that I know are worse than happy handclappers bashing anyone with a belief telling them how wrong they are. This woman sounds precisely like that.

Its Thursday ,the prime minister will conveniently be away from the house.

Are you completely stupid or just a troll. National has said they would repeal this, how can they be “under instruction”?

You can have an opinion, and I can point out facts that show your opinion is ill-founded, ill-informed and wrong.

Made my boss cry within 15 minutes of stepping in the door. Once I knew how to make her cry that just emboldened me to set better times.

Maybe they should endorse three strikes…Imagine Cindy having to push that through.

Just like the prime minisda

Nah, Baz is on the money.

Helped immensely by stupid questions from Bridges. Total facepalm there. It is clear he hasn’t got the skills to challenge Cindy. I am waiting for a silly Christmas stunt to get attention.

Im not ashamed and never will be. If you think Simon Bridges or Bill English would have done any different over the recent UN happenings then you are seriously unobservant of the wet liberal leadership National has had since John Key took over. Murray McCully did in fact do precisely what you have said, he was the one steering it thru before the election…and had National won they would have done exactly what the CoL has done.

National is still wetter than the ocean, just because it wears a blue wetsuit doesn’t mean they aren’t wet.

Word is she used to push around Parekura Horomia, which is impressive shoving power.

In January:

Not betrayed at all. I understand how MMP works. The only vote possible for me to get rid of Bill English was Winston, job done, extremely satisfied.

From 3 weeks ago:

Using your standard there would be about 10 MPs left.

Back in my day he’d be hung on the coathooks by his shorts, bog-washed in the Taj and given the bash for being a smarty pants…and Bob Hunt would have likely caned him, just because…all on the first day.

So, let’s get this straight….relatives with a criminal past preclude someone from public office? How many generations back does that apply?

Bridges is a lying so & so when he says he doesn’t know much about the Vernon Tava wet dream. McCully has been setting it up and working with Goodfellow on it.

Bridges is lying when he says he doesn’t know much about the Vernon Tava wet dream. McCully has been setting it up and working with Goodfellow on it.

I don’t know whether that cartoon of Simon makes him look like a giant douche or a turd sandwich.

No, one must not…they started carrying on with each other while both married and then Dowie decided she wanted to be Mrs Ross 2.0.

Murray McCully’s work, with Goodfellow and Bridges involved even though they deny it.

How’s that sink Winston, govern alone plan working out?

And where did all his votes go? Not National. Collapse Winston vote and govern alone looks retarded now.

Next you’ll be sounding like Labour voter.. Rogue poll…rogue poll.

I think if they throw milk the truth just might come out and end up all over John Keys face.

You guys don’t know Mark Mitchell very well, do you?

Fyfe would be an appalling choice given his private life.

It’s curious that he started commenting a few days after suffering a stroke, and has continued since, but hasn’t been posting.

Polity on Northland bridges ‘scandal’

Rob Salmond has been doing a lot of work on OAI requests and writing up the results in a series of posts at Polity. If he turns out to be on target with this then a Simon Bridges risks collapsing.

Polity posts:

Northland bridges – OIA scandal (1 of 3)

The paper trail behind National’s disastrous Ten Bridges bribe in Northland is almost comic in how damning it is of Ministers Bridges and English. Here’s the OIA I got back recently from the New Zealand Transport Agency. (Reply, briefing 1, briefing 2, email 1, email 2, email 3)

In this post I address whether or not getting advice from officials took place, and whether it was allowable for this promise, billed by National as a National Party promise.

Northland bridges – OIA scandal (2 of 3)

Overnight, I have received Simon Bridges’ version of events in relation to his abuse of public officials over the Northland bridge bribe.

Hilariously, he claims that the trail of increasingly panicked emails from NZTA officials about the costs of upgrading single lane bridges in Northland had nothing at all to do with National’s promise one working day later to upgrade several single lane bridges in Northland. I’m serious. That’s his actual story.

Northland bridges – OIA scandal (3 of 3)

Following from my earlier posts, readers may recall that one bridge in particular among National’s awful ten bridges bribe got a lot of stick – the Darby and Joan Kauri Bridge.

First, two-laning that bridge got some stick because it is completely in the middle of nowhere, on a rarely-driven State Highway connecting two very small population centres.

Cabinet Manual section 6.60

Chapter 6 is about pre-election periods. Here’s paragraph 60 of that chapter:

Before and after an election, the incumbent Ministers should ensure that any requests they make for advice or information from their officials is for the purposes of their portfolio responsibilities and not for party political purposes.

