Act Party's Dead Cat: Paul Henry as Tim Jago Distraction

There's a particular kind of political theatre that New Zealanders have grown wearily accustomed to over the last few years. It goes something like this: a genuinely damaging story breaks, and within hours, sometimes minutes, a shinier, noisier story is wheeled out to bury it.

This week the Act Party gave us another performance in the genre, the political dead cat, a shocking or attention grabbing announcement thrown onto the table specifically to change the subject from a story the party would rather the public did not discuss.

The term is credited to Australian strategist Lynton Crosby, and it has since become shorthand for exactly this kind of manoeuvre in political commentary from Westminster to Wellington: if you're losing an argument or there are damaging headlines, the trick is to throw a dead cat on the table, because everyone will stop talking about the argument or article and start talking about the dead cat, which in this case is Paul Henry.

On 14 July 2026, the NZ Herald reported:

 

Former Act Party Tim Jago president admits fresh historical sex abuse charge

Former Act Party president Tim Jago has admitted to further sexual offending.

The Herald confirmed today Jago has now pleaded guilty to one charge of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection.

He is due to be sentenced in the Auckland District Court on the historical charge on Thursday.

Readers will recall the disgraced Tim Jago spent nearly four years running Act's organisational machinery before a messy resignation in early 2023. At the time, the Act Party's response to being contacted by a complainant's wife was to provide her with an employment lawyer's contact details instead of directing them to Police.

Jago was subsequently convicted by a jury of indecently assaulting two teenage boys he had mentored through a surf lifesaving club in the 1990s. The fresh charge, relating to offending in 1995, was laid following a new police investigation and comes on top of an already grim record that includes a failed appeal and a third complainant who has separately come forward.

On the same morning, RNZ reported:

 

Paul Henry to stand for ACT in this year's election

Speaking later on RNZ's Midday Report, Henry said he imagined he would receive a high list ranking, but was waiting on a decision from the board.

"You'd have to be a fool not to put me right up the top," he quipped.

But asked directly whether he had any leadership aspirations, Henry said he was "absolutely not interested" and had no such discussions with Seymour about his future.

What has had far less attention is how that announcement came together, and how quickly Henry's position on a Crown entity board was unwound to make it possible.

Henry had been sitting on TVNZ's board since June 2025, appointed by then Media Minister Paul Goldsmith. TVNZ is a wholly Crown owned company, and its directors are bound by the standard obligations that apply to Crown entity board members: to identify and disclose interests, to discuss any significant political activity with the chair in advance, and to avoid conflicts of interest, including those arising from political ambition.

Public Service Commission guidance is explicit that board members standing for election should notify their agency early and agree on a management plan, precisely so a transition like this doesn't happen in the space of a single morning.

That isn't what happened here. According to the Herald's Media Insider reporting, Goldsmith said:

"I was told by Mr Seymour just before the announcement"

The TVNZ board chair confirmed he received Henry's resignation at around the same time. In other words, the minister responsible for TVNZ, and the chair of its board, appear to have learned that a sitting director was quitting to stand for a political party only in the hours before it became public.

Henry himself has said he had been discussing the position with Seymour for about a week beforehand. If that timeline is accurate, there was ample opportunity to notify TVNZ's chair and manage the conflict properly, well before a director appointed by the Crown quietly walked out the door on the morning he needed to be standing on a hotel rooftop to help distract from another Act Party damaging headline.

This matters because the whole point of the disclosure and management framework is to stop exactly this kind of last minute scramble, where a Crown entity is presented with a resignation as a fait accompli rather than a managed handover.

The sequence as reported, a week of private conversations with Seymour, followed by a same day resignation announced to the minister moments before a press conference, sits uneasily with the spirit of a framework built on early disclosure and orderly transition.

It also conveniently ensured maximum media impact for Act's candidate announcement, with no advance warning for TVNZ to manage its own position.

None of this erases what Tim Jago did, nor should it. Survivors do not get the luxury of having what happened to them buried beneath a celebrity photo opportunity.

But the Henry resignation raises a separate and legitimate question of governance: did a Crown broadcaster's board get treated as a formality to be dispensed with once its usefulness had passed, and should David Seymour and Paul Henry both be asked, directly, when the chair and minister were actually first told.

It is a fair question for a governing arrangement already labelled by critics as a Coalition of Chaos, one whose junior partner now appears unable to even manage a single board resignation without leaving a Crown entity blindsided on the morning of yet another dead cat press conference.

IPCA McSkimming Report Exposes another Police Cover-Up

In the dim corridors of power, where accountability is meant to be the bedrock of justice, a festering wound has been uncovered. The Independent Police Conduct Authority's (IPCA) 135-page report, released on 11 November 2025 after a protracted battle against suppression orders, lays bare the "significant failings" and "serious misconduct" at the highest echelons of the New Zealand Police.

This is no isolated lapse; it is the latest chapter in a grim saga of institutional protectionism that has shielded predators while revictimising the vulnerable. At its core lies the complainant, known only as Ms Z, whose desperate pleas for justice against a sexual predator and former Deputy Commissioner, Jevon McSkimming, were not just ignored but weaponised against her.

 

On Wednesday, 1 News reported:

Timeline: How the Jevon McSkimming scandal unfolded over nine years

A Facebook post in 2018. A LinkedIn one in 2023. 105 in 2024. Complaints against Jevon McSkimming surfaced for years but were never properly investigated. 1News traces the timeline of how police failed to act on allegations against one of their own, based on an explosive IPCA report.

The establishment's concerted effort to bury this scandal, through delayed investigations, manipulated protocols, and prosecutorial overreach, demands accountability. The fight to unearth the truth was itself a Herculean struggle. Ms Z's allegations, spanning years of emails and social media posts, documented sexual assaults, threats involving intimate recordings, and misuse of police resources to groom a junior employee, were largely ignored by authorities.

Suppression orders gagged the media and the IPCA, ostensibly to safeguard McSkimming's reputation as he vied for Police Commissioner. RNZ, NZME, and the IPCA opposed these in Wellington District Court, arguing public interest trumped the accused's career ambitions. Only on the report's release day did the veil lift, revealing how senior officers sought to narrow the IPCA probe's scope and timeline to spare McSkimming's promotion bid. This was no oversight; it was a deliberate cover-up, echoing the "culture of scepticism" Dame Margaret Bazley decried in her 2007 inquiry into police sexual misconduct.

Ms Z's ordeal perpetrated by a repeat offender exemplifies this rot. From 2018, she sent police hundreds of communications, emails to McSkimming's work address, anonymous posts, and 105 hotline reports, alleging rape, blackmail, and exploitation. But rather than probe these serious allegations, police dismissed her as a "fixated threat," charging her under the Harmful Digital Communications Act (HDCA) in May 2024.


On Thursday, The NZ Herald reported:

Jevon McSkimming case: Police defend decision to prosecute Ms Z over alleged abusive emails to the detective who arrested her

Senior police are defending the decision to prosecute the woman at the centre of the Jevon McSkimming scandal for emails she allegedly sent to the detective who arrested her and his wife.

This is despite Police Commissioner Richard Chambers apologising to the woman for how the previous police leadership mishandled her original sex allegations against the former deputy commissioner.

Earlier this week, the Herald revealed that instead of investigating whether the sex claims could be corroborated or not, the anonymous emails were used as evidence to prosecute her for a harassment campaign against McSkimming.

She was arrested and charged under the Harmful Digital Communications Act in May 2024, placed under restrictive bail conditions and silenced by wide-ranging suppression orders.

Crown Law even gave the victim an ultimatum. Discharge without conviction only if she recanted her claims against McSkimming, despite no investigation being undertaken into the alleged crimes at the time. This coercive bargain, tying absolution to false confession, reeks of abuse of process, undermining fair trial rights and natural justice. The charge was withdrawn in September 2025, not from ethical awakening, but because McSkimming balked at testifying.

However, another HDCA case still lingers against Ms Z for sending 10 emails to the detective in charge of her investigation, a vindictive pursuit that Police Commissioner Richard Chambers must halt forthwith. This isn't justice; it is revictimisation, a perversion of the law meant to shield the vulnerable.

Worse, the coverup extended to the Beehive. Police Minister Mark Mitchell's office fielded 36 such emails since December 2023; Prime Minister Christopher Luxon received 10 more in late 2023 and early 2024. Mitchell now claims that then-Commissioner Andrew Coster directed seconded police staff to forward these complaint emails to headquarters, discuss them with no one, including ministers. But is this true?

The IPCA report doesn't explicitly confirm such an instruction. The claim rests on a police memo reviewed by media and Mitchell's own statements. No secondee has publicly corroborated it. No verbatim directive has surfaced. Given the pattern of police secrecy, it may well be accurate, but without independent verification, we must treat the National Minister's claims with scepticism. Regardless, the emails were supposedly not properly escalated, and the No Surprises protocol was once again breached without consequence.

Mitchell claims ignorance until November 2024; Luxon cites "normal" triage. This strains credulity. With explicit subject lines such as "A complaint regarding McSkimming", we are meant to believe that no junior staffer, political advisor, or secondee felt obliged to flag them as important enough to bring to the Ministers attention? The No Surprises doctrine, enshrined in the Cabinet Manual, demands escalation for "matters of significance," especially scandals imperilling public trust. But here we have a government that ignores their directives, particularly when it is politically beneficial.

These emails were clearly not spam; they were screams for help from a systemically silenced young woman who had been abused by a man in a position of power the system was desperately trying to protect. The apparent protocol breach here, as in Mitchell's office, protected McSkimming, at the victim's expense, as well as those who should have acted in her best interests, namely those elected to represent the general public.

This pattern of secrecy is depressingly familiar. Recall the sexual deviant Michael Forbes, Luxon's former press secretary, whose 2024 filming of woman in private places and recording of prostitutes prompted police alerts to executives (including McSkimming) yet there was supposedly no ministerial knowledge until the media reported on details of his serious offending. Ministers feigned ignorance, police helped Forbes clean his devices and dithered on prosecution despite substantial evidence, mirroring the McSkimming inertia. Both cases reek of the old boys club and political insulation, where "no surprises" means keeping things hush hush so there's no inconvenient truths for the top echelon.

Former Police Commissioner Andrew Coster, who failed to disclose McSkimming's affair during his 2023 vetting process was clearly incorrectly appointed. He improperly pressured a rushed "quasi-investigation" to clear promotion paths for McSkimming, and lobbied the IPCA for premature closure of their investigation. Now on leave from the Social Investment Agency, he must be dismissed outright, no cushy payouts for one who subverted justice and the police's integrity. Not to mention his deputy commissioner Tania Kura, who dismissed the claims about McSkimming's impropriety as mere office gossip. 

Deeper still, buried beneath layers of institutional denial and public outrage, lies a profoundly historic plague of police-perpetrated sexual violence that has scarred New Zealand's law enforcement for generations. The infamous Louise Nicholas saga stands as a harrowing centerpiece: in the 1980s, she endured repeated rapes at the hands of serving officers Clint Rickards, Brad Shipton, and Bob Schollum, crimes that were systematically covered up for decades through a web of complicity, intimidation, and fabricated alibis among colleagues. This long-suppressed scandal eventually erupted into the public eye, triggering the damning 2007 Bazley inquiry, which laid bare "systemic flaws" in police handling of complaints and a deeply entrenched "culture of scepticism" that routinely dismissed and discredited victims, prioritizing the protection of officers over justice.

More recently, the 2022 conviction of Whangārei officer Jamie Foster, who was jailed for six years and nine months for raping a vulnerable female colleague in a secluded Northland motel room, serves as a stark reminder of the persistent “bad apples” rotting within the New Zealand Police. The victim, a fellow constable seeking safety after a work event, endured a “gross breach of trust” (as Judge Greg Davis ruled), yet the case exposed institutional failures: delayed suspension, a flawed internal probe, and a defence plea for home detention that echoed past leniency toward officers. Despite IPCA oversight and reform pledges, such abuses continue to fester, underscoring how judicial reluctance and police self-protection still shield predators and silence victims.

After McSkimming was found to have been accessing child and bestiality pornography on his work computers, the NZ Police were forced to conduct a wider investigation, but have been silent on how many other officers have been found to be exploiting vulnerabilities in internal systems to view objectionable material. The discovery of McSkimming's sexual deviancy, which emerged during Operation Jefferson, a probe into Ms Z's allegations of his sexual misconduct, uncovered thousands of pornographic searches on his police-issued iPhone, including 68 images of child sexual exploitation and 812 of adult bestiality material, spanning at least five years.

