About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

August 5, 2011 8:38am by David Farrar

Statement from Hon Phil Goff

Statement from Hon Phil Goff:

I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment64

NZ Politics
Phil Goff

Comments (64)

Login to comment or vote

Scott Chris

Give that man a cigar 😉
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 8:41am
Rick Rowling

That man did not show me his briefs.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 8:48am
Bed Rater

Level of humour is off the scale round these parts, as per usual.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 8:52am
hmmokrightitis

Oh god, Ive just had breakfast, can I please not have that image in my head?

PS. As was noted yesterday, if I had to chose whom was the credible party in all this, it wouldnt be Goofy, despite his vehement protestations. Explaining = failing. Epic fail Goofy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:01am
Monty

Put simply Phil Goff no longer has any credibility on this issue. He is unable to convince anyone except the remaining die hard 6% supporters that he is telling the truth.

I would now believe his mate Winston Peters Before I would believe the desperate Goff.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:03am
smttc

Can someone please remind me what political point Phil Goff was trying to score when he initially denied receiving a briefing from Warren Tucker.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:08am
Elaycee

Maybe it was also him who said:

“I did not tell the Police that the young man in question prefers to do his exercise ball workout, in the buff.”

😛
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:18am
mikenmild

This has actually gone beyond a joke. I can’t see how this affair can be left as it is with:

1. Mr Goff questioning the intergrity of Dr Tucker
2. Mr Goff feeling that Dr Tucker has brought Goff’s integrity into question.

One of these gentlemen is, as best, mistaken or, at worst, being deceitful.

This needs to be resolved. Barring either person changing their story, or either one resigning, only the Prime Minister is in a position to provide any resolution. For the sake of the reputation of Dr Tucker, I would suggest that there needs to be an immediate inquiry authorised by the Prime Minister. As the actions of the Leader of the Opposition can’t really be the subject of an inquiry, such an inquiry must examine Dr Tucker’s actions.

We cannot afford to have the reputation of someone who occupies such a sensitive position brought into disrepute. Given the statutory obligation of the SIS Director to provide briefings to the Leader of the Oppostion, it’s hard to see how the status quo can be maintained.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:18am
George Patton

Isn’t it amusing that Phil Goff, who leapt into this debate with gusto to accuse John Key of hiding something about the Israeli backpackers is in fact that one who has been left with questions hanging over him regarding his integrity?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:24am
joe bloggs

Mikenmild – meet cracked record.

It’s quite evident where the lack of credibility lies in this – in the red corner

Your faux concern for Tucker’s reputation does little for your own integrity either…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:25am
smttc

Mike, I’m sure the PM is very happy with the status quo. And Dr Tucker’s job is not in jeopardy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:25am
RightNow

smttc – absolutely spot on.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:49am
williamsheridan

I was bemused to hear Phil Goff on radio this morning trying to move the debate to why Whaleoil got the info and Fairfax didn’t; and trying to suggest that John Key should answer questions on this…… it’s a bit too late now for Phil to try and move the attention….. I suggest he should stop listening to Clare and realise this is all about HIM and HIS integrity……. I suspect that Phil might really believe he is in the right here and it this episode just serves to show that he is a very poor leader.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:52am
mikenmild

I see Goff is maintaining his line this morning. It’s just not supportable to have the Leader of the Opposition slagging off a senior public servant in such a way. Goff now says he’ll have a staff member take notes of future briefings. How bizarre – they are supposed to be confidential briefings on a basis of trust. There can obviously be no relationship of trust between these two genetlemen. One of them must change their story or go – and I doubt that should be Dr Tucker.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:58am
3-coil

Mikenmild – sorry, but you can hardly claim Goff’s non-existant “credibility” is on the line.

Goff has been dribbling unsubstantiated bullshit claims ever since Clark threw him the hospital pass of the leadership. E.g. we’re still waiting for the emails he had viewed (and promised us he would deliver) where Richard Worth supposedly asked the Indian “lady” to purchase some see-through clothing – Goff never fronted….because they didn’t exist! The list of Goff’s cock-ups goes on and on and on – he has zero credibility.

Edit: Goff still has the tricky task of answering either of Whaleoil’s questions posted yesterday. That should clear up who is mistaken here!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 9:58am
lastmanstanding

OK so if Goof is so confident he is telling the truth then let him submit to a lie detector test.
If he wont then we know he is lying.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:09am
Hollyfield

According to Stuff this morning
1. The Dominion Post asked to receive the information urgently, but the SIS said they couldn’t treat the reguest with urgency. The Dominion Post received the information last night.
2. Dr Tucker told Mr Goff he had legal advice that said the information had to be released forthwith.
3. Mr Goff asked Dr Tucker to delay releasing the information a couple of days.

Admittedly I have no idea whether the Dominion Post is part of Fairfax (I’m sure someone here will enlighten me), but all this talk from the left about information being selectively released only to a blogger with a political agenda is rubbish. The Dominion Post also received the information yesterday. Point 3 above is particularly damning for Mr Goff.

I can’t find the exact article now, but at about 8am I copied and pasted the text into another blog, so this is what was on Stuff at 8am today:

Slater was given the documents five working days after he made the request. A day earlier The Dominion Post asked for the papers, but was told the request could not be treated with urgency. The documents were declassified on the same day that Slater made the request.

The following day Mr Goff was contacted by Dr Tucker, who told him he had received legal advice which said the information had to be released “forthwith”.

Mr Goff told Dr Tucker it was unusual to release documents so quickly, and asked for “a couple of days” and for a copy.

AND

The SIS refused to comment last night. The Dominion Post received the reports late yesterday. An accompanying letter from Dr Tucker said: “Your request differs from Mr Slater’s in that you have also requested reports prepared for the prime minister.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:30am
alwyn

Of course Phil “is” confident of his claim that he wasn’t briefed.
If all else fails he can fall back on that other masterpiece of Bill Clinton’s.
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:35am
Adolf Fiinkensein

Ho Ho Ho

And all the while this is going on, the opinion pollsters are asking people if they will vote Labour?

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:35am
nonpartisan

What an embarrassment for Goff. He should have kept his big trap shut in the first place. The irony is delicious.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:44am
Inventory2

No, no , no DPF; as I commented here last night, it’s:

I did not have sexual relations with that briefing paper
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:47am
kiwi in america

I’m picking that Key will probably stay out of this – he’d rather a wounded Goff stay as leader than Labour enjoy a “new kid on the block” bounce from an 11th hour leadership change (a la Moore replacing Palmer thus saving Labour from total oblivion in 1990). Tucker is fine – he’s made his point and his honour is intact because he knows public opinon is on his side and he only has to endure meetings with Goff for a few more months.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:48am
krazykiwi

I’m sure the PM is very happy with the status quo

And that's a problem if a pathetic, a flapping opposition is interpreted as a licence for absolute rule, otherwise disguised as democracy at work.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:50am
nasska

Q. What do you get when you ask Phil Goff to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”?

A. Three different answers.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 10:53am
davidp

Is it possible that Goff might be suffering from mild alzheimers or something similar?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 11:02am
slightlyrighty

lastmanstanding, The lie detector test you speak of takes place on 26 November, and I think Goff will fail it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 11:04am
s.russell

Hollyfield,
Yes, the Dom Post is part of Fairfax along with The Press, the Taranaki Daily News, Waikato Times, Southland Times, Manawatu Standard, Timaru Herald, Nelson Mail and various lesser publications.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 11:16am
williamsheridan

@nasska ..
Q. What do you get when you ask Phil Goff to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”?
A. “I’m sorry, I have never been briefed on the answer to that, in fact, it is wrong to suggest I have ever seen the question”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 11:41am
KevinH

When you are the leader of the opposition you are on a hiding to nothing if you think you can bring the SIS into a public discussion concerning the SIS operational activities.It’s a no brainer and Goff knows that, so the best advice you could give Goff is to stop digging.
Additional to that Goff would know that these meetings are “observed” for security purposes available to the SIS only.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 11:57am
ross

> It’s just not supportable to have the Leader of the Opposition slagging off a senior public servant in such a way…

It isn’t? Not even if the senior public servant is Christine Rankin? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:01pm
ross

> Mr Goff was contacted by Dr Tucker, who told him he had received legal advice which said the information had to be released “forthwith”.

Haha, if you believe that, you’ll believe anything. The information didn’t “have” to be released at all. The SIS could’ve made any number of excuses to withhold the info. Following a complaint to the Ombudsman, maybe the info would’ve seen the light of day in a year’s time.

Tucker sounds like he’s been telling Goff porkies.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:06pm
Hollyfield

Thanks s.russell.
So that confirms that Fairfax did receive the OIA, probably at the same or a similar time as Whaleoil. (Dom Post says they received it “late yesterday”. And Whaleoil’s posts went up late afternoon.) It seems entirely reasonable that Whaleoil could check his email more regularly, plus of course he doesn’t need to have editorial approval so anything he writes so can be published much faster.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:07pm
Adolf Fiinkensein

Hollyfield@ 12.07

I think you’ll find Fairfax asked for much more than did Slater and this would have caused some delay.

Face up to it, Slater was just smarter and quicker off the mark than the whole damned lot of them put together.

If the MSM had any brains at all, they would employ him.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:22pm
ciaron

Yeah, Cameron should angle for Soper’s job 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:41pm
J Mex

Here are three options as to how it could have played out (some more likely than others).

Events version 1.
– Goff said he hadn’t been briefed
– Tucker gave him a polite “out”, by saying he’d only “flicked it past Goff”
– Goff didn’t take the hint (or miscalculated the likelihood that he would be proved wrong) and said he wasn’t briefed.
– Tucker unloaded the documents showing Goff had been briefed.

Events version 2.
– Tucker didn’t brief Goff
– Goff said he hadn’t been briefed
– Tucker tried to disappear the issue by saying he’d only “flicked it past Goff”
– Goff stuck to his story
– Tucker manufactured some fraudulent top secret documents to cover his ass

Events version 3.
– John Key, Crosby Textor and the SIS plotted to smear Phil Goff in an elaborate bear trap

Version 3 is the version currently favoured at “The Standard”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:46pm
Nookin

Ross:
Specifically, what excuses could have been made?
It seems to me that you are suggesting that the fact that SIS could have (but didn’t) fabricate unsustainable excuses which an Ombudsman would dissallow in 12 months is proof that SIS is lying about the legal advice that it had to release the information immediately. Are you a Labour Party strategist by any chance?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:51pm
Pete George

Events version 3.
– John Key, Crosby Textor and the SIS plotted to smear Phil Goff in an elaborate bear trap

That Goff could have easily dealt with by saying “whoops, must have forgotten that one”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:57pm
smttc

It’s version 1 except Tucker didn’t say he flicked it past Goff. Goff said it. The paperwork indicates it was a detailed and lengthy briefing. Goff sought to score a cheap political point against Key thinking the issue of whether he had been briefed or not would not see daylight. This is why his story keeps changing. He knows he cannot now maintain the position that the issue was not raised at all on 14 March. So he seeks to play it down by saying it was just flicked by him as inconsequential and he never saw the actual documents during the meeting.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 12:58pm
slightlyrighty

Version 3 only works if your intended target is a complete dunce…

hang on…….?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:03pm
ross

Nookin,

Haven’t you bothered to read Tucker’s covering letter to Slater? The letter suggests that the info requested would not normally be released. The info did not “have” to be released. I recently asked police for info about the Darren Hughes affair. Police gave me various excuses as to why they couldn’t or wouldn’t release the requested info. If Tucker really did tell Goff that he [Tucker] had to release the info “forthwith”, I suggest that Tucker really is lying about that claim.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:08pm
mikenmild

ross referred to Christine Rankin. Without going into details of that hoo-ha, there is an important difference.

Rankin was the CE of Winz, and to a certain extent was willing to get into political territory. Whether she was wise to appear so partisan and whether it was wise for (Maharey?) to puiblicly attack her are further points.

Tucker is the Director of the SIS. This is a sensitive position. The need for absolute political neutrality in respect of intelligence matters is blindingly obvious and has been written into the legislation. If we are to have a secret service, it needs to be able to:
1. keep secrets
2. maintain political confidence

I don’t see how Goff could have confidence in the Director after this. Goff is in a position where he could become Prime Minister (very unlikely, but it is still a possibility). Even as Leader of the Opposition this state of affairs cannot stand.

Although it may suit the PM politically to leave this as it is, I don’t think that is a very satisfactory result.

And ross, your argument about ‘having’ torelease the information does not stack up. Given what was in the public domain, the Director did indeed have to release what could be released consistent with the security interests that needed to be protected.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:11pm
ross

smttc said “The paperwork indicates it was a detailed and lengthy briefing”

Well, there there 7 items that those present were briefed on, so it could well have been a lengthy briefing. But what exactly was discussed re the Mossad spy issue? We don’t know because no notes were recorded. Further, the issue could have been given cursory attention.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:12pm
burt

lastmanstanding

OK so if Goof is so confident he is telling the truth then let him submit to a lie detector test.
If he wont then we know he is lying.

With all the practice he has had saying ‘the law was confusing’, ‘the ref changed the rules’ and ‘NZ is better under Labour’ – there is every chance he would do just fine on a lie detector no matter what the subject – he’s a professional…..
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:15pm
hmmokrightitis

Rule #1: Find yourself in a hole, stop digging. Goofy hasnt heard this bit of advice obviously.

Just heard the comment from John Key: “Its possible that Mr Goff may have forgotten he was briefed”. Statesmen like, calm, open. Makes Goofy look even more infantile.

Im certain this is a strategy on behalf of Labour, and that at some point in the next week or so all will be revealed, and we will gasp at the audacity, the sheer brilliance of what we think is utter stupidity, and watch with a sharp intake of breath as the polls reverse, JK is caught with his pants down at a cattery, and Goofy becomes our Fearless Leader.

Or not.

For comedic brilliance, this is Mr Bean like. Train wreck TV at its very finest. I would normally expect to pay for entertainment that is this good.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:15pm
ross

> I don’t see how Goff could have confidence in the Director after this.

You’re probably right. But then did Maharey or Michael Wintringham – then head of the SSC – ever have confidence in Rankin? No, but they possibly tried their best to work with her. At the end of her contract, she was replaced. The same would no doubt happen with Tucker if Goff became PM – Goff would work constructively with Tucker but the latter’s contract probably would not be extended.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:16pm
Elaycee

Jesus wept.

This has nothing at all to do with the PM. John Key has no reason to enter any debate – this is all about Goff lying his arse off in order to try and recover what he describes as his ‘integrity’… but Goff has put so many different versions of this event about [and obfuscated at every turn] in an effort to discredit the Director of the SIS that any ‘integrity’ has long since disappeared.

Goff will go – but he will hold on to the poisoned chalice until November.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:18pm
mikenmild

ross

I still cringe when I recall what fools Wintringham and Prebble made of themselve in the Rankin business.

‘if Goff became PM – Goff would work constructively with Tucker but the latter’s contract probably would not be extended’ – soory, I just can’t see it and we shouldn’t be expected to envisage a situtation where a PM obviously has no confidence in the SIS Director.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:20pm
Inventory2

This is now starting to assume similarities to the Colin Moyle affair of the mid-1970’s. It wasn’t the fact that Muldoon alleged that Moyle had been “picked up by the police for homosexual activities” that led to Moyle’s downfall culminating in his resignation from Parliament; it was the different and constantly changes to the version of the events that Moyle gave in the days that followed the initial allegation. As Goff’s story changes, his credibility diminishes.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:34pm
david

Elaycee (867) Says:

August 5th, 2011 at 1:18 pm
“This has nothing at all to do with the PM. John Key has no reason to enter any debate – ….”

