Mike Williams’ new job

August 30th, 2009 at 5:46 am by David Farrar

The Sunday News reports:

SECRET documents suggest that former Labour Party president got the $100,000-plus a year job heading the anti- mainly because he is mates with .

“Clearly there are some risks with the Williams appointment,” reads a confidential paper from the Trust’s board.

“There may well be other candidates in the marketplace who may be capable of doing a better job as CEO and chief fundraiser, however if we go that route we will very likely not have Holmes’ involvement,” it continues.

It is no secret that Holmes and Williams are close mates, so this is little surprise.

The document, dated August 2, adds: “Our recommendation therefore is to offer the CEO role to Mike Williams, but to give ourselves the ability to review the situation after say six months, subject to the constraints of current employment law.

“If he has not succeeded in raising significant sums in that time, there will not be enough funding for his continuing salary, so he does have an incentive to succeed.”

I am no fan of Williams, but to be fair to him he seemed to be reasonably proficient in fundraising for Labour.

But Williams’s appointment has led to high profile, anti-P crusader and his group MethCon withdrawing their support for the Stellar Trust.

He sent an email to the board on August 10 which read: “It is with some regret I wish to advise that I am unable to reconcile my concerns about the appointment of Mike Williams to the position of CEO to the trust. I believe this is a high risk appointment that will be very polarising given the political overtones.”

It is understood that Sabin, a former drug squad detective, believed Labour approached the P epidemic with a polarising “harm minimisation” approach, treating it as a public health and welfare issue rather than a public order problem.

Sabin may well be right, but really I wouldn’t hld the former party president responsible for what the parliamentary wing or Ministers decided.

The Stellar Trust board’s confidential August 2 paper also revealed there was a concern about how Williams’ appointment would be accepted by the National Government.

After last year’s election, Williams left Labour’s engine-room following a series of controversial media reports, including how he flew to Australia seeking dirt on .

The Trust’s reservations were passed on to Holmes, regarded as the public face of Stellar.

The broadcaster sought the Prime Minister’s views.

Key last night confirmed a call between himself and Holmes on July 26.

“I’ve moved on and I’m not a person who holds grudges.

“If Mike is prepared to spend his time trying to combat P, given the devastation that drug is causing, then I’m happy to work with him,” he told Sunday News.

Could you imagine Helen Clark saying the same thing about someone who had flown to another country in a (failed) attempt to smear her as a criminal fraudster?

Tags: , , , , ,

35 Responses to “Mike Williams’ new job”

  1. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Yeah yeah, we all know what a capital chap John Key is. Whatever we might imagine Helen Clark saying, surely we can’t be expected to make a judgement on something that hasn’t happened? The post seems to suggest that broadly you have no issue with William’s new job, but just needed a premise to have a dig at Helen Clark?

    Just let it go, David, it’ll eat you up inside. . . .

    [DPF: Good God nothing eating me up. I just love reminding people of the difference between the current PM and the old one. Those who don't like the comparisons seem to be the ones getting eaten up.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. mudrunner (91 comments) says:

    Sabin’s split is a typical example of small thinking where people are unable to keep in mind the big view of what organisation is about or able to achieve. If William’s appointment includes a change in approach for the Stellar Trust from that which accommodated Sabin’s position, there may be some worth in spitting the dummy, but I suspect showing a little more of Keys magnanimity would be better.

    P is a public order problem and now some leverage to make it be accepted and treated a such has been diluted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Admit it, David, it’s like a cancer inside you . . .

    I just think that she is past her sell-by date. Best to let her slide into obscurity. Like Monty Python said about the Belgians:
    “Let’s not call them anything, let’s just ignore them. . .’

    And equally yes! 100 times let’s get our teeth into the scourge of P . . . .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. billyborker (1,102 comments) says:

    If P IS a public order problem, when will the government come to grips with it? Where is the attack on the financiers? Fiddle faddle seems to be the only solution they have for anything that requires thought and action.

    Where is the coherent policy on drugs? Yes, a genuine harm minimisation one that would see alcohol and tobacco restricted far more severely than maryjane and E.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Tim Ellis (251 comments) says:

    I wonder if Mr Williams will be asking Owen Glenn for money.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Sushi Goblin (419 comments) says:

    Hi might be a competent organiser and a good fundraiser, but I would find it very hard to contribute a cent to the Stellar Trust knowing that any money given would be used to pay Mike Williams $120,000 (as is rumoured).

    It’s not that he was Labour, its that he was the perpetrator of some of the most negative dirt digging in New Zealand’s recent political history, not to mention his involvement and participation in a $800,000 plus electoral rort that arguably helped steal an election. I doubt there would be a benefactor in Auckland that would feel good about handing a cheque directly over to Williams.

    “Clearly there are some risks with the Williams appointment,” reads a confidential paper from the Trust’s board.

    Yes. And it would have been interesting to see what the board felt was the upside in appointing this odious divisive character.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. expat (4,050 comments) says:

    Obviously Holmes has dropped a chunk of cash into the trust.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Yeah to hell with the Stellar Trust.

    The Williams appointment looks like yet another grab in the charitable sector by lefties. CORSO, Barnardo’s, and Plunket, and others seem to be infiltrated by Lefties then taken over. They scare off the middle-class volunteers and rely on collection agents who clip the ticket and often use backpackers or other casual labour, usually transient.

    Secularisation of the country and the rise in families with two working parents have decimated the traditional volunteers of charity, and some of these people managed or oversaw the charities. They are out and leftist agitators are in. A sort of nationalisation of the charitable sector, with lefties rather than a leftist government doing the take over.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Inventory2 (10,337 comments) says:

    The real question then, if the Stellar Trust is paying Willimas $100k as CEO, is this:

    What percentage of money donated to the trust will actually find its way towards the fight against P?

    It’s sad that we have to think that way, but the recent revelations about the “charity industry” should make us all very sceptical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Viking2 (11,467 comments) says:

    Doomed to failure from the start for they know not what they are doing. Holmes has no idea and when asked by the most ardent advocate of fighting “p” in Nz to help with the cause refused because it didn’t fit his image. He would have needed to take some responsibility for his own actions.
    Stellar Trust are well meaning Rotarians who again are out of their depth and now are a cheque book for Williams.
    If you really want to know more and what really has to be done then contact Christine Davey in her Fight Against “p”.
    Real experience and supported by Sensible Sentencing. Much of Christine’s efforts can be seen at http://www.nzcpr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=20 and on her own website.

    Christine has been airing this topic and fighting for parental rights for over 3 years. Just an ordinary person with an extraordinary mission. Like always though ignored by those with the grunt to fix the problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. big bruv (13,884 comments) says:

    Goodness me, just how far will Holmes go to keep his spoilt brat out of prison?

    Appoint a good mate to head the trust, one with good political connections, one who might be able to get a high ranking politician to “lean” on a judge or two?

    Mind you, we have already seen that there are two justice systems in NZ, one for rich white media personalities and one for the rest of us.

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

    What percentage of money donated to the trust will actually find its way towards the fight against P?

    I don’t know what they mean by ‘large sums’, but in any ‘large’ fundraising campaign the vast majority of funding is obtained in the form of relatively large donations solicited from individual donors who have eventually been ‘sold’ on the idea, see this ‘ ‘gift pyramid’ – i would expect such donors to demand to know exactly where their money is going. It’s the little guys who might have to really work for some accountability.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. backster (2,171 comments) says:

    Ironic that the President of the Party that permitted the problem to get out of control ,despite being repeatedly warned to tackle it, should now be hanging about to slurp up the gravy that may spill from the largesse of those desperate to tackle the worst excesses of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Holmes’s position as a broadcaster excludes him from having political friends.

    Well it would if there was any integrity in the broadcasting industry.

    How is he ever going to report objectively on Williams??

    Holmes was reportedly a friend of Klark and her husband too.

    Slimy little Progressive weasel is a disgrace to his profession.

    Well, he would be if that profession had a milligram of integrity remaining.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Patrick Starr (3,674 comments) says:

    “I just love reminding people of the difference between the current PM and the old one.”

    hmmm – both thumbed their noses at overwhelming referenda results………

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    shit..!..a hundred grand a year..!

    isn’t the legal side of the drug industry also very well paid..?

    are all these screamers/panic-merchants on a similar earn..?

    and the question inventory asked must be asked again..

    how much of this money raised is used to pay these clowns..?

    and how much is divvied up by the ‘crew’..?

    but the question that jumped out at me..

    is..w.t.f. makes mike williams an ‘expert’ on ‘p’..?

    so ‘expert’..he is worth a hundred grand a year..?

    second question…

    ..what do they spend any money spent actually ‘fighting ‘p’…on..?

    (do they stand in front of anti-‘p’-posters..?

    ..in their offices..

    ..going ‘boo..!..hiss..!..p..!”.. ?

    w.t.f. do they do all day..?..

    in those offices..?

    ..(these ‘big-earners’ in the legal drug trade..?..eh..?..)

    sit around waiting for a call from breakfast-telly/holmes/campbell..?

    for them to go and do their ‘schtick’…?

    it’s fucken ‘easy street’ for them..eh..?

    and..a ‘good little earner!’..

    (as they say..those in the drug trade..(legal division)..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    more questions..

    will williams also be arguing against ‘the demon-gin’…?

    (y’know..!..the real ‘killer-drug’ in our culture/society..?..)

    will he be the poster-boy..for not doing ‘p’..?

