Holly Walker

With friends like these?

Holly Walker is taking a flogging from?all sides?with Dave Henderson of the?Association of Non-Governmental Organisations of Aotearoa?Do-Gooders Socialist Association of Aotearoa giving her a good slapping.

Ms Walker’s presentation to the select committee considering the bill contains four guiding principles:

1. Lobbying is a legitimate activity.

2. Open and accessible government and Parliament is vital.

. The public has a right to know who is lobbying MPs on which issues.

4. A lobbying disclosure regime needs to be practical, workable and fair.

No-one can disagree with these, but the bill before the House does not meet the last of the four. It is a sledgehammer for a nut.

What is being proposed doesn’t differentiate between the so-called bad lobbyists and those organisations and individuals who are participating in a democratic right to discuss and put forward a particular point of view.

No lobbying regime in the world has been able to come up with a justifiable definition of??good? vs ?evil? lobbying.? Holly?s real motive to have a law that enables her to publicly target groups she doesn?t like when they meet with her political opponents.

What is being proposed doesn’t differentiate between the so-called bad lobbyists and those organisations and individuals who are participating in a democratic right to discuss and put forward a particular point of view.

This latter group accounts for 95 per cent of the lobbying that takes place in New Zealand.

These discussions are often about informing MPs and officials on the impact of particular policies and issues in our communities. These are crucial to a functioning democracy.

The bill is in danger of stifling these discussions through bureaucracy. It appears to be written around an assumption that a few unidentified suppliers of independent advice are somehow acting inappropriately and thus need to be regulated.

Even the lefties are effectively calling the Lobbying Bill undemocratic.

This bill will keep charities and community organisations from fulfilling their purpose as they spend their time, our donations and taxpayer money creating lists of all their interactions with MPs.

How can this work when many people expect to see their MP at the supermarket on a Saturday or at the school fair on a Sunday?

Interestingly, this morning the tip-line has learned that Holly has sought to block certain vocal critics of her Bill from presenting to the select committee.

More on that to come?

Holly, give Jordan a call

Holly Walker scoffed at the offer of Jordan Williams to fix her silly lobbying bill. She should have a snack of humble pie and pick up the phone and give Jordan a call.

A bill seeking to make lobbying of politicians more transparent could have a chilling effect on communication with members of Parliament says Mary Harris, the Clerk of Parliament.

She said the bill would affect daily dealings of MPs and their staff with the public “and potentially could discourage constituents from engaging with members and their offices”.

Because it covered communication with MPs and their staff it could have “significant implications” for the House in the performance of its functions.

She had concerns that what she called the broad definition of lobbying activity in the bill could have “a potential chilling effect on open communication” with MPs.

“Many hundreds of individuals and organisations have contact with members and ministers every day, both in relation to matters of public policy and also in respect of personal grievances and concerns,” she said in her submission yesterday to the government administration select committee considering the bill.

Ms Harris also believed requiring lobbyists to register under law could give them a status or pre-eminent standing in policymaking processes.

“Such standing might be desirable in larger democracies, where the size of the body politic means not all who wish to participate in parliamentary processes can do so,” she said. “This is not the case in New Zealand.”

Ms Harris said the bill as worded meant she and her staff were not exempted. She suggested the bill might be better limited to the decision-making processes of ministers rather than all MPs.

She also questioned the Auditor-General developing lobbying codes in light of her “existing constitutional relationships with members, ministers and the House and her role in auditing the public sector”.

The bill is a dog’s breakfast that has been sicked up on the carpet. It should be substantially amended or withdrawn entirely. At the very least Holly should call Jordan.

Gillard goes arse up again

Julia Gillard has tipped over again after a shoe malfunction. She should have taken a leaf out of Holly Walker’s fashion tips and worn gumboots when walking on grass.

She sure is going to have a massive sore cankle in the morning.

Julia Gillard fell over spectacularly near the Gandhi Memorial in Delhi today after having yet another shoe problem.

On her way to a press conference on the last day of her tour of India, the Prime Minister lost a shoe when the heel dug into the soft grass.

Later she laughed off the incident, providing a lengthy explanation for the men around: “For men who get to wear flat shoes all day every day, if you wear a heel it can get embedded in soft grass.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard walks past the spot where she tripped earlier during her official visit to India.

