Some policy questions for the Dotcom Party

January 20th, 2014 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

If the party aims to get 5%, I’m looking forward to reading their policies on:

  • The living wage
  • The Treaty of Waitangi
  • Housing affordability
  • Top tax rate
  • Immigration laws
  • Reducing crime

A party with just one policy (don’t extradite me and I’ll give you some free stuff) is unlikely to go far.

Tags:

51 Responses to “Some policy questions for the Dotcom Party”

  1. redqueen (583 comments) says:

    The fact that the party still hasn’t released any official policies, or simply more information, tells you what you need to know. It’s just a media gimic with no real substance.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Joanne (177 comments) says:

    Immigration laws, tighten them so no large German will a criminal history gets in.

    Living wages – $28,000 per month.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    Don’t worry, I’m sure political genius Martyn Bradbury is on to it.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Peter (1,723 comments) says:

    A party with just one policy (don’t extradite me and I’ll give you some free stuff) is unlikely to go far.

    Dunno.

    Over 5% of people have consistently voted for a better-dressed clown on the basis he provides entertainment value.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. thePeoplesFlag (257 comments) says:

    If he gets rid of John Key and his STASI surveillance laws I am sure we can work out the details later about the other stuff.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 36 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Just put the obese criminal slug on a plane and ship him out. Not only is he a felon, he has interfered in the legal and political systems of our country. Once gone, Fairfax journos will need a new poster boy, preferably smaller in stature, suiting their feeble brains.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. thePeoplesFlag (257 comments) says:

    You people here are very anti-fat people… Is it a form of self-loathing?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 22 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. decanker (184 comments) says:

    Funny how a number of you like to say if the Greens just stuck to environmental policy they might be a party that more people could vote for; or that there needs to be a new green party that only focuses on environmental issues rather than being filthy watermelons etc.

    This post suggests you now think all parties need policy on all things?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Joanne (177 comments) says:

    Treaty of Waitangi – thinks it’s a treaty so people can enjoy the Bay of Islands. Fixed – helicopter in.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    redqueen – the party hasn’t even been launched yet!

    Once again Farrar simplifies to the absurd “don’t extradite me and I’ll give you some free stuff” to satisfy his own agenda. The party appears to have a strong interest in the surveillance state so I think it will be of interest to a lot of people.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. davidp (3,588 comments) says:

    They announced a number of policies months ago:

    “But even a $30 million mansion in Coatesville was not enough to keep him satisfied. “If you are used to money and you are used to a good lifestyle, New Zealand doesn’t really have much to offer … It is all kind of mediocre.” Friends visiting Auckland would scoff at the city’s nightlife, he said. Dotcom also criticised the 50 New Zealand staff at his mansion for their constant infighting and complaining.”

    The policies are:

    1. NZ should have more stuff for rich people to do.

    2. Auckland’s nightlife needs to be more Dotcom, less Auckland.

    3. Servants should be punished if they complain.

    These policies are the ones that initially attracted Bradbury, Thompson, and Edgeler. Then they stayed for the free pies.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Joanne (177 comments) says:

    @thePeoplesFlag

    No we are anti obesity. Look at Golden Bay.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    igm – could you explain this one a bit more for me: “he has interfered in the legal and political systems of our country”. Don’t you mean that he has highlighted how easily our government bows to pressure from the US and how easily a politician can be blinded by a large donation.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Ryan Sproull (7,288 comments) says:

    These policies are the ones that initially attracted Bradbury, Thompson, and Edgeler.

    Edgeler is legal expert who was hired, as I understand it, to be a legal expert.

    I expect I could hire DPF to provide expert advice on polling, if I had the inclination and funds. That wouldn’t say any more about him than that he doesn’t vehemently oppose my venture to the point of boycotting it and turning down paid work.

    [DPF: Exactly. I’ll poll for anyone who doesn’t represent a conflict of interest]

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. bc (1,377 comments) says:

    The Internet Party doesn’t interest me, and I certainly won’t be voting for them.
    But MikeG has hit the nail on the head. The Internet Party will tap into the GCSB surveillance issue.

    Now you can mock their followers for voting on a single issue, but click on one of DPF’s child smacking posts and look at how many people have said they are going to vote for Colin Craig based on his stance of wanting to get rid of the anti-smacking law.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. OneTrack (3,235 comments) says:

    MikeG – “Don’t you mean that he has highlighted how easily our government bows to pressure from the US and how easily a politician can be blinded by a large donation.”

    Can you explain when our government has bowed to pressure from US and which politician was blinded by a large donation?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. JeffW (327 comments) says:

    “A party with just one policy (don’t extradite me and I’ll give you some free stuff) is unlikely to go far.”

