Slater: “Palino…severely tainted”

“Palino isn’t such a man.  He’s severely tainted and doesn’t deserve to have a second go, no matter how early his image revitalisation run is started…”

A post at Whale Oil (Cameron Slater on May 18, 2014 at 5:00pm):


Auckland wants to get rid of Len Brown so badly, it will accept anything that comes along that doesn’t look like it is going to work them over.

Palino isn’t such a man.  He’s severely tainted and doesn’t deserve to have a second go, no matter how early his image revitalisation run is started with the help of a paper that is looking to work its way into the next mayor’s office.

Asked about any regrets about the 2013 campaign, Palino said rogue elements — Brown sympathisers — in his campaign team undermined him. He declined to name them.

Political scientist Dr Bryce Edwards said it was extremely naive for Palino to think he’d land support from right-wing elements again, after questions over tactics used to out Brown’s affair.

“There was definitely skulduggery involved. Whether it involved Palino or not is, I think, the question that will continue to dog him because he hasn’t really put his cards on the table and dealt with it.”

Now he’s trying to blame Luigi Wewege and Bevan Chuang as “Brown sympathisers”?  Yeah, late night car park meetings never happened either, did they John?

You don’t have the support of the people you let down John.

Who let who down I wonder.

They know where you went wrong, and it isn’t about not getting enough votes.

Meanwhile, Palino was keenly following debates this week on Auckland’s draft alcohol policy, which would limit liquor availability and opening hours. Palino said getting drunks off the streets must be balanced with letting responsible diners have a late-night drink.

Yeah, whatever.  You ran away to another country.  You stopped talking to everyone, and now you are trying to reimage yourself via a compliant Herald pining to have another mayor on speed dial.

Not going to happen.

If Palino and Lusk and Slater thought they could shove the past under a dirty carpet and start a fresh campaign with no baggage they may be mistaken.

Perhaps they know this and they are just trying to dirty up the mayoral campaign and inflict as much damage on everyone else that they can.

A “if we can’t have it we’ll make it as hard as possible for anyone else to get it” sort of thing.

It’s hard to imagine that this is a serious challenge.

Asset sale referendum – Yeah, Nah

The asset sale referendum will run from 22 November to 13 December. I’m going to Yeah/Nah it and vote both yes and no. This will be recorded as a spoiled vote, which I think is appropriate for a futile and expensive exercise in opposition party political posturing.

X   Yes        X  No

I supported National’s right to implement their flagship policy so two years ago I could have voted Yes to this.

Like just about everyone I don’t support selling Solid Energy so I could vote No now. But that vote would be distorted by opposition parties who are claiming it would mean I oppose the asset sales and think they should be stopped. It’s too late to stop most of them.

The referendum asks a question about whether someone supports asset sales or not, not whether they want the programme stopped. So the result of the referendum is irrelevant to the asset sales programme.

I also strongly oppose the principle aim of the referendum – from the start over eighteen months ago it has been used as an extended campaign tool by Greens and Labour. They knew it would be futile in stopping any asset sales. They are using it to sustain a taxpayer funded inter-election political campaign. It’s cynical abuse of the purpose of Citizen Initiated Referenda.

Government legislation has a parliamentary process, this cannot be dictated to by a petition and referendum that takes up to two years to take place. If a CIR was able to halt and overturn Government policies and programmes it would make our Parliament a farce.

The asset sale referendum is a foolish futile farce.

So I will vote Yeah/Nah to register my protest at this misuse and abuse of our democracy.