Cullen no confidence in SFO?

TV1 news has just reported that Michael Cullen refused to express confidence in the Serious Fraud Office after this afternoon’s privileges committee hearing into Winston Peters and the donation debacle.

Does that mean there’s a problem with the SFO performance or does it mean Cullen doesn’t like where their investigations into Peters and New Zealand First is taking them?

Update: Keeping Stock  explains the seriousness of this Cullen is Attorney General and one of the roles of that office is the responsibility for the SFO.

Matthew Hooton  is even blunter.

5 Responses to Cullen no confidence in SFO?

  1. Inventory2 says:

    So the Attorney-General has no confidence in the SFO – hmmmm, interesting


  2. homepaddock says:

    I2 – he didn’t say he had no confidence but he did refuse to say he had confidence which for those of us not skilled at dancing on the head of a pin is much the same thing.


  3. Paddy says:

    The latter, of course. Anyone who disagrees with that Pommy shite between now and the election will get a vote of no confidence…


  4. Inventory2 says:

    Have blogged on this now

    Is the SFO getting too close for comfort?


  5. pdm says:

    We shouldn’t worry.

    Not too many people have confidence in Cullen.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: