Wednesday, 6 December 2006

Brash responds to Hager

When Don Brash resigned from Parliament, he indicated that he wanted to respond substantively to Nicky Hager's book full of stolen emails. His latest newsletter, he says, is that response.
The information which Hager uses was stolen, of that I have no doubt, [says Brash] and he has almost certainly broken the law in doing so. How the information was stolen is still not clear, though of course I have views on that which I have conveyed to the police investigating the matter...
After discussing each of the claims in about as much detail as they merit -- "It is, of course, impossible to reply to every allegation in that book short of writing a book of my own" -- he concludes, accurately:
Hager never lets the truth get in the way of a good conspiracy theory. He has used information very selectively, apparently modified some of the emails he has obtained, and drawn conclusions which are, in many cases, quite absurd. One could get the impression from reading the book that the only thing my close advisers and I did all day was meet with narrowly-based religious groups, wealthy friends, and American neo-conservatives, which is patently ridiculous.

A few months ago, Hager fed the line to a Sunday paper that the SIS had infiltrated the Maori Party. Subsequent investigation proved that claim to be, in Helen Clark's words, a "work of fiction". Mr Hager specializes in outrageous claims. Nobody should take them too seriously.

As indicated earlier, there are lots of statements in Hager's book with which I disagree strongly. I do not intend to comment further on the issue until the police form a view on who stole the emails which provide some of the titillating material in the book.
The newsletter is online at Scoop. Incidentally, I note that Helen Clark commented recently that the practice of using the 111 computer system to access private information was "disgraceful." How much more disgraceful is the theft and publication of private correspondence. "Police take a very, very dim view of inappropriate use of the computer," said Clark over the use of 111 system, "and wherever it is detected they will act." So too should they act in the case of Hager's use of stolen correspondence. Consistency, if not integrity, demands that Clark support the prosecution of the theft.

UPDATE: The thief responds, conceding two errors, ignoring the charges of theft and that he fails to tell the whole story, and essentially demanding nothing less than a 500-page rebuttal of his own 350-page book. "The most notable feature of Don Brash's rebuttal, of course, is that he does not mention or bother to respond to all the hundreds of pages of revelations about his party where he was unable to find fault."

LINK: Nickey Hager's book - Don Brash Writes, Scoop

RELATED: Politics-NZ, Politics-National


  1. All assuming, of course, that the emails were stolen. The only reason there has not been a criminal investigation is that National can't be sure (or might suspect) that the leak was from a trusted source.

    Meanwhile you keep banging on about what a bad guy Nicky Hager is. We get it, I don't think anyone likes him.. preaching to the choir as it were..

  2. 'Banging on'? I don't know, Hamish .. I think it's just calling a spade a spade.

    Hager's background is important. He's from my hometown; in fact I went to high school with his youngest sister.

    When I knew them in the late 70's the family were overtly pro-Labour, anti-US, pro-union, pro-UN, anti-Springbok tour, pro-women's/Maori 'rights' .. you get the picture.

    Your classic white bleeding-heart lefties. He's just taken it to another level.

  3. Sure, I agree, so does everyone else.

    But I don't think he stole the emails. And if he didn't, who did? That is a far more interesting question that assuming that he somehow instigated the whole deal.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.