This, from Emmerson in the NZ Herald today is pretty sharp:
The euphemisms — ‘economical with the truth’, ‘not forthcoming’, ‘selective’, ‘evasive’, ‘spin’, ‘telling porkies’ — continue to fly (like pigs?) but how long will it be before the media and others in the mainstream start to describe the New Zealand prime minister’s performance by shorter, sharper terms like the cartoon above?
Has John Key ridden his ‘I didn’t lie, I just forgot’ donkey as far as it can go? Time will tell. He and his supporters have no doubt been emboldened by persistently favourable opinion poll ratings and I don’t predict a swift turnaround, if any.
But truthfulness is valued in NZ society, or should be, and Mr Key’s well-worn counter-factual defence of ‘There’s a range of views, but I don’t see it that way’ or his use of blatant political top spin (e.g. claiming to be ‘vindicated’ by an Auditor-General’s report that does no such thing) will, eventually, fail him — or fail to convince. Unless he gets bored in the meantime, I guess.
Here’s a partial list of the NZ Prime Minister’s ‘memory lapses’ courtesy of the NZ Herald’s Adam Bennett:
Unfolding picture
What role did he have in Mr Fletcher’s appointment?
Last week
“Only that the State Services Commissioner came to me with a recommendation.”
Yesterday
“I rang him and said look I think you might be interested, if you are interested in finding out about the job you should go and speak to Maarten Wevers who is the head of DPMC and see if that job is of interest to you.”Key’s memory lapses
* Forgot how many Tranz Rail shares he owned.
* Unsure if and when he was briefed by GCSB on Kim Dotcom.
* Forgot how he voted on drinking age.
* Could not recall whether he was for or against the 1981 Springbok Tour.
* Could not remember who was aboard mystery CIA jet parked at Wellington airport.
* Forgot he phoned future director of GCSB urging him to apply for the job.
Mr Key’s voluble partisan supporters won’t acknowledge it (nor admit it to themselves, probably) but ‘Brand Key’ — the ‘non-politician politician’ — is getting tarnished. In my view that’s not a result of dishonesty or arrogance or even hubris. I think we’re just seeing the outworking of a slippery ‘business ethics’ I-can’t-believe-how-much-the-punters-will-let-us-get-away-with approach to government.
This latest example: Mr Key shoulder-tapping an apparently thinly-qualified school friend — followed by a questionable appointment process — for an important role affecting New Zealanders’ civil liberties appears to be par for the course* for this government. Look at the controversy surrounding Judith Collins’s recent appointments of Robert Kee and Susan Devoy.
That the GCSB boss is the prime minister’s childhood friend is remarkable enough. That Ian Fletcher was appointed in such a manner — he ‘applied’ after a personal phone call from the PM, and Fletcher was the only candidate interviewed — seems dubious. (That, as I read it, is the gist of former GCSB head Bruce Ferguson’s ‘complaint’ having watched his Campbell LIVE interview last night. Worth watching.)
That Mr Key has engaged in progressive denials of fact (even denying the friendship with Ian Fletcher) then cagey admissions, now claiming memory lapses (‘Key forgets tip to friend over spy job’ – Andrea Vance), in an unedifying dance of a thousand veils is more than ‘disturbing’. It’s appalling.
What other skeletons are hiding in the closet?
– P
* How things are done on ‘Planet Key’?
I look forward to question time in parliament next week but i am afraid that most of the questions asked to the pm will be deemed by this dubious speaker politacal questions whether they are or not and no answer required.how is that for democracy in action
Clare Trevett comes close but can’t quite bring herself to call a spade a spade. See her NZ Herald column Teapot timely reminder on dispensing truth
John key needs to change his approach here.
The public will start to question his same strategy to these situations. I am not sure whether calling him a liar is fair.
I just watched the Campbell Live interview with Bruce Fergusson.
Even Bruce states “I am not in full possession of the facts.” So its just his opinion. and makes the whole interview a sham.
Now listening to John Keys statements after the interview certainly satisfied me, if its the truth of course, but from reading and listening to reports which are mostly hearsay and opinion makes Bruce’s assessment really seem like a TV3 and Bruce Fergusson pre conceived Beatup.
