Steven Joyce has lied.
Will it get brushed under the carpet this time and ignored?
I put in a set of written questions to Steven Joyce in late 2009 about his, and his govt’s intentions, re the structural separation of Telecom regarding the ultrafast broadband scheme. In October 2009 he responded.
The questions and answers are here.
This answer is particularly interesting:
15840 (2009). Clare Curran to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology (23 Oct 2009): What correspondence, if any, has he recieved or sent, listed by correspondent and date, about possible structural separation of Telecom
Hon Steven Joyce (Minister for Communications and Information Technology) replied: I have not received or sent any correspondence about possible structural separation of Telecom.
Yet two months earlier, in August 2009, Joyce received a letter from Telecom CEO Paul Reynolds referring to previous meetings with the Minister between himself and Telecom regarding the UFB, referring to Telecom’s potential involvement in the project, referring to constructive discussions and his “understanding that the government has a preference for Telecom to voluntarily offer to structurally separate”
Dr Reynolds sought a further discussion with Steven Joyce on this issue which he described as “extremely significant for us”.
So in August 2009, well before the tender was announced for the UFB, Telecom was raising structural separation with the government, which it understood was the government’s preference.
Meanwhile, Steven Joyce maintained there were no such discussions. He maintained that pretence for two years, right throughout the legislative changes which will preside over the structural separation. He got his spokesperson yesterday to say that Paul Reynolds was incorrect.
Joyce only released the letter this week after consistent pressure from the Dompost. Good on them.
But for how long will he get away with lying? Why are there not more questions being asked?
What else did he cover up? What other discussions were there with telecom about structural separation and how it would work?
The UFB tender process is a fraud and should be investigated.
Lying is not okay by government ministers.
Or is it?
Lying is not ok. But lying is not breaking the law.
When you mislead the House, it kind of is.
Clare, one major flaw in NZ is that we do not have anyone whose role it is to ensure politicians do not lie, or that parliamentary processes are upheld. You only have to watch qt to understand lying, or partial-truths is a major issue.
That’s why, unfortunately, politicians do not rank highly on the most-trusted progression status.
Perhaps government should do something about this? Haha… yeah right.
…profession… Damn it!
The folks at transportblog.co.nz aren’t too happy either with Joyce and his ability to bend facts regards transport spending.
http://transportblog.co.nz/2011/07/27/busting-an-annoying-transport-myth/
Be good if Labour could slam him on this as well.
Andrew, you say “one major flaw in NZ is that we do not have anyone whose role it is to ensure politicians do not lie, or that parliamentary processes are upheld.”
Isn’t that technically the role of the media and the opposition? But yes they have no real teeth and no statutory power beyond things like the OIA to investigate and lift out the truth. All of this seems to rely on the consent of the house/speaker and the individuals involved to actually work. Can you imagine how a special govt department to follow up on such matters would play in the media, especially since it will inevitably be labelled the Ministry of Truth by the commentators. Not to mention the fact it would be a huge target for political manipulation etc.
To me, whether or not Mr Joyce is lying is not the major issue here. Politicians, of whatever flavour, will lie when they can justify the need to lie.
No, the issue for me is to what extent has Mr Joyce manipulated the UFB and RBI process to meet his own agenda.
It seems to me that much time and money has been wasted in setting up a process that was always going to go to Telecom. I suspect that the cost of the UFB process – the direct costs of bidders and the income forgone from lost economic development opportunities, would be greater than the capital savings the government has made by giving the bulk of the UFB (and the RBI) contracts to Telecom.
On any rational basis, Telecom were always the proper party to win the UFB bidding. Their fibre assets in the ground and commitment to invest through to the end of 2011 determined that (which of course is why Telecom cleverly took the pre-emptive step of volunteering a FttNode program following functional separation).
However, there were, and continue to be, non-rational bases for Telecom not winning the UFB. Concerns about Telecom’s anti-competitive behaviours and the impact on ICT innovation amongst them.
