Archive for the ‘David Benson-Pope’ category

Blog played role in Benson-Pope resignation

August 14, 2007

Andrey Young has a good post about how her blog helped expose the lies of David Benson-Pope. Good for her. There are times when blogs can help change politics (another case in idiot/Savant at no Right Turn on sedition laws) but these cases are few and far between. hopefuly as the blogosphere grows and improves in quality it can become important. On of the wonderfull things about blogs and the internet is that it is difficult to regulate, so thus becomes unregulated free speech. This can only be described as a good thing.

Advertisements

Lying OK in Labour

July 31, 2007

David Farrar has a good post here about how David Benson-Pope lied to Helen Clark about his role in the Setchell sacking, but after Helen Clark found out, she did not sack him until the media found out Benson-Pope was lying. The moral of the story according to Farrar is in Labour “you don’t get sacked for lying. You get sacked for being caught by the media in a lie”. This principle is not new in Labour.┬áThe same moral can apply to stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers money for pledge cards to help win an election.

David Benson Pope sacked

July 30, 2007

David Benson-Pope has been forced to resign from Cabinet. This follows the unravelling of his lies that he knew no details of the sacking of Ms Setchell, and he didn’t express any opinion to anyone about her employment, and was not involved in the phone call from his office to Hugh Logan about Ms. Setchell’s employment, with it being revealed┬áthat at least four phone calls were made, and he expressed an opinion that he would be less “free and frank” in the prescense of Ms. Setchell. I didn’t buy his lies from the very begining, and I personally suspect that he said much more about the topic than him being less likely to be free and frank, but I have no way of proving these things. My fear is that with Benson-Popes head claimed, the matter will end. The reality is that it is perfectly possible (and I suspect) that Ms. Setchell was sacked on Benson-Popes orders, because she would get to know too much about a large taxpayer funded vote Labour government information campaign to promote Labour’s clean and Green credentials next election. I feel that there should be a full investigation into the issue, and the reinstatement of Ms. Setchell into her job. And the reason why Helen Clark forced Benson-Pope to resign was not here disgust at what happened, in fact I wouldn’t be suprised if Clark was involved in the sacking of Ms. Setchell, rather it was because he had become a huge political inconveniance for Labour.

Danger: flying pigs

July 25, 2007

Labour does not believe in public service neutrality. And Helen Clark and David Benson Pope are liars. These should be self evident from the following facts.

Helen Clark claims that David Benson-Pope did not know of the infamous phone call from Steve Hurring, who is the senoir advisor to David Benson-Pope, to Hugh Logan, CEO of the enviromental ministry, asking for Setchell to be sacked. David Benson-Pope also denies knowledge. Colin Espinor does not find this credible, pointing out that Benson-Pope is “known as something of a control freak who keeps his staff on a tight leash”, and that Benson-Pope lied to the pubic in a similar incident when his office (with Benson-Pope lying that he didn’t know) leaked parts of a police report relating to his mistreatment of pupils by him as a teacher at Bayfield High School. Espinor’s opinon is shared by Colin James who says “a person in the ministers office speaks for the minister. The minister is responsible for what that person says or does as a member of the minister’s office whether or not it is at the minister’s specific bidding or with the minister’s knowledge”. I find it easier to believe Espinor and James than Clark and benson-Pope. But there is no proof so lets give them the benefit of the doubt.

Until this, which reveals he was breifed on the issue, and his freudian slip, both of which help reveal Benson-Pope as a liar.

Of course, for the issue of public service neutrality, it doesn’t matter if Benson-Pope is a liar or not, because Helen Clark has publically stated that it was a mistake that Ms Setchell’s job application was processed in the first place. In Clarks eyes, if your partner works for National, you should be disqualified for working for the public service. So much for public service neutrality.

Why is Labour against public service neutrality, and why did they choose to sack Ms Setchell. Andrey Young provides the answer saying “the unspoken question would have had more force; do you relise that your new communications manager will be working closely on some of the campaigns on sustainability and carbon-neutrality we feel certain that the ministery will be planning before the election next year? If Labour had nothing to hide, it would have nothing to worry about”. The reason is so labour can get the public service to acquise in its plans to ensure its re-election by stealing large amounts of taxpayers money for advertising campaigns to inform people of its policies help it get re-elected. It didn’t want Setchell telling her partner, who might tell John Key, what was being planned.