Uffindell welcomed back by National

[king1]

Not sure what the father has to do with anything, no one suggested he was a witness to events. Something happened and if there was nothing to hide, why the cloak and dagger with the report? Uffindell is far from exonerated, and this whole debacle just makes him look even more guilty.

[Wainuiguy]

Not sure what the father has to do with anything, no one suggested he was a witness to events.  Something happened and if there was nothing to hide, why the cloak and dagger with the report?  Uffindell is far from exonerated, and this whole debacle just makes him look even more guilty.

Did National say at the start the report would be confidential?

Yes.   They did that to ensure people would come forward without any risk of being identified.

Did Labour investigate their bullying claims?  

No.  Instead they labeled the person reporting bullying a Bully then removed him from the party.

[Praktica]

Not sure what the father has to do with anything, no one suggested he was a witness to events.  Something happened and if there was nothing to hide, why the cloak and dagger with the report?  Uffindell is far from exonerated, and this whole debacle just makes him look even more guilty.

Did National say at the start the report would be confidential?

Yes.   They did that to ensure people would come forward without any risk of being identified.

Did Labour investigate their bullying claims?  

No.  Instead they labeled the person reporting bullying a Bully then removed him from the party.

Yeah - let's compare an entitled thug who admitted assaulting a pupil at his school, with someone who was able to produce no evidence of bullying, only allegations, and who sadly seems to be mentally disturbed. This is the national party way - justify entitlement and violence in any possible way.

[king1]

Not sure what the father has to do with anything, no one suggested he was a witness to events.  Something happened and if there was nothing to hide, why the cloak and dagger with the report?  Uffindell is far from exonerated, and this whole debacle just makes him look even more guilty.

Did National say at the start the report would be confidential?

Yes.   They did that to ensure people would come forward without any risk of being identified.

Did Labour investigate their bullying claims?  

No.  Instead they labeled the person reporting bullying a Bully then removed him from the party.

Uffindell was a bully, Sharma was a bully.  National hid the process and the outcome, Labour was as transparent as they could and needed to be...

Uffindell will probably be gone by next election, especially if the report is leaked... 

Sharma was the bully, he was investigated, didn't like the outcome, decided to blow up his career - he is right where he belongs...

For Sharma, it was kinda desperate and disingenuous to expect an investigation into the investigation of a bully 

anyways, enough deflecting, now where did I put that Uffindell report

[Wainuiguy]

Did National say at the start the report would be confidential?

Yes.   They did that to ensure people would come forward without any risk of being identified.

Did Labour investigate their bullying claims?  

No.  Instead they labeled the person reporting bullying a Bully then removed him from the party.

Uffindell was a bully, Sharma was a bully.  National hid the process, Labour was as transparent as they could be...

Uffindell will probably gone by next election, especially if the report is leaked... 
Sharma was the bully, he was investigated, didn't like the outcome, decided to blow up his career - he is right where he belongs...

It's kinda disingenuous to expect an investigation into the investigation of a bully 

So an investigation into bullying that happened last year - insane.  And it wasn't only Sharna let's not forget that.

But you want National to release a report into bullying that happened 19 years ago? Sorry that is alleged bullying.

---

Did National say at the start the report would be confidential?

Yes.   They did that to ensure people would come forward without any risk of being identified.

Did Labour investigate their bullying claims?  

No.  Instead they labeled the person reporting bullying a Bully then removed him from the party.

Yeah - let's compare an entitled thug who admitted assaulting a pupil at his school, with someone who was able to produce no evidence of bullying, only allegations, and who sadly seems to be mentally disturbed. This is the national party way - justify entitlement and violence in any possible way.

Did you do anything you regret when you were in your teens?  If we went back 22 plus years in your life would we find bad things about you?


And let's use that word - allegations.  So Sharma comes out and publicly says there is bullying in the Labour Party- oh he has mental health issues.  But a completely anonymous woman goes on RNZ and makes an allegation, wont even allow herself to be interviewed by the KC in charge of the investigation and that is all good?

[king1]

Uffindell was a bully, Sharma was a bully.  National hid the process, Labour was as transparent as they could be...

Uffindell will probably gone by next election, especially if the report is leaked... 
Sharma was the bully, he was investigated, didn't like the outcome, decided to blow up his career - he is right where he belongs...

It's kinda disingenuous to expect an investigation into the investigation of a bully 

So an investigation into bullying that happened last year - insane.  And it wasn't only Sharna let's not forget that.

But you want National to release a report into bullying that happened 19 years ago?  Sorry that is alleged bullying.

actually it would be alleged violence and thuggery - I was probably being a bit too nice including him in the same category as Sharma's misdemeanours.

But yes it should be released - the report is recent, what's to hide? If there is nothing to hide, release it?  Why not?

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Deflection.

Making the report public is easy, to preserve confidentiality simply remove the names.

But they won't because they have something to hide.

