Red Alert

Posts Tagged ‘rodney hide’

Hide’s unconstitutional bill waste of space

Posted by on July 11th, 2011

“If Parliament wishes to ban all dangerous weapons, it has to buy them.”

It may sound quirky but that’s what Rodney Hide’s Regulatory Standards Bill is all about.

In that aspect, the point of the principle in the bill, as argued by Senior Lecturer Richard Ekins from the Auckland University faculty of law, is to make it very expensive to limit how property owners may act, “for any property owner who suffers loss from regulatory change is entitled to be made whole”. But some legislation does limit liberty.

Senior Lecturer Richard Ekins pointed out in his witty article that the principle conflates “takings” and “impairment”.

He cited an Act titled the Bakeshop Act 1896 (NY) which prohibits any person from employing another to work in a bakery for more than 10 hours per-day, or 60 hours per-week. This act would depart from parts of Rodney’s bill for it restricts the freedom of contract between employer and employee. It would be up to the courts to consider this rationale, and to decide that the legislation is an unjustifiable limit on liberty.

I believe there are five main reasons why this bill is unworkable.

1: The bill changes the role of Parliament and the courts and requires “certification” by Ministers and Chief Executives, which puts CEO’s in a position to politicise themselves

2: The bill would be applied to new laws, but after existing for 10 years it can apply to existing regulation as well. This could empower the courts to reinterpret provisions in other laws to make them consistent with the principles prescribed in this bill, thus changing the original intention of Parliament when the law was enacted

3: Much of the principles are redundant as they are provided for in other legislation

4: The bill will create legal uncertainty and extra compliance costs for public entities, which will face more onerous annual reporting requirements.

5: This bill aims to fix an aggravated problem. The regulatory impact statement states that although New Zealand lacks its own indicators of legislative quality, the best international surveys available suggest that New Zealand does not have fundamental problems with legislative quality when compared with other OECD countries.
(more…)


Rodney Hide private eye

Posted by on June 30th, 2011

Just seen outside my campaign office on Te Atatu Rd: Crown car pulls over, Hon Rodney Hide gets out and takes a picture of my humble campaign office.

One wonders: Does he like the architecture? The tasteful red and white paint job? Is he getting ready for a new career as a private detective after November? Is this a suitable use of Parliamentary-funded Crown car and driver? If it’s work done as a Minister, will he answer parliamentary questions on it? Can I OIA the photo of my office? I wonder if Tau was miffed that Rodney didn’t snap his office across the road?

Any theories about this strange Ministerial behaviour?


The 2025 Taskforce

Posted by on May 24th, 2011

This year’s Budget offered no plan for the future. Full of cuts with no real gain, it was based on a bunch of optimistic predictions about jobs and growth with very little to back it up. Which makes you wonder why the government have spent over $325,000 on Don Brash’s 2025 taskforce? Clearly none of his recommendations have been adopted.

Following news that the Taskforce was to be scraped, I asked Rodney Hide (the Minister responsible for it) a few questions on how much it had cost, whether he was satisfied with it, and what it had delivered. I asked him whether he was satisfied with the performance of the Chair, to which he gave the underwhelming reply: “Yes, because the Taskforce produced two high quality reports.” Two very expensive door-stops if you ask me.

It also turns out that the decision to discontinue the 2025 Taskforce wasn’t made by the Cabinet but was made after “discussions” between the PM, the Minister of Finance, and Hide. In other words, Hide threw his toys after Brash rolled him and the Taskforce got the chop.

Given that the government have spent $325,000 of taxpayer money to effectively write the ACT Party’s manifesto for this year’s election, perhaps now they are rolling in dosh following the Brash coup, ACT would be happy to pay some of it back??


Taxpayer support for Brash?

Posted by on April 29th, 2011

It wasn’t so much a hostile takeover as a buy-out. Don Brash threatened to shut off the money to ACT unless they made him their Leader, in much the same way he threatened to shut off the money to National unless they did the same eight years ago. So now he’ll be leading ACT from outside Parliament until the election in November, when he supposes he’ll be back in Parliament.

All of this begs the question of how ACT will manage without a Leader in Parliament? Over the road the penguin is jumping up and down about Hone Harawira’s taxpayer-funded travel, but at least Hone is a duly elected MP. Will any taxpayer resources go into supporting Don Brash, the non-MP ACT party Leader? Will he have access to their Research Unit and media team? Will any of ACT’s taxpayer funded promotional material have the Don’s mug on them? Will any of their parliamentary staff be reporting to the party Leader?

I’m sure after the fuss they’ve made about the use of parliamentary resources in the past, the National government will go out of their way to ensure the ACT party don’t inappropriately use theirs…


Advice to Act – please keep Rodney

Posted by on March 12th, 2011

The Herald has turned on Act this weekend. Fran O’Sullivan has given publicity to Hide’s “little corporal” title. She made it very clear that decisions are being made as to whether an alternative right wing support party is to be launched.

The feedback I’ve had from mates in Epsom is that they are getting pretty sick of being asked to vote for a yellow jacketed idiot now better known for his rorts and hypocrisy than any policy. They tell me that many of the their friends will revolt if Key tries to instruct them again.

John Armstrong puts it pretty well :-

The Prime Minister is understood to have told party workers that his need for coalition partners overrides any local desires for Epsom to return a National MP to Parliament.

However, National’s soundings in the electorate are understood to show Hide is running well behind an as yet unselected National candidate, in part because he’s extremely unpopular with female voters.

The ideal in the short term for Labour would be for Hide to lose and Act to get just under 5%. The danger in the medium term is that a real low tax party which I think could get 10% would emerge.

So I suppose keeping Rodney in place is as good as it gets for Labour.


Fiasco

Posted by on February 17th, 2011

Fiasco

Maori representation on the Auckland Council has all the elements of a fiasco:  it started out as an ambitious undertaking but has ended in ludicrous and humiliating failure.

Aucklanders have been saddled with an unelected Maori board that has the power to appoint members to Council committees with full voting rights, after the Government rejected a perfectly good option of Maori councillors democratically elected off the Maori roll.  And the poor old Auckland ratepayer is going to be stung with $1.9 million a year, or more, to pay for this, depending on what the High Court decides.

So who is responsible? Not Local Government Minister Rodney Hide who says he opposed the provision but had it forced on him by the National and Maori Parties.  In Question Time yesterday the Prime Minister denied Hide had breached rules on cabinet responsibility because Hide had been speaking in his role as leader of ACT.  Ironically the PM criticised Pita Sharples who called on Hide to resign if he could not accept the Maori board, saying he should not have made those comments under his ministerial letterhead.

So who is responsible if the responsible Minister is not responsible?

The affair is another blow to Hide’s chances of surviving the election. First there was his spectacular fall from grace as the perkbuster and then his role in concealing his law and order spokesperson’s identity theft. Now the self-styled Minister of Ratepayers and one time champion of ‘one law for all’ has presided over a shonky and undemocratic Maori board at some cost to the Auckland ratepayer.

He is desperate to present the Auckland amalgamation as a success in election year but this has well and truly knocked the gloss off it.

It is also a failure of leadership by John Key. First he buckled to Hide’s threat to resign. Then to make good with the Maori Party he inserts a dodgy compromise option into the law without making any public statement.  The responsible Minister (Hide) openly slags the law he himself introduced to Parliament. Another Minister (Sharples) calls on the responsible Minister to resign over it. Key sees no problem with it all. The Auckland ratepayer is left to pick up the tab.


Garrett, Boag feature at Hide fundraiser

Posted by on February 7th, 2011

Don’t often link to Whaleoil. He can write some pretty nasty stuff. Doing it two posts in a row certainly won’t be viewed positively by some colleagues.

But this is too good not to be shared with more reasonable readers.

Whale attended the Hide’s Act fundraiser at the Alan Gibbs farm. Two important political features.