This led to an internal review of internet access controls, which revealed systemic weaknesses: unmanaged devices, limited monitoring, and the potential for staff to bypass filters and "exploit vulnerabilities to access inappropriate content." Documents from the review, obtained by RNZ, highlighted "urgent need" for policy changes, yet as of November 2025, Police Commissioner Richard Chambers has not disclosed exactly how many other officers the audit has implicated or if it has resulted in further disciplinary actions beyond McSkimming's admission of guilt and resignation. The opacity raises troubling questions about the extent of a wider culture of impunity within the force, where senior leaders' devices go unscrutinised until scandal forces accountability, potentially shielding numerous Officers at the expense of public trust.

Speaking of public trust, we cannot ignore the case of disgraced ex-ACT chair Tim Jago, who evaded charges for 1990s assaults on teen boys until a 2024 conviction, specifically delayed by the courts in 2023 until after the election to avoid political fallout for David Seymour and the ACT Party. Police's initial inaction also suggested political deference over justice. These are not anomalies; they signal entrenched corruption within our justice system, and give rise to a culture of indifference to sexual assault and a blame the victim mentality. Is it any wonder that many victims simply don't come forward?

This type of institutional corruption ensures most sexual assault victims, disproportionately women and Māori, find no justice. Only 9% of sexual assault offences are reported; of those, a mere 31% reach prosecution, with 42% convicting, yielding an under 5% rate for overall imprisonment for sexual assault. In New Zealand, lifetime prevalence of being a rape victim hits 23% for adults, yet systemic bias, doubting "desperate" complainants like Ms Z, still perpetuates impunity, and fosters an increased prevalence of offending.

How many more scandals simmer unseen? The IPCA's call for an Inspector-General is a good first step, but insufficient to clear the deep rot within the force. A widespread investigation and purge is imperative: mandatory reporting, independent probes, and leadership clean-outs to remove the old boys club mentality are clearly required.

Ms Z's bravery, commended by survivors like Louise Nicholas, has forced somewhat of a reckoning. But until the establishment prioritises victims over vested interests within the police and government, trust in our so-called guardians will erode even further.

The Jevon McSkimming Scandal Raises Serious Questions

The recent revelations about former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming have sent shockwaves throughout New Zealand. The discovery of child sexual exploitation and bestiality material allegedly found on his work devices is not just a personal failing but a systemic betrayal of public trust, a betrayal that must not be swept under the carpet. It demands a full inquiry into how McSkimming went undetected and raises serious questions about whether he was part of a wider network of depravity within the New Zealand Police Force.


Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Revealed: Child exploitation and bestiality material allegedly found on former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming's work devices

Child exploitation and bestiality material were allegedly found on former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming's work devices, it can now be revealed.

The revelation comes after a High Court judge dismissed an application to prevent media reporting the nature of the alleged objectionable material.

McSkimming resigned as the country's second most powerful cop in May amid separate investigations by the Independent Police Conduct Authority and police.

His resignation came a week after RNZ approached him, via his lawyer, with allegations about material found on his work devices.

RNZ earlier revealed pornography found on McSkimming's work devices was being investigated as alleged objectionable material.

His lawyer Linda Clark was then granted a rare "superinjunction" by Justice Karen Grau that prohibited reporting that disclosed the nature of the allegedly objectionable material, as well as the existence of the injunction itself.

McSkimming’s ascent to Deputy Commissioner, a position of immense power, was procedurally endorsed by then-Prime Minister Chris Hipkins in 2023, following a Public Service Commission selection process that apparently missed the rot beneath the surface. This isn’t the first time the police vetting system has failed us. Most notably, the 2018 inquiry into the appointment of Wally Haumaha exposed significant flaws in the vetting process, including inadequate scrutiny of candidates’ backgrounds and conflicts of interest. Haumaha’s interference during the 2004 Operation Austin, an investigation into historical rape allegations against police officers Clint Rickards, Brad Shipton, and Bob Schollum, whereby he downplayed their crimes, was unbecoming of an officer of the law.

