How many strikes does he get?

Act MP David Garrett (aka The Garotte) seems to have survived well beyond the three strikes he promotes.

Today he is reported as making sexually inappropriate comments to a female Act Parliamentary staffer.

That is on top of another incident, related to me a couple of weeks ago by a Green Party Parliamentary Service staffer. The staff member reports that he had just arrived at Parliament carrying a suitcase with a Wellington airport destination tag still attached. The staff member advises me he and Garrett shared a lift from the ground floor of Bowen House, and Garrett, whom he had never spoken with before, out of the blue commented:

You wouldn’t have got that on as cabin baggage, would you. Because you’re not a Polynesian who can get away with pretending to not speak English!

How many strikes does this guy Garrett get?

  • Drunkenly equating homosexuals with paedophiles on Eye to Eye.
  • Promoting a Bill that the Attorney General considers to be in breach of the Bill of Rights Act.
  • Having the same Bill criticised by the United Nations Human Rights Council as likely to violate two human rights conventions.
  • Caught out lying in his claim that 77 lives would have been saved if his Three Strikes Bill had been in force. Official information responses from the Corrections Department reveal there would have been none.
  • Racist comments to a Green Party staffer.
  • Sexual harrassment of an Act Party Staffer.

He’s got at least 6 strikes now. So come on Rodney – how come you are just saying you “hoped the incident would not lead to the end of Garrett’s career as a member of Parliament.”?

Isn’t it time to get rid of this guy?

About these ads

28 thoughts on “How many strikes does he get?

  1. As Garrett is married to a lovely Tongan lady, speaks the language and lived and worked in Tonga for a while its laughable that you can call him racist.That comment was an affectionate injoke by someone who understands the culture and ways of Island people….who do pretend not to know English when it suits.

  2. Anyway Rodney has his tounge firmly in his cheek when he says he told Garrett off….most likely they had a laugh about it after Rodney went through the motions of the telling off.Rodney himself told me after the election that it was nice to have some beautiful young women about Parliment instead of those ugly Labour boilers that grossed the place out previously.

  3. James said: That comment was an affectionate injoke by someone who understands the culture and ways of Island people….who do pretend not to know English when it suits.

    If the person he was talking to was a Pacific Islander or someone else whom he knew well, I would accept that. We can all have a good laugh at our own culture – as someone of Irish descent I can enjoy Irish jokes. I can also be offended by them. It depends on who tells them and on the setting in which they are told.

    But the person Garrett was talking to in the lift was someone he had never met. I think that is a very bad look. It can’t be an “affectionate injoke” if you don’t know the person you are talking to.

  4. Oh FFS how pathetic can you get, what are you going to soil your panties over next

  5. “most likely they had a laugh about it after Rodney went through the motions of the telling off.Rodney himself told me after the election that it was nice to have some beautiful young women about Parliment”

    James that is sick. They laugh about sexual harrassment and see women as objects that are the perks of a job as an MP? Sickening, though not surprising at all, sadly.

    Sexist, homophobic creeps.

  6. Toad,

    Have you forgotten than the Three Strikes bill is about violent offences? The ‘strikes’ you point out as committed by David Garrett do not constitute serious, violent offences by any means. In fact, half of these so-called strikes on your list are debatable ideological perspectives, not objectively defined offences.

    Stop twisting the meaning of words to suit your agenda. What happened to the Greens and intellectual honesty?

  7. Aww didums! Some poor prissy flower got offended…..welcome to the real world petal….where people speak their minds and say what they REALLY mean.

    FACT:The work place is where many/most people,male and female meet and form relationships.Big suprise…thats where most people interact with others and can learn about the character of those about them….which leads to attraction and intereaction from which relationships are formed..

    If David was being a cunt and outside the bounds of “accepted” rules by being overbearing and a coercive objective threat to her rights and safety then fair enough…..take him down….but if he was being a typical Kiwi guy making friendly,small talk risky banter with a female colleage who turns out to be so prissy and wet that she needs a pity party thrown and her hand held then fuck her and her sad pathetic whimpy existence.

    I have been there and seen that shit up close and first hand…Ifthis situation is as I latterly described then this ‘Woman” will be ostrisised and avoided by her work colleages as a risk and a humour free zone and if she has any clue will piss off to work somewhere else….sorry but every action has an equal an oposite reaction…

    Women like that set real Women back miles in their quest for equal respect from male co workers….ones who really respect Women who stand up and give as good as they get and hold their ground as human beings…not pathetic precious flowers who can’t take the real world and the people in it…

    PC has created a legion of pathetic Women and even more pathetic man…..it needs killing…. and killing quick.

  8. “James that is sick. They laugh about sexual harrassment and see women as objects that are the perks of a job as an MP? Sickening, though not surprising at all, sadly.

    Sexist, homophobic creeps.”

    No it isn’t ….its human nature as intended and its been the norm for hundreds of thousands of years of human existence.It might seem brutish,low,and base…but its honest and human.

    Newsflash….Men find Women sexual attractive…or not…..golly! The horror! Deal with it toots…its the reality we are living in.Further newsflash….many women turn to total [deleted - grossly offensive] at the prospect of being with a man with power…is it right?…I don’t think so…is it reality? ….yep!

    Sure it would be far nicer if people were attracted to each other for “higher” reasons,and some are,no doubt….but physical aspects do matter…its the touch paper that ignites all subsequent interactions between people…deal with it…we are animals with animal natures…good looks attract…ugliness does not.

    I wish it was otherwise…Personally Im no Brad Pitt but I can accept the world as it is and that those are the values that my fellow human beings hold.

  9. james @ no.2. “Rodney himself told me after the election that it was nice to have some beautiful young women about Parliment instead of those ugly Labour boilers that grossed the place out previously”.
    This coming from the grossest of all the boilers, Mr Hyde himself. wtf?

  10. James,

    The behaviour was bad enough that it was a male Act staffer who overheard that\t went to Hide.

    Your entire hysterical rant is based on false assumptions, not to mention a particularly pathetic form of sexism.

  11. Pingback: It’s got to be the woman’s fault at The Standard

  12. Oh, Toad.

    My sympathies to the male staffer concerned, who has finally discovered the kind of unwanted interlocutory attention that women in the public service have been complaining about for the past 20 years.

    James – your attitude and comments merely prove my assertion.

    Lady Penelope – sic transit gloria mundi.
    Those who live by the sword, insisting the sun has never set on the colonial empire, shall die by their own sword, having been dragged screaming into this century by those who do not hesitate to define Aotearoa/New Zealand as ‘post-colonial’, and possibly on the verge of Republican… check John Key’s media statements before the election!

  13. As Garrett is married to a lovely Tongan lady, speaks the language and lived and worked in Tonga for a while its laughable that you can call him racist.That comment was an affectionate injoke by someone who understands the culture and ways of Island people….who do pretend not to know English when it suits.

    Toad didn’t say he was racist, he said “that thing he did was racist”. It’s a big distinction. Nobody is inherently offensive to every race, because there’s usually at least one they grew up with intimately. Defending him from a racist action by claiming he’s not consciously and systematically racist misses the point.

    It’s entirely possible to be totally up-to-par on the culture and sensitivities needed to avoid racial insensitivities to Tongans, but still let your brain get away with you regarding polynesians in general.

    Likewise, even though I’m pretty pro-feminist, I’ve still done sexist things in my life. (which is okay so long as you’re willing to realise you crossed a line) It happens. The problem is really is how people handle it- and I’ve yet to see a politician handle racist or sexist comments in a way that I found completely satisfactory- ie. acknowledge they were wrong and that the interpretation of their actions was valid even if they hadn’t meant offense, and that they have something to learn. That’s pretty much all you need to do.

  14. “Your entire hysterical rant is based on false assumptions, not to mention a particularly pathetic form of sexism.”

    Just stating the facts honey….do you need to have a cry? I’ll get you a tissue.

    My point was that weak silly Women like this degrade all other Women by making them appear pathetic and child like….quite the opposite of what the feminist revolution intended no?…

  15. James, your offensive terminology (which I deleted) from an ealier comment plus your continued misogynist comments are getting you close to being put into automatic moderation.

