Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

16 Comments

  1. Maybe it’s because they are bunch of hypocrites who do exactly the same things.

        1. If you don’t know, maybe it’s time you woke up. Maybe you could ask Countryboy.

    1. She was the anti-gun lobbyist that sold out law-abiding Kiwis & made no one safer.

    1. And it was your lot who had the Han Spook sitting at the cabinet table. What a sack of shit you are Trevor, and dumb arsed one to boot.

  2. Who was it that sent the SAS to Afghanistan to kill brown people? Then kept quiet about it?

  3. While list seats allow a more accurate representation of the electorates political ideology the ability of the local electorate voters to know who exactly they are voting for has been lost . Now it’s, “numerous right wing politicians who were previously consultants”. Lange warned of this.

  4. ‘Growing perception of corruption’ and corruption itself is not quite the same thing. What we need is evidence of growing corruption in New Zealand’s political and governance systems not a survey based on public opinion and conclusions/ discussion drawn from it. I haven’t read the Helen Clark Foundation report so I may be way off track but way too often ‘perception’ is given the same weight as concrete evidence. That said, where there’s smoke there’s fire, as the saying goes. Political lobbying; political donations and elections funding; access to official information; foreign bribery; and beneficial ownership of corporate entities is good place for empirical research to find evidence, and somewhere where investigative journalists can look.

  5. https://helenclark.foundation/app/uploads/2024/08/Transparency-and-Integrity-Report-Shine-A-Light-DIGITAL-FINAL.pdf

    This is the glossy version, the report with the soft cardboard cover and color printing. You’ll need to dig a bit deeper for the research study itself, the unedited document. It’ll tum up in a journal no doubt in a different format, one would hope with a methodology included. It does however seem like the report was based on public opinion not for example ethnographic evidence, ie, the “strong belief that access money is a problem in New Zealand with 65% of New Zealanders agreeing that our economy is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful”. As much as I’d like to agree with public opinion, and if asked myself would have most likely said the same, personal views gained through a tick-box / multiple choice survey don’t always capture the full picture. Other commentary says as much, with the actors supposedly doing the rigging kept anonymous in the report.
    https://democracyproject.substack.com/p/the-political-corruption-report-that

    Still, the report achieves its aim: highlighting of the (perceived) issues surrounding corruption in NZ’s democratic political system, resulting in long overdue media exposure and hopefully increased public awareness. Not that the report is the fist cab off the rank, not by a long way. But a noble cause, right? What we need now is alternative evidence, case studies grounded in real events and real people, a more trustworthy discourse, and a full feature doco!

  6. Helen Clark’s call for stricter rules on political lobbying and transparency highlights serious concerns about corruption in New Zealand’s political system, but it remains to be seen if actionable reforms will follow.

  7. You have to ask what drives people to make political donations? Why not just donate to charity if you have too much money and no ulterior motive?
    Political donations have zero place in governments free of undue influence, or worse.
    All parties that qualify should be given the same amount of tax funded money to run their campaigns. Then we would hopefully get a system that serves the many instead of the few.

Comments are closed.