UPDATE: Stuff reports:
Labour leader Phil Goff has accepted under-fire Labour list MP Darren Hughes' resignation following sex scandal allegations.Hughes had telephoned to say he would resign, Phil Goff said at a press conference this afternoon.
"The controversy surrounding the allegations has made it impossible to carry out his role," Goff said.
He said he agreed with Hughes, but Hughes had made it clear he believed that he had not done anything wrong.
Earlier today fresh details emerged about the early morning incident involving Hughes with an eyewitness saying he saw a naked man near the MP's home.
In the meantime, Newstalk ZB suggests that the numbers are being done ...
Meanwhile, the real fun starts now. Labour's list, in order, reads like this:
38: Judith Tizard; 39: Mark Burton; 40: Mahara Okeroa; 41: Martin Gallagher; 42: Dave Hereora; 43: Louisa Wall; 44: Lesley Soper.
There's the dilemma. The next seven names from Labour's list were all rejected by the public, one way or another, in 2008. There is no new blood, Louisa Wall perhaps apart. Whoever takes over from Darren Hughes is NOT the future of the Labour Party.
Heck; Robert Guyton might not like us saying this (then again he might be chuffed!), but it's entirely possible that the Green Party could be the main opposition party after the 2011 election!
13 comments:
Yet another example of Goff flip flopping more than he changes his underwear.
This is about the 6th different position that Goff has had on the whole hughes thing in 3 days!!
What a useless leader.
There are many sources within Labour now saying that numbers are being checked for a coup.
This is not just right wingers claiming to have had this from Labour sources.
The rumours are really doing the rounds.
Goff is going, going, GONE!
Not only Goof going so will Full Moon!
Cadwallader
My Picks for the new Dream Team is any two of Cunners, Parker or Street......
LA - Bearing in mind that Labour like to have a gender and sexual orientation balance either Cunliffe or Parker will be leader with `dead end' Street as deputy.
Please, please; pick Cunners; pleeeeeeease!
Hughes has resigned.
We've been comparing the behaviour of National and Labour in light of this issue - Worth .v. Hughes.
Which has behaved more honourably with regards the voting public?
Hughes? Worth?
Key pressured Worth to resign you say Inv2.
Do we think Goff had to do the same to force Hughes into action?
What's your opinion about that Inv?
Well Rob; given that Hughes offered to resign yesterday but Goff declined the resignation, the spotlight has to to go on the latter. What changed between late yesterday and late today? Goff has now taken four separate positions with regards to Hughes' alleged misdeeds since Wednesday morning; around 62 hours ago, as I type this.
One other issue; this alleged offence took place in the early hours of March 2nd - the Wednesday morning THREE weeks ago. Goff claimed to have known about it for TWO weeks. Given that the police were first involved around 5am on March 2nd, where did the other week go. It defies belief that someone in Labour's leadership did not know about this almost immediately. Has Goff also been economical with the truth over than?
Inv2 thanks for attempting to address my comments, but you didn't at all, you just used my question about Hughes and Worth to continue your attack on Goff - that's a bit dull.
I thought I addressed the question fairly well Rob. I merely wondered what changed in 24 hours to convince Goff to accept the proferred resignation which he had previously declined. As I said on the other Goff post today, Mike Hosking summed it up well this morning when he said this:
"this should be all about Darren Hughes but it's not; it's all about Phil Goff now"
I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a fan of Hosking, but he's right on the money.
And as regards your first question; neither Hughes NOR Worth has behaved in the manner that one would expect an experienced, senior MP to behave. I criticised Worth when the allegations around him broke. I have been less critical of Hughes, largely because it is a police matter. At the very least he seems to be guilty of displaying exceedly bad judgment.
There; was that better?
No but perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly enough.
"Which has behaved (post exposure) more honourably with regards the voting public?
Hughes? Worth?
.. or neither? It's a bit soon to judge Rob; after all, the ink has barely dried on Hughes' resignation letter.
Hughes offered to resign some weeks before you claim.
Post a Comment