Member log in

Labour doesn’t want Hosking

Stuff reports:

The  Party is in a standoff with TVNZ over plans to use presenter  to moderate the live televised leaders’ debates.

The state broadcaster is refusing to budge, declaring: “Mike is our man.”

Leader David Cunliffe’s inner circle believes the Seven Sharp host is too close to National and has compiled a dossier of examples.

I think it is pretty obviously that Mike Hosking has a centre-right worldview. Just as John Campbell has a centre-left worldview. The issue is not their world-view, but whether they would be biased and be unfair moderating a debate.

I’ve never heard of National demanding (for example) that John Campbell not moderate a TV3 leaders debate, so am surprised that Labour is so sensitive that they are trying to demand a moderator they agree with.

National’s campaign manager, Steven Joyce, rejected this and said he was happy with the current format of prime minister versus opposition leader.

He said the party had no issues with TV3 using John Campbell for its televised debate. “We’ve all got to trust the professionalism of the interviewers,” he said. “There are people who think John Campbell is to the Left but the prime minister is more than happy to front on both TV channels.”


Political commentator David Farrar posts at Kiwiblog.

Comments and questions

What Labour is really saying is that it would prefer someone stupid to do the interviewing so they don't get called out on the B.S. they are promoting.

Ain't gonna happen.

No actually they are just wanting someone who isn't as utterly biased as Hosking. The idea of that obnoxious prat attempting to mediate a debate is appalling.

Not half as biased as John Campbell though.

You mean like Campbell who never met a Green he didn't want to kiss the a** of?

Campbell's idea of a hard question for the Greens is "How hard is it to be so saint-like"? But he's not biased like that nasty Hosking.

About the only thing Helen Clark did that I agreed with was when she called Campbell a little creep, and walked out.

Why would I, as a Labour supporter like Campbell? I still remember his ambus of Helen Clarker with Hager and his ridiculous CornGate nonsense.

Campbell can interview all the Greenies he wants too as he seems to be one himself.

I don't see them complaining about Campbell - and he is far more biased than Hosking.

If you rewatch the reach around that was Len Brown's mea culpa then you can see just how bias Campbell is. The idea of that obnoxious prat attempting to mediate a debate is appalling; and yet neither Labour nor National are complaining about him.

This is really quite disgusting from Labour...

For Labour to whinge about a TVNZ moderator not being a known-Leftie sycophant to lead the debate is a public admission that they wanted to "screw the scrum" before the debate is even started.

The fact that Shane & Tamati aren't the moderators to Labour's liking just begs for a big tax payer funded "Diddums" to them.

Perhaps Labour should approach the debates with a preference for a level playing field for all, instead of yet another sorry whinge fest they can't have the debate led by one of their more sympathetic friends in the media.

Perhaps Labour should just rely on professionals doing a professional moderation job and contest the debate on the strength of their credible argument, instead of trying for another "pledge card manoeuvre" with the leaders debate?

Labour are so sorry - Michael J Savage would be rolling in his grave!

I think this is all to muzzle Hosking. Labour believes by making this fuss, Hosking will go all out to allow them to attack Key more than normal. They are probably right too. Hosking while full of himself will pander to the audience to try to show he is as good as his predecessor, Holmes. They should get Henry now with him adjudicating I think many more would tune in.

How good was Holmes or is that a myth?

I would like to see the debate moderated by Jeremy Wells playing Mike Hosking.

If you have a quarter of a brain that works, you would be of no use to the Labour movement, they are only interested in a certain type of people who are society drop out's, who rely on any organization that will provide for them, in NZ the Labour Govt did a wonderful job of creating a society, where you needed 3 jobs to survive, plus a Government top up's to survive, in fact if they had won the Election which got them dumped, they would have created an environment where most NZ'rs would not have survived without Government intervention financially, so would have never ever been voted out of power, if Clarke had won that Election, we would all be living a life similar to any other Socialist Country in the World, Korea comes to mind!!! we are so lucky to have got out of that situation, look at Australia right now after Labour Governments have just about destroyed the country!!
We must be very wary of any sort of Labour Governments in NZ for this very reason, they want total control of every thing, Clarke very nearly achieved it remember!!! light bulbs, how long you could shower for, what sort of cars we were to drive and a lot more in the pipeline, much more and we would all be wearing denim hats and suits!!!

