Now THIS is more like it: Shadbolt set to break new law.

Now its the National Party who seem to have “lost their nuts”:

5:00AM Monday January 14, 2008
By Claire Trevett 

Tim Shadbolt. Photo / Getty Images

Democracy under attack

• Millionaire in campaign against ‘Soviet’ law
• Political party websites side-step election laws

Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt plans to break the new election finance laws this month in a bid to force a test case in the courts.

And he hopes to hire one of the country’s top constitutional lawyers, Mai Chen, to represent him.

Mr Shadbolt says he will publish advertisements by the end of the month that will break the Election Finance Act in at least two ways.

The Electoral Commission has warned that if he goes ahead it will consider reporting him to the police, and the National Party has also distanced itself from his plan.

Mr Shadbolt said his advertisement would tell people to vote for National and its Invercargill MP, Eric Roy, without having the necessary written authorisation from the party or the MP.

“That will make it clearly in breach of the act,” he said. “It will give us a chance to fight it out in the courts where hopefully a judge will decide if it does encroach on my human rights or not.”

The ad, which would focus on Southland Institute of Technology’s funding, would also not include his full name and address or any authorising statement. These are legal requirements.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Mr Shadbolt may also breach the new spending limits, which require anyone advertising for an individual candidate to register as a third party if they intend spending more than $1000 in an electorate.

The limits for broader election advertising are $12,000 if not registered and $120,000 if registered.

Electoral Commission chief Helena Catt said if Mr Shadbolt did go ahead with his plans, the commission would consider reporting him to the police.

The commission was required to report any breaches unless they were so inconsequential that there was no public interest in doing so.

However, Mr Shadbolt may have difficulty finding a publication willing to run his ad – Dr Catt said it was also illegal for anyone to publish election advertisements that did not have the necessary authorisation.

Mr Shadbolt has threatened to break the new law because a change in Government policy means a loss of about $6 million in funding to Southland Institute of Technology this year.

The mayor said he opposes the Electoral Finance Act because it restricts his battling the government that introduced a policy that was damaging his region.

Mr Shadbolt is refusing to register as a third party. His breaches could be punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 for anyone who is not a third party financial agent.

Mr Shadbolt said he would ask Mai Chen for help with any legal action, as well as Christine French, the lawyer for Southland Institute of Technology. Mai Chen could not be contacted for comment yesterday.

Mr Shadbolt said his defence would be based on human rights grounds.

His advertising would be done in his personal capacity, rather than as mayor, to protect the chief executive of Invercargill District Council from legal action.

The National Party sent out a blanket statement last week refusing to endorse or authorise any third party campaigns and advised all third parties to stick to the law.

Anti-Labour website hears electoral watchdog’s warning.

A 21-year-old who set up a website urging people to vote against Labour has been contacted by the Electoral Commission because he is not complying with provisions of the controversial new Electoral Finance Act.

Andrew Moore set up the www.dontvotelabour.org.nz website on the final day of 2007 after coming up with the idea while doing some dishes at home.

The site highlights particular issues related to Labour, including the passing of so-called anti-smacking laws, the Electoral Finance Act, and funding cuts to the Southern Institute of Technology which Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt has spoken out against.

But Mr Moore’s website falls foul of the Electoral Finance Act because he has not included a name and address on it.

Asked yesterday if his website was set up as a direct challenge to the act – which passed into law just before Christmas – Mr Moore said it did not begin that way.

“Initially it wasn’t, really, but as time has gone on it’s pretty much become that,” he told the Herald.

“For one thing, I don’t think I should have to put my name and address on there – I think it’s a breach of freedom of speech.”

The Electoral Commission yesterday confirmed it has looked at the website and is going to talk with Mr Moore because an authorisation statement is required on the site.

Mr Moore said he had received a message from the commission and had emailed back, but had not yet received any further contact.

“If they want to get in touch with me they’re most welcome,” he said.

The website does not promote any particular party but strongly criticises Labour.

Under the Electoral Finance Act such a website must carry a statement saying who is behind it, and if it cost more than $12,000 to set up then the person behind it must also be registered with the commission as a third party.

Under the previous electoral law, the internet was not covered in that way – although Mr Moore would still have had to provide a name and address if he had placed a similar message in an advertisement in a newspaper.

Mr Moore is a member of the Act Party and he was involved in marches against the anti-smacking laws and the Electoral Finance Act.

He said part of the reason he didn’t have a name and address on the website was because he lived at home and wanted to protect his family.

“I’m not going to say that’s the only reason there’s no address and name on there, but it’s part of it,” he said.

His family were “not necessarily all that delighted” with what he was doing, he said.

Mr Moore said he was “not scared” of the commission and a large number of people would stand alongside him if he was eventually prosecuted for the breach. The scenario potentially carries a fine of up to $10,000.

His comments come as other opponents of the new election campaign rules threaten a period of civil disobedience against them.

Some internet bloggers are threatening to deliberately flout the Electoral Finance Act to see what happens, while well-known shareholder activist Tony Gavigan has applied to register himself as a third party and wants all New Zealanders to do the same.

Mr Gavigan, who has represented shareholders in action against a major oil company and is now helping Feltex Carpets investors who lost money, said he did not register because he was planning to campaign politically.

“No, I think this is the way, civil disobedience, if we can put everyone’s name up there then the whole thing becomes a nonsense,” he said yesterday.

He was amused that while trying to register he had been told one of the criteria was a check on whether the third party’s name was obscene, confusing or misleading.

“My mother thought my name was okay,” he said.

Herald on Sunday 6/1/08: Matt McCarten – Labour in an extraordinarily bad position for election year.

5:00AM Sunday January 06, 2008
By Matt McCarten 

 

Democracy under attack

• Man defies Electoral Finance Act with website
• Fran O’Sullivan: Donor row has additional twists

Labour had a terrible finish to last year. Any hope for respite in 2008 was smashed within minutes of the New Year. Just after midnight, some wannabe drove up on a scooter to Helen Clark’s electoral office and threw a brick at the window.

PP: The name of the organisation is “People Power” Matt, do your homework. 

The incident wasn’t important in itself and in some regards was farcical. After all, our erstwhile vandal couldn’t even smash the window and was scared off by an old lady who was looking for a cat.

PP: For the love of mike! No cat, no lady seen at scene by People Power – what do you journos do, just copy notes from each other? The toughened reinforced glass did indeed take us by surprise – however the impact still made for quite an impressive press photo Matt, don’t you think?

But the political relevance of this action was that the offender released a press statement afterwards saying it was motivated by the new Electoral Finance Act which came into force on January 1.

 PP: Innocent until proven guilty Matt – should read “alleged offender”.

It’s clear the controversy over this legislation isn’t going away as the Government hoped. Labour’s party strategists would sense this is a warning of more headaches to come.

For example, in the past few days a website was set up opposing the re-election of the Labour Party. The website creator refuses to register himself as required by the new act.

PP: And “People Power” have done likewise.

The ensuing media attention has resulted in this website’s domain name being extensively published and will make the website more successful than the creator could have hoped.

More dangerously for Labour, Invercargill Mayor and occasional revolutionary, Tim Shadbolt, is heading up a campaign to also tip the Government out of office because of education funding cuts to the Southland Institute of Technology.

PP: Tim “no nuts” Shadbolt did his advertising prior to the EFA becoming law – hardly a bastion of courage is Tim, Matt.

Shadbolt is also required to register himself under the act, which he has no intention of doing. I’m sure he can’t believe his good luck his campaign will get even more profile.

Stupidly Labour and its allies voted in Parliament to include rules allowing imprisonment for this breach. You’d think the last thing the Government would want is the courts imposing this. Shadbolt would relish the opportunity to become a political prisoner in election year.

PP: So would “People Power”.

I agree with former Labour leader Mike Moore, when he says the new laws are badly constructed and target the wrong problems. It is clear the print media is going to run a year-long campaign opposing this legislation and will highlight breaches. I can’t think of another time the national media was so united in a political campaign. It’s extraordinary that Labour has put itself in this position.

A political colleague of mine told me on the eve of the bill’s passing that if Labour had any hope of retaining the Treasury benches, it must pull it.

I responded that the political price was too high to back down and they would believe their only option was to bluff it out and hope that the electorate would forget about it. But Labour has underestimated the fact that the opposition isn’t just its traditional political opponents but, more importantly, the media is.

PP: And the Joe and Jane average citizen, which is what “People Power” is made up of.

There’s a certain irony that the new rules still allow the owners of the media unlimited ability to run high-profile political campaigns themselves.

It’s hard to see how Labour can withstand it. The Government no doubt feels it has no option other than to battle on and hope for the best.

PP: Good luck on this one, NZ Government.

But if the campaign increases and more people refuse to comply with the new electoral law, what can it do?

PP: Sweet F.A. 

If the police refuse to charge perpetrators, the law will become a joke.

PP: Wouldn’t be the first time. People Power does sympathise with the Police, as ordinarily, we would respect the rule of law – with the EFA however, we simply cannot do so.

On the other hand, if someone is charged, it will create a platform for political martyrs and the subsequent fallout will hurt Labour.

PP: Good discernment Matt!

If the opposition campaign intensifies, Labour may well be forced to repeal the act.

PP: That’s the idea……. 

 That would be humiliating but I suspect that, left unchecked, the electoral laws controversy fanned by the media will dominate all other politics this year, preventing Labour from getting any new policy initiatives or election messages up. Given its current polling this will hurt the party badly.

The electoral finance reform was well-intentioned and tried to address secret funding. But Labour’s paranoia has created problems far worse than the solution. Ironically, political party spending isn’t, in the scheme of things, that important. The big parties are limited to spending $2 million on their election campaigns and rarely raise that amount of money anyway.

Less well-known is the leaders of both main parties get more than $2m each in their parliamentary leader’s budget to spend essentially on whatever they like. When you consider hidden subsidies, such as MP and political staff salaries and expenses during an election period, it amounts to more than $20m.

PP: And THIS is where the real big money is-  pointed out by a left wing opinion columnist.

Even then, most voters are influenced more by media reporting on politics through the year than 30-second ads on television in the last few weeks of the campaign. Party election spending only matters significantly when the support for both parties is close leading up to the election.

This clearly isn’t the case.

What is worrying for Labour is that it is already behind National a year out from the election. Unless it gets a clear run to set the agenda, the party knows it will remain where it is.

In the next few months, political survival may focus their minds. If face-saving and practicality does not involve a full repeal of this law, they should at least address the more draconian parts of it.

If they don’t, the legislation designed to protect them from their political opponents could well be what tips them out of office on election day.

PP: This isn’t a “maybe” Matt – it is a certainty come General Election 2008.

Website may spark call from election officials.

3/01/2008 5:52:01

The creator of a website challenging new electoral finance laws is expecting to hear from election officials.

 

Christchurch man Andrew Moore has launched the website www.dontvotelabour.org.nz. He says that breaches the Electoral Finance Act which came into force on Tuesday.

 

Mr Moore says the website was not set up to purposely break the law. He says he is angry at the idea of registering for freedom of speech but he is not sure what he’ll do if the Electoral Commission calls.

 

Mr Moore says it will be a case of playing it by ear.

Ex-PM slams Election Finance Act.

NZPA | Thursday, 03 January 2008

The Electoral Finance Act cannot possibly survive in its present form until election day, former prime minister Mike Moore said yesterday.

The legislation, which aims to control what can be spent on political electioneering, came into effect on Monday.

The act puts spending limits of $120,000 on non-political parties and the period of regulation covers almost the whole election year, instead of three months before an election.

“It was rushed, badly drafted, can’t be understood, (is) full of inviting loopholes, amendments were made at the last minute without scrutiny, and it’s a blogger’s breakfast,” said Moore, also former director of the World Trade Organisation.

He predicted it would be tested in the courts within weeks and would be found wanting.

“I tried to tell old friends that it was wrong in principle, wrong in substance, and will do the opposite of what its authors planned.

“People are going to deliberately test the law and the courts will be in an impossible situation.

“This will be great election year sport because it’s the solemn duty, even obligation, of citizens in a democracy to take on the powerful.”

Protest group People Power has claimed responsibility for throwing a brick at Prime Minister Helen Clark’s office early on New Year’s Day in protest at the act.

The day before, five daily newspapers carried advertisements from Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt protesting both the act and funding cuts for the Southland city’s tertiary institution.

Shadbolt was getting in early.

Under the act, anyone spending more than $12,000 on political advertising must register as a “third party” or be in breach of the act.

Those who do register with the Electoral Commission can spend up to $120,000.

Shadbolt said in his ad he was not willing to register with the Government “just for the right to free speech”.

New Website challenges Electoral Finance Act (not us, but they have our support anyway).

2/01/2008

New electoral finance laws in effect for just two days are already being challenged.

 

A new website called www.dontvotelabour.org.nz  has been set up to support the causes of Kill the Bill and Southern Institute of Technology, which both oppose the new laws.

 

Political commentator David Farrar says the site is in breach of the laws because a statement which advocates against a political party needs to contain the name and address of the person who has authorised it and must register its intention with the Electoral Commission.

 

Mr Farrar says the website is a minor breach and he doubts the Electoral Commission would prosecute.

Yahoo Xtra News: Brick throwers urged to own up.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com//080101/3/3gji.html

Tuesday January 1, 08:40 PM

The Auckland Council of Civil Liberties has challenged a group that claimed responsibility for throwing a brick at Prime Minister Helen Clark’s electorate office to come out of hiding.

The group, People Power, said it was protesting over the Electoral Finance Act, which came into effect today, and the suppression of free speech.

The brick cracked but did not break the office’s window in Mt Albert suburb around 12.30am today, with the offender seen disappearing on a scooter immediately afterwards.

Council president Barry Wilson said the anonymous act of “so-called civil disobedience” had no credibility.

“People Power needs to come out from behind its cowardly cloak of anonymity and answer the questions “who are you?” and “how can I join you if I don’t known who you are?”

Those responsible for breaking the window should front up to face a wilful damage charge, he said.

An e-mail purportedly from People Power said the Council for Civil Liberties had no mandate to demand what the group should do or shouldn’t do about its actions. “The ACCL are simply irrelevant to democracy, themselves being unelected to the position that they claim to hold.”

The Prime Minister’s office said the matter was in the hands of the police and would not comment further on her security, One News reported tonight.

Police northern communications spokesman Inspector Ian Brooker said a woman who witnessed the attack possibly prevented further damage.

The woman had earlier not been identified but was named by One tonight as Sheree Taylor. A local resident, she had been watching midnight fireworks when she noticed a cat wandering near the office about 12.30am. Knowing that a neighbour had lost a cat, she went to have a closer look.

She then noticed a person on a motor scooter, who had a short time earlier ridden up the road, stopped and thrown a brick at the office’s window.

“As she went closer to try to get the registration number of the scooter, she was attacked by the cat and screamed. Both the cat and the motor scooter rider were alarmed and left at speed,” Mr Brooker said.

Ms Taylor called police and supplied them with descriptions of the offender and his scooter.

She was not injured by the cat.

The e-mail from the group said it had not observed any third party at the scene or a cat and had not heard a scream.

The brick had several messages on it, including a demand to repeal the Electoral Finance Act.

It said a brick was a preferred method of communication to get Miss Clark’s attention about democracy “as opposed to the use of bullets and a bomb for the same purpose..”, referring to the killing of Pakistan Opposition leader Benazir Bhutto last week.

The group said it would indulge in other acts of civil disobedience between now and this year’s general election.

 People Power says:

Here is a challenge for the ACCL and spokesperson Barry Wilson:

1/ Pubically affirm your allegiance to the Green Party, and your servitude to the radical far-left of the political spectrum.

 2/ Invest some money in a website, or at least a contactable email contact.

3/ Make comments about us, to us.

People Power – “Power to the People”

people-power@windowslive.com

Newstalk ZB 2/1/08:

Courts may struggle to enforce EFA 2/01/2008 13:24:01 Former Prime Minister Mike Moore predicts the courts will be put in an impossible position if they are forced to rule on the newly passed Electoral Finance Act.   The Act came into force yesterday and Mr Moore says it is full of inviting loopholes and last minute amendments which went into the legislation without proper scrutiny. He expects it will only be a matter of weeks before the law is deliberately tested in the courts and found wanting. Mr Moore believes that the publicity generated by opposition to the act threatens to overshadow the good things Labour has achieved in government.   Opponents of the act claim it restricts free speech. Yesterday, a brick was thrown at the window of Prime Minister Helen Clark’s electoral office in the Auckland suburb of Mt Albert. A group called People Power claimed responsibility, saying their actions were a protest against the legislation.

Newstalk ZB: 2/1/08

Brick throwers tipped to face jail time

2/01/2008 7:16:01

The man who attacked the Prime Minister’s electoral office with an axe believe those behind the latest incident can expect jail time.

 

Tim Selwyn was found guilty of publishing a seditious document as well as wilful damage for his actions in 2004. A group called People Power is claiming responsibility for the latest incident, which saw a brick thrown through Helen Clark’s Auckland office.

 

Mr Selwyn says they are taking a big risk. He says if you are going to do this sort of thing, you have to be prepared to go to jail for it.

 

Mr Selwyn says he can understand the reasons behind the latest attack. He says the complicated nature of the Electoral Finance Act they are protesting against, means extreme action is necessary. However, he says throwing a brick through the window may not have been the answer.

TVNZ Reporter Lisa Owen’s questions to People Power – and our answers.

Hi Lisa,
 
Answers as follows:

Dear People Power,

Here are some questions for your consideration:

As it is not possible to examine the brick can you provide any confirmation that it is your group that carried this out eg did you take any photos of the act or the brick before dispatching it ?

A: We give quite specific information on the preparation of the brick in our press release, and the messages written upon the brick. A quick check with police comms will confirm we are who we say we are, and that the brick was “sent” by us.

What do you think this has actually achieved?

A: The purpose of this action was to be the first recorded act of Civil Disobedience against the EFA, as from the beginning of the enactment of the EFA (1/1/08). More actions are now planned, and we are hopeful that more New Zealanders will decide to make a stand for Democracy, in whatever way they may choose as appropriate for them.

And what next..how far are you prepared to go with this?

A: For us, more actions of a similar nature are planned – the white brick with message and delivery method will be the same – a “signature” if you will. Our bottom line is that no actual people get harmed – prior to throwing the brick last night, our representative first ensured that no-one was actually in the Labour Party Mt Albert Electoral office (apparently, it looked as if a party had recently been held – chairs and streamers etc were still on display, but no people were present). If we identify a risk to life and limb during an action, our rule is to back away, and come back some other time, so as to minimise risk to other people. We want to get a message across – not kill anyone.

Having said this, we can’t guarantee that other ordinary people in NZ similarly incensed with the EFA won’t take more drastic action – that is for them and their conscience to decide.

People Power – “Power to the People”

Look forward to hearing from you,

Lisa Owen.

TVNZ Reporter.

People Power – “Power to the People”

people-power@windowslive.com