The media are now demanding answers from Westpac – before we start calling for a boycott of Westpac for aiding the Police to spy on an investigative Journalist without a warrant, let’s get the media to ask the following questions…
QUESTIONS TO WESTPAC
If you do, why do you do this? How does a customer know they’ve had this mark against their credit rating made and how can they challenge it?
Did the investigation into Hager by the Police mean Hager’s credit rating has a mark against it?
How many other times have you handed customer information over to the Police without a warrant?
Was the former Minister of Justice, Simon Power, who now works for Westpac involved in this decision in any way?
What was the advice from your lawyers about handing over an investigative journalist’s details to the Police?
Even if Hager was a suspect rather than an uncooperative witness, what checks and balances do you have for customer privacy?
And for those keeping count
Dirty Politics 1.0 – Revelations in Hager’s book ‘Dirty Politics‘, that highlighted a black ops team working out of the PMs Office using far right blogger Cameron Slater to attack political opponents while retaining a ‘good guy’ mainstream media public profile for Key. Also highlighted plans to attack the SFO boss, attacking public health advocates and scientists, manipulating and colluding with mainstream media outlets, misinformation, falsehoods, character assassinations and in one case outed the SIS working with the PMs Office to smear Phil Goff, the Leader of the Opposition, months before the 2011 election.
Dirty Politics 2.0 – When the Donghua Liu story broke, the PM was suggesting Liu had donated ‘millions’ to the Labour Party and Cunliffe’s leadership was suddenly attacked by the Herald. The outlandish claims and misinformation in the end revealed nothing of the sort. There was no $100 000 dollar of wine or huge donations and the validity of the allegation quickly toppled into farcical when the Editor of the Herald accidentally revealed that the didn’t understand the difference between a signed statement and an affidavit. Once that was established, the story died in terms of credibility but the perception damage was done.
Dirty Politics 3.0 – When the story of John Key pulling the ponytail of a waitress broke on TDB, the sudden collusion between Rachel Glucina, the Cafe and the Prime Minister resulted in a front page herald article that put a spin on the story that was negative towards the waitress. Despite being told they no longer had permission to use the images, the Herald did it anyway.
Dirty Politics 3.1 – The punishment of Campbell Live embarrassing the Government was cemented into place the moment John Key’s corporate friends Julie Christie and Mark Waldon arrived as management. The decision to kill off one of the best TV Journalists NZ had occurred after a huge social media campaign saw ratings jump to their highest ever level. Cameron Slater’s media buyer sowed the seeds of failing ratings and Rachel Glucina kept pushing agendas in her columns. In the end NZ was a poorer media landscape for the decision and the Government also silenced one of their loudest critics.
Dirty Politics 3.2 – NZDF attack on Jon Stephenson was brutal. For daring to raise legitimate questions about what the NZ SAS were doing handing over civilians to known torture units in Afghanistan, the NZDF launched a campaign of smears against Stephenson. This campaign came unstuck recently when the NZDF had to pay Stephenson out in compensation.
Dirty Politics 4.0 – The attempt to roll Colin Craig as the Leader of the Conservatives smelled bad from the very beginning. The same names from Dirty Politics were popping up and the same tactics of attack politics used. Colin Craig is currently suing those involved and they are counter suing. This is yet to be resolved.
Dirty Politics 5.0 – The manner in which Nicky Hager has been harassed by Police for using stolen emails to uncover abuse of political power is made more astounding when you consider how quickly the Police acted for Slater. Add the manner Westpac handed Hager’s information over and breaches the Police have already admitted to and this all starts looking like one very large abuse of power.
Defining emails as property doesn’t trump the public interest element of Hager receiving them and selectively and responsibly publishing them.