This made us feel ill. From The NZ Herald
Labour and New Zealand First got $100,000 donations from fishing and racing industry heavyweights the Vela brothers in the 10 days before the election.
Both parties yesterday disclosed donations of $100,000 from Resource Finance, a company set up by brothers Peter and Philip Vela in 1999 and registered to the Velas' business address in Hamilton.
It follows controversy over donations from Vela companies to NZ First dating back to 1999 that the party did not disclose.
NZ First was cleared of wrongdoing by police, the Electoral Commission and the Serious Fraud Office but was told to update its returns.
Under new Electoral Finance Act rules, donations worth more than $20,000 have to be disclosed within two weeks.
Labour president Mike Williams said Peter Vela contacted him to offer the money. Mr Williams had not known about the donation to New Zealand First.
"He was very definite about wanting to make a contribution, and I accepted."
Mr Williams said there were no conditions to the donation, and he had explained to Mr Vela that his name would become public.
Labour got the money from Resource Finance on October 31, the same day it also received $60,000 from the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union.
Labour told the Electoral Commission of the EPMU donation on November 5, but did not tell it about the Vela donation until yesterday, two days after the election but still within the disclosure deadline.
Mr Williams said this was not an attempt to keep a potentially controversial donation out of the public eye until after the election.
He said he had not known about the EPMU donation, which would have gone directly to Labour's head office rather than to him.
Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corruption. Show all posts
Nov 11, 2008
Nov 6, 2008
Spy's Links With Labour Stronger Than First Thought
Oh dear, we just finish writing a post about New Zealand's Karl Rove, suggesting that Helen Clark, chief Labour campaign strategist, might be about to assume the title, and then we read about a colossal campaign stuff up. The supposedly non-aligned spy who supposedly went taping National leaders at the National Party Conference on the spur if the moment, actually turns out to flat with an important Labour operative.
Read all about it on Hooton, and on Kiwiblog.....
Read all about it on Hooton, and on Kiwiblog.....
Nov 5, 2008
Labour Up To No Good In Botany?
A very disturbing article in today's NZ Herald. If true this makes us extremely angry.
Some Chinese voters are crying foul over Labour's tactics to get the elderly to the ballot box early.
Botany resident Harry Lu plans to lodge a complaint with the Electoral Commission today after his mother-in-law was asked to cast her vote, and told who to vote for.
On October 24 she was taken by Labour officials to an early voting station at Panmure Library following a talk by Labour's Chinese candidate Raymond Huo.
Lu alleges elderly Chinese voters are being taken to early-voting stations by officials, coerced into casting their votes early - and being told where to put their two ticks.
Mr Lu said in Mandarin: "I feel that the Labour Party is taking advantage of the vulnerability of elderly Chinese voters."
His mother-in-law, who wanted to be known as Mrs Chen, 72, said she felt "cheated" after casting her vote because she didn't get the chance to listen to the policies of other parties.
"I don't even know who I voted for. I just followed the instructions of the Labour Party man on how to fill in my form because my English is not very good. He was standing right beside me and telling me what to write and where to put my ticks," she said in Mandarin.
Some Chinese voters are crying foul over Labour's tactics to get the elderly to the ballot box early.
Botany resident Harry Lu plans to lodge a complaint with the Electoral Commission today after his mother-in-law was asked to cast her vote, and told who to vote for.
On October 24 she was taken by Labour officials to an early voting station at Panmure Library following a talk by Labour's Chinese candidate Raymond Huo.
Lu alleges elderly Chinese voters are being taken to early-voting stations by officials, coerced into casting their votes early - and being told where to put their two ticks.
Mr Lu said in Mandarin: "I feel that the Labour Party is taking advantage of the vulnerability of elderly Chinese voters."
His mother-in-law, who wanted to be known as Mrs Chen, 72, said she felt "cheated" after casting her vote because she didn't get the chance to listen to the policies of other parties.
"I don't even know who I voted for. I just followed the instructions of the Labour Party man on how to fill in my form because my English is not very good. He was standing right beside me and telling me what to write and where to put my ticks," she said in Mandarin.
Fran O'Sullivan Calls For A New Enquiry
Fran O'Sullivan today calls for a new enquiry to be launched into links between Vela family donations to political parties and voting outcomes. We agree
If New Zealand had an independent Corruption Commission, it would by now be probing allegations that a former MP turned political adviser had tried to "sell policies for cash" and various political parties had been targeted.
At issue is whether the parties named in the Dominion-Post's news stories this week - Winston Peters' New Zealand First and Peter Dunne's United Future - did in fact cross the line when former National MP Ross Meurant tried to orchestrate favours for commercial interests such as the Vela family, from whom he later sought a "top-up" while he was a taxpayer-funded adviser to NZ First.
If New Zealand had an independent Corruption Commission, it would by now be probing allegations that a former MP turned political adviser had tried to "sell policies for cash" and various political parties had been targeted.
At issue is whether the parties named in the Dominion-Post's news stories this week - Winston Peters' New Zealand First and Peter Dunne's United Future - did in fact cross the line when former National MP Ross Meurant tried to orchestrate favours for commercial interests such as the Vela family, from whom he later sought a "top-up" while he was a taxpayer-funded adviser to NZ First.
Nov 4, 2008
Secret Agendas
Isn't it interesting that Labour is so knowledgeable about the latest episode in the secret taping saga. Clearly they have known about this for ages, which is why they have been into so much negative attack advertising. PM beaming from ear to ear - yuck what a thought.
Unfortunate use of explosive analogy given the failure of the neutron bomb last week.
Who will feature this time around? John Key maybe?
Dirty, dirty politics. Time to clean things up
This from NZPA
NZPA report:
Yet another secret recording from the National Party conference is set to be released tonight, PM says it is a "cracker"
Labour may indeed have its neutron bomb to derail the National Party.
Yet another secret recording from the National Party conference is expected to make an appearance tonight.
Newstalk ZB political editor Barry Soper has been on the campaign trail with the Prime Minister today. He says she was smiling ear to ear and only said it was a "cracker".
Last week Labour failed spectacularly in an attempt to link National Party leader John Key to the H-Fee scandal.
Source: Newstalk ZBCredit: Newstalk ZB
Unfortunate use of explosive analogy given the failure of the neutron bomb last week.
Who will feature this time around? John Key maybe?
Dirty, dirty politics. Time to clean things up
This from NZPA
NZPA report:
Yet another secret recording from the National Party conference is set to be released tonight, PM says it is a "cracker"
Labour may indeed have its neutron bomb to derail the National Party.
Yet another secret recording from the National Party conference is expected to make an appearance tonight.
Newstalk ZB political editor Barry Soper has been on the campaign trail with the Prime Minister today. He says she was smiling ear to ear and only said it was a "cracker".
Last week Labour failed spectacularly in an attempt to link National Party leader John Key to the H-Fee scandal.
Source: Newstalk ZBCredit: Newstalk ZB
Minister Bought For A Song?
Jim Anderton's comments on Winnie and Dunny this morning in the Dom Post have drawn some interesting reactions around town.
Another correspondent suggests that Mr Anderton might find this photo disconcerting. We wonder why?
Anderton Deeply Concerned
Jim Anderton raises concerns about the implications of the Vela donations for our fisheries policy. The Hive shares Jim's concerns. This from the Dominion Post front page:
Mr Anderton, the fisheries minister, said the financial ties between the fishing industry and some parties were "very disturbing". He said opposition from UnitedFuture and NZ First helped to block "vital" amendments to protect fish stocks this year.
Mr Anderton, the fisheries minister, said the financial ties between the fishing industry and some parties were "very disturbing". He said opposition from UnitedFuture and NZ First helped to block "vital" amendments to protect fish stocks this year.
