Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

44 Comments

  1. If Labour had done a decent job of running the country then all the money in the World would not have got National back .It is the people who were let down who will vote them out

  2. Brilliant public interest journalism. The concluding sentence is very telling. Democracy it seems is more than just one person one vote. I think most voters know this but all too frequently forget it. Good to be reminded.

  3. Would be interesting to see where Labour’s big donations come from. Or the Greens and NZF for that matter. I guess it’s all on public record. And how interesting to learn that Labour got the lion’ share leading up to the 2020 election. What was behind that?

  4. When you campaign on doing everything you can do to make the property market explode, including selling everything to anyone offshore, and you campaign on removing whatever mediocre regulations we have that protect resources or course these people will folk out huge sums. Bob the first will tell you they are deeply concerned about the cost of living and the poor. It’s f’ing laughable

  5. This makes it crystal clear why a weath tax in particular has no traction in NZ politics.

  6. When New Zealand premier Richard( King Dick Seddon) was asked why he gave favours to his friends he said,’do you expect me to give them to my enemies?”
    Donors to National are good at making investments and they expect National/ACT government to give them a good return on their investment.
    I know I am pointing out the obvious but for all of you on low incomes planning to vote National or ACT because you have taken a personal dislike to people in the Labour Party remember:
    You are not investors so you will not get any returns.
    Labour? Green – crap but the lesser of evils. Nationl/Act + plus corporate wealth= re-introduction of child labour, slavery and destruction of what remains of the Welfare State.

    1. I am sure you are right they will be putting kids down the mine as soon as possible.

    2. reintroduction of child labour, slavery and destruction of the welfare state! Thanks for the chuckle.

      1. No, the biggest chuckle was Seymour believing Nelson Mandela would be an Act supporter. Seems Seymour loves jokes but what he doesn’t realize is he’s the biggest joke of them all!

        1. Charles Meghan Markle similarly claimed that when she married the dimwit prince, Africans danced in the streets the way that they did when Nelson Mandela was released from prison. Both fantasists, obscenely trading on the reputation of a moral giant which they are not.

  7. As soon as Greens mentioned wealth tax, it would be like a ATM for National.

    One of the few countries in the world that has a wealth tax is Sweden, their rental property is extremely scarce (9 year wait with rent controls) and expensive so it seems to be the opposite of what the Greens seemed to be campaigning on.

    Why rent control isn’t working in Sweden
    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58317555

    Weirdly 20 years ago, NZ used to be full of easy to find rentals, but obviously when there is an net gain of 100,000 new people each year, that puts huge strain on everything from housing, infrastructure and health care. Made even worse if the people coming, are tax negative while the people leaving used to be tax positive!

    Our governments seems happy to borrow billions for the folly to become a poorer, less skilled nation and the supermarkets are happy!

    1. No, NACT parties have supporters with deeper pockets. They aren’t necessarily more popular.
      Their supporters are not just showing they approve of NACT policies, they are buying policy.
      The picture shows a guy saying the redistribution of wealth doesn’t work.
      Not redistributing wealth doesn’t work either.
      As usual there needs to be a middle road but the greedies always want more.

    2. John+Roy. Hate is a dirty word, but Labour, the Greens, and the ineffectual Nats are all pretty much disliked. That said, the Greens naked hatred of the alleged rich hasn’t helped anybody very much at all.

    3. Seems so John Roy, in 2023. But if BE is correct it was a very different story in 2020. National only declared a paltry $285k from big donations. Swings and roundabouts. Probably whispers of a wealth tax, however unlikely under any left of centre Labour govt, has the big players nervous.

  8. “Why are wealthy individuals and businesses giving such large amounts of money to National? The most obvious answer is that the party looks like it’s on course to form the next government.”

    What Bullshit, none of those listed donate to the Labour party – regardless of who “looks on course” to form a government.

    “The ball is therefore now in the court of the donors and the parties to assuage public suspicion that it’s not all about undue influence. ”

    Ya dreaming Bryce

    1. What we can agree upon, is the election will be won on right wing hate and big business donors, thank you for the admission.

  9. National are not going to win cause of big money. They are going to win cause Labour are so bad

  10. So there was no problem with Labour getting all the big money in 2020, but there is a problem with National getting it in 2023? Of course, the illusion of popular sovereignty under what is laughably called “democracy” is a complete sham, but the distinction as to what is right and what is wrong in this article seems to be not that big money determines policy, but who receives that big money.

    1. So Fidel how much “big money” did Labour get? Then we may take the rest of your comment seriously.

      I’ll help…$1,510,627.55
      National…$2,802,766.27

      Now, re read the article, it is “WHO” that is being highlighted, rich listers!

    2. Very good point.

      If we want better democracy political donations should be limited to all being the same value and public. Or no donations at all. As unpalatable as it might be some sort of state funding would be better than the corruption we have now.

  11. Right what we need to do within the next few weeks, months, part years… is to control promotion, advertising around elections with rules governing all.

  12. The National family have big appetites though doctor, 8 million won’t even cover the legal expenses of matriarch director Shipley.

  13. Wonder if National will continue from where John Key left off- no social housing or Kiwibuild at all !!

  14. Democracy is great at getting the best government money can buy, what is unusual is that anyone is surprised by the money train that follows electoral success. While the current government deserve their lack of support the answers from the current opposition do not inspire confidence that the next 3 years will be any better. This world is running out of time and while the billionaire class is looking to space for an escape my hope is in a more sure promise.

  15. Democracy is great at getting the best government money can buy, what is unusual is that anyone is surprised by the money train that follows electoral success. While the current government deserve their lack of support the answers from the current opposition do not inspire confidence that the next 3 years will be any better. This world is running out of time and while the billionaire class is looking to space for an escape my hope is in a more sure promise.

  16. A political donation from a company with share holders is either:

    Illegal because it seeks to gain influence on government. This is called corruption.

    Illegal because it gains nothing, influence or otherwise, for the money. Those spending the money have failed in their fiduciary duty to spend the company’s money wisely.

    Which one is it?

  17. Thanks Martyn – I am sure that the vast majority of that is correct. I am shaken and stirred too. It is time to set limits. We are being seduced by heartless financiers obsessed with the chase for profits, (the City version of rural chasing after foxes on horseback with hounds). who will suck us dry and sue us when we are bankrupt.

    I am reminded of Alex the financier cartoon in the Daily Telegraph and really it should be checked while getting our daily onceover. Forewarned is forearmed perhaps.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_(comic_strip)
    Peattie and Taylor are reputed to work closely with a variety of London financial contacts to ensure that their strips accurately reflect the recent scandals and rumours which pass around the City. Much gossip has circulated as to the likely inspiration for some of the characters. A storyline in March 2009 had one of Alex’s old colleagues leave the city to become a teacher, coinciding with a British government plan to ease the amount of time spent on teacher training and encouraging “fantastic mathematicians… who would have once perhaps gone into the City but now actually might be more interested in a career in teaching”.
    The most common kind of joke features a conversation between the characters, where in the final frame a twist ending becomes apparent – the context of the conversation was not what the reader had supposed, usually reflecting on the protagonists’ materialistic values and priorities.,,
    Another kind of strip which appears occasionally consists of only two large frames, showing two different characters, or the same character in two different situations, giving a monologue composed of almost exactly the same words, but which, in the different situations, have very different meanings.

Comments are closed.