    (as in ‘don’t do ‘p’..!..and get to look like me..!’..(?)

    do the anti-drug people get together for friday night piss-ups..?

    do they laugh long and loud..?

    ..at the fools who fund them..?

    and give public thanks to the ‘the drug industry’..?..

    that sustains them and theirs..

    ..so well..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. nickb (3,687 comments) says:

    I’d like to see the links between P and cases of violent crime, or all drugs and violent crime for that matter. The poster above me being a case in point

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    i’ve never used ‘p’..nckb..

    when i was doing that sorta thing..(long time ago/far away..)

    heroin/cocaine mixed together were my ‘drug-high of choice’..

    and the nearest i came to smoking ‘p’..

    was smoking crack-cocaine..

    eh..?

    ‘p’ is speed..

    speed kills..

    speed is the ultimate garbage-drug..

    and so ‘low-rent’ as to be beyond any consideration..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,903 comments) says:

    I find myself giving phil u two big ‘ups’ in one day. Williams is an oleaginous slug with no ‘political connections in high places. He has all the fund raising ability of a four day old dog turd on a Darwin footpath.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..or all drugs and violent crime for that matter..”

    the police/medical professions will both tell you that alcohol is ‘the big one’..

    ..and ‘by a country-mile’..eh..?..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    here you are ncb..

    your question is answered on the herald website..

    “..A recent report on the economic impact of alcohol abuse showed the harm of alcohol accounted for over three-quarters of the cost of all addictive drugs –

    – dwarfing the harm caused by headline-making illegal drugs like P..”

    (another wine..?..mike..?..)

    and of course our m.s.m ‘loves’ ‘p’..

    and ignores alcohol..

    ‘cos ‘p’-manufacturers/peddlers don’t place ads with them..

    ..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    it’s just another ‘drug-scam’..eh..?

    that ‘scare-industry’..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    Sushi Goblin notes:

    Hi might be a competent organiser and a good fundraiser, but I would find it very hard to contribute a cent to the Stellar Trust knowing that any money given would be used to pay Mike Williams $120,000 (as is rumoured).

    And that surely, is the point? Not what an affable fellow Key is, as Lee C notes. (I’d call Key a fool… the human instinct to hold a grudge is there for a reason – it makes you smarter next time, reminds you not to trust those who have sinned against you, and prompts you to give karma a helping hand when you get the chance. But that’s Key’s business).

    By appointing anyone to head a charity and paying them $120,000 you’re inviting people not to contribute, basically. By inviting someone whose… how shall I say this without getting DPF sued… moral compass has proven to point someplace other than due North, you’re magnifying the invitation.

    Still, it’s not without precedent. The last man to display a similar level of ethics in public office, Dick Nixon, also had a charity. In four years it made one grant, of $7,500. It was used to buy a portrait of Nixon. Perhaps the foyer of the Stellar Trust will soon be graced with a portrait of the great man himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    just feed the irrational prejudices of/propping up legal-prohibitions..

    and laugh all the way to the bank..

    stopping off for a liquid lunch..

    ..on the way..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Blue Coast (165 comments) says:

    Silly idea to appoint Willams as most of the country think he is still Liabour and tied to Owen the big donor. I give quite a lot to good causes but this one despite it great cause is off the list because of Williams and his past “aussie trips”.

    Blue Coast

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    So phil, with your experience, and your acknowledgement that “P” is not a harmless recreational drug, how do we discourage it’s use?

    [Not being a smart-arse here at all. About 50% of offenders I deal with at present are on "ice" as they tend to call it here, and it rises to about 80% for violent crimes (with another 15% being attributable to opiates, benzodiazepines and other drugs)]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    not with prohibition/black-markets..

    i mean..ya gotta face the fact..that people use that garbage..speed..

    (btw..stop glamourising it..by calling it ‘ice’..eh..?

    it is bath-tub speed..)

    is ‘cos there is no readily available cocaine here..

    ..the same pressures that brought us ‘home-bake’..

    ..have brought ‘p’..

    remember that moral-panic/trend..?..the ‘homebake’ one..?

    these things/drugs..go in fashions/trends..(often echoing economic/social trends..)

    ..and i’m picking that smack/downers/narcotics/opiates are going to accompany the upcoming economic chaos/depression…

    (cocaine was so early-zeros..!..)

    what to do to stop the spread of speed..?

    well..tear away the retail/pushing infrastructure..by legalising cannabis…

    (that’s a no-brainer..)

    people coming off speed should also be prescribed pot..(to help them thru the withdrawals..)

    banning precursors is hailed by some as the answer..

    but that wd just become another obstacle for the marketers to get around..(which they would..)

    so..my answer takes more of a macro-view..

    in that we must treat adults using drugs as their own business..(not a crime..cos there are no victims..aside from the freedom-thing..)

