Phil Goff and his briefings he never had

Phil Goff is now frantically trying to disguise his embarrassment at the fact that?he was briefed by the SIS on the Israeli ?spy? story despite public claims to the contrary.

The reason Goff should be held to account over this, is that he made hay in the media for over a week ? claiming he was being kept in the dark ? and implying that the head of the SIS had not done his job. He went large on the issue.

On Radio New Zealand two weeks ago he categorically stated he had not been briefed.

Radio NZ: Phil Goff says he was not briefed.

He even mentions that he gets regular briefings from the SIS. ? Why didn?t he check his facts before pushing on with the story for the rest of the week?

As late as Monday the week after he went large on the story he was still claiming he knew nothing and was busy fuelling speculation.

bFM: Phil Goff still claiming he was not briefed.

So now, after a week of huffing and puffing, we discover Phil Goff was indeed briefed – but the issue was so insignificant it was not worth remembering.

But it gets worse for Phil Goff.

After watching him spin this to maximum advantage for himself then squirm under questioning I saw that there was the possibility that Phil Goff was being extremely economical with the truth. So I sent in an OIA to the SIS and today I got their reply. [OIA letter and documents.]

Contrary to Phil’s assertions that the item was just flicked past him, it was actually the third agenda item in his March 14?briefing?and not only that re-briefed a his April 6 briefing.

It certainly looks far different from Phil Goff’s description of just “flicked past”. Phil Goff also raised questions about the issue:

“Discussed at length” seems incongruent with “flicked past”. The documents released by the SIS, though heavily redacted also show that a full?page?report on the investigation was shown to Phil Goff.

Phil Goff has categorically lied about this episode from the go. He lied about not being briefed, he was. He lied about not covering?the?detail, he was.??He lied about it being inconsequential, it wasn’t, he asked questions.

This man is unfit to lead a cub scout troop let alone the nation, he should resign or Labour should gank him.