Lyndon Hood: Laundering Dirty Politics

Scoop recently imagined speaking to the Prime Minister about Nicky Hager's book Dirty Politics .

Scoop News: So this book, then. Fire away.

Prime Minister John Key, Probably: Well you have to remember Nicky Hager is a well-known conspiracy theorist.

SN: In that he is presenting evidence of people conspiring, secretly, to do things?

PMJK,P: Exactly. Point proven.

SN: Some of which sound illegal.

PM: They don't sound illegal to me.

SN: Why not?

PM: I'm not listening.

SN: Do they look illegal?

PM: I'm also not reading.

SN: You often don't read stuff that might contain inconvenient information, yes? Police reports about your ministers and so on?

PM: It's a thing.

SN: Anyway, if we can get past the ad hominem and focus on the evidence…

PM: Well can I just remind you that ad hominem means attacking the person and Nicky Hager isn't actually a person so it doesn't count. I have documentary evidence he's a cartoon viking. He should stick to that.

SN: Are you thinking of Hagar?

PM: Yes.

SN: When you confused Nicky Hager and Hagar the Horrible just then, were you doing it deliberately?

PM: I just don't know anyomore. But my point is, he's not a person so much as a bogeyman…

SN: He's not actually a bogeyman.

PM: Well what is he then? A frisbee? Some kind of potplant?

SN: I'm pretty sure he's a person.

PM: Well you might have an opinion about that but I think the people of New Zealand are really interested in the big issues.

SN: What are they?

PM: Well that here's this political smear campaign based on stolen emails that just describes ordinary politics.

SN: Can you really believe all once that it's based on evidence stolen from, y'know, the actual people in question and that it's entirely uninteresting non-news and that it's lies?

PM: No, but I can believe them all one at a time. I've had training.

SN: Do you think, if the documents were originally stolen, it might still be in the public interest to bring the behaviour described in them to light?

PM: I tend to talk as if the public are interested in what I want them to be interested in, and I'm not interested in this book at all.

SN: And you do think the events described in the book are politics as usual?

PM: Yes.

SN: Is that a good thing?

PM: Is it good that it's politics as usual? Or is it good that I think it is?

SN: Both?

PM: Well there's no point judging is there? I can't control the political environment I live in. Nor can I control whether you find the blasé attitude I take towards it utterly terrifying.

SN: So do you think your campaign will be damaged?

PM: Well there isn't any one single smoking gun in the book.

SN: Really? You don't think there might be one or two?

PM: People have looked very carefully. All there is in the book is bits of paper with words on them.

SN: But are there any figurative smoking guns?

PM: Oh I see. No.

SN: Are you sure you're not being a little optimistic?

PM: Well I can see it could be a bit difficult to make out a figurative smoking gun in among so many figurative steaming knives and figurative blood-spattered cudgels but I reckon we're in the clear.

SN: Not Jason Ede accessing Labour's servers and using his access to intelligence agency information against your political opponents?

PM: Well Jason Ede doesn't work for the Prime Minister's Office.

SN: Who does he work for?

PM: Dunno really. He's is around the office a lot though, now you mention it. Maybe he makes the tea or polishes the door handles? Did you consider that?

SN: Or what about evidence of Judith Collins getting a prisoner transferred as a favour to a friend?

PM: How would you like to come and photograph me standing next to Peter Jackson?

SN: I'd rather you answered my question.

PM: Yes, well, we all know that's not going to happen.

SN: I'll just put that it's lies, shall I? So what about the way ole Whale Oil basically ends up looking like your best mate?

PM: Suppose Peter Jackson was my final offer.

SN: I'll get my camera.

© Scoop Media