    I don’t see why not. We have one large party whose economic policies seem to be about the delaying of bankruptcy, another large party whose policies seem to be about speeding up the road to bankruptcy and a smaller party who not only wants us to be bankrupt but to go back to subsistence agriculture as a lifestyle while we approach that nirvana.

    As a policy, don’t extradite me, is pretty tame in comparison.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. PaulL (6,048 comments) says:

    I don’t really see why a party that’s only just launched is expected to have policies on everything. Even large and well established parties like the Labour party hold back policy until the actual election campaign.

    I suspect it will turn out to be true that they have no serious policies. But I’m OK with giving them some reasonable time to come up with some, rather than firing too early.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Pete George (23,687 comments) says:

    PaulL – I agree to an extent, but Dotcom planned on launching his party today. It would be advisable to outline at least some of his major policy focus to give people an idea of what his party would stand for. But so far getting good advice on political strategy has not been Dotcom’s strength.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Than (500 comments) says:

    But MikeG has hit the nail on the head. The Internet Party will tap into the GCSB surveillance issue.

    The GCSB issue was in the news almost constantly for months, with the Greens vocally opposing the law changes the whole time. Both their polling and National’s barely moved.

    By definition a one-issue party can only get the votes from people who consider that issue more important than any other. They are handicapping themselves before they begin by minimising the size of their potential audience. Which is why both the Internet Party and the Pro-Smacking Party (AKA the Conservatives) won’t get anywhere.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. freethinker (696 comments) says:

    One Track – answer – John Banks & Winston Peters. Hollywood over Lord of the Rings and Now The Hobbit – tax refunds, GCSB illegally spied at the behest of Cia/FBI/NSA not sure if all, then changed our law to legalise the illegal activity. Politicians are just as devious/corrupt/incompetent as Dotcom which is probably why they would prefer to see him gone as he will know which cupboards to look in for the skeletons!!!!!!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. PaulL (6,048 comments) says:

    @Pete George. I don’t see how you could say he hasn’t had awesome political advice. Last time I looked he had an expert on payroll, someone who’d been around the NZ political scene for years. Of course, some would have checked whether that person had ever worked for a political party that ended up getting elected, but that’s just nit picking really.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Ryan Sproull (7,288 comments) says:

    The GCSB issue was in the news almost constantly for months, with the Greens vocally opposing the law changes the whole time. Both their polling and National’s barely moved.

    Anecdotally, a significant number of people who are strongly concerned about the issue also want nothing to do with the Greens’ other policies.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Than (500 comments) says:

    Perhaps, but in that case they had Labour or NZF as other alternatives. If they wouldn’t vote for any of these parties over privacy issues, why would they vote for the Internet Party?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Yogibear (372 comments) says:

    I’m still waiting to hear Bradbury logically and coherently justify his claim that a party set up to oppose current government policy is supposed to take more votes from the current government that it will from other opposition parties

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Yogibear (372 comments) says:

    If the Internet Party’s natural partner’s are Labour and the Greens, the coalition agreement discussions around the nanny state policies around a Fat Tax are going to be a doozy.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. dime (10,134 comments) says:

    Imagine an election result that included:

    3.6% dot fatty
    4.2% winnie
    3% conservative (and craig wins a seat)
    1% maori and they only win 2 seats
    9% greens

    fuck it would be hilarious. the fall out. the screams, the protest, the wah wah wah

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. edhunter (552 comments) says:

    I draw your attention across the ditch where the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party, Family First Party, & Liberal Democratic Party all got into Parliament with a lot less policies than Dotcoms party will have.(might be slightly unfair to the FFP)
    And also isn’t that the beauty of MMP & being a minor party? If you’re lucky enough to be part of a government the best you can hope for is to get 1 or 2 of your policies onto the table & the rest of the time it’s shut up & do as your’re told.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. CJPhoto (227 comments) says:

    not necessarily. They could support any party that gives them their key policies. So the real question is, are there any policies that they wont support.

    The Maori party went with National, in order to get a few policies they wanted across the line. The Internet party could be no different.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Yogibear (372 comments) says:

    Dime – your scenario reminds me of the theory of perpetual motion: A cat always lands on its feet, toast always lands butter side down. If you taped a piece of buttered toast to each of a cat’s paws and then dropped them from a height, theoretically they should spin forever just off the ground – creating an endless source of energy.

    Would the same happen if we taped Kim Dotcom to Colin Craig?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Richard Hurst (874 comments) says:

    Dotcom’s answer to all those policy questions: Champagne! Champagne for everyone!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Peter (1,723 comments) says:

    To be fair, KDC appears to have one more sound policy than Labour and The Greens combined.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. duggledog (1,589 comments) says:

    Kim Dot Com is a featured guest on Radio Hauraki (yes it’s still going) breakfast tomorrow morning, not sure what time but probably around eight a.m.

