Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Corruption at the Electoral Commission?



Dear Leader appears to control the police but has she got the Electoral Commission in her pocket too?
It certainly seemed bizarre that the Employers and Manufacturers Association cannot campaign on various issues while the EPMU is somehow an independent third party that is not really Liarbour in drag.
Then, yesterday Keeping Stock yesterday noted a delightful contradiction concerning New Zealand First.
Decision #1 - the Democrats for Social Credit filed its 2007 return 19 days late, without excuse, and the matter has been referred to the Police for investigation.
Decision #2 - New Zealand First is given a “last chance” to file its 2005, 2006 and 2007 returns, which it has already filed, while not disclosing ANY donations.
The party is already under investigation by the Police and the Serious Fraud Office over its funding, and its leader is before the Privileges Committee over another funding issue.
Whale Oil continues the story:
"It appears that there are at least two standards at the Electoral Commission, one for tiny parties outside of parliament that no-one has heard of and that involved police investigations and one for political parties that are members of the government protected by being close to Helen Clark.
How many chances does NZ First get? No other party gets so many chances. Is there any
point to the elections when it appears the Electoral Commission is hopelessly compromised."
Adam Smith, at the Inquiring Mind, says there are other questions that need to be asked.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dear Leader appears to control the police but has she got the Electoral Commission in her pocket too?

yes of course!


remember 2005. When the electoral commission actually came out and said that Labour corruptly stole the election? What was the result? Labour removed from office and Don Brash as PM?

Nope - the head of the electoral commission was replaced.

Even Labour's returns show that Labour bought the 2005 election with Owen Glenn's money.

That should mean jail time.

Psycho Milt said...

I see "corrupt" now is defined as "makes decisions I disagree with."

Socrates said...

What if they are putting a new deadline so that they could potentially prosicute for the older returns? I.E. the date of the offence is now September 30th 2008?? Just a thought