Rabbiting on about a losing sign of the times

You are a loser. PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES
You are a loser. PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES
I know what it is to be labelled a loser.

There is photographic evidence.

You will have to take my word for that.

The quality of the photo in question is not good enough for publication. (The deluded photographer disputes this, but it is fair to say it looks as if it was taken during a solar eclipse. All of us in the photo have an air of the unhinged. Enough said.)

The photo (sent to me three times) formed part of the sisters’ Murchison A&P Show postmortem in February.

The other three are pictured clutching their first, second and third prize-winning knitted rabbits along with the official certificates itemising their place-getting.

I am bravely smiling, holding my rabbit (who later found a happy home with my 95-year-old aunt and her cat Dolly) and a card saying LOSER.

The photographer was my youngest sister, the Earthquake Baby, who positioned herself (and her third-placed rabbit) in the foreground.

I have not asked, but I suspect the only reason she did not get me to form an L on my forehead with my fingers is she knew I would struggle to get it round the right way.

When we discussed the photo last week, the EB had not heard of the controversy around Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs Andrew Bayly’s visit to a Spy Valley Wine premises in Marlborough on October 3.

Mr Bayly fronted up to the media on Friday, October 18 to apologise for his behaviour towards a worker who had complained the minister repeatedly called him a loser, made an L sign on his forehead, and told him to f... off during a visit.

While Mr Bayly repeatedly said he apologised unreservedly for his behaviour, he also did not accept he had sworn at the worker and denied he had been drinking before the encounters.

He had first told Prime Minister Christopher Luxon the night before his media apology, only when it was clear the understandably disgruntled worker, unhappy with Mr Bayly’s earlier efforts to make amends in a letter of October 11 to his employer, had sent a letter of complaint which was circulated to various political parties.

The complainant said his interactions with the minister made him feel embarrassed, angered and powerless. He considered it degrading to be insulted in such a personal way and made the object of ridicule in front of his peers and colleagues.

It is difficult to see how Mr Bayly could ever have considered this bizarre behaviour was light-hearted towards someone he had never met before.

I also find it curious that in his October 18 email to the aggrieved worker, he says "please let me know if you feel it would be valuable for us to speak and when would suit you".

In my experience, people subjected to appalling and belittling behaviour want to run a mile from the abuser.

What was also baffling was Mr Luxon’s response. If he has done anything to fully investigate what happened, and there must have been witnesses, he has not shared that publicly.

Mr Bayly’s account was confused, and it was not a good look when Leader of the House Chris Bishop had to quickly confer with him when Parliament was sitting to clarify aspects of the story as the PM was attempting to answer questions about it.

Mr Luxon seemed to think it was OK not to sanction the minister because Mr Bayly had apologised, and it would not happen again. Really?

The sensible approach would have been to stand him down temporarily, investigate the matter properly and take it from there.

When I told the EB about all this, her response was that the difference between me and the complainant was that I was a loser.

The knitted rabbit competition had been my idea, I had plenty of experience at making them, but I had not secured a placing among the novice rabbit creators.

Also, I am family, and in our family, trash talking around our A&P Show entries, while it might sound appalling to outsiders, is all part of the fun for us.

But she went a step too far when she said I was the one who suggested I hold the LOSER label. When I contested that, all she could come up with was "if the name fits, just saying".

My response: "Loser or liar? Which is better?"

She suggested I could check out her version of events with the other sisters.

But if it is good enough for the PM not to investigate stuff, why should I bother?

She did not really have an answer to that, but she could say with certainty she had not been drinking before, during or after the event.

I had to accept that. She is a teetotaller.

— Elspeth McLean is a Dunedin writer.