Clark/Peters Axis Announces Election Date
Prime Minister Helen Clark has announced that the election will be on 8 November, and is prepared to begin the election campaign today with Winston Peters still a member of her Government.
In her announcement speech, Clark strongly positioned herself to the Left, with many references to looney left-policies like buying back rail, attempts to trap as many people as possible in the welfare net like Working for Families, and falsehoods like the “Gold Card” and the so-called “20 Hours Free” early childhood education policy. (Just paid another $1,300 for my daughter’s early childhood education yesterday - god only knows what it would cost if it wasn’t “free”.)
Most interesting is that Clark is prepared to begin the election campaign with Winston Peters at her side. She must know that his side of the story is entirely without credibility, that the documents presented by Peters to the Select Committee appear likely to be forgeries, and that the Las Vegas story is just about to break.
Her willingness to leap into the abyss with her corrupt, pathological-liar and narcissistic-personality-disorder-sufferer Foreign Minister cannot be explained on the existing publicly-available evidence. It suggests there is something else about the Peters affair, and how it relates to Labour, that we do not know about, that is trapping the Prime Minister into standing next to the crook.
Bill English alluded to this in Parliament yesterday when he asked the Prime Minister: “Can the Prime Minister confirm the now widespread rumours that the reason she will not sack Winston Peters is that he might go feral on her in the same way that Owen Glenn has done, and he knows where the bodies are buried?”
I am struggling to think whatever else could convince such a once-savvy politician as Helen Clark to think she can win an election joined at the hip to Winston Peters?
PS. Of course, The Standard had the story before anyone else. When are they going to drop the fiction that they are in some way “independent” from the Prime Minister’s Office?
Related Posts
Tags: election date, Helen Clark, The Las Vegas Issue, The Standard, Winston Peters
September 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
I guess the wicked witch was too scared to go full term in case she actually melted with the onset of summer.
I can’t help but look at the events over the past few weeks and think Muldoon was correct in suggesting that “Win Peters will be the first Maori PM of New Zealand”. These days Winston seems to be the man dictating terms - when legislation is passed, when urgency is taken, and now, when election dates are called. When Helen gets the call from Phil at his bbq in late November, she might want to reflect on how her judgement went so badly awry.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Geez Mathew ,Deleted phrase, not acceptable, National will need to include you in their Electoral advertising expenses.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I am glad she has found a single word for us to focus our minds during the coming campaign.
That word is trust.
The first use of the word trust that should be on all our minds is prefaced with a nother word. That word is Spencer.
Her willingness to shelter Winston from justice should be the defining issue on Nov 8th.
September 12th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
hi matt,
you ashamed of whaleoil or something..?
jo zinny
Was there a point to that question ? Please stick to the post topic.
Bryan Spondre
Blog Producer
September 12th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
I thought the announcement speech by Clark was frankly too long and the first political part of it was read out without any fire at all. Clark looked like a boxer who deep down knows that this going to be one fight too many.
The parties:
LABOUR: Definitely the underdog who needs National to make mistakes (and lots of them). Clark banging on about trust wasn’t a great start to the campaign. They have a tired looking lot of ministers with too many of them going back to the 1980’s and with the new generation of current MP’s not exactly exuding charisma and ability. Also how well organised are they and it what shape are the party membership and funds in?
NATIONAL: Has to be a hot favourite to be the biggest party in the next Parliament. They do need to demonstrate that they can run a near faultless campaign and stop taking backward steps as they tend to do. Key has the ability to foot it with Clark and needs at least hold his own in the TV debates. The National Party musn’t just rely on tax cuts to win the election which means they must show they are really in tune with middle New Zealand. Another lingering question they must answer is do they have enough good MP’s to fill the essential cabinet portfolio’s? Some senior members like Nick Smith and Maurice Williamson don’t exactly inspire confidence and will Ryall really have the ability to grasp the difficult Health portfolio? A graveyard job if there ever was one. English, Brownlee and Power should be able to make capable ministers.
