Disorganised, dishonest, and hypocritical

A great description of NZ First by one of it’s own candidates.

The Herald reports:

In a report titled “NZ First Concerns & Issues Regarding Election”, Helen Peterson – who was 20th on the party’s list in 2017 – said “members who paid huge amounts of money towards the campaign and promised repayment did not receive any reimbursement”.
“Money allocated to support the campaign was not used for the purpose in which it was donated,” she alleged in a list of dozens of complaints.
“Members felt exploited as they financed the party’s activities with little recognition or reward.”
The report goes on to say complaints had been ignored and describes the party as “disorganised, dishonest, and hypocritical”.

The only surprise is that she was surprised.

It also laments the party’s selection process meant there no MPs in the House were representing Auckland.
“[It] leaves Auckland, who have the highest population, and where there are a third of the country’s total electorates without a New Zealand First Member of Parliament representing them,” Peterson said.
The Herald earlier reported complaints the selection process was “sexist” with the top 18 members of the party’s list only including three women, and included people with membership of less than six months while long-serving members were pushed down.

NZ First doesn’t have criteria such as other parties in terms of geographic balance or length of membership. The only criteria is what Winston thinks of you.