Visualising the Budget, Ctd

Your NZ

Following on from Rodney Hide’s column this morning Pete George has helpfully prepared a graphic to assist you in understanding how much money our government is spending…imagine what it would look like if Labour was spending freely.

Thoughts on Len’s Jafa-taxes

Len Brown couldn’t be trusted with a council credit card – what makes him think he can prudently spend $10 billion dollars?

Graph of the Day

George W. Bush was a good president in many respects but in others he was a wasteful, free spending looter of the economy.

The graph below from the New York Times shows why. A similar graph here would look really sick for Labour. It would highlight Clark and Cullen screwing up our economy badly by locking in spending and blowing large cash amounts of white elephants that need comprehensive feeding plans like Kiwirail.

Of course harden trolls and pinko apologists will attempt to describe tax cuts as spending. They aren’t. And this post is about the validity or otherwise of tax cuts. It is about locked in spending forcing the hand of future government.



Dear Lockwood

Hon Dr Lock­wood Smith
Speaker of the House of Representatives

By blog and email

Re: Breach of Par­lia­men­tary Ser­vices Spend­ing Rules

Dear Dr Smith,

Please find over­leaf  a scanned copy of a brochure sent to the general electorate by Labour over the weekend of 16-17 July 2011.

This “postcard” is authorised by Rick Barker and carries the parliamentary crest suggesting that Parliamentary Services paid for the brochure.

The brochure does not carry the recommended wording as stipulated by the Electoral Commission in their advice to parties earlier this year (attached).

In addition the brochure carries a website for voters to gather additional information. This website is not funded by Parliamentary Services, it clearly is a site that asks for donations, votes and membership in clear breach of Parliamentary Services and Electoral Commission guidelines. By funding the brochure which then directs voters to Labour’s own site, authorised by Chris Flatt, not Rick Barker, they have deliberately obscured the purpose of the brochure to Parliamentary Services when seeking funding.

Could you please clar­ify whether it is legal for the Labour Party to use Par­lia­men­tary Ser­vices fund­ing for the ben­e­fit of a polit­i­cal party and in par­tic­u­lar the ben­e­fit of the Labour party in order to solicit votes, membership or money? If it is not could you please tell me what steps you intend tak­ing against Labour, and what steps I per­son­ally can take to stop any party abus­ing Par­lia­men­tary Ser­vices funding.

In the inter­ests of pro­vid­ing transparency and infor­ma­tion for the pub­lic of New Zealand I would like to pub­lish all the rules and guide­lines that polit­i­cal par­ties rely upon for deci­sions around use of Par­lia­men­tary Ser­vices fund­ing on this blog. Could you please pro­vide this information?

Yours faith­fully

Cameron Slater