[king1]

Yeah - let's compare an entitled thug who admitted assaulting a pupil at his school, with someone who was able to produce no evidence of bullying, only allegations, and who sadly seems to be mentally disturbed. This is the national party way - justify entitlement and violence in any possible way.

Did you do anything you regret when you were in your teens?  If we went back 22 plus years in your life would we find bad things about you?


And let's use that word - allegations.  So Sharma comes out and publicly says there is bullying in the Labour Party- oh he has mental health issues.  But a completely anonymous woman goes on RNZ and makes an allegation, won't even allow herself to be interviewed by the KC in charge of the investigation and that is all good?

Praktica is not in politics, scrutiny of background isn't required

Again, It's kinda disingenuous to expect an investigation into the investigation of a bully at the behest of said bully

The complainant is not anonymous, the people that need to know her name know who she is...  from what I can gather she provided a statement but concluded early on that the outcome was predetermined, given the lack of transparency and being paid for by National.  Not hard to see why I guess...  Probably didn't help the cause but doesn't change the facts...

[Wainuiguy]

So an investigation into bullying that happened last year - insane.  And it wasn't only Sharna let's not forget that.

But you want National to release a report into bullying that happened 19 years ago?  Sorry that is alleged bullying.

actually it would be alleged violence and thuggery - I was probably being a bit too nice including him in the same category as Sharma's misdemeanours.

But yes it should be released - the report is recent, what's to hide? If there is nothing to hide, release it?  Why not?

Luxon announced it would be confidential  but independent.   You now want him to go against that?
Do you believe that if he was being less than truthful about the report outcome that the KC who did it wouldn't be saying something?  It has her name all over it.

The report was recent but the events weren't.  For Labour the events were recent but no investigation held, no report written.  Just label the complainant as having "mental health issues" while another of their MPs also has allegations come out.  While the Speaker has tax payers fork out $350000 plus for his bullying.

[harm_less]

I love the twisting of words in these situations

Dew KC's independent inquiry into the incident "did not substantiate any allegations of bullying outside of Sam's time at King's College", party president Sylvia Wood said on Monday.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/...se-it.html

National said the report found Uffindell "did not engage" in the behaviour his former flatmate detailed on RNZ last month - which prompted the inquiry.
That included dismissing her claims he bashed on her door, yelled obscenities and smashed up the flat through violent behaviour.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/...se-it.html

But the woman and her father stand firmly by her account of what happened at the flat and are deeply unhappy Uffindell's word was taken over hers.

She had originally said she fled to her friend's house but later said she ran to the library where she called her father, who put her up in a motel for the night.

The woman gave a written statement during the inquiry but did not participate further, believing it to be a political snow job - bought and paid for by the National Party.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/...se-it.html

And Luxon's refusal to give a straight answer in this interview: https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018859579

[Wainuiguy]

I love the twisting of words in these situations

And Luxon's refusal to give a straight answer in this interview: https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018859579

So she says she is being called a liar then proceeds to say the KC is one.  Sounds legit.  Maybe she was the bully?  Now she just having mental health issues.

[Lilith7]

I love the twisting of words in these situations

And Luxon's refusal to give a straight answer in this interview: https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018859579

Good grief! Blatantly using a blizzard of words to avoid answering.
I think politicians go to a special school where they learn to poli-waffle.

[Wainuiguy]

And Luxon's refusal to give a straight answer in this interview: https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018859579

Good grief! Blatantly using a blizzard of words to avoid answering.
I think politicians go to a special school where they learn to poli-waffle.

I believe it is taught by Professor Jacinda Ardern.

[king1]

I love the twisting of words in these situations

And Luxon's refusal to give a straight answer in this interview: https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018859579

he would of been better off not giving that interview

[Praktica]

Good grief! Blatantly using a blizzard of words to avoid answering.
I think politicians go to a special school where they learn to poli-waffle.

I believe it is taught by Professor Jacinda Ardern.

Typical national party tactics - accuse your opponents of what you are doing yourself.

[Wainuiguy]

And Luxon's refusal to give a straight answer in this interview: https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018859579

he would of been better off not giving that interview

Could say the same for the accuser in this case.....

[king1]

he would of been better off not giving that interview

Could say the same for the accuser in this case.....

Luxon was full of puff and bluster with no answers...

[Wainuiguy]

Could say the same for the accuser in this case.....

Luxon was full of puff and bluster with no answers...

The interviewer was trying hard for him to say the accuser was a liar - he wasn't having any of it.

[king1]

Luxon was full of puff and bluster with no answers...

The interviewer was trying hard for him to say the accuser was a liar - he wasn't having any of it.

yep but sometimes the words don't need to be said for meaning to be conveyed.

[Praktica]

You can bet that those that knew Uffindell at school, and university will be tracked down and interviewed, to see what more can be discovered. He'd better hope the bodies are buried deep.