The most disappointing part of this ridiculous hack/leak omni-shambles is that it is taking attention away from properly critiquing how utterly vacant and disappointing the so called ‘transformative’ Wellbeing Budget really is. Labour would be thankful for this distraction if the distraction wasn’t so huge.
So we now know that the GCSB told Treasury it wasn’t a hack and were so concerned that Treasury were going to describe their incompetence as a hack, that they actually contacted their Minister, Andrew Little, to warn him that Treasury were wrong.
Andrew Little’s direct quote when asked by ZB if he had warned Grant Robertson of this looming crisis has to be read to be believed…
“I’m satisfied that I acted appropriately and in a timely way with all the information I had,”
“I know what I know. Grant Robertson knows what he knows, and actually Grant and I know what we each know.
“I’m quite happy and relaxed about anything I had to do in relation to any of this.”
…what does that mean? Why is the Minister speaking in riddles? “I know what I know. Grant Robertson knows what he knows, and actually Grant and I know what we each know.”
What?
We want to know did you tell Grant that the GCSB believed Treasury were wrong about a hack and were about to make the allegation despite being told it wasn’t a hack?
Why is the Minister being so obtuse in his answer?
What the actual bloody hell happened here? The fact that no Politicians will be asked anything in this whitewash inquiry is starting too smell bad now.
The most disturbing part of all this however is the unbelievable hypocrisy by some on the Left and Right over this entire fiasco.
Pundits on the Right who are the first to denounce any leak or hack of information (usually because it’s painting the Right in a bad light) have suddenly overnight become the patron saints of whistleblowers. So many justifications for why a National staffer typed in over 1000 different google searches and all of them as pure as the virgin snow.
Some on the Left don’t look much better, if it had been Treasury under a National Government who had lied about a hack, we would universally be roaring for heads to roll and an investigation of who knew what when. That some are still so desperate to claim the hack was illegal ignores Treasury incompetence and their manipulation of the truth after the GCSB warned them not to.
The tribalism isn’t new, the hypocrisy isn’t either (we saw it play out with the free speech debate last year between Chelsea Manning & Southern & Moluneux) but what is illuminating is the depth with which the entrenchment has become.
In such an environment, even attempting to debate the merits of the budget almost seem moot.
“I’m satisfied that I acted appropriately and in a timely way with all the information I had,”
“I know what I know. Grant Robertson knows what he knows, and actually Grant and I know what we each know.
“I’m quite happy and relaxed about anything I had to do in relation to any of this.” – The words are straight out of Donald Rumsfeld’s mouth! ffs!
There is no NZ Left, Bomber, and you know it full well.
There is a left when we bloody well say there is.
“Rumsfeld stated: Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know.”
Well y’know the hacks are going to be crucial for Simon Bridges mental game, he really really needed something to boost his ego. Don’t see how Paula Bennett fits in with her crazy eyes but Amy Adams has been putting in work as well over all I’d say Amy Adams is Nationals best performer in the shadow finance roll.
What I think people need to understand is that Labour and Grant Robertson built their budget for the average economy. So that’s the average between benefits and corporate welfare with benefits being low wage welfare and straight wealth transfers from the state to capitalists and just straight honest corporate welfare. So Robertson built his budget so that its average and ideal for right in the middle so that they’re a bit more honest about welfare programs. So for something like benefits you’d be wanting beneficiaries using state run progresses as much as possible instead of spending billions on housing homeless in motels and the like.
Where as The National Party just got there concepts wrong because as soon as they engage in corporate welfare and crony capitalism, the capitalists are already receiving double bonuses and gifts before they even get into building out New Zealand’s productive sectors. So it comes out National budgets come out a little backwards. So when it comes to the GDP and growth, boom. National grows the economy by more than Labour but only just. Then when National get stuck into WINZ they’re just struggling like every other beneficiary so National is just getting its concepts wrong, and it produces poor performances. And in the middle classes they’re just struggling but the top end of town does marginally better than they would under labour but over all national performance lags behind Labour.
So National just get their concepts wrong and it’s to much to one side and if they bring it back slightly the other way they’d be a lot better performance for the average right across the board. So National have to be less generous on tax cuts and give up some of that beneficiary bashing although that would leave Paula Bennett with not much to do be causes that’s all she does is bene bash. And so it takes time to change concepts like these, just takes a lot of time to clean old habits out Y’know and the National Party Leadership just needs to get on top of that and Labour really needs to outperform National in this area.
People really need to start to wake-up that there is no tangible difference between any of the parties in parliament. The only thing they exist to achieve is pitting us against each other, i.e. deliberately sowing divisive legislation – which creates partisan politics, and subsequently ensures they keep their jobs (by automatically being against whatever the other “side” is doing). The “democratic” choice became fake probably within the first term of the system being introduced. Simon and Jacinda high-five each other every time they cross paths, because the system is designed to feel out and create friction, even when none existed previously.
no timestamps on the phone logs or the email trails or something?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAC-5BQnuXI
Please stop saying “hack” as though it had some generally-agreed-upon meaning. Just, please stop. The bullshit has been sprayed across quite wide enough an area already without you adding to it.
Yes, government officials should never have been using the word in the first place, but perhaps we could all stop compounding that error via repeating it?
I think you’ve also missed the key points of this Martyn;
1. Simon acted like a buffoon which unfortunately furthers his decline in popularity.
2. Simon has no idea how the public perceive him. He’s like a very old young person.
3. Labour should want Simon to stay as leader, but his display consolidates the public view that he needs to drop down to senior reserve for the remainder of the season.
3. The public couldn’t give a rats arse about the leak but Jo average would never act like Simon if they found the budget on a Lower Hutt train.
4. Brian in IT at treasury made a mistake -whoopee do. Does he deserve the sack-no. The best way to learn is from your mistakes.
5. Its really a gotcha moment all round but this gotcha thing is really who we are NZ. Who are we NZ? We are that guy who finds a state secret and wants money for it. We are that guy who sets a trap to make someone pay. We have become that guy.
So Simon has a leak in his own caucus, spends thousands trying to find the leaker. Now Simon goes hard out with leaked information trying to discredit the government. There is a name for that. Does Simon have ANY idea why he is disliked?
Ethics, morals, principles and integrity all seriously lacking in our last government all very important and essential qualities for good strong leadership.
I want to know what Little and Robertson knew now, especially if there has been an ethical/political no no.
The only thing to take from what Little says is that he told Robertson. They both know that but neither will come out and say it straight. If I were a journalist I’d be smelling some of Robertsons blood. Seems Little isnt going to stand around being Robertsons fall guy
Comments are closed.