Best OIA response ever
April 6th, 2009 at 5:33 pm by David FarrarAt 10 am I blogged on the candidate expenses and donations summary.
I noted Charles Chauvel spent $5,551 on Internet advertising and said “What did Charles spend $5,551 on?”
At 3.01 pm the Electoral Commission sends me a copy of his expense and donation return. Now that is what you cann great service!
The $5,551.13 all went on Charles’ website. It’s a nice website but that’s a fair bit of money for it. On ther other hand the regulated period was from 1 January 2008, so that cost may include all the updates with new material.
Related posts:
- Parliamentary Service proposes to limit pre-election spending
- Labour concedes booklet to be an expense
- Greens let off for late donation return
- The Electoral Finance Act strikes again
April 6th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
People who don’t know much about web design stuff can be duped into believing that something that can be done in a day with a simple HTML editor actually takes weeks and weeks – and be billed for it.
Vote:April 6th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
It’s an “ok(ish)” site, but at $5,551 he got totally ripped off!
Vote:April 6th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
That is $5,551.13 of OUR money he spent on HIS site.
He got ripped for sure and blew OUR money self promoting HIM.
I think it is time to seriously reign in the Parliamentary service rorts that are going on.
[DPF: We don't know who paid for it. It now is a parliamentary site but may not have been last year]
Vote:April 6th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
I think a real company (not a one man band, they have far different costs) probably has to charge at least $200 an hour to survive longer term. In this case that would be 27 hours. Which isn’t much. I agree with you guys that this website looks cheapish, i.e. it can be build with Drupal in about 16 hours, but that would be an exact copy. Maybe this person had to spend 8 hours talking to Charles what he wanted. We alsi have that diary part, maybe that’s being retrieved by interfacing with an external system, increasing the cost.
So I disagree with “totally ripped off” and “in a day”.
And if you guys are doing website work for cheap, contact me, as I’m always looking for cheap labour.
Vote:April 6th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Btw, it’s a good thing Google doesn’t index keywords. The web site has as its keyword “election 2005″…
Vote:April 6th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
The code was written in 2005.
If the taxpayer is paying for it then why is this statement contained in the meta tags?
Nice to see him claiming copyright over the parliamentary crest.
Vote:April 6th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Does Charles think he is above the law just like Aunty Helen did? Is the creep the full tin of biscuits?
Vote:April 7th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Five and half K for a WEBSITE????
Jesus did it come with a happy ending or what?
Vote:April 7th, 2009 at 8:35 am
Maybe he designed/built it himself and pocketed the $5.5K?
Vote:April 7th, 2009 at 9:01 am
$5000-$7000 is what you pay for an average website. His however, is a very average website.
Vote: