Desperate lies

March 22nd, 2014 at 4:37 am by David Farrar

10013890_528879050558016_1257819981_n

 

This is the latest advertisement from . Its desperate stuff which I doubt would survive a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority.

Note no mention of the fact that the PGF lost a contestable contract to the Salvation Army, who also spoke out against the deal. So the entire premise is a lie.

Also the decision was not made by Ministers. To quote Peter Dunne:

The process to retender the contracts for these services was an open contestable tender.   The evaluation panel deciding on the tender comprised six members: three internal Ministry staff and three external evaluators from the Department of Internal Affairs, the Health Promotion Agency and a Pacific health consultant.  

“The Ministry of Health has been particularly mindful to keep the process clearly separate from any perception of political interference. This extended to commissioning an independent review by Pricewaterhouse on its proposed decisions.

Also I understand the total amount being spent by the Ministry of Health on problem is increasing by $750,000 over last year. So its a decision to increase funding and to go with a provider that will actually assist more people more effectively.

Labour seem to be upset because the PGF was a great source of taxpayer funding for their activists and candidates. Likewise the Greens haven’t mentioned that the former CEO is an active member of the Green Party and partner of a Green MP.

Tags: ,

69 Responses to “Desperate lies”

  1. Martin Gibson (226 comments) says:

    From Wikipedia:
    “Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud (6 May 1856 – 23 September 1939) in the 1900s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.

    “Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by George Eman Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one’s negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life.[4]”

    It’s different when Labour and the Greens do it of course!

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Komata (1,105 comments) says:

    One has to ask:

    Given the very short time between the announcement being made, and the appearance of the advertisement, where would the labour party members who created this advertisement have been able to obtain such a large pile of chips (chips which seem to have quite a similarity to those available at a certain establishment situated near Hobson street in Auckland )? Not from a casino, surely; their leaders, those who champion the needs of poor, oppressed, and hard-done-by (despite living in Herne Bay in $2.5 million mansions) would never have darkened the doors of such an establishment would they, much less actually made use of any of the ‘facilities’ ‘on offer? Would they?

    Tell me it isn’t so, I want to believe……

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Brian Smaller (3,981 comments) says:

    Tell me it isn’t so, I want to believe……

    I think it just…may…have been photoshop.

    I think DPF has nailed it – they are upset that the labour party has lost a funding source.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. mjw (206 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 41 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. kiwi in america (2,431 comments) says:

    This is realpolitik Labour style. No lie is too brazen if it results in a progressive candidate beating a hated Tory in an election. Labour are so desperate that they will cling to anything they can. It’s a ‘throw enough mud and see what sticks’ strategy. How did has that worked so far? The GCSB scaremongering – a beltway issue that exercised only those already voting Labour/Greens. Pillorying John Key for his wealth – backfiring badly because Cunliffe is rich himself. Each new “gamechanger” policy is found to have gaping holes within days of launch.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Keeping Stock (10,087 comments) says:

    The lies that Labour are telling about the Problem Gambling Foundation are bad enough but Trevor Mallard is involved, so you’d expect a pretty low standard anyway. But for David Cunliffe to be repeating those lies (both direct lies, and lies of omission) is absolutely inexcusable.

    Labour’s hypocrisy over gambling and SkyCity is breathtaking, and I couldn’t resist posting this comment on Cunliffe’s FB page last night:

    If SkyCity is so dodgy Mr Cunliffe, why did eight Labour MP’s accept tickets and corporate hospitality from SkyCity during the 2011 Rugby World Cup? Are Clayton Cosgrove, Trevor Mallard, Grant Robertson, Moana Mackey, David Shearer, Kris Faafoi and Labour leader at the time Phil Goff hypocrites for now opposing SkyCity’s Convention Centre, having been only too happy to accept a freebie?

    And DPF himself broke the story of five Labour MP’s visiting SkyCity’s corporate box at Eden Park in June last year to watch an All Black test match, including the then-leader David Shearer.

    Labour is hopelessly compromised over SkyCity, from whom its MP’s are only too happy to accept handouts whilst they slag it off in Parliament. But they are also hopelessly compromised over the Problem Gambling Foundation, for whom one of their 2014 candidates is a senior manager. And yet they continue to attack Judith Collins over a glass of milk.

    If this is indicative of what Labour has to offer in the election campaign, it’s going to be fought from the gutter. I have nothing but contempt for Labour and its leader.

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz/2014/03/dunne-fisks-labours-lies.html

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. mandk (815 comments) says:

    @mjw
    Did you actually read the post?
    And are you familiar with the work of the Salvation Army? They have done a bit of work in the area of addiction, you know.
    Labour are sulking because the PGF is just another wasp nest of lefty activists, being funded by the tax payer.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. kiwi in america (2,431 comments) says:

    mjw
    Joe public who doesn’t have a gambling problem will not see the Sallies taking over as an issue – they are seen as a safe religious organization that does nothing but good in the community. The stated purpose of the change was to, just as you suggest, boost the outcomes due to better delivery.

    This is pure Labour sour grapes and losing a gravy train. When you spend a chunk of your tax payer funding on lobbying for one side of an argument and your senior staff are closely identified with the Labour and Green parties, it should come as no surprise when the politicization of problem gambling results in losing your contract to a far less political and publicly popular organization like the SA. Hoist by their own petard especially when, if the primary issue is as you claim opposition to the Sky City deal, then the contract has gone to someone else who also opposed that deal.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. mjw (206 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 31 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    Do you really think it will take time for the Sallies to be effective, mjw? This is an organisation that has been working with addiction issues for years, and are already helping with problem gambling by helping those who have the problem. They have pre existing infrastructure, and personnel on the ground now. They are already doing the job.

    They just now have better funding to do the job even better.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Keeping Stock (10,087 comments) says:

    @ mandk – in my blog-post I refer to a very close friend who in desperation turned to the Sallies 15 years ago when his marriage collapsed as a result of his gambling addiction and alcoholism. He is now sober and pokie-free, and his marriage of more than 30 years was saved.

    I have nothing but respect for the work that the Salvation Army does in this area, and has been doing for more than 150 years.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. tas (589 comments) says:

    I’ve seen this lie repeated on facebook. They really are desperately pushing this. It’s pretty despicable.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Mobile Michael (410 comments) says:

    If I was one of the six members of the evaluation panel who recommended the Salvation Army Oasis Centre, and had that decision audited by PWC, I would be talking to a lawyer. Trevor Mallard has defamed them, and now Labour has defamed them by claiming they acquiesced to Ministerial interference. All the evidence shows that the Ministry of Health ran a good procurement process and have made a sound commercial decision.

    Of course, Ministerial interference is something Trevor Mallard knows about, as well as defaming public servants.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. mjw (206 comments) says:

    Mandk – yes I read the post. DPF doesn’t provide a source for his claim of $750k, so we can’t examine the facts. Also, I think much more is needed.

    KiA/SR – I must admit I haven’t forgiven the Sallies for their nationwide campaign against homosexual law reform. They have not resiled from their views as far as I would know. Not sure I would describe them as non-political – more as likely allies of the Conservative Party. If they campaign for the Conservatives, will they lose this contract?

    And yes, I think it will probably take them time to get up to speed. I could be wrong. Maybe they will do a great job – I hope so. But the key point here is that this another smell from a very smelly deal. If the deal wasn’t already smelly, this wouldn’t be an issue.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 1 Thumb down 25 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. mandk (815 comments) says:

    mjw,
    please refer to Keeping Stock @ 7.44

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. mjw (206 comments) says:

    mandk – grant you that point. Our comments are crossing – see 7.47 for my concerns.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. duggledog (1,331 comments) says:

    Labour are indeed upset they’ve lost a funding source, because,… they’ve got an election to win!

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha haaa

    Ya see they hate John Key to the point it’s becoming pathological because as I’ve said before he’s doing Labour much better than they ever have, with change to spare. And… and… he’s not even a career politician! How can this be?

    It would be like spending your whole life playing tennis to professional standard then getting your ass whipped by a ten year old

    Suffer in your jocks Labour; you can’t win an election like this.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Elaycee (4,285 comments) says:

    @Keeping Stock (7.32am): Agree 100%.

    My 10c… As someone familiar with the Industry, it comes as no surprise the squawks are coming from those with vested interests – not only people who have been able to turn the PGF into a vehicle for their own political grandstanding, but also those who have enjoyed lapping from the PGF trough (‘PG counsellors’ etc) – their pain will be felt in their pockets.

    This was a contestable contract and the Salvation Army clearly submitted the best proposal. The perception the PGF had morphed from a provider of problem gambling services into a political lobby group, may or may not have been of interest to the selection panel – who knows? But interested parties would have known the key requirements for the contract because they would have been clearly stated in the RFP.

    But one thing we do know: The needs of the <5% of the population who have a problem with gambling, will be met via the good folk at the Salvation Army. And if people were genuinely interested in the provision of professional PG services, that's where the focus should be.

    Instead, the bleats are loud because a lobby group has lost out. That says it all.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Yogibear (274 comments) says:

    Look on the bright side: Finally a Labour ad with no typos.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Chuck Bird (4,661 comments) says:

    It would be nice to see a government brave enough to cut funding to the NZ AIDS Foundation which spends a lot of its efforts politically lobbying and does nothing effective to reduce the rate of HIV in New Zealand and often the exact opposite. For example the AIDS Foundation lobbied hard against migrants being screened for HIV. It was not until a number of innocent women got infected that the law was changed back.

    The former CEO is Kevin Hague.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. thePeoplesFlag (168 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 34 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Steve (North Shore) (4,489 comments) says:

    Trevor might have to bake some cakes and run a stall for a fundraiser instead of using other peoples money

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. OneTrack (2,563 comments) says:

    “I’ve seen this lie repeated on facebook. They really are desperately pushing this. It’s pretty despicable.”

    It’s pathetic. They have nothing else.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    Labour seem to be upset because the PGF was a great source of taxpayer funding for their activists and candidates.

    Speaking of desperate lies…

    Likewise the Greens haven’t mentioned that the former CEO is an active member of the Green Party and partner of a Green MP.

    You do realise that both the above comments make the decision to stop funding them look even more likely to be politically-motivated, right?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 21 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. kiwi in america (2,431 comments) says:

    mjw
    The Homosexual Law Reform Act was passed almost 30 years ago – get over it. Back then many Christian groups opposed it. The SA’s opposition absolutely in no way has affected their ability to do amazing even life saving work in the area of drug/alcohol and other addictions. I did volunteer work in this area – the Sallies are very highly regarded even by the most secular humanist atheists in the caring professions because they don’t try and preach religion – they just live it in their actions.

    As for “National lost me” comment, are you inferring that you were a National supporter and you are defecting to what Labour or the Greens over the Sky City deal? Helen Clark when PM happily promoted an almost identical deal and Labour’s MPs were happy to plunge their snouts into the Sky City trough recently when invited. As for the Green’s you accept their hypocritical sanctimony, their leader’s corrupt attempt to circumvent NZ’s courts to help Kim Dotcom and gladly accept their PC bans on everything? I suspect you are what right leaning talk show hosts in the US call lefties who call pretending to be a disaffected Republican or floating voter but peddle the left’s talking points – a “seminar caller”.

    Vote: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Paulus (2,487 comments) says:

    Sallies have been dealing with all sorts of Addiction for over 80 years.
    Good on the Sallies – glad to see that they won a contestable contract.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Yogibear (274 comments) says:

    I’m waiting for the Green press release that decries the wanton militarisation of problem gambling

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. alloytoo (430 comments) says:

    Interesting how some Labour sycophants are turning feral on the Sallies.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. mjw (206 comments) says:

    KIA – I’ll get over it when the Sallies get over it. I don’t’ believe they have changed their mind, or that they regret it. If I am wrong, I am happy to be corrected. If you can show me they have apologised for their public campaign against homosexual law reform, I will accept that and start to donate to them again.

    As for your speculations; I would characterise myself as a classical liberal with a strong dose of Hayek (including his support for the welfare state). I have also developed the belief that we should change governments every six years to protect our freedom. At present, I am seeing more and more confirmation of that belief.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. kiwi in america (2,431 comments) says:

    mjw
    You miss both my points. The first being that opposition to legislation subject to a conscience vote in Parliament 30 years ago in no way negates or even remotely takes away from the SA’s ability to properly execute this contract.

