Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

Bill Ralston in his main article in the HoS focuses on the dirty tricks campaign waged by Labour against Richard Worth. This campaign, if not masterminded by Phil Goff was clearly fronted by him. He was happy until it turned to muck to appear in any media outlet that would let him.

Adam had hoped with the departure of Clark and Mike Williams that those days were behind us. Evidently not.

Ralston dissects the L’Affaire Choudary and clearly sees Labour set-up all over the tacky business.

Ralston rubbishes the information previously advanced by that moral arbiter Phil Goff and writes:-

I now find it impossible to give her and Goff’s allegations any credibility. She has insisted Key keep secret the content of the texts that Worth supposedly sent her, so she has made it impossible for the public to verify her claims. Certainly on the basis of the few innocuous texts released so far there is no evidence of any sexual propositions or harassment.

From what we’ve seen so far in the Choudary affair, Worth is guilty, at worst, of being a silly old fool.

No one has come out of this business with their reputation enhanced by what now must be seen as a Labour Party dirty trick.

Goff has ducked for cover, after a couple of weeks of drip-feeding juicy tidbits to the media and taking the moral high ground. That can only be seen as an admission he was wrong.

Given the Labour Party behaviour during the 2008 elections, Mallard’s attempts to smear Melissa Lee which may well have contributed to the derailment of her campaign it is clear that as the adage has it:-

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

Goff had the opportunity to put the old, tainted Labour image behind him, in a similar way to that in which Key has remodelled National.

For whatever reason Goff chose to go and play in the gutter. That calls his judgment into question. Others have commented in similar vein as Adam has noted.

He should not now be surprised to see his image tainted for many.
More to the point it can be argued that by putting out information about which charitably it might be said he mis-spoke, far from being the holder of any moral highground, it can be inferred that he, or those in his camp who believed they were assisting the objective, sought to mislead the media and the electorate.

Goff has been found out and found wanting.

Given that as Labour Leader he needs to build trust with the electorate, why squander an opportunity in this manner with prurient half-truths and accusations. Is he that desperate?

Advertisement