Stolen Money per vote
Andrew in comments has done a neat table showing how much money was stolen (okay illegally spent) per vote received per party. It is:
1. NZF; $1.16 per vote
2. United; $1.05 per vote
3. Labour; $0.82 per vote
4. Green; $0.67 per vote
5. Act; $0.52 per vote
6. National; $0.01 per vote
7. Maori; $0.001 per vote
8. Progressive – no theft
Also people may be intrested in what proportion of total advertising was found to be illegal per party. It is:
1. Green 69.6%
2. NZF 66.7%
3. Labour 66.1%
4 United 47.7%
5 ACT 10.4%
6 National 8.1%
7 Maori 1.8%
8 Progressive 0.0%
A stark difference between the first four parties and the last four.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
No tag for this post.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Just for comparison could we add in the $1.3 million National got from the Brethren?
October 12th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
DPF, In the words of the Late National Party Sir Robert Muldoon..” The public only have a 3 month memory.
Legislation will be past, as Wilson said the Political Parties were not sure of the legislation. It will all be forgotten come next election, for the sake of NZ lets move on!
October 12th, 2006 at 3:16 pm
As a public service, translations are provided:
Sonic: Boo hoo, waa waa waa, sob sob
Cadmus: Corruption is okay when my hero does it. Hell genocide is okay when my hero does it.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:19 pm
Yeah this is stark difference. The first four are the government.
At this point one could describe it as the illegal government all things considered.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Is that the best you have got David?
If Labour pays it back what are National going to do then?
October 12th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Labour’s paying it back – now for Nats to pay their GST bill and subsequent fine.
http://www.labour.org.nz/news/latest_labour_news/news-061012/index.html
October 12th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Labour’s paying it back – now for Nats to pay their GST bill and subsequent fine.
http://www.labour.org.nz/news/latest_labour_news/news-061012/index.html
October 12th, 2006 at 3:27 pm
Labour’s paying it back – now for Nats to pay their GST bill and subsequent fine.
http://www.labour.org.nz/news/latest_labour_news/news-061012/index.html
October 12th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
Anon – National tried to do this but the only way they could was for the legislation to be changed. National tried to introduce this legislation and was not allowed to by the Government. Tells you alot about their mindset doesn’t it. One wants to pay it back but the other doesn’t want you to.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
Busy day eh Sonic! You must be earning your fees today
October 12th, 2006 at 3:31 pm
Sonic – that’s all I needed for you.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Here’s a breakdown of how many dollars got spent by the parties per vote.
Vote count obtained here:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/features/election2005.html
Dodgy Donations obtained here:
http://www.elections.org.nz/parties/donations_summary.html
Party Votes Dodgy Anonymous/Trust Donations Donation Amount per Vote
National Party 809674 1504793 $1.86
Jim Anderton’s Progressive 24624 15000 $0.61
Labour Party 832425 315000 $0.38
United Future New Zealand 55605 15000 $0.27
M�ori Party 40488 10000 $0.25
Green Party 103617 20000 $0.19
ACT New Zealand 31074 0 $0.00
New Zealand First Party 119336 0 $0.00
October 12th, 2006 at 3:37 pm
Sonic:
You really are a prize shit. Stop making shit up.
Let’s also include the $40 million that Labour got from the EPMU. While we’re at it, include the $700 million that ACT got from George W, and the $45.3 billion that Pita Sharples got from the citizens of Mars.
Sonic, get a fucking job, and then you might care about the tax you pay, where it’s being spent, and whether it’s being spent to buy your vote.
Asshole.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:37 pm
markw – could you define ‘dodgy’ for us. could it be that ‘dodgy’ is in the eye of the beholder?
October 12th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
“Just for comparison could we add in the $1.3 million National got from the Brethren?”.
Still struggling with NCEA maths, Sonic? What do you get if you take away $800,000 from $1.3 million? The amount that the EB spent at the last election.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:46 pm
Andrew – I defined dodgy as Anonymous donations, or trusts which were effectively anonymous donations.
But you’re right, other people might not think that those were dodgy. Here’s the breakdown of donations vs votes.
Party Votes Dodgy Anonymous/Trust Donations Donation Amount per Vote
Jim Anderton’s Progressive 24624 60207.8 $2.45
National Party 809674 1881793 $2.32
Green Party 103617 143008.54 $1.38
Labour Party 832425 930977.04 $1.12
ACT New Zealand 31074 32200 $1.04
M�ori Party 40488 32000 $0.79
United Future New Zealand 55605 27000 $0.49
New Zealand First Party 119336 0 $0.00
October 12th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
Sorry, the heading was wrong on the second post.