Dominion Post Editorial A Must Read
We agree fully with today's Dominion Post Editorial, so much so we repeat it in full:
NZ First leader Winston Peters is still grinning and still excoriating critics who dare to question his integrity. But the grin is forced and his tongue-lashings lack their customary sting. He is a man under siege, The Dominion Post writes.
In addition to having to explain why the party of the ordinary bloke solicited donations from big business and failed to declare them in accordance with electoral law, he now finds himself under pressure to explain the nature of his relationships with businessman Philip Vela, whose family has substantial fishing and horse racing interests, and with lobbyist and former National MP Ross Meurant, who worked as a policy adviser for NZ First from 2000 to 2004.
Private papers obtained by The Dominion Post show Mr Meurant advised Mr Vela that his company could influence NZ First policy by giving money to the party. The same documents show that Peter Dunne's UnitedFuture Party was offered $5000 on behalf of the Vela family days after agreeing to oppose United Nations plans to tighten international fishing restrictions. Mr Dunne has confirmed receivng a donation from the Velas, but says money was not discussed when he met Mr Meurant to discuss fishing matters.
That is a plausible, if not particularly satisfactory, explanation. New Zealanders pride themselves on living in a country in which MPs operate in the national interest rather than in their own or their party's interests.
The more is learned of the relationship between politicians and big business, the more naive that view appears. But at least Mr Dunne has given an explanation. Mr Peters wants the public to take him on trust.
"Have you seen me flying around in helicopters?" he thundered after being asked about a conversation in which he reportedly told Mr Meurant to "tell those bastards [the Velas] I need a helicopter". The answer, readers of The Dominion Post know, is yes. In 1999, he used a helicopter to campaign on the East Coast. Just a few months beforehand it had been registered to a PM Vela. In 2005, he again used a helicopter for a campaign trip.
In Mr Peters' defence, it should be pointed out that the papers obtained by The Dominion Post do not conclusively prove that NZ First traded policy for cash, but they do show that Mr Vela was advised it was to his advantage to donate money to the party.
In July 1999, Mr Meurant told Mr Vela that "another" $9999 would help secure a meeting with Mr Peters' "backroom advisers". In December the same year Mr Meurant suggested Mr Vela lobby to have him appointed as NZ First's research manager. If appointed, he said he wanted to continue working for Mr Vela and would give his projects priority. Later that month he warned the businessman that, without someone from his side driving policy and cajoling NZ First's MPs ("demonstrably lazy bastards"), he could not be certain of achieving the desired outcome. In March 2000 he told Mr Vela that Mr Peters was keen to fight tax issues of concern to Mr Vela.
These are matters that strike at the heart of public confidence in the democratic system. It may be that Mr Peters can explain them away, but with the election just days away, he is running out of time to do so.
NZ First leader Winston Peters is still grinning and still excoriating critics who dare to question his integrity. But the grin is forced and his tongue-lashings lack their customary sting. He is a man under siege, The Dominion Post writes.
In addition to having to explain why the party of the ordinary bloke solicited donations from big business and failed to declare them in accordance with electoral law, he now finds himself under pressure to explain the nature of his relationships with businessman Philip Vela, whose family has substantial fishing and horse racing interests, and with lobbyist and former National MP Ross Meurant, who worked as a policy adviser for NZ First from 2000 to 2004.
Private papers obtained by The Dominion Post show Mr Meurant advised Mr Vela that his company could influence NZ First policy by giving money to the party. The same documents show that Peter Dunne's UnitedFuture Party was offered $5000 on behalf of the Vela family days after agreeing to oppose United Nations plans to tighten international fishing restrictions. Mr Dunne has confirmed receivng a donation from the Velas, but says money was not discussed when he met Mr Meurant to discuss fishing matters.
That is a plausible, if not particularly satisfactory, explanation. New Zealanders pride themselves on living in a country in which MPs operate in the national interest rather than in their own or their party's interests.
The more is learned of the relationship between politicians and big business, the more naive that view appears. But at least Mr Dunne has given an explanation. Mr Peters wants the public to take him on trust.
"Have you seen me flying around in helicopters?" he thundered after being asked about a conversation in which he reportedly told Mr Meurant to "tell those bastards [the Velas] I need a helicopter". The answer, readers of The Dominion Post know, is yes. In 1999, he used a helicopter to campaign on the East Coast. Just a few months beforehand it had been registered to a PM Vela. In 2005, he again used a helicopter for a campaign trip.
In Mr Peters' defence, it should be pointed out that the papers obtained by The Dominion Post do not conclusively prove that NZ First traded policy for cash, but they do show that Mr Vela was advised it was to his advantage to donate money to the party.
In July 1999, Mr Meurant told Mr Vela that "another" $9999 would help secure a meeting with Mr Peters' "backroom advisers". In December the same year Mr Meurant suggested Mr Vela lobby to have him appointed as NZ First's research manager. If appointed, he said he wanted to continue working for Mr Vela and would give his projects priority. Later that month he warned the businessman that, without someone from his side driving policy and cajoling NZ First's MPs ("demonstrably lazy bastards"), he could not be certain of achieving the desired outcome. In March 2000 he told Mr Vela that Mr Peters was keen to fight tax issues of concern to Mr Vela.
These are matters that strike at the heart of public confidence in the democratic system. It may be that Mr Peters can explain them away, but with the election just days away, he is running out of time to do so.
Nov 3, 2008
This Is Interesting
What was a former employee of Winston Peters (now working for the PM's Office on matters relating to Winston's old portfolio) doing out drinking on Friday night with a member of the Vast Right Wing Blog Conspiracy?????
Has anyone noticed an increase in Winston related gossip on a certain blogsite with a fishy theme???
Has anyone noticed an increase in Winston related gossip on a certain blogsite with a fishy theme???
Monday Study
While the Busted Blonde has been asking easy question we have something more challenging for you. Something to study overnight. Tomorrow we have a question for you about an event that occurred recently in Wellington and whether this fits the definition below - this comes from Section 216 of The Electoral Act 1993 :
Bribery
(1) Every person is guilty of a corrupt practice who commits the offence of bribery.
(2) Every person commits the offence of bribery who, directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or by any other person on his or her behalf—
(a) gives any money or procures any office to or for any voter, or to or for any other person on behalf of any voter, or to or for any other person, in order to induce any voter to vote or refrain from voting; or
(b) corruptly does any such act as aforesaid on account of any voter having voted or refrained from voting; or
(c) makes any such gift or procurement as aforesaid to or for any person in order to induce that person to procure, or endeavour to procure, the return of any person or candidates at an election or the vote of any voter,—
or who, upon or in consequence of any such gift or procurement as aforesaid, procures, or engages, promises, or endeavours to procure, the return of any person or candidates at any election or the vote of any voter.
(3) For the purposes of this section,—
(a) references to giving money shall include references to giving, lending, agreeing to give or lend, offering, promising, or promising to procure or endeavour to procure, any money or valuable consideration:
(b) references to procuring any office shall include references to giving, procuring, agreeing to give or procure, offering, promising, or promising to procure or to endeavour to procure, any office, place, or employment.
(4) Every person commits the offence of bribery who—
(a) advances or pays or causes to be paid any money to or to the use of any other person with the intent that that money or any part thereof shall be expended in bribery at any election; or
(b) knowingly pays or causes to be paid any money to any person in discharge or repayment of any money wholly or in part expended in bribery at any election.
(5) The foregoing provisions of this section shall not extend or be construed to extend to any money paid or agreed to be paid for or on account of any legal expenses incurred in good faith at or concerning an election.
(6) A voter commits the offence of bribery if before or during an election he or she directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or by any other person on his or her behalf, receives, or agrees or contracts for, any money, gift, loan, or valuable consideration, office, place, or employment for himself or herself or for any other person for voting or agreeing to vote or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting.
(7) Every person commits the offence of bribery if after an election he or she directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or by any other person on his or her behalf, receives any money or valuable consideration on account of any person having voted or refrained from voting or having induced any other person to vote or refrain from voting.
(8) In this section the term voter includes any person who has or claims to have a right to vote.
Bribery
(1) Every person is guilty of a corrupt practice who commits the offence of bribery.
(2) Every person commits the offence of bribery who, directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or by any other person on his or her behalf—
(a) gives any money or procures any office to or for any voter, or to or for any other person on behalf of any voter, or to or for any other person, in order to induce any voter to vote or refrain from voting; or
(b) corruptly does any such act as aforesaid on account of any voter having voted or refrained from voting; or
(c) makes any such gift or procurement as aforesaid to or for any person in order to induce that person to procure, or endeavour to procure, the return of any person or candidates at an election or the vote of any voter,—
or who, upon or in consequence of any such gift or procurement as aforesaid, procures, or engages, promises, or endeavours to procure, the return of any person or candidates at any election or the vote of any voter.
(3) For the purposes of this section,—
(a) references to giving money shall include references to giving, lending, agreeing to give or lend, offering, promising, or promising to procure or endeavour to procure, any money or valuable consideration:
(b) references to procuring any office shall include references to giving, procuring, agreeing to give or procure, offering, promising, or promising to procure or to endeavour to procure, any office, place, or employment.
(4) Every person commits the offence of bribery who—
(a) advances or pays or causes to be paid any money to or to the use of any other person with the intent that that money or any part thereof shall be expended in bribery at any election; or
(b) knowingly pays or causes to be paid any money to any person in discharge or repayment of any money wholly or in part expended in bribery at any election.
(5) The foregoing provisions of this section shall not extend or be construed to extend to any money paid or agreed to be paid for or on account of any legal expenses incurred in good faith at or concerning an election.
(6) A voter commits the offence of bribery if before or during an election he or she directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or by any other person on his or her behalf, receives, or agrees or contracts for, any money, gift, loan, or valuable consideration, office, place, or employment for himself or herself or for any other person for voting or agreeing to vote or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting.
(7) Every person commits the offence of bribery if after an election he or she directly or indirectly, by himself or herself or by any other person on his or her behalf, receives any money or valuable consideration on account of any person having voted or refrained from voting or having induced any other person to vote or refrain from voting.
(8) In this section the term voter includes any person who has or claims to have a right to vote.
Busted Blonde Trying To Tease Us
Over at Roar Prawn the Busted Blonde is trying to blow Winston's world completely apart. She has just dangled a tantalising quiz.
We think that this article from the Dom Post a few months back might help answer this question. Take note of where this fellow used to work (once the KGB were finished with him).
Hoki or scampi for dinner anyone?
We think that this article from the Dom Post a few months back might help answer this question. Take note of where this fellow used to work (once the KGB were finished with him).
Hoki or scampi for dinner anyone?
Hellicopters Most Popular Story On NZ Herald Website
Winston's latest attempts to bluster his way around the truth are really back firing. The Herald is also running with the helicopter photo for 1999 and it is the most read story on its website at present
NZ First leader Winston Peters says he did not use a helicopter for election campaigning - but the photographic evidence suggests otherwise.
Mr Peters has flatly denied using a helicopter to campaign, calling the suggestion "stupid".
"Did you see me flying around in a helicopter? Who would try and campaign out of a helicopter?"
But the Herald has obtained a photographic sequence of a smiling Mr Peters posing before taking off from Gisborne Airport shortly before the 1999 election.
Mr Peters' denial followed a report he demanded the free use of a helicopter during the 1999 campaign from his wealthy backers in the Vela family.