Haumaha, who worked closely with the serial Police rapists in Rotorua during the 1980s and 1990s, reportedly dismissed victim Louise Nicholas’ allegations as “nonsense,” suggested officers “stick together,” and described Shipton as a “big softie” and Schollum as a “legend” with women, remarks that downplayed the numerous serious sexual assault allegations against his colleges. This type of culture within the Police is likely widespread and clearly hinders accountability, evidently resulting in only 4.2% of all sexual assault victimisations (reported and unreported) being prosecuted, and just 1.2% resulting in convictions. Who is to say that such a sick culture that treats all complainants as liars isn't also in play when victims are making allegations of bestiality or pedophilia against Police officers?

Recommendations from the Haumaha inquiry, intended to tighten oversight, appear to have been ignored or inadequately implemented. How else could someone like McSkimming, allegedly harbouring such grotesque proclivities, slip through the cracks?

The McSkimming case isn't an isolated blemish. New Zealand has seen other high-profile figures caught with objectionable material or involved in sexual offending. Tim Jago, former president of the ACT Party, was convicted of eight counts of indecent assault after being found guilty of sexually abusing two teenage boys in the 1990s whom he knew through an Auckland surf lifesaving club that he was defrauding. He was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison in November 2024. Ron Brierley, a celebrated corporate raider knighted in 1988 and known for his close ties to powerful politicians like former Prime Ministers Robert Muldoon and Jenny Shipley, pleaded guilty in 2021 to possessing over 11,000 images of child sexual abuse after his 2019 arrest in Sydney.

Then there's Anthony "Aussie" Malcolm, a former National Party MP for Eden and Cabinet minister who died in September 2024, who was under police investigation at the time of his death following multiple complaints of historical child sexual abuse, including allegations he sexually assaulted a teenager in 1992. Not to mention former Auckland councillor David Tamihere, (John Tamihere's brother) who was convicted in the 1990s for possessing child abuse material.

More recently, Michael Forbes, deputy chief press secretary to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, resigned in June 2025 after a questionable police investigation revealed he recorded audio of Wellington sex workers without their consent and amassed intrusive photos and videos of women in public and private settings.

These cases underscore a disturbing pattern: sexual predators in positions of power are evading accountability due to vetting systems that appear woefully inadequate.

As well as a large question mark over the organisations that have allowed such despicable individuals to attain positions of power, the decisions these individuals made, whether in policy, governance, or law enforcement, must now be thoroughly re-examined. Were their judgments clouded by their sick depravities? Did their access to sensitive material enable them to undertake further crimes? Did the access they had to various government and police systems allow them to cover-up their crimes or, worse, protect others who share similar criminal interests? The public deserves answers to these very serious questions.

The possibility that McSkimming’s actions were not isolated but part of a broader pedophile network within the police cannot be easily dismissed. Speculation on social media has raised concerns about systemic corruption, with some alleging that the police under former leadership failed to pursue certain offenders due to institutional rot. While these claims largely remain unverified, they fuel public distrust and highlight the need for a thorough investigation into whether McSkimming’s alleged crimes were enabled or concealed by others within the force. The pattern of his offending points to the conclusion that McSkimming has been offending for a long time. So why wasn't he caught earlier?

The police are entrusted to protect our most vulnerable, yet McSkimming’s case suggests a betrayal at the highest levels. A full, independent inquiry is therefore non-negotiable. It must probe not only how McSkimming, and potentially other police officers, evaded detection but also whether the recommendations from the Haumaha inquiry were deliberately sidelined. Why were routine audits of police device usage paused in 2020, as Commissioner Richard Chambers admitted? Why were internal controls so weak that staff could bypass them to access inappropriate content? These are not mere oversights; they point to a culture of negligence that must be dismantled.

Politicians and police must face stricter vetting, with ongoing monitoring to ensure those in power are held to the highest of standards. The Policing Act is clear: a Deputy Commissioner must be a fit and proper person. McSkimming’s alleged actions might mock that standard, but we cannot allow the taint of such depravity to linger or poison the rest of the New Zealand Police force.

A public inquiry, coupled with a review of decisions influenced by those implicated in such scandals, is essential to restore trust. New Zealand must confront the spectre of pedophiles within positions of power head-on, rooting out any networks that may lurk within our institutions. The safety of our children and the integrity of our justice and political systems depend on it.

