It seems that the career of Labour MP Darren Hughes is over. The only way I can see him surviving politically now is if the police announce that the complaint made against Hughes was a false one.
I would not bet on that occurring - not because I have any insight into what Hughes did on that fateful evening, but because the best realistic scenario for Hughes is for the police to simply announce that there isn't enough evidence to lay charges. In sexual matters, when one party alleges consent was not given, while the other says it was, it can be difficult for the police to proceed unless there is other evidence corroborating the complaint.
So even if Hughes survives the legal processes now underway, it seems likely that the only thing that would save him politically is evidence that the complaint was motivated by ill-will. Absent this, Hughes will be regarded as suspect in the eyes of the public. And questions about Hughes' personal judgement will linger, even if the complaint goes nowhere.
This is a dreadful blow to Labour, and to Phil Goff. Goff knew about this matter for a couple of weeks but did nothing. Goff attacked John Key for keeping mum on the allegations against Richard Worth, so now he must face the consequences of carelessly handling that particular petard.
The affair also blew up just when cracks in National's management of the economy were starting to appear (to be fair, they've been there for a while, but they're becoming more obvious by the day). Now we can expect an intense focus on Phil Goff by a scandal-hungry media bored of policy and economics stories.
We can also possibly expect the return of Judith Tizard to Parliament if Hughes resigns. Maybe that's why Goff kept quiet.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
9 comments:
I welcome comments, but I ask commenters to follow a few simple rules:
1. I delete anonymous comments. Please use either a name or moniker. I am not asking anyone to reveal their secret identity. Just don't call yourself "Anonymous".
2. Please don't abuse or defame others.
3. Moronic or nonsensical comments may be deleted.
4. I don't often exercise the heavy hand of censorship, but I do reserve the right to delete any comment I don't like, for any reason.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The notion that Tizard will return to parliament is a myth gleefully propagated by Farrar, Slater et al which has been mindlessly repeated by the mainstream media.
ReplyDeleteOn election night 2008, Tizard was on Radio NZ after conceding Akl Central and was asked what her what plans for the future were and she was unenthusiastic about returning to political life even if she made it back through the list after the counting of special votes.
Since 2008, she has expressed no desire to return to national politics and is not standing for Labour this year.
I think there's plenty of money to be made on ipredict by shorting MP.TIZARD
Anon, all that may be true, but the perception exists in the media and right wing smear blogs that Tizard is hovering, ready to resume her parliamentary career.
ReplyDeleteRightly or wrongly, Tizard was widely derided for her performances in the last government. Even the perception that she may return will be damaging.
This is such a waste of someone who looked to be very promising.. I feel very sorry for him, imagine the pressure despite not even charged or convicted for any offence.. and your career in Politics looks likely to be destroyed.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet a "prominent" TV Comedian escapes imprisonment for what to me is a disgusting crime and will still continue their career.. Hmm something not quite right here.......
Peter, I'm not sure the prominent comedian gets off more lightly. He will also probably never be able to work in his field again, because too many people know who he is. It's not hard to find out. Plus he's got a conviction and will have a sentence of some kind imposed on him (though the judge has indicated it won't be jail).
ReplyDeleteI also don't feel sorry for Hughes, because I don't know what exactly he's been accused of and whether he's done anything wrong. I will suspend judgment for the time being.
Well thats what I'd have thought as well, but for the last comments from one of his supporters outside court, to the effect that he's a great guy and that he would employ him without any qualms.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don;t know who he is , any clues ?
If you'll forgive a bit of link-whoring, my response to the proposition that not only must Hughes be exonerated by the complainant if he is to survive politically, but that the complainant must also confess malice, is really too long for a comment so I've made it a post:
ReplyDeletehttp://shiftfocus.com.au/blog/2011/03/on-guilt-and-the-finding-thereof/
Rex, your post makes some good arguments. But I'm not saying Hughes should go. Not at all. If he's not convicted of any offence then as far as I'm concerned he's innocent.
ReplyDeleteBut as I commented on your blog, in politics the onus is reversed. Hughes' name will probably be tarnished irreparably. People still whisper about what Richard Worth may have done, though no charges were ever laid, Hughes may end up in the same position. It shouldn't be that way, but it's just how politics is. It's a dirty business.
Scott, fair enough, but people whisper about what Worth might have done because Key pushed him out of parliament for some sort of unspeakable act.
ReplyDeleteI understand you're simply noting the reality rather than approving of it, Scott. And as I said, I agree with that assessment of his chances.
ReplyDeleteI just feel we (being those of us who express opinions others note, even if only a handful of others) ought to make clear how damned WRONG that is :-(