Who should really freak out about Labour’s new ‘President’s Club’

By   /   April 12, 2017  /   11 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

Newshub, who were earlier today trying to u-turn on a fake news story about an alligator were still able to get their teeth into Labour’s new high roller funding programs, the ‘President’s Club’. Here’s Lloyd Burr doing his best Paddy Gower impersonation with all the huff and puff of an asthmatic meth smoker..

Newshub, who were earlier today trying to u-turn on a fake news story about an alligator were still able to get their teeth into Labour’s new high roller funding programs, the ‘President’s Club’. Here’s Lloyd Burr doing his best Paddy Gower impersonation with all the huff and puff of an asthmatic meth smoker..

The Labour Party has launched an exclusive secret society called The President’s Club for those who donate big bucks to the party.

It opened for business two weeks ago, with the primary role of luring in big cheques from wealthy Labour supporters.

It’s Labour’s version of National’s Cabinet Club, which sees exorbitantly-priced tickets sold for exclusive dinners attended by Cabinet ministers of the Crown.

Labour president Nigel Haworth says The President’s Club differs from Cabinet Club because Labour MPs aren’t involved, and aren’t used to lure in donations in exchange for access.

…who should really be freaking out about this is the National Party. For Labour to be setting up a high roller donor club there has to be demand and there would only be demand if the Business Community and powerful Auckland lobby groups thought Labour were going to be the next Government.

Labour have gone out of their way to bend over backwards to the Business Community by promising to never do anything that would ever make the Business Community unhappy – ever – and that is paying off dividends if that same Business Community now see Labour as a Party they can invest in.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that business are finally coming around to the Labour Party, after almost a decade of underfunding infrastructure, Auckland has ground into a gridlock that makes doing business near impossible.  Labour’s direct investment position is far more palatable than National’s shrug and leave it the market approach.

Should voters be concerned Labour are being bought off in some way? Sure, those concerns are always legitimate, but the way Policy gets formulated in a Party with as many policy wonks as Labour has makes those sorts of games almost impossible to pull off without many people noticing the changes.

There are just too many passionate ideologues within the Party for that type of direct policy for cash switch to occur so I think voters can still be safe in the knowledge that while big business are knocking they can’t call the shots.

 

***
Want to support this work? Donate today
***
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook
***

11 Comments

  1. Not a Robot says:

    “Should voters be concerned Labour are being bought off in some way? Sure, those concerns are always legitimate, but… those sorts of games [are] almost impossible to pull off without many people noticing the changes.”

    This is an incredibly naive statement. First, to believe that Labour hasn’t been catering to big donors in the past, and second to believe that now that it’s out in the open, we can just “trust them” and everything will be ok.

    Has Labour learned NOTHING from watching the anti-Establishment movements around the world? Didn’t Bernie Sanders prove that he could mount an entire US Presidential campaign with an openly Socialist platform, without Corporate donors? A campaign so powerful and effective it took the combined might of the Clinton Machine and the captive MSM to derail it? Isn’t Labour aware that even as we speak, movements like Justice Democrats are successfully organising in the Home Counties against every Establishment Democrat in the United States, from County Clerk to Congress, to have them replaced by Democratic Socialist candidates? In AMERICA?

    In complete contrast, as if we lived in the Land that Time Forgot, New Zealanders are openly being asked to choose which Oligarchical political party we prefer to be ignored and disrespected by; the Nats and their moneyed interests in the “Cabinet” group, with unprecedented direct access to power, or the Labour Party’s completely outrageous and elitist “President’s Club”.

    Let’s be clear, either way, these Oligarchs win, which is something I and others on the Left have been railing against for years. Yet here we are, at the Shameless Stage.

    What the hell is wrong with this Blog that the best it can offer is an apologia for this disgrace?

    Adjectives fail me Martyn.

    • The Daily Blog Martyn says:

      Sure, but I’m pretty familiar with how stringent the internal Labour policy procedures are, if there was undue influence, it would get out pretty quickly and I suspect a fairly large backlash would follow.

      If having that opinion leaves you wordless, I doubt you’ll survive the election.

      • Not A Robot says:

        The thing about Oligarchies? When they own *both* parties, they don’t give a damn about backlashes. Or elections for that matter – elections become a circus for the Masses.

        However they do appreciate loyalty, especially from the media. And what media person doesn’t already know this without being told?

  2. The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell says:

    “For Labour to be setting up a high roller donor club there has to be demand…”

    No.

  3. Sam Sam says:

    Money eh. The OP makes me wonder how much a vote is really worth. But at least Labour had some guts and called it what it is instead of trying to misslead like every ones favourit cyber hoe the National Party, calling theres something that seems tame and welcoming to all

  4. Red Buzzard says:

    Would David Cunliffe as leader of the Labour Party have endorsed this?…I would have thought he would have had more savvy (not of the neoliberal kind)

  5. darth smith says:

    the members through the lecs put up policy through the platform process and the changes that the members demanded in 2012 make sure that the far right can never hijack the party ever again they el find themselves deselected the national council has the power to remove an mp.the members took back control of the party thats why labour is only party where the members get a say as who is leader it might seem like we are fighting but its democracy in action.

  6. Quicksilver says:

    Well, at no point have I been overwhelmed by a torrent of anti-business rhetoric from Labour. I don’t think there’s any danger of them being “bought off” – that happened some time ago.
    On another note – anyone sick of hearing how the Hagaman’s have been allegedly besmirched by Andrew Little? Especially in light of the contrary opinion that there was never any reputation to damage in the first place!

    • CLEANGREEN says:

      I guess whatever it takes to get control back from this sell-out Nactional Party scoundrels that have all but sold the country. so fighting fire with fire is inevitable today, and if the business community see that investing in a sound policy for running a NZ policy again instead of the NatZ running an overseas investor policy is better for our local business to survive.

      It could be sold as similar to Trump’s popular “make America strong again” it could be “invest in NZ security & wealth first” policy?

      I feel so much harm was done by NatZ when they allowed the sale of our icon companies like Fisher & Paykel and so many others that we have slowly lost our business base and allowed the foreign takeover of our commerce so getting together with kiwi companies may be wise at this time.

      We must see the return of our kiwi SOE’s like Kiwirail, and Kiwi bank all be placed in a much stronger monetary state to function properly and not be slowly smothered until they die.

      Fight fire with fire.

  7. Mike in Auckland says:

    Political parties should get a certain amount of taxpayer funding to run election campaigns, and those not represented in Parliament should also get a minimum amount, to offer a degree of fair play in the competition for votes.

    Making parties independent from donors, that is apart from individual member donors, who pay a membership fee, that could only enrich our democracy and bring it back to some form of grassroots representation.

    All else will inevitably end in a more or less corrupt scenario, where the rich and powerful, either individuals or business interests, will have undue levels of influence on parties and their policies, and what they may do or not do when in government.

    Sadly our citizens and taxpayers have been corrupted in their minds, to not understand how important a different system is for their democracy. Hence we get stupid views like, “my money should not go to finance political parties”.

  8. J S Bark J S Bark says:

    O tempora, o mores…