English stuck to the party line yesterday in forcing Brownlee to adhere to National Party’s spin on Resolution 2334. "We understand that Israel was upset about the resolution and our role in it, but we're keen looking ahead, to having a positive relationship with Israel.” He said the Resolution was, "expressing longstanding Government policy, in fact, a longstanding commonly-held international view.” Common sense suggests if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. While Brownlee is trying to dig us out of a diplomatic blunder, English seems intent on digging the hole deeper. McCully utterly betrayed our traditional friend and ally by spearheading one of the most anti-Israel UN resolutions in recent years - a resolution unanimously condemned by the US House of representatives. The House rightly declared that Resolution 2334 "undermines the prospect of Israelis and Palestinians resuming productive, direct negotiations" and "contributes to the politically motivated acts of boycott, divestment from, and sanctions against Israel and represents a concerted effort to extract concessions from Israel outside of direct negotiations.” Why is English incapable grasping this? It's hard to fathom that a New Zealand Prime Minister could remain so cavalier in face of such a major diplomatic blunder. “Oh well. We understand you're angry by our betrayal, but what's done is done. Let's just forget about it now and look to the future.” Winston Peters correctly states that McCully acted unilaterally on an important international issue that should have been decided by Cabinet. "In a response under the Official Information Act, Mr. McCully’s office claims the text of Resolution 2334 from Egypt, was not presented to the Cabinet because it was received on December 22, 2016 and voted on in the morning of December 24, 2016. The office claims Mr McCully’s actions were consistent with New Zealand’s policy settings. That statement is false,” said Peters. “And that’s the reason why countries like Australia and others are asking the New Zealand Government for an explanation." Peter’s believes the National government feels vulnerable on the issue is therefore refusing to reveal any information around the decision. English seems to think there is little public interest in the issue and is expecting it will soon be forgotten by voters. It’s up to you and me to send English a strong message on September 23rd that New Zealanders do remember; that elected officials must be held accountable for reckless diplomatic gaffes.