There's some rather weak comparisons being made between reports of John Key's motorcade speeding through Samoa, and the infamous incident of Helen Clark speeding up to Christchurch to make a flight to get to the rugby in Wellington.
Very weak comparisons, so I thought I'd set the record straight, by comparing 8 key factors in the events, scoring a point against Clark and/or Key against each question to arrive at an "Outrage Index" score. The higher the final score, the more we can be justifiably outraged at either incident. But first, to get you into the mood for the Race, listen to this:
1. Helen Clark's car was traveling at a top speed of 170kph, whereas John Key achieved a top speed of only 120kph. That's a significantly slower speed, and ranked as "almost legal" whereas Helen's speed is clearly moving towards "World's Fastest Indian" level and immediate loss of license. Score Helen 1 outrage point, John 0
2. One car was speeding in a third world country, on a mere two lane highway, with livestock and children potentially on the side of the road, and the other was in Samoa. OK, we'll score that as one outrage point each.
3. Helen was speeding to get to the rugby. John Key was escaping a towering tsunami of water several metres high and his life was in danger. Hang-on, they were actually rushing him over to have a shower before heading out to the devastation zone. We'll score that as one outrage point each as well.
4. Helen was speeding in New Zealand, and is arguably beholden to NZ law, and yet she ignored it. John Key was in a motorcade under the control of the Samoan police, in Samoa. John Key was probably thinking "if this was my country I'd tell them to keep to the limit, by oath." 1 outrage point to Helen, and John get's away with the "When in Rome defense" (Note: You cannot use this defense as a North Islander visiting the South Island, because they are civilised there. However, it can work for any Kiwi visiting Auckland)
5. Helen, after almost breaking the sound barrier and traveling at a speed that would give any self-respecting boy racer fluffy dice, claimed not to notice anything untoward. She was apparently engrossed in the gripping novel 'Pinocchio'. On the other hand, John Key noticed going over 80 kph and so did his staff who asked the Police to slow down. 1 outrage point to Helen and 0 to John.
6. John Key wanted to attend an international disaster, whereas Helen wanted to get back in time to see the All Blacks play the Wallabies.... Now, before you go asserting that the All Blacks playing does constitute an international disaster, we need to put this in the context of 2004 when they were on form, so it's one outrage point for Helen even thinking the game could have gone like that. (Yes, we won 16-7)
7. Helen Clark admitted that she actually had no particular interest in rugby and had only gone to the July 17 Test in her capacity as the country's Prime Minister. John Key was also in Samoa as Prime Minister. That too could score nil all, but using the excuse "I don't actually give a toss about who keeps the Bledisloe Cup" is tantamount to treason in a Prime Minister, so it's one point to Helen again.
8. The fact that Chris Carter turned up in Samoa to survey the damage in his capacity as member of the opposition could also count against Helen in this contest, but I shall believe Phill Goff's hasty press release advising that Chris Carter had only turned up there due to be mistaken for a battered old leather suitcase destined for Tokyo, and had been claimed by the Labour Party as lost luggage. Regarding the rugby - I do not recall any National opposition members using their awesome power and authority during after match celebrations to beg for autographs, so zero for John there.
So the final score on the outrage meter is 7 out of 8 for Helen and only 2 out of 8 for John Key.
I trust the issue is now settled.
Very weak comparisons, so I thought I'd set the record straight, by comparing 8 key factors in the events, scoring a point against Clark and/or Key against each question to arrive at an "Outrage Index" score. The higher the final score, the more we can be justifiably outraged at either incident. But first, to get you into the mood for the Race, listen to this:
1. Helen Clark's car was traveling at a top speed of 170kph, whereas John Key achieved a top speed of only 120kph. That's a significantly slower speed, and ranked as "almost legal" whereas Helen's speed is clearly moving towards "World's Fastest Indian" level and immediate loss of license. Score Helen 1 outrage point, John 0
2. One car was speeding in a third world country, on a mere two lane highway, with livestock and children potentially on the side of the road, and the other was in Samoa. OK, we'll score that as one outrage point each.
3. Helen was speeding to get to the rugby. John Key was escaping a towering tsunami of water several metres high and his life was in danger. Hang-on, they were actually rushing him over to have a shower before heading out to the devastation zone. We'll score that as one outrage point each as well.
4. Helen was speeding in New Zealand, and is arguably beholden to NZ law, and yet she ignored it. John Key was in a motorcade under the control of the Samoan police, in Samoa. John Key was probably thinking "if this was my country I'd tell them to keep to the limit, by oath." 1 outrage point to Helen, and John get's away with the "When in Rome defense" (Note: You cannot use this defense as a North Islander visiting the South Island, because they are civilised there. However, it can work for any Kiwi visiting Auckland)
5. Helen, after almost breaking the sound barrier and traveling at a speed that would give any self-respecting boy racer fluffy dice, claimed not to notice anything untoward. She was apparently engrossed in the gripping novel 'Pinocchio'. On the other hand, John Key noticed going over 80 kph and so did his staff who asked the Police to slow down. 1 outrage point to Helen and 0 to John.
6. John Key wanted to attend an international disaster, whereas Helen wanted to get back in time to see the All Blacks play the Wallabies.... Now, before you go asserting that the All Blacks playing does constitute an international disaster, we need to put this in the context of 2004 when they were on form, so it's one outrage point for Helen even thinking the game could have gone like that. (Yes, we won 16-7)
7. Helen Clark admitted that she actually had no particular interest in rugby and had only gone to the July 17 Test in her capacity as the country's Prime Minister. John Key was also in Samoa as Prime Minister. That too could score nil all, but using the excuse "I don't actually give a toss about who keeps the Bledisloe Cup" is tantamount to treason in a Prime Minister, so it's one point to Helen again.
8. The fact that Chris Carter turned up in Samoa to survey the damage in his capacity as member of the opposition could also count against Helen in this contest, but I shall believe Phill Goff's hasty press release advising that Chris Carter had only turned up there due to be mistaken for a battered old leather suitcase destined for Tokyo, and had been claimed by the Labour Party as lost luggage. Regarding the rugby - I do not recall any National opposition members using their awesome power and authority during after match celebrations to beg for autographs, so zero for John there.
So the final score on the outrage meter is 7 out of 8 for Helen and only 2 out of 8 for John Key.
I trust the issue is now settled.