I fail to believe the way influential people have been treating the latest "indiscretion" by the Prime Minister as nothing more than "naughty" or a simple case of an "error of judgement".
Miss Clark is, after all, an academic and would have entered into this artistic sharade knowing full well her actions were plagiarist at best and fraudulent at worst.
To try and explain it away as being "no big deal" or justify it on the grounds of her "being a busy person trying to help a good cause" is a nonsense, and shows the arrogance and disdain she has for both the law and the people she represents.
Adding further insult, she goes on the attack by insinuating that others have done the same in the past. Not a scrap of evidence is presented for this, just her say-so. Anything to reduce her culpability.
This is not what we expect of a Prime Minister.
Helen Clark's charity art forgery is consistent with her disregard for truth and openness.
It should go well with her collection of airbrushed and tooth straightened personal photographs; one of which has now been used to displace the Queen's image in our diplomatic posts.
It is interesting to see how other people view Helen Clark's perceptions. To her our well-maintained and militarily competitive Skyhawks were "clapped out"; to the Canadians, they are something, which they are prepared to pay good dollars for to replace one of their older aircraft types.
The Canadians would not accept rubbish and neither should we.