Here's the story in full from The Waikato Times. I'd be interested in your comments.
"A Hamilton Green Party candidate's future with the party is under a cloud after he admitted to misleading the Waikato Times.
Max Coyle, a candidate for the Hamilton West electorate, apologised for misleading the paper after his partner Melissa Campbell appeared in a story on Monday about the young mum's likely voting intentions ahead of the election.
The story was part of an ongoing series on the region's voters.
She did not reveal her partner's role in the Greens.
In a statement released yesterday by the party, Mr Coyle said he made an error of judgment by not ensuring the paper knew he was Ms Campbell's partner and he offered his "sincere apologies for the misleading the Waikato Times".
"I apologise to the party for this error. And I also apologise unreservedly to the Waikato Times. "
Green Party co-convener Georgina Morrison said the party expected a high standard of behaviour and was disappointed by the events.
"Max and his partner assured us that they did not deliberately mislead the media. He is a young new candidate, with great enthusiasm but not much political experience."
Mr Coyle would take a few days off to "reflect on what had happened."
While his candidacy is not suspended it has cast a shadow on the party in a week when it is expected to release the rest of its candidates for Waikato seats.
"We will be discussing with Max his ongoing role in the Green Party," said Ms Morrison.
Waikato Times editor Jonathan MacKenzie said Ms Campbell had every opportunity to disclose her partner's role in the Green Party.
During the interview she was asked what her partner did, why she was supporting the Greens and how she became involved in Green issues but she did not disclose her affiliations.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
I'm sure Phil Goff will demand his immediate resignation.
It's a crucial issue Fred.
Pivotal.
Simple Bobby,he has been sprung and now damage control is underway.
SNAFU
Ya need an edit function Bobby, that last I said was from me.
Cheers
Sprung failing to ensure that the paper knew he was Ms Campbell's partner - yes.
Silly billy.
No edit function available sorry Lofty. I'm the one who needs it most. Not a great proof-reader, me.
You can choose your friends (partners etc) but not your family. Would his friends be expected to declare they are friends with a Green candidate? I don't choose my friends etc because of their political views and affiliations.
If she was saying she was going to vote National would she have to declare that her partner was a Green candidate. Her view is HER view, gone are the days of subservient women that bow to the desires of their husband (thank god, I wouldn't have coped).
I hope we don't end up like USA where every interview and conversation involves "Are you a Republican or Democrat?"
Why is she even questioned what her partner does? Maybe they already knew and wanted her to walk into it. Do they ask the men in the series what their partner does? Reeks of a setup or sexism. A decent journalist would do his own homework. What bearing does it have, I don't think I've shared similar views to many of my ex's, cos I can have my own. FFS
Coyle was proud of the article and was tweeting to draw attention to it. There is the complicity.
It is only about the Green's "holier than thou" pedestal being a fiction.
Nobody cares that they are devious, just they they tar everybody else whilst claiming purity for themselves.
Lofty, the edit function is in the "preview" pane.
Ah thanks Anon
Yes, well like I said yesterday, it is difficult to hold the moral high ground when smarmy wee twitters (tweeters, twotters or whatevers) like Coyle let you down eh Bobby.
Kylie, with all "due respect" it is not about choosing friends or partners, it is about complicity in a hoodwinking exercise, but I suspect you know that.
By the way Bobby what is the difference between a co-convenor & a Co-Leader???
The person who purports to speak on behalf of your party, and is lamely tying to hose this silly little issue down, has the title of co-convenor....wot the...is that?
Convenor of what??? Who do you take orders from, who gives direction??
Co means more than 1, how many??
Phew what a shower to hang your flag with Bobby, but I suppose when it all gets too much you can ask politely for your flag back eh? :-)
Lofty - I assume you make that comment because of my recent media. I know I am not involved in 'hoodwinking' because I have argued my case for 4 years, feel free to check minutes. I also begged him not to run for Board as I would be tarred with his brush but bloody independent thinker that he is, made his own mind up. Comments like your's are why I asked him not to get involved.
You do not respond as to whether the 'what does your partner do?'question is relevant to a political interview. Were the others asked too? Is being a candidate is employment? (I will be checking when I get a chance) I know if someone asked me that of Charlie I wouldn't say it was community board member.
It would have been prudent to declare the relationship. Not doing so reflects poorly on the individuals and the party.
This situation is hardly unique, though. Many a time I have wondered how Jane Clifton was considered to be a serious political commentator with her poorly disclosed links to the intimate details of the upper echelons of the Natiional party.
Anonymous@10:57
Coyle was proud of the article and was tweeting to draw attention to it. There is the complicity.
Complicity?I don't think so. His proudly tweeting doesn't show that he was complicit in the original action by his partner, it shows that he delighted in the article. That's all. You are stretching the truth here.
It is only about the Green's "holier than thou" pedestal being a fiction.
The Greens don't have a 'holier than though' pedestal. That exists as a judgement in your mind. If they did however, the actions of the partner of one of the Greens new candidates wouldn't tarnish the reputations of the Green MPs, those individuals I champion for their honesty, at all. Even if the candidate was guilty of failing to alert the journalist to the details regarding his partner, it's a trifling issue and hardly condems all Greens to the status of the other parties.
Nobody cares that they are devious, just they they tar everybody else whilst claiming purity for themselves.
'They' are not devious, as you claim. They don't claim purity, as you claim.
'They' don't tar everybody else' as you claim. Your argument is very poor Anonymous, and seems to consist of a rehash of your own prejudices, but I do appreciate your making it.
September 21, 2011
Lofty - no, it's not difficult to hold the high moral ground, though perhaps this episode shows that nothing is absolute. I make my claims for the Green MPs. To claim that every Green supporter, candidate, staff member is 'pure of heart and action' would be foolish. I don't. In general terms though, I hold that the Green Party MPs have a much higher standard of behaviour than many of the other political parties on the planet.
Armchair Critic is correct, it would have been prudent. The partner of the candidate has dropped the Greens into a minor controversy by her lack of foresight. I won't lash her for it though, as I don't know the circumstances and the degree to her intention to deceiove, if any.
Lofty - I've no status in the Green Party and never took much notice of the structures - co-convener (there must be two I suppose) are like second-tier managers I suppose, like Judith Kirk was for the Nats.
As to my flag - you can keep it, I'll weave another from hemp and muka in a trice.
No Kylie, I made that comment in regard to the two smarty pants greenies in Hamilton only, I am flattered that you think I may take an interest in your affairs though.
In general I absolutley agree with you in regard to private and priviledged personal info.
In the Hamilton case, these two were being duplicious, everyone knows it, they were sprung, and good job too.
You cannot fool all of the people all of the time eh Bobby.
Now I will have to google muka......as if I don't have enough to do Bobby, thanks.
Ah well I am off on a 2.5 hour drive to Opotiki now, so I will catch all you green machines tomorrow.
Robert Guyton @ 12.43pm
Complicity?I don't think so.
Greens don't have a 'holier than though' pedestal.
'They' are not devious, as you claim. They don't claim purity, as you claim.
'They' don't tar everybody else' as you claim.
So there you are, all untrue.
Robert said so.
And I'm the go-to man for such claims Anonymous. I'll put you right!
Post a Comment