Someone should show this paragraph, along with my timeline of the advice Simon Bridges received from NZTA about replacement of single-lane Northland bridges just before his political party announced a policy to replace some single-lane Northland bridges, to John Key.

Looks like he’s got a clear case of a Minister in breach of the Cabinet Manual.

I’ll leave the arguments to those who know more about these things. The politicians are at odds:

NZ Herald: Minister should be sacked over bridge pledge – Labour

Labour leader Andrew Little says the Prime Minister should sack Transport Minister Simon Bridges over claims Mr Bridges broke ministerial rules in developing the Northland byelection bridges pledge.

TVNZ: John Key stands by Simon Bridges after he’s accused of breaching Cabinet guidelines

Prime Minister John Key says he has no plans to take action against Transport Minister Simon Bridges following claims he may have breached Cabinet guidelines by receiving official advice on his by-election bridge upgrade promises prior to their announcement.

Henry Inquiry timeline

Date Time of email Event
15 April David Henry Inquiry into the unauthorised disclosure of the Kitteridge report established and Terms of Reference publicly released.
30 April 5.07pm Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service requesting:• All printing, copy and scan records for all Ministers that had access to the Kitteridge report (10 National Ministers, John Banks and Peter Dunne).• All printing, copy and scan records for senior staff in each of the 12 Minister’s offices, including SPS’s and Press Secretaries.

• Printing, copy and scan records for three Prime Minister’s Office staff members

6 May 8:45am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Ministerial Services to advise that Parliamentary Service requires authorisation from Ministerial Services to give printing, copy and scan records.
8 May 10:29am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service with revised request, which had previously been hand delivered to Ministerial Services, asking for email logs for external emails for the 12 Ministers and their staff for the date range 22 March to 9 April. It also advises that Ministerial Services has given authorisation for that request to be processed.
2:51pm Henry Inquiry Administrator requests from Ministerial Services cellphone billing records for 12 Ministers and their staff as well as staff from the Prime Minister’s office for 25 March to 9 April.
4:41pm Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service to request printing and copy records for 12 Ministers and their staff and staff from Prime Minister’s office.
4:45pm Parliamentary Service emails Ministerial Services and asks them for written confirmation from each Minister they are happy to make available information relating to staff as it believes Ministers are the employer.
5:15pm Ministerial Services emails Parliamentary Service to advise DIA are the employer of all Ministerial staff and all staff had signed a Code of Conduct so the Inquiry doesn’t need written authorisation. However, with respect to Ministers, Parliamentary Service has asked Ministerial Services to provide authorisation for each Minister individually and please hold cellphone records for each Minister in the meantime.
10 May 9:40am Ministerial Services to Henry Inquiry Administrator – now have the Ministers’ cellphone records ready.
2:17pm Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Andrea Vance’s landline and cellphone numbers to Parliamentary Service.
14 May 11:30am Henry Inquiry Administrator to Parliamentary Service – cellphone phone logs. This is in reference to logs of Ministers and staff. In terms of authorisation granted by Ministerial Services, Henry Inquiry Administrator states he believes all individual Ministers given written approval.
16 May 3:24pm Parliamentary Service emails Henry Inquiry Administrator with external Ministers’ email metadata, including Peter Dunne’s.
17 May 10:22am More attachments with Ministers’ metadata regarding scans from photocopiers to 12 Ministers’ email addresses.
10:37am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service to advise only missing is mobile phone call logs for people on the list.
3:39pm Parliamentary Service emails Henry Inquiry Administrator with cellphone call records files for Ministers and staff. Includes Ministerial car phones.
Monday 20 May 11:41am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service – were you able to locate remaining 10 or so phone records? On another matter, how long would it take for you to retrieve the content of emails if we requested them? If those emails were for Ministers, does that present any issues?
1:32pm Parliamentary Service replies to Henry Inquiry Administrator to say “it can be the same day if it is only a few or less. I believe we have the necessary approval for Ministers.”
2:25pm Henry Inquiry Administrator lodges formal request for all emails between Andrea Vance and Peter Dunne between 22 March and 9 April (dates provided in metadata rundown in email on 16 May at 3:24pm). Also emails between Andrea Vance and one staff member from each of Adams, Finlayson, Tolley, PM’s offices.
5:53pm Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service and requests phone records for Ministers and staff extensions for contact to and from two “numbers of interest” (Andrea Vance’s landline and mobile). Also states “Please note, we do not want the call logs of the two numbers of interest. That is outside the parameters of our Inquiry.”
21 May 9:55am Parliamentary Service forwards email record request to a contractor allocated to this. Parliamentary Service then emails contractor to get idea of effort and ETA.
10:50am Parliamentary Service contractor sends email with attachment of emails records for Dunne/Vance and email records between four Ministerial staff/Vance to Parliamentary Service at 10:50am.
4:25pm Parliamentary Service sends email records file for Dunne/Vance emails and emails between four staff and Andrea Vance to Inquiry at 4:25pm. At 5:12pm Parliamentary Services emails Henry Inquiry Administratorwith a message to call urgently re email sent today and then sends a recall notice for email at 5:18pm. Email titled “DPMC Info Request”.
5:16pm At 5:16pm Parliamentary Service sends revised file with only email records between four Ministerial staff/Vance to Inquiry. Email titled: “Last part of info”
Henry Inquiry Administrator deletes email titled “DPMC info requests” with Dunne/Vance email records from his email without opening file.
Thursday 23 May 8:34am Henry Inquiry Administrator to Parliamentary Service re email title “last part of info” to say “as discussed we can’t open .pst documents”
9:30am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service saying Mr Henry discussed an issue with Ministerial Services and Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff but not Acting Head of Parliamentary Service. The upshot is that Acting Head of Parliamentary Service will be talking with Dunne’s office with the aim of getting the Minister’s permission to view the emails.
Sunday 26 May 9:49pm Parliamentary Service emails Henry Inquiry Administrator – “if you have authorisation sorted, I can send you the files.”
27 May 8:18am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service and says “Just to confirm . . . we’ve only got authorisation to see non-minister email, not Dunne’s.”
10:45am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service asking who to contact to access swipe card records into the building.
2:47pm Henry Inquiry Administrator sends formal request to Parliamentary Service for building access logs for two people for 6-8 April. Asks is this data able to be retrieved and what authorisation do you need?
28 May (5:30pm) 5:30pm Parliamentary Service emails Henry Inquiry Administrator with two activity reports as requested for those dates. Authority to release obtained from Head of Parliamentary Service.
Wed 29 May 2013 12:35pm Parliamentary Service emails security policy for Parliamentary precinct to Inquiry.
30 May 8:37am Parliamentary Service to Henry Inquiry Administrator attachment “DPMC infor request extracted”. This is emails between four Ministerial staff and Andrea Vance in readable format.
5:27pm Parliamentary Service contractor sends Henry Inquiry Administrator email titled “Phone call information”. It says Parliamentary Service has confirmed happy for me to provide you with the information. Could you forward request to me via email.
5:37pm Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service asks for Minister’s landline call logs and Vance’s three numbers (extn, landline and cell) for 10 National Ministers.
31 May 9:02am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service “should note not yet sought permission of non-National Party Ministers for their phone logs. Expect to later today.”
9:44am Parliamentary Service contactor sends email to Henry Inquiry Administrator with two attachments – call logs for 10 National Ministers and call logs for Andrea Vance.
11:19am Henry Inquiry Administrator responds “Let’s be clear. We did not request the second report you’ve attached here i.e. the one showing all calls to and from the numbers of interest. We’re not interested in looking at that”.
4:00pm Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Mr Dunne’s Chief of Staff to say “David Henry tells me Mr Dunne has approved release of information so therefore this is the request we are going to send.”
3:53pm Senior Parliamentary Service staff member forwards email from Parliamentary Service contractor to Henry Inquiry Administrator again with two attachments of phone records.
4:28pm Henry Inquiry Administrator replies to Parliamentary Service to say he did get them.
4 June 8:59am Mr Dunne’s Chief of Staff confirms to Henry Inquiry Administrator that Mr Dunne agrees to request to access phone logs of his landline.
1:39pm Parliamentary Service emails Henry Inquiry Administrator requested report (Mr Dunne’s landline calls)
10:46am Parliamentary Service emails Henry Inquiry Administrator to say Ministers’ private lines potentially not logged, will confirm.
5 June 10:59am Henry Inquiry Administrator emails Parliamentary Service to say deadline tight – answer before 2pm today appreciated.
5 June Henry Inquiry report delivered to Prime Minister.
7 June Henry Inquiry report released by Prime Minister.