Institute of Chartered Accountants says Kill the Bill
The Institute of Chartered Accountants joins the Law Society in asking the for Electoral Finance Bill to be killed:
The Institute is deeply concerned that expert advice from the accounting and legal communities has been substantially ignored. Accordingly, we join the New Zealand Law Society in calling for the bill to be dumped,” says David Pickens, the Institute’s director of government relations and strategic projects.
“The only way a workable solution will be achieved is for the bill to be dumped and redrafted from scratch.
“To proceed in the face of such widespread and considered opposition sets a dangerous precedent. Democracy is too valuable and delicate to allow it to be trampled by such a flawed process.”
Now when is the last time you heard accountants get so worked up about an issue??? Shows how bad it is.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
This is a simple tactic of over drafting so you get most of wht you want passed. There may be a next draft including a clause making it illegal for the presence of children at political rallies.
Just think up something your self. Just remember, what ever you have thought, they already have.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
“Now when is the last time you heard accountants get so worked up about an issue??? Shows how bad it is.”
I know. Who would have thought that accountant’s generally lean to the right? Mind Blowing stuff really.
[DPF: nice smear. They did not erally take a position on any of the political aspects of the bill. They offered their expert professional opinion that the audit requirements were unworkable and impossible. They were ignored]
November 19th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
I’ve been raising some problems about Clause 5 and Clause 53 on The Standard, but nobody there seems to have a satisfactory answer.
Under the bill, I have to provide my name and address whenever I express a view on who people should vote for. Otherwise, I commit an illegal practice.
That is not free speech.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
In answer to your last sentence my I offer myself as a long standing member of NZICA as an example.
Not all CAs conform to the usual stereo type
November 19th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
milo: is this over a $ limit or would we still have to do this even if we spent no money?
November 19th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Max – even if you spent no money. If I’m wrong, I hope to be corrected. So far, nobody has shown that I am wrong.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Yes Nome, The main reason accountants (and Lawyers and human rights advocates) are against this bill is because they secretly have right wing interests to protect. Meanwhile Klark and the Greens are doing backroom deals to rig the amounts of money one can recieve anonamously in their favour. Oh the deception from those evil accountants.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Ah yes GD but you did graduate to freedom fighter. Did you take it in small steps, perhaps via banking?
Spread the word about the march in Wellington everyone.
November 19th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
As usual Roger is an epic fail.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
“They did not erally take a position on any of the political aspects of the bill.”
They recommended that the entire bill be rejected. Can’t think of a more political statement actually. Every organisation/institution has its ideological predilections, be them latent or express.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Bit of a bugger that the Coalition for Open Government’s come onboard though, eh David? And what’s this about the HRC saying it’s not so bad after all? One suspects your little scare campaign is about to run out of steam. Sucks when the facts get in the way, huh?
[DPF: Tane - have you corrected your lies yet? You have proven incapable of debating on the issues, and your one attempt to do so was 100% conclusively wrong.]
November 19th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
“As usual Roger is an epic fail”
Unlike your attempts to form sentences?
November 19th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Kevin Actually I was going to be an actuary but I decided it was all too exciting so chose accounting instead.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Nick C – Don’t generalise about lawyers or accountants. NZICA and the Law Society are entitled to their opinion and cannot simply be dismissed as such.
Accountants and lawyers aren’t always right-wing Keynes-phobes, and that isn’t even an accurate stereotype.
As a future member of NZICA I don’t personally agree with their statement issued today, but it may well indeed be representative of the membership.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Soldier being trained in crowd control in Wanganui.
When soldiers are used in a democracy against people protesting against immoral and unjust laws, what is the next step for the citizens of that country??
November 19th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
hmmm sarcasm is a beautiful thing … i withdraw.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Has the Law Commission voiced an opinion on the amended bill yet?
November 19th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Yes – interesting. See this by the HRC.
““We’re pleased to see the very wide definition of election advertisement has been dropped which allows outside groups to participate in issues-related advocacy,” says Human Rights Commission, EEO Commissioner Dr Judy McGregor.”
And this classic from no right turn
November 19th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Accountants , lawyer society , human rights commission, 80% -pissed off voters , just like the smacking fiasco – eh ? A real pattern is emerging . The nanny state is falling to pieces under Auntie Helen, who has the blinkers on and is totally oblivious to the self destruction of the freak show corrupt puppets . This women is clearly not well in the head ?
What has Sir Jeffery got to say about it at the Law Commission ? Ouch !
November 19th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Sir Geoffrey Palmer has been deafingly silent over this issue.
What’s he doing these days?
November 19th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
“[DPF: Tane - have you corrected your lies yet? You have proven incapable of debating on the issues, and your one attempt to do so was 100% conclusively wrong.]”
TSK TSK
November 19th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Question, after the amendments, will the bill go back to select comittee for further refinement, or is that all the submission thet we, the people, get?
Where to from here?
November 19th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Yep I grew up in a left wing greenie family, but now….Chartered Accountant. Who would have thought that accountants would get political? Well they could become an MP (Pansy Wong; Katrina Shanks), become PM (Rob Muldoon), prosecute an MP (Graham McCready), arrange a protest march (John Boscawen)….
November 19th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
I wold not be in too much of a hurry to cry joy, Roger et al. The revisions are still up for analysis and to expect a fully inspected analysis the day it was revealed is folly. David has done a basic lookover and highlighted some flaws, wait until the professionals give it a once over.
As to fail. I guess you don’t spend a lot of time on Internet forums. It might be … how did you put it the other day … be too much of a “waist”. (laughs)
Fail is used to indicate failure and is used exactly as shown above. As in:
“Roger, you are full of fail”
or
“Roger, you are an epic fail”
Often spelled as phail, etc. as well. It’s ugly though, agreed.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
“Where to from here?”
Confronted on the streets to where the govt is channeling us to be crushed and conformed by their iron fist.
I’m thinking Helen is far too smug introducing this bill so close to an election. To swing that election to herself is the obvious. But even at the risk of public back lash?
The bill does everything for her except stop people ticking the opposition boxes.
We can only conclude she believes the electorate to be totally brain dead and must wonder at her utter contempt for her fellow citizens, which judging by her discomfort at the Kiwi who sat next to her in the theatre is very, very deep contempt indeed.
November 19th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Accountants are smart people – not like politicians who have the brains of concrete tunnel supports .
November 19th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
hinamanu said “The bill does everything for her except stop people ticking the opposition boxes.”
Bro, we need to read the fine print – even THAT is probably outlawed somewhere in the EFB!!
November 19th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
“Yep I grew up in a left wing greenie family, but now….Chartered Accountant. Who would have thought that accountants would get political?”
Yep – my brother’s a charted accountant and used to vote for the Alliance – still he’s adamant that accountants are mostly to the right of center Not to surprising to hear really.
November 19th, 2007 at 11:38 pm
Geoffs busy seeing how he can sneakily remove self defence as a defence in cases involving violence…..
November 19th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
Going to Eric Idle by any chance gd? “we’d better hope there’s intelligent life out there in space bacause there’s bugger all down here on earth”
November 19th, 2007 at 11:58 pm
Phillip John/Roger Nome:
Once again you let yourself down with a ridiculous assertion. Unless your brother has personally met every member of the accounting profession, or even a significant proportion of members, he’s no authority on their political leanings. Are you that naive?
I suspect that your blinkered perspective is the product of an unwise assumption that accountants’ sole mission in life is to help rich-listers structure their tax affairs effectively.
Next you’ll be telling me that all doctors want the age of alcohol purchase raised because they see the results of binge-drinking in emergency departments.
November 20th, 2007 at 12:28 am
DPF – please lift this thread out of Uncategorized – it’s an important part of the history of electoral reform in NZ. TIA
November 20th, 2007 at 7:36 am
Peak Oil Conspiracy: I suspect that your blinkered perspective is the product of an unwise assumption that accountants’ sole mission in life is to help rich-listers structure their tax affairs effectively.
I wonder if these young pups realize that employers, smart ones leastways, will use Google as part of their evaluation of a future employee. And whilst it would be unethical and quite probably illegal to hold political viewpoints against them, one can certainly hold their stupidity against them.
I know that every time I see a candidate cross through here I research their name to see what papers they have published, how well they can converse and reason and how maturely they carry themselves.
Another good reason why, if you are going to be an asshat on the internet, you should remain anonymous.
November 20th, 2007 at 12:20 pm
Here is a precis of what the Accountants Institute said about the Bill.
It will:
(a) Mandate audits that will serve no useful purpose.
(b) Add greatly to electoral costs.
(c) Result in a huge number of qualified audits, thereby eroding public confidence in the electoral system.
If that is right wing poppy cock then you can call me Tane