The disgraced former MP Garrett who stole the identity of a dead child has been rehabilitated and is involved in the Act Party again. Maybe fair enough from his perspective because Hide and his friends knew about his previous life before he was selected. And certified him as an appropriate candidate for Act. But they ran away from their mate when his troubles became public.

I wonder whether this will just count as one strike and he will be back on the list again. I suppose it depends on the size of the Sensible Sentencing Trust donation.

But even more interesting is the involvement of Michelle Boag in Act. She has been involved in the National Party since the late 1960s or early 1970s. Involved, generally on the losing side in just about every plot going. McCully and her were (are?) a team straight from Machiavelli. Obviously debate about her role. Maybe they have taken her on to run their campaign in the hope she can do as well for Hide as she did when she ran English’s campaign in 2002 – 22% ?

Possibly she was laundering some of the money from the Waitemata Trust – donated to National but being used to prop up Epsom these days.

Or maybe she is recruiting talent for National and was just there as a spy.

But whatever the reason she was there she certainly demanded and got 5 star treatment.

Update – very reliable source tells me that Boag stayed on for private dinner with the Act inner circle after the fundraiser. Very curious.


Checking for signs of the apocalypse

Posted by on January 22nd, 2011

up-side-down-flying-bird-8629-1242829648-8

I have just been outside to check for any signs of weirdness that might indicate the apocalypse is on us. No sign of birds flying upside down. Water still seems to be flowing down hill. Which makes this morning’s Herald editorial even more of a shock.  It is scary. I agree with every word of it.

The Herald says the Government has  breached a fundamental principle of democracy in allowing non-elected advisers to vote on Auckland Council committees. Exactly.

But wait there is more.  The editorial rightly points out it is the Government’s problem to fix.  Rodney Hide, the great advocate for one person-one vote, brought this legislation to the House. Labour and the Greens voted against it.  The Herald’s solution: Two dedicated Maori seats elected by Auckland residents on the rolls of the Maori parliamentary electorates covering the Super City.  Couldn’t agree more.

Hat tip to The Aucklander who broke the story.


Limiting big money in local govt

Posted by on December 11th, 2010

Campaign donation returns for the Auckland mayoral race were filed yesterday and Auckland Mayor Len Brown is taking a bit of heat here and here for channeling $499,000 in campaign donations through a trust. His unsuccessful opponent John Banks accepted $520,086 in anonymous donations.

I think there should be openness about donations to political campaigns. Local government electoral law needs to be changed so donations are transparent, there are sensible spending limits, and limits on third party campaigns.

The parties have argued over these issues in recent years in relation to central government but I don’t think anyone has worried too much about tightening up the rules for local government. With the creation of the Auckland Council the power and resources at stake make it essential there are rules to limit the influence of big money.

Local Government Minister Rodney Hide says he doesn’t want to see any transparency requirements.

To be fair to John Banks and Len Brown, they have both operated within the law. The National Party has a history of using secret trusts. It was pretty obvious John Banks would rely on big anonymous donors. Len Brown would have been tying one hand behind his own back if he hadn’t been willing to accept anonymous donations too. The rules need to be changed so there is a level playing field.

National should have included transparency for campaign donations when it passed the Auckland super city legislation, as well as a lower spending cap, and limits on third parties. Now would be a good time to review the Local Electoral Act to get this sorted out.


Urgency, local government and the democratic process

Posted by on November 13th, 2010

The Government is planning to push Rodney Hide’s water privatisation bill through its remaining stages under urgency next week. This is not surprising in itself, given how much of this Government’s business has been done under urgency.

But it is irksome that urgency is being used to pass yet another local government bill that takes away democratic rights.

Two out of Rodney Hide’s three Auckland bills were passed under urgency, one without even a select committee process. They corporatised Auckland local government, and radically centralised power, without giving Aucklanders a say.

Then Nick Smith’s sacking of the Canterbury Regional Council and suspension of elections for more than three years.

Now the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill opens the door to privatisation of water supply by allowing 35 year contracts that can include private ownership of water infrastructure. At the same time it repeals many current requirements for Councils to consult the community.

The Nats are sensitive about all this.  Right up until the committee finalised its report National members continued to argue these 35 year contracts that allow private ownership of water infrastructure do not amount to privatisation. They also criticised our use of the word corporatisation in relation to the Bill’s repeal of the requirement to consult the community before shifting services into a council-owned corporate entity.

You can download the committee report here, including the Labour-Green minority view. Make your own mind up.


It wasn’t meant to end this way

Posted by on November 2nd, 2010

John Key and Rodney Hide were like awkward guests at someone else’s party at last night’s inauguration of Mayor Len Brown and the new Auckland Council.  The Town Hall was packed with Len’s mob who had come to hear the ‘it’s our time’ message so it is not surprising Key and Hide were given only a polite reception.  Key delivered a wooden written-by-officials speech suprisingly lacking in heart for such a big occasion.

It wasn’t meant to end this way. John Key had all but endorsed John Banks for mayor. The Nats set out to remake Auckland in their own image.  But Len Brown’s campaign was driven along by deep public unease with Hide’s over-centralised and corporatised super city. In the end Aucklanders gave a thumping mandate to Brown’s inclusive vision, his pledge to protect communities and save our assets, and his promise to build a modern rail network.

This puts Key in an interesting spot. Any public goodwill for having unified Auckland was long ago corroded away by Hide’s handling of the process. The Nats must be furious with Hide for having stuffed their Auckland agenda and lost the mayoralty for Banks. That alone must be reason enough for pulling the plug on Epsom.

Aucklanders’ expectations however have now been raised.  The mayoral election made one thing clear.  If the super city is to mean one thing it has to mean action on public transport. Len Brown has staked his political career on this. He has invoked the memory of Robbie’s Rapid Rail. But he cannot deliver the level of investment needed on his own. Only central government can do it.

The Mayor dropped several references to rail into his inaugural speech. John Key didn’t take up the challenge, and noted that on some things ‘we will disagree’. National-ACT don’t get it. Auckland cannot go on building motorways, and now must invest in rail the equivalent treasure it has sunk into motorways over the past few decades. Steven Joyce is wedded to his Holiday Highway but won’t commit to the central city rail loop.

So what is Key to do:  Embrace a left-leaning mayor and council who ran against his plan for Auckland? Wean his party off its historic dependence  on the roads lobby by cranking up a big investment in rail?  If he doesn’t, and National are seen to be white-anting the popular mandate of the new Mayor for all of Auckland, I predict Aucklanders will make National pay at the polls next year.


Review of Special Education

Posted by on October 20th, 2010

There is something missing from Rodney Hide’s announcement today about the review of Special Education. The details. What has been released is a summary of submissions (which will be interesting reading) and some PR fluff. There is no real indication of how the laudable goals that are mentioned are actually going to be achieved.

There are some good initiatives in this report. The goal itself of more inclusive schools, more support for children coming out of early childhood education, enhanced teacher training, better coordination of resources. But the language is vague, and the absence of a proper report or clear set of recommendations is frustrating at best, and deliberate at worst.

One thing is for sure- there is no sign of any additional resources. There was an attempt to dress up money announced two years ago, but the reality is that for the changes that are proposed (80% of schools to be fully inclusive by 2014) there is serious work to be done. Rodney Hide says its a change of attitude that is needed not more resources. For some schools there may well be some need to alter their approach, but it is not going to make the difference for many students. That will require additional resources.

Because the release today was so light it is impossible to know even what the Minister means by fully inclusive or how it will be measured. Hopefully it means parents being able to make a real choice about sending their child to a local school.

We are now going to have to go through the OIA process to get the Cabinet papers and other documentation that lie behind this announcement to actually see the details. Its a silly waste of time for everyone concerned. But we will keep on at this.


Review of Special Education

Posted by on October 20th, 2010

Since we have discussed the review, and its delayed release, several times on this blog, it is worth noting that it will be released by Rodney Hide at 1pm today. I will write a response later, but watch out for any changes to the way services are structured (eg use of special schools as resource centres) and how funding is organised.


Mark Ford, czar of water and transport

Posted by on October 7th, 2010

When Mark Ford took the job of chairman of the Auckland Transition Agency 16 months ago he said he would seek no further employment with the Super City once the Auckland Council was set up. That promise was made amid concerns about how much power Mr Ford would wield in the ATA role. The Herald reported at the time that some National Cabinet Ministers were understood to have had concerns about his conflicts of interest heading Watercare and the transport authority.

But such official concerns seem to have dissipated. Mr Ford, working closely with Local Government Minister Rodney Hide, has overseen the establishment of the super city, at times directly advising Cabinet. He was responsible for the recruitment of the executives and hand-picked boards who will run the city. And now he himself has landed two of the most powerful roles. He is the new CEO of the new water monopoly. He is also chair of the powerful transport agency which will spend more than half of Aucklanders’ rates.

I think Mr Ford’s competence is unquestioned but I have been critical of the concentration of power in the hands of one unelected official. It is particularly galling such a significant appointment has been made three days out from a new mayor and council taking office. There is a convention in central government that senior public service managers don’t get appointed during an election campaign. Why couldn’t they have waited until the new mayor and council were in place?


Hide has no delegations

Posted by on October 3rd, 2010

As I have posted about a few times before I am pursuing the whereabouts of the review of special education. This is an important document for parents, students and schools. A lot of decisions are on hold in special education awaiting the review. It was by all accounts finished when Rodney Hide dumped Heather Roy as Minister more than a month ago.

Anne Tolley excitedly told us that Rodney was the Minister responsible for the area, and I have lodged written questions to him about the review. It is a bit of surprise then to find that those questions have been transferred by the Office of the Clerk to the Minister of Education on the grounds that Mr Hide still does not have any delegations. Delegations are the formal transfer of responsibility for issues from a lead Minister, in this case Anne Tolley, to an Associate Minister.

There are two possible scenarios here- either incompetence is reigning and the work has not been done to allow Rodney Hide to answer questions or he is trying to hide from answering questions on the review. Whichever it is, this is not an indication of a Minister or a government committed to special education. Its a pity- Heather Roy had actually done a very good job of the process of the review. That good work is being completely undone. Its bad enough Rodney Hide is still a Minister, but worse still that he is mucking around on such an important area.

UPDATE: At 8.15 this morning the questions were transferred back to Rodney Hide. Ah, the power of the blog… Now lets hope we get some answers, because technically they are overdue!


Rodney Hide too distracted to be a Minister

Posted by on September 24th, 2010

As previously noted the last time I asked Rodney Hide where the review of special education was I got a very short shrift.  The review was all but done when Heather Roy was unceremoniously dumped.  Parents, schools and families are anxiously awaiting the outcome.  They appreciated the work Heather Roy had done, but are worried the review seems to have disappeared. It is now a month since Rodney Hide became the Minister responsible for special education and we have not heard a peep from him on the subject.

I am strongly of the view Rodney Hide is not appropriate to be a Minister, and John Key’s continued defence of him is disturbing.  In addition he is clearly far too distracted to actually follow through on the important tasks of being a Minister.  For the good of all those involved in Special Education John Key needs to do the right thing and relieve Rodney Hide of his portfolios.


When ‘speak to the hand’ isn’t good enough

Posted by on September 23rd, 2010

ata_board_rounded_370px

Mark Ford was appointed by Rodney Hide to set up the Auckland super city. The ratepayers of Auckland pay him $540,000 a year.

He was responsible for hiring the agency Momentum to recruit 45 senior executives for the super city. Momentum has close ties with the National Party, employing former National Party President Michelle Boag as a senior executive, and with former Prime Minister Jenny Shipley on its board. Back in February it was revealed Ms Boag was working for John Banks’ mayoral campaign as an unpaid adviser while at the same time recruiting the super city’s chief spin doctor.

