Cehill Pienaar

Skullduggery in the Hunua Selection?

Long time readers will know this blog does not support any candidate for selection in National seats, believing in fair play and ethics in selections at all times.

In 2011 WOBH outed the skullduggery in Rodney where Brent Robinson and Cehill Pienaar tried to jack up a selection by not following the rules or the unwritten selection etiquette of the party.

In 2011 the National Party was forced to abandon their selection in Rodney and start again because the electorate chair was trying to jack up the selection. The electorate chair was forced to resign the day after the selection, and deservedly so as there is no place for dodgy behaviour from impartial office-holders in the National Party.

In 2014 it appears that certain electorate chairs haven’t learned that they need to remain impartial.? Read more »

Rodney Skulduggery Update

I have refrained from commenting on the Rodney selection in the last few weeks as the tipline has been quiet. The simple explanation for this is that the revised process has been a lot fairer than the process was before it was suspended, and this is a credit to Party President Peter Goodfellow who had the guts to stop an hopelessly flawed process.

Selection for Rodney is tonight, and so I want to run a quick recap on why the process was suspended and started again.

  1. Brent Robinson tried to win the process through unscrupulous means.
  2. He stacked his branch with members from his fundamentalist church, increasing his branch membership by around 600%. This completely blindsided the sitting MP and the other three branches, and forced an audit of membership.
  3. Brent then tried to intimidate candidates out of the race. One requested a meeting with the electorate chair and was ambushed by Cehill Pienaar, Brent Robinson and ten others and basically told Brent had the nomination won. Many quality candidates were likewise ambushed and scared off.
  4. At a meeting of delegates for nominees, Brent colluded with the electorate chair to stitch up his opponents by suggesting a speech to those in the room. He was prepared for this, and his opponents were not. New Zealand?s favourite grandmother, Maggie Barry, was intimidated out of the race by this and is now seeking the nomination in North Shore.

The wise words of Solomon provide some insights for the good delegates of Rodney:

Proverbs 28:2 When there is moral rot within a nation, its government topples easily. But wise and knowledgeable leaders bring stability.

As of late I have gained a great deal of understanding from Solomon’s wise words in the book of proverbs. There are many great verses that budding politicans would do well to read and understand the wisdom of Solomon. The behaviour exhibited in Rodney amongst some and in particular Brent Robinson was not the makings for a long term National MP. It smacks of hypocrisy, and as a Christian I find Brent?s behaviour absolutely appalling. Again Solomon provides appropriate words:

Proverbs 28:10 Those who lead good people along an evil path will fall into their own trap, but the honest will inherit good things.

Delegates should choose their new MP carefully, and choose him or her from the other four candidates all who have not tried to rig selection. I wish Karen Rolleston, John Kirikiri, Chris Penk and Mark Mitchell well tonight.

When two dogs fight

The Rodney selection debacle has finally made the papers. Adam Bennett has been following this from afar and has put the pieces of the puzzle together. Apart from the old “Ned Flanders” photo of Peter Goodfellow the article is very accurate, at least until they quote from Alan Towers.

The selection of National’s candidate for the safe Rodney seat has been delayed amid bitter infighting, with frontrunners Brent Robinson and Scott Simpson said to be tarnished by claims of attempts to slant the selection process in their favour.

Delegates were to have met this week to select the candidate to replace Lockwood Smith from a shortlist of five – Mark Mitchell, John Kirikiri, Christopher Penk, Mr Robinson and Mr Simpson.

If the electorate chair Cehill Pienaar and Regional Chair Alan Towers hadn’t both tried to jack up the delegates then the buggers’ muddle that exists now wouldn’t have?occurred.

Once?again I?have?been proven to be right with my allegations.

It is also understood a number of those signed up recently to Wainui should, according to party rules, have been registered to other branches because of where they live.

National’s hierarchy has decided to formalise branch boundaries within the electorate, a move that is likely to see members reallocated from Wainui to other branches.

That is the branch stacking sorted but what about the Regional delegate stacking?

With both frontrunners now perceived to have indulged in “dirty pool”, the party insider said the way was now clear for one of the other candidates to come through.

Strong potential contenders include Mr Mitchell, a former policeman, and Mr Kirikiri, the district’s former deputy mayor whose key strength is said to be his strong relationships within an electorate that is regarded as very parochial.

Another party stalwart also said the competition was now far more open.

“People want this to be a fair contest and they don’t want to see a few people abusing the rules, so I think there’s an element to that.”

Dirty pool indeed! More like Murky pool. The most hilarious quote is one from Alan Towers:

Mr Goodfellow said he understood Mr Towers was reconsidering how he would appoint delegates to the selection committee.

This was because of “the criticism he’s facing that the way in which he’s exercised his discretion hasn’t generally been what you’d expect”.

This week, however, Mr Towers dismissed the allegations about his selections as “ridiculous”.

The only changes he was making in terms of appointing the 15 delegates needed to make up the quorum of 60 for the selection panel would be to reflect changes to the pool of potential delegates resulting from the reallocation of party members among the electorate’s four branches.

I hesitate to call people liars…except when they lie. I knew Alan Towers would do and say that, I have been waiting patiently for the lie to come out. Does he really want me to publish the list of delegates he appointed, the electorates they are from and the relationship to Scott Simpson? Because I will if he keeps lying. As a taster perhaps the media would like to ask him about Roger B. of Hunua/Botany electorate , or perhaps Jim S. of Mt Roskill electorate, or maybe Roy M. from Auckland Central and then there is the dear old thing from up north who has described Scott?Simpson?as “like a?son to her“. Alan Towers knows I know he isn’t speaking the truth, but does he want everyone else to know.

What Alan Towers could do, though, is the honest thing and change the regional delegates copying either the model Malcolm Plimmer used in Palmerston North, with five long standing members from each of the three surrounding electorates, or by putting ranking party members in as delegates.

The fifteen people this blog would like to see as delegates are:

The four Deputy Regional Chairs
The six members of the list ranking committee
The electorate chairs from Whangarei, East Coast Bays, North Shore & Northcote
PLus any shortfall made up of deputy electorate chairs.

These people all hold positions within the party they have been elected to, and they were not elected because they were Scott Simpson loyalists. So the stench of corruption would be removed from the selection process if the regional delegates are changed in the same way as the rigged local delegates are going to be removed.

This whole messy buggers’ muddle of a process has been a shambles, and it is fair to say that Alan Towers chances of ever getting on the board are now non-existent.


Palmerston North selection update

The selection for the new National party candidate for Palmerston North was held today.

Unlike all the dodgy?shenanigans?by locals and regional power?brokers?in Rodney the selection was a fairly straight forward affair.

Ultimately being local counted and Leonie Hapeta narrowly edged out Karen Rolleston for the nomination. Leonie will make a great candiate and short of breaking her ankle like she did in the local body elections will be out door knocing and securing the last provincial seat that Labour currently holds for National.

Leonie is a battler and can beat Iain Lees-Galloway.

Karen Rolleston is a very capable candidate too, and had she not been bullied out of Rodney by Brent Robinson and Cehill Pienaar may well have had a good crack at that seat. With some good sound advice and some fine tuning by a competent strategist she could well make a good showing soon in a selection closer to her home base of the North Shore. Karen can contect me for some suggestions.

All the best to Leonie Hapeta though, take the fight to Labour and tip out their lack-lustre candidate in November.

I'm still wondering

Yesterday I pondered whether Cehill Pienaar had filled in his immigration application honesty and completely. I also ponder whether or not he answered Question H3, the next to last question honestly and truthfully in full?
immigration application form question h3
If he does not fall into that category, who does?
Also via the tipline I have been provided with an extract from the Immigration Operations Manual:

A5.25 Applicants normally ineligible for a residence class visa unless granted a character waiver.

Applicants who will not normally be granted a residence class visa, unless granted a character waiver (see A5.25.1(b) below), include any person who has been:

  1. convicted at any time of any offence against the immigration, citizenship or passport laws of any country; or
  2. convicted at any time of any offence involving prohibited drugs; or
  3. convicted at any time of any offence involving dishonesty; or
  4. convicted at any time of any offence of a sexual nature; or
  5. convicted at any time of any offence for which they were sentenced to a term of imprisonment (whether the sentence was of immediate effect or was deferred or was suspended in whole or in part); or
  6. convicted (whether in New Zealand or not) of an offence committed at any time when the applicant was in New Zealand unlawfully or was the holder of a temporary entry class visa or held a temporary permit under the Immigration Act 1987 or was exempt under that Act from the requirement to hold a permit, being an offence for which the court has power to impose imprisonment for a term of three months or more; or
  7. convicted at any time of any offence involving violence; or
  8. convicted at any time during the last five years, of an offence (including a traffic offence), involving dangerous driving, driving having consumed excessive alcohol (including drunk driving and driving with a blood or breath alcohol content in excess of a specified limit) or driving having consumed drugs; or
  9. in the course of applying for a New Zealand visa (or a permit under the Immigration Act 1987), has made any statement or provided any information, evidence or submission that was false, misleading or forged, or withheld material information; or
  10. at any time in a public speech or public comments, or public broadcast, or in publicly distributing or publishing a document;
    1. argues that one race or colour is inherently inferior or superior to another race or colour; or
    2. used language intended to encourage hostility or ill will against any person or group of persons on the basis of colour, race or ethnic or national origins of that person or group; or
  11. has been, or is, a member of (or adheres or has adhered to) any organisation or group of people which (at the time of the person’s membership or adherence) had objectives or principles based on:
    1. hostility against people or groups of people on the basis of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins; or
    2. an assumption that persons of a particular race or colour are inherently inferior or superior to other races or colours; or
  12. in support of any application by another person for a New Zealand visa (or a permit under the Immigration Act 1987), has made any statement or provided any information, evidence or submission that was false, misleading or forged.

Note: When considering whether or not an applicant has committed an act that comes under A5.25 (i), (j) or (k) or (l) above, an immigration officer should establish whether, on the balance of probabilities, it is more likely than not that the applicant committed such an act.

It is as clear as the nose on Nelson Mandela’s face that Cehill Pienaar meets all of those criteria highlighted. I have provided several blog posts with the evidence of such activity. Note that both the immigration form and also the?immigration?guidelines don’t actually ask whether or not you have renounced this behaviours, they simply ask whether ot not you were involved, and Cehill Pienaar was most definitely involved.

People have been thrown out of the country for far less.

I'm wondering

I’m wonder how Cehill Pienaar got the right to stay in NZ?
I also wonder if he declared his previous background in South Africa as revealed on this blog on his immigration application forms, which all require certain information:
Questions H5 and H6 from immigration application form

Questions H5 and H6 from immigration application form

Now, I wonder how he got in here with his background?
Did he declare his background?
If he didn’t declare his background, will Immigration revoke any visa he has now?
Will they prosecute him for failing to provide relevant information?
Or will he be regarded as a National party member in good standing and be left alone because of the embarrassment he might cause?

Knowing me, Knowing You – Cehill Pienaar – Part three

Ahead of the first meet the candidates evening in Rodney tonight I hear through my vast network of informants that apparently Cehill Pienaar thinks that I have been silenced, that no more will be heard from me on Rodney.

Sorry meneer, I cannot be silenced quite so easily.

The New York Times has an old link to an article about the fight against the removal of apartheid, a fight Cehill Pienaar was in the front lines of.

Cehill Pienaar on FW deKlerkWhere did Cehill make this comment about FW deKlerk’s trip to Europe to discuss the process to bring about the end of apartheid.

At a rally at the Voortrekker Monument:

A hillside amphitheater behind the Voortrekker Monument was filled with whites holding flags of the old Boer Republic, the Conservative Party and the neo-Nazi Afrikaner Resistance Movement along with bright umbrellas against the autumn sun.

Mr. Treuernicht contended that the African National Congress, which espouses nonracialism, hated Afrikaners and ”rejects our right to exist.” Mr. Treuernicht proposed that Inkatha, a Zulu political and cultural organization headed by Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi, ally itself with the Conservatives to stop Communism from taking over South Africa.

Ahhh…so he was there speaking to the neo-nazi?Afrikaner?Resistance Movement led by Eug?ne Terre’Blanche, and there is also the link to Inkatha. Just a reminder to dear readers of the flag of the AWB. a flag that was flying in great abundance when Cehill Pienaar made that impassioned speech.

I will not be?silenced?while we have un-reconstituted racists inhabiting the National party, and worse when those same racists are plotting and colluding to jack up a selection on behalf of Brent Robinson. There are four other fine candidates that delegates can choose from without choosing the?malignancy?of these two.

A thought for Rodney Electorate

After reading The Richest Man Who Ever Lived: King Solomon’s Secrets to Success, Wealth, and Happiness, a book by Steven K Scott, I have been reading Proverbs every day. There are 31 chapters in Proverbs and so I read a chapter each day. If it is February or any other month with less than 31 days then the last day I will read the?remaining?chapters, and then start again from Chapter 1 the next day.

As I have ben reading each chapter I have come across Proverbs that apply as much to today as they did when the book was written. I have also noticed that many Proverbs relate to governance. Today being the 22nd, I read Chapter 22 and verse 8 leapt from the page as being?particularly?pertinent for Rodney electorate.

Proverbs 22:8 (New Living Translation)

Those who plant injustice will harvest disaster,
and their reign of terror will come to an end.

National party delegates are sensible people, as they go into the meet the candidates meetings and the final selection I know that they will do the right thing.

Knowing me, Knowing you – Cehill Pienaar – Part 2

The tipline has run hot. There is much coming out of South Africa about Cehill Pienar, the electorate chair of Rodney who has tried rather ineptly to stitch up a selection for Brent Robinson. there is so much that I think I will just drip feed it out this week.

Here is a couple of starters for those who think he is just a mild old saffa living life peacefully in New Zealand.

First up is a speech he gave to Orewa Rotary back in 2008. I’m told he fondly reminisced about the good old days of apartheid. In that?document?the full speech notes are available on request. If I was a reporter I would be asking for that.

Then there is this little gem from South Africa about Cehill Pienaar.

Well I only have at this moment to go on what their leaders say. And in the declaration of Mr Cehill Pienaar, the Leader of the Conservative Party in the Orange Free State, last night after the congress was closed, the Free State Congress of the Conservative Party, they are now saying that if we don’t get an election the only option open to us will be violence.

That is from an interview with Kobies Gouws in 1991. They are talking about the troubles in Ventersdorp between the AWB and South African security forces. The AWB of course was famously lead by white racist Eugene Terreblanche. Cehill Pienaar was a leader in the Conservative Party and the only sensible comparison you can make is that they were like Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams is like Cehill Pienaar, the AWB, along with their proxy thugs in the government like the CCB were the armed wing. They worked hand in hand, and ultimately before coming to New Zealand Cehill Pienaar joined forces by becoming a senator within the IFP.

Of course Cehill Pienaar likes to say he is a reformed racist because he was once a senator for the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). He goes out of his way to say this to anyone who asks, including candidates seeking his vote in selections. He even tells reporters that he has no knowledge of the far right. He is a liar. Anyone with even a basis kind of knowledge of the IFP knows that they were toadies to the backers of apartheid. Not only that they worked hand in hand with both the CCB and the AWB to terrorise their opponents to achieve the their goal of a Zulu homeland. The far right of South Africa was determined to form a White homeland and supporting the IFP was a tool try to achieve that.

There is plenty more to come on this man, but it galls me as a kiwi that people like him are hiding here in New Zealand and attempting to pervert our democratic processes here. By helping, orchestrating and enabling the?branch?stacking of Brent Robinson he has brought his?despicable?politics to the fore in New Zealand.

The funny thing is that they thought they could get away with it. Thankfully we have technology and good honest people in Rodney ratting out the dirty, underhand tactics. Just a few years ago they might have succeeded.

Rodney Selection Skulduggery Update

Thanks to the tip line a lot more information has come through about the Rodney Selection process and the highly unethical behaviour of Brent Robinson and Cehill Pienaar in trying to pervert the democratic intentions of the National party’s rules and constitution. Apart from Branch Stacking, Cehill has attempted to force out long standing members who would not favour Brent, including Lockwood Smith?s long time campaign manager. Lockie is apparently irate but being a thoroughly nice bloke is just going to be really very cross about it all.

Stuff has now run an article on the skullduggery.

Skulduggery in Rodney second billing on Stuff

Though the quotes from an un-named senior party person are telling:

‘The politics of the party are more important than the pulpit, which is the driving force for these candidates?

”They will be sticky on social issues.”

The source said conservatives are viewed as not in touch with middle New Zealand and not in line with John Key’s broader image.

The source said the politics of the Christian-right does not fit in with the party’s broader appeal.

”It really is the hyprocritical deviousness that is apparent which is hard for members to take.”

My sources inside National say that it is likely Brent is going to be told that the regional delegates will be stacked against him, and pressure exerted against him if he chooses not to withdraw from the race. The finer points of how this will happen have not yet been thrashed out, but they will be in the next three or four days. He will be given the clear message if he does withdraw there will be no long term repercussions and he will have a very good chance of being selected in East Coast Bays in 2014 when Murray retires.

Through the tip-line and google alerts this blog is now in contact with some interesting media sources in South Africa who are considering running stories on what Cehill Pienaar is doing. Apparently there are a few people in the South African press who have long memories of this man, and there have been offers of providing full details of his extremely colourful past, especially in the 1980s, to this blog and their media friends in New Zealand.