National manipulate personal circumstances for political gain? No Way!
Really?
National accused of using Karel Sroubek’s estranged wife for political gain
The estranged wife of Czech man Karel Sroubek has become a political football, as the Government accuses the National Party of over-stating threats to her safety and using her for cheap political points.
But National is standing by its claim that she has real safety concerns, and that those fears have been exacerbated by the Government.
This week during Question Time, National’s justice spokesman Mark Mitchell has demanded to know why Immigration NZ officials turned up to her house that was part of a “police safety plan” to “pressure her” into taking part in Immigration NZ’s review of the Sroubek case.
Mitchell, who has a letter from the estranged wife giving him permission to speak for her, said the visit amounted to “bullying behaviour from the state”, and that police should never have told Immigration NZ where she lived because she was in a police safety plan.
Police Minister Stuart Nash even said that police should not divulge that information to anyone in order to protect her safety.
But Nash then sought assurances from police about their behaviour, and said today that police had not divulged any information to Immigration NZ about the address of Sroubek’s estranged wife.
Immigration NZ confirmed that they already knew where she was and police did not provide the information.
“Further, I was advised the address where she lives is not a police safe house, but that police have contacted her several times to verify what assistance she needs or what complaints she wishes to make,” Nash said.
“The story being put about by Mark Mitchell is not correct.”
But during Question Time today and speaking on behalf of the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters said that police had offered protection to her on three occasions – but she had declined.
He said the National Party was chiefly responsible for compromising her safety by referencing her in 23 oral questions and 56 public statements.
“In short, you’ve got someone who – for political purposes, venal political purposes at that – is being used as a trump by Opposition members. If protection and secrecy and privacy are called to this issue, then the National Party has been a major offender.”
…what? National would use personal circumstances and manipulate those for political gain?
Surely a political Party who hid harassment claims and then weaponised them against one of their own and then had a hand in having that person sectioned under the mental health act would have such rigorous ethical standards that they would never manipulate personal circumstances for political gain.
Surely?
National are just aiding and abetting a woman scorned in my opinion. Time they let it go and moved on. I hope my tax dollar isn’t going towards their dead cat throwing.
Mitchell is a NZ Police drop out – he was a dog handler – so expecting any degree of professionalism from him may be a big ask. But he still shouldn’t tell lies about them, or involve a vulnerable lady in public shenanigans.
This looks more like the exploitation of another poor woman by Nat corn-fed clodhoppers than “bullying behavior from the state.”
Mitchell may have made big bucks in the aftermath of the agonising tragedy which Western powers inflicted upon Iraq, but money is no
substitute for having brains and using them, and nor is it license to lie.
It is a shame if Mrs or Mr Sroubeck is in a hard place, but there are many NZ’ers in very hard places, and in harder places, and Mitchell needs to learn to prioritise his issues or to just belt up.
The Nats are looking like flies in their death throes spinning like lies on my old rimu windowsill. Time past.
national are desperate and clutching at straws
In the lead up to the 2008 election John Key used and manipulated a young woman for political purposes and gain. Once her usefulness in his scheming had passed the ‘Used by date’ he discarded her. And there was not a peep out of Mitchell for this manipulation by John Key.
When John Key was sexually harassing a waitress by constantly pulling her ponytail despite her requests to stop Key ignored her requests and as expected there was not a peep out of Mitchell for what Key was doing.
Surely as an ex-cop Mitchell should have spoken to Key and said what he was doing was unacceptable? But no. Was Mitchell frightened of John Key and hence him turning a blind eye to Key’s antics?
Sroubek was in NZ during the past National government and probably conducting some criminal acts back then.
I now wonder as to what influence or control does Srouberk have over the NZ National Party for them to jump to his aid? Can we as law abiding NZers ever expect the NZ National Party to ever jump to our defence and aid? I very much doubt it as our personal experience of National is they only do something to suit themselves and their OWN political gain.
National constantly come across as being opportunistic and resorting to even false comments just to prove a point.