These Sordid Scandals Should Have Sunk The Government

The stench of cover-ups from the current coalition Government reveals a grim truth: the right-wing establishment is more invested in protecting its own and saving face than upholding justice. The latest revelations about National MP Hamish Campbell’s deep ties to the Two by Twos cult, Chris Luxon’s disgraced press secretary Michael Forbes, and ACT’s attempt to silence a sexual abuse victim to shield their former president Tim Jago expose a pattern of moral decay and institutional complicity. The police, courts, and right-wing media have played their part in sweeping these scandals under the rug, leaving victims voiceless and the public in the dark.

Let’s start with Luxon’s former deputy press secretary, Michael Forbes, who resigned in disgrace after recording sex workers and other women in private spaces without consent. Forbes didn’t just make a weak apology, he admitted to violating women’s safety, capturing audio and photos in compromising settings, including through windows at night.

They confiscated his work phone and yet nobody at his work knew? https://t.co/SK3mlWENxk

— Scott Nickerson (@totaraforest) June 5, 2025

The police investigated in July 2024 but decided it didn’t meet the “criminal prosecution threshold” or that Forbes' victims should be informed. They also supposedly didn't inform the Prime Minister or the relevant Ministers, as they're required to do under the "no surprises" convention. No charges, no accountability, just a shrug from Commissioner Richard Chambers, who’s “open to new information” but won’t revisit the case. Chamber's also blamed his predecessor, Andrew Coster, who also knew nothing. The police then endorsed their own decision to not investigate, even though Michael Forbes had repeatedly broken the law.

Christopher Luxon’s crocodile tears over Michael Forbes’ predatory actions ring hollow. His “shock” and belated vetting review are performative, masking National’s pattern of protecting creeps like Forbes and Sam Uffindell, while victims’ dignity is trampled. Luxon, likely aware of Forbes’ police investigation since July 2024, failed to act until media exposure forced his hand, revealing a culture of negligence and complicity that prioritises political optics over accountability.

Then there's Hamish Campbell, National’s Ilam MP, who’s deeply entrenched in the Two by Twos, a secretive religious sect with a rap sheet of pedophilia convictions. This isn’t some loose association that can be explained away. Campbell’s an elder, hosting Bible study sessions with young children at his Christchurch home while the FBI and NZ Police investigate the cult for systemic child sexual abuse. Over 140 perpetrators have been identified globally, with one New Zealand minister, William Easton, jailed for abusing boys over numerous decades.

#BHN National MP Hamish Campbell says he only knows about child abuse cases in his church from the media, Mike and Abi from Our2x2Story on TikTok disagree as they know the details of allegations in NZ

Full illuminating interview with them 9pm Monday her and on YouTube #nzpol pic.twitter.com/3SCqdK7MOW

— Pat Brittenden (@patbrittenden) April 12, 2025

Campbell’s response? A mealy-mouthed claim of “no personal knowledge” of the abuse and lies about his position in the cult. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, ever the spineless opportunist, downplayed Campbell’s ties, insisting people are “free to practise their faith.” Free to be involved in a sect that is enabling child abuse, more like. The mainstream media, quick to fawn over Luxon’s “moderate” image, barely pressed the issue, letting Campbell’s “private matter” excuse slide without challenge. If this were a left-wing MP with such close ties to a cult that regularly molested children, the mainstream media would hound them out of office.

ACT’s rap sheet is just as vile. Tim Jago is rotting in jail for sexually abusing boys in the 1990s, convicted after a victim bravely came forward. But ACT tried to silence that victim, desperate to protect their party president from accountability and keep things quiet until after the election. This wasn’t a mistake, it was a calculated move to bury the truth and preserve their brand. The courts, while convicting Jago, offered little spotlight on ACT’s interference. Rather they helped to hide the truth until well after the election, arguing that it wasn't appropriate to make the public aware of Tim Jago's crimes just before casting their votes.

