But what about the e-mails they wanted seized?

David Shearer, Russel Norman and Winston Peters have made a lot of noise this week. All are incensed that journalist Andrea Vance's phone log (as opposed to any data regarding actual calls) was handed over to David Henry whilst he investigated the leak of the Kitteridge Report on failings of the GCSB.

But turn the clock back around 7 weeks, and you'll find that things were very different. Winston Peters wanted the Police to investigate Peter Dunne, and boasted proudly how he had seen private e-mails between Dunne and Ms Vance. Dr Norman told Radio New Zealand this:

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said the inquiry into the leak to Fairfax Media does not confirm whether Mr Dunne in fact did it, and police need to investigate and force Mr Dunne to release the emails.
"Clearly (inquiry head) David Henry didn't have sufficient powers to make Peter Dunne release the emails. If the police are investigating a Crimes Act offence, then they do have the powers to get Peter Dunne to release the emails."
Dr Norman said it needs to be seen whether Mr Dunne has breached the Crimes Act.

To his credit, Dr Norman thought things through over the weekend that followed, and did a complete u-turn. But his initial response was that private information involving Ms Vance should be taken by force by the Police.

And David Shearer took a similar stance to Dr Norman's initial one, as the Dominion-Post editorial reported on 11 June 2013:

Labour leader David Shearer's call for police to seize UnitedFuture MP Peter Dunne's emails and question him under oath about the leaking of the GCSB review suggests he has a remarkably short memory. It is little more than a year since Labour colleague Phil Goff used leaked Mfat documents to reveal that cuts within the ministry were undermining New Zealand's diplomatic capability. 
The Labour leader's comments also show a worrying lack of understanding of important principles. Is Mr Shearer really suggesting the police should have the power to seize material from anyone suspected of embarrassing the government? 

David Shearer's comments may have been made in the heat of the moment, but they reveal a particular lack of political nous. It is really ironic now that he wants John Key's head on a platter because Ms Vance's telephone records were erroneously given to Mr Henry by Parliamentary Services.

We all know that there is an element of the theatrical to politics. But Mr Shearer, Dr Norman and Mr Peters, in the best traditions of Cirque de Soliel, added gymnastics to the theatrics with their back-flips and u-turns. The end result, once their faux outrage is added in is little more than farce, and does them no credit whatsoever.