Neutron bomb or damp squib?

Labour must be worried that the fallout from Winston Peters’ lobbying to appoint  Owen Glenn as honorary counsul to Monaco is reflecting badly on Helen Clark and endangering Labour’s chances of re-election.

Bill Ralston  said:

Over the past couple of weeks the polls showed an increasing trickle of voters dribbling back to NZ First as their memories of Peters’ embarrassments of the last few months began to fade in the glare of the election campaign. Their doubts will now be reawakened.

It is a bitter blow for Labour and Helen Clark. They had been counting on NZ First just cresting the 5% MMP barrier and effectively slamming the door on Key’s chances of forming a government.

The depth of their concern is evidenced by the release of their “neutron bomb”.

It’s an attempt to link John Key to the H-fee white collar crime.

But the Herald story is linked to one which quotes former Serious Fraud Office head Charles Sturt saying Key had nothing to do with the matter.

That suggests it’s a damp squib.

6 Responses to Neutron bomb or damp squib?

  1. adamsmith1922 says:


    A major concern to me is the oxygen afforded the smear by the way the media choose to treat the story.

    It is too much to expect them to expose the smear.

    Key and National need to expose this for the blatant smear attempt that it is and the fact that it is used to divert attention from Petrs and Labour’s own very unsavoury behaviour

  2. Now what happened to the rumour, mentioned on Tumeke! that National had evidence of the Police and Liarbour being in bed with each other.
    What’s sauce for the goose?

  3. Colin Lucas says:

    Yawn! What disappoints me is the Herald will front page this one.
    I would be lucky to get the exact dates I changed jobs in 1986 and 1998 respectivley. As for who I had lunch with or who paid…
    Anyway my old mate Chas Sturt effectively pours cold water on the story with his comment that Mr Key did nothing to be accountable for.

  4. Buggerlugs says:

    Right, let me get this straight.
    Mike Williams, who collects $157,000 from government (central and local) board appointments, flies to Melbourne to go through court files. Who paid for his trip?
    Given that Mike has shown himself to be less than the sharpest knife in the drawer, he would have needed assistance to go through the 13,000 page court files.
    Who paid for this assistance and how much did it cost?
    If that’s the best Labour can do, then they really are seriously screwed (both in the polls and in their collective head).

  5. rayinnz says:

    It has been suggested to me by a past Labour voter and union member that it was a cunning plan to get big Mike out of the country
    Sort of makes sense going by his past stuff ups

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: