Todd Barclay faces Clutha-Southland selection challenge

47 comments on “Todd Barclay faces Clutha-Southland selection challenge ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Gosman 1

   29 November 2016 at 8:55 am

   An excellent opportunity for a party on the left then. 🙂
   • Ovid 1.1

     29 November 2016 at 9:34 am

     Clutha is old-school rural conservative. I can’t see the seat flipping, but maybe there’s a chance to raise the left’s party vote by a few points.
   • b waghorn 1.2

     29 November 2016 at 12:15 pm

     Winston should run a big campaign , if he can find a good candidate.
     • Graeme 1.2.1

       29 November 2016 at 2:31 pm

       NZ First, with the right candidate, may have had a good chance against toddles, but with Simon Flood sticking his paw up again it’ll be safely blue for the foreseeable.
2. Colonial Viper 2

   29 November 2016 at 9:01 am

   Were Flood and Key associates at Merrill Lynch?
   • Gosman 2.1

     29 November 2016 at 9:49 am

     They worked in different divisions so unlikely they had much to do with each other. That stated – so what if they were?
     • AB 2.1.1

       29 November 2016 at 4:36 pm

       Do parasitic organisms normally operate in pairs? Generally not from my limited knowledge of zoology.
     • reason 2.1.2

       29 November 2016 at 9:26 pm

       Do you think Simon Flood was helping Corporations and other ‘clients’ get in on the tax dodging that Key was doing for Merrill lynch and their clients gosman ??? …..

       “As head of global foreign exchange for investment giant Merrill Lynch he shifted a considerable amount of his business to Ireland in the mid-1990s to take advantage of a 10 per cent tax rate for foreign investors.

       The investment was a runaway success.

       “We transferred across the aircraft leasing business, the complex interest rates derivatives business, the entire back office for global foreign exchange and a huge chunk of private clients’ business,” says Key. ” …

       “But as a former money-man, he is also interested in how Jersey built its economy on the back of offshore trusts.

       “Why not look at the success lessons from other small island economies?” he asks.
       The Irish model is perhaps more easily understood here than the Jersey model,

       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10336608

       I wonder if Simon Flood is another merrill lynch millionaire who got bailed out …….and gifted Bank of America shares when Merrill was going bankrupt … like Key is.

       Bank of America is a very aggressive user of tax havens ….. …. very fitting for ex-merrill boys investments http://ctj.org/pdf/offshoreshellgames2016.pdf

       http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/05/new-zealand-the-worlds-tiniest-international-stock-exchange-a-big-ponzi-scheme-and-other-crazy-tales-from-john-keys-financial-services-hub.html

       Also is Is a tax dodge artist a ‘money trader’ ???
   • Graeme 2.2

     29 November 2016 at 2:52 pm

     I wondered that there may have been some history there when he withdrew from from the 2014 candidacy.

     He’s a very personable guy, with very good emotional intelligence, who does things to a very high standard, in a practical and appropriate way. He doesn’t strike me as one who goes into a candidate selection process to withdraw at the last moment for family reasons.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2.1

       29 November 2016 at 3:52 pm

       On the one hand, it sounds like exactly the sort of thing someone with good emotional intelligence might do under certain circumstances, and on the other hand, fight, you bastards, fight!
       • Robert Guyton 2.2.1.1

         29 November 2016 at 3:58 pm

         The issue is, I think, that the sitting MP, trained and anointed by Bill English, is being challenged by a capable challenger. This is untidy and provides the Left with a great opportunity to revel in the discomfort such a situation affords. National won’t lose Clutha/Southland, bar some miracle, as it’s always been said a smurf could take it, but there’s entertainment to be had.
     • the pigman 2.2.2

       30 November 2016 at 7:40 pm

       “family reasons” could just as easily be code for, “Just gotta wait to make sure that 16 year old gets that abortion…”
       • Graeme 2.2.2.1

         30 November 2016 at 8:42 pm

         Na, I take him as more thorough and prepared than that. And probably unlikely to come a gutsa from that angle. Would more expect a further indiscretion from the incumbent.
3. shorts 3

   29 November 2016 at 9:33 am

   I wonder if Barclay realises he may just have blown his opportunity to hold the seat until he decided to retire

   what a plonker
   • mosa 3.1

     29 November 2016 at 9:37 pm

     Its a plonkers party…no surprises there.
4. Ad 4

   29 November 2016 at 9:41 am

   Todd Barclay for National got 21,500 votes last time
   Liz Craig for Labour got 6,600.
   The Green candidate got about 2,300

   Liz has to be in it to get the party vote, and to get in to Parliament on the list.
   I am sure she is realistic.
   Waitaki, I think, is the only stronger seat for National.

   Whoever gets the nomination for National in Southland, I am sure they will represent Queenstown’s foreign capital very well.
   • Graeme 4.1

     29 November 2016 at 2:35 pm

     Waitaki, but with slightly different boundaries including Queenstown, was once a Labour seat held by David Parker, so it is possible with the right candidate.
5. save nz 5

   29 November 2016 at 9:47 am

   What a choice! lucky NZ! sarc.

   Increasingly this is going to be the issues with candidates – they are equally as bad as each other. That is why people stop voting. If everyone is as bad as each other, says all the same things (think unitary plan group think in Auckland) then don’t blame the voters for thinking politicians are all the same.

   Sadly as we have seen when ‘new blood’ comes along with new ideas the cartel pushes them out. (Mana, Conservative party, The opportunity party will be similar).
   • Gosman 5.1

     29 November 2016 at 10:02 am

     How is the cartel meant to be able to push out these other parties?
     • save nz 5.1.1

       29 November 2016 at 11:09 am

       “Parliament is not as diverse as people assume. Since the first MMP election 20 years ago, not a single new party has broken into Parliament. From New Zealand First to the Maori Party every group was either already in Parliament, or created by a party-hopping MP.

       MMP hasn’t delivered any outsiders. Instead, it’s a cosy cartel of politicians who create and maintain rules that keep new parties from being able to grow and make it into Parliament. MMP was supposed to shake up the party system, but has failed.

       It is notable that in 2015 polling by UMR research showed only 68 per cent of the public were “generally satisfied” with the political party options and 25 per cent “would like to see a new party or some new parties emerge before the next election”.”

       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11749955
       • Ad 5.1.1.1

         29 November 2016 at 1:52 pm

         Elamain Kopu

         Nandor Tanczos

         Plus the lower ends of the NZFirst lot.

         Fairly outside.
6. Bearded Git 6

   29 November 2016 at 11:12 am

   Watch Queenstown’s fascist ex-mayor Vanessa Van Uden throw her hat in the ring.
7. save nz 7

   29 November 2016 at 11:24 am

   @ Gosman – lets look at last election…

   Cunliffe has some fresh ideas – smeared by Natz, MSM and his own party – result – Labour looked untrustworthy and unfit to govern, Cunliffe resigns and now is leaving parliament.

   Mana – had some fresh ideas, smeared by Natz, MSM, the opposition – result – Mana looked untrustworthy and Hone Hawawira is not in parliament, Laila Harre is running a restaurant, Dotcom is having a Kangaroo court witch hunt extradition for Hollywood backers but paid by NZ taxpayers.

   Conservative party – a couple of days before the election, Colin’s own press secretary calls him untrustworthy and resigned. He just fails to make the 5%. Colin Craig out of parliament.

   Funny enough – those that seem to want to make some changes (for the left or the right) seem doomed to failure…..

   At the same time Dimwit Dunne still there, the kid on $500,000 or what ever it is, who represents ACT are all troughing in Wellington.

   Mark Mitchell just had to pay Slater approx $6000 to lever out other National MP’s to get his job in parliament according to dirty politics…. what a return on investment – now he’s running the security of our country… go figure

   Russel Norman leaving, and their was a lot of smears against him before he left.

   Anyway anyone with new ideas seems to either be blocked from getting into parliament or their lives made unpleasant until they leave.
   • Pedant 7.1

     29 November 2016 at 2:44 pm

     Yes it seems ok for Slater and Lusk the Brokeback Cowboys to intervene in local selections yet when someone even slightly appears to be doing it elsewhere it is all Michelle Boag’s fault! He really is shameless. That Police Minister Collins seems to be Chief Protector of Toddy tweeting her support (when he is under Police investigation currently) says it all really, he IS in Team Dirty Politics.
8. Incognito 8

   29 November 2016 at 11:34 am

   Bill’s shoes were obviously too big for wee Toddy.

   Talking about big shoes: Parmjeet Parmar also seems to have a penchant for very big shoes.

   When do people learn that confidence does not equal competence?
   • David C 8.1

     29 November 2016 at 12:38 pm

     So wee Toddy got twice the electorate vote and three times the party vote of the illustrious Labour Leader.

     What size shoes does David Little take?
     • Macro 8.1.1

       29 November 2016 at 2:30 pm

       Do you have any idea what constitutes a false equivalence ?
       • David C 8.1.1.1

         29 November 2016 at 6:10 pm

         I have a reasonable idea thanks Macro.

         I am pretty sure what it is not tho, comparing someone who took a safe seat and held it with hardly any change in % of votes to someone who took a safe seat and made it safe for the other party and tanked the electoral vote AND the party vote.

         but maybe I am wrong and you need to smack some learning into this uneducated Tradie.?
         • Macro 8.1.1.1.1

           29 November 2016 at 6:42 pm

           Ok you obviously don’t.
           So here goes..
           “A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects (a “safe” seat) is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude (Little tanked the electorate vote), when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.
           Firstly you equate New Plymouth with Southland – two completely different electorates with two completely different demographics.
           Secondly you falsely claim that they are both “safe” seats -Southland for National and New Plymouth for Labour. This is arid nonsense since Labour has not held New Plymouth since 2005! Furthermore Labours share of the electorate vote has been tracking downwards in New Plymouth since that time. It is hardly fair to compare the two results.
9. Gosman 9

   29 November 2016 at 11:43 am

   What do you mean smears? Hone Harawira and Laila Harre dcided to get in to bed with Kim Dotcom because of his money. That was the extent of any smear campaign. Was this in any way untrue? What do you expect people to do – not report negatives?
   • save nz 9.1

     29 November 2016 at 12:21 pm

     Keep spreading that discourse Gosman. Of course the National party runs it’s election campaign with zero money from rich backers – sarc.

     Are you trying to say that parties are not allowed money from backers to fund themselves? Or just small and new parties that should not accept money from rich backers?

     Personally would like to see all donations made illegal and the candidates/parties all get a set amount of money to campaign on.
     • inspider 9.1.1

       29 November 2016 at 1:30 pm

       Did we ever find out how much money was in cunliffe’s secret trust and who donated it?
       • Ad 9.1.1.1

         29 November 2016 at 1:54 pm

         Can you describe or even summarise the disclosure rules for electoral funding?
         • inspider 9.1.1.1.1

           29 November 2016 at 2:21 pm

           Sure if you are willing to explain the transsubstantiation that goes on when the cut and thrust of political debate miraculously becomes a smear, but only for the cuts and thrusts that go from right to left.

           You will do the world a great service if you can.
           • framu 9.1.1.1.1.1

             29 November 2016 at 4:04 pm

             were talking smears during the last election arent we?

             the comment chain is a bit broken – just making sure im on topic
             • inspider …

               29 November 2016 at 4:44 pm

               Ask savenz. He’s the one claiming smears without identifying them
       • save nz 9.1.1.2

         29 November 2016 at 1:57 pm

         @inspider
         I’m more interested in john Key’s blind and offshore trusts and his reasoning to make us into a tax haven and why we are now being investigated by the EU????
         • inspider 9.1.1.2.1

           29 November 2016 at 2:24 pm

           We’re not being investigated by the EU

           http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/82762846/new-zealand-is-not-heading-for-the-tax-haven-blacklist-says-european-union
     • Gosman 9.1.2

       29 November 2016 at 2:25 pm

       Did I state they private individuals or businesses can’t give money to political parties? That doesn’t mean people can’t be pulled up on receiving cash from particular individuals. Don’t you think someone accused of serious crimes funding a political party is not worthy of comment?
       • McFlock 9.1.2.1

         29 November 2016 at 4:45 pm

         “serious crimes”. Lol.

         Laundering drug money is a serious crime.
         Earning money from a better business model than the studios and production corporations is not, even if they have an archaic legal concept to protect their obsolete revenue streams.
         Transferring that money from one account to another is only money laundering if the money was dirty in the first place.
       • reason 9.1.2.2

         29 November 2016 at 10:03 pm

         Criminal you say Gosy ?

         Do you think Kim Dotcom is more criminal than the funder of crime stoppers ………. Lord ashcroft. …. a man who also donates millions to Tory parties.

         The ‘good’ lords a immoral fraud who should be in jail……… I suspect he is also a mentor for john key…..

         Lord Ashcrof who has been described as a ‘phillanhthropist bussinessman’ by NewZealand media is
         actuallly a very very dodgy Billionare tax haven builder ….. facillitating financial crimes …. and getting rich at the expense of the poor.

         His ‘steal from the poor’ CV :
         “the Royal Bank of Canada, which – despite its name – had extensive operations around the Caribbean.
         In 1987, the branch was bought by Michael Ashcroft,”

         “In 1990, in part after advice from Ashcroft, Belize passed laws creating an offshore financial centre” (offshore financial centre = tax haven )
         “Belize Corporate Services, a non-bank entity owned by Ashcroft’s holding company, has advertised the sale of “Belize Ready Made Companies” as well as “virtual office” services,”
         http://www.taxjustice.net/2015/10/05/belize-and-the-curious-tale-of-the-british-lord/
         “perhaps the founder of the Crimestoppers charity ought to have been a little more curious about why customers were using bearer shares, mail holding accounts, nominee directors and all the other accoutrements of offshore tax crime.”

         His bank has been accused of directly stealing $10 million meant for social housing ….
         https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/jun/16/ashcroft-bank-belize-privy-council-row

         “A bank with close links to Lord Ashcroft will be accused in a British courtroom of keeping $10m destined for social housing in a poor central American country,” …..

         …..“She accused Ashcroft of being the guiding hand behind the bank’s dispute with the government”….. “There is no doubt that he is a controlling hand behind the bank. We will continue to argue the money belongs to the Belizean people,” she told the Guardian.”

         And although a Billionaire keeping $10 million meant to help poor people is bad enough …. Its on a PPP deal, that he’s involved with some serious looting involving hundreds of millions …..

         “Under the terms of the agreement, the islanders pay about $22m a year for the next 25 years – almost $600m – for the $124m invested by a Canadian health company and its financial backers who awarded the $65m hospitals construction contract ….”
         https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/mar/31/lord-ashcroft-link-caribbean-firm

         He is battling for control of his dirty money owners registry …..

         “Lord Ashcroft, the billionaire Tory party donor, has been drawn into a bitter row with the government of Belize over the control of its offshore register, which has been responsible for the formation of more than 100,000 companies in the tax haven.”

         “But the row has also raised questions about how much money Ashcroft’s business interests have made from helping develop Belize as a tax haven.”

         Presently his bent bank seems to be biting its bent customers……as a run on funds is taking place … customers like ” the Belizean arm of Mossack Fonseca” can not get their money out …..
         https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/02/lord-ashcrofts-belize-bank-hit-wave-withdrawals-bbi

         Now knowing the type of ‘expertise’ Ashcroft has ……….. it all casts a different light over Keys meetings with him….

         …… teaching the ropes ??? …. fundraising ??? …
         • Gosman 9.1.2.2.1

           30 November 2016 at 5:37 am

           Yes and that should and has been reported. What was being stated here is the media should not have focused on Kim Dotcom financing the Internet/Mana Party for some reason. Pure nonsense.
10. Cinny 10

    29 November 2016 at 8:19 pm

    Unstable government, infighting, wonder if the media will investigate the rest of the rumors? Any ex staff gone overseas to live recently to avoid questions? Barclay and English might fill you in if you ask nicely, or maybe they won’t.

    But at least media is touching on this and so they should, more to come, if they want to dig.
11. mosa 11

    29 November 2016 at 9:53 pm

    Flood is ex Merrill Lynch eh.

    This selection like the general election has already been bought.

    Nearly nine thousand votes for Lab-green last time.

    Thats a sizable vote in a safe National seat.

    Not everybody loved Todd it seems but the seat is a great retirement option for Flood and Key will be keen on having him on board to chew the fat about the good old days trading and making all that money.
12. Dorothy Bulling 12

    1 December 2016 at 4:11 pm

    Liz Craig is standing against Sarah Dowie in the Invercargill electorate in the 2017 election. She has a pretty good chance of taking this one for Labour. She is a worthy candidate and was blooded in the Clutha Wallace electorate last time. Barclay has written his own obituary and is a child messing around in an adult world. Just not up to the job, but we should be wary of a Merrill Linch man coming in. Who needs another money trader in Parliament?
13. Smilin 13

    2 December 2016 at 11:50 pm

    I used to know some concrete truck drivers in Clutha maybe they could mix up a batch and bury both of them
    Get a block vote uh

Links to post

1. Clearing the decks « The Standard: posted on 1 December 2016 at 8:57 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS