Will this appear on TV3?

May 13th, 2014 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

writes in the Manawatu Standard:

Are you ready to hear something that will shake your faith in our democracy? Brace yourself.

I can reveal that a network of highly organised corporations have gained influence over one of our political parties. They give this party thousands of dollars – and there is no doubt they get their money’s worth.

For instance, the corporations in question have privileged party connections. As hard as it is to believe, they actually have a direct hand in choosing the party leader. Less directly, a high number of party MPs and organisers used to work for them.

The party regularly proposes legislation that furthers the goals of these corporations.

One of their umbrella organisations was even awarded a government contract that one watchdog group called a “cosy deal” to do “little, if anything”.

Yes, the role and influence of unions over the Labour Party is truly disturbing.

Of course, you probably shouldn’t expect the TV3 news team to express any alarm over this. I also wouldn’t hold my breath while waiting for John Campbell to demand which Labour Party figures met with which union bosses (and what was discussed and what promises were made).

Union bosses that pay enough money to Labour ever get private meetings on a regular basis with MPs to discuss and write policy.

Reasonable disclosure standards should be maintained and adhered to. As long as they are – and there’s no evidence of actual favours being traded for donations – it’s hard to see what there is to get het up about.

After all, it’s reasonable that people who are donating to a cause have an opportunity to talk to the people they are donating to. It’s also reasonable for politicians to talk with the people they hope will back their cause.

So it doesn’t really disturb me to know that organised labour is a powerful force within the Labour Party. I know that the party is supported by, and will support legislation favourable to, the trade union movement. I price that into my decision about voting for it. People make the same calculation about National and the farming and business sectors.

The alternative is for private donations to political parties to be banned altogether and for all political activity to be exclusively financed by the state. This is the preference of the Green Party – and it is hard to escape the feeling that the “revelations” about private donor fundraising are being used as a stalking horse for that cause.

Public financing of political parties should be resisted. When parties don’t depend on voluntary donations – from individuals, business, trade unions and other non-government sectors – they will become a self-perpetuating elite of career politicians. Incumbents will benefit from a system rigged even more in their favour, and grassroots politics will wither.

Our members of Parliament will become less like our delegates to the Government, and more like the Government’s emissaries to us.

And however you feel about the present system, it’s preferable to that.

This is the agenda that must be resisted. Taxpayers being forced to fund political parties. It entrenches the incumbents and means that we end up not donating to the parties we agree with or support – but being forced to fund the parties we detest.

Tags: , ,

37 Responses to “Will this appear on TV3?”

  1. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Wonderful piece of reporting DPF, pity there were not more prepared to do the same, unfortunately they takes their directives via one Andrew Little of EPMU infamy. Bet this would not get mentioned by MSM.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. thePeoplesFlag (242 comments) says:

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

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 41 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Bob R (1,362 comments) says:

    If political funding solely came from taxpayers wouldn’t that mean politicians would be solely beholden to taxpayers? Wouldn’t that be a good thing, rather than being controlled by well organised and funded special interests on each side of the political divide?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Rich Prick (1,670 comments) says:

    It is even worse than unions gaining influence and policy from their Labour mates. Unions achieved a direct cash kick-back under Labour dressed up as “Health & Safety” training.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. ShawnLH (4,489 comments) says:

    Unions should be politically independent, and disallowed from funding or publicly supporting any party. We need new laws to confine them to only advocating for their members with employers, and a law which would criminalise the current Labour party arrangements.

    No matter how much the Left whines that it’s not, it really is a form of political corruption.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ROJ (114 comments) says:

    My time is valuable. I presume that of everyone else is to them, too.

    Therefore, if private donations are to be legislated against, all voluntary work done for parties will be too. Pretty hard to organise any political party, unless they are run solely by state civil servants.

    North Korea, anyone?

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. RightNow (6,976 comments) says:

    “It is called the LABOUR party, you idiots. I think the clue is in the name”

    We’re all well aware who owns them, but thanks for stating the obvious.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    If you can’t illegally rort the taxpayers then retrospectively validate your actions and kill a standing court case against the PM – Then you need to make it legal to just take tax payers money.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. anticorruptionnz (212 comments) says:

    The reason not more speak up is because when you do you get your arse sued off , that’s what they do to the media as well so that is why they dont touch it .. not economical

    It was the labour party which was up to its neck in the granting of law enforcement powers for a fictional organization the animal welfare Institute of New Zealand ( AWINZ )
    it all happened when Bob Harvey was the president of the labour party in 1999 .

    Neil Wells a Labour party faithful got to write the no 1 bill for the animal welfare legislation. He became independent adviser to the select committee and then applied for law enforcement powers for a fictional organisation, which transpired to be nothing more than himself in a pseudonym.

    there were only two private law enforcement authorities the other was the RNZSPCA

    He ran the operation from council premises in Waitakere where Harvey was Mayor. the council officially denies any knowledge but the council staff resources and infrastructure were used to do the work for what was in reality a private enterprise, the proceeds of which went into an account Wells had sole control over but again held in a pseudonym . Public office for private gain ( Wells was the manager of Dog control at Waitakere )

    This is evidence as to how they write create and enforce legislation all for private pecuniary gain. Haven’t found any evidence of kick backs to the labour party but would not be surprised if there were any .

    But wait there is more labour appointed judges ensured that I did not get a fair hearing in court , Wells took me to court for defamation- I did nothing but speak the truth , I never had a hearing, my defence of truth and honest opinion was stuck out , all done using the charitable dollar which he collected in part from the rate payers of Waitakere .

    I have not been able to get a minister or any one to look at it. yet have so much evidence it is not funny.

    I have lost my family , 8 years of my life,my marriage and over $300,000 and potential earnings plus health issues .

    Guess that is why people stay silent you cannot be a whistle blower in NZ you get done like a dogs dinner cause we are hell bent on being the least corrupt country and we get there by totally ignoring fraud and corruption and doing everything we can to silence whistle blowers

    so who will speak up next hands up ????

    see the evidence yourself my latest post
    http://www.transparency.net.nz/

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. RightNow (6,976 comments) says:

    Bob R: “If political funding solely came from taxpayers wouldn’t that mean politicians would be solely beholden to taxpayers? ”

    Unfortunately, given that voting isn’t exclusive to net taxpayers, no.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. chris (641 comments) says:

    Imagine the stink that would be kicked up by the left if a group of organisations, such as the EMA and Business Roundtable, helped to fund the National Party, helped select the leader, helped select the candidates, got kick backs for their support, and wrote legislation for them. It would be called corruption, rightly so. Why then, is it not corruption when the labour unions do it? Oh of course, it’s different when the left do it…

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Ryan Sproull (7,096 comments) says:

    When parties don’t depend on voluntary donations – from individuals, business, trade unions and other non-government sectors – they will become a self-perpetuating elite of career politicians.

    Wow. I can barely even imagine such a crazy dystopian possibility.

    *cough*

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Liam Hehir (123 comments) says:

    @thePeoplesFlag

    I’ve always been open about the fact that I have a National background. I stated it in the inaugural Firing Line column and it’s also noted on my personal website.

    Far better to be open about it, in my view, and allow people to know where you’re coming from then to allow it to be obscured by a pretence of total objectivity.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (872 comments) says:

    Moving on…..Paddy Labour Gower has just figured out that there is a spelling mistake in one of the reports prepared by Judith Collins…Gone by lunch time time tomorrow….

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Yoza (1,788 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (2,439 comments) says:
    May 13th, 2014 at 3:16 pm

    Unions should be politically independent, and disallowed from funding or publicly supporting any party. We need new laws to confine them to only advocating for their members with employers, and a law which would criminalise the current Labour party arrangements.

    No matter how much the Left whines that it’s not, it really is a form of political corruption.

    There is no compulsory unionism any more and unions are democratic institutions, if their memberships vote to support contributions to a major political party surely that is their right, these are New Zealand citizens after all. Far more sinister would be those politicians and political parties that received financial support from foreign people and corporations attempting to influence our political process from afar.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 25 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. J Bloggs (226 comments) says:

    “Far more sinister would be those politicians and political parties that received financial support from foreign people and corporations attempting to influence our political process from afar.”

    What? Like the Internet party?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. SPC (5,563 comments) says:

    Why not compromise, via using the matching funds concept – whereby individual donations up to maximum are matched by taxpayer funds?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Steve (North Shore) (4,544 comments) says:

    Wait until John Key finds out about this

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    SPC

    Why not follow the principle that if the party has any merit for NZ then NZ people will support it ?

    Weird concept I know, much easier for Labour to be irrelevant but supported by an act of parliament which guarantees it funding rather than wither and die as a party… like it probably should have after it’s disgraceful self serving helping itself to tax payers money in 2005.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Bob R (1,362 comments) says:

    ***Bob R: “If political funding solely came from taxpayers wouldn’t that mean politicians would be solely beholden to taxpayers? ”

    Unfortunately, given that voting isn’t exclusive to net taxpayers, no.***

    @ Right Now,

    Well, that needs to be fixed :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. SPC (5,563 comments) says:

    burt, matching funds is a system designed to democratise funding in the sense that donations are only matched up to a certain level. thus reducing the impact of a wealthier donor few.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Mark (1,474 comments) says:

    This could well turn into one of the most personalised elections we have seen for many years. The increasingly partisan nature of the media is going to see to that.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. SPC (5,563 comments) says:

    Comparable to a wealthy few having influence in the electoral process, is where money can purchase privileged place on the net.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11254247

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. mara (765 comments) says:

    I would love to see the formation of a credible Taxed Enough Already Party in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RichardX (324 comments) says:

    igm (989 comments) says:
    May 13th, 2014 at 3:10 pm
    Wonderful piece of reporting DPF, pity there were not more prepared to do the same, unfortunately they takes their directives via one Andrew Little of EPMU infamy. Bet this would not get mentioned by MSM.

    You do know this was in the Manawatu Standard?
    You know….your favourite MSM news source

    igm (989 comments) says:
    May 12th, 2014 at 9:06 am
    It is so bad, I am sure the editor of “Manawatu Standard” is publishing verbatim, editorials prepared by Andrew Little.

    April 16th, 2014 at 7:48 am
    “Tojo” is a loser, always was, always will be. He is a typical unprincipled left-wing envious charlatan having the intellectual abilities of his effeminate mates Hipkins, Parker (who takes off with stroke-ridden friend’s wives, runs businesses broke, ruining partners lives), and Lees-Galloway (being championed by the editor and deputy editor of “Manawatu Standard”).

    February 25th, 2014 at 3:32 pm
    It is rumoured the editor of Fairfax publication Manawatu Standard, is actually a Labour Party member, which wouldn’t surprise me, as he continually promotes the hapless Lees-Galloway at every opportunity.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. ShawnLH (4,489 comments) says:

    Yowza,

    “if their memberships vote to support contributions to a major political party surely that is their right,”

    I doubt that any vote was ever taken on that issue. As to “rights” Lefties invent “rights” out of thin air all the time to support their ideology, and in this case the “right” your claiming creates real political corruption that is not good for democracy.

    ” Far more sinister would be those politicians and political parties that received financial support from foreign people”

    Like Mana being funded by the foreign criminal DotCon? And your voting for Mana right?

    Hypocrisy is never pretty Yowza, and yours is showing.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. OneTrack (2,988 comments) says:

    Yoza – “if their memberships vote to support contributions to a major political party surely that is their right, ”

    And if any democratic members happen to vote the wrong way, a few of the boys will go over and sort it out. Isn’t that right Yoza.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Yoza (1,788 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (2,447 comments) says:
    May 13th, 2014 at 5:55 pm
    Yowza,

    [Yoza]“if their memberships vote to support contributions to a major political party surely that is their right,”

    I doubt that any vote was ever taken on that issue. As to “rights” Lefties invent “rights” out of thin air all the time to support their ideology, and in this case the “right” your claiming creates real political corruption that is not good for democracy.

    Property rights were ‘invented out of thin air’, it is a meaningless point. I don’t see how unions working with a political entity which, if elected, plans to enact policy to benefit the members of those unions is corruption – the Labour party does have a long tradition of union support, there is no secrecy here. Unions are not vast financial institutions, the money they contribute to political campaigns is sparse when considering the numbers they represent, they are not capable of fomenting the kind of corruption you like to pretend they are.

    [Yoza]” Far more sinister would be those politicians and political parties that received financial support from foreign people”

    Like Mana being funded by the foreign criminal DotCon? And your voting for Mana right?

    Hypocrisy is never pretty Yowza, and yours is showing.

    I like Hone Harawira, I think he is a decent bloke. I will be voting Mana as there is no other party that remotely reflects my political beliefs. I am wary of Kim Dotcom, but the way the New Zealand establishment is out to get him to please US corporate interests is the greater evil.

    OneTrack (2,072 comments) says:
    May 13th, 2014 at 6:00 pm

    Yoza – “if their memberships vote to support contributions to a major political party surely that is their right, ”

    And if any democratic members happen to vote the wrong way, a few of the boys will go over and sort it out. Isn’t that right Yoza.

    The only time I have been in a union when that would have been an issue was when I was working on cable gangs down at Herd St for Telecom. There was one guy out of about 60 who was virulently anti-union when we went out on strike and picketed our yard, he was left completely alone. After two days all our demands were met and the regional manager who instigated the strike was moved to Palmerston North.

    The use of violence, threats or abuse are generally counter-productive, I seriously doubt any union would countenance such behaviour from its members.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Rich Prick (1,670 comments) says:

    Yoza, I must take exception to your last paragraph, well all the rest too. I was a union victim from the compulsory days. I had my car tyres slashed and was assaulted for daring to work in a hotel as a university student when the useless buggers went on strike right at the beginning of one set of summer holidays which happened to be my only opportunity to earn for the following year (no, we didn’t have interest free student loans). And I was forced to pay those c%#ts for my treatment. I learned my hatred of unions early in life.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Yoza (1,788 comments) says:

    “I had my car tyres slashed and was assaulted for daring to work in a hotel as a university student when the useless buggers went on strike … I learned my hatred of unions early in life.”

    Which is probably why it is regarded as counter-productive

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Rich Prick (1,670 comments) says:

    Can you make the discomfort I still have from a poorly healed collar bone go away? Your words are nice, but fucked if they work for me. Nice that unions have worked out maiming their members is regarded as “counter-productive”I’m pleased to hear that.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. scrubone (3,092 comments) says:

    The use of violence, threats or abuse are generally counter-productive, I seriously doubt any union would countenance such behaviour from its members.

    Like the watersiders caught on video a few years back chasing a “scab” into a building to beat the crap out of him? Or perhaps the union meeting I saw at about the same time where union members were quite happy to advocate violence against bosses, knowing that the meeting was being recorded for TV?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    mara

    I would love to see the formation of a credible Taxed Enough Already Party in NZ.

    We could call it…. The Association of Consumers and Tax payers…. or some such thing….

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    SPC

    I fail to see how matching funds up to a level would remove large donors. Cunliffe has shown us large donors can still be hidden. From now on till eternity we’ll be hearing … ‘It’s how Labour do it too’ from National when they are in opposition. Labour being in office will of course then say it’s unacceptable…. and we’ll add another excuse for rorting the system to the long list of … it’s how it’s always been done. But we’ll throw a few mill of tax payers money at the ones who raise the most funds… how will that help ?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Yoza (1,788 comments) says:

    Rich Prick (1,359 comments) says:
    May 13th, 2014 at 9:10 pm

    Can you make the discomfort I still have from a poorly healed collar bone go away? Your words are nice, but fucked if they work for me. Nice that unions have worked out maiming their members is regarded as “counter-productive”I’m pleased to hear that.

    scrubone (2,980 comments) says:
    May 13th, 2014 at 10:31 pm

    Like the watersiders caught on video a few years back chasing a “scab” into a building to beat the crap out of him? Or perhaps the union meeting I saw at about the same time where union members were quite happy to advocate violence against bosses, knowing that the meeting was being recorded for TV?

    Does your indignation extend to the killer of Christine Clark who was deliberately run down on the Lyttelton Port picket line in 1999?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. ross411 (611 comments) says:

    I once lived in a country where I was legally required to belong to a union, and to pay them a stipend out of my salary. There was no union which directly applied to my job, so a vaguely related one was selected for me. I never saw a union representative, nor did I ever hear of them doing anything worthwhile except taking money. When joining I was regaled with tales of how the union had holiday homes which workers could apply to stay in, but strangely it was supposed to be quite difficult to get a stay in them. The common worker didn’t get a look in.

    Why is it any time you hear about a union, it isn’t them either doing something right, or something just? Instead it smacks of corruption and those who speak out for them are shrill and unwilling to hear any wrong?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Rich Prick (1,670 comments) says:

    Yoza, why should I care about a unionist run over, just another union causality albeit at the hands of some one I don’t know. What’s ya point.

    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.