The MP wanted to paint the helicopter in NZ First colours and fly it into rural areas, according to documents obtained by the Dominion-Post.
"Tell him [Philip Vela] to hire me an unmarked helicopter. So I can paint it black/white and NZ First. Then I can drop into small rural towns and schools," he wrote in one.
"Tell those bastards I want a helicopter. Don't give me this crap about the machine needing repairs."
Can anyone explain why Helen is still sticking by Winston?? Isn't Labour fighting this election on the issue of trust?
NZ First leader Winston Peters says he did not use a helicopter for election campaigning - but the photographic evidence suggests otherwise.
Mr Peters has flatly denied using a helicopter to campaign, calling the suggestion "stupid".
"Did you see me flying around in a helicopter? Who would try and campaign out of a helicopter?"
But the Herald has obtained a photographic sequence of a smiling Mr Peters posing before taking off from Gisborne Airport shortly before the 1999 election.
Mr Peters' denial followed a report he demanded the free use of a helicopter during the 1999 campaign from his wealthy backers in the Vela family.
The MP wanted to paint the helicopter in NZ First colours and fly it into rural areas, according to documents obtained by the Dominion-Post.
"Tell him [Philip Vela] to hire me an unmarked helicopter. So I can paint it black/white and NZ First. Then I can drop into small rural towns and schools," he wrote in one.
"Tell those bastards I want a helicopter. Don't give me this crap about the machine needing repairs."
Can anyone explain why Helen is still sticking by Winston?? Isn't Labour fighting this election on the issue of trust?
Dunne Story Raises Questions About Winston's Visit To The FAO
There is a story on the front page of the Dominion Post about Peter Dunne, a UN FAO fisheries management plan, and a $5,000 donation from a Mr Vela. This is disturbing enough. But it has set an alarm bell ringing. Remember Winston's famous trip to Vegas which followed an extended stay in Rome? What was the official business in Rome? A visit to the FAO. We have expressed surprise at this in the past as it is outside Winston's portfolio interests. But was it outside hiss wider interests?? We now need to know whether Winston raised fisheries issues while at the FAO. OIA anyone???? Maybe it will be best to wait until 9 November to submit this. Helen still seems to be standing by her man.
Winston's Helicopter Bluster Come Back To Bite
How did you interpret this?
"Let me ask you this question: Who would be campaigning from a helicopter unless they're going on a deer stalking expedition?" Mr Peters thundered on TVNZ's Agenda programme yesterday.
"Have you seen me flying around in helicopters?" he went on.
"I'm asking you to use your intelligence and your memory: do you recall me flying around in helicopters in any campaign?
"Let's have some sense, some sanity here.
"Which politician worldwide would campaign from a helicopter. Don't be so stupid."
This was Winston's reaction to the story about him demanding a helicopter from Vela in 1999.
Well we knew about him using helicopters in 2005, but what if there was photographic evidence from 1999 of Winston about to get into a helicopter? That would look as though once again Winston has sought to mislead us.
Well by chance the Dominion Post has been given a copy of just such a photo by former NZ First candidate Gray Eatwell, and it is proudly displayed on page A2 of today's paper. It appears above and here is the article that goes with the story....
"Let me ask you this question: Who would be campaigning from a helicopter unless they're going on a deer stalking expedition?" Mr Peters thundered on TVNZ's Agenda programme yesterday.
"Have you seen me flying around in helicopters?" he went on.
"I'm asking you to use your intelligence and your memory: do you recall me flying around in helicopters in any campaign?
"Let's have some sense, some sanity here.
"Which politician worldwide would campaign from a helicopter. Don't be so stupid."
This was Winston's reaction to the story about him demanding a helicopter from Vela in 1999.
Well we knew about him using helicopters in 2005, but what if there was photographic evidence from 1999 of Winston about to get into a helicopter? That would look as though once again Winston has sought to mislead us.