The mainstream media’s coverage of Tim Jago’s sexual abuse scandal was a masterclass in deflection, framing his crimes as dusty relics of the 1990s rather than a searing exposé of ACT’s willingness to shield predators for political gain. Outlets like NZ Herald buried the story’s prominence, while others echoed ACT’s “we didn’t know” excuse, ignoring David Seymour’s sluggish response to clear warnings. This selective silence exposes a media complicit in protecting power, sidelining victims, and sanitising the right’s moral failures.

Tim Jago's name suppression was maintained for years because his lawyer argued it would be bad for ACT if his identity came out.

David Seymour knew about the allegations against his child sex predator party president for THREE MONTHS before he stood him down. pic.twitter.com/IJturIPLjg

— Nick (@StrayDogNZ) January 31, 2025

The pattern is clear: Government MPs close ranks, the police drag their feet, the courts soft-pedal, and the mainstream media, beholden to right-wing interests, churns out sanitised narratives that are designed to twist the truth or keep the public entirely in the dark. 

Campbell’s cult connections are “private,” Forbes’ violations are “unfortunate,” and Jago’s crimes are “old news.” This isn’t just incompetence; it’s a system rigged to protect powerful men while victims are left to fend for themselves. The right-wing media’s silence on these issues is deafening, their selective outrage reserved for fake scandals on left-leaning targets. Meanwhile, Luxon’s government dodges accountability, banking on public apathy and short news cycles.

These aren’t isolated incidents…they’re symptoms of a right-wing culture that prioritises power over principle. Campbell, Forbes, and Jago are just the tip of the iceberg, an iceberg that would have normally sunk any government in a properly functioning democracy. The police and courts must stop shielding the connected, and the media needs to do the right thing, grow a spine and start reporting on these issues without bias. Until then, the victims: children, women, and survivors, will continue to pay the price for a system that appears to be rotten to the core.

Cameron Slater's Selective Outrage Over Benjamin Doyle

Cameron Slater, the once-feared Whale Oil blogger now pathetic bedroom hack, is back at it again, flogging a dead horse while the rest of the right-wing propaganda circus has packed up and left town. His latest fixation? Green MP Benjamin Doyle, whose private social media account sparked a brief, baseless frenzy among the right wing conspiracy crowd. But while even the most rabid propagandists have moved on, Slater’s still out there, ranting like a man unhinged, desperate to keep the Doyle story alive. It’s not just pathetic…it’s peak hypocrisy from a man who’s made a career out of selective outrage.

Doyle’s private account raised a few eyebrows until the MP delivered a clear, forthright explanation that shut down the speculation. No scandal, no conspiracy—just a personal account blown out of proportion by the tinfoil-hat brigade. The evidence was flimsier than a paper tissue, and most of Slater’s allies, sensing a dud, quietly dropped it. Even the frothiest commentators, such as Sean Plunket (who had previously defamed Doyle), realised there was no story here. But not Cam. He’s still spinning wild yarns about Doyle’s supposed depravity and claiming there’s a conspiracy within mainstream media not to report, with zero substance to back it up, as if the world didn’t get the memo that this homophobic tale’s deader than dial-up internet.

Now, let’s highlight Slater’s incoherent hypocrisy. One minute he’s slamming the media for ignoring his Doyle hit job, whining that they’re shirking their duty. Yet when it comes to actual scandals involving actual predators, Slater’s as silent as the once vociferous but now discredited right wing propagandist, Michelle Boag. Does anybody even remember her?

Take the Tim Jago convictions and cover up for instance, the former ACT Party president and convicted pedophile, who abused teenage boys in the 1990s through his role at a sports club, was a major scandal that should have sunk David Seymours' career. The ACT Party helped the pedophile to hide and downplay his crimes. Did Slater dedicate a single blog post to exposing Jago’s pedophilia? Not a peep. And what about the Two By Twos cult, a secretive sect with a chilling number of pedophilia cases, including allegations of systemic abuse swept under the rug? National politician Hamish Campbel was caught blatantly lying about his links to the cult. But did Slater make any mention of this? No! Once again it was absolute crickets from Cam. For a self-styled crusader, his blind spots are glaringly politically biased.

This is Slater’s playbook: scream about imagined conspiracies on the left while dodging real horrors on the right that don’t fit his pathetic and childish narrative. He’ll smear a Green MP with baseless gossip but won’t touch stories that might upset his right-wing mates. It’s not just lazy…it’s spineless disinformation from a has-been blogger. The man who is cozying up to other reprobates like Winston Peters is now a complete caricature, a hypocritical fool chasing phantoms while real predators like Jago and cults like the Two By Twos completely escape his radar.

