Showing posts with label Bullying. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bullying. Show all posts

Thursday, November 09, 2023



Bullies all the way down

We've known for a while that Labour has a bullying problem. Meka Whaitiri. Gaurav Sharma. Kiri Allen. Shanan Halbert. Mostly, they bully their staff. But soon-to-be-former police minister Ginny Andersen has found a new victim: her volunteers:

Stuff understands she alleges Andersen “yelled” at the young woman and her brother, at the party’s Lower Hutt election night event, made them feel uncomfortable, pushed them to leave and was aggressive.

The mother alleges Andersen was angry she hadn’t knocked on enough doors during the campaign. Andersen lost her Hutt South seat to National’s Chris Bishop.

She goes on to list other alleged incidents over a three-year period, in which the volunteer was belittled, and shouted at for choosing a family trip over working for the MP.

Which also answers another question: we know from their public statements and leaked emails that Labour's MPs sure as shit aren't going to accept any responsibility for their election loss. So who are they going to blame instead? Their volunteers - the people who believe in the party as something other than just a means of career advancement, and who give up their time to it to help centrist careerists climb the pole and get $296,007 salaries.

The good news is that this particular aspect of the problem is probably self correcting, in that bullying volunteers eventually results in all but the careerists leaving and devoting their efforts elsewhere, leaving MPs to do their own doorknocking. But it also suggests that Labour's bullying problem is absolutely ingrained, part of the party's toxic culture. And if that's the case, its probably better to just burn the whole party down rather than continue to tolerate it.

Friday, September 22, 2023



Another Labour bully

Back in June, we learned that Kiri Allan was a Parliamentary bully. And now there's another one: Labour MP Shanan Halbert:

The Labour Party was alerted to concerns about [Halbert's] alleged behaviour a year ago but because staffers wanted to remain anonymous, no formal process was undertaken

[...]

The staff members worked with Halbert in a range of roles. None wanted to appear on camera for fear of retribution. Newshub has agreed to protect their identities.

They told Newshub that Halbert was "manipulative", "scheming", "a narcissist" and that they live in fear of him.

Newshub tried to organise an on-camera interview with Halbert, but he declined.

This is another incident where the Labour Party has attempted to cover up and not investigate bullying. They need to look hard at themselves, at what sort of behaviour they are willing to tolerate in their MPs, and at how they keep selecting these sorts of arseholes as candidates.

The good news is that on current polling, Halbert isn't likely to be bullying people around Parliament for much longer. Instead, he'll have to find victims in the private sector. But Labour should still make certain of that by de-electing him, because bullies should have no place in our Parliament.

Thursday, August 24, 2023



Now de-select him

Earlier in the month National MP Tim van de Molen threatened and stood over the chair of the select committee he was serving on after getting angry over the number of questions he was allocated. Today, the (powerful) Privileges Committee found that he had committed contempt of Parliament, and recommended that he be censured. That looks like it will happen next week, and be one of the last acts of this Parliament.

National has already stood van de Molen down from all his portfolios, but it should do more. Parliament has a bullying problem. It is a toxic environment due to those bullies. If it is become better, they need to be removed. And one way for parties to do that is to drive out toxic, bullying MPs (another way is for us to de-elect them).

Van de Molen is already the lowest-ranked MP on National's list. But he's still their candidate for Waikato, a safe rural seat. They need to de-select him. Otherwise, they're effectively saying that his conduct is acceptable and that they want a thug like him in Parliament.

Friday, June 30, 2023



Another Parliamentary bully

Two days ago Stuff carried a story about Labour Minister Kiritapu Allan's staff quitting rather than put up with her bullying. And it appears to have opened the floodgates:

A senior public servant, with decades of experience, says Cabinet Minister Kiritapu Allan “yelled and screamed” so loudly, staff in the office heard the telephone call.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said they witnessed Allan’s interactions with younger staff members both from government agencies and her Beehive office in a meeting, as well as seeing her “absolutely berate” another official for 20 mins on another occasion.

Allan “strongly refutes” the allegations.

Another former senior official with a long history of public service, has also spoken to Stuff to confirm they had concerns about Allan’s dealing with staff. “Basically low trust and respect of public servants was [the] issue,” they said.

And NEMA’s chief executive Dave Gawn, in a statement, said he “was aware of concerns regarding relationships in the minister's office, and that he understood action was taken to address these concerns.”

Labour are as usual circling the wagons around their bully, calling the reports "dirty politics" and saying that there have been no "formal complaints" (while refusing to release evidence of informal ones). But senior public servants don't put their careers and reputations on the line like this for no reason. And those careers and reputations are on the line, because while Stuff has withheld names, unless Allan is a total sociopath who does this to everyone, she will know exactly who her victims are.

I've said this before when it's come up, over Sam Uffindell, and Judith Collins, and Nick Smith, and Meka Whaitiri, and Maggie Barry, and all the rest: we should not tolerate bullies in our Parliament. And if certain political parties do, we should not tolerate them either. Labour needs to either sack and de-select Allan, or show that she has recognised that she has a problem and has taken effective steps to remedy it. Otherwise, we should regard them as a party of bullies and bully-apologists, and shank them for it at the ballot box.

Meanwhile, its been three years since the Francis report made it clear that Parliament was a toxic sewer of a workplace. And this shit is still going on. Parliament only got round to establishing a Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards last year, after three years of foot-dragging. The obvious question is whether they will be investigating Allan. And if not, what the fuck are they for?

Monday, August 08, 2022



Party of bullies

Back in June Sam Uffindell was elected to parliament in the Tauranga by-election. Turns out he's a bully who beat a kid with a bed-leg at school:

The National Party’s newest MP, Sam Uffindell, was asked to leave his exclusive boarding school after viciously beating a younger student late at night.

Uffindell only offered the man an apology last year, 22 years after the attack, and nine months before he publicly announced his political aspirations.

[...]

The victim, who was 13-years-old at the time, was left with severe bruising and significant trauma.

Police were not involved. Instead, Uffindell was disciplined alongside three other teenagers who joined in on the beating, and asked to leave the school, Auckland’s King’s College.

Uffindell characterises this as "just being silly and playing up". Which is typical for bullies, and tells you everything you need to know about the man. The kicker is that the National Party knew this "and were grateful he had disclosed it to them", but they selected him anyway. They think someone who got together with a gang and beat a kid with a bed-leg is fit to be an MP. And then he gave his first speech about cracking down on crime...

Well, maybe we should. Beating someone with a bed leg is assault with [a] weapon. It has a penalty of up to 5 years imprisonment, which makes it a category 3 offence in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act. And since the penalty is more than 2 years, s25(2)(b) means that charges may be filed at any time. And from the Stuff report, it seems there's no shortage of witnesses. If National wants to have any credibility on crime, maybe it should start by expunging the criminals from its own ranks, rather than selecting and covering up for them...

Wednesday, June 22, 2022



A perfect example

Last year, a stranded kiwi criticised the MIQ system. Covid Minister Chris Hipkins responded by doxxing and defaming her. Now, he's been forced to apologise for that:

Minister Chris Hipkins has admitted he released incorrect and personal information about journalist Charlotte Bellis, after she criticised the managed isolation system.

[...]

Under mounting public pressure, Hipkins, who was Covid-19 minister at the time, cast doubt on Bellis’ story with a claim she had been offered consular assistance twice since early December 2021 but had not responded to the offers.

It’s understood Hipkins’ public apology was a request of Bellis’ lawyers. After Hipkins admitted fault privately to Bellis in March, her lawyers sought an apology instead of pursuing a legal settlement for defamation and a privacy breach.

Good, but obviously it would be better if Ministers weren't bullies, and didn't abuse their positions to obtain and release personal information about their critics. And obviously it would be better if the Prime Minister held her Ministers to account when they misbehaved liek this.

Its also worth noting that if Hipkins' department, Te Kawa Mataaho - Public Service Commission - had their way, he would have enjoyed legal impunity for this "proactive release". Which makes Hipkins, like Paula Bennett, a perfect example of why we should never allow that to happen.

Wednesday, June 02, 2021



We should not tolerate parties which tolerate this

In the wake of National MP Nick Smith's resignation on Monday night, people have finally been talking about what a scumbag he was. Newshub reports that his behaviour was an open secret around Parliament, something everyone knew about but no-one talked about, with people saying (anonymously, for fear of repurcussions):

  • "Smith was notorious for that red mist"
  • "One of the most difficult assholes I've ever worked for"
  • "I have no fond memories of that guy"
  • "He was prone to bouts of extreme verbal anger towards other ministers and staff. It was out of the ordinary even then. But we didn't complain because we were Gen Xers. We should have"
Meanwhile Stuff reports that the complaint which led to his resignation was not lodged by his immediate victim, but by "another National Party staffer who recorded the incident and made a complaint". Which suggests that Smith's behaviour was so toxic that his own staff were habitually recording him to document it. Which raises the obvious question: why do parties put up with this? Because as Smith shows, abusive MPs are a PR bomb waiting to go off, and when they do it damages both the party (who are rightly suspected of covering up and/or condoning abuse) and our political system as a whole. They're simply bad politics. So why not downlist, de-select, or otherwise show them the door to remove the risk?

Sadly, the answer seems to be that the main parties are staffed by bullies and run by bullies. Judith Collins is out there this morning defending Smith, saying he was under "tremendous stress" and suggesting that recording his outburst was illegal (which is getting pretty DARVO). But then, she's a bully herself. As for Labour, Meka Whaitiri (who allegedly assaulted a staff member) is not just still in Parliament, but has been reappointed to Cabinet. So Labour supports bullying as well. Voters should not. And we should make that clear at the ballot box.

Tuesday, March 02, 2021



A toxic organisation

Back in 2019, following media revelations that bullying was widespread within the police, the Independent Police Conduct Authority announced that it would be investigating the issue. Today, they reported back, and found the police to be a completely toxic organisation:

An independent report into police culture has described a “boy’s club” within the senior ranks that has presided over an “atmosphere of fear and acquiescence”, which “marginalised and ostracised” those who challenged the status quo.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority report, published on Tuesday, was based on interviews with about 220 current and former police staff, revealing a police culture in which staff, including senior staff, fear to speak up and a significant minority report abusive behaviour.

Reports include female staff being called “bitches”, physical intimidation, and officers refusing to respond to calls for backup when staff felt they were at risk in the field.

The latter basicly means police trying to kill one another. That's how toxic they are. The report also found "cliques, nepotism and cronyism" dictating promotions, and (if you read the RNZ version) HR not wanting to know about the problem, blaming the victim, and concealing or not keeping records of complaints (which sounds like a Public Records Act violation, and immediately invites the question of how widespread that culture is).

This obviously isn't good for the staff, but its probably not good for policing, or the public. Work doesn't get done efficiently in such environments, but also, this toxic environment will flow out to their interactions with the public. Which is basicly what we see every day.

(I'm also wondering where the hell the Police Association was in all of this. But I suspect the answer is "part of the problem"...)

Stunningly, the report makes no recommendations. So here's an obvious one: fire the bullies. Seriously. Just fire them. They're a toxic influence, clearly incorrigible, and things will not get better until they and their bullshit mindset are out of the organisation. Given the identified problems of "macho culture", a "boys club", and "alpha males" with "limited emotional intelligence", for bonus points fire them and replace them all with women. They make better managers anyway.

Tuesday, November 05, 2019



Good riddance

National MP and former Conservation Minister Maggie Barry will not seek re-election next year. Good riddance. Because in case anyone has forgotten, barry is a bullying thug who terrorised both public servants and fellow MPs. She is one of the people who makes Parliament a toxic workplace, and our country is well rid of her. The only sad thing is that she has been allowed to quit, rather than being dumped by voters as unfit for public office.

Now, if only Meka Whaitiri would do the same...

Wednesday, October 23, 2019



Bullying their critics

Over the past month we've heard some horrific stories about bullying in the police. The police's response? Try to bully people into silence:

The police have told a whistleblower to retract his statements to RNZ about being bullied or face legal action.

The demand came just hours after Police Commissioner Mike Bush announced a review into how complaints of bullying are dealt with.

[...]

In a letter sent to his lawyer, the police said Mr Woodward had breached confidential settlement agreements from 2014 and 2017.

"Your client, John Woodward, has been speaking with the media (Ben Strang of RNZ) regarding his employment with Police," the letter reads.

The letter states that under the agreement, both parties agreed to only talk positively or in a neutral manner when speaking about each other to third parties.


Which I think both proves the point, and shows the danger of confidential settlements: they are used to cover up abuses, silence victims, and sweep bad behaviour under the carpet while allowing perpetrators to bully and victimise again. The idea that a government agency is using them - and using them in this way, to publicly bully and silence critics - is simply unacceptable. The Prime Minister needs to step in, and make it clear that no public agency - including the police - will be allowed to enforce such settlements.

Friday, October 05, 2018



An unrepentant bully

The Department of Internal Affairs has released the redacted investigation report into the allegations of bullying against former Minister Meka Whaitiri, showing that the investigator David Patten found it probable that Whaitiri grabbed (that is, assaulted) her staffer and yelled at them. DIA also released a letter from Whaitiri's lawyer, showing that she vigorously contested the allegations and the report's conclusions, and even alleged that they were politically motivated. But the clincher is Whaitiri's press release, the core of which is this:

I am disappointed my behaviour led to a complaint.

Not disappointed in the behaviour, but that someone had complained about it. Which is what you'd expect from a bully.

Whaitiri's responses simply confirm the allegations of the report and show that she is completely unrepentant to boot. Faced with a complaint of bullying, she's tried to bully her way out of it. I'm glad she failed, and glad she's no longer a Minister. While she can't be sacked as an MP, the sooner she leaves Parliament, the better. There should be no place for bullies in our Parliament.

As for the Maori caucus, their backing for this unrepentant bully reflects poorly upon them all. They need to take a long, hard look at themselves, the behaviour they are supporting, and the political standards they accept. Supporting a bully to keep on bullying is never right, and they need to acknowledge this.

Monday, May 15, 2017



National: Party of bullies

Over the weekend National showed its true colours, with Associate Housing Minister Alfred Ngaro openly threatening to cut government funding for political purposes:

He even suggested Labour list candidate Willie Jackson could expect to lose Government support for his Manukau Urban Māori Authority interest in a second charter school, and its Whānau Ora contract should he "bag us" on the campaign trail.

"We are not happy about people taking with one hand and throwing with the other," Ngaro said.

"Do not play politics with us. If you get up on the campaign trail and start bagging us, then all the things you are doing are off the table. They will not happen."


He's since apologised (for being caught), but its worth remembering that National has form on this. John Key threatened to cut the Human Rights Commission's funding when they criticised his increased spy powers. Backbencher Shane Reti threatened to cut roading funding to critics during the Northland by-election. And of course there's this little gem from then-MP Tau Henare:


It seems to be a deep-seated belief in National that government funding is for donors and cronies, and that it should be deployed as a weapon to silence and bully critics. This isn't just deeply undemocratic - as Andrew Geddis points out, it is also illegal. And the fact that such statements have been made gives every critical organisation denied funding a prima facie case to have the decision overturned. But the existence of a theoretical remedy doesn't really help if your organisation will go bankrupt or have to lay off skilled staff in the interim, and so National will probably get away with its American-style threats. Unless we vote the bullying pricks out of office in September.

Thursday, August 16, 2012



No accountability for information thuggery

back in 2009, Social Development Minister Paula Bennett committed an appalling act of information thuggery by accessing MSD records and releasing information on two solo parents who had dared to criticise government policy. She was rightfully taken to the Privacy Commissioner, which found that she had indeed violated these people's privacy, and her case was referred to the Office of Human Rights Proceedings for prosecution.

Yesterday, Bennett settled the case, apparently in exchange for an apology - which turned out not to be an apology at all, but an exercise in bluster and self-justification by the Minister, combined with threats to further abuse the privacy of those whose information is held in trust by the New Zealand government. When asked today if Bennett would keep her job, Gerry Brownlee (acting on behalf of the Prime Minister) basically said "yes".

This isn't good enough. We have a Minister here who has broken the law and pissed on privacy, in order to silence dissent and for political gain - and then acted in bad faith to get it to go away. In the process, she has undermined trust in government, and public participation in our democracy. She needs to be held accountable for that. Our government should not tolerate the presence of a lying bully like Bennett. If they continue to do so, it will simply be another sign of their moral bankruptcy.

Thursday, March 22, 2012



More information thuggery

Today in Parliament, Labour MP Lianne Dalziel asked some questions about the fairness of the government's bailout for red zone property-owners. Gerry Brownlee's response? To dump the details of her earthquake claim into the Parliamentary record.

Again, this is an appalling act of information thuggery, involving deeply personal information. This is purely operational information, which should never have been in the Minister's hands. And yet, when its needed for a political smear, its available to him. This suggests misconduct on the party of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, as well as a gross abuse of power by the Minister.

This isn't the first time a Minister of this government has behaved like this. Paula Bennett is off to the Human Rights Review Tribunal for breaching the privacy of beneficiaries who had stuck their heads up and complained about their treatment, in a case which looks to cost the government tens of thousands of dollars. Sadly, Brownlee's comments are covered by Parliamentary Privilege, so there seems to be no scope for holding him to account. The government department which gave him the information, OTOH, could be in a different boat. There is no reason for Ministers to know the private information of individuals dealing with CERA, it was not collected for the purpose of enabling bullying, and so passing it on to him was a violation of privacy principles. CERA needs to be held to account for that. And in future, government departments faced with such requests from Ministers should not only refuse them - but publicise the fact that the request was made, so the public can hold abusive Ministers to account.