Home > NZ Politics > Should parliamentary staffers be fair game?

Should parliamentary staffers be fair game?

A few issues doing the rounds at the moment, most of which disappoint, and a few of which I will blog on today.  In order of importance, beginning with the least important (the other one will be Goff’s Nationhood speech).

Charles Chauvel, who I will begin by saying has been particularly strong for Labour in the House and with his media lines on the ETS amendment legislation in the past week, partakes in some rather less inspiring antics with this blog post on redalert.

He posts the Facebook page of an Act staffer who jokes that he “is booked for 8 nights in the Abel Tasman National Park…before Minister Brownlee rips it ip.” Which is actually kind of funny. Hell, it’s the kind of thing I might write, if I was fortunate enough to possess such wit.

It is not the first time Charles has posted comments from parliamentary staffers on Labour’s blog (or used their names in the House).  As an ex-parliamentary staffer, and hopefully a future one, I do not find this precedent particularly encouraging.  In saying that, I am reasonably careful, at least I try to be, in what I write on platforms such as Facebook or this blog for that matter.  However, it would be nice to know that people aren’t sniffing around waiting for a badly timed joke.

Humour transplant’s for Labour have been suggested and Charles’ biggest National Party voting fan is understandably disheartened.  On the bright side, Trevor Mallard used the comments thread of the post to say he: “would have come down on the other side of the judgement call Charles made. If staff members enter the debate themselves – make more traditional public statements, attack other parties then they are fair game. But they don’t have the house to answer back as we do as politicians. Them being stupid not enough reason for having a go.” – Good on you Trevor.

  1. Craig Ranapia
    November 27, 2009 at 11:36 am | #1

    Fair game for what? As I said in the comments to that post, I certainly hope Parliamentary staffers retain their sense of humour — not least their ability to take the piss out of themselves — because it’s the only way to stay sane for any length of time.

    A sense of perspective and proportionate response doesn’t hurt either. A pissy blog post and wasting a question on a fucking staffer’s transparently sarcastic Facebook status update? Please…

  2. piglet
    November 27, 2009 at 11:57 am | #2

    and as for Trevors prissy little comment about the staffer being stupid, that the fawning left are praising as the balance displayed in the new labour movement, puh-lease.

  3. November 27, 2009 at 7:24 pm | #3

    It’s weird. I have no idea why this angered me as much as it did. Clearly, in the greater scheme of things, it’s a trifle. Also, I have no intention of working anywhere near Parliament, so I don’t have any skin in the game.

    Yet…

    It all just seems a little bit creepy. I suppose it’s because I don’t want Wellington to turn into DC, where you can’t get a job without six months of vetting, and where one stray joke taken out of context can sink a career.

  4. Kenny Denver
    November 28, 2009 at 1:22 pm | #4

    Jake, the ACT staffer was dumb. Nice to see you jumping to the defence of an ACT staffer. Supporting your own party and getting on with helping to get them re-elected would be better use of your time. Eating your own in public is unhelpful.

  5. November 28, 2009 at 2:08 pm | #5

    Is Trevor Mallard, who also said he didn’t agree with Charles’ decision to blog that, “eating his public and being unhelpful”?

    This blog is for writing about politics not about supporting a political party.

    And I think you’ll find that that is what the people who read it are actually looking for.

  1. No trackbacks yet.