Well by chance the Dominion Post has been given a copy of just such a photo by former NZ First candidate Gray Eatwell, and it is proudly displayed on page A2 of today's paper. It appears above and here is the article that goes with the story....
Can anyone identify the helicopter? It displays the letters "HFV" under the rotor.
Nov 2, 2008
HOS Calls For Next Government To Have A Clear Mandate
We agree with the Editorial in today's Herald on Sunday, the next Government needs a strong and clear mandate. It needs to be stable if we are to survive in the stormy financial seas that are if anything growing more stormy. Will the proposed AXIS Hydra have that clear mandate and provide the desired stability? We don't think so.
The HOS editorial concludes as follows:
And so, with a week to go, the polls suggest there is a mood for change. But the incoming Government needs to have a clear and unequivocal mandate. The crisis enveloping global financial systems will call for strong leadership from decision-makers untrammelled by the need to pander to the competing desires of coalition partners. The worst thing that voters could do on Saturday is to try to second-guess the main party leaders with so-called strategic voting.
We need a clear result to strengthen the hand on the tiller in the stormy seas ahead.
On Winston (we can't resist)
For no matter how much Peters harrumphs and blusters, the donations fiasco has revealed him to be both a hypocrite and a man whose doubletalk has been hard to distinguish from calculated deceit. Clark would need to ask herself whether she should rely, like every administration in the MMP era, on such a perverse dissembler to keep her on the ninth floor of the Beehive. She may believe that she has a political mission to fulfil and that it is fair to resort to any expedient within the rules that allows her to do that. But a real leader knows when the prize is not worth the price.
In the end, Clark may not face that choice, since Peters will probably be consigned to the oblivion he so richly deserves. But she also faces the question of whether a minority Government she leads would have a legitimate claim to power. If Labour were to win significantly fewer party votes than National and yet assemble a ramshackle coalition with the Greens, the Maori Party and the Progressives, Clark could end up with a constitutional hold on power to which it had no moral entitlement. A Government so formed would risk being seen as cynically corrupting the intentions of MMP, which could lead to a regrettable backlash against proportional representation. And a Government whose very existence runs counter to the plainly expressed will of the people is not likely to go down very well in the country that invented the concept of the fair go.
The HOS editorial concludes as follows:
And so, with a week to go, the polls suggest there is a mood for change. But the incoming Government needs to have a clear and unequivocal mandate. The crisis enveloping global financial systems will call for strong leadership from decision-makers untrammelled by the need to pander to the competing desires of coalition partners. The worst thing that voters could do on Saturday is to try to second-guess the main party leaders with so-called strategic voting.
We need a clear result to strengthen the hand on the tiller in the stormy seas ahead.
On Winston (we can't resist)
For no matter how much Peters harrumphs and blusters, the donations fiasco has revealed him to be both a hypocrite and a man whose doubletalk has been hard to distinguish from calculated deceit. Clark would need to ask herself whether she should rely, like every administration in the MMP era, on such a perverse dissembler to keep her on the ninth floor of the Beehive. She may believe that she has a political mission to fulfil and that it is fair to resort to any expedient within the rules that allows her to do that. But a real leader knows when the prize is not worth the price.
In the end, Clark may not face that choice, since Peters will probably be consigned to the oblivion he so richly deserves. But she also faces the question of whether a minority Government she leads would have a legitimate claim to power. If Labour were to win significantly fewer party votes than National and yet assemble a ramshackle coalition with the Greens, the Maori Party and the Progressives, Clark could end up with a constitutional hold on power to which it had no moral entitlement. A Government so formed would risk being seen as cynically corrupting the intentions of MMP, which could lead to a regrettable backlash against proportional representation. And a Government whose very existence runs counter to the plainly expressed will of the people is not likely to go down very well in the country that invented the concept of the fair go.
Disagreements Within NZ First
Yesterday's information about cash for policy payments to NZ First involving Ross Meuraant have highlighted growing tension within the NZ First team. NZ First, as we all know, is as tighly controlled by Winston as Adolf Hitler controlled the Nazi Party. Election returns can't be filed on time because Winston needs to see them first etc. If you slip up or challenge the leader you are out - just look at the way Dail Jones has been treated. So it is highly unusual for NZ First MPs to be questioning the Leader's judgement, let alone in public. But today, in the Herald on Sunday this is just what has happened.
Yesterday, Ron Mark said he had warned Peters about his involvement with Meurant: "I have no relationship with Ross, other than advising Winston he should have nothing to do with him."
Peter Brown, the party's deputy leader, said Meurant's comments were "bullshit" and he was playing up his own importance.
Brown, too, had expressed concerns about working with the lobbyist. "I went to Winston privately," Brown said. "I just said to him, `I don't know what's wrong with the guy, all I know is that something adverse will happen _ it's not a question of if, but when'. But the boss knew him from old and got on quite well with him."
Dail Jones, another NZ First MP, described Meurant as "irrelevant" and criticised his work.
Yesterday, Ron Mark said he had warned Peters about his involvement with Meurant: "I have no relationship with Ross, other than advising Winston he should have nothing to do with him."
Peter Brown, the party's deputy leader, said Meurant's comments were "bullshit" and he was playing up his own importance.
Brown, too, had expressed concerns about working with the lobbyist. "I went to Winston privately," Brown said. "I just said to him, `I don't know what's wrong with the guy, all I know is that something adverse will happen _ it's not a question of if, but when'. But the boss knew him from old and got on quite well with him."
We must say, we are with Ron Mark and Peter Brown on Meurant (we took a dislike to the man in 1981 during the Springbok Tour), but then unlike Winston, we did not go to school with Meurant.
Dail Jones, another NZ First MP, described Meurant as "irrelevant" and criticised his work.
Nov 1, 2008
Helen Admits Labour Paid
For Mike Williams trip to Melbourne to try and unearth dirt on John Key. We imagine that those who have donated to Labour will be less than pleased. But more importantly why did the PM try and mislead us on this point when it was first raised? This election is all about trust.
More Details On Pages A6 and A7
Of the Dominion Post. The documents are summarised by date. It was nice of Winston to place two advertisements in the Dominion Post today. People will be able to compare and contrast. Is he all about communities first or protecting seniors first? Or is it about Winston First? Helicopter anyone?
Peters And The Money Man
We can see why the leaders of the Axis Hydra were so worried last night. One of their heads has an enourmous headache. It looks as though Meurant has bleated. There we have it in black and white full detail of Winston's money for policy outcome with the Vela family. And we also get a ueful insight into Winston's real personality. And all on the front page of the Dominion Post. 7 days before the election this is very bad news for Winston and for those who have defended him.
Read all about the money......
And read about the demands for the NZ First helicopter....
Well done Phil Kitchin.
Read all about the money......
And read about the demands for the NZ First helicopter....
Well done Phil Kitchin.
Oct 31, 2008
Something Is Up
We mortals don't get to read the morning newspapers until about 5am when they are either available at home or the stories start appearing on the internet (the Herald is starting to put some stuff up around 4am). But if you are the PM or Heather Simpson you get to read tomorrow's Dominion Post before you go to bed.
Something is in the Dominion Post tomorrow that the Labour-led AXIS hydra team don't like. Our best guess is that it either involves Williams or Peters. Our team was spread from Waitakere (where the PM was) to the opening of the ballet in Wellington tonight (where Jeanette was) and we tell you, those cell phones are running hot and the faces are not looking happy.
Sleep well.
Something is in the Dominion Post tomorrow that the Labour-led AXIS hydra team don't like. Our best guess is that it either involves Williams or Peters. Our team was spread from Waitakere (where the PM was) to the opening of the ballet in Wellington tonight (where Jeanette was) and we tell you, those cell phones are running hot and the faces are not looking happy.
Sleep well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)