I understand that Winston’s performance in the House in yesterday’s General Debate even had members of his own caucus shaking their heads in disbelief.
To recap … hot on the heals of his failure to secure $1.8m in damages from the Crown over the leaking of details regarding his superannuation over-payments (and the awarding of just under $320,000 against him in costs) Peters went on a bizarre rant (using parliamentary privilege) where he accused a whole new raft of people as being responsible for the leak … that it came from one Rachel Morton (parliamentary staffer) who passed it ACTs David Seymour who in turn passed it to Jordan Williams (Taxpayers Union) who told John Bishop (father of National MP Chris Bishop) who leaked it to Newsrooms Tim Murphy.
Simple question … why then did he waste his own and taxpayers money (estimated at $1.2m) in suing ex-Ministers Bennett and Tolley, the CEO of MSD and the State Services Commissioner?
Instructive that Peters is refusing to repeat the allegations outside of Parliament where he could be sued.
For myself I think the pressures he’s facing (including the ongoing SFO investigation into ‘his’ Foundation) has got to him and he’s lashing out against all and sundry. Begs the question … is he really compos mentis?
No Minister 
Yes, Winston Peters is very sane and doing what he has done for years, i.e., as little as possible while enjoying a full and well inebriated social life at that taxpayers expense…then bursting into a flurry of activity in the two months before the next election in the hope that he can retain the same lifestyle. And to give credit where it is due, no one matches Peters for turning dross like teapot tapes or leaked Nat Super update details that would have been the death knell into election gold. The man is a political alchemist and skilled snake oil salesmen who should never be underestimated.
It’s those who continue to vote for him who need a sanity test.
It’s those who continue to vote for him who need a sanity test.
Just thought that could bear repeating…
I’ll take compost mentis.
Is Winston Peters cracking? On the evidence, Veteran, you’d have to say yes. But he’s had 40 years’ practice at this sort of thing – bizarre accusations, patently obvious distortions (NO) then flashing a grin, as if it’s all a game. And perhaps it is to Peters. But not to the rest of us who have to pay the cost, emotional and financial. The sooner he’s out of public life the better. I’ve had enough, and in sure the latest victims of his weird behaviour would agree.
Rachel heard it from Anne, and Rachel told David S and David S told Jordan and Jordan told John and John told Tim,
Conjecture and hearsay…where have i seen that before?
2005
While you might think Winston has just blindly lashed out, in fact that is highly unlikely. He will be making his accusations based on information that he has been given, but the information is unlikely to be sufficiently verifiable to pass any legal test, even the civil test of proof on the balance of probabilities. After all we do know the information about his Super was leaked. It didn’t just come out of thin air. It came from someone with access.
I note that on this site, and on Kiwiblog, that there is a view that he is stupid/drunk/has demetria/lies all the time, etc, etc. Of themselves, these things are defamatory under just about any legal test, including The Veteran’s view that Winston is non compos mentis. No proof, it is just enough to make the statement.
Having known Winston just about my entire adult life, I don’t believe he wilfully lies. There is always a basis for what he says. The Winebox was particularly telling. He had to launch that against the bitter opposition of both Labour and National. He was proved right by the Royal Commission.
Unfortunately, the internet, and particularly blog sites, have enabled people to say whatever defamatory thing that pops into their head, all under pseudonyms, knowing there will never be any legal consequences.
Has that opportunity improved political debate? In my view, it clearly has not.
Extreme partisanship and gross and defamatory insults have become the norm for way too many people. Perhaps it is not surprising that Parliament appears to be attracting people of lesser ability than might have been the case in the past.
The Winebox – I recall reading the NBR summary by Fran O’Sullivan. She pointed out that whilst Mr Peters was proclaiming “we’ve won”, the actual ruling by the judge was quite against Mr Peter’s case. i.e. he actually lost.
Wayne: “defamatory under just about any legal test” – seriously? IANAL but AFAIK for a case of defamation to succeed, it must be shown that the claimant’s reputation has been damaged. Winston has a politician’s reputation – it is already mud so calling him a liar and so on cannot be defamation as it is impossible to lower his reputation by such. Similarly anything stated as opinion fails the test of defamation; it needs to be stated as fact. Everything in comments above has been stated as opinion.
I find your heroic and gallant defense of Winston surprising and perhaps coloured by either friendship or Stockholm Syndrome.
It is my opinion that Winston is a despicable, cowardly little jerk who has a very distant relationship with the truth. From the safety of Parliamentary Privilege he gives the appearance of a zoo chimpanzee flinging shit.
“I don’t believe he wilfully lies.” … What is “unwilfully lie” mean. Lying under coercion? Or stating something incorrect under the impression it is correct? The latter is by definition not a lie. So if he says something that is untrue it’s either intentional lying or just being wrong. I find it impossible to believe Winston is wrong so often especially when stating things that are to his own political benefit.
Winston has a long list of “incorrect statements” in his wake. Seems to me that he’s wrong a lot in a very public way, or he’s intentionally lying”. Just my opinion of course.
Wayne … I posed the question. Didn’t say he was. But the feedback I’ve received was that it was a bizarre performance.
I got an email to go look and watched most of his demented rant.
No other word for it.
And seeing that he didn’t fill out an official document correctly, one that many fill out to gain the OAP, I cannot see as to why (or how) its such a big deal (unless of course) there is a reason as to why he’s claiming to be a victim..
Time to go Winnie. You’ve used up our charity
I had to laugh at my wife and I explaining this to our kids, only to be greeted by this response from Beloved Daughter:
Oh, and no he’s not losing it. He’s doing what he has always done, especially when his back’s to the wall. And here’s the thing, even if he’s gone from Parliament after this election I would not count him out in 2023. I certainly thought he was finished after 2008! The only way he’ll ever leave the place is feet first OR unable to be re-elected.
And you can bet that our journalists will not be able to resist his juicy tidbits over the next two months; clicks, eyeballs, ratings… They know they’re helping a rogue but it’s Baptists and Bootleggers time again.
C’mon, Wayne. You don’t believe he willfully lies? What about the donations? What about the Bad Boys of Brexit? He tells porkies all the time. The truth is not defamatory. And spouting off a rumour about David Seymour is outrageous. I believe Seymour, I don’t believe Peters.
To be fair Max, what Wayne said was …
I’ll let George explain, as he did to Jerry:
Vet and other commenters.
Peters also alleged yesterday that DPF was told and he tried to shut the whole thing down.