    (and that if their use becomes a problem..as all drugs do with some..then that is a health-issue..not a prison/crime-issue..

    various european countries have had sensible/health-based drug policies for some years..

    (switzerland being just one example..their treatment of heroin addicts..is hailed as a raging success..links at whoar..)

    but portugal went on step further..and legalised all drugs .. as an experiment..to see what wd happen..(as prohibition clearly wasn’t..’working’..

    the portugese experiment was such a raising success..(low-level/to feed drug habit crime has all but vanished..)

    the police love it..they can focus on real crime/criminals..

    the insurance companies love it..(less claims..)

    the treasury loves it..not having to pay to pursuit/imprison druggies..

    so..portugal has made their experiment..permanent..

    ..and now mexico has followed suit..about a week ago..

    ..and has legalised the personal posession of all drugs..

    so..seeing as what we do now..dosen’t/isn’t working..

    (save for sustaining gangs..and the incuubi who hang off this trade..

    ..and i include the williams/legal scare-industries in that category..)

    i think we should take a closer look at what portugal/mexico are doing..and the successes there..

    (and hey..!..don’t get me ‘started’ on that foul muck methadone,,!..eh..?..)

    but we have to take the crime/profit motive out of drug use..

    btw..i also think alcohol should also have to be on prescription..

    ..and treated the same as all other drugs..

    ..and certainly not advertised/promoted/’approved-of’..

    people have always wanted to get toasted/bladdered/w.h.y..

    and they usually grow out of it…(save for the booze-freaks..most of them keep on keeping on..eh..?..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. lilman (958 comments) says:

    What a cheerleader you are David, I couldnt give a rats arse about key, the facts are he is stalling on the smacking bill,even after the countryspelled out what they wanted.
    And your saying what a great guy he is, please gow some balls and say it as it is.
    As for what hellen would have done to holmes and williams, well ask keyhole, its the same thing

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. terry (62 comments) says:

    seems like mike sabin may have wanted the job?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    Phil:

    Thanks for the well thought out reply. Sorry my response is so late.

    well..tear away the retail/pushing infrastructure..by legalising cannabis

    I’m in favour of legalising cannabis, but do you really think that someone who wants the rush of speed would be satisfied with the mellow effect of cannabis?!

    I’m ready to be convinced to support legalising all drugs on the basis that prohibition is not working, but I do wonder whether there’s a cohort of people who are kept from the worst drugs mainly by the legal repercussions? I’m talking the middle class would-be cocaine user, for example.

    And it’d need to be accompanied by harsh penalties for peddlers. The fact that most are also addicts means they’re often getting community service sentences through Drug Court (a WA initiative that actually shows some compassion) while their victims, who’ve run out of money to pay them and robbed someone are getting sentenced to prison in the Supreme Court.

    If you have an addiction, fine, you deserve compassion. If you encourage / facilitate someone’s else’s addiction for monetary gain you’ll get no sympathy from me.

    and hey..!..don’t get me ’started’ on that foul muck methadone,,!..eh..?..

    Damn right. The poison that’s being peddled to the masses as “dealing with” addiction when all it’s doing is feeding it. If someone’s addicted to opiates, treat them with controlled doses of morphine. Any comments on subutex / suboxone? Naltrexone? (Which the Australian government refuses to fund despite hundreds of people who’ve been saved at the brink of self-destruction because the doctor — who already funds most of the treatment cost himself — won’t pay for double blind trials etc).

    I’ll check out your drug treatment links. I’m not dealing with addiction per se, just it’s criminal fallout, but anything that can be an ambulance at the top of the cliff is of interest. I have Portugese friends but hadn’t discussed drugs with them… I shall now, to get a first hand perspective.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. MikeE (555 comments) says:

    I wouldn’t take anything seriously that comes out of that organisation “Methcon” they are pure reefer madness type hysterical fools.

    I’m pretty sure they were invovled with promoting a so called drug expert from Hawaii, and stories of the strawberry flavoried meth – which of course was an urban legend..

    They’d rather see people die from meth (to teach them a lesson) than have a harm minimisation approach.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    r
    u
    bin
    g
    h
    a

    ck

    e

    d?

    ph
    il(w

    hoa

    r
    .c

    o.n
    z

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    Was that meant for me, phil?

    If so no, I was genuinely seeking your opinion. I’ve never been addicted to anything, don’t smoke and never have, drink rarely and socially, don’t do drugs. Even as a kid the bag of lollies my aunty brought me every week used to get stored away till the cupboard was backed with little white paper bags bulging with sugar.

    So one thing I can’t get my head around is the psychology of addiction, what works, and why. Just asking your perspective, is all…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    i was trying to answer the questions you raised..

    will do so in morning…

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

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