Oh but he has. Goff and King (with a supporting cast of unknowns) have consistently been trying unsuccessfully to turn this into an attack on Key. They have accused him of lying and fabricating stories .. it is a bit like it is inserted as a footnote on every page of the talking points.
The real point is that Key has chosen not to “wrestle with the pigs” as the saying goes and that is a wise choice. Just saying that if he needs a reason to wade into Goff, he actually has one.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:38pm
smttc

I really am starting to wonder if in maintaining the proposterous position he has, Goff is counting on the public asking themselves “Why would Goff be prepared to die in a ditch over a small issue such as this? Maybe his version of events is correct.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:40pm
slightlyrighty

david, there is a missive that you could do well to remember.

“Never argue with a fool. He will only drag you down to his level…….and beat you with experience”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:41pm
Rex Widerstrom

lastmanstanding suggests:

OK so if Goof is so confident he is telling the truth then let him submit to a lie detector test.

Lie detectors rely on first establishing baseline of truthful answers against which the lie can be detected. That requires the subject to stop lying for at least a few minutes.

Just sayin’… 😉

I’ve not been following this closely, too much work on. But Goff is saying that in future he’ll have a staffer take notes? SIS or not, I would have thought that a staffer would be present recording every meeting taken with the Leader of the Opposition. It’s just common sense… if you’re involved in the discussion it’s hard to take notes, particularly of your own contribution.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:42pm
mikenmild

david

I think John Key has to get involved here. Tucker can’t defend himself. The PSA has issued a wishy-washy statement saying, in effect, “Play nicely boys”. It shouldn’t just be left hanging.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:44pm
david

slightly – I’m long enough in the tooth to recognise what you say and, if you read carefully was actually saying much the same.

The point I was making is to raise the question of how long should Key put up with the slagging, mudslinging, lying and innuendo that comes down on his head. My feeling would be “until the job is done” but others may disagree which, after all is the fun of a discussion thread.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:45pm
david

Rex, It will be fun if the LOP briefing rules change when “Stormin” Rusell Norman becomes leader of HM opposition.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:50pm
backster

The course of events seems to be…..Fairfacts through their most obscure publication the Southland Times printed a series of vague l but well written allegations that a group of Mossad agents were in some way taking advantage of the Christchurch earthquake to invade the Police Computor system, but fled the country after one of their number was killed in the earthquake he being in possession of several passports.
The following day Fairfacts Flagship Dominion Post built on the issue with front page articles written by the Southland Times Editor in collusion with a Dom Post Staffer, most of that article based on information received from the companies expert of SIS affairs(their quote) Nicky HAGER author of Hollow Men and far left agitator. It was about then that Phil GOFF started demanding action and explanations as to why he was unaware of what had been built up into serious scandal status. John KEY said “Hang on this was storm in a teacup there were perfectly innocent explanations and Goff received the same briefing I did” or words to effect.
GOFF denies, still being under some illusion that some serious espionage was involved.
FAIRFACTS applies for copies of all relevant documents under official information Act. The SIS are aware that Fairfacts have caused all this trouble by printing exaggerated calumnies based on information from Hager are certainly going to make sure that nothing is released to them that they can misconstrue or exaggerate.
GOFF can’t remember the briefing because the matter was always a non-event and not worthy of recall. GOFF believes that KEY would sink to the low standard that he did himself when he used confidential eavesdroppings to accuse Don BRASH of the alleged but unproven ‘ Lunchtime comment’ or that KEY would use the Helen CLARK appointed TUCKER to aid him in the lowdown manner that GOFF used the strikingly attractive Labour activist Neelam to kneecap Richard WORTH. Labour are so into underhand tactics that they cannot understand that people of character are above them.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 1:52pm
Nookin

Ross
Indeed, I had read the letter. I also read the OIA (did you?) and noted that Goff had waived the statutory ground of confidentiality of advice. If the ground of objection is waived by the person receiving the advice then there is no good ground to withhold the information. In the absence of cause to withhold the information, it must be released.

