Probably old info. But who cares, in a few days it wont be a leak it will be accurate. Its point scoring caused by a naughty someone, there is that. So, someone is not into privacy, friendly with National, that's what most overlook. Dodgy is the undertone.

gzt: Finance Minister Robertson is saying it's older and most likely originates from Treasury Dept rather than Parliament. Not a good look for budget security.

True. Must be a few involved in it. Also not a good look for it being supplied to Bridges. I'm sure he has no idea where it came from or whom...  :-) Like I said, a bit on the dodgy side to put it mildly. And that's part of our Parliament, ok.

So, instead of being seen as trustworthy by publicly saying it was offered to National and rejected,

National took the low road, for me it just confirmed Bridges is not a leader I would trust.

sir1963:

 

So, instead of being seen as trustworthy by publicly saying it was offered to National and rejected,

 

National took the low road, for me it just confirmed Bridges is not a leader I would trust.

 

You nailed it. Its Labours problem it leaked, even though there are other parties involved. But, it wasn't dropped on the floor and National found it. Bridges wont say the source. Also, it leaked throughout the day. No, he acquired the source, and dribbled it out all day. Also he released the report on Nationals culture of sex discrimination on the same day, so that was fourth rate news. It was about women being safe (Oct 2018). It was about Jamie Lee-Ross and more. Today it wasn't about that, never was he said, opposite to Oct 2018. . ironically its secret! There is a 2 page summary, women are not mentioned. Who was interviewed? Not women it seems. This is so poor its not funny. Bring Collins in, this is a farce. Two examples of dirty politics. I dint lie Collins, she is too toxic, don't like Paul she is tweak, there are others behind them that look ok, but a hard ar$e like Collins might be what's needed. 

sir1963:

 

So, instead of being seen as trustworthy by publicly saying it was offered to National and rejected,

 

National took the low road, for me it just confirmed Bridges is not a leader I would trust.

 

I love how you've totally chosen to ignore the 'how' the leaks came about to ensure that blame can only be placed on the Nats in all this. 

Plenty here were happy to speculate on Bridges' leadership based on a leak of his travel expense. Either it goes both ways or isn't acceptable at all. 

GV27:

 

sir1963:

 

So, instead of being seen as trustworthy by publicly saying it was offered to National and rejected,

 

National took the low road, for me it just confirmed Bridges is not a leader I would trust.

 

 

I love how you've totally chosen to ignore the 'how' the leaks came about to ensure that blame can only be placed on the Nats in all this. 

 

Plenty here were happy to speculate on Bridges' leadership based on a leak of his travel expense. Either it goes both ways or isn't acceptable at all. 

 

You are correct. But I dont see anyone saying its not Labours fault. Nor saying its Nationals fault. Its about behaviour. Its clear that National sourced it, or were offered it by those friendly to them and used it to best effect. As stated its getting pretty low and devious. That the issue, not the leak. Its gutter politics. And its only about a budget that is to be released in a day, and a budget thats not about all the normal huge topics, its mainly a social budget, its not headline news that most budgets are.

No, its not blaming the leak, its criticising the gutter politics.  

tdgeek:

 

No, its not blaming the leak, its criticising the gutter politics.  

 

Am I to take it that Simon Bridges has invented the one man tango then? 

GV27:

 

tdgeek:

 

No, its not blaming the leak, its criticising the gutter politics.  

 

 

Am I to take it that Simon Bridges has invented the one man tango then? 

 

Dont follow you, sorry. Google doesn't help.

tdgeek:

 

GV27:

 

tdgeek:

 

No, its not blaming the leak, its criticising the gutter politics.  

 

 

Am I to take it that Simon Bridges has invented the one man tango then? 

 

 

Dont follow you, sorry. Google doesn't help.

 

It's a dance. Usually there are two people involved ;)

To contribute more meaningfully: It's a reasonably shrewd move. Ministers can't respond, Robertson will be too busy finding out what happened to reply properly and all of the planning would have been around the pageantry of a 'well-being' budget, which in reality, is going to be just like any other budget. 

It basically hands National a vacuum that they can dominate. I am sure there will leaks in the future, but there's probably going to be a few announcements kept in reserve that they can drop if they need to get control of the discussion back off them in future. Frankly, Bridges would be a rubbish politician if he didn't grab hold of it, and most people demanding he take some sort of high ground would only find some other way in which he fails in their eyes to complain about. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. 

GV27:

 

tdgeek:

 

No, its not blaming the leak, its criticising the gutter politics.  

 

 

Am I to take it that Simon Bridges has invented the one man tango then? 

 

Seems to me that the only one dancing is Winston. 

GV27:

 

tdgeek:

 

GV27:

 

tdgeek:

 

No, its not blaming the leak, its criticising the gutter politics.  

 

 

Am I to take it that Simon Bridges has invented the one man tango then? 

 

 

Dont follow you, sorry. Google doesn't help.

 

 

It's a dance. Usually there are two people involved ;)

 

To contribute more meaningfully: It's a reasonably shrewd move. Ministers can't respond, Robertson will be too busy finding out what happened to reply properly and all of the planning would have been around the pageantry of a 'well-being' budget, which in reality, is going to be just like any other budget. 

 

It basically hands National a vacuum that they can dominate. I am sure there will leaks in the future, but there's probably going to be a few announcements kept in reserve that they can drop if they need to get control of the discussion back off them in future. Frankly, Bridges would be a rubbish politician if he didn't grab hold of it, and most people demanding he take some sort of high ground would only find some other way in which he fails in their eyes to complain about. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. 

 

Tango, yes, one man tango I thought was another meaning. Urban dictionary type of thing.

Shrewd is good. But is it shrewd or is it planned, underhand antics? Yes, it gets Govt off side, but cant National bitch about the budget when its out, rather than "acquire it" There is no way it just happened to find him. I watched state elections one year in Louisiana. One guy was telling us all that his opponent got caught for stealing candy as a kid. On and on, etc, its gutter politics. Id rather that Kiwis argue the points, than stoop that low. If Simon found papers arriving on his desk throughout the day and he saw hey this is good, then fine. But we can all see its not like that. Leak? Theft? Paid a stooge? Then the National Party discrimination report, thats worse. I do not like Crusher, but I'd trade her as leader anytime now. Simon has to go. Most of the Govt are soppy, most Nationals are whiners (yes and expected as Opposition) but I dont class any of them as devious. 

GV27:

 

sir1963:

 

So, instead of being seen as trustworthy by publicly saying it was offered to National and rejected,

 

National took the low road, for me it just confirmed Bridges is not a leader I would trust.

 

 

I love how you've totally chosen to ignore the 'how' the leaks came about to ensure that blame can only be placed on the Nats in all this. 

 

Plenty here were happy to speculate on Bridges' leadership based on a leak of his travel expense. Either it goes both ways or isn't acceptable at all. 

 

One of the reason budgets are kept secret is to stop "insider trading".

And note, I also said National/Bridges could have said it was offered to them and they rejected it , they would have been seen as the good guys, people with integrity. It was THEIR choice, no once forced them to take the low road. And yes, its not acceptable at all.

JaseNZ:

 

This has got to hurt if this is true, Seems to be a lot of leeks going on now days. Grant Robertson is saying some are true and some are not. If some are true then that must be a leak.

 

Clearly some folk within the powerbase are not happy. 

Treasury has referred the apparent leaking of Budget information to police, saying it has sufficient evidence to indicate that its systems have been deliberately and systematically hacked.

This is very serious, not a good look if they knowingly knew this, all will be denied in this refrain though.