Speculation is rife about the expelling of Brendan Horan from NZ First yesterday by Winston Peters. The shocking move in parliament was preceded by a lot of procedural mumbo jumbo whereby Gerry Brownlee had to propose a way for Winston to even raise the issue because of the Speakers anal retention to the rules.
The idiot John Banks even jumped in to try and move things along, which made the house look like a complete circus.
Anyway Winston Peters was finally given the chance to speak and succinctly expelled Horan from NZ First. Despite this, many people have started to question the decision, not so much to come to Horans aid, but to damage Winston Peters' credibility.
Today, David Farrar at Kiwibog wrote:
Farrar is copying a post by Scott Yorke, who yesterday wrote:
Clearly it's incorrect to say no opportunity was given to Horan to present his side of the story prior to the decision to expel him from the NZF caucus. Peters gave Horan every opportunity to provide information to him to base a decision on. Peters and the NZ First caucus also had to make a decision about this, and it turned out that the information provided was compelling enough for Horan to be expelled.
Scott York and others assuming NZ First never had a meeting to discuss Horans future involvement in the party is a bit unwarranted, and clearly Horan is no longer a member of NZ First. Whether he stays on as an independent will largely depend on Horans belief at his innocence, and just how much of that evidence against him is made public.
The bit I'm feeling uneasy about though is the fact that Mana Ormsby, Horans half brother, made this a public matter in the first place. Their mothers request was that money be recovered from Horan making this a family matter... Clearly there's a level of vindictiveness in making a private matter public that therefore makes me question the motive behind ruining Horans political career, which I might add has nothing to do with recovering any supposed money Horan stole from his mother.
We cannot know at this stage if the accusations are true or false, and such family squabbles can go on for years and years. Despite the question of Horans innocence or guilt being largely unanswered for the public, Winston had no choice but to limit the damage a scandal like this would do to his party, being that his supporters would naturally identify with Horans accusers.
Personally I think Winston Peters did have compelling evidence to base his decision upon, and despite Horan being a likable guy, he fits well into the usual mode of a conman who's unable to accept he's done anything wrong. Even if he doesn't accept he has done anything wrong, his continued presence in the house of representatives is questionable... Mainly because there is always a presumption of guilt with politicians.
Either way, this scandal has been detrimental to NZ First. It has also been detrimental to the publics perception of politicians and clearly a better system of vetting potential MP's is required.
The idiot John Banks even jumped in to try and move things along, which made the house look like a complete circus.
Anyway Winston Peters was finally given the chance to speak and succinctly expelled Horan from NZ First. Despite this, many people have started to question the decision, not so much to come to Horans aid, but to damage Winston Peters' credibility.
Today, David Farrar at Kiwibog wrote:
But Horan is still a member of the party. Now you can argue that these rues don’t stop the caucus suspending an MP, or even expelling him. But it seems the caucus has not made any such decision on Horan. It is unclear if they have even had a discussion on the issue.
Farrar is copying a post by Scott Yorke, who yesterday wrote:
I’m going to assume there hasn’t been a hearing by NZ First’s board, because I’m sure someone would have mentioned a hearing if one had taken place, and I’m also going to assume from Horan’s defiant statements that he hasn’t resigned as a member. And while his future plans are unclear, he hasn’t to my knowledge joined another party.
Clearly it's incorrect to say no opportunity was given to Horan to present his side of the story prior to the decision to expel him from the NZF caucus. Peters gave Horan every opportunity to provide information to him to base a decision on. Peters and the NZ First caucus also had to make a decision about this, and it turned out that the information provided was compelling enough for Horan to be expelled.
Scott York and others assuming NZ First never had a meeting to discuss Horans future involvement in the party is a bit unwarranted, and clearly Horan is no longer a member of NZ First. Whether he stays on as an independent will largely depend on Horans belief at his innocence, and just how much of that evidence against him is made public.
The bit I'm feeling uneasy about though is the fact that Mana Ormsby, Horans half brother, made this a public matter in the first place. Their mothers request was that money be recovered from Horan making this a family matter... Clearly there's a level of vindictiveness in making a private matter public that therefore makes me question the motive behind ruining Horans political career, which I might add has nothing to do with recovering any supposed money Horan stole from his mother.
We cannot know at this stage if the accusations are true or false, and such family squabbles can go on for years and years. Despite the question of Horans innocence or guilt being largely unanswered for the public, Winston had no choice but to limit the damage a scandal like this would do to his party, being that his supporters would naturally identify with Horans accusers.
Personally I think Winston Peters did have compelling evidence to base his decision upon, and despite Horan being a likable guy, he fits well into the usual mode of a conman who's unable to accept he's done anything wrong. Even if he doesn't accept he has done anything wrong, his continued presence in the house of representatives is questionable... Mainly because there is always a presumption of guilt with politicians.
Either way, this scandal has been detrimental to NZ First. It has also been detrimental to the publics perception of politicians and clearly a better system of vetting potential MP's is required.
