Armstrong on Labour

October 2nd, 2010 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

At the end of his column, John Armstrong states:

That change has been accompanied by a major attitude shift. has distributed a flyer which seeks to deliberately trick people into thinking that National is responsible for the entire GST component of their bills.

Just as scurrilous is Labour’s bogus assurance that the $270 million cost (at least) of forgoing GST on fresh fruit and veges will be funded by the recent rise in excise duty on tobacco. That money is already accounted for in Government spending.

Goff is playing hard ball. He has little option. National beware. The old enemy is going to be a tougher and rougher election-year proposition than you might think.

This is a diplomatic way of saying Labour will not hesitate to lie and deceive – both over what National has done, and over how its promises can be paid for.

This will not come as a shock to National. They are well used to it. Remember the pamphlets authorised at the highest levels claiming National will sell state houses and evict the tenants? Pure lies.

I wonder if the Government should not amend the Electoral Act to make it riskier for Labour to try and use deliberate lies as a campaign strategy. S199A says:

Every person is guilty of a corrupt practice who, with the intention of influencing the vote of any elector, at any time on polling day before the close of the poll, or at any time on any of the 2 days immediately preceding polling day, publishes, distributes, broadcasts, or exhibits, or causes to be published, distributed, broadcast, or exhibited, in or in view of any public place a statement of fact that the person knows is false in a material particular.

Maybe have that apply for the final two weeks instead of final two days?

Tags: ,

13 Responses to “Armstrong on Labour”

  1. homepaddock (435 comments) says:

    “Maybe have that apply for the final two weeks instead of final two days?”

    WHy only two weeks? Wouldn’t that make it okay to deliberately lie at other times?

    [DPF: Generally the issue of lies should be dealt with by exposure, ASA complaints and even defamation. You don't want the Police in a position of having to decide 365 days a year if a politician has lied.

    But in the final period before an election, a blatant lie can affect the election, before there is time to rebut it. The National will evict you from your state house type notice is exactly the sort of thing that it is intended for]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Bevan (3,965 comments) says:

    This is a diplomatic way of saying Labour will not hesitate to lie and deceive – both over what National has done, and over how its promises can be paid for.

    Well they way to combat that is to leave it up to the MSM to do their job and highlight Labour’s lies – I wont hold my breath!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Nick C (340 comments) says:

    “The $270 million cost (at least) of forgoing GST on fresh fruit and veges will be funded by the recent rise in excise duty on tobacco.”

    So, their plan to pay for this tax cut which they claim helps the poor is by increasing a tax which predominantly hurts the poor?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Pete George (23,417 comments) says:

    Armstrong is right, Labour know they aren’t aiming this campaign at people who may think about and challenge what they are promoting. Those same targets probably won’t here or red most or all of the criticisms. Cynical, you could even say despicable.

    The problem with this approach is while it might work with the non-thinking non vote changing party support will it work where it matters, in the swing vote?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. flipper (3,918 comments) says:

    Why not 90 days?
    or
    Why not a “key to the truth” card (funded by the taxpayer, of course)?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Inventory2 (10,254 comments) says:

    I’ve also blogged on this today (link on the GD page), and thought that these comments from Armstrong were particulalrly telling:

    That change has been accompanied by a major attitude shift. Labour has distributed a flyer which seeks to deliberately trick people into thinking that National is responsible for the entire GST component of their bills.

    Just as scurrilous is Labour’s bogus assurance that the $270 million cost (at least) of forgoing GST on fresh fruit and veges will be funded by the recent rise in excise duty on tobacco. That money is already accounted for in Government spending.

    Armstrong has been around a while, and when he starts using phrases like “deliberately trick people” and “Just as scurrilous is Labour’s bogus assurance..”, readers should take note.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. MT_Tinman (3,092 comments) says:

    I’m with Homepaddock and would add a provision that any entity deliberately disseminating false information using public money should immediately be declared corrupt and unfit to receive any further tax-payer funding (including wages, salary etc.).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. reid (16,174 comments) says:

    Absolutely MT and HP. Politics is the competition of ideas. There is absolutely nothing wrong with requiring all of those who ask us to elect them, be prepared to tell us what they believe to be the truth. It happens in other areas: you’re not allowed to commit libel or slander against any person at any time, a lawyer is not allowed to deliberately lie to the court, an accountant is not allowed to knowingly publish false accounts, why should the political profession be any different whatsoever.

    We’re not talking about spin, we’re talking about deliberate falsehoods such as those raised in the thread. Those are deliberate. Plain and simple.

    Penalties? How about a $100k fine for each offence, levied against both the individuals and the party.

    Timeframe: all the time, not just two weeks prior to an election.

    I’m serious. This is not to stifle debate, it’s to prevent untruth. We wouldn’t need it, if some of us weren’t as thick as they are, but sadly, we do.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    The real problem lies within NZ’s media. Liarbore should be able to lie and bullshit to the cows come home. If we had a true neutral media there would be no place to hide for these arseholes and that includes the ones on the right also. It’s the media that are the traitors to the people, the politicians are just being politicians, they can’t help themselves. We lost control of our country when the MSM became the lackey of the government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Inventory2 (10,254 comments) says:

    @ Sideshow Bob; agreed. Fortunately now the blogosphere can fill soem of the void left by the MSM. The key is getting more people tuned in to the blogosphere and social media.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Mark (497 comments) says:

    As I always say and say again Lefties lie.

    It’s a proven fact again and again.

    Yet lefties bemoan the fact they they themsevles dont lie but support people who do. Liars the lot of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. DJP6-25 (1,348 comments) says:

    As socialisim is built on a lie to start with, lies are necessary to promote it. So, assume any socialist with their mouth open is lying. The penalties mentioned above should apply for the duration of the election campaign. Also assume the steam powered media are actively supporting any socialist over any non-socialist opponent.

    cheers

    David Prosser

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    If National lose the next election they’ll only have themselves to blame. Too timid, too cautious, too lacking in ideas to move NZ forward. Too useless. Instead we get imaginary tax cuts which give a thoroughly discredited Labour party a foot in the door.

    What progress is John Key going to campaign on at the next election? Claytons tax cuts? Mining? Reducing Government Largesse? Killing the welfare parasite?

    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.