1. No public funding for politicans.
2. Full disclosure of all funding over $10000 from a single and that means single not playing words source.
3. Penalty for non disclosure by donor and donee 5 years jail.

The Totality Oppresive State Sanctioned Electoral Reforms Bill.

IMHO: George just nailed the name contest!

Sorry Andrew, although the labbels are going a little too far, it does show what Labour would do if it had the chance. The Bill is not about reducing election spending, but rather banning people from spending any of their own money (except very small amounts that won’t even cover the cost of two of the most expensive one page advertisements in the New Zealand Herald) on any topic that any other party (including the McGuilicudy serious party) takes a view on, while allowing the government to spend lots of your tax money for their re-election. and anyone who thinks that these “working for families” adds are merely to inform people of government policy, and not help them get re-elected is naive. witness the case of a Kiwisaver promotion being linked to the labour party website. Witness the fact you don’t need to apply for Working for Families to get it, so no need for promotion. witness the recent case at Vic Uni of Young Labour handing out taxpayer funded class timetables for people to put details of their class times in it, with the labour party logo on the front cover (to remind them of who to vote for?) and a list of Labour achievements inside.

Nope, sure haven’t. However, calling any bill that aims to reduce election spending an “Anti-Democracy Bill”, “Helengrad Gag” or a “Shut Down Democracy Bill”, is hysteria.

Labour’s pledge card spending wrong, as was the EB funding. Both undermined the democratic process. Do you remember the outrage in 1993 when Christian Heratige, McGillicuddy Serious and Natural Law were given $75,000 worth of TV advertising. Nobody seemed bat an eyelid that both National and Labour were given somewhere around the $600k to $700k worth. Democracy? Hah!! Election spending buys seats. It’s pure and simple.

Just why would anyone vote labour?

not even close. National will need to get at least 46% of the vote to be sure – of victory. i.e. act is poling at 1-2%, as is UF, and Winston’s a goner. U can keep on dreaming about the Maori Party and Greens jumping on board the blue boat, but we all know deep down that’s not going to happen. Gonna be a close one.

Why waist time debating Master Baiter? No one cares about what he has to say anyway.

Look – two examples – they both agree with democracy, and they both oppose de-regulation of the electoral system (ie both want spending caps, and are against anonymity). [I happen to disgree with them on both these issues, but there you go...democracy and (some) free speech].

So it doesnt hurt to occasionally be constructive.

So the fact that the aforementioned “government department communication” linked to the Labour website instead of the Kiwisaver website, doesn’t disturb you??

Read this carefully Roger, think….then type.

The fact that most New Zealanders (according to you )condemn what the EB did should illustrate that this legislation is not necessary! I didn’t hink it was the smartest move either, however most people I know can make up their own mind.

But taking the steps proposed by Labour is several steps too far. This is either an extreme response to an overstated problem, or a calculated move to silence opposition.

Bad government anyway you look at it.

OK, that does it. I’m resorting to ad hominem. Seeing I’ve already been tried and hung for it, what have I got to lose? You’re a fucken dumbarse James, and I’ll tell you why. I did not compare the Labour govt to Soviet Russia. Of course its different, but as the legislation we’re discussing shows so well, its only different because Klark and her acolytes have to suffer the restraints of a democratic system. That’s why they’re always attacking it. (democracy)

What I’m comparing James, is the mindest. The mindset of the people behind this legislation, the mindset of the people who would persecute the Exclusive Brethren, the mindset of those who pursue political power and control over others at any cost, that mindset that infests the left in NZ, is the very same mindset that existed in Soviet Russia during Stalin’s time.

Businesses have employees, not members.

However, these organisations cannot express opinions to the general public if the cost of that is to be over $60000 in an election year.

Anyway you look at it, this is about the government of the day ensuring that it can maintain a high profile through the public service. While the Government Departments are saying “this is what is happening” the underlying and unspoken message from labour would be “this is what we’ve done!”

Electioneering by default. Announcements by the Government department would be seen as an announcement by the governing party.

Now I do not for one moment advocate that departments should be muzzled. But then neither should the opinions and viewpoints of others who may have opinions about these policies, whether in favour or opposed.

Typical commie- a lie drops as easily from their mouths as the foam does when they come upon an Exclusive Brethren. (or anyone who strongly opposes their corrupt regime).

I repeat, there is no case against the EBs. Therefore the very justification for the proposed “legislation” is completely false. The left are merely using the EB incident, an event they engineered themselves, to attempt to put the usual commie constraints on freedom of political expression.