    Please be a little more temperate with your language and address the arguments rather than put women who comment here down.

  16. “James, your offensive terminology (which I deleted) from an ealier comment plus your continued misogynist comments are getting you close to being put into automatic moderation.”

    Toad….I used the word s**t to describe a certain kind of Woman who sleeps with men to gain favours etc…perfectly valid usage in the context of my point I would have thought.

    “Please be a little more temperate with your language and address the arguments rather than put women who comment here down.”

    Fine…your blog your rules….but I was mearly replying to this…

    ‘“Your entire hysterical rant is based on false assumptions, not to mention a particularly pathetic form of sexism.”

    …if Anita can dish it out she should be able to take it…and my comment was mild compared to what I could have said…and no-one has addressed my argument that this sort of situation actually damages Women by making them appear pathetic.

  17. It doesn’t just apply to women James.

    As Anna at The Hand Mirror has made very clear earlier this evening in response to Steve Tew of the NZ Rugby Football Union’s comments on the assault on a French rugby player, it is about blaming the victim – regardless of their gender.

  18. As Anna at The Hand Mirror has made very clear earlier this evening in response to Steve Tew of the NZ Rugby Football Union’s comments on the assault on a French rugby player, it is about blaming the victim – regardless of their gender.”

    What “victim”? There was no harrassment,which is a continued series of unwanted sexual actions….as far as we know David made ONE remake which actually offended a MALE staffer who reported it to Rodney…do we even know if the Women was offended herself or even liked the comment?She may have been in hysterics for all we know.

    The only victim in all this is David Garrett….a victim of PC boohoo BS

  19. Its seems that the “sexual comment” David made to the staffer was nothing of the sort.

    From Whaleoil..

    “My understanding of the Garrett situation is that his so called “off colour remarks” to a sissy staffer was along the lines of “Fuck Off, and stop annoying me”.

    Hardly the stuff that warrants copious quantities of lefty hand-wringing. Good god I tell people to fuck off daily, some, slower learners to be fair, more than once.”

    Amen.Being told to Fuck off is a Kiwi right of passage…who amoungst us hasn’t told,and been told by someone to “Fuck off” at some time?

    So its a beat up over a heat of the moment snap at someone who appears to have been “harrassing” Garrett herself judging by the tone of the comment…

    A waste of time over an incident that happens thousands of times all over NZ everyday…whoopdee-do.

  20. You’ll forgive me if I take Cameron Slater’s word with a grain of salt until someone more reliable confirms it, I hope.

  21. Acknowledging that there is a lot of crap that passes for journalism in the NZ Herald, I still think it has more credibility than Cameron Slater/Whaleoil (who has probably been personally phoned by Garrett re how to spin it).

    The Herald on Sunday’s original story was that:

    The comment [by Garrett] described an oral sex act.

    That has not been publicly disputed by either Garrett or Hide – only by Slater on his Whaleoil blog.

  22. Just to add there was no “water cooler” either….as someone on the ACT inside I know tells me.

  23. James, you seek to misdirect.

    The reference to the :water cooler” has been disputed. The reference to an oral sex act has not, other than by Whaleoil.

  24. What could he have said? “Get ya lips on this baby if you want a real drink?”

    Or the old classic…”While you are down there….”

    Whatever it seems she didn’t find it something to complain about…the wet male staffer did.If Garrett made such a coment I am in no doubt he was on friendly terms with the women to the point of feeling at ease enough to do so.Its the male staffer who’s taken it upon himself to complain on behalf of this women when she may have had no problem with the comment and didn’t want him to complain on her behalf…

    I hate crawly little snits like that.

  25. Quite seriously, if we can’t learn to distinguish between murderous violence (the legislation applies to that) and flippant talk, if we can’t learn to distinguish between sexual violence and, talk; We will have a fucking total societal meltdown.

    In fact, that is what is happening.

    You lot who demonise anyone associated with ACT as a knee-jerk reaction should sit down with someone for half an hour who has lost a daughter to murder, or with someone brutally sexually molested, and then spend time beating up on the proponent of tougher justice in NZ.

    ‘For fucks sake’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s