How much of Labour’s ICT policy did Dotcom write?

Yesterday Labour’s ICT policy got leaked, with all its naf names for things.

Clare Curran got blamed but good sources tell me it came from David Cunliffe’s office, in any case he is the spokesperson responsible for ICT.

It doesn’t really matter though, Curran was thrown under the bus. Isaac Davidson from the Herald reports:

Labour has revealed that it embarrassingly sent internal policy documents and speech notes for leader David Cunliffe to a National Party Cabinet Minister.

ICT spokeswoman Clare Curran’s staff accidentally emailed the documents to Communications and Information Technology Minister Amy Adams.

One of the documents outlined Labour’s potential strategy in the ICT sector.

It included proposals such as a fixed monthly allocation of broadband for every citizen, a Digital Bill of Rights, and a levy on telecommunications companies or internet service providers to fund New Zealand digital content.

Ms Adams said it was not the first time she had been accidentally emailed confidential Labour documents.

“Strangely enough, it’s the second time they’ve included me on their internal communications.

So maybe they like me, who knows? ??

“They invited me to a strategy session just after Mr Cunliffe became leader so I’m starting to get a complex.”

The minister said she only had a brief look at the documents but it appeared that Labour’s main idea was to start all their policies with the word Kiwi.

Ms Curran’s document outlined plans for policies called KiwiMap, KiwiCode, KiwiCall, KiwiCap, KiwiCloud and Kiwis Come Home.

I received many communications about this last night.

My sources inside the grounds of the Dotcom Mansion tell me that these proposals were the exact ones discussed with Dotcom, indeed promoted by him and that extensive meetings were held after Curran’s two visits to the mansion to discuss them and flesh them out. Make no mistake this policy is Dotcom’s policy…the source are adamant that this is what has been planned all along.

With all the secret meetings, and now secret donation trusts one has to wonder just who are the anonymous other parties who donated, and given the leak of a policy document that bears an uncanny resemblance to policy discussions held at the mansion questions might be validly raised.