I repeat my question, specifically what excuses could have been made? Don’t make them up, go the the Act and tell me by reference to the relevant sections.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 2:12pm
mikenmild

Nookin

Ha Ha. Perhaps ross felt that because some OIA requests are refused and further action through the Ombudsmen take months; this would be the SOP for the SIS. Kudos to the SIS for promptly releasing what information they could ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 2:27pm
Paulus

Phil – How deep is your hole ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 2:31pm
ross

> Tucker can’t defend himself

Of course he can defend himself. He can release the handwritten notes that should’ve been taken and all other relevant info showing that he gave Goff this info. It’s strange that he doesn’t this already.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 2:44pm
ross

> In the absence of cause to withhold the information, it must be released.

That’s for the Office of the Ombudsmen to decide. There are numerous excuses that could’ve been used and I’m sure you know what they are.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 2:47pm
PaulD

@backster 1.52 the course of events seemed to be one of a group of Israeli backpackers killed by earthquake, phone calls by Israeli PM, unwanted search and rescue team asked to butt out, then forensics team allowed to help before NZ Authorities realised that that put them close to Police computer terminal. then some headless running around before the “nothing to see here”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 2:57pm
3-coil

backster (1:52pm) – that’s a very fair and reasonable summary of events!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 5:02pm
Steve

I got it. I finally figured it all out. Phil Goff thinks the SIS briefing was a secret told to him only.
He now still thinks it is a secret and will not confirm or deny that he knows a secret
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
August 5, 2011 6:02pm

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« General Debate 5 August 2011

Q+A 5 August 2011 »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Top Stories

General Debate 21 November 2024
General Debate 22 November 2024
The newest Green MP
Imagine a different scenario
The progressive NZ media
Great progress
What do NZers think of the Mongrel Mob and Black Power
Hot off the Press: Term 3 School Attendance Data
Home detention for meth dealing
A cunning plan?

Recent Posts

Secret lawyers 22 November 2024
Do the KCs believe in democracy 22 November 2024
The newest Green MP 22 November 2024
About time 22 November 2024
The $800,000 lotto draw for researchers 22 November 2024
General Debate 22 November 2024 22 November 2024
A cunning plan? 22 November 2024
Hot off the Press: Term 3 School Attendance Data 21 November 2024
Great progress 21 November 2024
Judge gets it right 21 November 2024
Imagine a different scenario 21 November 2024
The progressive NZ media 21 November 2024

Recent Comments

The newest Green MP
Steve Otto(North Shore)
The newest Green MP
Steve Otto(North Shore)
Do the KCs believe in democracy
Steve Otto(North Shore)
Secret lawyers
Steve Otto(North Shore)
General Debate 22 November 2024
Jack5
Do the KCs believe in democracy
Eastlander
Do the KCs believe in democracy
trout
Do the KCs believe in democracy
Rmal
Do the KCs believe in democracy
Rumblestrip
The newest Green MP
Bloody Dago
Secret lawyers
Rumblestrip
Secret lawyers
cmm
Secret lawyers
AgainstTheFlow
Secret lawyers
cmm
Imagine a different scenario
jptucker

Links

Justice in Brazil
No Right Turn
"Seymour is only doing openly what M?ori nationalists and their Pakeha allies have been doing, quietly for the past 50 years."
Not PC
Daily review 22/11/2024
The Standard
Do the KCs believe in democracy
Utopia
More young offenders will get boot camp, bus drivers will get some protection – and there’s relief for southern farmers
Point of Order
Your Cheatin’ Ballot III: Pennsylvania Right Now
No Minister
Sowell says
Hompaddock
New Zealand government urged to back ICC arrest warrants for Israeli leaders without equivocation
The Daily Blog
The transgender agenda sunk Kamala
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What does “reciprocity” mean in New Zealand laws?
Croaking Cassandra
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d