Saturday, 28 June 2008

STUFF.CO.NZ: PM forces disabled man to walk

A partially sighted Christchurch man with Parkinson's disease was forced to struggle down the street to his car after Prime Minister Helen Clark's security commandeered parking spaces.

Clark was "very shocked" by the incident, and police have apologised.

Clark's security meant Elizabeth Winkworth was unable to park outside the Christchurch Town Hall to pick up her husband, Marshall Leaf, 81, after a performance by the Christchurch Symphony Orchestra on Friday night last week. more

Political Animal comment In the wake of finger wagging and rib poking over the Maori History gaff by Labour this week and the scandal over Ms Clark removing the democratic right for 10% of the population to have a referendum over the anti smacking legislation, we have an arrogant Mugabe-like convoy of $200,000.00 BMW limos inconveniencing an individual with Parkinson's disease.

Of course there is a track record for Clark and transport related slip ups. She is well known for endagering the proletariat when her comfy limo sped at 170km through a 50km zone on the way to watch a rugby game.

NZ HERALD: Latest Digipoll political poll

5:00AM Saturday June 28, 2008
By Claire Trevett


Political Animal comment: Will Ms Clark call this latest poll in a trend since October 2007 another "rouge poll"?

The Herald DigiPoll does not include reactions to Clark's attempt to stiffle democractic freedoms again by delaying the anti smacking referendum until after the 2008 election and the gaff by Labour over Maori History this week.

Labour's support in Auckland has dropped dramatically in the Herald's latest DigiPoll survey after a month in which violence in South Auckland and soaring petrol prices dominated the public's attention.

The June Herald-DigiPoll shows Labour's support in Auckland has dropped to 28.2 per cent - 10 points down from last month when it was sitting on 38 per cent support.It is also well behind National, which 58 per cent of decided voters in Auckland supported.National also increased its nationwide support to 54.9 per cent - its highest level since the Herald-DigiPoll survey began - and widened the gap between the two parties from 15 points in May to 22.5 points this month.

Labour's nationwide support has dropped four points since last month to 32.4 per cent, but the drubbing in Auckland - often described as the place elections are won and lost - will be of major concern for the party.However, Helen Clark's standing in the preferred Prime Minister stakes has not been hurt - she rose to 45 per cent, while John Key dropped one point to 46 per cent.

The polling period took in a month dominated by crime following a spate of homicides and violence in South Auckland. Yesterday, a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister said this had clearly impacted on the polls.However, she said Helen Clark's leadership on the matter was reflected in the preferred Prime Minister rankings.National Party leader John Key said Labour's lack of action on violent crime had lost it support."This confirms the trend in other polls that people are rejecting Labour's economic management and are frustrated by the increasingly violent society for which it has no answers."The economy continued to rate as the top issue likely to affect respondents' vote (23.8 per cent).But public concern about crime saw law and order selected as the next issue most likely to affect voting, rising to nearly a quarter of respondents (23.4 per cent) - up from just 11 per cent in May. It overtook tax cuts (19 per cent) as the second biggest issue.

Among the minor parties, NZ First received a boost to 3.3 per cent - tantalisingly close to the 5 per cent threshold for automatically qualifying for seats in Parliament - after the month's emphasis on crime and the Super Gold Card gains leader Winston Peters secured in the Budget.The Green Party (5.9 per cent) remained the only smaller party polling over 5 per cent.This is also the first full DigiPoll survey since the Budget and shows Labour has not reaped any dividends from targeting low- and middle-income earners with its tax cuts package and help under Working for Families.National has made inroads into one of Labour's strongest support bases - those on low incomes. Among households with incomes under $30,000, 38.6 per cent supported National to Labour's 40 per cent. National was strongly dominant among the middle-income earners, with 54 per cent of those earning $30,000-60,000 and 57 per cent of those earning $60,000-80,000.However, National has yet to release its policies on key issues including Working for Families, as well as its tax cut package.

The widening gap between the two main parties reflects the results of three other polls released last week by Fairfax, Roy Morgan and One News-Colmar Brunton, which the Prime Minister said were "extreme".The poll of 1210 respondents was taken between June 6 and 25 and has a margin of error of 2.8 per cent.

The results are of decided voters only.

Related Political Animal Reading

Helen Clark kicks democracy below the belt

Wednesday, 25 June 2008

Helen Clark kicks democracy below the belt


By Rod Emmerson




Helen "Mugabe" Clark and her stance to deny a referendum during the 2008 Election to the nearly 10% of Kiwis who voted in a petition to overturn the anti smacking bill is yet another full smack in the face with a closed fist, for democracy in New Zealand.

We shouldn't be surprised. I signaled her current stance last week when the petition came back to the house, but it is just another crime against democracy that Clark and her government have been infamous for over the last 9 years.

Labour and all who sail in her, and vote for her hate freedom with a passion and have done everything they could to stifle it.

Related Political Animal Reading

Labour's State Control out of control
Electoral Finance Bill Vote
NZ loses democratic freedom

Sacha Cobern's letter to NZ Herald Editor
Electoral Finance Bill Protest 2007

If it isn't the anti democratic Electoral Finance Act, where individuals and groups fear legal reprisals for speaking out against the government in election year, it is Clark and Winston Peters threatening the media with "correction" when they don't like what they are saying.

Removing legal freedoms by removing the Privy Council without indication or consultation before an election has constrained full and fair legal process in New Zealand.

The freedom to eat, smoke, say and do as individuals have a right to has been diluted to such an extent that most individuals and families live in fear of some government agency, or in the case of the EFA or anti smacking law, the police, knocking on the door to take citizens away for questioning.

While that sort of political correctness has reined supreme, the freedom for innocent Kiwi citizens to roam their neighbourhood safely has been suppressed because of rampant welfare bred violence and lack of consequences from the Justice Department and slack politically correct policing directed from the top floor of the Beehive.

Government's exist not to constrain freedom but to champion it. It is their job to make sure we all live our lives, as much as possible, without fear of consequences if we dare to voice an opinion or have a view that differs from our fellow citizens. Even this blog has been threaten by mentally deranged Labour voters plotting to illegally use photo-shopped pictures of my good self.

In Helen Clark and her government we have an administration clearly willing to remove our democratic freedoms in the vein hope they can hold on to power long enough to continue to remove the last vestiges of democracy that we currently cling on a steep cliff face to.

To most enlightened individuals, except Helen Clark herself, the irony of her speech yesterday in Parliament about one Robert Mugabe from Zimbabwe and his current murderous rampage-his first one in the early 1980s supported by Clark- will not be lost.

In Mr Mugabe we have a tyrant who clings to power by removing democratic freedoms by bad law,threats,violence,torture and murder. In Ms Clark we have a dictator who clings to power by removing democratic freedoms with bad law and threats.

How long will it be before the relatively thick line between the two gets thinner?

I fear for the future of our democracy and the safety of its people if Labour are voted back in in 2008.

c Political Animal 2008

Monday, 23 June 2008

STUFF.CO.NZ: Colmar Brunton Political Poll

Sunday, 22 June 2008, Stuff.co.nz


Labour is taking a hammering in the polls with the third poll in as many days showing a massive 20-plus gap between National and Labour.

A TV One Colmar Brunton poll tonight had National on 55 per cent with Labour lagging behind on 29 per cent support.

This followed yesterday's Fairfax Media poll by AC Nielsen showing National winning 54 per cent of the party vote against Labour's 30 per cent.

The latest Roy Morgan poll also shows a large gap with National support up two to 52.5 per cent while Labour drops 0.5 to 31.5 per cent backing.

The TV One poll gives National more than enough seats to govern in its own right.

This poll has the Greens on 7 per cent support, the Maori Party 4.4 per cent, while New Zealand First has the backing of 3.2 per cent of voters, meaning it would be out of Parliament unless leader Winston Peters wins Tauranga.

National would have 68 seats compared to Labour's 36 seats. The Maori Party would have six seats, the Greens nine seats, and - assuming their leaders held their seats - United Future, ACT and the Progressives would each have a seat.

National leader John Key also had a solid lead in the popularity stakes.

He was the preferred prime minister of 38 per cent of voters, ahead of Prime Minister Helen Clark on 27 per cent. Mr Peters was the preferred prime minister of 4 per cent.

The TV One poll sampled 1000 voters and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 per cent.

The Greens held the same rating of 7 per cent in yesterday's Fairfax and the latest Roy Morgon poll.

In the Fairfax poll, NZ First was on 3 per cent, the Maori Party 2 per cent, while ACT and United Future both attracted 1 per cent support.

In the Roy Morgan poll, NZ First was on 4 per cent support, the Maori Party had 2 per cent support, as did ACT, while United Future gained just 0.5 per cent backing.

The Roy Morgan poll also did a regional analysis which showed that even in Wellington, where support for Labour had been strong, National's vote was ahead of Labour.

Pollster Gary Morgan said that at 52.5 per cent, National's support was the highest it had been since the last election, which showed New Zealand voters were looking for a change.

Saturday, 21 June 2008

STUFF: Fairfax media Neilson poll


Labour voters still believe Prime Minister Helen Clark is the best person to lead them into this year's election, despite the party's continuing poor performance in the polls.

The latest Fairfax Media-Nielsen poll shows Labour has closed National's lead by three points but is still well behind. Labour is up one point to 30 per cent in the June poll, while National has fallen two points to 54 per cent.

The Greens continue their rise, up one point to 7 per cent, while New Zealand First has slipped back two to 3 per cent.

The Maori Party is on 2 per cent and ACT and United Future 1 per cent.

The Government has also had a slight lift in the preferred-prime minister stakes, with Clark up two points to 30 per cent and National leader John Key down by the same amount to 43 per cent.

The Nielsen poll is the first to show any lift in Labour's fortunes since the May Budget and might provide hope to the Government that it has begun a recovery from the rock-bottom 29 per cent Labour scored in last month's Nielsen poll.

Labour may also take comfort from Nielsen's findings that voters do not see any alternative to Clark to lead the party into the election, with 52 per cent of all voters opting for Clark over her closest rival, Mount Roskill MP Phil Goff, who scored 12 per cent.

Leadership rumblings have surfaced several times in recent months, but Labour voters were emphatic, with 85 per cent plumping for Clark.

Only 5 per cent of Labour voters preferred Goff, while 18 per cent of National voters thought Goff a better leader for Labour.

Other leadership hopefuls barely rated a mention, with Shane Jones and David Cunliffe scoring 2 per cent and 1 per cent respectively.

The Press also asked voters whether they felt it would help Labour's chances at the election if Clark stood aside.

Thirty-seven per cent said it would be either harmful or very harmful to change now, but 22 per cent thought it would be helpful or very helpful, including 18 per cent of Labour voters.

A third of all voters thought it would make no difference to Labour's chances whether Clark stayed, including 31 per cent of Labour voters.

In another sign sentiment may be hardening, 75 per cent of voters say they are either unlikely or very unlikely to change their minds between now and the election, while 18 per cent say they are likely or very likely to switch allegiances.

Labour hopes to capitalise on undecided or swinging voters during the election campaign, but the poll shows Labour voters are more likely to change their minds than National's, with 20 per cent of Labour voters considering a switch compared with 14 per cent of National voters.

Those most likely to change their mind before polling day are Aucklanders, young people and those on low incomes.

In a glimmer of good news for the Government, Labour has retaken the lead over National in Wellington and has made inroads into National's lead among young people and low to middle-income earners. Clark's popularity in the capital and in Christchurch has also increased.


Labour is slipping further behind in the key battleground of Auckland, with National opening up a lead of 60 per cent compared with Labour on 27 per cent.

For the first time in the Nielsen poll, National has captured the larger share of the Maori vote, with 39 per cent of Maori planning to give their party vote to National and 22 per cent to Labour.

A further 22 per cent said they were planning to vote for the Maori Party.

That leaves Pacific Islanders as the only ethnic group now favouring Labour over National.

The poll surveyed 1101 people between June 11 and June 17 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 per cent.

Of those polled, 4 per cent were excluded for being under 18 or ineligible to vote. A further 13 per cent were undecided or said they would not vote for any party.

They were excluded from the base for this question.

Wednesday, 18 June 2008

Sue Bradford strikes out (Again)


The comely Ms Bradford, in her element.



Given that the repeal of section 59 has been voted down by over 350,000 voters(almost 3 times more people that voted for Bradford's Green Party) in the petition for a referendum to allow good parents to discipline their children, in an appropriate way, and it will be held during the 2008 Election ,it is time for the latest Stan Blanch cartoon.

Stan can be quite a vicious bastard, at times extremely pithy, but he is often on the money and at at times much more, than mainstream political cartoonists.

c Political Animal 2008

Monday, 16 June 2008

FAMILY FIRST PRESS RELEASE: Anti Smacking Referendum to go ahead

Sports and Field days Crowds Give Anti-Smacking Petition Huge Boost

Family First NZ says that the numbers of signatures on the petition against the anti-smacking law and demanding a Referendum at the upcoming Election has been hugely boosted by a number of large events over the past 2 weekends.

“Over 12,000 signatures have been collected at the two recent All Blacks tests, a Warriors game, the Waikato Field days, and other sporting and community events,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

“The signature count from the Fielddays alone was a whopping 8,700. It has certainly reinforced to us the strong feeling against this unpopular and ineffective law by typical NZ’ers who are attending these events. There is no shortage of people wanting to sign the petition.”

The organisers originally had a shortfall of 18,027 signatures after the audit of the original 324,216 signatures submitted in April. However, since then, more than 50,000 signatures have been collected. These will be submitted before the deadline of the end of the month.

“This confirms that a Referendum will be held on the anti-smacking law at the same time as the Election, it confirms that a huge proportion of NZ’ers want the law changed to protect good parents, and it sends a very clear and loud message to the politicians that they should listen to the views of the voters who will be making a choice at the upcoming Election.”

“It’s time to tackle the real causes of child abuse, violence and crime without criminalising the efforts of good parents raising productive and law-abiding citizens of the future,” says Mr McCoskrie.

“There is good reason that only 23 of the almost 200 countries have adopted this law. NZ can lead the world by being the first country to reverse this flawed law before its effects are fully felt by families and the community.”


Political Animal Note: Contrary to the rather loopy Sue Bradford, who has a representation of less than 120,000 Green voters, the more than 350,000 who voted against the repeal of section 59 are a huge number, perhaps one of the biggest petitions ever seen and unless there is more of the same skulduggery from Helen Clark and the feminist Junta in the Labour Party to stop it there will be a petition during the 2008 general election.

Well done McCoskrie and Family First, while I dont agree with everything the movement stands for Political Animal salutes you now.

Related Political Animal Reading

Sascha Cobern's letter to the Editor of the
NZ Herald

Anti-smacking petition a slap in the face for out of touch Politicians

Sign the Anti Anti smacking petition

Cindy Kiro gets violent

c Political Animal 2008

WASHINGTON TIMES: Beguiling curves of the Swedish model

To give readers of Political Animal an idea of what the Labour Party's "Swedish Model" is this piece from the Washington Times will give you a glimse. Particularly important are these two outtakes:

The outlines of the Swedish "third way" welfare state began appearing in the 1950s. As late as 1960, taxing and government spending in Sweden, as a percent of GDP, was only slightly larger than in the U.S. But then the welfare statists went into full bloom. Taxing and spending surged in Sweden during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s until the mid-1990s, when tax revenues were more than 50 percent of GDP and government spending had reached a whopping 66 percent by 1995 (a peak from which it has slightly declined).

The extent of the failure of the Swedish model are both shocking and little known. For example, no new net jobs have been produced in the Swedish private sector since 1950.

In New Zealand over the last 9 years the State has grown faster than the economy and total Crown Expenses are expected to be $67.9b for the year to June 2008, or 41.2% of GDP. That is awfully close to Sweden in the 1990s and will clearly lead to a larger State apparatus and a smaller private sector.


Originally published 10:27 p.m., April 25, 2004, Washington Times

When considering the Swedish model, one can be forgiven for thinking of a comely statuesque blond with blue eyes. However, to economists and policy junkies, the Swedish model refers to the "third way" between socialism and capitalism many on the American left laud as the ideal.

Does the Swedish model work as advertised? According to a new paper by the highly regarded Swedish economist, Nils Karlson, the "model has become quite different from what was intended and to what many people still believe to be the case."

The extent of the failure of the Swedish model are both shocking and little known. For example, no new net jobs have been produced in the Swedish private sector since 1950. (By contrast, the U.S. created more than 60 million new private-sector jobs during the same period, from 52 million in 1950 to about 115 million in 2002.) "None of top 50 companies on the Stockholm stock exchange has been started since 1970."

Again, contrast this with the U.S. where many of our biggest companies had not been born or known of in 1970, such as Microsoft, Intel, Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Cisco, etc., Mr. Karlson's litany of failures of the Swedish model include: "Sweden has dropped from fourth to 14th place in 2002 among the OECD countries (i.e., affluent industrialized countries) in terms of GDP per capita since 1970."

In addition, "well over 1 million people out of a work force of around four million did not work in 2003 but lived on various kinds of public welfare programs, such as, pre-pension schemes, unemployment benefits, sick-leave programs, etc." Finally, "a majority of the adult population are either employed by the state or clients of the state in a sense that they have a majority of the income coming from public subsidies."

A half-century ago, Sweden was a great success story. One hundred fifty years ago, Sweden began a transformation from a poor agricultural society to a rich industrial society. The economy was deregulated, taxes were lowered and tariffs abolished. Modern limited liability company laws and a patent system were adopted. The result was from 1890 to 1950, Sweden was the world's fastest-growing economy, and developed a number of globally known and respected companies. During this time, Sweden was a low-tax country where the total tax burden reached only 21 percent of gross domestic product by 1950 (currently total taxes are approximately 30 percent of GDP in the U.S.).

The outlines of the Swedish "third way" welfare state began appearing in the 1950s. As late as 1960, taxing and government spending in Sweden, as a percent of GDP, was only slightly larger than in the U.S. But then the welfare statists went into full bloom. Taxing and spending surged in Sweden during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s until the mid-1990s, when tax revenues were more than 50 percent of GDP and government spending had reached a whopping 66 percent by 1995 (a peak from which it has slightly declined).

The rise in taxing and spending was coupled with increased market regulation, "social engineering" and state planning. All the taxing, spending and regulation had a number of unintended consequences, such as undermining volunteer organizations as people increasingly turned to the state for help. Job security legislation made employers more reluctant to hire. Fewer new firms were created, new inventions and innovations declined, and real costs of providing goods and services rose. Increasing taxes on labor undermined work incentives and increased the "black" or underground economy.

In addition to cataloging the economic decline resulting from the rise in the Swedish welfare state, Mr. Karlson argues that perhaps the most damaging consequence of the "third way" is the loss of "dignity" among the Swedish people. Mr. Karlson takes a classical approach and argues every individual has a "unique value" and a "good society" requires individual liberty, personal responsibility and respect for the liberty of others.

As the welfare state undermines the ability to engage in productive activity to support oneself, and individual liberty and responsibility, there will be a corresponding loss in dignity. This loss of dignity debilitates both the individual and society.

The Swedish model teaches us good intentions are not enough when trying to create a humane, compassionate and prosperous society. Failure to fully understand the economic and social consequences of policies that increasingly regulate and tax productive activity was the Swedish model's fatal flaw.

Unfortunately, this same ignorance of the consequences of taxing, spending and regulation is rampant among far too many of the American political and media class. The good news is the Swedish model is not totally useless; it is a fine model of what not to do if only we can get the American people and their opinion leaders to understand it.

Richard W. Rahn is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute.

Sunday, 15 June 2008

Feminist Socialists: A disease with a cure


Helen Clark and the collectivists in the current Labour Party Government are a product of the feminist/socialist movement rooted in the early 1970s. This movement had its genesis at universities across New Zealand, in the Labour Party's case it was Auckland University.

While there Helen, Michael, Goff and co went bra less, didn't shave parts of their bodies(or in some cases let it grow), protested against anything sensible, smoked dope, experimented with bi sexuality, embraced lesbianism (not that there is anything wrong with that Seinfeld would say) listened to Helen Reddy,drank beer, sometimes went to lectures,smoked dope again, and generally wasted their and everyone else's time and money.

Related Political Animal Reading

Labour's State Control out of Control
Labour's Socialist peril
Mike Moore: Return to Muldoonism
At least Robin Hood was honest: Labour will buy the 2008 Election
Clark's push for Neo-Muldoonism Deja Vu all over again

While there they also fomented the centre piece and central thinking of the current Labour Governments policies.

The central core of that was a socialist/communist bent(nothing sexual of course) centered on policy to destabilise the family unit, restrict individual freedoms and make the State the centre of everything.

What we have seen over the last 9 years of Labour Party policy is a massive increase in Nanny State interference and attacks on personal freedoms.

The legalisation of prostitution-leading to the legitimisation of the act as a career path for Women.

Allowing homosexuals to marry-inherently a male/female institution.

Removal of the Privy Council -allowing judicial activism from politically appointed Supreme Court Judges.

Introduction of the Electoral Finance Act-making individuals and groups fearful of speaking out against the incumbent government.

Repeal of Section 59- the anti smacking bill made good parents criminals and allowed the State to further interfere in family life.

Working for Families-an oxymoron at best, made working families reliant on the State and led to the highest ever number of people on welfare in New Zealand's history.

Attacks on choices -of what individuals want to smoke, eat, watch and listen to and propaganda run constantly on all forms of media to brainwash the masses in feeling guilty if they made their choice to do what they wanted.

Relaxation of the definition of rape-putting innocent males accused in a worse position than a genuine rape victim and therefore lessening the importance of real rape victims.

State employees growing - a huge increase in State sector employees, leading to higher taxes increased red tape and a burden on the private sector

Increased personal tax- leading to families having to work harder and straining the "nuclear family". A deliberate intention to allow the Labour-led State to step in and take control through the Working for Families welfare package.

Interference in employment relationships-legislation passed to allow extra holidays, maternity leave,higher wages, de facto compulsory unions, crippling Kiwisaver and ACC legislation let government agencies take control of private business decisions for the first time in NZ history.


Stealing taxpayer money to buy 2005 Election- not since Watergate in the early 1970s have we seen such a political scandal in this country. NZ$824,000.00 taxpayer money illegally used (and covered up)to fund Labours 2005 election campaign and retrospective law passed to make that theft legal.

The Feminising of education-especially at the primary school level, boys have been largely sidelined to something of a curiosity. Normal rough and tumble play by boys has been hindered(bullrush has been banned!!) by feminist teachers with the same agenda as Clark and her Junta (love that word Junta) and feminist agendas have been given prominence.

The Feminist socialist agenda hatched by Ms Clark and her band of fellow travelers at Auckland University in the 1970s has changed New Zealand society, not for the better but to the detriment of our freedoms, the majority of its working citizens and former taxpaying retirees and to the societal ideal of the successful nuclear family.

This bunch of jack booted, slobbering, anti democratic carpet munchers haven't finished though and their agenda will only be completed when we start to look more like those poor souls in Sweden or the Swedish Model, on which Clark's socialist/feminist/communist model is based. The Swedes suffered under a similar regime for 65 years. That model is almost complete State control over every aspect of our lives.

Luckily though, the sensible among them have said fuck you arse holes we are taking back our lives and they have begun to turn the evil tide of socialism back.

You have a chance to turn the tide back come election day. Vote wisely my friends.

c Political Animal 2008










Saturday, 14 June 2008

I think I love you Sir Bobby

My faith in sensible, comical,intelligent "rich pricks" has been restored by Bob Jones and his promise to purposefully break the filthy, socialist anti democratic Electoral Finance Act by using his own hard earned dollars to mount an advertising campaign against the fascists in the Labour Party Government.

"This is the most despicable thing I think I have seen in my lifetime in this country, I really do, certainly by any Government... this overwhelms me. I cannot believe it happened." Bob Jones 2008

Having lived through the fascist Muldoon era of the late 1970s- to early 80s for Bobby to say that is really nailing the point home to those of you who are waivering on the EFA's intentions and the hatred that Labour have for the democratic system and those that value not only political freedom but their personal freedoms as well.


Political Animal Electoral Finance Act coverage


For those of you old enough to remember, Bob ran for office in the 1984 election just to oust National's Muldooon and succeeded. Sadly what he did back then by using his own money to run for office is now illegal because of the EFA and I guess that is one of the reasons for his current tilt at those in office.

Opposition from all sectors of the political sphere is growing against this Act and even Labour voters have been showing their opposition on all forms of media, especially the better blogs , talkback and when protesting around the country.

This blog supports Sir Bobby and will be keeping you all up to date in his fight to keep these knuckle dragging collectivists from inflicting more attacks on the freedoms of this country and its individuals.

c Political Animal 2008


Wednesday, 11 June 2008

Go ahead, make my Day


PC used to mean a big burly strong, tall, male Police Constable not politically correct.

The shooting of an Indian dairy owner by some low life Polynesians last weekend continued the PC garbage image of the police.

Instead of going in with guns immediately and shooting the bugger dead we have an innocent victim six feet under instead.

"Police protocol" apparently had to be followed and 30 minutes after the first call to the boys in blue they arrived. About 25 minutes too late.

This kind of nonsense was also followed after the Kahui slayings and when the young wild man Wallace went on a rampage with golf clubs and baseball bats and was rightly shot for his troubles before he injured or killed an innocent victim.

The constable who shot him was wrongly vilified by the criminal's family and the police gave him little backing.

The problem isn't the cops on the beat as such, but their political masters, the Labour Party, who have hamstrung the cops to such an extent they are too scared to do their duty-protect and serve the public.

When an excuse is made by the cops in the latest incident, that they wanted to make sure it was safe for them before they entered the dairy then you know you have a big problem. What about keeping the public safe, it is your job!!

It is time the head of the Police, Howard Broad, stepped down from his position because of the failure he clearly is. Appointed by Helen Clark herself, this man has been guilty of manipulating young constables in the past, not to breath test him after being found drunk at the wheel of his car. He is a disgrace and so is Clark for appointing him. She knew he was a drunk driver.

What we need is a Dirty Harry rather than a Deborah Harry at the top. New Zealanders are sick of being victims and it is time we took back the streets, in South Auckland and other desolate parts of the country.

Instead of reporting to base after a shooting to get approval to use guns, make sure their hair is parted on the left and their pants are not too tight and put innocent lives at risk, all we need is a Clint Eastwood to answer a victim's call with a few succinct sounds.

BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG.

We know what the alternative is and it is unacceptable to most of us.

c Political Animal 2008

JOHN BOSCAWEN: Freedom of Speech Trust Newsletter


Newsletter No.2 – Electoral Finance Act

By John Boscawen – Freedom of Speech Trust


10 June 2008


The Electoral Finance Act was passed by Parliament in December last year despite the objection of our Human Rights Commission, the New Zealand Law Society and all our major newspapers. The Act imposes restrictions on free speech far beyond what both the Human Rights Commission and the Electoral Commission considered reasonable. The Freedom of Speech Trust has been established to campaign for the Act’s repeal. Please feel free to circulate this newsletter to your friends and associates.

A tribute to Graham Stairmand

It is with great regret and sympathy that I acknowledge the very recent death of Graham Stairmand, President of the Grey Power Federation.

Graham was a strong opponent of the Electoral Finance Bill and he joined Garth McVicar, Rodney Hide and myself in a legal action against the Bill late last year. (See below).

His work for senior citizens was acknowledged by the presence at his funeral of the Minister for Senior Citizens Hon. Ruth Dyson, National’s spokesperson for Senior Citizens Sandra Goudie and MPs Peter Brown and Nicky Wagner.

I acknowledge his opposition to the Act, the support he gave me and the courage he showed in joining the legal challenge. I extend my deepest sympathy to his family.

Bill of Rights challenge against the Attorney General returned to High Court – 15 May

In the absence of a written constitution one of the most important protections we have to our democracy and to our rights to free speech is the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This Act requires the Attorney General to notify parliament of any bill that comes before the House that is “inconsistent” with the Act.


Almost everyone (and certainly the Human Rights Commission and the New Zealand Law Society) agrees that the Electoral Finance Bill was inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act when it was introduced last July, yet the Attorney General failed to notify the inconsistency. This is hard to comprehend given the Bill required every New Zealander to first sign a statutory declaration before they spent a single dollar expressing any political opinion in election year. Incredibly the Crown Law Office thought this was acceptable and not inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.


Late last year I, along with Garth McVicar, the late Graham Stairmand and Rodney Hide commenced legal proceedings in the High Court in Wellington seeking a declaration that the Attorney General failed in his duty. We sought urgency.

The Crown opposed urgency and sought to have the proceedings struck out – so, in the event they were successful we would have been denied the chance to argue our case.

Earlier this year we updated our Statement of Claim to argue that the Electoral Finance Act, (as passed) was also inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.


The strike out application was heard in a full day open court hearing at the Wellington High Court on 15 May. Justice Clifford reserved his decision.

Tauranga Protest – 3 May

On Saturday 3 May between 600-800 people marched through downtown Tauranga opposing the Electoral Finance Act. The protest march was an outstanding success and was the largest protest seen in Tauranga for several years – certainly since the 1981 Springbok Tour, if not before.


The protest was widely covered in the Bay of Plenty with extensive coverage in the Bay of Plenty Times – which featured it as its main front page story on the Thursday before the march.


For their coverage, see
http://www.bayofplentytimes.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3771539&msg=email link.


TV3 also covered a full report of the protest on their main 6.00pm news bulletin.

Other Protest Actions

In addition to the Tauranga protest we have organized two recent protests. In the first, 35 opponents of the Act protested outside the Rendezvous Hotel in Auckland (formerly the Carlton Hotel) on 23 May where the Prime Minister was addressing a post Budget luncheon. Our placards called for a repeal of the Act and a restoration of free speech.


In the second protest, a small group distributed leaflets to the attendees of the Green Party Conference in Auckland over Queen’s Birthday weekend. We highlighted the fact that the Green Party was proposing a closer working relationship with the Maori Party. The irony was that the Maori Party had been a strong opponent of the Electoral Finance Act. In his speech to parliament on the third final reading of the Bill, Maori Party MP Hone Harawira said:

‘Yes folks, money talks, but nothing talks quite like the truth and the truth about this bill is that it’s nothing but an arrogant dismissal by this Labour-led government to deny the citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand the right to participate in one of the fundamental rights of any so-called democratic society: How you elect your government……. Money is not what drives people to vote. It is the truth’.

Our message to the Green Party MPs and their supporters was to show some leadership, acknowledge that parliament did not fully understand what it was doing when the Act was passed and move to repeal it.


More protests, particularly in provincial areas, are planned for later this year.


Uncertainty of our Electoral Law and the likelihood on legal challenges post election day

When I first began my campaign of opposition to the Electoral Finance Bill my focus was the impact of the Act on free speech and the right of ordinary citizens to participate in the electoral process. The recent ruling by the High Court that the Engineering, Printing Manufacturing Union people may be prohibited from registering as a third party because it is involved with the management of the Labour Party is just one example of the restrictions the Act imposed.


However an equally important issue has emerged over recent months and that is the application of the Act to the MPs, themselves. This is well illustrated by the Chief Electoral Officer ruling that Trevor Mallard’s car, painted red and emblazoned with his name and Labour Party logos is an “election advertisement”. While the trivial issue may be the car failed to carry the authorization of Trevor Mallard’s financial agent, the much more important issue is that the cost of his election advertisement must be included in his $20,000 expense allowance for his election campaign in the Hutt electorate.


The problem he faces, is how much and what cost does he include? Certainly the cost of the paintwork but what about the running costs of the car? - a form of depreciation allowance?

Trevor Mallard is now faced with the very real prospect of having to run a very conservative campaign, and spending well within his $20,000 allowance. The alternative is to spend close to the $20,000 allowance, and to run the risk, assuming he retains his electoral seat, of being challenged in court post election day on the ground he did not fully return the full cost of his car’s advertising. This highlights the point made by Professor Bill Hodge speaking at our Auckland protest in March that the Act is uncertain and is likely to lead to a number of legal challenges post election day with the final result of the election not known until well into next year.


Continuing Campaign

If you are concerned about the implications of the Electoral Finance Act on our democracy and on free speech I would be grateful for any support you can give to bring about repeal of the Act. In the first instance you can forward this email to your friends and family.


Financial contributions can be made to Trust at PO Box 42-267, Orakei, Auckland, or direct to the Trust’s bank account 12-3252-0039335-00.

Regards


John Boscawen

Trustee – Freedom of Speech Trust

Email: john@boscawen.co.nz



Political Animal Electoral Finance Act coverage

The purpose of the Bill is clear

c Political Animal 2008

Cartoon c Stan Blanch 2008


New grab by Labour at taxpayer funds comes with fakes included

The latest grab at taxpayer funds to prop up the coffers of the Labour Party election fund is reminiscent of the NZ $824,000.00 of taxpayer dollars stolen to buy the 2005 election by funding an illegal pledge card.

The juicy irony this time though is that the sanctimonious fools at Labour passed the Electoral Finance Act in 2007 to make this sort of sneaky rorting of taxpayer funds illegal although now this pack of thieves wont have to pay us back, taking a lead from Winston Peters when he refused to repay the $158,000,00 of taxpayer funds he stole to finance his 2005 election.

Political Animal Electoral Finance Act coverage



The 2008 breach involves an expensive foldout junk mail booklet that will be dropped in budget stretched households all across the nation bestoling their meagre personal tax cuts and large welfare handouts to the undeserved listed in May's 2008 Budget.

This is not the first time Labour have broken their own law, being the first to break it at the beginning of 2008 and now having several cases before the police and Electoral Commission for subsequent law breaking.

It goes to show, that Labour continues to have little concern with the conventions of democracy, law, respect for public money and full disclosure when it comes to electoral funding.

Lessons from Owengate from earlier this year were not learnt. Donations of money were secretly made from Owen Glenn to Labour Party coffers, again breaching the spirit of the Electoral Finance Act and other electoral laws.

The real kicker is that the photo used on the front cover was of a fake American Family, and taken from stock photos from a website. The photo has also been used by Rudd's Labour Party in Australia to spiel their propaganda.

Labour Party President Mike Smith is behind this latest scandal and he said as much when he last breached the EFA that he would do it again, and he has.

The fact that a fake family was used to advertise Labour Party budget policies, sneakily using taxpayer funds to do so, shows voters,especially Labour Party ones, that the content contained in them is just as one dimensional, and lacking in morals as the method of letting the voting public know.

Lesson not learnt from 1999 when Helen Clark signed her name to a picture she said she painted.

Pass me the bucket.


Related Political Animal reading

Owen Glenn: Snouts in the trough
The Owen Glenn story: Singing the same tune but hitting a bum note
Labour Party Election funding murky at best
Labour first to break Electoral Finance Act

c Political Animal 2008

Monday, 9 June 2008

New Zealand needs an open democracy

During my recent visit to Bangkok, I watched a whole lot more TV, for one reason or another this is a sad fact but I wont go into that here!

While watching various news product from around the world, most of it politics, I was struck by how open and free the United States primaries and the US electoral system were. Where else in the world would two sides of the same political party, the Democrats, would go hammer and tongs for 16 months against each other, throw every filthy piece of dirt, tens of millions of dollars and say the most outrageous things that would be the end of the most stable of friendships in the real world, in the hope that one or other individual would be able to challenge John McCain come November 2008 for the US presidency, in the most powerful open democracy in the world.

Related Political Animal reading

NZ losses democratic freedom
Mike Moore turns the knife
List of MPs who voted for Act
Auckland Protest against EFB
The purpose of the Bill is clear



McCain himself was left open to similar scrutiny, his private life stripped bare for all to see, the very marrow at the centre of his soul was open to question.

No matter the politics that one follows or ones own "world view" one cannot deny that politics in America is in a very healthy state, as defined by the process of selection of candidates,not necessarily the quality of the candidates-you only have to look at the poor political and personal records of Hillary and Barry Obama to see the genesis of truth there.

While watching the box I also saw reported other forms of democracy. The brutal, murderous and secretive dictatorship of Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe, where politics is decided at the point of a gun and more recently through threat of starvation, Thailand's "benevolent dictatorship" or democracy with a bomb strapped to it in the Hamas led Palestine.

Lying somewhere in between those extremes lies the New Zealand democratic system. Sick from the dog wagging the tail, extremist lunatics like the global warming fanatics in the Green Party, the racist propaganda from the Maori Party, the complete nonsense from Winston Peter's and his New Zealand First Party and the evil Socialist intent of the ruling Labour Party Junta.

We have individuals like Margaret Wilson, Winston Peters, Sue Kedgly and Jeanette Fitzsimmons who were not voted into power by New Zealanders, but by their own party members and they have made life and death decisions based on their own ill conceived form of personal agenda politics on behalf of all0p New Zealanders.

The epitome of how closed our political landscape was the imposition of the Electoral Finance Act by Labour government politicians last year. Unlike the openness and strident debate that has been seen in America for the last 16 months the EFA has led to a fearfulness of opposition to speak out against the incumbent Labour government, by New Zealanders, the media and opposition politicians alike. The threat to an open democracy where debate can be had without fear or favour just doesn't exist in this country anymore.

While Mugabe and Hamas use extreme forms of control to influence political and personal behavior to sniffle debate and the freedoms of their respective political systems and retain political control, the New Zealand Labour Party have used legislation to achieve similar results.

For the future of a good democracy in New Zealand we must reform our nations political structure in a way more closely aligned to America, where free and open debate reign supreme, if not our future lies closer to Mugabe's Zimbabwe rather than the open democracy that we once had.

Removal of the MMP voting system and repeal of the Electoral Finance Act will allow such a democracy to flourish once again and give the nation the hope that it deserves.

c Political Animal 2008