Now while you likely to think that’s great Greg/Craig/Shaun/Amy that’s your viewpoint well no its fact right from Bruce and Johns mouth.
As I said before John needs to change his first approach to these situations by not stating he has no memory of events then days later his memory has returned not a good look.
However beneath the surface at the real issue I feel Key is correct Labour/opposition (yes you Peter) then make the leap from this poor approach to questioning to he must be hiding something.
Sorry yet to see anything with substance here.
Craig (et al) …
Let me break it to you gently: I regard the former head of the GCSB Sir Bruce Ferguson’s view of these events as considerably more valuable, insightful and informed than yours as a sock puppet who can’t seem to decide even which name to use, and whose response to views and information that doesn’t suit your prejudices is to cry “Labour Party shill!” repeatedly.
I guess you’ve read this from today’s left wing rag The NZ Herald: PM put mate’s case for job in 2009
Oops.
– P
Alzheimers appears to be galloping across the National and ACT parties like one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse …
Key is a lowlife creep as are most of his lineup … nothing to see here … move along public.
But they will still vote for him … you wait and see …
I don’t like it when commenters, especially those using noms de plumes, engage in personal abuse like you just did with Mr Key, Ivan. It degrades the tone of the website.
Keep it seemly, please.
– P
Well … you did imply he might be a liar … and thanks to that you actually got an acknowledgement of same in the Herald today.
Liar vs Lowlife creep as descriptors … not very much difference in fact one is more direct and less personal opinion tainted …
Seemly according to who …
Seemly according to me, Ivan. (Why even ask? Really!)
What do you mean about the Herald?
Don’t bother Ivan, Peter picks and chooses whether he puts his moral hat on to suit his argument’s
You are 100% correct
Liar which Peter just accused John Key of being and calling him a Lowlife which you imply are all in the same.
Nice to see you two boys demonstrating such warm agreement (about how despicable I am).
Not despicable at all, just pompous.
[…] over the issue of his … incomplete explanations — ‘dance of a thousand veils’ I called it — of his role (and the probity thereof) in appointing a childhood friend to the role of Director […]
[…] See earlier post: John Key is getting a reputation as a liar […]
[…] John Key is getting a reputation as a liar (PM’s ‘unfolding’ disclosures about his involvement in Fletcher appointment to GCSB head.) […]
[…] protect him from fallout from his own varying statements. You may recall, I suggested earlier that Mr Key’s reputation for veracity is suffering. Nicky Hager seems to […]
Good points, Peter.
With Key (or any other politician for that matter), they can get away with a porky or mis-representing the truth a few times. But each time they do it; and the media report it; fragments stick in the public consciousness and subconsciousness.
The “email from a mystery friend” regarding Standard & Poors was perhaps the first indication that Key was not only prepared to lie, but was willing to dig a bigger hole to defend himself. His media conference, in many eyes, condemned him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHJb1DB42rg
Just recently, Key’s comments over Kim Dotcome were equally outrageous,
“The man is a conspiracy theorist. He makes things up.”
If I may post a link to my full deconstruction of his TV3 statements; http://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/2013/07/04/facepalm-3-john-key/
There comes a point though, when the media stop taking Key’s assertions at face value, and the public see him simply as another politician.
Without getting too far into mutual back-slapping territory, Frank, yes, I agree with you that the “Standard & Poor’s said a change of government would mean an increased chance of a credit downgrade” gaffe (and the follow up) was a moment when a spinning plate fell off a stick.
See: http://www.thepaepae.com/hansard-can-be-a-real-bitch-eh-mr-key/19504/
I don’t know if anything can/will dent his popularity though.
John Key is a very good communicator most of the time and it seems *many* people just seem to want to believe the best of him.
Fair enough, I guess. That’s politics.
– P
[…] ethics’ are no substitute for operating based on sincerity and political principle . See: John Key is getting a reputation as a liar. (That perception and issues of ‘truthfulness’ and ‘sincerity’ are a […]