Jordan Carter

Problems with another candidate for InternetNZ council [UPDATED]

Don Gould        Source/ InternetNZ cadidate profile

Don Gould Source/ InternetNZ candidate profile

We have already seen the demise of Alistair Thompson’s credibility when he was caught moonlighting on behalf of the Internet Party.

The funny thing is with some sunlight being shone on InternetNZ and the political connections of council members is that as a side issue it has thrown some sunlight on another candidate.

Don Gould is another of the candidates standing for the vacant position as a result of the resignation of Nat Torkington.

His candidate statement leaves out some important information.

You see Don Gould is actually Donald John Gould and he has a criminal past.

In 2008 he was convicted of having a sexual relationship with a 15 year old. The Herald reported:

Christchurch tutor Donald John Gould, 38, has been remanded on bail waiting to be sentenced after he admitted having a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old student. He pleaded guilty to charges of unlawful sexual connection and doing an indecent act.

Christchurch Court News added more information:

A Mairehau man faces a likely prison term for a six-week sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl.

Donald John Gould was remanded on bail to a crown sentencing session on January 23, and warned by Christchurch District Court Judge John Bisphan that jail was “very likely”.   Read more »

Alistair Thompson standing for Internet NZ Council elections

via the tipline

Disgraced journalist Alistair Thompson wasn’t just attempting to pretend he was an independent journalist while working, for what sources within the Dotcom Mansion tell me was months of planning, on launching a political party.

He was also planning on standing for a vacant council position on InternetNZ and according to their website is still a candidate for the vote.

Nominations opened on 10 January, while Thompson was working on the Internet Party.

Thompson Read more »

The truth about the Coalition for Fair Internet Pricing

WreckingCrew copy

Earlier today, I blogged about how Matthew Hooton, Paul Brislen, Vodafone and a host of vested interests have duped Kiwi households out of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Essentially, the Labour-leaning Coalition for Fair Internet Pricing conned media into thinking their campaign was about going into bat for Kiwi households. But it is actually about lining the pockets of greedy telcos like Vodafone, Orcon, Slingshot and their mates.

I want to refer people to the Coalition’s original press release when it launched its campaign.

Now that media have finally wised up to what I have been saying, I have made some changes to the Coalition’s press release to more accurately reflect its true position.

Broad Coalition Says Yes To $600 Million Windfall for Telcos

A coalition of Kiwi companies, industry associations and consumer advocate groups has today announced proposals to introduce what economists Covec say is a new windfall of at least $600 million for telcos such as Vodafone, Orcon, Slingshot and Telecom.

In a discussion document issued last month, Communications & IT Minister Amy Adams proposed to provide certainty for both the industry and Kiwi households by overruling a crazy determination by the Commerce Commission that would see Chorus stripped off hundreds of millions of dollars it planned it use for the rollout of ultra-fast broadband.   Read more »

Game over for ultra fast broadband?

800px-Fibre-optic_cable_in_a_Telstra_pit

Well, I hope Matthew Hooton and his merry band of mates are pleased with themselves.

Thanks to their hyperbole and lies, New Zealanders are now at risk of not getting ultra fast broadband for decades.

Get used to YouTube clips stalling, get used to not being able to livestream sports events, get used to needing an hour to download an email attachment and get used to not being able to use Skype properly.

Thanks to Hooton and his BFFs, faster broadband is NOT coming to a town near you.   Read more »

Hooton’s campaign of misinformation begins

So Matthew Hooton has finally started his broadband campaign against the Government, as revealed on this blog two days ago. As usual he has used the same tired old grouping of the disaffected, the greedy and included tax dodging ratbags and second rate bloggers to patch over the appearance that the grouping is nothing more than his drinking buddies.

I have to give Hooton some credit, though. Even though he was openly boasting that he was going to get journalists to fall for his campaign, the journalists have still taken the bait hook, line and sinker.

In saying that, it was nice of Hamish Rutherford to acknowledge me in his story today, although he’s since removed the compliment.

The campaign is expected to come under attack from the Government, and has already been slated by Right-wing blogger Whaleoil.

What’s become clear from today’s launch is that the broadband campaign is actually a Labour-led political campaign.  Read more »

Hooton’s plan to trick journalists

Matthew Hooton is telling anyone that will listen that he’s going to get the press gallery and IT journalists to fall for his latest campaign.

He reckons he’s so clever that he will have journalists eating out of his hands.

In fact, he has been openly saying that the journalists are always falling for his PR lines, and it’s now no longer a challenge for him.

The tip line is running hot with reports that Hooton is launching a campaign on behalf of Vodafone and Internet NZ tomorrow against the Government.

I understand the campaign is about a review the Government has underway about the relationship between pricing for the legacy copper network and pricing for the new fibre network.

One of the main policy planks of National in 2008 and 2011 was the big step-change in ultrafast broadband through fibre-optic cable rollouts.

National proposed a hefty $1.5 billion taxpayer contribution to help accelerate the rollout. It was, and is a bold plan to make New Zealand a more advanced, productive and connected nation. The use of fibre to improve peoples’ lives through better connectivity will be profound.  Read more »

Stuart Nash Hits Back At Critics

Stuart Nash has again blogged on Recess Monkey clarifying his post after he joined a list of Labour’s enemies.

Just to clarify, however, my initial post wasn’t actually about Louisa or the Marriage Equality Bill at all, but about the strategy Labour has pursued so far this year.

That is right, Nash was not responsible for that strategy. So who was?  How much strategic input has say Grant Robertson or Jordan Carter had?  Can they all just blame Trevor now Nash has said “not me”?

One thing is for sure, Nash is confused about his mate David Parker.

I know that David Parker has been doing some serious thinking about this and he is a man of huge integrity and intelligence; and a man of courage. I expect to see some pretty revolutionary ideas to come from his office.

Right so this is the same David Parker who allegedly breached the Companies Act for filing false declarations to the Companies Office when of all people, a trained lawyer and Attorney General?

Mr Parker and Helen Clark described Mr Parker’s declarations as a “mistake” and Mr Parker said he believed many other people filed such declarations to “cut corners”.

By ticking the box, he saved himself $400 or $500 a year in audit fees.

“In respect of my own life I’ve done a lot more in my life than a lot of people have and overall I am proud of my achievements, but I’m certainly ashamed of this particular mistake,” he said last night. With the benefit of hindsight I was a bit glib in the way I ticked the form and sent it in.”

Parker is the last man who can comment about declarations, returns and forms and it has not held him back from being the next big thing in Labour years on.

The hypocrisy of the Labour Party know no bounds.

 

Pagani gone drilling

During the 2011 election campaign much was made of Labour’s working man roots, especially the miners.  It seems that Labour has not only turned its back on the working man but has also driven one of its key strategists to work for the Oil and Gas industry. Jordan Carter ecstatically tried to break the news to his acolytes:

And Martyn Bradbury is alluding to some sort of putsch against Pagani on his little read hate-blog.

It now seems an open secret that in fact John Pagani has left of his own free will and accepted a role with NZ Oil and Gas.

Of course, Pagani isn’t there as a ‘working man’ but he’s going there as another lobbyist.  What becomes even more interesting is that he is the third former Labour staffer to go to the mining/drilling industries.  Mike Munro is working for Todd Corporation and Deborah Mahuta-Coyle signed on as a lobbyist for PEPANZ (the Petroleum industry’s lobby group).  Technically it may actually be four since Pagani is replacing another former Labour staffer Chris Roberts. Perhaps this explains Labour’s claimed change of heart on mining where they now share the same stance as National.

So what finally drove Pagani out (again)? Was it Mallard’s constant nitpicking over every word in every press release – only to then have a tantrum, go to his office and ring his media mates to bitch?  Or was it the slow creep of the ‘gaggle of gays’ as they took over the Leader’s office? Word has it that Mold has even turned from being Shearer’s number one supporter to now being the ultimate fag hag to Robertson.

Shearer’s strain to decide whether to appeal to middle New Zealand and ‘Waitakere Man’ has now disappeared. May be Sio and Nash are right?  May be Labour has lost the plot and got lost in the Jordan Carter like rhetoric.  After all, how many people who have experienced the real world are left in the Leader’s corridor?  All are too busy navel gazing, being terribly academic or are the ultimate beltway junkies.  How is Shearer ever expected to succeed with advice coming from those people?

Shearer is now a lonely, invisible man.  Who does he turn to?  Shearer’s instincts will be to include his opposition in his tactics… the silly man hasn’t worked out that in politics having no one on your side is a dangerous position.

Nash vs. Carter

Cactus Kate has spent a considerable amount of time analysing both Stuart Nash’s short and to the point blog post of the other day and Jordan Carter’s long winded post talking about the strategic blunders or triumphs (depending on your point of view) of Labour.

Carter invokes the birth of the welfare state in his post on equality which is nonsense in itself given the welfare state back then was not meant to be as broadly applied as it is today. And we all know it because fundamentally that is what the man on the roof is all about where people are sick of the breadth of the welfare state and how so few New Zealanders are actually net taxpayers. Labour cannot actually counter this because their spokesperson Jacinda Ardern actually agrees with most of what Paula Bennett is saying.

Even Labour’s run at child poverty (whatever that is) was muffed dreadfully because the public’s first response was one to again state the obvious, what the hell are the parents doing with the welfare assistance they are receiving? And it highlighted why people keep having children they cannot ever afford.

Carter has uneloquently attempted to take “equality” as discussed in the #marriageequality debate and stretch it further. What he is failing to grasp is that there never really was a debate as 80 MP’s voted for it (even John Banks) and the only person really against it was Colin Craig and 50,000 petitioners from Family First. Grant Robertson noted in the shockedhaughty tone that only he can pull off, that few people stayed after the marriage equality debate to support the $15 an hour minimum wage bill.

Why would they? GLBT supporters didn’t sign up for that and are discerning enough to fight their own battles. Many are sick of paying for other people kids while forking out to attempt to have their own. Many are also sick of being taken for granted by Labour and are voting Greens or even National. The gay community itself is not just a left one that Labour can automatically rely on to support their every cause. And as Nash effectively illustrated, the causes seem to be numerous. Too numerous that people have disengaged.

Does National have a Campaign School?

Labour may be tits, but they get some things right and will be a threat in the future when they get a real leader.

One of the great things Labour do is train up activists. They have a summer school and a campaign school. They bring in a lot of people regularly and train them up. Participants loved it. Jordan Carter blogs about it:

I’ve spent the weekend in Hamilton at the first Young Labour campaign school.

It’s been an interesting couple of days for a number of reasons. The turnout was fantastic — around about sixty attendees not counting presenters. There was a good broad range of topics, from elections to issues campaigning and thinking about messaging and communications.

Ten years after the first Summer School, which is a Labour Party event organised by Young Labour, a campaigning focus like this is well timed and much needed. Campaigning is core business for a political party and we don’t make enough effort to teach people how to do it.

National’s weak party leadership means National does not have a Summer School. It does not have a campaign schooleither. Its Candidates College meets once a year (Nov 2-3 this year) and participants are lectured at, learning nothing useful except in National you are expected to sit and be lectured at without complaint.

Lord knows what the Young Nats do but ten years after Young Labour set up their school the Young Nats have not followed suit. This shows massive lack of leadership from the Young Nats presidents, the party president and the General Manager.

The latter two are far more interested in shutting down training than encouraging it, and don’t want anyone with any independent thought anywhere near the party. They even question prospective Candidates College members very closely about their friends and acquaintances with stern warnings issued by a board member about continued friendship with those who shall not be named.

The joke is they try veiled threats about candidates future prospects when in all likelihood they will be nowhere near the organisation of the party in less than 3 years.