GREENS: Russel Norman is an untried campaigner who is likely to do anything. Whether or not Fitzsimmons is up to another campaign is debateable. They could do well if they stop being Labour’s lapdog and target some of the soft Labour vote if National keep leading in the polls by a wide margin.
NZ FIRST: Looks shot after the Owen Glenn fiasco. Peters’ credibility is in tatters so the less said about them the better. Unlikely to make the 5%.
MAORI PARTY: Look like having a good election as long as Harawiri doesn’t go off the deep end and shoot his mouth off. Sharples is an astute politician who could make a good minister in the next Government.
UNITED: Dunne will bore us to tears with talk about ‘commensense’ and similiar shit but will probably win his seat. Doesn’t have any beliefs other than what will keep him in a ministerial post.
ACT: Hide has revived his flagging career without some excellent work on the NZFirst issue and has been instrumental in denting Peters. Should get 3-4 seats if they have strong campaign. With Key moving the Nats to the centre they do have room to move on the policy front.
PROGRESSIVE’S: Anderton will win his seat but who really cares?
September 12th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Actually Hooton as it is pointed out on the Standard Stuff had it before them. When is Stuff going to drop the fiction that it is somehow “independent” of the Prime Ministers office?
September 12th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
View latest Peters interview at:-
http://my.wapid.co.nz/kickapps/_Winston-in-trouble-again/video/324714/46670.html?null&d-5624307-p=true
September 12th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Mark my words. This tactic was used to avoid having to sack Peters. The election date has been set for weeks if not months.
By announcing it she will be able to avoid dealing with Peters because of the “imminent election”.
September 12th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
bryan,
point to the question was that the word ‘forgeries’ appeared as a link.. BUT.. no link.. (yes, the others were active)
a little research revealed ‘whaleoil’ as the emanent source of that claim.. further inquiry .. this claim proved a total waste of time.. most misleading .. if not false..
so my question was two-pronged.. as above plus had matt known as this latter aspect, too, and been disobliged to quote as readers otherwise might have been expected do..
September 12th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Matthew - don’t be pathetic. Read our About and actually find out what the people on The Standard are about (rather than relying material from the technically incompetent Whale).
Obviously we’re political activists - we say so in the About. I’ve been an activist for Labour for the decades - but I don’t write many posts. The writers come from almost all left affliations.
Yes the writer have access to people that slip us material - every journo does. Now so do bloggers. But in this case it was just an educated guess. Frankly I’d agree with IrishBill in his post You dicks
The Standard was setup, configured, and resourced by me to provide a access for left-wing writers and commentators. I personally agree with at least half of the stuff put up as posts there. The others I regard as being ‘interesting’ opinion.
The only financial outlay for the site is and has been from my pocket. The posters come from a multiple string friendships and I don’t know who most of them are myself. I rely on the people who added them to the site. To date the results have been quite good.
Now lets look at your affliations - is it true that you’re just a shill for the right wing of the National Party? Gossip is cheap isn’t it (as I hear you do on National radio periodically). Why don’t you do some work and exercise your brain for a change?Lynn, gotta draw the line somewhere.
Bryan Spondre
Blog Producer
September 12th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
jo zinny - the word “forgeries” was always linked to the primary source, which was whaleoil.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Lynn Prentice - whatever. Staffers from the prime minister’s office write for the standard and other material is suggested by the Beehive to other writers, including those who work for Labour affiliated unions. This is no big deal. But it surely does not make the standard “independent”. Why don’t you just disclose the work places of your authors?
September 12th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Lindsay
At the beginning Clark looked like someone had pushed her to declare (reduce herself to a candidate a few weeks early) or she was unhappy at declaring after reading a call to do so in that morning’s Dominion Post.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
The Standard would be as independent of Labour as Kiwiblog is from National. David Farrar would say what he posted was his own opinon and the same applies for those who publish at the Standard.
September 13th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
But I post openly under my own name. People can judge from my extensive disclosure statement how coloured I am from my associations.
September 15th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
What did I tell you? Helen announces she’s not going to fire Peters.