Party Votes All Donations Donation Amount per Vote
Jim Anderton’s Progressive 24624 $60,207.80 $2.45
National Party 809674 $1,881,793.00 $2.32
Green Party 103617 $143,008.54 $1.38
Labour Party 832425 $930,977.04 $1.12
ACT New Zealand 31074 $32,200.00 $1.04
Maori Party 40488 $32,000.00 $0.79
United Future New Zealand 55605 $27,000.00 $0.49
New Zealand First Party 119336 $0.00 $0.00
October 12th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
“Sonic, get a fucking job”
What another one! sorry mate this one makes me enough cash thanks.
“the $700 million that ACT got from George W, and the $45.3 billion that Pita Sharples got from the citizens of Mars”
I think it’s time you went for a nice lie down and a cup of tea. Today has obviously not turned out as you expected.
Fox, shot.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
Sonic:
Only you could see it as a victory for the Labour Party: that after months of public calls from every quarter, and a big slide in the polls, that Labour has agreed to repay the taxpayer’s money it illegally spent.
If the Labour Party ever get too poor to continue paying you as their ridiculous mouth-piece, you might be able to get some work as Kim Jong Il’s propaganda merchant.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:17 pm
1. Green 69.6%
2. NZF 66.7%
3. Labour 66.1%
4 United 47.7%
These parties, apart from Greens, form the government.
And what was that about National buying elections?
October 12th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
Sonic,
Like Labour, I think you are out of touch with the state of public opinion.
The fox is not shot. Taking money & then paying it back does not stop the taking of the money being a crime.
The general public is not completely thick. Labour has shown its self to be untrustworthy with public money. It has also just been shown to have been hoarding HUGE amounts of public money with its budget surplus. Easy to make a connection, and the natural conclusion is not good.
People do not like having their money stolen so that policicians of dubious personal honesty can buy themselves into public office.
Then look at the worst offenders Labour, NZ First, UF & the Greens- hey they effectively make up the government. Next connection- the election result is now under suspicion, and this is getting plenty of air time on the radio at least.
This story has many many more miles in it. It has moved beyond the domain of the beltway and political blogs. It is out in the open, and it is the public that are starting to make the hue and cry.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
Sonic must be disappointed. What was supposed to be easy meal looks increasingly like a it might not just roll over, or worse that it might bite back. Easier kills elsewhere he tells himself as he carefully backs away in pursuit of smaller, tamer or more injured prey. And in the distance a dog howls ….
October 12th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
” Taking money & then paying it back does not stop the taking of the money being a crime. ”
Better watch that line Peter, after all that is exactly what National did!
October 12th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
Andrew, the problem that both you and the National party leadership has is that it’s key demand “pay it back” has now been met.
I’m interested in where you think you can go with the issue now.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:35 pm
Where to go then? … well how about the polls !
I contend that the Governing parties’ illegal spending (aka thieft) made the difference in the last election outcome. Let’s prove me wrong and go to the polls shall we? After all this is [suposed to be] a democracy …
October 12th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
I’ve just posted a pie chart of the partys.
Will do a few more by the time the day is out.
Nice to see Labour was in fact lying when they said there would not pay it back!
October 12th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
Sonic,
Paying it back does not make it right. Punishment should be apportioned, but it needs to be done in proportion to the amount wrongly used.
Labour has not yet paid the money back. It has only indicated that it will, and, since they have been shown to be untrustworthy, the money is not paid until it is paid.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:49 pm
“Paying it back does not make it right. Punishment should be apportioned, but it needs to be done in proportion to the amount wrongly used.”
So what punishment for National and what punishment for Labour.
No election for two years Andrew and a government with stable confidence and supply arrangements.
I’m not saying this issue is quite dead yet, but the fat lady has just put on her costume and cleared her throat.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Labour in the shit this afternoon for ripping off the taxpayer to re-elect itself and steal an election.
Labour in the shit for an $11.3 billion surplus, obviously a government ripping off the taxpayer by taxing us all too much.
And this morning’s Granny Herald features toll roads for Auckland- yet another way the socialists want to tax anything that moves.
Anyone detect a pattern here?
October 12th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
Labour in the shit this afternoon for ripping off the taxpayer to re-elect itself and steal an election.
Labour in the shit for an $11.3 billion surplus, obviously a government ripping off the taxpayer by taxing us all too much.
And this morning’s Granny Herald features toll roads for Auckland- yet another way the socialists want to tax anything that moves.
Anyone detect a pattern here?
October 12th, 2006 at 4:55 pm
Sonic,
Don’t worry about us nats supporters, we’ll be fine. (3rd term governments have ways of generating support for the opposition…)
Nice of you to worry about us though, now that Labour has followed all our advice.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Suitable punishment.
Back to the polls. Election in 3 months time. Each party’s electioneering allowance reduced by the same $ amount as they used illegaly in the last election.
The only singing I hear, Sonic, is the cries for a new election.
October 12th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
Well boys and girls [and those of the Labour party that are in between] it looks like the hens got caught in the foxhouse. Being female they will not fight fair and will harbour hurt while plotting vengeance
Seeing how one of the greatest numbers of hits to this blogsite is ird.govt we can all look forward to the tonton macoute turning up.
Unless of course someone in that department is spending a lot of unauthorised time on the web and just happens to click here regularly by mistake.
Come in the NZ Herald.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:25 pm
This simply repay the money is a joke, I look at these figures and conclude WE DO NOT HAVE A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVT IN NZ.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:49 pm
Exactly Burt.
At nearly $800,000 unlawful overspend when only 40-odd thousand votes separated the two main parties, it was Liar-bours rank corruption and dishonesty that swung it.
No wonder they went on a last minute spending spree at taxpayer’s expense.
Liarbour has bought the last election with OUR money.
You can excuse a small amount of overspending due to incompetence or mere oversight, but come on, we are talking nearly $800,000 here.
Liarbour and the other parties were warned before the election what was lawful and what was not.
Yet Liarbour ignored this advice.
They are guilty, guilty, guilty and no amount of weasel words from the PM can alter the fact.
She is the corrupt leader of a corrupt government elected through a most blatant disregard of electoral law.
Thamnks to her, New Zealand is a now kumura republic. We are sinking ever further into Third World corruption.
Remeber her words when she was elected in 1999 about bringing higher standards of accountability, etc, to government.
How can she sleep at night, the corrupt, deceitful, hypocritical and lying toad!!
October 12th, 2006 at 7:52 pm
It is obvious we do not have a Government that was legitimatly elected. Where’s the punishment for those who morbidly overspent and grossly flouted the rules. Now Labour is hoarding our money ready to offer fresh bribes for the scheduled 2008 election. We true kiwis cannot allow that to happen. We need an election within the next 6 months otherwise this country is doomed to Labour’s mutant form of socialism for the next 20 years or more. Rise all true Kiwis and spread the word “we need an election”.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:54 pm
It is obvious we do not have a Government that was legitimatly elected. Where’s the punishment for those who morbidly overspent and grossly flouted the rules. Now Labour is hoarding our money ready to offer fresh bribes for the scheduled 2008 election. We true kiwis cannot allow that to happen. We need an election within the next 6 months otherwise this country is doomed to Labour’s mutant form of socialism for the next 20 years or more. Rise all true Kiwis and spread the word “we need an election”.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
It is obvious we do not have a Government that was legitimatly elected. Where’s the punishment for those who morbidly overspent and grossly flouted the rules. Now Labour is hoarding our money ready to offer fresh bribes for the scheduled 2008 election. We true kiwis cannot allow that to happen. We need an election within the next 6 months otherwise this country is doomed to Labour’s mutant form of socialism for the next 20 years or more. Rise all true Kiwis and spread the word “we need an election”.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
Burt:
None of the parties except the progressive(s) are without blame here, which means that no party was clear on the rules. Therefor this was a problem of legal clarity, which will be addressed.
By the way did you know that:
Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen today called on National to immediately pay the $112,500 it owes to broadcasters from its election advertising last year.
“National was caught out breaching the legal limit on broadcast advertising by treating the cap as GST exclusive rather than inclusive.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:02 pm
It is obvious we do not have a Government that was legitimatly elected. Where’s the punishment for those who morbidly overspent and grossly flouted the rules. Now Labour is hoarding our money ready to offer fresh bribes for the scheduled 2008 election. We true kiwis cannot allow that to happen. We need an election within the next 6 months otherwise this country is doomed to Labour’s mutant form of socialism for the next 20 years or more. Rise all true Kiwis and spread the word “we need an election”.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
philipjohn
Yes you are correct, it is not just Labour who flouted the law and used unauthorised funds to purchase an election. This is why a fresh election is required. The water is so muddy that it’s not about pointing the gun at one party. The green party are technically the worst offenders, followed closely by NZ1. But Labour spent the most $$$$$.
For this it receives more outrage. Simple really, the biggest offender draws the most attention.
The fact that the parties that generally make up the Govt are the worst offenders is all the more reason for an election.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:16 pm
philipjohn
As much as it pains me to agree with Dr. Cullen, he is correct in his call that National pay the money back (The GST). Their excuse that they are not allowed to repay it is just bollocks. Sure they can’t use public funds or they would be engaging in further unauthorised spending. But there is nothing stopping them from using the parties own funds. Nothing apart from political mileage….
October 12th, 2006 at 8:20 pm
Burt:
Election for the last 20 years has involved PS funding being spent in the same way, and now Brady decides to do an about face on the interpretation of the law and we are expect to declare the election nul and void? Pull the other one. The rules have changed now and will apply to every forthcomming election, and this is what we can expect.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:23 pm
philipjohn
I think that is crap, if it were true Labour would not have agreed to pay it back. They would have stood their ground and toughed it out in court. Knowing full well that they would win in the end.
The truth is more likely to be that the rules have been flouted for so long that they thought they would just continue to flout them.
All the more reason for an election. Arrogance and self serving parties knowingly acting outside the law to win power is not a democracy.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:29 pm
“I think that is crap, if it were true Labour would not have agreed to pay it back. They would have stood their ground and toughed it out in court. Knowing full well that they would win in the end.”
really? It might be a moral and financial victory for them, but would it be a political victory? I think that the overriding concern here is to preserve votes.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:43 pm
philipjohn
Everything Labour do is to preserve votes, including using unauthorised advertising $$$$. Policies invented in the last few weeks leading up to an election are about preserving votes.
Are you saying that any party can do what ever they like if it is to preserve votes? Including convincing people that the laws were changed so it’s not fair but since we are a rally high principal party we will pay it back anyway. Spin is about preserving votes, integrity and principals are about winning votes.
An election will sort it. A fresh mandate is required to clear this stench.
October 12th, 2006 at 8:47 pm
David you must do somethng to clean up this site of yours. I can’t remember ever having seen so must Leftie blood running in the gutters or such a pile of foetid Leftist entrials rotting in the afternoon sun. You really should know better!
October 12th, 2006 at 8:52 pm
I notice that snakeoil Dunne and litigeous Peters are backtracking on their promises to repay using their usual weasel deceit. Time for an election and a cleaning of the pigsty.
October 12th, 2006 at 9:25 pm
Well said rumpole and adolf. If redrag had his way half of NZ would be shot at dawn or sent to Antartica. Then H1 + H2 and the rest of the misfits and unacceptable characters could carry on with their mutant socialism without interuption. But hang on who would pay for the costs, whoops, redrag you need to come up with a better idea. Pehaps you need us Torys after all. I think Dr C1 has worked that one out already.
October 12th, 2006 at 9:37 pm
Basically excepting the few statistical anomalies, the percentage they overspent by are probably close to each parties desired level of taxation. Adding National’s ooops on the GST might drag them out of the anomaly bucket as well.
October 12th, 2006 at 9:40 pm
The National overspend cannot be paid back by National. The debt is not owed by National, it is owed by the electoral commission. National, as I understand it, sought a law to transfer that debt to them such that they could pay it. Labour refused.
If people are going to continue to bring this up as some form of moral equivalence with Labour’s misappropration of govt funds, then I suggest they start by getting the facts straight, and then explaining why those facts are similar to Labour’s misappropriation.
October 12th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
Sonic said: No election for two years Andrew and a government with stable confidence and supply arrangements
Sure we have a government. So does North Korea, Burma, Cuba… you get the picture. When the integrity of the democratic process is compromised to the extent that is has been, we the voting public, are entitled to hold Labour to account.
Governments are installed to serve us, not to dominate us and abuse their privilege. I think an increasing number of New Zealanders this that the latter is manifesting and would be happy to go to the polls?
What about you Sonic… are you up for it?
October 12th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
Sorry – a repost with corrections
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sonic said: No election for two years Andrew and a government with stable confidence and supply arrangements
Sure we have a government. So does North Korea, Burma, Cuba… you get the picture. When the integrity of the democratic process is compromised to the extent that is has been, we the voting public, are entitled to hold Labour to account.
Governments are installed to serve us, not to dominate us by abusing their privilege. I think an increasing number of New Zealanders believe that the latter is manifesting and would be happy to go to the polls.
What about you Sonic… are you up for it?
October 12th, 2006 at 10:11 pm
With so many political parties caught with their snouts in the trough, I hardly think it likely there will be an election any time soon.