Maybe the reason you can't punctuate is because you don't read.

Maybe the reason you don't read is because you listen to Hosking.

The need to consign all of your political enemies to the loser classification says far more about your failed intellectual credentials than it does of alternative political positions. I don't think that all Nats, or Greenies, Conservatives (hmm well maybe), or Act supporters are idiots just because we disagree politically. Politics and Government functions best when there are strong well thought out alternative views that challenge the ruling ideology.

And your last sentence is exactly why Cunliffe should have no fear with Hosking running the debate.

Well said

Well said.

Labour's right, but for the wrong reason.

It's not that Hosking's right wing.

It's that he's incapable of sustaining a coherent discourse.

This is brilliant, first Cunliffe is 'sorry for being a man' and now he's proving it by being a big pussy over choice of compare in an election debate. Ok so TVNZ has Hosking but as others point out TV3 has Campbell - seems balanced enough.
Keep digging David C, don't stop now !

It's not that Labour don't want Hosking, they just want a gender-neutral interviewer in keeping with their avowed ethos of a 50/50 makeup when it comes to their MPs.

"Calling all eunuchs, androgynous-types, hermaphrodites and trans-genders....."

If Labour don't like the interviewer they should simply refuse to take part. That's the best way to enhance their chances anyway.

Hosking is a kiss-ass to JK and he is incapable of moderating from a neutral position. He's a right wing, opinionated shock-jock.

If the Nats want to take a similar objection re Campbell, that's fine too.

Labour again lets itself get side tracked by trivia, rather than focussing on the policy debate. (Assuming Labour has some policy to debate.)

Of course Labour have policy to debate. There's the thing about trucks keeping left, bringing back the Moa, compulsory Maori in schools (although maybe that's a maybe) They are going to tax the rich more, which is a truly novel approach as we have always taxed on income, not wealth. There's even more of that wonderful stuff but I've forgotten the details.

You would think that Labour would relish this rather than avoid it. There answers should be so robust as to polarise MH and in doing so secure more voters. Seriously.....

It's a piece of moral cowardice from Cunliffe. If he can't cope with some questioning from someone who doesn't think the sun shines out his bottom, how is he going to cope with the much harsher glare the media will focus on him if he becomes Prime Minister?

Clearly there is only room for "yes men" around him.

Best Cunliffe doesn't turn up for the debate.Labour will get more votes if he is not there.

Question: Will Cunliffe apologise for refusing to use Hosking, and, will he apologise for apologising? Further, what sort apology will he give? Will he give an apologist's apology, and apologise for that, or will he just apologise for the apology?

And if he does take part in the debate will he be wearing his red scarf?

I predict that this dummy spitting will be followed by an apology

Cunliffe -TVNZ: Sorry, but Mike Hosking is so pro National that he might not be nice to me and could hurt my feelings. Can it be someone else?

Cunliffe - Hosking: Sorry to call you during dinner. Nothing personal, but I don't want you as the interviewer. I'm sorry but that's the way I feel.

Next Day

Cunliffe - Hosking: I'm copping a fair bit of flak over this. On second thoughts, it's OK for you to do the interview. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Hoskings really gave Cunliffe a back-handed serve last night by saying even his own kids are called moron's by Hosking.

David really should understand that in the very unlikely event he became Prime Minister,he wouldn't always be able to only talk with Cuba and Venezuela - he would need to talk many people and some won't like his politics and will call him on it.

Saying "It's not fair" when on the world stage will only embarrass NZ even further, so just stop. Stick to the knitting... and knit yourself a new scarf already!

But please keep up the whinge-fest David, you're doing absolute wonders in the polls as a result.

Hold on - rather than slagging these guys, could we focus on who will moderate? Maybe someone with the actual skill-set, as opposed to a TV "journalist"