    It will be interesting to see what sort of ride they give him, well he’s probably going to get a bit of gentle ribbing and they will all have some laughs. Nothing too serious.

    Personally I think Dot Com is quietly shitting himself about being extradited to the U.S. I think he thinks if he can endear himself to the NZ public, somehow public opinion will assure he gets to stay here.

    I mean on the one hand he says, as noted above, that Auckland is all a bit ho-hum and his kiwi staff are rubbish, then on the other hand he allegedly wants to stay here and make this country a better place.

    Regardless, if there’s one thing that annoys the crap out of me and most real kiwis, it’s f***ing Germans and also Americans who come here and then ten minutes later they’re protesting or complaining about the place and our terrible government. Nelson and Golden Bay areas are full of these wankers

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. holysheet (433 comments) says:

    Bring it on, I say.
    He will only take voters away from the gweens, liaborr and winston first. The more dumbarses who vote for kim dong dum the better for national.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. PaulL (6,048 comments) says:

    @holysheet: no dumb people vote for National? Based on my personal observations of the percentage of the NZ public who are dumb, and the fact that National got almost 50% in the last election, there have to be quite a few dumb people voting National. Some of them might go to KDC. :-)

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

    edhunter says:

    I draw your attention across the ditch where the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party, Family First Party, & Liberal Democratic Party all got into Parliament with a lot less policies than Dotcoms party will have

    Yes, but their “victories” were due entirely to the quite insane preference system Australia uses for the Senate, which results in Senators with less than a percent of the vote winning seats based on the fact that people dislike them less than they dislike others, rather than reflecting a positive vote (even though they like to pretend otherwise). So the Sex Party, for instance, can get a much higher initial vote than many others, but lose out when the minnows, most of which are conservative in nature, swap preferences.

    The Motoring Party senator will make a particularly interesting contribution I suspect, having had to retrospectively clean up his social media profiles, which showed him behaving like a drongo, when unexpectedly elected. When asked by the medias on his first day in Canberra what his political ambitions were, he refreshingly admitted to having no idea.

    And being represented only in the Senate, paradoxically these parties will have no chance to propose legislation of their own, so it doesn’t matter if they have one policy or a hundred. It’s the ultimate gravy train, better even than being a List MP.

    Ryan Sproull points out:

    Anecdotally, a significant number of people who are strongly concerned about the issue also want nothing to do with the Greens’ other policies.

    The Greens’ stance as defenders of freedom over the GCSB issue rang as untrue to many people who know full well their inclination to regulate and ban in other areas. And to those suspicious of their somewhat Luddite pronouncements on other technologies. Do such people constitute 5% of the voting populace? It’s a possibility, and one that it would be stupid to ignore.

    I’ve said all along that Bradbury is wrong… it’s not National that should be worried by Dotcom’s foray into politics, it’s the Greens. If Bradbury knew his stuff as a self-styled “political consultant” he’d be advising Dotcom to adopt a moderate but explicit pro-environment policy, bolt that to his “internet freedom” platform, add a few other “must have” policies and aim to supplant the Greens.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Viking2 (11,574 comments) says:

    We should perhaps ask the Nats the same questions. Their answers so far are vague, unsuccessful and in the case of the TOW enabled the Oxford comma hunter to give many millions to the third inhabitants of NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. davidp (3,588 comments) says:

    Ryan Sproull>Edgeler is legal expert who was hired, as I understand it, to be a legal expert. I expect I could hire DPF to provide expert advice on polling, if I had the inclination and funds. That wouldn’t say any more about him than that he doesn’t vehemently oppose my venture to the point of boycotting it and turning down paid work.

    I’m a consultant. I try to manage my reputation so that people listen to what I say and then hire me. Part of my reputation management is to refuse work for organisations that themselves have a bad reputation. I think that is pretty basic. If you want to command top dollar then turn down offers from criminals, fraudsters, and clowns. And Dotcom falls in to all three categories.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. PaulL (6,048 comments) says:

    @davidp: don’t agree that these are equivalent. There aren’t that many political parties in NZ, and I think the cause of democracy is assisted by helping anyone prepared to start a party to be fully compliant with the legislation. I wouldn’t like to think that electoral lawyers (of whom I assume there aren’t many) started getting picky about who they’d provide advice to – it might be hard for some parties to start at all.