In October 2009, Mr Joyce was “neither for nor against structural separation of Telecom”. But at some point, that separation became a requirement for Telecom to be involved in the UFB. Questions I would like to see answered are: when was that point in time (when structural separation became a requirement of the UFB)?; why was that requirement made?; did Mr Joyce verbally instruct the MED to include that requirement in the UFB details (he will likely not have sent or received any written communications, nor discussed this with Telecom or the PM/Ministers in Oct 2009)?
I have not been able to determine when structural separation was put on the table – hope you can Clare.
“Lying is not ok. But lying is not breaking the law.”
Frankly this sums up too many people. When our lawmakers/leaders behave as though the law sets the maximum standard of behaviour not the minimum what hope us?
I suspect this thread would be brimming with comments were it a non Government MP/Minister caught in a lie. Afterall according to many here, you dont speak until you know the answer for sure…
John, Ministers lying about an expensive outlay proposed on behalf of NZers may not be “the major issue” but it matters.
Don’t we cast our vote on what we are told and read?
Sorry, there is no need for politicians to Lie.
A simple id prefer not to answer that quetion or similar will suffice.
If politicians lie it shows that they are trying to hide something they would rather not have the public know.
We cant rely on the Media as they have commercial interest behind there questions (such as has happened to the Murdoch Empire.
The opposition rely on the media in NZ and dont have the money to get the message across if the Media have other agenda.
Thank god for Blog sites like this and others(even right wing blogs) and face book etc, the lies eventually come out and get known by everyone.
But Phil Goff is allowed to forget paperwork that has passed his desk?
Steven Joyce = Hollow Man = dirty tricks = not to be trusted.
It is very disappointing to see one of our country’s leaders, an MP, using words like liar, lies, lying on this forum. You are not allowed to use this term in the House, so should still have some respect for parliamentary usage when posting here, at least maintaining the impression of some decorum befitting your position.You lose respect by commenting in this manner, and your argument loses strength because of it. The Labour opposition is floundering in the polls, and muckraking like this will do nothing to salvage any respect for the party as a viable government. While you may very well have a valid argument, it would come over better if couched in more reasonable terms.
no slightlyrighty he’s not, he has been taken to task publicly for it and online. I for one don’t think two wrongs make a right… but many from the right who post here seem to. Hence your comment is not about a Minister lying but about the LOO forgetting paperwork (has at least two threads for this topic).
What word/s would you have used RT1 given Joyce and most Ministers don’t answer a question (given to them in advance,in writing) without researching it? Same when Brownlee lied over the Hobbit?
Righty, Phil never got the paper work.
I don’t use the word lying easily. But tell me when you are asked whether you have received correspondence on a specific issue and you say no, then it is revealed tha you received correspondence on that issue, well before you were asked, what conclusion do you draw?
If he’s lied and you feel that strongly then report him to the privileges committee, better still make full use of question time next week.
I am sorry Clare, but I will not return to the Labour fold whilst labour MPs remain so firmly and stridently entrenched in the politics of ‘angst’ and the gutter. No lying is not OK, but after so many years of this and far worse from the Clarke government, your protestations smack of hypocriscy.
Why can’t Labour take a more aspirational perspective? It used to. There are many, many Kiwis who want to see this government held accountable. This requires a strong opposition. Continuing down the same track that Labour has been on for the last 2-3 years is getting no result. No one is listening to the repeated attacks on Key and the government, especially as they have been so inept.
The more that Labour engage in this the more the public perception of a party in complete disarray is reinforced.
Clare that is the same thing that PG did with Tucker. Except reading through your post it’s actually quite hard to work out what your point is. I thought you were a PR person. Why can’t you package your message up into something digestible? It reads like you’re only playing to the beltway, nobody could follow your post and work out what you’re saying. I really don’t think voters are going to change their mind over the structural separation of Telecom. 98% of voters don’t know what that is.
So a letter from Reynolds a few months earlier doesn’t mean Joyce l1ed. That may be Reynolds recollection of a meeting. Have you got Reynolds on record saying Joyce l1ed about it?
@Richard the First, Dave and John Allen
The Authoritarians
Excusing the misbehaviour of their leaders is exactly what RWNJs tend to do and that is what all three of you have just done – Excuse the appalling behaviour of your leaders.
This and, of course, make a huge stink about it in the MSM (although that’s unlikely to get much traction as the MSM is there to protect National in line with the above Authoritarians.)
Tracey said: “but about the LOO forgetting paperwork”
Not a good idea to forget the paperwork for the Loo.
I have made no comment whatever on the status of Steven Joyce’s position. Rather I take exception to the language used in the original post. Often a stronger argument can be made by avoiding vituperation, and letting the argument stand or fall on its own feet. Clare’s argument would have been better if it concentrated on statement of the facts, letting readers draw their own conclusions.
what do think the evidence shows Richard I ? or do you wish to pontificate instead .
That’s your choice RT! which I respect.
Battleheed, I don’t excuse PG’s behaviour or any other politician who falls below a “decent” standard. The National party leader promised a higher standard by his team than he said we had seen from labour. Sadly once in he set the bar at the same level.
Who’s lying now slightlyrighty @1158am?
I heard on a radio nz news item yesterday that the former SIS Director admitted that he hadn’t provided Goff with the paperwork. He gave it to Key, but not Goff which is a pretty poor show. And you know something, it wouldn’t surprise me if Key knew all along that Goff never received it but pretended he didn’t know. Can’t prove it of course but previous form is often a good indicater of a person’s current behaviour.
Steven Joyce’s past form is not unsimilar to Key’s either.
That sucks Anne
ooops… just noticed. Should be indicator. That’s a bad one.(scowl)
Sigh, Anne didn’t see me.
He clearly lied. But he knows that one politican lying to another politican is not a big deal to the public and not news to his mates in the media. But how come a Tory minister lying over a big money commercial deal is kind of expected, and not news, yet a Labour MP lying over watching a video is front page news and grounds for sacking?
I would say that telling others that they can’t call a liar a liar is protecting the liar and that’s exactly what you did.
Are you talking about Shane Jones Jennifer? I don’t think that’s an issue you really want to bring up.
That’s okay Anne everybody makes mistakes.
But how come a Tory minister lying over a big money commercial deal is kind of expected, and not news,
Well, when the PM wines and dines you at some considerable expense it’s difficult to turn around and criticise him or his ministers. Best to pretend the lying and cheating isn’t happening. It’s a bit like a reverse of the Murdoch affair where the prime-minister is the one doing the conniving and manipulating…
Latest reports show Joyce saying the letter was ‘overlooked’
Yeah right.
I suppose he spent a big effort preventing its release was a good use of his time
Sigh…. If anything, this is just another case of political exposure…. By the opposing party.
I wonder how good things would be if political parties invested the same effort into coming up with solutions to our problems as they did to slandering and exposing the opposition?
Sigh…. If anything, this is just another case of political exposure…. By the opposing party.
Really Adam. So your saying it’s not the job of the Opposition to expose questionable political behaviour or decisions by the leading government party? It sounds to me like you have a very limited understanding of the role of the opposition in the Westminster system.
And as for policy solutions to our problems… who comes up with the vast bulk of policy ideas? The Labour Party and the Greens. In fact most of the posts on this site are to do with ideas and policy solutions. You point me to a National web site that discusses and shares detailed policy planks and ideas.
Yeah and Bill English was caught out ‘misleading the house’ and what happened ?? Nothing nix nada and what will happen this time, the same thing. They scary thing is if they get back in how much damage will they do in the next 3 years??? Will there be anything left ? Or will NZ be full of those who can’t get work and the low paid and those who exploit them.
Yup, we see it again from Nat supporters, morality is different if you support the ruling party.
joyce lied sounds like the whole tender was a fraud the rest of tenders should sue the government the contract should be re tendered in fair and open process and joyce should resign. but no these are the hollow men.