He doesn’t get the difference

March 26th, 2009 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

says:

Back in 2006, the (then-Labour) government passed the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, which retrospectively validated Parliamentary Services expenditure in the wake of a nonsensical, retrospective reinterpretation by the . The rabids in the sewer (and some supposedly outside it) preached revolution.

Today, the (now-National) government introduced the Appropriation (2007/08 Financial Review) Bill, which among other things retrospectively validates various items of unapproved, unappropriated expenditure.

Will we see the same outpouring of outrage from the sewer, or will they finally admit that such retrospective validations are standard procedure and happen almost every year? Hmmm, I wonder…

This is one of the more desperate rewritings of history.  Yes validations are common place, but Idiot/Savant deliberately overlooks the vast differences with this one.

Also he continues to smear and lie about the Auditor-General. The Auditor-General warned parties before the 2005 election about their spending. They ignored him. The opinion of the Auditor-General was backed up by the Solictor-General. And what was truly despeciable is that the Government and certain scyophantic supporters attacked the Auditor-General time and time again claiming he was wrong – and then they went and passed a law which killed off a law suit that would have resulted in a Court deciding if he was right or not.

It is bad enough to attack an Independent Officer if Parliament for doing their job, but to attack them and to support a law change that would stop a court case over whether they are correct is disgusting.

As for the other issue of validation, here are what made this case different:

  1. The MPs voting for validation had personally gained (in a political sense) from the illegal expenditure. They were not disinterested participants. This is totally different to a minor breach by some junior official in a department.
  2. Not all parties had agreed to pay the money back, and in the case of NZ First never paid it back.
  3. The MPs voted down an amendment that would have allowed the Darnton vs Clark lawsuit to continue, so that a court ruling could have been obtained on whether or not the was illegal.
  4. The MPs who voted to validate kept claiming the expenditure was legal and like Idiot/Savant attacked the Auditor-General, rather than accept the ruling.
  5. The Auditor-General had explicitly warned MPs before the election about their expenditure, and they ignored his advice
Tags: , ,

50 Responses to “He doesn’t get the difference”

  1. Tim Ellis (253 comments) says:

    Also he continues to smear and lie about the Auditor-General. The Auditor-General warned parties before the 2005 election about their spending. They ignored him. The opinion of the Auditor-General was backed up by the Solictor-General.

    You’re too harsh on NRT, DPF. Even though NRT is neither an auditor nor a lawyer, his anonymous left-wing credentials make his opinion clearly superior to that of the professional experts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Kimble (4,375 comments) says:

    You would think the Left would have enough sense to stop fighting battles they lost, and couldnt ever have won to begin with.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    Once again NRT proves why he won’t allow comments. The Standard have posted about this as well. Righties rise in revolution re: retrospective law and I’m banned so I can’t even have a bash at them…

    They are calling for me…. For what it’s worth, I posted a comment which acknowledged that I was banned and therefore accepted the comments fate. I simply said they could not compare vanilla validations of unexpected or unplanned spending with alleged breaches of electoral funding laws by the AG with validations going back 14 years covering an unspecified amount of money. However the comment was deleted, which was fair as I’m banned.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Tauhei Notts (1,601 comments) says:

    When I read pieces like this I drop to my knees in supplication and thank God that on 8th November 2008 New Zealanders saw fit to get rid of those barren harridans and their sycophantic hangers on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    Socialism good, everything else evil EEEEEEVILLLL!!!!

    There you go DPF, whenever you feel the urge to read that little cesspool of hate just remember ther above and it will save you time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. vibenna (305 comments) says:

    No Right Turn seems to have evolved from angry young man to inflexible fossil without going through all the usual intervening steps.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. village idiot (748 comments) says:

    I find it very odd that you are attacking Idiot/Savant so often these days, David, when we all know I/S is regarded as a fair and balanced blogger. Stranger and stranger.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. PaulL (5,872 comments) says:

    That’s a strangely appropriate handle, given the content of your comment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Manolo (13,320 comments) says:

    The letter S in I/S stands not for Savant, but Supreme. In fact, this rabid leftie is Idiot Supreme.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. David in Chch (508 comments) says:

    I find it interesting how so many people use “Left” and “Right” labels. I consider myself centre left. I subscribe to the underlying principles of social democracy. HOWEVER those principles include high ethical and moral standards which, sadly, the Labour Party and its government contravened. So last election I refused to vote for them. End of story (and of the Labour-led government as so many people like me also said “Enough!”).

    NRT and The Standard may purport to be “left” but until such time as they accept that there are rules and ethics in any social democracy that MUST be followed they will not have my support back. Simple really. And I think there are a lot of others who think the same.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    Idiot/Savant will probably turn up here soon and argue that he’s not a complete paper weight spin merchant. Pity the weakling won’t stand his ground on his own blog.

    Idiot/Savant – If you are reading this, I dare you to open up comments on that thread.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Ryan Sproull (7,026 comments) says:

    You should double-dog-dare him. He’ll be the laughing stock of the whole school if he backs down from a double-dog-dare.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. lofty (1,303 comments) says:

    Yes David in Chch,
    I am also one of those who refuses to entertain the labour liars, until respectability and the desire to follow the accepted norms of politics return.
    The rantings of their sycophantic fawners leave me cold, and the refusal even still, of the opposition MP’s to answer truthfully their critics also leaves me cold, and angry.
    The systomatic hijacking of what I considered to be my natural party, has left me shaken, a party I mght add I devoted a lot of time to in the past, but never would I defend the indefensible as those sycophants of today seem to think is OK.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    burt, just email him then, the address is right there on the left hand side of the page. Just don’t expect to get an answer if you deign insults to be a good form of argument (just saying).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. gd (2,286 comments) says:

    Oh Dear Most of the LEFT and sadly a few of the RIGHT just dont understand the basic principles of good governance.

    Take conflict of interest. I would love to have a cream bun for every time Ive witnessed a LEFTIE totally and completely miss the point of a conflict of interest that is staring them in the face.

    Like in a committee meeting where I have had to point out that they cannot vote on a matter because they are conflicted.Do they understand that as they have an interest in the matter that it is not appropriate for them to have a say in the outcome of the vote.
    NO.

    Take disclosure again the LEFT have a very quaint view That is you only disclosure if you think you might be caught out. Clark/Cullen were both masters at the art of non disclosure if they could get away with it.

    Take transpernacey Again Clark/Cullen preferred the opaque rather than the clear glass the list goes on and on and on

    Andso without understanding the techincial aspects of governnace as Tauhei Notts says above they voted against bad governnace on that fateful day in early November 2008

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    The rantings of their sycophantic fawners leave me cold,

    FWIW, I/S often rants against Labour too, though unsurprisingly most of the ranting these days is about National.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    Oh one further thing re: The standard. More and more threads are tunring up as ‘Published by The Standard’. If lprent has died he will be turning in his grave right now. People have been warned they will be banned (and some may have been) if they refer to ‘the standard’ as an amorphous mob of people. “The Standard” is a piece of software remember.

    Hey perhaps that’s all it is, some trivial comment generator that get passed a url, builds a ‘Hey over on …’ page, quotes a few bits and creates the thread. That would explain the intelligence level of the threads but is no excuse for the loyal bunch of ‘here here’ reef fish that comment within it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    Idiot/Savant I double-dog-dare you to open comments on your No Right Turn : Hypocrisy thread.

    Cheers Ryan.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. burt (7,791 comments) says:

    stephen

    burt, just email him then

    If I email letters to the Dom-Post they are published from time to time. Why oh why would I waste my time emailing a response to a low level piece of spin designed to captivate reef fish when it would never be published. It not likely it would be responded to either. Why would I do that ? – I stopped writing to Santa Claus years ago, did you?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. glubbster (351 comments) says:

    The Labour Party wholeheartedly subscribe to the view that the ends justify the means. Until this changes, we will continue to see them fail to understand the rule of law and its supporting concepts. Labour’s view of its self-importance and devine political purposes are above the law it seems. Perhaps it is also their erroneous assumption that Parliament is a supreme being and therefore can do anything (be manipulated) to reach the ends they crave. They forget that the public do not want this unrestrained power. And didn’t Palmer argue in unbridled power how MMP would solve/offset these issues? Another Tui ad.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    burt, if your ego demands that what you say is ‘published’, then tough luck (probably), but if you simply want a dialogue, then email may well provoke a response.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. unaha-closp (1,111 comments) says:

    He doesn’t get the difference

    $800,000.00

    The difference is $800,000.00

    The thing I/S doesn’t get is the single solitary standard to which most people hold politicians. Don’t steal from us.

    What I/S puts in place of this standard is something different. To I/S the primary rule is don’t be a Right-winger.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. deanknight (263 comments) says:

    The caution against re-writing history is a good one. But perhaps one that the Auditor-General and DPF need to be wary of – the puported “warning” should not be overstated. The rules were acknowledged to be ambiguous and there was no specific warning:

    http://www.laws179.co.nz/2006/08/retrospective-or-retroactive.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. petal (704 comments) says:

    There IS a reason I stopped reading that blog after 3 weeks. More I than S. Perhaps no S at all. To even read his blog AND comment on it is to shine a light where none should be at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. greenfly (1,059 comments) says:

    Well Petal, you are a fool then.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. racer (258 comments) says:

    “burt
    Hey perhaps that’s all it is, some trivial comment generator that get passed a url, builds a ‘Hey over on …’ page, quotes a few bits and creates the thread. That would explain the intelligence level of the threads but is no excuse for the loyal bunch of ‘here here’ reef fish that comment within it”

    Yeah, maybe something that randomly picks articles, and breaks them up into several pieces separated by “heh”, designed specially do dog whistle to you racist, sexist, hate filled, deluded idiots.

    “burt
    If I email letters to the Dom-Post they are published from time to time. Why oh why would I waste my time emailing a response to a low level piece of spin designed to captivate reef fish when it would never be published. It not likely it would be responded to either. Why would I do that ? – I stopped writing to Santa Claus years ago, did you?”

    What a disgusting sense of entitlement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,810 comments) says:

    I’ve never read his blog and don’t intend to. The internet traffic to that blog no doubt indicates that there aren’t many other people who chose to read it either.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. racer (258 comments) says:

    Its more popular than whale oil.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    More people visit Auschwitz, does that make it more “popular”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. getstaffed (9,189 comments) says:

    Not all parties had agreed to pay the money back, and in the case of NZ First never paid it back

    Left field question: Whatever happened the ‘the list’ the Winston gave to the Speaker… you know, of the charities who ‘received’ the Winston First money? Did she leave it in the top drawer for Lockie to peruse?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. PhilBest (5,117 comments) says:

    Tauhei Notts said it.

    DPF needs to realise that this is not just about the way that lefty bloggers think, this is about the existential threat to civilisation of that ilk getting into power and governing according to the way they think; you are simply not going to be able to change them by arguments supported by truth or reason, either in the blogging scenario or the governing scenario.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. PhilBest (5,117 comments) says:

    petal (281) Vote: 5 0 Says:

    March 26th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
    “There IS a reason I stopped reading that blog after 3 weeks. More I than S. Perhaps no S at all. To even read his blog AND comment on it is to shine a light where none should be at all.”

    And petal said it, too. But I’d change that to “….shine a light where none can shine at all……”

    What was that famous book about socialist government, one of many…….”Darkness at Noon”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    Think Animal Farm and the phrase pig in shit makes more sense.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Ryan Sproull (7,026 comments) says:

    Idiot/Savant I double-dog-dare you to open comments on your No Right Turn : Hypocrisy thread.

    Cheers Ryan.

    Great heavens!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. lprent (102 comments) says:

    burt: More and more threads are turning up as ‘Published by The Standard’.

    “The Standard” is a generic poster used for things like notices and reposting. Click on the name or on this link to see what has been published under that name..
    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/author/notices-and-features/

    You’ll see that there are notices like Drinking Liberally. There are simple reposts from other sites where we think that the post deserves more attention. What they are not are original posts by the individual posters or where there was substantive opinion by one of us.

    We were getting enough of this external material that it was interfering with searching for posts by authors. So they’re now mostly going out under a generic ‘writer’. For instance the last DL Auckland had 2 notices and will get another when Lyn publishes the video and I can put it up.

    Good to see that you’re keeping track.

    BTW: I think that rOb wants to discuss retrospective validating legislation with you. For some reason he seems to think that you’re avoiding the topic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. big bruv (13,210 comments) says:

    Lynn

    Many of us would want like discuss a whole raft of things with you guys however as soon as anybody raises an issue that does not comply with the lies of the Labour party they are banned.

    It’s a pity, your site could be a place where robust debate occured.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    I wouldn’t bother BB,

    The retentive one is only here to try and get some traffic onto the echo chamber. He’s just trying to be subtle, fail.

    Ignore.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. racer (258 comments) says:

    Even redbaiters survived there bruv, maybe your just lacking a point?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    racer, go back to the substandard with traveller eve. your perpetual motion eco car is racing to a halt here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. racer (258 comments) says:

    more of a 4 cylinder petrol man myself, though should the good times keep rolling, a nice powerful inline 6 is in my future.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    whatever. take your latest pseudonym back to the substandard and play with your union mates there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. racer (258 comments) says:

    No sir. Take yourself back home and get back to making love to your dog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Go and help the low paid union members whos families you are taking money away from.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. racer (258 comments) says:

    Ermm why? I’m not a union employee, let alone a union member?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. racer (258 comments) says:

    How ever I do note they are free to leave the union if they feel like it. (The fact that they don’t must really hurt people like you)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    Zzzz.

    Wake me up when knobjockey goes back to the substandard or gets a job. whatever happens first.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. racer (258 comments) says:

    zzzz wake me up when expatrapist gets a clue.

    Plenty of jobs, of the last 2 main ones i’ve had, the threat of a constructive dismissal case was a far more powerful bargining tool than any union, and the other job I was far to qualified for, so was just a filler-iner and I didn’t care how crap the conditions were.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    obviously it didn’t involve spelling, or being paid much.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. racer (258 comments) says:

    With such powerful wit and intellect you must be CEO of a pretty big company.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    I’m a simple self employed boy from the provinces.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.