    Probably it depends a bit on what sort of advice – there’d be some advice I might say no to (for instance, if someone asked me to help them work out how to rort the system). But I got the impression what he’d been doing was pretty straightforward – what are the things we have to have so as to register a party kind of advice, not how to bend the rules kind of advice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Tauhei Notts (1,749 comments) says:

    I saw a wonderful piece about the Krim Dot Com party in the Herald last week.
    What scared me was that party will have huge expertise in digital technology and facebook, twitter, tweaking, texting etc; all things I have little understanding of.
    Because of that aim towards the 18 – 28 people, who are presently too unconcerned to shift off the couch and vote; Dot Con & Co. will be able to get them to shift off their chuff and vote. It is a huge number.
    Collectively they have the attention span of a gnat, but they all have one thing in common with all of the contributors to this blog; they have one vote.
    And there are thousands upon thousands of them.
    I see it with the young blokes I play golf with. The young bastards drive 280 metres and as I am walking the 160 metres to where my tee shot finished, they are busy texting. Catch them over a beer afterwards and they have absolutely NO interest whatsoever in voting or politics. All politicians are unscrupulous people; they use a four letter Anglo Saxon term to describe politicians. But together they make up a huge constituency. And the person who can persuade them to vote will get an unbelievably large vote.
    Most contributors here, like me, know that Krim Dot Com must have severe constipation; as he is full of shit. But the young blokes cannot see that. Unless you have an attention span in excess of 90 seconds such information will not penetrate your brain.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    if there’s one thing that annoys the crap out of me and most real kiwis, it’s f***ing Germans and also Americans who come here and then ten minutes later they’re protesting or complaining about the place and our terrible government. Nelson and Golden Bay areas are full of these wankers

    duggledog , The biggest moaners, by a country mile, are the dreadful Poms. No other immigrant group has done more to drag this country down.

    Germans expect very high standards and are never satisfied that anything is quite good enough. Their complaints differ from those of the Pom, in that Germans offer a solution and have a point to their moaning.

    No one cares what Americans think. Just look at the state of the US, now run by a black warlord.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. davidp (3,588 comments) says:

    PaulL>Probably it depends a bit on what sort of advice – there’d be some advice I might say no to (for instance, if someone asked me to help them work out how to rort the system).

    In this case things get a little stranger. Graeme E writes for Public Address, and Russell Brown of Public Address is a shareholder in the company that owns the Dotcom party’s domain name. Should Graeme be offering legal advice when he has a long standing relationship with a part owner of the party? To me, it sounds a bit like a conflict of interest. Altho it might just be political and media inbreeding… it’s hard to tell.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Johnboy (17,007 comments) says:

    Treaty of Waitangi should be floated on the net and drifted up on to the cloud to dissipate…… where it really belongs! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Johnboy (17,007 comments) says:

    Whatever you do where the Germans are involved: …..Never mention the war! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Liberty (271 comments) says:

    NZ first scraped up 5% with only one policy of xenophobic bigotry.
    So it quite feasible for a Person with a dubious history . Pushing an anti American
    policy will attract a large number from the left. Which is surprising as most the simple souls would be
    quite at home in the deliverance counties.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. wreck1080 (3,972 comments) says:

    I wanna see their policy on fat taxes.

    Anyway, he could get in, theres a number of nerds & pirates who might like him enough.

    I thought the whole deal with MMP was so one issue parties had a chance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. publicwatchdog (2,827 comments) says:

    How about policy on ‘white collar’ crime, corruption and ‘corporate welfare’?

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Paul Marsden (999 comments) says:

    Liberty (185 comments) says:

    January 20th, 2014 at 8:04 pm
    NZ first scraped up 5% with only one policy of xenophobic bigotry.
    So it quite feasible for a Person with a dubious history . Pushing an anti American
    policy will attract a large number from the left. Which is surprising as most the simple souls would be
    quite at home in the deliverance counties.

    Vote: 0 0

    So right. There are a now also a lot of Muslims (and other immigrants entitled to vote) in NZ, who despise the USA. This fact was driven home to me way back 9/11, when I remember feeling quite sick reading all the anti US sentiment in the book of condolences in the Auckland Public Library, shortly after the Twin Towers attack

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. V (750 comments) says:

    On the plus side, at least we know of Dotcoms criminal history before he gets into parliament.
    (obviously not that he will because of not being a citizen).

    More than can be said of David Garrett, John Banks, Taito Phillip Field, David Benson Pope, (who am I missing – there’s been so many).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Azeraph (608 comments) says:

    Well I’m voting for them, Why? Why not and i’m sick of having an American for a prime minister. I hope it shakes beehive up, they need it, they are losing Nz and they don’t even know it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. ChardonnayGuy (1,217 comments) says:

    Excellent point. I have several that I want to ask Colin Craig. Namely, why is that his party’s religious social conservative policies seem so much more developed than its (alleged and uneven) fiscal conservatism? And when will Colin Craig deliver a detailed policy speech on anything other than his party’s conservative Christian obsessions? As I’ve said elsewhere, this is ‘clip on’ fiscal conservatism.

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