Now we find out Ms Boag has been soliciting money and votes for John Banks on Momentum letterhead while the agency is recruiting the super city’s top executives. Mr Ford is asked about it by the Herald and he says “I’m not going there.”

When Mark Ford effectively says “speak to the hand” it is a disturbing sign of what could be in store for Auckland after the local body elections.  After overseeing the establishment of the super city, and advising Cabinet against allowing elected representatives on the boards of CCOs, and overseeing the appointment of the CCO boards, Mr Ford finds himself appointed to chair the powerful new transport agency which will spend more than half of Aucklanders’ rates.

He will be responsible for every transport matter from the smallest pot-hole to the second harbour crossing. And this is how seriously he takes public accountability.

But let’s be clear about this. Mark Ford is only a public servant. Rodney Hide is the Minister. He is responsible. He designed the structures of the Auckland super city which have shifted 75% of civic operations into council owned companies run by hand-picked corporate boards.  The entire lot was signed off every step of the way by John Key’s Cabinet.

It is time for Rodney Hide to tell Aucklanders whether this is the standard of public accountability he expects from the people running the super city.

Update: Rodney Hide washed his hands of responsibility for this matter in Question Time this afternoon, even though the Momentum contact is costing Auckland ratepayers $355,000 to recruit 45 managers for the super city. I’m calling on Hide to show some accountability and tell Mark Ford to bring the ATA’s relationship with Momentum to an end.


Systemic Market Failure?

Posted by on September 22nd, 2010

When this country is in recession and Kiwi families are doing it bloody tough, I cannot bear to stand by and see rich and powerful private interests – whom I will not name at this point and this post is not about SCF – rorting the rules and using their clubs and networks to finesse processes.

It makes Godzone look like “the coldest banana republic in the world”.

For goodness sake interests associated with the Natural Dairy Crafar farms bid (potentially with Nat links) reportedly gave $200,000 to the National Party while the Natural Dairy application was still before the OIO and while National has a ministerial policy review underway. 

National should IMMEDIATELY reject that bid – otherwise what is left to separate this from complete corruption?  Brown envelopes?  Is David Garrett really the only sick or crooked puppy on the Govt benches? 

Was it OK for the OIO-overseeing Minister of Finance to lease his (trust’s) house to the govt for a staggering ministerial rent, or accept hours of free TV for his “Plain English” ads?  Isn’t it time we Kiwis stood up and demanded that the tories do sweat the small stuff like the rest of us?  Isn’t it time John key held SOMEONE to account for SOMETHING rather than smile, wave and make excuses?

The Fendalton and Queen St methods are different from the Crafar one but they are even more dangerous and subversive: very polite circles of influence in the clubs and boardrooms - with massive flows of funds through anonymous trusts that violate the intent of the Electoral Finance Act.  Prestigious law firms and lobbyists.  This is up with the worst sort of influence peddling  I saw in Washington D.C. -  One dollar one vote:  permanent plutocracy unless we fight back.

Beyond political donations, look at the ability of the rich and powerful to get their way while the poor and middle struggle: $2 billion a year of tax avoidance through LAQCs and trusts that National in government has refused to touch.  Half the top 100 welathiest NZers are still not on the top tax rate!

This post is not about SCF, but researching that issue has opened my eyes to the complexity of the company and accounting structures in daily use around the markets.   One prominent international investment broker told me he tells his clients never to invest in NZ other than through an ASIC-regulated (Australian) vehicle, because our market is a wild west.

Well what is the point of getting our savings rate up (and asking hard working families to go without consumtion) if the investment vehicles we need to get the money to our struggling firms are being milked and siphoned by fees and sweet deals to the cronies in the markets?  Why would any sane Kiwi sweat 80 hours a week to build a real business here?  Where will our kids choose to live?

We are talking the need for a full scale root and branch reform.  For example, is the Trustee model not a fiction?  Issuers want tame trustees; trustees want clients.  How do you prevent a race to the bottom?  I will wager now the FMA Bill will not do the job.  We have BIG problems here folks. 

It might have been cool to point the finger at Labour when the champers was flowing during the bubble hype days; but corporate influence peddling is about as attractive as a bucket of sick in the middle of a recession.

There is a real risk of systemic market failure in the NZ financial markets.     They remind me of telecommunications markets in the 1990s – time for a big cleanup.

It is not right and not fair on the silent majority who play by the rules and who are getting absolutely screwed. 

It will only get worse until we have a Govt with the guts to stand up to it.   The smiling millionaire from Bankers Trust is hardly likely to do that!


John Key backing Rodney Hide’s “high standards”

Posted by on September 22nd, 2010

The National Party, aided by Peter Dunne spent all day yesterday trying to stop Labour asking questions about John Key’s support for Rodney Hide and his action in covering up David Garrett’s bizarre identity theft.  Finally today we got to have some answers.

And they were extraordinary. The most extraordinary is at about the 8 minute mark of the video below where John Key says that he thinks Rodney Hide has behaved in his political and personal life to a high standard. Also just after the two minute point we get a lesson from John Key on the apparent difference between ethical standards and judgement. It was a sorry display from the PM.


John Key is just another politician

Posted by on September 18th, 2010

So, as others have noted, our Prime Minister John Key has said he thinks Rodney Hide has handled the David Garrett fiasco well. The Herald reports John Key said Hide “has shown very good judgment” and has his full support.

No-one else believes that, so what is going on?

In my opinion, it shows John Key to be just another politician.

It pains me to use that phrase, because it demeans all politicians and our parliamentary democracy.

Sometimes the mistakes made by MPs in any party reflect so poorly on the institution of parliament and MPs that most New Zealanders think less of us as a group and have less confidence in our democracy. Most MPs feel a degree of shame when this happens.   This week’s events are a case in point. It is not so much what David Garrett did many years ago, as the deception and hypocrisy by ACT since.  The public are right to feel misled and distrustful.

So when John Key says he stands by Rodney Hide and ACT’s handling of this, I feel let down by my Prime Minister. I do expect him to uphold the integrity of Parliament. He has not.

Rodney Hide has lost any shred of the moral authority that a Minister needs to maintain the confidence of a Prime Minister.

Now, I am not calling John Key dishonest or corrupt. But he trades on being different. On not being like other politicians. Yet, he so plainly is. The litany of bad mistakes he has tolerated in order to maintain his hold on power is long enough to make the conclusion that he is no higher being.  I won’t list them all but they include:

  • Allowing Hide to criticise National as being weak, lazy and easy to manipulate
  • Giving Hide more rope when the perk buster was busted on his ministerial perks
  • Letting Hide choose Boscawen (an MP with less than 2 years experience) to take over Roy’s portfolio in his Government when Hide and Key both said she had performed well as a Minister and it was clear what was going down was an internal implosion caused in no small part by Rodney Hide’s bullying and other mistakes
  • Allowing  Bill English to stay on as Deputy PM and Minister of Finance after changing accommodation expense rules to profit himself (or his family trust)
  • Brushing over Phil Heatley’s abuses of his Ministerial privileges

Add to that the latest errors of judgment by Hide and ACT, which have exposed ACT to ridicule and irrefutable allegations of hypocrisy and poor judgment.  John Key’s response, to back Rodney Hide and express confidence in him, shows he is in no special category of politician.

What should the leader of our country have done, you ask?  Well, Phil Goff called it correctly.  John Key should have stripped ACT of all its ministerial warrants. They are scandal ridden and unworthy.

After less than two years into its first, and I hope only,  term John Key’s government is tainted by disrepute.  John Key is the leader of that government. The Prime Minister’s own brand is tarnished.

John Key has stopped walking alongside New Zealanders. They know Key is wrong to support Hide and ACT. He is just another politician.