Wednesday, May 2, 2012

By accident or design?

3News reports on a case of mistaken identity:

Trevor Mallard is taking responsibility for the Labour Party leader's blunder in Parliament yesterday.
David Shearer went for the Prime Minister's jugular when he brought up a past quote, in an attempt to prove John Key's hypocrisy for not sacking John Banks.
But he missed by a mile - it turns out the quote was from National-leaning blogger David Farrar.
Mr Key had never uttered the words and David Shearer had to return to the House last night to apologise.
Mr Mallard this morning told RadioLIVE he was to blame.
"It's a terrible mistake and I take responsibility for that," says Mr Mallard, who still managed to get in a dig at the Prime Minister.
"We confused David Farrar with the Prime Minister – they both say the same things all the time, and the quotes got shuffled.
"I looked at the questions beforehand, I should have seen the difference."

Oh dear; whilst on the face of it this is a simple case of Trevor Mallard confusing John Key for David Farrar (or vice versa), we're not so sure. That David Shearer had to return to the House last night to correct the statement he made in the House is embarrassing in the extreme for the Labour leader who is struggling to make his mark in the role. It was a gaffe he could have done without.

If anything, it shows the folly of relying on anything that Trevor Mallard says or does. His track record of accuracy isn't great; at last report, he was still to substantiate the allegations he made about an "American bag-man" way back in 2005. That was shortly before he famously insulted a religious group, describing them as "chinless scarf-wearers". He admitted in an online session prior to the 2011 election that this was "not my finest moment".

Seriously though; can't you tell the difference between these two?



So we have to ask the question; given all the speculation that Trevor Mallard is Labour's king-maker, was this a simple error which rebounded on the leader, or is there are more Machiavellian explanation?

10 comments:

Lesley said...

Trevor needs to go back to his day job. What is it now?

Anonymous said...

The moral of the story is do your own research before you mouth off.... These guys should do their job and stop mud raking - The game of Politics. Trev needs to put on his gum boots or get out of the bog.

Murray said...

Yes it wasn't prime minister Key, it was prime minister Farrar.

Labours boogyman.

Keeping Stock said...

Quite right Anon; and after all, Trevor Mallard has been an MP since 1984, with a 3-year hiatus between 1990 and 1993. It's not as though he's a first-termer, and that's why the story's worth a second glance.

Judge Holden said...

Quick, quick look over here! Don't look at John Banks! He's boring!

Do you think he's corrupt and shifty, or weird, corrupt and shifty?

Anonymous said...

@Judge Holden. All of the above.
He is also a full scale nincompoop of the highest order and is an embarrassing holier than thou hypocritical christian conservative BS wowser who has his own interests at heart only, not those to whom he preaches.
'Wide Boys' anybody? Banks is a Wide Boy extraordinaire.

Keeping Stock said...

@ Judge Holden; there have been at least five posts on John Banks since Saturday, including a caption contest one which invites people to lampoon him. That's hardly "Quick, quick look over here".

Anonymous said...

That was then This is now.
"Quick! Look!

hats said...

you are right

NFL said...

i will back your blog!
good job