Slater’s Doyle obsession isn’t just a waste of pixels; it’s a sign of his irrelevance…irrelevance Slater amusingly accuses other bloggers of. The mainstream media and right-wing noise machine has moved on, and even his old cronies aren’t buying Slater’s homophobic rubbish! Yet here he is, alone in his echo chamber, recycling tired old tropes about a non-issue. Cam, just take the hint. New Zealand has moved on. Maybe it’s time you did too.

ACT’s “Tough on Crime” Facade Crumbles with Jago’s Appeal

For years and years and years, David Seymour and his posse of deluded neoliberals have been preaching their “tough on crime” gospel to voters. Harsher sentences! More police! Lock ‘em up! Throw away the key. But when it comes to their own, namely former Act Party president Tim Jago, a convicted pedophile, suddenly the tune changes. Supporting the kiddy fiddler's appeal while victims relive their trauma? That’s not a policy...it’s a betrayal. Let’s rip the mask off David Seymour's hypocrisy.

Jago was found guilty of eight counts of indecent assault on two teenage boys, and copped a measly two-and-a-half years behind bars. The jury took just three hours to decide, yet here he is, claiming a “miscarriage of justice” and appealing his conviction with a high-priced lawyer in tow. And ACT? Instead of distancing themselves from this predator, they’ve been disturbingly quiet, with whispers of party insiders still backing their old mate. This from the same crew who demand “personal responsibility” and “consequences” for everyone else. Funny how principles vanish when it’s one of your own.

Yesterday, 1 News reported:

 

'Disbelief': Tim Jago's appeal against convictions, sentence set for June

Former ACT Party president Tim Jago's appeal against his convictions and sentence for historical abuse of two teenage boys will be heard in June — to the disbelief of the mother of one of his victims.

Last year a jury convicted Jago of indecently assaulting the teenagers he knew through an Auckland surf lifesaving club in the 1990s.

He was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in jail. He gave up his battle for name suppression in January this year.

Jago's lawyer today confirmed the appeal would go ahead in June at a Court of Appeal hearing in Auckland.

The appeal is made on the grounds of a miscarriage of justice.

It claims "the jury reached an unreasonable verdict", and that the judge's summing up was "unbalanced and incomplete".

It also says the sentence was "excessive" and that home detention was clearly the appropriate sentence. 

ACT’s tough-on-crime shtick is built on posturing...cracking down on gangs, pushing for longer sentences, and parading as the law-and-order saviours. Yet, when Jago’s victims, like survivor Paul Oliver, speak out about the ongoing pain of this appeal, where’s Seymour’s outrage?

Oliver called Jago’s appeal a “vanity project,” and he’s spot-on. It’s a slap in the face to victims (victims the coalition said would be at the heart of our justice system), dragging them through more legal torment while Jago pretends he's been wronged by a miscarriage of justice. If ACT were truly tough on crime, they’d be condemning this, not letting it slide. But no, their silence about Jago's complete lack of remorse appears to condone his despicable crimes.

ACT’s handling of Jago’s case has been dodgy from the start. When allegations surfaced in 2022, Seymour advised a victim’s wife to contact a lawyer...not the police. An employment lawyer, for a criminal matter! The Act Party obviously wanted to keep it hush-hush to dodge the 2023 election fallout. Name suppression dragged on for an unbelievable two years, shielding ACT from scrutiny while Jago’s victims suffered in silence. Now, with Jago appealing, the party’s still in damage control, issuing bland statements about “taking action” without a second thought for Jago's victims. Tough on crime? Yeah right!

This isn’t just about Jago...it’s about ACT’s moral bankruptcy. They can’t claim to champion victims while their ex-president, a convicted child abuser, gets a free pass to clog up the courts. If Seymour wants to salvage any credibility, he needs to publicly denounce Jago’s crimes and appeal and apologise to the victims. Anything less proves ACT’s “tough on crime” stance is a hollow slogan, trotted out for votes but ditched when it suits them. Kiwis deserve better than a party that picks and chooses which crimes to care about.