"I don't necessarily think it's a flaw for someone to respond to a question with "I don't know" or even (shock! horror!) "You know, I thought I knew and I was wrong."
Unless of course they are Prime Minister and the question is "there is possibly a tsunami heading for the west coast, should we evacuate"? or "Hello my name is George Bush and I'm planning to invade Iraq, fancy sending your army to join in'?
"And while I'm not going to comment on a book I haven't read (and won't for a long time, if at all"
Do you also put your fingers in your ears and chant "na, na, na" when anyone mentions it?
Lucy, I think it means that Key was on his outlook contact list.
Don Brash as the seemingly kindly old caretaker who is in fact the evil man behind the whole scheme.
Thats exactly the point here Craig, we have accusations winging around I would think even National party supporters will want to get to the bottom of it.
I wonder if, after the investigation, you all will still be nominating the Auditor General as man of the year? iirc he has rather a fundamentalist view on election funding law.
If Clark can stop grinning long enough she can now pop up on the evening news with her sternest face on and announce that she has asked the auditor general and the police to investigate these very serious claims.
Perhaps also new legislation to ensure such a thing never happens again.
Cut National off at the knees.
They nearly got away with it too, if it hadn't been for those pesky kids and that scooby, scooby doo!
"If a party contests the party vote then its total party election expenses (including GST) cannot exceed $1 million plus $20,000 for each electorate candidate nominated by the party.
If a registered party does not contest the party vote then its total election expenses cannot exceed $20,000 (including GST) for each electorate candidate of the party.
In both the above cases these party limits are separate from the expense limits applying to any electorate candidates' campaigns."
Which National party genuis thougt "lets make party funding our top issue through 2006" knowing that this was waiting to come out.
Been trying to find a column by Basset saying what a great speech Orewa 1 was (without disclosing he wrote it)
No luck yet though.
The brethren stuff is fun, the party funding stuff is the killer.
"The final chapters of The Hollow Men deals with the funding behind the National Party designed to add millions of dollars to the election campaign without breaching National's $2.24 million legal spending cap.
Hager claims following a meeting between Dr Brash and businessmen Peter and Michael Talley in 2004 the brothers offered Dr Brash $1 million to help get National elected.
The Talley brothers are alleged to have prepared a proposal called "The repackaging of Don Brash" in conjunction with Motueka lawyer Nick Davidson.
The written proposal included details of a plan to set up a company or trust named Vco to manage the funding.
Quotes from the proposal in the book say that by directing the campaign spending through the privately controlled Vco, they "would avoid any declarations of political party funding".
Worse than that, a blunder.