Friday, March 17, 2006

it's disgusting

this post has been updated
The Police find a prima facie case against David Benson-Pope, but did not prosecute.
The Police found a prima facie case against Helen Clark after she signed a painting she did not paint.

A Prime Ministerial motorcade was caught speeding, but Ms Clark let police officers take the rap for it.

Now Police find a prima facie case against Labour for spending $400,000 of our money for its unauthorised pledge card.

What does the Police do? Put out a news release advising that it will not prosecute, because they had no evidence that the spending was intentional. This is despite "sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case in respect of an offence under s221 of the Electoral Act".

Yet to prosecute, the spending doesnt even have to be intentional, as David Farrar has noted.
Section 214(3) defines the two offences related to over-spending:

Every person who directly or indirectly pays or knowingly aids or abets any person in paying for or on account of any election expenses any sum in excess of the maximum amount prescribed by this section is,—

(a) If the act is done with knowledge that the payment is in excess of the maximum amount prescribed by this section, guilty of a corrupt practice; and

(b) In any other case, guilty of an illegal practice unless the person proves that he or she took all reasonable steps to ensure that the election expenses did not exceed the maximum amount prescribed by this section.

This means that the police don't think Labours actions are corrupt, only illegal. Personally, I think many in Labour knew what they were doing, but won't say so. Roll on the OIA requests.

I have minimal respect for Labour and I have no respect for the Police farce. This is the Police who prosecuted a National MP for driving a tractor up the steps of Parliament, but wont prosecute for Labour lawbreakers.

If Police are not required to uphold the law when Labour politicians are involved, why don't we merge Police with the Labour party just like we are doing with Child, Youth and Family and the Ministry of Social Development.

It appears only the ignorant, those with no integrity, no morals, and no conscience are upholding up this corrupt Government, which is not taking responsibility for anything it doesnt want to.

Helen Clark promised new standards of integrity for this term. Its obvious what these standards are.

To be charged, Labour people don't have to merely break the law, or even be corrupt - they actually have to be found to have been corrupt.

Corruption is the new standard set by Helen Clark. Corruption has no place in a democracy.

Can Helen Clark set her standards any lower, while remaining in Government?

1 comment:

Matthew said...

Hi Dave,

yes I read this in the Herald today and was amazed as well (but, then again, should I be amazed anymore with this administration?).

The police said that they wouldn't prosecute for two reasons. One that because Labour didn't know what is was doing was wrong ("the rules were unclear"). Well so what. If that is valid then how does that stack up with this: when a person is charged and found guilty in court but then says to the judge, "but I didn't know it was wrong". The person would be laughed out of court. But not so with Labour.

Secondly the police said that many other parties were doing the same thing, and it would be unfair to single Labour out. Gosh, so if that logic follows then you could say that a person who has a prima facie case against them of murder shouldn't be charged because "well there are plenty of people who have prima facie charges or murder against them, but it would be unfair to single this person out."

What on earth are we coming to?