Who refused to donate to Labour?
April 30th, 2008 at 11:39 pm by David Farrar44 Labour MPs donated over $10,000 to help bail out their illegal pledge card and other associated spending. But they had 50 MPs last year. So who did not donate or donated under $10,000. By process of elimination they are:
- Taito Philip Field (left them mid year)
- Damien O’Connor
- Shane Jones
- Charles Chauvel
- Lesley Soper
- Paul Swain
It is possible they did donate, but it was just under the $10,000 disclosure limit.
Related posts:
- Labour List Speculation
- Owen Glenn did donate to NZ First
- Anonymous Donations starting to flow through Electoral Commission
- The purge is coming …
May 1st, 2008 at 12:27 am
If my boss asked me for 10% of my wages because he had chosen to break the law and we needed to pay a fine on a project we released last year I would tell him to f*** off.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 6:37 am
I’m with hubbers on this one. Of course, with politicians this is them buying their own job security basically and given by the 2007 Donations Return thread they seem to be doing bloody well for themselves anyway. Unlike the rest of NZ who seem to be suffering under the tax burden. These guys can drop more than the minimum wage on donations, etc.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 7:08 am
So that’s a list of 44 stupid rich pricks, 5 slightly more intelligent rich pricks and one about to be convicted rich prick. Someone should tell Cullen.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 7:54 am
goodgod – one ultra-rich prick, 42 rich pricks, 5 slightly more intelligent rich pricks and one about to be convicted rich prick. (All together now…) And a Partridge up a Gum treeeeeeeeeeee…
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 8:36 am
Soper has always been on Clark’s shit list, but Jones and Chauvel? what’s their excuse?
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 8:47 am
Any other tax payer who borrowed $800,000 for the two or so years these pricks did would be hit with hundreds of thousands of dollars of penalties and use of money interest. It’s a classic case of people who make the rules not following the rules. They choose when to pay it back and had no penalties. Bastards.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 8:53 am
burt: for the two or so years these pricks did would be hit with hundreds of thousands of dollars of penalties
I wonder how IRD would react if I owed them $800,000. Sure, Labour did not owe IRD directly – but they owed the public for the funds they stole.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 9:00 am
Are forced donations are effectively a protection racket? “Step right up, step right up… buy your place on The List. Out-bid other marginal MPs for three years of [impotent] job certainty”
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 9:01 am
Yes Pascal, I’ll try not paying my personal and company tax for two years and when I get the horrendous penalties and interest I’ll simply pass retrospective validation and wipe all the penalties away. Oh – that’s right, I didn’t make the penalty and interest rules so I’m expected to comply – bugger. I wish I was the one who made the laws for others then I could flout them and move on.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 9:06 am
If those were my local MP it would almost (only almost) enough for me to consider giving them the electorate vote just for having the guts to stand up to Helen and Cullen. Certainly a good way of limiting their career options. Does not amtter the whole bunch have very limited job security past October regardless. No wonder they all have such long faces and are generally a caustic bunch of pricks around Parliament. Misery breeds misery and they deserve evry bit of shit while they await their fate in October.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 9:55 am
The big secret is who in Nationals caucus donates how much to the party, based on their own wealth of course
It pretty obvious that MPs donate to their own party or their own re election for electorate MPs.
No information from national about this
How come ?
And as others have raised it , National has NOT PAID the GST it stole from broadcasters to get increased TV time in the last week of the election
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:15 am
ghostwhowalks: And as others have raised it , National has NOT PAID the GST it stole from broadcasters to get increased TV time in the last week of the election
They tried. Legislatively they were unable to do so and their appeal to introduce legislation to allow them to do so was blocked by the government (The Labour Party, incidentally).
They resolved the situation by purchasing broadcasting time from the television stations, requesting that it be used for charity or public benefit messages. To the best of my knowledge the television stations accepted that. (Not sure about TVNZ though)
So what you are doing is you are trying to compare the theft of $800,000 of public money to a GST based mistake. You are attempting to equate Labour’s reluctance to repay the money with Nationals’ desire to put matters right. An act which they were blocked in by the Labour Party.
At least TRY to be honest GhostWhoWalks3.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:16 am
GWW
“And as others have raised it , National has NOT PAID the GST it stole from broadcasters to get increased TV time in the last week of the election”
Guess what…nobody gives a fuck!..move on.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:17 am
GWW
Why was Heather Simpson not prosecuted for the theft of $880k despite the police finding a prima facie case against her?
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:33 am
big brov
I’ll answer that because it’s easy, she was not prosecuted becasue she works for labour. Move on!
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:41 am
GWW lies again. If a National MP donated over $10,000 then it would be disclosed as has happened in the past.
And National has solved the money owing to the broadcasters in way satisfactory to all parties, without breaking the law.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:54 am
Ummm … how would we know? Just because some MPs have done it openly in the past does not mean that others have not done it less openly by donating via the Waitemata Trust.
I have no evidence at all that any has, but you’ve stated that only the trustees know who has donated via a trust, so I’m guessing that you have no evidence that none have.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 10:57 am
Satisfactory to all parties ???
You mean National gets something that money cant buy, and the broadcasters dont get their GST
Thats why TVNZ wants its money( & GST )up front this time
Are you the defence for Taito Field in coming up saying black is white.
To summarise, national fraudulently got TV time , The police didnt prosecute for public interest reasons.
The kiwimob mafia says Move on ! It was a mistake ( they wouldnt accept that excuse from labour).
But fraud is fraud.
Vote:National also misused a small amount of money under the AG rules for advertising. THEFT is THEFT
May 1st, 2008 at 10:59 am
GWW
Is that the same Philip Field former Labour MP?
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 11:00 am
GWW: The kiwimob mafia says Move on ! It was a mistake ( they wouldnt accept that excuse from labour).
Because Labour could not use that excuse. They had been advised by the Electoral Commission that they had to include the pledge card in their return. They accepted that advice and then deliberately ignored it by excluding the pledge card.
You are looking at the difference between a deliberate theft and a mistake. And you’re trying to make them equal.
Sorry mate, but while there are people with an IQ above 10 around you’re just not going to wash that one.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 11:06 am
It must be a sad day for socialists when they have to resort to paying bills with their own money.
Kind of like a pig feeding from a trough and then having to shit in it to keep it topped up
Kiwimob Mafia, thats a good one ghost, any more?
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 11:41 am
GWW
Come on we have been over this hundreds of times. Yes National may have breached the law, yes labour breached the law. BUT GWW the problem is this – Labour retrospectively validated it and let National get away with it. It was very nice of labour to be so accomodating but I do think they did it in their own self interest and the “off the hook” for National was a side effect of them giving themselves a get out of jail free card.
Had Labour not validated their own law breaking then National may have been taken to task for theirs. Move on – nothing to see here becasue the corrupt Labour party made law breaking OK.
I wish all parties who were identified in the AG’s report were dragged into court – but Labour made sure that wouldn’t happen.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
GWW3 … I’m sure all National MPs donate to the Party as do its many thousands of members. My electorate alone has probably more members than the entire Labour Party and for the last five years at least it has received recognition as the Party’s most successful electorate. Each year we raise literally tens of thousands of dollars and all from the ‘little’ people so despised by your mob. But that’s somewhat different from your MPs having their collective arms twisted so as to pay back the nearly $1,000,000 you bastards stole from the taxpayer to buy the last election.
Heard Barry Soper describe ‘Slippery’ Mike Williams as Labour’s fund-raiser par-excellent. Begs the question, just how much native talent is required to levy people with the unspoken message of ‘pay up or move on’.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 1:07 pm
So are you now saying National didn’t break the ‘guidelines’ on election advertising.
But they did , ( Jim Andertons party was the only one that didn’t)
So much for the rules being clear.
Now the tar brush will blacken all offending parties does it not.
Plus National fraudulently ripped off the broadcasters to try to get an advantage in the last week of the election.
Thats TWO slaps with the tar brush for one party which is the most corrupt
And if a charity was better off , well name it so we all can congratulate them
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 1:16 pm
GWW: Plus National fraudulently ripped off the broadcasters to try to get an advantage in the last week of the election.
Thats TWO slaps with the tar brush for one party which is the most corrupt
This thread is not here for your lies.
National did not fraudulently rip off the broadcasters – they made a mistake. And they attempted to correct that mistake immediately.
If you want slap a tar brush on the most corrupt party, apply it to Labour who first accepted, then ignored the advice of the Electoral commission, stole $800,000 from the public purse and then introduced retrospective legislation to cover their own asses.
You will not succeed in reframing the debate on this. You fail.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Buggerlugs says:
I could hazard a guess – these two legends in their own minds didn’t get the recognition and high public office that was clearly their due, unlike any other first term MP. Therefore toys are being hurled from the cot.
Poor boys. If they’d had the sense to sign up to, say, NZ First or United Whatever-they-are-now, they’d have found that overweening egos matched only by lack of competence was no bar to high office
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
GWW3 (1:07) – “..the tar brush will blacken all offending parties…”
I find that comment racist and offensive. On behalf of all “People of Other Colour” please desist from this primitive bigoted stereotyping.
Vote:May 1st, 2008 at 2:04 pm
“overweening egos”
Rex that is a great line
Vote: