JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT:’CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ (Department of Justice) in alleged fraud scheme’
CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ in alleged fraud schemeJane Burgermeister | April 29, 2011 at 3:13 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/puNtl-1cu
|
CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ in alleged fraud scheme
Thursday, April 28, 2011
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
(NaturalNews) CDC researcher Poul Thorsen, who famously headed up the “Denmark Study” that many claim disproved any link between autism and vaccines, has been indicted in Atlanta by a federal grand jury on charges of wire fraud, money laundering and defrauding research institutions of grant money.
Poul Thorson is a scientist who formerly worked for the CDC, and over the last several years, he oversaw millions of dollars in grant money that was used to conduct research to “prove” that vaccines have no link to autism. Dr. Thorson’s research papers include the famous “Danish Study” entitled Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/…)
This paper concludes that thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in vaccines around the world, has no statistically significant link to autism. It is one of the key papers used by vaccination proponents who argue that thimerosal is safe to inject into young children. That Poul Thorson’s credibility is now being called into question by a federal indictment of fraud and money laundering will, of course, have ripple effects throughout both the vaccine industries and autism support groups (more about that below).
Be sure to see our “Web of Alleged Fraud” chart which accompanies this article: http://www.naturalnews.com/files/We…
Learn more: http://naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html#ixzz1KvEeARD8
WHISTLEBLOWER WARNING! ‘..The NZ POLICE are planning a raid on Te Whanau a Apanui.’
30 April 2011
Hi folks!
I have received this information from more than one source…….
Please pass it on!
Penny Bright
______________________________________________________________________________________
I received this tip off and wish for public intervention to ensure it does not happen. Your investigation and insistence to the NZ police may make the difference.
___
…The NZ POLICE are planning a raid on Te Whanau a Apanui.
The Police are currently recruiting as many Maori within the Police Force to ‘soften’ the impact of the raid on this small Maori community.
Make NO MISTAKE this is a REPEAT of the… brutal scare mongering tactics that were applied to the TUHOE raids October 2007 and REMEMBER the shambles of that operation? TAX PAYERS money has been spent and is still being spent on an unfounded and unjustified case that is yet to produce any hard evidence or results.
The proposed raids on Te Whanau a Apanui are a direct response to a community who are trying to stand up for their own rights. They oppose oil drilling off their coast and this is how they are being treated! Their concern is for ALL New Zealanders, they know if Petrobas is granted permission they are the first in a line of many who will ravage much more than the East Coast. We need to show our support.
STATE ENFORCED RAIDS WILL BECOME REGULAR EVENTS IF WE DO NOT OPPOSE THEM
Our source is very reliable as they were approached by the police force to join the mission but refused as they whakapapa to Te Whanau a Apanui. THIS IS SERIOUS.
All phones to the east coast community are tapped and people are being marked.
This is outrageous and unnecessary.
SEND THIS to EVERYONE you know. If you could get in touch with as many media, radio, paper, reporters as you can that would be great. The NZ Public deserve to know what is going on and we need to blow their covers before it happens.
For all further enquiries please contact:
Dayle 021378770
The Law Of Mother Earth: Behind Bolivia’s Historic Bill – Written by Nick Buxton
The Law Of Mother Earth: Behind Bolivia’s Historic Bill
… this article showed what the real challenge is, changing the
extraction model to something else, the question is – what is the else?
Written by Nick Buxton
Posted: 28 April 2011 10:59
A new law expected to pass in Bolivia mandates a fundamental ecological reorientation of the nation’s economy and society.
Indigenous and campesino (small-scale farmer) movements in the Andean nation of Bolivia are on the verge of pushing through one of the most radical environmental bills in global history. The “Mother Earth” law
under debate in Bolivia’s legislature will almost certainly be approved, as it has already been agreed to by the majority governing party, Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS).
The law draws deeply on indigenous concepts that view nature as a sacred home, the Pachamama (Mother Earth) on which we intimately depend. As the law states, “Mother Earth is a living dynamic system made up of the undivided community of all living beings, who are all interconnected, interdependent and complementary, sharing a common destiny.”
The law would give nature legal rights, specifically the rights to life and regeneration, biodiversity, water, clean air, balance, and restoration. Bolivia’s law mandates a fundamental ecological reorientation of Bolivia’s economy and society, requiring all existing and future laws to adapt to the Mother Earth law and accept the ecological limits set by nature. It calls for public policy to be guided by Sumaj Kawsay (an indigenous concept meaning “living well,”
or living in harmony with nature and people), rather than the current focus on producing more goods and stimulating consumption.
In practical terms, the law requires the government to transition from non-renewable to renewable energy; to develop new economic indicators that will assess the ecological impact of all economic activity; to carry out ecological audits of all private and state companies; to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions; to develop policies of food and renewable energy sovereignty; to research and invest resources in energy efficiency, ecological practices, and organic agriculture; and to require all companies and individuals to be accountable for environmental contamination with a duty to restore damaged environments.
The law will be backed up by a new Ministry of Mother Earth, an inter- Ministry Advisory Council, and an Ombudsman. Undarico Pinto, leader of the 3.5 million-strong campesino movement CSUTCB, which helped draft
the law, believes this legislation represents a turning point in Bolivian law: “Existing laws are not strong enough. This will make industry more transparent. It will allow people to regulate industry at national, regional, and local levels.”
However, there is also strong awareness among Bolivia’s social movements-in particular for the Pacto de Unidad (Unity Pact), a coalition of the country’s five largest social movements and a key force behind the law-that the existence of a new law will not be enough to prompt real change in environmental practices.
A major obstacle is the fact that Bolivia is structurally dependent on extractive industries. Since the discovery of silver by the Spanish in the 16th Century, Bolivia’s history has been tied to ruthless exploitation of its people and its environment in order to transfer wealth to the richest countries; poet and historian Eduardo Galeano’s
famous book Open Veins draws largely on the brutal story of how Bolivia’s exploitation fuelled the industrial expansion of Europe. In 2010, 70 percent of Bolivia’s exports were still in the form of minerals, gas, and oil. This structural dependence will be very difficult to unravel.
Moreover, there is a great deal of opposition from powerful sectors, particularly mining and agro-industrial enterprises, to any ecological laws that would threaten profits. The main organization of soya producers, which claimed that the law “will make the productive sector inviable,” is one of many powerful groups who have already come out against the law. Within the government, there are many ministries and officials that would also like the law to remain nothing more than a visionary but ultimately meaningless statement.
Raul Prada, one of the advisors to Pacto de Unidad, explained that the Mother Earth law was developed by Bolivia’s largest social movements in response to their perceived exclusion from policy-making by the MAS
government, led by indigenous President Evo Morales. They have generally supported MAS since its resounding election victory in 2005, but were frustrated by what they saw as a lack of progress. Rather than merely expressing their concern, these movements-comprised mainly of indigenous and farming communities-are pro-actively developing a series of new laws. Their first priority was the passage of the Mother Earth Law, based on a commitment made at the historic global Peoples Conference on Climate Change held in Bolivia in April 2010. To some surprise, the diverse movements soon developed a consensual agreement that was supported by MAS legislators.
Raul Prada notes that, even with significant pressure from social movements, transitioning to an economy based on the concept Vivir Bien will not be easy. “It is going to be difficult to transit from an extractive economy. We clearly can’t close mines straight away, but we can develop a model where this economy has less and less weight. It
will need policies developed in participation with movements, particularly in areas such as food sovereignty. It will need redirection of investment and policies towards different ecological models of development. It will need the cooperation of the international community to develop regional economies that complement each other.”
Ultimately, though, this is a challenge far bigger than Bolivia, says Prada: “Our ecological and social crisis is not just a problem for Bolivia or Ecuador; it is a problem for all of us. We need to pull together peoples, researchers, and communities to develop real concrete alternatives so that the dominant systems of exploitation don’t just continue by default. This is not an easy task, but I believe with international solidarity, we can and must succeed.”
Nick Buxton wrote this article for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media organization that fuses powerful ideas with practical actions. He spent four years in Bolivia learning from movements fighting for social and environmental justice.
‘Public Watchdog’ Howick by-election candidate Penny Bright has launched ‘partial rate$ revolt’ against Auckland $upercity planned 4.9% rate increase.
Penny Bright Independent Candidate Howick by-election:
POSTCARD campaign to National PM John Key threatening a ‘partial rate$ revolt’ against Auckland (Supercity) Council proposed 4.9% rate increase has begun.
National Prime Minister John Key supports ‘partial privatisation’ of state assets.
I support a partial ‘rate$ revolt.
Postcards addressed to National Prime Minister John Key, considering ‘not paying this proposed Auckland
Council 4.9% rate increase,were enthusiastically signed by some of the hundreds of attendees at today’s launch of the ‘Mana Party’.
The Auckland Council apparently has received only 1800 submissions to their Draft Annual Plan, where people had an opportunity to comment and make submissions – if they knew anything about it!
(Submissions closed on 1 April 2011).
Over 4000 ‘postcards’ have been printed – which people can sign and send (no stamp required) are going like ‘hotcakes’ !
People are signing them and taking more postcards away for others to sign and send to Prime Minister John Key.
The wording of this ‘postcard’ is as follows:
“This new Auckland (Supercity) Council is now proposing a 4.9% rates increase!
(While reducing most former Council’s prompt rates payment discounts.)
Where are the ‘economies of scale’ resulting from forcibly abolishing our eight former councils and replacing them with this ‘corporate controlled organisation’?
National promised to ‘consult with Aucklanders once the findings of the Royal Commission were known’:
http://www.national.org.nz/files/2008/local_government_policy<http://www.national.org.nz/Article.aspx?ArticleId=28830>
You didn’t. Citizens were denied our lawful right to a ‘binding poll’ and now Auckland is being run ‘like a BIG business, by BIG business , for BIG business’.
Bigger contract$ for fewer but bigger contractors? Serving whose interests?
The ‘books’ are NOT open.
We don’t know the name of the consultants/contractors; the scope, term and value of these contracts.
WHO IS IN CHARGE?
Where is the ‘due diligence’, ‘cost-benefit analysis’ and ‘transparency’?
CUT rates by cutting out contractors and bring core Council services back ‘in-house’!
I pledge to consider not paying this proposed Auckland Council 4.9% rate increase.
NAME:_________________________
ADDRESS:______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
SIGNED:_____________________________________DATE:______________
(Please advise the Auckland Council forthwith – submissions closed on 1 April 2011)
___________________________________________________________________________
I intend to distribute these ‘postcards’ widely both in the Howick Ward, and at upcoming events where I believe there should be considerable interest, including the ‘March for Social Justice, which is being held this Sunday
I am also planning to work with others to distribute the above-mentioned postcards in the Epsom electorate, where I believe those living in high-valued properties should be suitably horrified with this proposed ‘$upercity’ rates increase – given that the public were led to believe that this forced amalgamation of eight Auckland councils was going to be somehow ‘better’ for ratepayers.
I remember how, on the recent Auckland Council Mayoral campaign trail, former Auckland City Council Mayor John Banks, now National Party/ACT Party proposed Epsom candidate stated how he enthusiastically supported from ‘Day One’ – this Auckland ‘Supercity’.
What I want to know is why would (former?) National Party supporters would want to feed the mouth that bites them?
The answer is simple – cut rates by cutting out the consultants and private contractors and return core council services to ‘in-house’ council provision”
I now have evidence which shows that the books are NOT open and how the contracting appears to be ‘out of control’. This is in the form of a recent Local Government Official Information Act reply from the Auckland Council on this pivotal issue of private sector contracts.
Penny Bright
Judicially recognised ‘Public Watchdog’ on Metrowater, water and
Auckland regional governance matters.
‘World Water Warrior’ – NZ attendee at World Water Forum Kyoto 2003.
Auckland Mayoral candidate 2010.
Botany by-election candidate 2011
Howick by-election candidate 2011
‘Anti-corruption campaigner’
Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference (Brisbane) 2009
Attendee: Transparency International 14th Anti-Corruption Conference
(Bangkok) 2010
Ph (09) 846 9825
021 211 4 127
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz
www.stopthesupercity.org.nz
www.stopprivatisation.org.nz
_________________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Auckland Council 4.9% Draft Annual Plan proposal.
http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/PlansPoliciesPublications/annual_plan/Pages/home2.aspx
<http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/PlansPoliciesPublications/annual_plan/Pages/home2.aspx>
‘Transition Rate
Amalgamates the different rates you previously paid in 2010/2011
including the Auckland Regional Council rate but excluding those for water
supply and wastewater.
Proposed increase from 2010/2011 4.9%
Wastewater rate
Applies to properties that had wastewater or sewerage rate for 2010/2011 and
are connected to Watercare Services Limited network.
Proposed increase from 2010/2011 4.5%
Penalties for late payments of rates are proposed to be 10%.
A discount of 1.5% will be offered for the full payment of rates by the
first installment date.
_______________________________________________________________________
NBR 1 March 2011 article
Amount spent on consultants in 2008
$62 million
http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/news.asp?pageID=2145848073&RefID=2141732572
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10512497
By Bernard Orsman<http://www.nzherald.co.nz/bernard-orsman/news/headlines.cfm?a_id=67>
5:00 AM Monday May 26, 2008
Auckland City chief executive David Rankin and senior managers have bent the
rules to hand out millions of dollars in consultancy work to former staff,
official papers show.
Mr Rankin, first as finance director and then chief executive, has overseen
payment of $8.7 million over the past four years in consultancy fees to 29
former staff and companies linked to former staff.
The news follows revelations last week that council spending on consultants
is budgeted to soar to $62.2 million this year, up 9.6 per cent on the $56.7
million budgeted.
NBR: ‘Hide gone, Brash to lead ACT’ + my comments
Hide gone, Brash to lead ACT
UPDATED 12 NOON: Rodney Hide has resigned as Act leader and Don Brash is to take over after becoming a member of the party this morning.
His party leadership will be formalised at an ACT party caucus meeting on Saturday. He will be a leader outside Parliament.
At a joint media conference in Auckland, Dr Brash said it wasn’t the time to comment on plans for the party, but said New Zealand’s indebtedness is one of his most serious concerns.
A key objective of Act under his leadership will be to raise the income levels of all New Zealanders, he said.
Dr Brash said he and Mr Hide had been friends for over 15 years and that if Mr Hide hadn’t won the Epsom seat in 2008 the country could still have Helen Clark as a leader.
“For that New Zealand owes him considerable gratitude,” Dr Brash said.
Mr Hide will remain as an MP until the November 26 election. He said he would like to stay on as a Minister (he is Minister of Local Government, Minister for Regulatory Reform and Associate Minister of Education) but that that was a matter for Prime Minister John Key.
Mr Hide told reporters he didn’t see the coup as a kick in the guts on a personal level and that he was supportive of anything which helped Act succeed even if there was no place for him.
“A change of leadership is never easy but we’ve managed it,” he said.
Asked at the press conference whether Act had lost its focus on its core economic message, Dr Brash recalled a conversation he had had a few years ago with Mr Hide.
“He said I give a speech every day of the week about the economy and get no coverage. I do something about taxi bills and it gets on the front page.”
Mr Hide said he was planning to stay with the Act Party but wouldn’t comment on his future in Epsom.
“Rodney and I have been friends for more than 15 years,” Dr Brash said. “In the last week or so I have put our friendship to considerable strain.”
He said Mr Hide has “consistently espoused the values for which Act is most known” but defended his earlier comments that Mr Hide’s brand had become “toxic”, which he blamed partly on a “media witch-hunt.”
The leadership change follows a public challenge to Mr Hide’s leadership by Dr Brash, a former National Party leader and ex-Reserve Bank Governor.
Earlier today, Dr Brash was “cautiously optimistic” he had the numbers to oust Mr Hide.
While media reported he had achieved this by turning the vote of Dunedin-based MP Hilary Calvert, the 70-year-old former National Party leader said he “doesn’t know that for sure.”
He needed at least three of Act’s five MPs to back him and, as of then, had two of them — Sir Roger Douglas and Heather Roy.
Deputy leader John Boscawen supports Mr Hide and, until yesterday, Ms Calvert was committed as well.
Dr Brash yesterday met Sir Roger and Ms Calvert in Auckland to explain his reasons for wanting to replace Mr Hide, whom Dr Brash said had a tainted brand and would lead Act to certain defeat in the November 26 general election.
Mr Hide yesterday posted an open letter on Facebook, saying he had been surprised by Dr Brash’s weekend announcement that he was going to seek the leadership of ACT.
He said he had previously invited Dr Brash to join the party and had discussed co-leadership, and Dr Brash had turned him down.
“We reviewed various options on how we could work together in a collaborative way to build a strong party for the future,” Mr Hide said.
“Don then wrote me a letter setting out his decision to turn down the opportunity. The letter alarmed me because I thought it was a letter designed to be leaked, as it was especially one-sided.”
The Prime Minister, who is in England this week, said yesterday he could see no reason why Mr Hide would not be able to keep his ministerial roles if Dr Brash took over as leader.
Print
Email 
Share
MY COMMENTS:
This is the sort of ‘democracy’ that ANZACs were supposed to have died for?
Where the ‘will of the people’ is supposed to be ‘the basis for the authority of government’?
Where Don Bra$h, who apparently has the anonymous big business(?) cash – takes over the leadership of a party he’s not even a member of?
In order to try and achieve a National/National (oops! ACT) coalition government to force through more Rogernomic$ type reforms?
‘Shonky’ corporate raider John Key plus ‘Don the Dictator’?
‘Don the Dictator- who apparently has no respect for lawful due process in his ACT /National takeover – so how much respect is he going to have for the ‘RULE OF LAW’ inside Parliament?
Oh yes!
How convenient.
Parliament cannot be held accountable to the law because it is ‘sovereign’ and has the power to change the law.
So – why bother with Select Committee processes at all?
Why not pass EVERYTHING under ‘urgency’?
This current National/ACT government has got this railroaded Rogernomic$-style blitzkrieg approach to the passing of legislation off pat…………..
(hmmm….. where has this track been gone down before??)
Why doesn’t Dictator Don just complete his new ‘unbridled power’ look – by growing some facial hair above his top lip?
Why doesn’t Dictator Don then practice his new ‘unbridled power’ walk – swinging his outstretched straight arms without bothering to bend his knees?
Concerned?
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!
Sunday 1 May
Assemble 2pm
Opposite Britomart
Penny Bright
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
“John Banks as the probable candidate for the Epsom electorate? Has the new coup leader Colonel Brash underestimated the average IQ of the Epsom electors?”
Fair question.
So who IS going to stand in Epsom for
National/National (oops! ACT)?
Who is Don the Dictator/ Mr Burns going to select?
Who do the money bag$ behind Don the Dictator/ Mr Burns want?
YAY!
‘Democracy’ according to the ‘golden rule’ – those who have the gold – make the rules?
‘Clean, green’ NZ – the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ – yeah right!
Not happy?
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!
Sunday 1 May
2pm
Assemble opposite Britomart
Queen St
Auckland
Penny Bright
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________
Comments and questions
News Flash?Labour wants” BIG DON” to challenge “WEE PHIL”as seen that fortune favours the brave.Just kidding as most of THE LIEBOUR party are shivers looking for some easy picking spines to crawl up.
What a disgraceful bit of carpetbagging that reveals Act to be a true joke now – you don’t even have to be a member to take it over. As a 3 time Act voter I’m off to a real party this election.
i agree with meow here… Helen stole the Testosterone from Goff, Broad, and the minister of wine and cheese. Shes one verile old girl..
Haaa!! ACT and the Nutty Professor deserve each other. What a circus!
And to have Hilary Calvert holding the balance of power is a complete joke. She has all the calibre of a pin hole!
A real party? You can see one?
I wonder what Rodney will do now? Normally these kind of people from Act (Prebble an example) go to work at a Governance role with property development and construction firms that they have lobbied for in the house. But I think Rodney’s mates are all know insolvent.
Too bad.
Maybe they could all meet at McDonald’s and have a party there!
Fresh leadership, and some pro middle class simplifications in the government will be welcome. Lets hope for a powerful right wing to balance out this bloated fat belly government we have.
Slimy Brash stricks again. How could you even trust the guy! His current escort would have to be a bit worried as he’s probably looking to update his lady as well. He obviously can’t live in the real world and has to try and return to the public trough once again in order to survive.
Don Brash is better than Hide. Lets hope National loses some of its majority in this election because there are alot of people in the National party I dislike. I didn’t vote for a Key/English government then and I wont now.
Rodney had better check the names on the knives in his back: Michael Bassett, Sir Roger Douglas, Heather Roy, Don Brash, Peter Tashkoff. Quite a collection.
Hopefully Brash will be more effective at drawing attention to & putting presure on National’s keep borrowing & hope strategy. OK for a short term, but clearly the fallout from the GFC has a while yet to go, before govt revenue will be what it was in 2007-8.
Don Brash with his “one law for all” will have my vote this year.
Brash – almost reptilian – in his almost alien-like disregard for his fellow humans …
Mr ‘family man’ does in his’ good friend’ Hide – for the sake of the country.
Survival of the fittest society here we come.
What a complete ideological fanatic he is …
Who cares? What a complete Circus 🙂 Don the Joke replacing Rod the Bully. ACT was gonesky at the next election and nothing’s changed except that surely even fewer people will be prepared to admit they support the party of few lead by the geriatric sandbaggers!
This is great for the ACT Party and and great for NZ. We need more of a right wing govt to keep govt finances under control, less spending, less taxing, smaller govt and more private enterprise.
Labour and the greens have it backwards!
The formula of a Labour govt is to tax high and increase govt spending. The poor and the middle class love this mantra, as they see more benefits coming their way and securing the vote for Labour. This is short sighted. This model just locks people into dependence on the govt and not actually helping the poor and middle class.
These benefits that Labour use as bribes for the poor and middle class votes are vile.
The benefits are not free, you as a taxpayer pay for them.
Would we not all be better off, poor and middle income included, if we had a flat tax of 15% ? and were expected to look after ourselves!
I think so.
At the moment NZ is addicted to other peoples money via the govt. redistribution system.
How about we all just keep more of our own money via a flat 15% tax and get rid of the huge govt deciding how our tax is spent.
Humm, more freedom, more money, less govt, less tax.
Its pritty blatant this system would work far better.
For the record: Last election I voted for labour, because they claim to ‘look after the people’
This election it will be ACT.
Why: Because I believe I can spend my money better than the govt will ever spend it, period!
So its best left in my hands! For me to choose how I spend it.
Give me my freedom and my money!
Nice comments section you have here NBR. My favourite part was where it was respectful, to the point and non-rabid.
/sarcasm
Hey BVJ Martinborough…
Geriatrics’ votes are just as valid as inexperienced name-callers’ votes !!!
And there’s more of us than you……
to be honest the Labour and National parties were the same last year with Key using the line prosperity, opportunity and security – taken out from the last budget under Helen Clark.
Bye Bye ACT. National under Brash came close’ to winning the previous election only because traditional labour voters turned away to the Maori party/greens, and were not attracted to Barsh – this is just PR spin that lazy media have continued. ACT will now disappear – Brash is a fool who has lived off taxes his whole life (as has Douglas – what business has this man created?). It is a pity that Rodney did not have th eballs to fight on…
What does ACT mean?
Is it ASSORTED CRETINS and TROGLODYTES?
I would appreciate knowing if I am correct?
This is the sort of ‘democracy’ that ANZACs were supposed to have died for?
Where the ‘will of the people’ is supposed to be ‘the basis for the authority of government’?
Where Don Bra$h, who apparently has the anonymous big business(?) cash – takes over the leadership of a party he’s not even a member of?
In order to try and achieve a National/National (oops! ACT) coalition government to force through more Rogernomic$ type reforms?
‘Shonky’ corporate raider John Key plus ‘Don the Dictator’?
‘Don the Dictator- who apparently has no respect for lawful due process in his ACT /National takeover – so how much respect is he going to have for the ‘RULE OF LAW’ inside Parliament?
Oh yes!
How convenient.
Parliament cannot be held accountable to the law because it is ‘sovereign’ and has the power to change the law.
So – why bother with Select Committee processes at all?
Why not pass EVERYTHING under ‘urgency’?
This current National/ACT government has got this railroaded Rogernomic$-style blitzkrieg approach to the passing of legislation off pat…………..
(hmmm….. where has this track been gone down before??)
Why doesn’t Dictator Don just complete his new ‘unbridled power’ look – by growing some facial hair above his top lip?
Why doesn’t Dictator Don then practice his new ‘unbridled power’ walk – swinging his outstretched straight arms without bothering to bend his knees?
Concerned?
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!
Sunday 1 May
Assemble 2pm
Opposite Britomart
Penny Bright
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
Very true about national and labour, but this comment has no relevance to my arguments for why ACT is the best Party for NZ, small govt, less tax, more money and more freedom.
I Believe ACT is the only real option, national is too nice and too carefree about borrowing millions on behalf of the tax payer, thats you and me, they are taking out debt on our behalf and I dont really agree with that.
If Labour were the govt we would have 39% taxt rates, more people moving to oz and higher borrowing, then in a few years we would be in the position of Ireland, Greece etc. I just dont trust them, I trust my self and fellow NZers to be more frugal with the money.
As a general rule,
No matter if you are a Nation, a business or a charitable organisation. The finances have to stack up other wise you just die.
Everything must operate in a commercially viable fashion.
This is my view, and I dont expect everyone to agree with me. But I do think any man should be able to see that facts on the table and make an informed decision.
Limited Govt. and a more free country definitely have its merits, and are you really that happy with the status quo. Im not.
Key’s winning word was ASPIRATIONAL which contrasted starkly with Helen’s ” You will do as you are told – IS THAT CLEAR!” remember the shower heads? !!!
John Banks as the probable candidate for the Epsom electorate? Has the new coup leader Colonel Brash underestimated the average IQ of the Epsom electors?
The only name Rodney needs to check on the knife in his back is his own, for taking his girlfriend on an overseas trip at the taxpayers expense. He almost destroyed ACT as a consequence and this is the end result. He has no one to blame except himself.
Hey Penny, just imagine how many extra votes ACT are going to get at the next election. My prediction somewhere between 5-10%. It’s not curtains for ACT by any stretch, but it is a nasty jagged pill for the political left – hence your frenetically incoherent ramblings. Sorry darling, your beloved left wing are on the u-bend out to Mangere this election, and for a very long time afterwards. You might have to get a job.
Regarding dictatorships, aren’t the vast majority of historical & current dictatorships left wing?
Bring on November has it right – Vote ACT, and aim for limited government, less tax, and more freedom.
yes thats true, but his whiny voice was a contrast too. also his nose.
“John Banks as the probable candidate for the Epsom electorate? Has the new coup leader Colonel Brash underestimated the average IQ of the Epsom electors?”
Fair question.
So who IS going to stand in Epsom for
National/National (oops! ACT)?
Who is Don the Dictator/ Mr Burns going to select?
Who do the money bag$ behind Don the Dictator/ Mr Burns want?
YAY!
‘Democracy’ according to the ‘golden rule’ – those who have the gold – make the rules?
‘Clean, green’ NZ – the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ – yeah right!
Not happy?
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!
Sunday 1 May
2pm
Assemble opposite Britomart
Queen St
Auckland
Penny Bright
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
It is truly a sad indictment on our political structure, why do we & should we place any value on a party with five active members, thanks be to the great unwashed who swallowed the MMP bait hook line and sinker all those many years ago…we would have a lot less of this nonsense without it.
It is truly a sad indictment on our political structure, why do we & should we place any value on a party with five active members, thanks be to the great unwashed who swallowed the MMP bait hook line and sinker all those many years ago…we would have a lot less of this nonsense without it.
the legislative process isn’t your cup of tea Penny? It doesn’t deliver outcomes you like?
Thankfully there is a better solution: repeal all legislation, abolish parliament, and leave the people free. No more crony capitalism. No more rule of men. No more politicl elections for Penny to stand for.
Penny – there are so many flaws in your logic i don’t even know where to start. What do you tell your kids you actually do during a day? Actually, I suspect you don’t have any – your types never do.
I’m with Paddy and “bring on november”.
It’s time for a lot less of the borrow , spend and hope policies.
Penny, good luck with your march on Sunday.
Your website states this. . . .
~
PROVIDE COUNCIL SERVICES ‘IN-HOUSE’ AND CUT OUT ALL THOSE PRIVATE ‘PIGGIES -IN -THE -MIDDLE’!
If private sector provision is SO ‘efficient’ – then how come over the last 20 years rates have gone up – not down?)
~
I suggest you look at this video for a much better structure for local councils
http://reason.tv/video/show/sandy-springs-georgia-the-city
Its about a City that outsourced everything to the private sector, and they are now winning! Winning at local govt means the residents are happy and these people are!
Im pleased other readers have pulled you up on your incoherent ramblings .
Also a thanks to Paddy for agreeing on my post !
Look at the facts people and make your own decisions, you will soon see that more freedom and limited govt stacks up as the best option and we should embrace this. NZ could transform into world leaders of running small state sector and flourishing private enterprise. Let private enterprise create the jobs not the borrowed stimulus package that incurs interest for our kids to pay. Short term thinking again.
Join me on my ‘March Against Democracy’ or MAD courtesy of the newly formed “Coalition of Social Justice”.
This re-imagined (reified) new “theory of justice” demands that men counteract the “injustice” of nature by instituting the most obscenely unthinkable injustice among men: deprive “those favored by nature” (i.e., the talented, the intelligent, the creative) of the right to the rewards they produce (i.e., the right to life)—and grant to the incompetent, the stupid, the slothful a right to the effortless enjoyment of the rewards they could not produce, could not imagine, and would not know what to do with.
Yay for Social Justice just like Soviet Russia, Maoist China, Fidel’s Cuba and ALL the other places that this system of (a)morality has killed…I mean…supported the Public!
Sorry but I will support ACT now that Don is in charge. ACT need to stick to the core message regarding the economy.
I think ACT should get around 4%-8% support at the next election. Interested to see the party list on who they will bring in, sounds like Banks will be there… who else?
I don’t mind if its Brash or hide or Whocares. Same as I don’t mind if its Goff, Mallard, or Nocare, in Labour, same with greens. But can one of these parties who keep saying National is doing this and that wrong, tell me what is the right way to govern the country. Mr Brash, Goff etc, if your not part of the solution you are the problem.
This will go down in history as a sad day for New Zealand. Brash will bleed votes from National and increase fears from those in the centre about what a National/Brash coalition will do. Maori will refuse to work with Brash, but fear that they might, will boost support for Hone First. Labour will pick up votes as a result of uncertainty and fear of a move to the right. Throw a resurgent NZ First into the mix and we could have a one term Key government. Why? Because Don Brash and his friends don’t accept that no one credible likes their extremist policy prescription. Dumb, dumb, dumb
A considered and, in my view, intelligent assessment with which I heartily agree.
Coming?
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE!
Sunday 1 May
2pm
Assemble opposite Britomart
Queen St
Auckland
Penny Bright
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
NOW if only Labour had the same balls… oh yeah thats right Helen took them to NY for safe keeping!!!
epic funny !!!!!!!!
As someone on a reasonable income and with some judicious savings for my retirement I can not agree with you. Try paying for everything (health, education etc) on a miserable $15/hr. You can work your arse off and still be no better off. The real problem is that the wealthy have been accumulating more and more of the resources in fewer and fewer hands manly due to convincing governments to reduce their tax and regulations. Take a look at the Scandinavian countries – the reason that they have less crime and more social coherence is because they do not have these huge disparities in income and they provide social services for their people (I have visited a few times and they are much nicer countries to be than here!). How do they manage it? They PAY TAX
So true
Press Release: Professor Jane Kelsey: Call of Solicitor-General to Stay Case against Urewera 18
27 April 2011
www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1104/S00326/call-of-solicitor-general-to-stay-case-against-urewera-18.htm
Call of Solicitor-General to Stay Case against Urewera 18
Wednesday, 27 April 2011, 9:08 am
Press Release: Professor Jane Kelsey
Call of Solicitor-General to Stay Case against Urewera 18
Solicitor-General David Collins has been urged to exercise his discretion to stay the proceedings against the Urewera 18 who are due to face trial in early May, more than three and a half years after their arrest in police raids on 15 October 2007.
The request came in a letter co-sponsored by lawyers Moana Jackson of Ngati Kahungunu and Professor Jane Kelsey from the University of Auckland. It was endorsed by over 150 prominent Maori, academics and social justice campaigners.
“The accused, their whanau and the whole of Tuhoe have had this hanging over them for almost four years, unable to live a normal life. They already carry the label of ‘terrorists’ forever”, Moana Jackson said.
“Now they face the human and financial costs of a twelve week trial in Auckland. To achieve what? To vindicate the police’s anti-terrorism powers and the waste of millions of dollars trying to prove there was some terrorist plot based in Tuhoe?”, Mr Jackson asked.
“The situation is totally out of hand. The Solicitor-General needs to step in and bring the whole wretched episode to a close, as they did with the Bastion Point prosecutions in 1978.”
Professor Kelsey observed that “The efficiency of the court system has already been put ahead of their right to trial by jury. This is not a clinical, technical case; it requires people’s common sense about what was actually going on”.
“The right to a jury trial is fundamental to this case. And if the publicity means there can’t be an untainted jury, as the Solicitor-General himself said in the contempt case against Fairfax and the *Dominion Post*,[1]<#_ftn1>then the Crown needs to stay the proceedings.”
“The credibility of the justice system is at stake”, said Professor Kelsey.
*******Solicitor-General David Collins, QC
Crown Law
Wellington, New Zealand
Dear Dr Collins:
We write to you about an urgent matter of justice concerning the prosecution of 18 people for firearms and organised criminal group charges resulting from Police Operation 8 that culminated in the so-called ‘Terror Raids’ of 15 October 2007. All of these 18 defendants have pleaded ‘not guilty’.
In September 2008 during the Crown prosecution of Fairfax Ltd and Dominion Post editor Tim Pankhurst for contempt of court, you said:
- “The consequences of the respondent’s articles is that they have undermined the chances of any defendant successfully advancing a defence of lawful, proper and sufficient purpose.”
Given this statement and a number of others that you made during the course of that trial, you clearly believe it is impossible for the defendants to have access to their principal defence to the arms charges, aside from individual issues of identification.
As importantly, the prosecution has been underway for nearly four years, a delay utterly unacceptable in a society that places a high value on the right to a speedy trial. In this case, the preliminary hearing did not take place until nearly a year after the initial arrests, with pre-trial applications another year later. The lives of these people have been tortuously on-hold for 1200+ days awaiting their fate.
Justice delayed is justice denied suggests that ultimately the biggest loser is the Crown. With such inordinately long delays, New Zealanders will come to believe that the rule of law is impotent and unable to protect their rights—thereby failing in its primary function.
Due process of law clamours for fundamental fairness, justice and liberty. We are convinced that no justice can be served by the continued prosecution of this case by the Crown. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to use your discretion to withdraw the Crown prosecution and issue a stay of the proceedings. You have the power to bring a just end to this sorry episode.
Yours sincerely,
Jane Kelsey, Professor
Faculty of Law
University of Auckland
Moana Jackson
Ngati Kahungungu and Ngati Porou
Director, Nga Kaiwhakamarama I Nga Ture
Additional signatories attached
_____________________________________________________________________________________
www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/index.asp
THE PURGE OF INCONVENIENT LAW
20 April 2011
The denial of trial by jury to the eighteen Operation 8 defendants by judicial decree is now before the New Zealand Supreme Court. Though the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, Judicature Act and Crimes Act all exhort the right to elect trial by jury, do not hold your breath that the Supreme Court will uphold the law and reverse the lower court decisions.
At the fore is the ease to which the still infant Supreme Court has repeatedly cast aside statutory guarantees to trial by jury in the most spurious fashion. The lower court reasoning that a jury would use improper reasoning in its decision-making against these 18 defendants sounds too Orwellian to stand in law. But the Supreme Court has been masterful in creating fictitious reasons why such laws have not mattered in the past.
Variously the Supreme Court has stated issues are too complex for juries, trials too long or, simply, made a broad reference that trial by juries are not fair to juries or judges, or have been denied in some case in some other country.
The seminal right to jury, which has been a linchpin in the English legal system for 800 years, is being destroyed by judicial fiat in New Zealand. If you think the effects will be benign, or even positive, consider the following Supreme Court decisions.
In 2009, the Supreme Court, when prohibiting trial by jury in Wenzel v Queen, surreptitiously tagged on an irrelevant opinion to obscure contravention of clear statute when it ruled “The proposed grounds of appeal are quite hopeless. First of all, it is an impossible argument that a fair trial requires a trial by jury.” The appeal did not state “fairness” as a ground: it relied upon Bill of Rights Act and Crimes Act guarantees. If this was not troubling enough, the Supreme Court relied upon a Canadian case, R v Lee, where the defendant did not show up for his jury trial, and then was denied one, as grounds why its decision to prohibit jury was consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Wenzel was facing 7 years in prison. In the subsequent judge-alone trial, he was sentenced to 5 years by District Court Judge Epati. In later overturning the verdict and ordering a new trial, the Court of Appeal pulled no punches in stating the Judge had failed fundamental principles of fairness and logic in finding Wenzel guilty. Equally troubling, the Judge dismissed charges against the lawyer who was Mr Wenzel’s co-defendant and gave that lawyer name suppression without justification and without providing reasons. Fairness by judge-alone?
In Solicitor General v Siemer last year, the Supreme Court covered up the fact that the High Court ignored Mr Siemer’s election to trial by jury by quashing the judgment and ordering a new conviction and penalty of three months prison, thereby meeting the Bill of Rights Act threshold for judge-alone trial. Proving the judges on the highest court are eminently more efficient at least than juries, the bench declared a new trial was not necessary because the Solicitor General’s unsworn submissions from the bar were sufficient to confirm guilt.
Then there is the case of Gregory v Gollan, where the Supreme Court, in 2009, reaffirmed the lower courts were correct to use discretion to deny Mr Gregory’s “application” for trial by jury. Gregory’s counsel responded to the Supreme Court that an “application” was not required and was not made. He asserted Judicature Act, section 19 A(2) gave Gregory the direct right to “require” a trial by jury. Because the Supreme Court’s actions were such a blatant contravention of the rule of law, Counsel requested Attorney General Chris Finlayson intervene in the public interest. Finlayson’s office responded simply that judicial independence effectively means judges can pick and choose which laws they want to apply in New Zealand. For its own part, the Supreme Court refused to be pulled into defending its seemingly lawless decision and simply ignored the evident inconsistency brought to its attention.
We may not consider this issue important now, but there are profound reasons why trial by jury is central to egalitarian legal systems. History will judge New Zealand jurisprudence on this issue of trial by jury. And history has shown us that public complacency is an elementary factor in degradation of the rule of law by those in power.
LOSING THE PLOT
12 April 2011
The Urewera 18 have applied to the Supreme Court against the Court of Appeal’s rejection of their right to trial by jury.
Citing no right to appeal interlocutory judgments ahead of trial, the Crown prosecution opposes the Supreme Court considering the matter until at least after the scheduled trial in August, if at all.
In what is already the most expensive prosecution to taxpayers in New Zealand’s history, the result will be a mistrial if Crown argument is accepted and the Supreme Court determines post trial that denial of jury breached New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and Crimes Act guarantees. Strategically the Crown’s hope is that a fait accompli on judge alone trial will bolster the economic pressures on the Supreme Court upholding the lower court’s imposed discretion to deny this statutory right.
Meanwhile, it has been reported in the Whakatane Beacon that Tuhoe will back a request to solicitor-general David Collins later this month to drop all charges against the 18 defendants. After the September 2007 raids held many without bail on terrorism charges, public protests forced Mr Collins to reduce the charges to various weapons, drugs and gang charges. It is reported Tuhoe leader Tamati Kruger said iwi would endorse the request to drop charges, sponsored by lawyer Moana Jackson and Auckland University law faculty professor Jane Kelsey, adding “These people will never, ever get a fair and just trial.”
The original Police affidavit used to obtain the warrants to make the arrests which grabbed world headlines 3 ½ years ago suggests several defendants were charged because of their personal association with their co-defendants or for using offensive language in describing Police. Despite a court-ordered public suppression order of this police affidavit from day one, Auckland High Court Judge Helen Winkelmann read out key phrases for the TV cameras in court when revoking bail against one of the defendants Jamie Locket a week after the arrests. Those sensationalist excerpts, that “white men are going to die in this country” and “I am going to go commando”, were not given any context and were not representative of the police affidavit. Talk radio was ablaze in the days afterward, with many advocating reestablishment of the death penalty.
Three years later it was Winkelmann who denied 14 of these 18 defendants their statutory right to trial by jury on grounds jury members will likely use “improper reasoning processes” in reaching a decision and the trial is expected to be lengthy. As with the affidavit, the Judge suppressed her ruling from the public. It is this decision which the Court of Appeal upheld last month and the Supreme Court is now being asked to consider.
‘Horrified at the thought of a John Key/Don Bra$h – National/ACT – more Rogernomic$ ‘Coalition? AUCKLAND MARCH! 1 May 2011 : Britomart
27 April 2011
PRESS RELEASE: Penny Bright – Media Spokesperson Water Pressure Group
‘Horrified at the thought of a John Key/Don Bra$h – National/ACT – more Rogernomic$ ‘Coalition?
MARCH!
Sunday 1 May 2011
Rally 2pm outside BRITOMART
Auckland
March down Queen Street to Aotea Square
(Organised by the ‘Auckland Coalition for Social Justice’).
The spectre of a blatantly pro-corporate National /ACT coalition with John Key and Don Brash at the helm, wielding more pro-Rogernomic$/ anti-people policies should have the effect of driving voters towards those parties which have stated positions opposing such policies.
‘When the people lead – the politicians shall follow!’
The newly-formed Auckland ‘Coalition for Social Justice’ (established at a meeting held on 29 March 2011) of community groups, people from religious organisations and unions has organised the following event for the following reasons:
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE
|
PRESS STATEMENT
MARCH FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE. John Key is not working for New Zealand.
A new Coalition of community groups, people from religious organisations and unions has been formed. Our slogan is Social Justice (meeting occurred on the 29th March 2011).
Our aim is to challenge the policies of John Key and his National led coalition.We believe they are not serving the interests of the majority of New Zealanders.
We are organising a MOBILISATION of ordinary Kiwis on SUNDAY 1ST MAY. Also more action when National announces the BUDGET on 19th May 2011.
Throughout the world ordinary people are challenging the Free Market prescription from government cuts to privatisation/asset sales.
New Zealanders are angry about GST, milk prices and secret Trade deals, cuts to Early Childhood education and privatisation of electricity.
Meredydd Barrar, spokesperson says, “Enough is enough. Recent government announcements about cuts and a Budget that will certainly condemn the majority of New Zealanders to relative poverty is not acceptable. Children and struggling families as well as students looking to further their higher education will be penalised”.
“There is a latent anger in New Zealand at the moment.
We aim to translate it into action. National’s policies of cut backs and austerity measures will increase the gap between rich and poor which is already the 6th highest in the OECD. We believe this is unacceptable and uncivilised”.
‘New Zealanders deserve better than an economic philosophy that only seems to make bankers, corporate and speculators richer’.
Meredydd Barrar
Spokesperson
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
National are obviously concerned that they will not get the numbers to govern alone – so they either need to breathe life into the ACT corpse – or blow hot air into the forming of a new ‘hollow man’ political right wing party.
Arguably the Botany by-election results helped to confirm that asset sales are NOT popular with the NZ voting public, including (former?) National Party supporters.
Interesting that there is some agreement here across the political spectrum over how inept the ‘I’m Brash – I’ve got the ca$h – it’s my way – or the highway’ attempted National Party takeover of ACT has been.
Bulldozer corporate boardroom tactics based on the ‘golden rule’ – ‘those who have the gold – make the rules’ – are arguably NOT a good look in our so-called New Zealand democracy.
How many thinking voters are asking the obvious question – if this is how ‘Don The Dictator’ Bra$h acts in order to get into power – how on earth would he act if he was in power?
If he has so little respect for the internal ‘due process’ of the ACT Party that he wants to lead – (before even becoming a member) – how much respect will he have inside Parliament regarding the ‘rule of law’ and ‘doing things in a proper DEMOCRATIC way?
Perhaps ‘Don the Dictator’ Bra$h might support the doing away with a number of Parliamentary democratic safeguards – Select Committee processes, for example?
Seems he won’t get any disagreement from his fellow National Party mates on THAT one – will he – given the number of times this National/ACT government has rushed through legislation under ‘URGENCY’ on ‘corporate raider’ John Key’s watch?
Where is the ‘transparency’?
WHOSE ‘gold’ is behind this attempted hostile takeover by ‘the too-Bra$h Don’ who STILL(?) isn’t even a member of ACT, and is STILL(?) a member of the National Party?
So – in the true form of corporate ‘democracy’ – according to the ‘golden rule’ ie: ‘those who have the gold make the rules’ – Brash ‘I’ve got the ca$h’ – without even being a member of the ACT Party – is saying ‘pick me, pick me as Leader – or I’ll start a new party’.
Not that there is much difference between National and ACT when both their personnel and policies are effectively so interchangeable?
Is this the sort of NZ ‘democracy’ we have?
Is THIS the sort of ‘democracy’ for which those whose sacrifices are commemorated on ANZAC day are supposed to have died?
Where we get the government that the majority of big business want us to have, through corporate media manipulation, (and anonymous political donations)?
‘Bumbling but ‘nice guy Mr Magoo’ Don Brash’ has now dropped the spin-doctored packaging to reveal ‘bumbling, but arrogant Dictator Don Bra$h’ – for the world to see…
Hopefully because of the bullying, ‘stumble-bum’ way that Don Brash has gone about this ham-fisted National Party attempted ‘takeover’ of ACT – he will have put off a LOT of decent, thinking Kiwis who believe in a ‘fair go’.
I encourage as many as possible of these decent, thinking Kiwis, who support public monies being used for social, not corporate welfare, and support public ownership operation and control of OUR public assets and resources – to make a stand in support of these principles, outside Britomart Sunday 1 May at 2pm.
If you care – be there!
‘WHEN INJUSTICE BECOMES LAW- RESISTANCE BECOMES DUTY!’
Penny Bright
Judicially recognised ‘Public Watchdog’ on Metrowater, water and
Auckland regional governance matters.
‘World Water Warrior’ – NZ attendee at World Water Forum Kyoto 2003.
Auckland Mayoral candidate 2010.
Botany by-election candidate 2011
‘Anti-corruption campaigner’
Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference (Brisbane) 2009
Attendee: Transparency International 14th Anti-Corruption Conference
(Bangkok) 2010
Ph (09) 846 9825
021 211 4 127
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com
www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz
www.stopthesupercity.org.nz
www.stopprivatisation.org.nz
RODNEY HIDE’S LETTER TO ACT MEMBERS – HIS SIDE OF THE ‘BRA$H – I’VE GOT THE CA$H – HAND OVER THE ACT LEADERSHIP’ STORY!
27 April 2011
Always good to read material from source folks!
Penny Bright
_________________________________________________________________________
keepingstock.blogspot.com/2011/04/interesting-e-mail.html
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
An interesting e-mail
From time to time, we are surprised with what finds its way into our e-mail inbox. This morning was one of those times. When we turned our computer on and checked our e-mail, we’d been sent a copy of the e-mail that Rodney Hide has apparently sent out to all Act members.
Quite why this was sent to us we’re not sure. We’re not members of ANY political party. At times we’ve been critical of Act and Rodney Hide, especially given the trials and tribulations both have faced in this parliamentary term. We were also critical of Heather Roy when she and her advisor Simon Ewing-Jarvie leaked a dossier of Hide’s alleged failings last year in an attempt to undermine Hide’s leadership. Lastly, we made the comment yesterday that Brash’s challenge for the Act leadership when he’s not even a party member was extraordinary. We guess we’re relatively neutral, bordering on apathetic when it comes to Act’s internal wranglings.
Whilst we remain neutral, and are highly unlikely to give either of our ticks to Act regardless of who leads the party out of this chaotic situation, we believe that we should reproduce this e-mail fully, unedited and without additional commentary. We’ve consulted our source, who has endorsed our appraoch, so here is what Rodney Hide had to say to his troops:
On Good Friday, Don Brash informed the President that he had told the Dominion Post he would only be interested in working with ACT as the leader of the party. This has resulted in an unprecedented leadership challenge by a person who is not a member of the party.
Let me give you the background.
I have always encouraged Don to join ACT, even before he joined and stood for National in 2002, and again when he lost the leadership of National to John Key in 2006.
Now in 2011, I have been working proactively with the President and Board to identify strong candidates who will build strength into the future of the ACT Party. This included engaging with Don Brash, and a number of others, to gauge their interest in joining the ACT Party Candidate register.
Don and I had a series of meetings during which time a number of ideas were floated on how the party could best leverage Don’s strengths. Don’s initial position was that he would join only as leader, with John Banks as ACT’s candidate in Epsom. I suggested John Banks was not an ACT person but that clearly Don was.
I discussed Don’s proposal with the President, Vice President and Deputy Leader. We were agreed that the first step for Don was to join the party.
I met with Don, asking him to join and said I would pay his membership fee! He refused. We reviewed various options on how we could work together in a collaborative way to build a strong party for the future.
Don then wrote me a letter setting out his decision to turn down the opportunity. The letter alarmed me because I thought it was a letter designed to be leaked, as it was especially one-sided. I shared the letter with the President, Vice President and Deputy Leader.
That was where matters stood.
I was as surprised as anyone with Don announcing over Easter he wanted to publicly contest the leadership of the ACT Party while still a member of the National Party.
Don has publicly stated that he will only become a member of ACT if he is leader. In today’s media Don has made his interests very clear.
It seems to me that Don has put ACT into a difficult position because he can’t become leader unless he is a member. The leadership of ACT is determined by the caucus and ratified by the Board.
My position is that I serve as Leader of the ACT Party on behalf of the membership until the caucus and the board determine otherwise.
And so, the President and I, along with the Board and the caucus, continue to seek out good candidates for ACT who will build a strong party into the future. Leadership succession is an essential consideration, just as it is in any organization. Equally we wish to provide ACT members with a team that will deliver on our ideals and principles, who will ensure that New Zealand becomes a prosperous economy where individuals are empowered to succeed.
I do not intend on putting my head in the sand over this challenge, but at the same time there is important work to be done that builds on the foundations the Board has been laying over the last few months.
I look forward to talking with you personally as I continue the excellent visits around the country such as I enjoyed last week in the Waikato.
Best regards
Rodney Hide
Done! Judge this for yourselves …
6 comments:
- Jacqueline said…
- I think i have missed something. Or something has gone completely over my head – this happens from time to time – i am five foot nothing after all ;)Isn’t that pretty much just outlining what has already been said in the news?
- April 27, 2011 9:23 AM
- gravedodger said…
- This mess has all the hallmarks of the biggest cluster F**k of conservative politics for so long in my memory.
A bunch of egos behaving as if the rules do not apply to them and is a sign of diminishing grasp of reality for Don Brash, a man I have had enormous regard for as a person with a vision of what we as a nation need to follow if we wish to rejoin the real world of growth based economic outcomes.
all I see here is around 7 / 8 % of the right of center MMP vote on November 26th being consigned to the trash bin where I would hope that number of financial dwarfs votes of the socialists should go.
These egos are committing political “jonestown” and are traitors to the nation, the socialists will be wetting themselves. A clear case of the lack of judgement of reality that so many “educated” people have of the real world as Darwin found out so long ago.
Dr Don Brash for the weekly Darwin award by a clear margin.
One word to sum it all up, DEVASTATION. - April 27, 2011 9:39 AM
- big news said…
- Brash didn’t “lose” the leadership to John Key.He resigned.
- April 27, 2011 10:10 AM
- showmethetaxcut said…
- Regardless of whether Don Brash’s tactics are right, he is right about one thing – Rodney Hide is toxic. He needs to suck it up and step aside. I gave my party vote to ACT last election. Not this time. Not if Hide is the leader. National will need every party vote it can get to keep Labour away from the treasury benches.
- April 27, 2011 10:29 AM
- Inventory2 said…
- I have some sympathy for that view smtc, but I don’t know that I would go as far as “toxic”. I’m no particular fan of Hide, but he has been at the centre of a number of gaffes this term. Whether or not the condemnation has been deserved is open to debate, but the perception is that Hide is a hypocrite, and in politics, perception is everything.David Garret has set it out well over at WO’s:http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/?p=22597
I did believe however that Hide’s e-mail as reproduced was temperate compared to much of what has been written about this tawdry business, and it deserved to be aired.
- April 27, 2011 10:36 AM
- Tinman said…
- There is a perception out there that Brash rescued National.Brash took National towards where National voters would like it to be (and where, except under the Richardson influence it hadn’t been since the ’60s) and good on him for that.Brash had National ahead of Labour in all the polls except the one that counted.
He then lost the unlosable election (2005) by his political incompetence subjecting NZ to three more years of pain and suffering which we pay for to this day – and will for years to come.
Notably it was only the advent of Key and his positioning of National where non-committed voters found it attractive that rolled the great Satan.
The latest move demonstrates Brash has learned nothing of politics, nothing about how to get elected.
I dislike Hide but will more likely than not vote for ACT should he continue to “lead”.
I won’t should Brash become part of that party!
- April 27, 2011 10:37 AM
‘Proposed changes to immunisation policy cause concern’
‘Proposed changes to immunisation policy infringe parents’ rights’ Katherine Smith – co-editor of The New Zealand Journal of Natural Medicine
-
Archives
- July 2011 (5)
- June 2011 (108)
- May 2011 (107)
- April 2011 (110)
- March 2011 (53)
- February 2011 (25)
- January 2011 (7)
- December 2010 (4)
- November 2010 (3)
- October 2010 (13)
- September 2010 (12)
- August 2010 (24)
-
Categories
- 9/11 TRUTH
- Anti-GE
- Auckland Mayoral campaign
- Botany By-election 2011
- Centre for Public Integrity
- CLG REPORT:
- Fighting corruption in NZ
- Fighting corruption internationally
- Fighting water privatisation in NZ
- Howick by-election campaign
- Human rights
- i watch news (Centre for Public Integrity)
- Internationally significant information
- Jane Burgermeister Report
- Metrowater
- Stop the $uper City
- Transparency in Govt spending
- TRUTHOUT
- Uncategorized
- VINCE SIEMER REPORT
- WORLD WATER WARRIORS
- YOU TUBE: John Clarke and Bryan Dawe
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
The Watchdog 
NOW if only Labour had the same balls… oh yeah thats right Helen took them to NY for safe keeping!!!