Peter Goodfellow

Nats prepared to do deal with devil

National are all at sea with local body politics.

Richard Harman at Politik reveals what everyone in Auckland has known for some time, that National doesn’t want to compete in local body politics and is prepared to do a deal to support Phil Goff.

Prominent Auckland National Party members and some MPs are working on a plan intended to give the centre right control of the Auckland Council.

The plan has been discussed by National’s Caucus and Party President Peter Goodfellow indicated at last weekend’s party conference that the party’s board would soon discuss how National dealt with local body elections.

Mr Goodfellow said that knowing that the Caucus has already ruled out allowing centre right candidates to stand under the National brand as Labour and Green candidates are.

Caucus are self-interested numpties…including Jami-lee Ross who declared to caucus that he didn’t want another Nat stomping around in his electorate.

But the plan Richard talks about isn’t really a plan.

It involved Paul Goldsmith, together with Desley Simpson, trotting around talking to people about something, they’re not quite sure what, but it won’t involve Maurice (just quietly) and #win.

They have no policy, no vehicle and no plan….worse they have no money for such a debacle.    Read more »

The Upcoming National Party Board Election

The National Party Board has an election for the first time in many years.

Caucus favourite and all round good bloke Grant McCullum is retiring, much to the disappointment of all those who have enjoyed many late nights out with him over the years. The National Party will be a sadder place for not having Grant around, and the party needs to consider how it brings the fun-loving type onto the board as the rest are very, very boring compared to Grant.

The other retirement is the (unfortunately) underwhelming scion of one of New Zealand’s most stellar families – Malcolm Plimmer, whose health is compelling him to retire.   Read more »

It is hard to know if Frances O’Sullivan is serious

Frances O’Sullivan has a frankly strange and meandering column in today’s ‘newspaper’.

In her column she makes this bizarre statement:

Increasingly there is also talk of a coalition of like-minded politicians to get Auckland moving.

Under this scenario, Labour MP Phil Goff is being touted as a mayoral candidate with the right-of-centre faction being led by Orakei Local Board chairwoman Desley Simpson.

Goff – who has been gallivanting in Rome this week with close friends former Labour political colleague Darren Hughes, Australian Ambassador Mike Rann (also a Kiwi) and Waitemata Local Board chairman Shale Chambers – has been part of the Auckland political scene for decades.

He is supposedly cut from Labour’s cloth.

But Goff is from the blue jeans brigade that made up the “Vietnam era” generation of politicians. The university lecturers, lawyers, and urban professionals who joined Labour in the 1970s and early 1980s with a clear aim to overthrow the spendthrift prime minister Sir Robert Muldoon, liberalise the New Zealand economy and get the nation focused on “paying its way”.   Read more »

We’ve dissected Labour, now what about the Tories?

Labour’s troubles have been dissected after the UK election disaster.

But what about the Tories?

Political parties that win often do not have a critical review done to improve. That is certainly the case with National here. No review is currently underway for Northland, and Steve Joyce and John Key have decided that none is really warranted because they are still riding high in the polls.

There is a reticence to change the board. They keep winning, as does the president – and so the board gets older, and more stale. Worse some practices have developed that are now seeing talent driven from the party because they don’t subscribe to the infallibility of the board. Excuses are made for refreshing the board…”it’s election year, don’t rock the boat”, or “we just won no need for change”, leaving a window of only one year to make those changes.

The Conservatives have the same problems cropping up now.

Breitbart looks at this, and it is funny how similar it is to the National party.:

I am as happy as the next conservative that the Party confounded all predictions and achieved the majority that has returned David Cameron for the next 5 years. Business and the stock market understandably breathed a huge sigh of relief.

But it is also clear that something sinister and fundamentally un-conservative has infected the way the Party conducts itself. More than ever before, it is consumed with a nasty, controlling and centralized culture that demands unquestioning conformity. And woe betide those with the temerity not to genuflect in fealty.

The recent attacks on the Bow Group and its chairman Ben Harris-Quinney and the commentator Tim Montgomerie offer an unpleasant example of a much wider malaise. The two men are not cut from the same ideological cloth, but both offer an approach to conservatism that at times differs from the current Conservative Party house view. This appears to make them fair game for ad hominem attack.

Read more »

Nats rolling in cash, far more effective with it than Kim Dotcom

Contrary to the myth the left wing likes to promote, that money buys elections, it really doesn’t.

Kim Dotcom proved that when despite claiming in court he was impoverished he donated millions to the Internet Party which spectacularly bombed.

Meanwhile the national party has been stashing the cash.

Donations to the National Party in 2014 jumped by more than half on the 2011 election year, as the party’s fundraiser outgunned Kim Dotcom’s largesse.

On Tuesday the Electoral Commission revealed the annual party returns, disclosing every donation registered political parties received over $1500, as well as totals for anonymous donations.

The National Party declared donations of $3.98 million, 55 per cent more than the $2.57m it raised in 2011.

Although Dotcom gave by far the largest political donation – $3.5 million – to the Internet Party, his party did not attract other cash from donors.

National raised just over $1 million from donations above $15,000, the level at which identities generally have to be made public. A further $2.75m was raised from donors who gave between $1500 and $15,000, a threshold below which the party can keep identities secret. All up, about 1000 people donated more than $1500 to the National Party.

National president Peter Goodfellow said the party had stayed in close contact with supporters and worked hard to raise cash, as it was going to be a “tough” campaign.

“We have 30,000 members and supporters. We keep good contact with them and they clearly showed that they wanted to support the policies that we were advocating,” he said on Tuesday.

Read more »

NZ Herald Crowdsourcing: We found nothing, but let’s smear National anyway

The NZ Herald launched a “crowdsourcing” initiative to go digging into political donations after the returns were released by they Electoral Commission.

It is the sort of panty sniffing behaviour we’ve come to expect from the Herald.

Basically they are trying to find  donors and then single them out for this donation or that donation and try to pass some sort of moral judgment on that.

Little wonder then that donors try to remain as anonymous as they can.

Essentially though the Herald has found nothing, but after touting their great initiative with much fanfare they had to write something. David Fisher was obviously busy making up something else so they pulled in Matt Nippert to write the hit job.

An analysis of electoral finance declarations shows more than 80 per cent of donations to National Party candidates were channelled through party headquarters in a loophole described as akin to legal “laundering”.

National’s heavy reliance on funding candidates with donations from the party – shown in a Herald study to account for more than $1m out of $1.2m raised by their candidates for the 2014 general election – was a “striking use of electoral law that appears to be laundering the money”, said Otago University political science lecturer Bryce Edwards.

Electoral law requires candidates to reveal the identity of donors who contribute $1,500 or more, but political parties can keep donors secret even if they give up to $15,000.

Dr Edwards said the channelling of candidate donations through parties had “become a way around” having to disclose more information about the source of campaign funds.

“It’s not illegal and it’s up to different interpretations whether it’s ethical or not, but there should now be heat on politicians to explain what’s going on and to tighten up this loophole,” he said.

Read more »

The post from The Standard that Labour doesn’t want you to see

Lyn Prentice from The Standard likes to go on about how independent the authors are, how no one tells them what to do or say, and since the election has been gobbing off repeatedly along those lines.

Then yesterday he wrote a post attacking Clayton Cosgrove.

In the afternoon however the post disappeared, and this message popped up on The Standard.

standard message

So, after telling us how all independent they are they get a message from Tim Barnett to take the post down, and incredibly they then do so.

I have had, over the years, many requests from the hierarchy of the National party requests to take posts down, or instructions to stop bashing people, like Peter Goodfellow, and all those requests were met with a polite “Get stuffed”. If they pushed the issue then it go a stronger response along the lines of “Go f*ck yourself”.

Yet here we have a supposedly independent blog and author taking orders from the Labour party hierarchy.

Word from my Labour sources, both inside Fraser House and labour’s caucus is that Barnett and Moira Coatsworth are trying to hose down the animosity and open warfare and so are strong arming people to shut up, or remove posts like the one that has disappeared from The Standard.

Unfortunately for the world’s greatest sysop this is the internet…and nothing is gone even when you delete it.

So as a public service and as a matter of public interest in trying to understand why the Labour party is successfully censoring The Standard, here is the text of the post that the Labour party is trying to quietly bury.    Read more »

The advent of political Mega-donors

The best thing about Kim Dotcom pouring millions into this election is that he has set the benchmark for all other parties…and it is the left-wing that has done it.

Previously we have had whinging from unions, Labour and the Greens about donations like that from Tony Astle or from chinese donors…but that was always small beer compared to the union cash, Owen Glenn’s half million to Labour and now Kim Dotcom’s millions to the Internet party.

Labour attacked Simon Lusk for daring to write a paper which some disaffected and myopic Nats leaked to them, where he advocated for the professionalisation of politics. Precisely that which Kim Dotcom is now doing.

We haven’t heard a peep really though from Trevor Mallard about German bagmen, or paid professionals, and nor will we…because when the left do it then everything is ok.

We have now entered an era of big money in politics and there isn’t a damn thing that can be done to stop it. I welcome the advent of this…and quietly snigger at the trap the left has set for themselves.

National though needs to clean out the board and any fool holding positions that hankers for the era of amateurism in politics. They need to go, because like with Rugby Union the inevitable has happened, and it is now time for the professionals. Peter Goodfellow, Alistair Bell and any other office holder who advocated for the “Lusk Clause” in candidate training needs to quit. The party now needs to mobilise and raise proper funds and set up a formalised training programme that recognises true political talent and encourages that.   Read more »

So why did you support MMP then Bill?

I have repeatedly written about the strategic stupidity of the National party.

At the last election there was a referendum about voting systems and the “brains” trust of National, which included the idiot Peter Goodfellow as well as John Key, Steven Joyce, Gerry Brownlee and Bill English resolved to do absolutely nothing about taking a position on MMP. Instead they let the unions and the opposition all lobby for the retention of a system that lets a coalition of the losers take power.

Now Bill English is crying rivers of tears about it all.

Labour could still win power at the next election, National deputy leader and Finance Minister Bill English said in a speech warning against complacency.

“The Opposition can be divided, it can have many leaders and co-leaders, it can have no vision, very little policy, be disorganised but under MMP it can win and we need to remember that every single day.”

Mr English was speaking at National’s northern regional conference in Auckland this morning.

He said National would need to win the highest vote any incumbent Government had ever won – it was re-elected for a second term in 2011 with 47.31 per cent of the vote.

Read more »

Didn’t anybody warn her?

Peter Goodfellow and Desley Simpson. Photo / Norrie Montgomery

Peter Goodfellow and Desley Simpson. Photo / Norrie Montgomery

National Party powerbrokers Peter Goodfellow and long-term partner Desley Simpson have married in an intimate service at a resthome.

Goodfellow, president of the National Party and heir to a $500 million fortune, married Simpson in a chapel at the resthome of St Andrew’s Village in Glendowie where his elderly father lives. Read more »