    If you think that a Labour/Greens/Mana government would enhance freedom in NZ then you are away with the fairies (of the non homo type)!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. OneTrack (2,563 comments) says:

    What were National thinking regarding the convention centre. They should have just put taxes up so the gummint would pay for it. And then a ministry could be started to administer it. And then they could have populated the ministry with a large cohort of public servants who would “administer” the centre, following the rules. We can afford it. And if nobody actually uses the center, we can just put up the taxes some more to pay for the ongoing costs. You didn’t need that hospital anyway.

    In lefty land, this is called a win win. More taxes, more public servants. High five. It worked for Greece.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Judith (7,458 comments) says:

    I don’t think anyone with any experience in this field can deny the Salvation Army plays a very important role in the area of Problem Gambling. I haven’t seen anyone say they are not capable of doing the job, regarding dealing with people that need individual assistance. However, they are not for everyone, which is why the contract for dealing with Asian Problem Gambling remains with PGF. There are some people that do not for a variety of reasons want to deal with an organisation with such a strong religious aspect. There should always be a choice for everyone as to whether they wish their recovery to be overshadowed by a religious component, or not.

    From what I have seen is that the issue is not regarding the Salvation Army’s ability (which does not numerically show to be any more effective than that previously offered by PGF) so those suggesting they have proven to be the more effective organisation, are actually wrong. They are just the most well known organisation who historically and due to the great work, give us all the ‘warm fuzzies’ – however, they are not ‘squeaky clean’ as past issues have revealed regarding other aspects of their work.

    The Government has requested that the contract go to the organisation that will deal only with Problem Gamblers. It does not want to fund a group that will openly and actively advocate, especially against the things they want, (despite the legislation requiring advocacy and lobbying on issues at a National level).

    It doesn’t matter which way you look at it – this move is an attempt to silence something requested in legislation.

    The fact that Peter Dunne is involved is hilarious. Whilst I put no blame on John Key, he was not around ten or so years ago when this began, but he seriously needs to look into Peter’s involvement and remove him as spokesperson on this issue, before it drags Key’s administration down.

    Peter Dunne really enjoyed the ‘hospitality’ of the time – and let’s just say, ‘he’s been vance’d before. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. jcuk (576 comments) says:

    Komata … it is all done in a photo editing programme … I doubt if they had even one chip :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Tauhei Notts (1,601 comments) says:

    I’ll bet $20 that the Sallies will do a better job than the Problem Gambling Foundation.
    Then I’ll go all up Dundeel at Rosehill.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. mjw (206 comments) says:

    kiwi in america – there has long been a desire to emulate Singapore on the ‘right’ in New Zealand. My fear is that is exactly what is happening. The first step is to adopt their version of crony capitalism. The next step appears to be the creation of a political aristocracy that milks the state for benefits, while silencing their opponents through lawsuits and punitive funding choices. The end game is a monarchy under the guise of democracy.

    The funny thing is, half of Singaporean young people want to live somewhere else.

    If we don’t protect our freedom, we will lose it. I think John Key has a lot going for him, but I don’t want him to be Prime Minister for life.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,787 comments) says:

    I want to know who paid for the bloody advert?

    Labour is broke so did the bill go to the PGF?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Left Right and Centre (2,816 comments) says:

    Congratulations – Labour secure the conspiracy theorist talkback caller voting block.

    It’s right up there with 3 minute abs as the biggest con going. Maybe they could make a little infomercial to play at 2am ?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Reid (15,904 comments) says:

    Lefties are much better at propaganda than conservatives and lies like this are all about planting the meme which is happening right now and the Sunday papers will finish it off and the news cycle will move on on Monday and the BSA complaint will be a footnote in people’s memories. So the question is what is the govt going to do to counter the meme right now?

    My guess is: nothing. Maybe they’ll mention it on Q&A which no-one but the beltway watches, but that’s about it.

    Which just proves my point. National needs to have a contingency plan in place for when this happens again because it definitely will during the campaign if not before, and not sure about you but I’ve had a gutsful of blatant, outright hysterical lies.

    And such counter-plans need to be real aggressive because the media like Mary Wilson and Campbell are aggressive in their lies so countering them needs equal and opposite aggression, as well.

    I don’t think National will do this but that’s what they should do.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. kiwi in america (2,431 comments) says:

    mjw
    NZ under National is 1,000 miles from the Singapore model and no reputable commentator from the right (be they in or out of Parliament) touts Singapore as a model.

    However your description of crony capitalism and “a political aristocracy that milks the state for benefits” seems to more accurately describe Labour in government far more than National. It was Labour who tried to restrict political free speech with the draconian Electoral Finance Act, it was Labour who stole $800,000 from the taxpayers to fund their pledge card and passed retrospective legislation to make it ‘legal’ and it is former Labour MPs and Cabinet ministers who are more likely to suck off the public teat post Parliament by their appointment to numerous SOE boards, Qangos and other tax payer funded sinecures whereas the Nats are more likely to take their chances in the private sector.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Fisiani (943 comments) says:

    Trevor Mallard tells another lie. What do you expect? He believes that some people will believe his lie. He will tell more lies. He believes that most voters are thick.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Fisiani (943 comments) says:

    Adolf you asked who paid for this lie. Look at it again, You did. I did. We all did. Trevor Mallard has got Parliament’s seal on it. That means if was not paid by Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Kimble (4,374 comments) says:

    where would the labour party members who created this advertisement have been able to obtain such a large pile of chips …

    Those are nothing like casino chips. They are the generic composite chips you get in cheap home poker sets.

    Speaking of desperate lies…

    Hey Milt, how about you front up and explain why Labour would care about a lobby group that lost out to an organisation that better helps problem gamblers?

    Fucking Lefties. Start up a lobby group to support your political party, call it something that hides what it really does, get funding from your team when they are in Government, lie to everyone. Oh, but all for the “greater good” of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. mjw (206 comments) says:

    Kiwi in America – as I say, change the government every six years. The third term of every government in the last 40 years has been deeply unpleasant for NZ. That is 81-84, 96-99, 2005-2008. What will 2014-2107 hold for us? The direction is very clear already.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (779 comments) says:

    There is a saying from our great Chief of Staff…”If you throw it will stick”…..

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Chris2 (754 comments) says:

    It was under a Labour Government, in 2002, that the then CEO of the Problem Gambling Foundation resigned when he was found to have used his Foundation-owned credit card to the tune of more than a quarter million dollars, including ATM cash with drawls, and that he was gambling the Foundation’s money.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Reid (15,904 comments) says:

    What will 2014-2107 hold for us? The direction is very clear already.

    mjw:

    81-84 failed because Lange prevented Douglas from finishing the job – imagine if we’d had a 25% flat tax since then, for example.

    96-99 failed because Bolger didn’t have the intellectual capacity to recognise the opportunity he had been given to finish the job Douglas started.

    05-08 failed because Hulun is and was an evil venomous cancerous and corrosive hater and wrecker who destroyed everything she ever touched including the entire country by the time she’d finished with it

    14-17 is going to be extremely tricky because the global economy is going to tank this year and cause the biggest depression the world has ever seen, bar none. Worse than 1929 x 10. That’s not going to be Key’s fault and the question is: do we want an experienced crisis manager at the wheel or an untested bunch of economic illiterates?

    There is a saying from our great Chief of Staff…”If you throw it will stick”…..

    Yes, it’s a shame Matt and team doesn’t see any ethical issue with that philosophy isn’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Richard Hurst (751 comments) says:

    On the 27th of March it will be the anniversary of the Sallies coming to NZ in 1883.

    The Salvation Army: Helping problem gamblers since 1883.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Chris2 (754 comments) says:

    For consistency, Labour should also run this advert…..

    “The Labour-party Mayor of Auckland voted in favour of the dodgey pokies Convention Centre deal …… so Sky City rewarded him with free room upgrades so he could commit adultery for two years”

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. twofish (74 comments) says:

    Unfortunately for the Salvation Army they become ensnared in Labour’s lie.
    To say “the Problem Gambling Foundation spoke out against the dodgy pokies convention centre deaL – so National have cancelled their funding” implies that the alternative is less vocal or easier on the issue.

    The Salvation Army also spoke out against the deal, but are a lesser force by Labour’s insinuation.
    I believe it is now incumbent on the Salvation Army to re-iterate their position,
    sad as it is that Labour’s lies necessitate this.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Fentex (855 comments) says:

    Note no mention of the fact that the PGF lost a contestable contract to the Salvation Army, who also spoke out against the deal. So the entire premise is a lie.

    That doesn’t logically follow. Choosing to punish one party does not imply an alternative might not also annoy you, it just means you were sufficiently annoyed by one you turned to another.

    This is related to one of the flaws of the logic of competition improving all things – your choices don’t necessarily involve an ability to choose the feature you wish among competitors and that lack in comparative provision fails to improve service by selection.

    More directly to the point it’d be easier to believe National didn’t want this because PGF opposed their policies if members didn’t suggest they did.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Kimble (4,374 comments) says:

    Once again reality doesnt matter to Fentex.

    Problem gamblers dont choose between the Sallies and PGF.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. scrubone (3,044 comments) says:

    http://halfdone.wordpress.com/2014/03/22/labour-supporters-foul-mouthed-and-racist/

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. chris (556 comments) says:

    The biggest problem with an ad like this is that so much of Labour’s target market (uneducated voters) will see this and take it at face value. No amount of arguing about it here, or talking about it on TV programs or in the newspapers (which so many people won’t watch or read anyway), will make a difference to these people. As an example, you should read some of the stupid posts on the Labour Party Facebook page.

    On the flip side, they’ll mostly be blind tribal Labour voters anyway, so it probably doesn’t matter so much. But if they’re swing voters…

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Psycho Milt (2,246 comments) says:

    More directly to the point it’d be easier to believe National didn’t want this because PGF opposed their policies if members didn’t suggest they did.

    So it turns out there is an honest man in the National Party, who’d have thought it?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. mandk (815 comments) says:

    Just back from kids’ cricket, so I’m a bit slow with this one, but did anyone hear Radio NZ’s coverage of this at 8.00?
    They mentioned that the PGF had lost the funding, but didn’t mention that the contract had gone to the Salvation Army instead.
    Disgraceful reporting.
    Is Radio NZ another wasp nest of lefties funded by the taxpayer?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Keeping Stock (10,087 comments) says:

    Is Radio NZ another wasp nest of lefties funded by the taxpayer?

    Do you really need an answer to that question mandk?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. RightNow (6,639 comments) says:

    Green Party gambling spokeswoman Denise Roche – whose husband founded the Problem Gambling Foundation – said the Salvation Army was also opposed to the SkyCity deal, but the difference was that it wasn’t reliant on Government funds at the time.

    ‘‘If an organisation has to reduce its ability to advocate in fear of losing its funding, then we’re losing democracy.

    ‘‘Salvation Army was able to talk about their opposition to the casino extension because they weren’t as heavily reliant on government funding.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9854941/Gambling-funding-reasons-rejected

    The PGF will now be free to advocate without fear.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. mandk (815 comments) says:

    “Do you really need an answer to that question mandk?”

    No. But it would be interesting to know what other tax-payer funded organisations have been infiltrated.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. RightNow (6,639 comments) says:

    I have been mistaken in my previous comment. It seems the PGF will retain about $1 million of funding, and will not be spending one cent of it on advocacy.

    The foundation’s chief executive Graeme Ramsey said that its taxpayer funding came with strict conditions, and not a cent of it was spent on advocacy work.

    Campaigns were paid for with private donations.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11224123

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. wrightingright (136 comments) says:

    > “Likewise the Greens haven’t mentioned that the former CEO is an active member of the Green Party and partner of a Green MP.”

    Even now amongst PGF’s employees they Greens candidates and key strategic campaigners being paid on the taxpayers’ dollars.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. wrightingright (136 comments) says:

    > “The solution: the Nats should substantially increase problem gambling funding. That will prove they are not permanently in Sky City’s pocket.”

    A little small problem here @mjw….. there *is* being an increase in funding!

    Looks like with your own words you’ve proved National is not in Sky City’s pocket ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. flash2846 (161 comments) says:

    @ Reid
    Lefties are much better at propaganda……..

    So very true Reid; a more aggressive approach is needed. Every bullshit headline should be contested by the minister in charge. How hard can it be to say to the media “that simply is not true, why haven’t you checked your source? or did you make it up?”
    Every time I hear “the minister lied to the media” I know it is likely to be a misleading slant and the words “pot”, “kettle” and “black” come to mind

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Elaycee (4,285 comments) says:

    @RightNow (2.48pm): Stuff has caught the malaise normally associated with the NZ Hoorald – that of telling porkies. For the record: John Stansfield was not the founder of the Problem Gambling Foundation – for 6 years he was a ‘senior advocate’ for the Northern Local Government Officers Union!

    The PGF was originally called the Compulsive Gambling Society (CGS) which was formed in 1988 with funding from the New Zealand Lottery Grants Board. Psychiatrist Fraser McDonald helped three men who were experiencing problems with gambling establish the CGS because, at that time, there were no services available for gambling problems. CGS started out as a telephone service, with the first national hotline of its type beginning in 1992. As the need grew, services expanded to include face-to-face services; a second clinic was opened in Manurewa in 1993. In 2001 the PGF succeeded the CGS, moving from an addictions and medical-based philosophy to a public-health approach.

    Stansfield was CEO between June 2003 and June 2008. And it may only be a spooky coincidence, but IIRC, the Chairman of the Board who appointed Stansfield was ex Labour MP Richard Northey. Spooky… 8O

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. mjw (206 comments) says:

    *sigh* ok, here we go again. “A Health Ministry spokesman said the contract given to the Salvation Army for services was largely worth the same amount of funding previously given to the foundation.”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9853344/Problem-Gambling-Foundation-loses-Govt-funding

    That doesn’t look like a substantial increase in funding to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. freemark (428 comments) says:

    Stansfield (in his role as head of a local school BOT) is recently the recipient of highly dodgy funds from the Auckland ratepayers via the Watermelon Local Board on Waiheke. It appears that this LB does what unelected Trougher Roach tells them to do. Allegations have been made that they will go directly into Green Party coffers. There is also a rumour that Stansfield’s Academic position was bought for him by a wealthy offshore Greenie. These are more credible stories than the Duck Shit in the release above.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    The PGF employs 63 people. Most of these will lose their jobs. In other words, the Sallies will be asked to do more with less…how did that work out at Pike River?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. freemark (428 comments) says:

    63 people Hue? 55 of whom are probably (by the sounds of it) troughing watermelon activists diverting funds to a couple of lefty political parties, and feathering their own nests. Maybe they should now show how much they “care” by teaching contraception, vegetable growing & snail saving to the oppressed. The ones that actually do some good on the ground will probably get jobs with the Sallies actually making a difference. But here is a free idea to get some electoral support for your heroes – print up some posters and place them in all the pokie bars (or anywhere actually) They could say something like: The Green, Labour & Mana Parties don’t think any of you are able to play these machines responsibly, and they want to ban them. They also don’t want any of you to have well paid Construction Jobs to build a great free Convention Centre. The National Govt believes that most of you are able to make your own decisions and have a bit of fun. They are working with organisations to help you if you do have problems with gambling. They also want to see you in good jobs building cool stuff and making good money to feed your family with and have some fun.
    Actually I think I’ll print some up myself – will you help me distribute them?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. hmmokrightitis (1,506 comments) says:

    Youre status as a cock is safe wossy.

    The Sallies are being ‘asked’ to do nothing. It was a competitive tender. They offered their services for a set $ amount – what they thought they could deliver for $x. No one forced them, that’s what tendering is all about. Their tender was considered better than that of the PGF. Thats why the word ‘competitive’ is in there.

    Do keep up you idiot. Yes, I make allowances for the fact that you think red but do try harder.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Fentex (855 comments) says:

    From the Salvation Army;

    National manager of addictions Captain Gerry Walker said he had not yet been shown a contract and “did not know what the situation is”.

    His organisation had applied for its usual amount of funding for gambling addiction services – between $1 million and $2 million.

    So the claim that;

    The process to retender the contracts for these services was an open contestable tender. The evaluation panel deciding on the tender comprised six members: three internal Ministry staff and three external evaluators from the Department of Internal Affairs, the Health Promotion Agency and a Pacific health consultant.

    “The Ministry of Health has been particularly mindful to keep the process clearly separate from any perception of political interference. This extended to commissioning an independent review by Pricewaterhouse on its proposed decisions.

    Appears to be misleading given the Salvation did not contest for the funding.

    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.