Mike Hosking's presence on the stage helps Jacinda, but his dimissive treatment of voting rights should disqualify him from hosting debate

Mea culpa, at least a bit. 

i said lefty efforts to oust Mike Hosking were dumb and counterproductive. They are.

i said you couldn't conjure in a lab an adversary as perfectly suited as Hosking to highlighting Ardern's strengths in a television debates. You could not.  

But, while I continue to believe Hosking's presence on the stage amounts to advantage Labour, more recent events have persuaded me that Mike Hosking is unsuited to the hosting role.   

On  Seven Sharp, Hosking made some utterances that sounded for all China's tea  as though only voters enrolled on the Maori roll can cast a vote for the Maori Party.  This is obviously untrue, as I can attest, having voted for them in the last election on the General Roll.

in the wake of his screw up, Hosking had one job: to set the record straight. As a political journalist, whatever his leanings, he should consider it anathema to allow false claims as they pertain to voting rights to stand uncorrected in the plainest possible terms. Surely, hosts, journalists and pundits are abrogating some basic democratic obligation  by failing to communicate accurate information about rules around voting.

When Mike Hosking could have chosen such a path by correcting the record in clear, unambiguous terms, he opted instead for petulance, denial and yet more obfuscation.

That shows Hosking is more interested in protecting and projecting his ego than  conveying  accurate informatiom about our most fudamental democratic rights.'

That alone should persuade TVNZ to start searching for a new moderator.'