”And then when you pull your foot out, the shoe doesn’t come, and then the rest of it is as you saw.”

Walker’s Gumboots Ok, Curran’s Rugby Jersey Not?

What the f***?

An eagle eyed long-time reader spotted the horribly sanctimonious Holly Walker yesterday making a mockery of Parliament’s dress code in an attempt to be taken less seriously than Kermit the Frog as she sits with the adults.

I look forward to Eric Roy, Tau Henare, Chris Tremain and Todd McClay wearing gumboots in Parliament and seeing how that goes down with the Speaker if they do a bit of duck shooting from their mai-mai.

Walker’s female co-Leader has purple hair. Are the Greens in a competition to make the Maori Party seem dignified and well attired? The rest of Walker’s outfit is bad enough. A man cannot get away with looking as disheveled.

If Clare Curran was booted out for the Highlanders jersey, how the hell does Holly Walker get away with gumboots? She’s an MP and an alleged Rhodes Scholar. Although you would not know it after her recent failure in the “Lobbying” Bill and a pelting from Labour’s Senior MP’s.

Women must wear “normal business attire”. A female farmer would not wear gumboots in the city if they had to walk on carpet. Walker’s are probably cheap and from The Warehouse so she cannot claim them to even be a Jimmy Choo/Hunter fashion item. They also break the “no dickheads” rule. Only rural New Zealanders and blue collar workers should ever wear gumboots. Anyone wearing them from a city looks like a dickhead.

Does Winston Peters describe Walker as dressing like “Brown’s cows”?

But Winston Peters, noted for his sartorial credentials, said he didn’t think that leather jackets and cardigans were what New Zealanders expected to see when they came to Parliament.

He had observed relaxed dress standards among men in the Danish Parliament. “They looked like Brown’s cows.”

There was an insignificantly ranked MP from the Cook Islands government seated in Parliament yesterday. Dressed in her form of business attire she must have been sniggering wondering why she bothered. She will return to the Cook Islands and laugh with tales to the jandal wearers at Trader Jacks that New Zealand is so backward she saw an MP in their Parliament wearing gumboots.

UPDATE: Some self important spokesperson from the Greens has rung me to clarify that they were not gumboots…they were in fact Green leather boots…I remarked they still look like gumboots.

One thing that does come to mind though…Is Holly Walker a vegetarian/vegan?

Labour protecting the unions from Lobbying Bill

While Holly Walker’s bill may be woefully drafted, what is worse is Labour’s attempts to protect their union mates.

Labour wants trade unions excluded from a potential lobbying register and blames the MP who drafted the plan for including them in the first place.

Green MP Holly Walker’s member’s bill would require those who lobby politicians to be registered and adhere to a code of ethics.

It passed its first reading with unanimous support from all parties, but Labour has since put forward an amendment that would exclude trade unions.

The unions are major backers of the Labour Party.

Follow the money.

Labour has no funders outside the union movement, and without union money they are screwed. National are too strategically stupid to make any changes to legislation to make their sworn enemies suffer, so I would expect Comrade Kate will support Labour’s attempts to amend the bill to protect her mates in the union.

Holly Walker’s Woeful Bill Exposed, Ctd

Someone was a bit punchy for an unknown reason yesterday and took it out on his sanctimonious, holier than thou constituent who then had a tantrum accusing that someone of being wrong.

In doing so that someone keeps up the good work of Jordan Williams in exposing Holly Walker’s inadequacy in legal drafting despite the advantage of an Oxford education and a Rhodes Scholarship.

Well done to that someone. ?Jordan will pass by this week using his swipe card with some more tips on how inadequate this Bill is and how you can help combat more of the Greens silliness.

Acting “Too Gay” Bad For You

A medical examiner has told students not to act “too gay” if they wish to be a Doctor and that Asians should sound more Welsh or Scottish.

In one passage covering what she referred to as the ‘camp category’ she wrote: ‘One candidate was facing a 3rd sitting and yet no one had told him that his mannerisms, gait, speech were too overly gay, and that he was sitting an exam administered by a right-wing conservative Royal College.

It it is probably quite good advice

Other advice in Dr Coales’ guide tells Asian trainees to ‘focus on emphasizing the lyrical Scottish or Welsh accent.’ Dr Coales also suggests female candidates avoid wearing floral dresses so that they appear more like a doctor rather than a nurse.

I mean who takes Holly Walker seriously in the gawdy outfits she wears to Parliament?

In a separate article published in Pulse Magazine in 2009 she said male students should consider shaving off their facial hair so they don’t appear ‘deceitful’ or ‘unclean’. Meanwhile she said those who are overweight should ‘project an image of Santa Claus’ by interlocking their fingers over their stomachs.

Gerry Brownlee does a mean Santa Claus but Richard Prosser might do better with a shave so not to looks so deceitful or unclean.

Holly Walker’s Woeful Bill Exposed

Junior Lawyer Jordan Williams has come out and given Little Miss Rhodes Scholar a good paddy whack for a stupid piece of legislation. ?Some say it is as silly as Jacinda Ardern’s poorly drafted Gay Adoption Bill.? ?This is not a good example of the capabilities of young women elevated to positions of grandeur before their ability catches up.

The only response Walker really has is to turn it personal and whinge ?that Jordan is not neutral. ?Which is quite ironic considering it is a lobbying Bill and he is registered quite transparently. It is also ironic that when the bill was introduced Holly Walker said in?parliament?that she would accept assistance form anyone…she must have whispered out of the reach of the microphones…”except for Jordan Williams”.

“An accountant emailing an MP about a tax policy on behalf of a client will be committing a criminal offence unless the accountant is a registered lobbyist. A fine of up to $10,000 for individuals and $20,000 for companies can be imposed.

Walker actually agrees her Bill is stupid. ?Perhaps, like with Ardern a grown up can assist her with the drafting and leave her to wear cardigans in the cheap seats. ?That grown up will not be a neutral bystander either, they will be a Pinko. ?Perhaps a friendly, helpful yet backstabber like Hutt colleague Trevor Mallard can assist. ?He seems to assist everyone else on the left when they are technically deficient with fine points of procedure in the House.

In reply, Ms Walker blogged Mr Williams is hardly ?a neutral bystander?.

She refuses to accept the bill will harm the democratic right to access MPs.

But she admits the current draft has a very wide definition, so as to ?capture influence whenever and wherever it takes place?.

Ms Walker also acknowledges New Zealand does not have high-profile scandals seen overseas.

As an aside, I ask Jock Anderson if this is acceptable language for a fine publication as the NBR.

A back passage storm is brewing between a political lobbyist and a Greenie who wants tighter control around lobbying.


Plastic Bags and Sanctimony of The Greens

Holly Walker is a right regular drama Queen as an MP. ?Excited to be everywhere.

Her cat however appears less than impressed with the practising of Green virtues in the house and a little confused by Holly’s mixed messages.





The trouble with Chauvel’s amendment

? Karl Du Fresne

Charles Chauvel inadvertently reinforced for many the belief that Labour is captured ?by the?unions. Karl du Fresne explains why and also how this will likely cause trouble between the Greens and Labour:

In other words, transparency?s all very well when it?s wicked professional lobbyists and corporates who are under scrutiny, but Chauvel thinks people like Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly and secretary Peter Conway ? two of the lobbyists outed last week as having swipe cards giving them special access to Parliament ? should be allowed to continue flying under the radar. They are, he says, ?less sinister? than the other sort of lobbyist. Well, he would say that, given Labour?s need to protect its friends and benefactors in the unions.But hang on. Either we have transparency or we don?t. Chauvel wants us to believe that union lobbyists are all honourable people with unimpeachable motives, so can be relied on to go about their business without scrutiny, while anyone representing business is by definition ?sinister? and cannot be trusted. Good luck with that, as they say. He also expects us to assume that all charities, churches and NGOs are by definition beyond suspicion when many of them are highly politicised and should be subjected to exactly the same rules of transparency as everyone else.

The trouble with Chauvel?s panicky back-pedalling is that it immediately creates the suspicion that Labour and the unions have something to hide. The public are not stupid: they will think it very telling that Labour and the unions are the only people baulking at the Walker bill.

It also hints at the tensions that would inevitably arise in a Labour-Greens coalition, where the well-intentioned idealism of Green MPs like Walker would sit very uncomfortably alongside the murky realpolitik practised by Labour.