Goff back-pedals to snub Harawira

Email
Print

Tue, 15 Mar 2011 6:21p.m.

Labour Party leader Phil Goff (file)

Labour Party leader Phil Goff (file)

By Political Editor Duncan Garner

Some Labour MPs say their leader Phil Goff has just broken the rules of his own caucus.

Goff has decided to rule out working with Independent MP Hone Harawira after the next election, despite caucus voting all options were to be kept open.

Just last month Goff was saying it was arrogant to rule people out, but now, he’s done it himself.

“I don’t think Hone Harawira would be a reliable coalition partner,” Goff said yesterday.

Many in Goff’s caucus had told 3 News that Labour’s position was not to rule out anybody. Goff denies that.

“That has never been the position of the caucus,” he said.

But, on February 2 – the day Prime Minister John Key ruled out Winston Peters – Goff was recorded saying it was “arrogant to say who is going to be in Government and who is not”.

“You have to let the people decide.”

One senior Labour MP told 3 News today that’s when Labour took a position not to keep all its options open.

On the Harawira decision, that MP told 3 News:

“I was really surprised, I thought caucus had agreed not to rule anyone out. I saw last night Phil changed that. Weird.”

Harawira says other Maori MPs within Labour have expressed their surprise to him too.

“Is this the guy who said this morning he consulted with his Maori MPs, but the told me last night he didn’t,” Harawira says.

Last month, Goff refused to rule out Harawira. But now, all that’s changed.

Goff says caucus agreed with his position – retrospectively – this morning.

“There are a lot of calls that I have to make. They are then discussed in caucus. There was no opposition,” Goff says.

The reality is, if Goff wants to be Prime Minister, he will need the six likely votes Peters would bring to Parliament – should he make it back.

That’s why Goff won’t rule out Peters.

Indeed Goff has today suggested Peters - who has been sacked three times as a Minister – is a much more reliable option than Harawira.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

17 Mar 2011 05:36p.m.

Kim wrote:

I ask again Jono..what possible reason could peters have to lie? The donation was not illegal asking for it wasn't illegal, spending it on his legal fee's (see i can google too) wasn't illegal. the only thing he was censured for was for apparently lieing about it.
Glenn on the other hand had a reason to lie. He had just been told to piss off over the monoco thing and National were romancing him left right and centre.
There was no more proof of than phone call than to say it was placed... Glenns word only that he spoke to peters.
And if you dont think emails can be faked give me you email and i could send you an email from yourself to yourself with whatever date i chose. (its possible just ask any tech.)
So yes i need more proof than that before i write off someone who has spent his life in the public's service.

17 Mar 2011 05:04p.m.

Jono wrote:

@Kim,

The evidence is phone records showing a conversation between Peters and Glenn, followed two minutes later by an email from Peters' lawyer to Glenn asking for money pursuant to Glenn's conversation with Peters. But I guess that's not enough for you...

17 Mar 2011 08:40a.m.

Kim wrote:

LOL good comeback pete. Exactly what i expected.
How many times have you met Winston? To have that sort of opinion about someone you must know him personally..or more likey you are just spewing the party line.
You should ring duncan he can always use another one eyed reporter that cannot think for themselves and fall for keys lines.

16 Mar 2011 11:35p.m.

Pete wrote:

Go back to your fantasies Kim and take your happy pills. Winstons a self centred racist loser and the rest of the country know it. Time you woke up from your little happy dream.

16 Mar 2011 09:47p.m.

Kim wrote:

@Pete
You forget to mention that the best so called proof the inquiry could come up with about those donations is an email supplied by a guy who has to take prostitutes to the races because he has no real friend.
Anyone with 5 mins worth of computer training can fake an email.
If he was guilty why no sanctions?
I will tell you why because the media dropped it as soon as they started to look stupid with all the acusations.
It was dropped because on the balance of evidence there was no case to answer. it was always about perception and you fell for it hook line and sinker.
You make a big song and dance about the baubles of power but don't mention the consessions he got for his supporters in the coalition deal he made with Labour.
Sure he took on a great portfolio but so what. hes an experianced govt minister and has been finance minister in his time.
Even national credit him with a good job in his time as foreign minister.
Like i said before pete you just spew out the same old unsubstantiated claptrap national supporters have been useing for years.
Before i go answer this.. Why would winston deny knowing about that donation when if he had said yep he knew there would have been no fallout. it was not an illegal donation it was legit so why deny it?? Again i will answer for you. because every party has the rule that donations are handled in such a way that protects the leader from acusations of bribery.
So in effect Winston was villified for following the acepted rules for donations.
We all know national gets huge donations from the business round table types but ask key if he knows who what and how much and he will use winstons sign hes trying to buy.

16 Mar 2011 08:26p.m.

Pete wrote:

Kim I dont agree with everything national stands for in the same way I dont agree with everything labour stands for so you can forget trying to paint me as a national party 'supporter'. But I'm no idiot either and when Winston stands up and says hes not going to go for the baubles of power and then chucks everything to be foreign minister... makes one wonder. Then he lies about secret donations to parliment and the public, sorry I have no respect for the man after that. I voted for him years ago, never again.

16 Mar 2011 07:58p.m.

ALEXANDA wrote:

duncan why dont you have the guts to use your real name ? you come in pretending to be another person . i note you never have taken up the challange ? lol becouse you cant wed see just how biased you are .

16 Mar 2011 04:49p.m.

Timmy wrote:

If this is true...Phil Goff is an idiot!

16 Mar 2011 10:46a.m.

Kim wrote:

@Pete
I live on a planet full of idiots that allow themselves to be brainwashed by politions with agendas.
Maybe instead of spouting out the same old national party retoric you could actually say something intellegent to refute my statement.
How about answering my question?
How about you tell us all what winston was "proven" to have done.
The whole winston beatup was an exercise is throwing mud and hoping some of it sticks. Unfortunatly for winston idiots like you just believe what National and thier media tells them to believe. Even when the outcome was that winston did nothing wrong. (or at the very least the wrongdoing he was acused of was unproven. Not that the media allowed that to stand in the way of a good story.)

16 Mar 2011 10:45a.m.

Samuel wrote:

Circle the wagons! The Red and the Blue must join in alternating unholy accord against this knave, I mean native. But my dear Kakapos, which structurally undemocratic, duopoly gaming, foreign sponsored, Union Jacking (did I say that?) great clan will get to sidecart the Owen Glen's Geriatric Investments Party to it's Rolls Royce I mean America's Cup yacht I mean BMW, FIRST NZ?