Top-level security review follows incidents

A top-level review into security around the home of Prime Minister Helen Clark has been carried out after a robber managed to flee a crime scene and hide in her back yard.

In another incident, Diplomatic Protection Squad cops were left red-faced when a group of taggers managed to graffiti Clark's house, where she lives with husband Peter Davis, and other residences in the upmarket Auckland suburb of Mt Eden.

...

In April, Clark's office confirmed the Labour leader's close protection had intensified after unwanted approaches by members of the Exclusive Brethren.

Until then she had not required a security escort while walking from her Beehive office to Parliament.

She is now routinely shadowed by two or more DPS staff.

Prime Minister Helen Clark's home in Auckland's Mt Eden was tagged with graffiti in August - despite the house next door being rented by the Diplomatic Protection Squad (DPS).

DPS head Inspector Terry O'Neill said the incident, which prompted a review of the Prime Minister's security, was regrettable, the Sunday News newspaper reported.

It also reported that a dairy robber was able to hide in the property's back yard.

One neighbour - whose home was also tagged - told the newspaper he could not believe his home had been attacked when specialised police staff were in the neighbourhood watching the prime minister's home.

Miss Clark's security arrangements were also increased after a member of the Exclusive Brethren accosted her in Parliament before the last election.

A spokesman for Miss Clark revealed the incident after National accused the prime minister of hypocrisy, saying she had criticised opposition MPs for meeting members of the sect while she had done the same herself.

But Miss Clark's spokesman said at the time there had been no scheduled meetings and she had increased her security to stop them approaching her.

Now that the mince pies have been eaten, the presents torn open in an ecstasy of expectation and then quietly exchanged or put up for sale on Trade Me and the careful diplomatic dance of a family Christmas dinner has come to a hopefully peaceful conclusion, thoughts are turning to 2008 and what it will bring, writes The Dominion Post.

Some things are so predictable as to be virtual certainties.

An All Black will behave badly, there will be much tut-tutting about damage to the brand, and a carefully crafted mea culpa will be quickly delivered. The incident will probably involve alcohol.

A politician will also behave badly, there will be somewhat less tut-tutting - the brand is already so badly damaged no one expects anything different anyway - and a carefully crafted mea culpa will be delivered as late as possible and only because the leader has said one has to be. The incident will probably not involve alcohol but probably will involve Trevor Mallard or Tau Henare.

Elsewhere in politics, NZ First leader Winston Peters will regard any questions about his coalition intentions as the election approaches as an enormous affront and typical of an impertinent media.

It's also a safe bet that the Exclusive Brethren will find themselves off the invitation list for National's campaign strategy sessions in 2008, and that Labour's campaign gurus won't be getting taxpayers to fund a pledge card this time round.

The passing of the bill marks a milestone in the battle over Labour's spending of public money on its pledge card before the 2005 election and National's role at the same time in encouraging a covert campaign of support by members of the Exclusive Brethren church.

The bill imposes new restrictions on political advertising by people and groups outside Parliament.

Labour has played the Exclusive Brethren card and it has got its way on new rules governing the running of elections.

The controversial Electoral Finance Bill passed its final reading in parliament last night by 63 votes to 58.

Labour front-bencher Pete Hodgson says it is the National Party's fault there was need to change electoral laws.

He says the party colluded with the Exclusive Brethren at the last election campaign, and did nothing to stop the Church running its anti-Government campaign.

John Key: Why will Tim Shadbolt not be subject to the law this Government is going to pass this afternoon, which quite clearly says that if someone, as a third party, spends over $120,000 in the electoral period using the slogan “Bring down the Government”—which the Electoral Commission has already indicated would mean the Labour Government—that person would be in breach of the law; and maybe the person who does not understand the law is not Tim Shadbolt but is actually the Prime Minister?

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK: I would hope that the Leader of the Opposition would be advising people to follow the law, not dodge it as he did with regard to the Exclusive Brethren.

...

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Which division of law covers the issue of free speech: the electoral law, or the censorship, copyright, and defamation laws of this country; which of the two divisions are we talking about when we talk about free speech in New Zealand?

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK: What the electoral law talks about is paid speech. The National Party, with its secret donors and trusts, wants to be able to spend whatever it likes in order to buy an election, as Mr Key tried to do last time with the Exclusive Brethren.

I want to ask everyone who is opposed to this Bill a question: Why should anyone be allowed to do what the Exclusive Brethren did in my electorate at the last election?

They came into my electorate on the Friday before the election that Saturday.

They bought a full page ad in the local newspaper.

The ad told lies about me. They distributed that false advertisement to every household.

The address given for the ad was fake.

The people behind it tried to remain anonymous.

But we found out they were church people!

This was an ad published the day before the election, when it was far too late to respond in reply.

This was an attempt to buy an election with money, instead of with truth and with ideas.

I want to know: how is that fair?

How is that democratic?

How is it fair and democratic that people who don't identify themselves can spend as much as they like to sway the result of an election?

I support the Electoral Finance Bill because elections should not be decided by the largest wallet.

I support this Bill because it is about ensuring no one can buy an election result.

I support this Bill because the best ideas should win, not the best funded ones.

The Electoral Finance Bill has just been passed into law after a day of furious debate.

The bill was supported by Labour, the Greens, New Zealand First and Jim Anderton in its third and final reading, passing by a majority of 63 votes to 57.

Opposed to the bill were National, the Maori Party, Act, Taito Phillip Field and United Future.

Ministers now say it is workable, but National maintains the legislation is a shambles that will lead to litigation.

The bill was drafted in response to the Exclusive Brethren's initially covert, $1 million campaign against Labour and the Greens during the 2005 election.

Former prime minister Mike Moore yesterday said it was wrong in principle and would not work.

"They are using a sledgehammer to smash a few nutters. . .it will do the opposite of what's intended," he said.

Plans for future expansion at the exclusive Agnew School, in Gerard Street, do not translate to an influx of Exclusive Brethren followers descending upon Toowoomba.

The group, dubbed the most secretive Christian sect, has had a bad reputation in the national spotlight, according to Exclusive Brethren spokesman Tony McCorkell.

"They are very peaceable group of people who mind their own business and keep to themselves and as a general rule they don't attract media attention in everyday lives," he said.

Toowoomba City Council approved the extensions so the school could grow from 20 secondary school students with two teachers to 60, including primary schoolers, next year.

Ultimately, the applicants Southridge Education Trust expect numbers to rise to 180 students by 2018.

Mr McCorkell goes to great lengths to stress group members aren't that different.

But members of the 200-plus strong Toowoomba congregation weren't that convincing.

The spokespeople were evasive, did not want to be quoted, and opposed to the exclusive school being linked to the church.

The Chronicle's enquiries were directed to Mr McCorkell, the Brisbane-based inaugural media face for the 40,000 member, 187-year-old group.

Secret or media shy, he translates, to private.

"They value their anonymity," he said.

They are cautious about "reflections on the church".

"If you do something in the community, your religion shouldn't be part of that," Mr McCorkell said.

"Brethren do business with non-Brethren, they interact with society like anyone else except they don't share a meal with people they don't share communion with on a Sunday," he said.

The Brethren have a busy social calendar with each other.

Mr McCorkell admits the Brethren are exceptionally protective of their children.

So "morally questionable influences" like television, radio, cinemas and even university campuses are banned.

The Brethren, he says, seek to live simple lives.

And, Mr McCorkell proffers, no windows in the church is a matter of better acoustics.

"It's simply a design feature, nothing sinister."

And there will be no-one from the Bethren running for the Toowoomba Regional Council because they don't hold office.

In fact, most don't vote.

The Government's Election Finance Bill is likely to backfire next year with several people or groups likely to challenge the its election campaign finance law, former Labour Prime Minister Mike Moore says.

He said Labour appeared "traumatised" by what happened with the Exclusive Brethren after their initially secret spending campaign during the last election and the secrecy of its subsequent activities snooping on senior MPs' private lives.

"They are now using a sledgehammer to smash a few nutters ..."

The former Labour Prime Minister, Mike Moore, has renewed his criticism of the Electoral Finance Bill.

Mr Moore described it as flawed and an overreaction to the activities of the Exclusive Brethren in 2005.

He said the government is "using a sledgehammer to crack a few nutters" ...

A former Labour prime minister has again criticised the controversial Electoral Finance Bill, describing it as flawed.

The bill, which sets out new rules for next year's election campaign, is set to be passed in Parliament on Tuesday.

Mike Moore says it will restrict people from campaigning in an election year. He says the Labour Party is too traumatised by the activities of the Exclusive Brethren at the last election.

"These were evil, awful people. But they are using a sledgehammer to crack a few nutters. The scope of the bill is going to do all sorts of things that are unpleasant."

Nothing will deter Helen Clark from passing that bill because it is pure utu. It is payback. Clark has the vengeful memory of a homicidal elephant, and she will never forgive the Exclusive Brethren for what it tried to do to her. The fact the sect bankrolled National is secondary to the dirty tricks campaign it tried to wage on her, and the covert action it took with private eyes. She heard the sleazy rumours that emanated from the conspirators and knew the fruitless sting operations they tried to pull.

The Electoral Finance Bill is punishment for National taking the Brethren's cash, and it is the only penalty she can impose on her enemies as, unfortunately, constitutionally these days she is unable to have them boiled in oil, hung on the rack and have their heads stuck on pikes at the front door of Parliament. I am sure the Prime Minister thinks wistfully of the good old days of the Tudors when Elizabeth I would cheerily disembowel those who plotted against her.

The adult-entertainment industry has declared war on the fundamentalist Exclusive Brethren sect for allegedly infiltrating local councils.

The Canberra-based Eros Association says the conservative Christian group is bankrolling legal challenges to halt the spread of adult stores.

The accusations come after a group of Exclusive Brethren business leaders offered to fund Lithgow City Council's Supreme Court fight against a development application for a sex shop.

The Department of Local Government gave the offer a green light, claiming councils were allowed to "accept donations from third parties" - a clause critics say amounts to sanctioned bribery.

Flirt Adult Store owner Jeff Oliver won an appeal in the Land and Environment Court after the council refused him planning permission to set up shop in Lithgow's main street.

According to council and independent correspondence, local members of the Exclusive Brethren offered to fund the council's appeal against the court ruling.

The council was prepared to accept the money after the Department of Local Government decreed there was no legal impediment to it "accepting a donation from a third party".

It decided not to pursue the appeal, however, and the Flirt Adult Store was allowed to open.

About 100 members of the Exclusive Brethren live in the Lithgow area.

"There is increasing evidence that the Exclusive Brethren have infiltrated other morals groups around the nation and have embarked on a national campaign to stop adult retail shops from opening," Eros co-ordinator Robbie Swan said.

"There is also increasing evidence that their members are secretly being elected to local councils, with moral agendas their main reason for being there.

"There's an urgent need for a national enquiry into just how far this 'entryism' has gone and to what extent local government decisions on moral matters have been compromised by this cult."

Lithgow councillor Martin Ticehurst said he was disturbed by the fact it was perfectly legal for councils to accept money from groups such as the Brethren that wanted to influence outcomes.

"It's not just the involvement of religious groups that concerns me. Councils should not be allowed to accept money from any activist group," Mr Ticehurst said.

"It could be perceived as a form of bribery, and I think it's potentially dangerous."

The sect, which does not allow its members to vote, is known for its large donations to the Liberal Party.

Letter to Editor

Your reporter Sally Kidson (Nelson Mail, December 7) did well to expose the visit to Nelson on Friday by Bruce Hales, the so-called Man of God, leader of the Exclusive Brethren, and the pathetic attempts made at the airport to make his presence seem important and mysterious.

In his book The God Delusion (page 321), evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins referred to these people as "a more than usually odious sect", and everyone who followed the course of our last general election knows the links they succeeded in forging with the National Party during the campaign.

To my mind, there is something quite sinister about the way the Exclusive Brethren hide their nefarious political activities behind a cloak of religiosity.

One wonders what sleazy anti-government campaign they are funding this time. Are they trying to suggest that the Government is attempting to curtail our freedom of speech, or do they wish to deprive women of the right to vote? What a laugh!

Maybe Tony McCorkell could be persuaded to come clean and tell Nelson Mail readers the truth about what went on at the "church" in Nayland Rd. Which Bible readings were being savoured - the story of Lot's daughters in Genesis 19, perhaps?

N.B. Matheson
Monaco,
December 9th, 2007 .

The Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commissioner will investigate a complaint that a Liberal Party federal election pamphlet incited hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.
One of the complainants, Martine Delaney, welcomed the decision, saying that vilification of minorities had no place in Australian elections.

"The purpose of the Liberal pamphlet was not to promote policy debate but to foster fear, ignorance and hatred," Ms Delaney said. "With the right of free speech comes a responsibility not to abuse that right by inflaming prejudice."

She said the pamphlet had declared same-sex marriage and intersex rights as extreme and harmful and associated them with the skull and crossbones -- a symbol she says is universally associated with poison and death.

Last year Ms Delaney complained to the commission about a Liberal pamphlet distributed during the 2006 state election campaign which condemned same-sex marriage.

Print advertisements, authorised by the Exclusive Brethren religious group, which condemned transgender and intersex rights, are presently before the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Tribunal.

In the course of its investigation the commission discovered that the cost of the advertisements had been invoiced to the Liberal Party.

A commission spokeswoman confirmed an investigation of the 2007 campaign pamphlet was being made.

Investigations are normally concluded within six months.

Liberal Party state director Damian Mantach said that the 2007 brochure was the 2006 brochure with some of the wording taken out.

However, he said the skull and crossbones had been added to the 2007 publication.

"I think it is frivolous bringing these type of cases," he said.

"The Liberal Party stands by the brochure and its contents."

The commission spokeswoman said a complaint had also been received against a Timber Communities Australia television advertisement about same-sex marriage.

In the NSW seat of Lindsay, members of the Liberal Party distributed a pamphlet from a fake Islamic group saying the ALP supported the Bali bombers and the building of a mosque in western Sydney.

The Exclusive Brethren say they are becoming more open, but when spiritual leader Bruce Hales jetted into New Zealand last week, the church went to great lengths to shield him. HELEN MURDOCH spoke to the church's first media frontman, Tony McCorkell.

Reclusive, elusive, secretive or just plain private, the Exclusive Brethren Church remains an enigma.

Dwarfing a Nelson motel couch, the church's media manager, Sydneysider Tony McCorkell, maintains that the church is changing, reviewing its administrative practices and openly engaging with the community.

McCorkell is the inaugural media face of the 40,000-member, 187-year-old group, known for its reclusive separatism, family division and controlling regulation.

In New Zealand the sect helped bring down former National Party leader Don Brash when its funding for a supporting pamphlet drop and budgeted $1.2 million election campaign became public.

McCorkell said the National Party business was "very unfortunate and the public backlash vilified thousands of innocent church members".

New Zealanders wanting to voice their electoral opinion through a lobby group or pamphlet did not have to state their religious beliefs.

"But we have seen in New Zealand a culture where Exclusive Brethren are not seen as members of the public," he said.

Recent child abuse cases involving Exclusive Brethren members, in Nelson and Australia, have also hit the headlines.

As a result the Exclusive Brethren went to several different church groups, examined their policies, sought legal advice and came up with strategy covering legal and moral obligations, said McCorkell.

"The church abhors child abuse, and there is never any suggestion they have tried to cover it up. But we do think there has been a lack of direction on how to deal with it."

A complaint or confession is now immediately referred to a designated committee which hands it on to police.

"In the past the church has tried to deal with the matter themselves; now the matter is dealt with by the authorities," said McCorkell.

Those accused are banned from attending church, but members can offer pastoral care to them and their families – and where possible, the victims – until the matter is dealt with.

The child-abuse strategy was among a range of administrative changes the church had made in recent years, said McCorkell.

A comprehensive review in 2003-04 also considered how the church dealt with members who had left.

The church could have done better, but it was made up of human beings and "humans do not get everything right", he said.

Former Exclusive Brethren, known as "The Outs", have gained increasing media attention over the plight of families they say are cruelly separated by the controlling church.

"There are a handful of former members who engage in strong criticism of the church for the various issues they have," said McCorkell.

"No-one is stopping them from having a voice, but it has to be accurate and true."

Exclusive Brethren believed the Bible was God's inspired word, he said.

"And it means what it says – do not engage in immoral or unethical behaviour.

"That is not to say that they are cut off if they do engage, but there is a process the church follows of repentance, recovery and reconciliation and recovery cannot take place until the behaviour is dealt with."

Hales, son of former leader John Hales, has been a leading light in change, said McCorkell.

"He understands very clearly the church needed to change to remain relevant to its congregation, but they did not change what they believed, just reviewed how they did things."

Hales, known as the Elect Vessel, the Lord's Representative on Earth, the Great Man, the Paul of Our Day, the Minister of the Lord in Recovery by members, is a prosperous supplier of office equipment in the Sydney suburbs.

McCorkell described Hales as "very generous, very loving and very understanding. He has a heart for people in need and gives fully of himself."

His whistle-stop tour of New Zealand last week was a time of Bible reading, socialising, fellowship and discussing issues.

McCorkell denied Hales was in town to raise cash.

The visit was swaddled in secrecy to protect Hales's privacy, he said.

The fact it was his second trip to New Zealand this year underlined Hales's accessibility to his congregation.

He made brief trips to global Exclusive Brethren groups every month, when time permitted, said McCorkell.

The church was increasingly engaging with the public and the media but the principles of separation remained, he said.

"The more we engage the more people realise we are not that different."

The world leader of the secretive Exclusive Brethren left Auckland yesterday after a week-long visit to New Zealand, but church members deny he was on any political mission.

It was Elect-Vessel Bruce Hales' second visit to the church's 7000 New Zealand followers and culminated in meetings with 2000 of them at services in Mangere.

Mr Hales' spokesman, Tony McCorkell, yesterday told the Herald the visit was concerned only with spiritual matters and had nothing to do with "the current political issues".

"He's met with no politicians; there's been nothing political whatsoever."

The Exclusive Brethren have copped flak in this country following their controversial $1 million anti-Green, anti-Labour pamphlet campaign leading up to the 2005 election. The campaign was bankrolled by seven leading members who are businessmen.

Extracts:

JOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement yesterday, when asked how she expects well-intentioned, honest, ordinary New Zealanders to understand the Electoral Finance Bill, that “One expects people to read it carefully and to consult lawyers”; if so, why?

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes, because well-intentioned, honest, ordinary New Zealanders are not the focus of this legislation. Those who plan large advertising campaigns have always needed to be conscious of electoral law, which of course is why at the last election the Exclusive Brethren and the National Party colluded to stay just within the electoral law, meaning that a $1.2 million campaign could be run by the Exclusive Brethren without being charged against the National Party’s allocation.

...

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Has the Minister received any reports to explain the contradiction that those people who complain that money cannot buy elections nevertheless want to have no cap on expenditure?

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: The member gets to the heart of the matter. What this bill is about—and everybody in this House understands what this bill is about—is stopping people from doing what happened in 2005, when a small cabal of wealthy people rorted the election law to try to buy themselves a National Government, in order to bring on Armageddon and the end of the world. That was actually their aim in life, amazing as it may seem. “Vote National for the end of the world” was the Exclusive Brethren’s purpose.

Hon Members: Point of order—

Madam SPEAKER: Is the point of order the fact that we cannot hear? Thank you. The Minister will please repeat, in silence, the essence of the answer, please, and no one is to interrupt.

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: I repeat that the essence of this argument is that people at the last election tried to buy themselves a Government by rorting the election law, and the extraordinary thing was that the people who were trying to do that the most—the Exclusive Brethren—were trying to persuade people to vote for a National Government because that would actually have hastened the end of the world.

The leader of the Exclusive Brethren was kept under tight security in Christchurch yesterday.

The Right-wing religious sect's Elect Vessel, Bruce Hales, was unable to be photographed outside the group's Tuckers Road compound.

Australian-based Hales is notoriously secretive. He has not been snapped by a media photographer in nearly 20 years.

Exclusive Brethren spokesman Tony McCorkell said Hales and his family were in the city to conduct a Bible reading.

Attendance was by invitation only.

However, a former sect member, who declined to be identified, said the real reason for the trip would be fundraising.

McCorkell rejected that, saying Hales, "doesn't do that kind of thing".

"His meetings are purely about ministry and Bible readings. What people give to the church on Sunday in the church plate is their business," he said.

The former member disagreed.

"I wouldn't be surprised if he was doing a tour through New Zealand requesting money for schools and things like that, but it all comes under the guise of the gospel."

Despite Exclusive Brethren believing their global leader was "Jesus Christ walking on the earth", meetings such as yesterday's gathering were rather dull affairs, said the former member.

Anyone who wanted to speak to the Elect Vessel personally had to make a prior arrangement and wait their turn.

The former member said Hales had changed the focus of the sect to be more financially motivated and had introduced "letters of criteria" about what members could wear.

The group hit the headlines in 2005 when it was revealed that it was behind anti-Greens and anti-Labour pamphlets in the run-up to the election.

Extracts:

The Government says the bill, which re-writes the rules covering election campaigns, is essential to stop a repetition of tactics like those used by the Exclusive Brethren in the 2005 election.

The sect spent about $1 million on an initially covert campaign to support National, and the bill will put a stop to that by making any organisation spending more than $120,000 register with the Electoral Commission and disclose its funding sources.

National says the spending cap, and restrictions on what third parties can say and do during a campaign, is an attack on democracy and free speech.

Ms Turei said National was annoyed because it was losing its secret funding.

She told Parliament said that in 2005 Labour received $400,000 in anonymous donations while the National Party received $2.2 million from secret trusts.

"These of course are only donations that are over $10,000, so who knows how much money either of those parties received in lots under $10,000. The public simply do not know," she said.

Extract:

The Government says the bill, which re-writes the rules covering election campaigns, is essential to stop a repetition of tactics like those used by the Exclusive Brethren in the 2005 election.

The sect spend about $1 million on an initially covert campaign to support National, and the bill will put a stop to that by making any organisation spending more than $120,000 register with the Electoral Commission and disclose its funding sources.

National says the spending cap, and restrictions on what third parties can say and do during a campaign, is an attack on democracy and free speech.

Labour MP Rick Barker said freedom of speech did not mean "buying as much advertising as you can afford".

Labour MP Marian Hobbs said she did not care who was doing the buying.

"If it were Forest and Bird or my friends the Society of Friends, the Quakers, I would be just as angry as if it were the Exclusive Brethren. I do not care who is buying the election. What I care is that one group puts itself up above the law, puts it up above human rights and says because I have money, I have the right to buy an election."

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, a strong supporter of the bill, said the only people affected by it were those who thought money could buy elections.

The Greens are rebutting right wing criticism of the Electoral Finance Bill.

National is condemning the legislation as an attack on democracy and is accusing Labour of stacking the legal deck in its favour for the next election.

Green MP Metiria Turei says it is interesting to note that most of the hysteria is coming from political parties with big financial backers. She claims National benefited enormously from loopholes in the law at the last election and ruthlessly exploited them. Ms Turei says National's relationship with the Exclusive Brethren campaign is an apt example.

The Greens also say John Boscawen, who organised public protests against the legislation, is linked to the Business Roundtable and accuses the organisation of pulling the strings.

Mr Boscawen admits he is an associate member of the Business Roundtable but says his campaign is his own initiative. He is emphatic that he has received no financial help in any shape or form from the organisation. Mr Boscawen is also a member of ACT which is opposed to the legislation, but he says the only reason he got involved in the issue is because he believes democracy is under attack

:

Extracts:

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK: I understand the United Kingdom period begins at the beginning of the year. If the member thinks that this is a long electoral period, he obviously cannot be watching the American election campaign.

John Key: How is a piece of legislation that is so complicated that the Electoral Commission admits it will have to tell people with questions to seek their own legal advice, and that its chief executive fears could lead to an Americanisation of New Zealand politics through endless court battles, going to enhance freedom of speech and democracy in New Zealand?

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK: The Americanisation came with the work of the “hollow men”. The member was one of the key bagmen who went around collecting the money, briefing the Exclusive Brethren, and knowing they were funding the campaign.

...

John Key: If the Prime Minister is really concerned about the use of big money, why does she not move to address the really big money in our electoral system—that is, the use of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money for parties to spend on election material like the pledge card, and the use of tens of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money for soft advertising from Government departments, which we know this Government now treats as part of its own political party?

Rt Hon HELEN CLARK: That is typical of the hyperbole that has come from the Opposition across the whole bill. I refer back to The Hollow Men and Mr Goldsmith’s email to Don Brash, which talked about Mr Key’s schedule being one of “meeting with loads of big donors”. That was his role in the last campaign—to thwart electoral law through the Exclusive Brethren and through big donors.

Jeanette Fitzsimons: Does the Prime Minister agree that the Electoral Finance Bill is designed to stem the flood of secret money into political parties—for example, the practices revealed by Nicky Hager’s book The Hollow Men, whereby the National Party in 2005 received secret millions of dollars from members of the Business Roundtable, including David Richwhite, Alan Gibbs, Doug Myers, and Peter Shirtcliffe?

Extract:

MPs exchanged heated comments in parliament on Tuesday night as the government's controversial Electoral Finance Bill came under debate for the final time.

The new law is designed to clean up election campaign funding, outing secret donations like the one the Exclusive Brethren made in 2005.

Extracts:

New Zealand's parliament is debating a Bill to stop groups like the Exclusive Brethren sect from unduly influencing elections.

The Electoral Finance Bill was conceived in the wake of the 2005 election, when members of the Christian sect spent $NZ1.2 million ($1m) on an anti-Labour Party advertising campaign.

New Zealand's then opposition leader Don Brash later admitted he'd known about the Brethren's activities.

Parliamentarians today began the second reading of the Bill, which is expected to be passed into law next week.

If passed, the Bill will replace the existing Electoral Act, which allows groups or companies to spend unlimited amounts of money to anonymously advertise their views during election campaigns.

Under the new rules, individuals and groups will be limited to anonymous advertising expenditure up to $NZ12,000.

Any person or group wanting to exceed that must surrender their anonymity and register, and even then are restricted to a maximum advertising budget of $NZ120,000.

...

This story was also carried by:

Extracts:

Parliament is set for its last hurrah of the year this week, as MPs return to the Debating Chamber for a final frenzied sitting before rising for the long summer recess.

Despite the usual round of Christmas parties and drinks, however, there is likely to be a little less cheer around Parliament than normal. The Electoral Finance Bill will dominate this final sitting and it's likely to be a grim fight to the death for both sides.

The ramming through Parliament of last-minute legislation to clear the decks before Christmas is every bit as familiar a Yuletide tradition as mistletoe and fig pudding. But this year the Opposition is likely to put up more than its usual token resistance and will drag out the debate on the bill for as long as it possibly can.

After stringent opposition to the bill Labour has finally introduced tougher limits on anonymous donations, an end to the funnelling of money through blind trusts into party coffers, and raised the bar on the limit of third party campaign expenditure from $60,000 to $120,000.

The greatest sticking point, however, is Labour's insistence that the various funding caps apply for the entire election year. The reason the Government has been unmovable on this particular clause is that it goes to the heart of the intent of the legislation: to stop either National or its allies from spending their way to victory in 2008.

The reclusive Right-wing religious sect, the Exclusive Brethren, has been used by Labour as a justification. Its million-dollar advertising campaign last election has entered political folklore and its impact on the 2005 result will be debated for years to come.

Even if the electoral laws were not changed, the ham-fisted attempts of the Brethren to influence the election would be seen by the public for what they were. Smear campaigns usually go down badly. Just look at the Australian Liberal Party's embarrassing attempt to portray Labor as terrorist sympathisers using fake pamphlets in Sydney recently.

...