Brown spends up big in bid for power
Nope not Gordon Brown, but Len Brown. His spending is already into six figures it seems, and he is planning a million dollar campaign.
Where are the Labour Party and Green Party people condemning big money in politics, and demanding law changes to stop him “buying” the election?
Brown has already spent between $150,000 and $200,000, according to his rival, Auckland Mayor John Banks – but Brown has dismissed this as at least $100,000 too high.
Brown also denied that his funding had come principally from former Auckland City mayor Dick Hubbard – however the cereal king has paid a small sum.
Brown predicted yesterday that his campaign would reach the million mark.
So who is funding Brown? Surely this Labour Party member will reveal all.
While there will be a cap of $70,000 on all campaigns, that only covers the last three months before the election.
Now think about this. A national campaign has a spending cap of $2.4 million for the last three months and the fact National ran some billboards just ahead of that time period worth around $250,000 saw Labour force through a law change to stop such a thing. So National spent an extra 10% of the regulated period budget before the regulated period. While Labour Party member Len Brown is planning to spend an extra 1300% before the regulated period.
October 18th, 2009 at 8:59 am
Can’t expect much more from the lying thieving socialist pricks. Wonder when NZer’s will learn about these things.
Won’t of course because the socialist press and various hanging about outfits are so devious that it never gets out unless the bloggers make a headline.
More blogging, more often.
October 18th, 2009 at 9:15 am
DPF, one of the downsides of having the Mayor of a local authority the size of the new Auckland Council elected “at large” is that candidates have to spend a large amount of money to have any chance of getting elected.
The Greens do support strong restrictions on local authority electioneering spending as well as spending on electioneering for national campaigns. But while the rules remain slack, you’ve got to play by the rules to be in with a chance.
What do you expect Len Brown to do – sit back on his principles, spend insufficient to run a competitive campaign, and let Banks win it by default? I’ll bet he’s spending plenty too.
[DPF: Banks has said so far he has not spent $10. To be running billboards 15 months before an election is a level of activity not seen before]
October 18th, 2009 at 9:15 am
One small minor tiny detail you may have overlooked DPF. You do not have a skerret of evidence on how much Len has spent.
Relying on the word of Len’s main opponent and then treating it as gospel is just a tad silly.
[DPF: Len himself suggests it is around $100,000 and the costs associated with the multiple billboards he has displayed is publicly available]
October 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am
“What do you expect Len Brown to do – sit back on his principles”
nah – I just hope he does a lot more of naming his potential running mates
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyID=163777
October 18th, 2009 at 9:23 am
mickeysavage – have you driven through Auckland in the past 2 months ? – Hard to find a large OGGI type biollboard without Browns face all over it
October 18th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Liarbores response will be..” nothing to see here peasants..move on”…
October 18th, 2009 at 9:26 am
He’s leaving his run a bit early, isn’t he?
October 18th, 2009 at 9:36 am
Another timely reminder as to why Labour was defeated last year …
Perhaps Len Brown’s campaign slogan (endorsed by his Labour Party backers) will be “Do as I say; not as I do”.
October 18th, 2009 at 9:51 am
So one is to accept Mr Banks’ word that he has spent nothing, and also his assessment of Mr Brown’s expenditure, presumably because it is Mr Banks and is the Right’s chosen candidate (sorry, was the Right’s chosen candidate – things are not so clear now, of course). I would be quite happy to accept both candidates’ assertions – Mr Banks not much yet, Mr Brown $50k.
Mr Brown has stolen a march on Mr Banks (and, let’s be fair, on some of his possible rivals on the Left), is up and running and, I think, will get his volunteer base quite easily. All the Right can do for now (until they decide whether to switch horses -but to whom?) is begin the the campaign of innuendo and insinuation. It strated early in relation to his health. I’m waiting for the rumours to arise that roubles, or renminbi, are financing Mr Brown, that he was born to Islamic fundamentalist parents in the Tora Bora caves, and that he was once seen committing that most awful crime, talking on his mobile whilst driving.
October 18th, 2009 at 10:19 am
IV2 – I think racist Sharples just gave him a campaign slogan “There’s so much enemy that is not brown.”
October 18th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Mickysavage: You are overlooking one little point as well:
Brown predicted yesterday that his campaign would reach the million mark.
October 18th, 2009 at 10:49 am
DPF said: To be running billboards 15 months before an election is a level of activity not seen before
And the Auckland Council is a local authority of a sort we have not seen before.
Banks already has a high profile across all of the Auckland Council’s district as a consequence of being a former Cabinet Minister and radio talkback host. While Brown has a high profile in Manukau City, his profile in the rest of the Auckland region has been nothng like Banks’.
[DPF: Excellent. Thank you for arguing the case I made against the EFA. The reason you do not extend the regulated period is because incumbents have a hge advantage in name recognition, and pre-period spending allows challengers to have a decent chance.
This of course explains the hollowness of the left's support of the EFA. Basically they just didn't want parties or candidates they oppose to be able to spend up large - but they think they should be able to - preferably with taxpayer money]
October 18th, 2009 at 11:07 am
As well as running Auckland City BANKS is Executive Director of Huljick Investments, far and away the top Kiwi Saver provider in New Zealand returning 24% for the 2008 year while most of the competing providers were in deficit. Perhaps ACC should headhunt him, though incidentally the Chairman of the company is Don BRASH. I know with BROWN you also get Sue BRADFORD they are both good at spending, how are they at managing finances.
October 18th, 2009 at 11:14 am
[DPF: Len himself suggests it is around $100,000 and the costs associated with the multiple billboards he has displayed is publicly available]
The article records Brown’s comment that Bank’s claim of $150k to $200k expenditure so far was $100k high of the mark. Ergo the expenditure could be as low as $50k and Len does not suggest that it is around the $100k mark.
I agree there should be public disclosure of who is funding Brown. Our democracy requires this information to be publicly available.
Can you remind me again DPF who funded the National Election campaign last year?
[DPF: Around 40,000 members and supporters]
October 18th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Mickysavage, It looks to me like Brown has had around 8 billboards (probably around 5-15k each per month depending on size). In addition to that, he’s run ads on the back of buses (which look hugely expensive), plus paid for a series of newspaper ads – probably $15,000 in total. That sounds like $100k to me – easy. More like $150,000.
You can see indicative costs here:
http://www.isitemedia.co.nz/index.php/content/timetable_buses
http://www.oggi.co.nz/billboard-selector-results.asp?chkAuckland=3%2C16%2C13%2C56%2C17%2C15%2C14%2C64&optMonth=Any&cmdSearchNew=Find+Billboards&Address=
October 18th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Mickey – “So one is to accept Mr Banks’ word that he has spent nothing,”
Well actually people accept the fact that THERE ARE NO BILLBOARDS OR ADS for mr Banks as evidence that he hasn’t spent any money on them, you moron.
October 18th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
“So who is funding Brown”, now let me guess. Probably a good chance the poor saps who pay union fees or failing that Liarbore are fleecing the taxpayer again. Whatever the answer may be you can be sure the shifty bastards while have their arses covered and they will claim to be pure as driven snow.
October 18th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Mickey is right, it could be as low as $50K. That means Brown Len has a further $20K to spend in the next 12 months so that he reaches his legal limit of $70K. That’s about $1,650 per month. And Brown Len is a lawyer so he should be the first to obey the law.
We’re counting, Brown Len.
October 18th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
toad suggests there are two candidate’s?? Never meet Len Brown but until recently i have thought of him as a rather bland conservative sort living in the shadow of Barry Curtis. Brown seems to have “come alive .. sorry” over the Super Mayor issue and it will interesting to see if he losers his nice guy image when the election gets closer and the polls have him behind .. they may have to bring in the Muss to attack Banks and his team with lies and innuendo??
October 18th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
I don’t give a fuck how much the useless c**t wastes as long as none of it is mine.
October 18th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
These amounts of money are miniscule when you consider the electorate is 1/3 of New Zealanders (the ones living in NZ anyway). DPF- you would know how much leaflet drops cost, remember Labours pledge card.- I’m not sure even the amounts of money mentioned would pay for lot of these. So I doubt that what has been spent to date is going to mean much in 12 months.
That said- those groups and individuals supporting mayoral candidates will get good value for money. Someone directly elected by 1/3 of the population of NZ will be put on the fast track to the PMs office- as they will be have proven electoral credentials (as opposed to cabinet ministers who merely have their party’s favour) and will be able to use the unprecedented mayoral position (and 3% of the council’s budget) for self publicity . This makes it even more strange that the right would select someone as old as John Banks who would not be able to convert his Auckland support and profile into a national political asset.
October 18th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
DPF said: Excellent. Thank you for arguing the case I made against the EFA. The reason you do not extend the regulated period is because incumbents have a hge advantage in name recognition, and pre-period spending allows challengers to have a decent chance.
I didn’t argue the case you made. All I am saying is those with less name recognition need to spend earlier – not that they need to spend more.
[DPF: In which case Len Brown has already spent his entire allowable budget]
October 18th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Don’t believe everything you read http://bit.ly/zA0Az
October 18th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
it’s a pity that local politics are so aligned with national politics .. I think it would be great for a local mayor to be that .. local with ideas based local ideas. I realise a huge area like the “new” Auckland, or whatever name it may become, needs more than a local .. I would suggest finding a classy CEO type .. can’t think of anyone at the mo .. Counties just lost by +7 so a little unhappy even though the Big Harbour had a huge win.
October 18th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
DPF said: In which case Len Brown has already spent his entire allowable budget
Actually he hasn’t, under the law as it stands, but your suggestion DPF only goes to demonstrate the folly of rushing the whole Supercity proposal through so quickly and with such inadequate consultation.
It appears the the inadequacy of section 111 of the Local Electoral Act was not identified – it has incremental limits on spending until a local authority gets to 250,000 electors. But it never anticipated an authority such as the Auckland Council having vastly more. So the spending limits are ridiculously low in that context.
October 18th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Looking forward to voting for Banks and giving prickysavage something else to cry about.
October 18th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Predictable, I suppose, Hurf Durf, given that it is an FPP at large election.
But I would have thought John Banks would be way too left wing and environmentally conscious for you to support if it were an STV election.
After all, Banks supports the Britomart-Mt Eden rail tunnel. Gotta be the man, eh!
October 18th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
I use the train, so I don’t mind about rail expansion if it’s a) done without too much of a burden on taxpayers money or b) deemed to become profitable. On the list of transportation options, it goes car >>>>> train >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bus.
October 18th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
It’s just a bit rich, if you don’t mind me saying so, and stereotyping, I know, watching the wealthy right complaining about spending from the poor left.
Although, to be honest, the difference between Nats and Labour is definitely not a right/left divide. Once in power, they are both conservative parties. The last vestiges of ” left” left with Helen.
October 18th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
The “poor left”??!!!!!
The “utterly corrupt, thieving basterds of the left” more like it.
Poor? Not for a lack of trying to rip off the taxpayer at every turn.
Corrupt, conniving, deceitful, immoral, lying, cheating basterds. I give you “the left”.
Where’s the $800,000 you lot stole?
What happened to the billions of $$ in surpluses that you lot pissed up against the wall? (and the trainset, WFF, ACC etc)?