October 12th, 2006 at 10:19 pm
Adolf said: David you must do somethng to clean up this site of yours. I can’t remember ever having seen so must Leftie blood running in the gutters or such a pile of foetid Leftist entrials rotting in the afternoon sun. You really should know better!
Hahaha… great imagery. Hey but we do need the lefties nearby. They bring some balance (plus a humourous level of bollocks) to discussions. Besides, a right without a left would be just a tad fascist would it not?
October 12th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
Just posted a graph which should put it in perspective. http://halfdone.wordpress.com
October 13th, 2006 at 6:20 am
The validating legislation should not only validate the misappropriation, it should also make the amounts owing as a debt due to the Crown and finally it should include authority for the National Party to repay the GST on its broadcasting allocation.
October 13th, 2006 at 9:21 am
Tim
There should be no validating legislation.
All parties who have broken the law should be prosecuted by the Police.
Anything less amounts to collusion/conspiracy between the government and the police against the citizens of this country.
Regardless of if you support a left or right or libertarian political party, no party should be above the laws that parliament makes and the rest of us have to abide by.
October 13th, 2006 at 10:01 am
The validating legislation would only validate the appropriation. Whether there was criminal conduct involved should be left as an open question. In my view the behavior came very very close to that. Peters is going off on a legal frolic of his own. He can be permitted to keep the fruits of his litigation if he wants, to but he must first put the money he owes in escrow pending the outcome. The rest can pay as a debt due to the Crown. They can be given until the end of 2008 to pay interest free. A pretty generous outcome in my view.
October 13th, 2006 at 10:10 am
This is ridiculous, all the parties broke the rules and National, with their GST ‘error’ was the third worst offender so stop pontificating you slimy Tories. BTW this GST ‘error’ was made by the party who’s leader had a good deal to do with introducing GST to New Zealand in the 1980s. i.e. he chaired several commissions on the matter. So the idea that this was an error just seems a tad fanciful doesn’t it? Lying sumbag.
October 13th, 2006 at 10:44 am
PhillipJohn
The GST money is substantially less than the overspend by Labour. Labours massive overspend won the election result. In other words – it is a stolen election.
National has consistently said that it can and will pay the money if it is legally allowed to. It will be paid out of National Party money, not taxpayer money. I actually believe they should pay the money anyway and face the legal consequences.
Regardless of the above, as I noted, ALL PARTIES WHO BREAK THE LAW SHOULD BE PROSECUTED BY THE POLICE AND FACE THE CONSEQUENCES, including the National Party.
Anything less amounts to conspiracy between between the Parliament and the Police who should be completely independent of each other.
The Police should not be scared to prosecute political parties. If they are scared then this country is in trouble because it means the police are under the thumb of political parties.
October 13th, 2006 at 10:54 am
IP, sonic already works for Kim Jong Il’s brother: Men Tally ill. (hat tip to David Letterman)
October 13th, 2006 at 10:56 am
“Sure we have a government. So does North Korea, Burma, Cuba… you get the picture”
The picture being that you are totally deranged?
October 13th, 2006 at 11:06 am
Battler:
So we should chuck all the MPs out of parliament and get a fresh batch of crooks? If this fiasco has showed us anything it’s that politicians are all as bad as each other, they lie, they cheat they steal, all for the pursuit of power. After all isn’t that what they’re their for? Isn’t that what parliamentary democracy produces? Isn’t this what politics produces? This was the thesis of one of the greatest political philosophers of all time Machiavelli, and the more I study politics the more astute he seems to be.
October 13th, 2006 at 11:14 am
All the parties have done what they thought they could get away with. Each of them weighed up in their minds whether the benefit of bending the rules would outweigh the possibility and consequences of being caught, and they have been found out. But this is the beauty of parliamentary democracy – because all the parties are competing for votes they will dig up all the dirt they can find on each other, and in the end many of their dirty deeds are unearthed – which keeps them honest to a degree. A recent UN report has found that New Zealand is one of the least corrupt countries in the world so it seems that we have it relatively good with our politicians. We should be thankful for that much.
October 13th, 2006 at 11:28 am
The U.N itself is ridden with corruption – and it’s spreading like a vile cancer everyday.
I would take anything that corrosive organisation reports with a grain of salt.
October 13th, 2006 at 12:13 pm
good to see DPF’s moderation trial is weeding out the personal attacks, crazed rants and multiple postings.
October 14th, 2006 at 9:39 am
Sure Sonic… If you somehow feel better believing that I’m ‘totally deranged’ then I’m very supportive of this tag. I’m content to stay objective