During last night’s TV One debate, Richard Pamatatau, whose decribes himself as “Programme Leader Graduate Diploma Pacific Journalism. Auckland University of Technology” tweeted “Claire Robinson was a private secretary to Jenny Shipley – hmmmm”. This was retweeted many times, and a lot of abuse was subsequently directed at me.
It was felt that the fact that I worked as a Cabinet Minister’s Private Secretary 20 years ago should (a) be a disqualifier for being a political commentator — Trevor Mallard tweeted “if this is true than expect TVNZ resignation”; (b), that it meant that I couldn’t provide objective commentary — Glenn Williams “Wammo” called me a “ boil on the political commentary landscape “and (c) that I must be a National plant. Deborah Mahuta-Coyle tweeted “just take your national party rosette out of your pocket and slap it on your forehead.” Even TV3 reported hearsay as “fact” on their website this morning that I had once been a press secretary for Jenny Shipley.
Claire Robinson's rebuttal of the allegations made against her by two Labour Party candidates and others is detailed, but it's well worth a read, for she completely pulls the rug out from under those who were engaged in publicly slagging her off last night. And at the foot of the list, she comes up with this little gem:
Fact 5: I voted Labour in the 1990 general election, just prior to taking up my role. I voted Labour in the 1993 general election, after I had left the role.
Oh; the irony! Claire Robinson is being accused of being a National Party plant, but was a Labour voter when seconded to Jenny Shipley's office, and was a Labour Party voter in the next election after her secondment.
But the haste with which the rumours of Claire Robinson being a Tory plant spread across the Twittersphere was alarming; it's very quick and easy to make allegations based on hearsay and rumour. We wonder if the likes of Trevor Mallard and Deborah Mahuta-Coyle will be as quick to apologise to Claire Robinson via Twitter, or even better, in person as they were to besmirch her name, or to allege political partisanship.
We doubt that will happen though; which is why some in the blogosphere led by Cameron "Whaleoil" Slater are beginning to refer to Labour as "the nasty party". Here's a chance for two Labour candidates to prove the critics wrong.
14 comments:
Ugh. Seriously. Who cares about this crap?
Aren't there better and more important matters to be worrying about?
New Zealand politics are getting beyond childish.
Jacqueline you should care as these labour nasty party people want to be the government. It appears that they really show their true colours in the social media, maybe in the misguided belief that only their loyal sycophants will read their posts.Heaven help us if they gain power as these attitudes will continue with anyone who disagrees with them. GAM
Quite so Anon; it's also a not-so-subtle message to the public service that when Labour is in office, sycophancy rules; just ask Erin Leigh or Madeleine Setchell to tell you about the consequences of blowing the whistle.
And Jacqui; it is an important matter to be worried about. The public service is supposed to be, by definition, politically neutral. But what Labour did between 1999 and 2008 was bully and cajole the public service, and anyone who dared express a contrary opinion was publicly humiliated, whether they were wrong or right. That's why the Supreme Court recently upheld Erin Leigh's right to sue her former employer.
Jacqueline, the answers to your question I2 was too polite to provide are (in reverse order);
No.
We do and you should because these jokesters are vying to represent you (us) for the next three years.
You are correct, NZ politics is becoming childish, if not worse, but, unfortunately, one group are far ahead in leading the way down - your lot.
Claire Robinson has explained her position and we are reminded of your wise words Inventory that explaining is losing.
Labour is nasty. So are the Mana Party - can you imagine John Key or Bill English protesting outside the Mana or Green launch ?
Having said that Slater is in no position to call anyone else nasty. He takes nasty hypocrisy to stratospheric heights.
Tinman - i don't have a "lot".
I have always voted National in the past. I will not be voting National this time, however i am not a Labour supporter either.
It is sad when a person cannot find one decent, or honest politician or party to vote for.
That is just how things are in this country at the moment though. Isn't it? - like trying to decide who is the least evil out of all the evil scum trying to run our country.
I am beginning to think i won't bother voting at all. Evil is evil. It doesn't really matter.
"...who is the least evil out of all the evil scum trying to run our country."
Is that the real you speaking, Jacqueline?
Sirloin. Agree re slater. The conservative right tories would never protest because they have nothing to protest about except the need to smash their children. They don't like to be seen to rock the boat my dear fellow.
Terry - i might have been overly negative last night when i typed that, due to being in the middle of an argument with my son who knows aboslutely everything about everything - at the age of 20 - therefor had had a gutsful of childish he said, she said behaviour - but yes, that is how i feel about our politicians.
Name one honest, non hypocritical, NZ politician who actually keeps his / her promises and i will go stand on K Road for an hour tonight.
It aint going to happen...and that is why i don't have "a lot".
@ Jacqui; so your son's an EOE too; Expert on Everything. I'm sure they grow out of it eventually.
I am praying that is the case INV2!
I was VERY close to telling the EOE to expertly find somewhere else FREE to live last night! ;)
The conservative right tories would never protest because they have nothing to protest about except the need to smash their children.
Given what that particular debate was about, you have no business calling Slater nasty if you're going to make comments like that.
Scrubone: There was a large section of the Christian right who did want the right to hit their kids. It would be fair to say that the only protests from the right are from Christians who want to impose their un-scientific dogma on the rest of us.
ON the other side the left have a number of flaky beliefs , that lack foundation in reason or science , that they would love to force on the middle.
Post a Comment