Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Compare and contrast

I guess you can hardly blame Liarbour and its media lapdog for trying to raise the 'trust' issue over John Key and those rail shares.
As if the situation is in the same league as Winston Raymond Peters, MP, 63, of No Fixed Abode.
John Key fessed up within seconds.
We have been spared the site of Key holding up a banner saying 'no.'
We have been spared an inqury.
We have been spared people flying in from overseas.
We have been spared months and months of gossip and speculation.
And what he did seems more an issue of moral judgement, a bit of political stupidity, rather than anything illegal. Even Cullen said it wasn't insider trading.
Thus, we move on to Winston Peters, and how he has been found to have lied all along, that he is guilty of deceit, as noted by Colin Espiner.
Yet, despite being damned by his peers, says Audrey Young, Peters claims the committee and its findings were a political charade.
John Armstrong notes the widespread findings of contempt from Peters, with only the axis MPs backing him, noting the impact on Dear Leader.
She has been made to look foolish for trusting him for so long. Were it anyone but Peters, they would have been removed long ago.
Armstrong calls for Peters to be sacked, but notes Liarbour claims of politicisation of the committee, that it was tainted, claimed Liarbour, but Armstrong says Liarbour is guilty of politicisation as much as anybody else.
Labour's reluctance to upset Peters with rigorous questioning during his appearances in front of the committee was understandable given Labour's dependence on him for the past three years and conceivably for the next three as well. But it is to Labour's eternal shame that it behaved thus.
In the end, the majority verdict is a victory for principle over expediency and for the integrity of the privileges committee.
If it was someone else, Peters would be calling for his or her resignation from Parliament. If he followed the founding principles of his party, he would be considering resigning from Parliament. Don't hold your breath.

Indeed, we need to look at how government standards have fallen in Helengrad, despite Clark's promises way back in 1999 for transparency and higher standards.
Before commenting on the integrity of the smaller parties, David Farrar listed what Dear Leader is now condoning.
Clark condones a Minister who:
1-breaks the rules of the Register of Pecuniary Interests
2-breaks the rules of the Cabinet Manual
3-fails to disclose a $100,000 gift
4-tells multiple lies about it
5-gives false evidence to the Privileges Committee
6-benefits with $100,000 towards his legal fees from a billionaire whom he then lobbies to be made Consul to Monaco
7-has a $40,000 debt paid off by a company/family that benefits greatly from policy decisions he makes as Minister of Racing
8-has filed false donation returns to the Electoral Commission
Can it get any worse?
So while the Standard and its leftist allies will try and chip away at Key's 'honest' John image, contrast a mere stumble over an orchestrated campaign of lying from Peters, coupled with an orchestrated campaign by Liarbour to discredit the priviledges committee. The politicisation shown by the axis MPs contrasting with the honesty of the smaller parties.
And of course she kept quiet of her knowledge for six long months.
So yes, if this election is all about trust, bring it on.
The lies and deceit committed by this Liarbour First government and its poodle, bringing ever lower standards of government incontrast to earlier promises, compared to a silly stumble committed by John Key.

UPDATE: John Key outlines his share dealings and admits where he went wrong. What a contrast to Peters and Clark, notes David Farrar, who still deny any wrongdoing.

No comments: