Brian Edwards Media

Blethering Bennett Rides Again

2668_large11

 

 

 

 

 

 

You really have to wonder how much longer John Key can keep the Blethering Bennett in his Cabinet. Here is her latest effort, reported in this morning’s Herald:

Ms Bennett today said she had reiterated to Ms Rankin Mr Key’s position that she should not campaign against the law.

“She certainly been made very clear that we don’t expect her to be actively campaigning on the no vote,” she told reporters.

Ms Bennett said the interview was Ms Rankin’s personal opinion.

“I think it’s pretty clear that Christine Rankin was speaking as Christine Rankin and not as families commissioner and in that case I thought it was quite acceptable.”

Ms Rankin was entitled to her own opinion, she said.

“I think that when she’s speaking as a families commissioner then she is with them on what they are doing but I think that she’s entitled to her view as long as she’s not actively campaigning against the commission, and what they believe, she is allowed to put a view forward.”

Asked what actively campaigning was, Ms Bennett said Ms Rankin should follow the commission’s rules and policies.

The stupidity of these comments beggars belief. Does Ms Bennett really think that a Government appointed member of the board of an autonomous Crown agency can publicly express opinions directly at odds with the policy of that agency on the grounds that these are her personal opinions?

How is the public to know at any given time which hat Ms Rankin is wearing, when she is speaking as Ms Rankin [private citizen]   and when as Families Commissioner Rankin?

According to The Blethering One, Christine Rankin should  simultaneously “follow the Commission’s rules and policies” and not follow them.

Good grief!  Was I too kind in calling her an idiot?

, ,

8 Comments:

  1. What else could Bennet say?

    Key should not be barring Rankin from campaigning against the law change. If I recall correctly, Cindy Kiro was outspoken in support of the law while still Commissioner.

    Key’s instruction is the problem, putting both women in an impossible position.

    • What else could Bennet say?

      Well, I think that’s rather different. Kiro was the Children’s Commissioner and, as far as I know, there’s only one of those and his/her brief is to represent the interests of New Zealand children rather than to articulate Government policy. In supporting the mis-named ‘anti-smacking” law she was, in an event, not opposing but supporting Government policy.

  2. It seemed to me that when Key told the Press that if Rankin didn’t stay out of it then she would lose her job. On the other hand we believe in the freedom of speech. Does that mean that John Key has another potential for a Worth type mess on his hands? Does Paula also the get caught in the no win area should Rankin speak out again as in Investigate? Messy!

    • It seemed to me that when Key told the Press that if Rankin didn’t stay out of it then she would lose her job.

      Surely you’re not suggesting that Ms Rankin will ever “speak out again” and embarrass her Minister and the Government! It couldn’t happen. Could it?

  3. Exactly the same excuse that appalling fraud Michael Laws used when vilifying people (and indeed whole towns) via his radio show. “I was speaking as an individual, not the mayor of Wanganui…” came the predictable bleat. Tui ads immediately sprung to mind. Perhaps Trevor Mallard should have had a go at the Speaker “as a private citizen” this week instead of as a minister.

  4. Good grief! Was I too kind in calling her an idiot?

    A bit harsh she will be quite hurt once the powerpoint presentation explains it to her.

  5. i don’t think you can use crayons in powerpoint, so any dawning comprehension may take some time.

    • I don’t think you can use crayons in powerpoint, so any dawning comprehension may take some time.

      Now that really is unkind.