Negative campaigning


19 responses to “Negative campaigning

  1. John Bishop is the only Lambton Ward candidate running a negative campaign attacking the Greens and Stephanie Cook. e.g. from his newsletter – “Stephanie Cook says her big project [Edible Wellington] for the next three years is a community garden. Maybe it can work, but is that the limit of her ideas? After 15 years on council, one might think she could come up with something better, bolder and of more benefit than that!”

    I suppose he gets his ideas from ACT party mate John Ansell. Bishop was a former ACT party press secretary. Bishop wrote a glowing story about him in the right-wing NBR rag in 2008. Bishop says “ACT is about choice”.

    John Bishop is clearly the only one who thinks ACT is a centre party. They have about 2% support in the real world. Scroll down for ACT is a centre party story.

    Say Bishop “However the media coverage to date has missed a vital shift in ACT strategy. ACT isn’t competing on the fringe any more. It’s trying to be a centre party. A radical centre party with some novel ideas but a centre party nonetheless.”

    I suppose Libertarians are mild centre-right and Greens and Labour are evil communists in Bishopworld. ACT’s slogan is “Less government is good government’. Bishop would add, ‘No government is better.’

    • I can assure Johnny that John Ansell has contributed nothing to my campaign. I was not a party press secretary, and the quote about ACT being a centre party is from an article I wrote as a political journalist for the National Business Review. I do not claim ACT is a centre party. I reported that they were trying to present themselves as one. The effort has not been successful as everyone can see. Finally I do not share the libertarians’ view of the world. Government – controlled by and serving the people – is good.

      • It was a piece in your personal Communications Line newsletter of 21 August 2008, not the NBR.

        “ACT is a centre party

        Rodney Hide is wandering around in a “look at me, look at me” yellow jacket that makes him look like a shaven raisin atop a moving custard, but ACT needs attention if it is to get traction. They did well mediawise with Sir Roger Douglas putting his hand up for the cause again, and in the past few weeks Rodney’s had plenty of coverage in his favourite sport of Peters baiting.
        However the media coverage to date has missed a vital shift in ACT strategy. ACT isn’t competing on the fringe any more. It’s trying to be a centre party. A radical centre party with some novel ideas but a centre party nonetheless.
        At the party’s annual conference in March deputy leader Heather Roy MP made a presentation which effectively repositioned ACT away from its Friedman-Thatcherite associations. Less government was good government, she said, but education and training, health and social services and the provision of superannuation were now among the “core roles” of the state for ACT.
        According to Roy the other roles for the state were: national security, infrastructure, justice and the maintenance of law and order, being smart green and fiscal responsibility – running a tight ship on economic matters.
        The minimalist view that the state should be confined to the defence of the realm and enforcement of contracts was implicitly rejected.
        “We have to build the strength and relevance of ACT as a classical liberal party that is new and true again,” Mrs Roy said. This was in contrast to the “false and old’, policies of the other parties, who had failed to make New Zealand prosperous or safe.
        Ad man John Ansell followed this up with a pamphlet setting out Sir Roger Douglas’ 20 point plan to restore New Zealand’s prosperity. The policies include cutting and flattening taxes, introducing night courts and a Taxpayer Bill of Rights, increasing migration, more land for housing, reforming the RMA, and making education and health more competitive, a referendum on MMP and finding mentors to teach families parenting and life skills.
        Ansell’s brochure copy said “if anyone says these policies are ‘hard right’ note how many of them have been adopted by left wing governments from Sweden to the UK to Bill Clinton’s America. In the UK privately run prisons are now the norm under a Labour government. In Sweden the only party that doesn’t support a voucher system enabling parents to choose the best school for their children is the former Communist party.
        He told me: “ACT needs to occupy a position in the centre of the political spectrum, straddling the 50% line where the majority of voters are. All the ideas (in the Douglas plan) are less state, more private, so it’s still ideological, but they are also world best practice.””

  2. I’d hardly call that a negative campaign. It seems a fair enough comment. The idea is pretty silly, and the comment about her having spent 15 years on Council already has been made by other candidates too.

    The rest of your comment just seems like amusing delusional rantings. Given your past record of (lack of) accuracy with regard to McKinnon and Bishop and Cunningham, it’s hard to take anything you say seriously.

  3. I support McKinnon and you can abuse me all you like. Bring it on. As I said before it turned out another McKinnon owned the car. He has 3 brothers. But the comments above are from published articles that John Bishop has written. Facts are facts. He says ACT is a centre party. Who is delusional?

    Cunningham’s links to Mike O’Sullivan of St Laurence are a matter of the public record. Go to the Companies Office website and look for yourself. His 14 foot signs are on his buildings. Cunningham is the director of 16 companies. But the records show he has no shareholding in Village Accommodation, a company he claims to own. These are facts. He is the Wellington President of HANZ and has called for reform of the drinking laws to allow 365/7 drinking, wiping out prohibitions on ANZAC day and Easter.

    You seem to be running a damage limitation exercise for right of centre candidates. Good luck to you.

  4. This flyer is being circulated by Bryan Pepperells shambolic group “The City is Ours”. It is hardly surprising they don’t have the balls to put their name to it.

  5. Pepperell should pull out of the mayoral race and enable a straight fight between Kerry and Celia. He’s like the Peoples Front of Judea or is it the Judean Peoples Front, so busy fighting amongst themselves they have lost sight of the ultimate objective, no more Kerry.

    • Bryan is just a distraction. Under STV he is completely irrelevant until he drops out and his second preferences are distributed … then we will see either Kerry or Celia win!

  6. No abuse Johnny and no defence of the “right of centre” candidates (as if anyone who is on a Council can be described as “right wing”!) – just amused by how you seem to monitor this site 24/7 (as if enough average punters who vote will actually visit), and use any excuse possible to demonise those who you dislike (even if its due to apparent past political affiliations).

    • Aren’t “apparent past political affiliations” the problem with Mr Bishop and other so-called “independent” candidates who have held (and may still hold) party political affiliations? We know, within relatively broad boundaries, what philosophical principles will underlie the voting records of candidates who have declared their afiliations (like Labour and the Greens) but I am extremely dubious of “independents” who try to conceal their political past, like Bishop.

    • Xenoplexy, I am not a member of a political party and never have been. Tell me about my “past political affiliations”. I am most interested. You appear to be attacking commentators on the blog rather than examining the candidates, their background and suitability. That is what we are here to do, not criticise each other.

  7. How many council candidates have worked “in the ACT office in Parliament”? In fact how many New Zealanders have worked in that office. It takes a special kind of person I would say.

    John Bishop bio

    “He had executive lease assignments with Telecom, the Fire Service, Victoria University, and KPMG, worked with the Ministry of Social Development, and in the ACT office in Parliament.”

  8. Johnny I was there. I have never hidden that – as you have discovered. I was there in 2001 and 2002 on a contract from Parliamentary Services. I was not a member of the party, and I have never been a member of any poliutical party. The job was interesting but ultimately a dead end. I left at the election. I have moved on.

  9. If you weren’t a press secretary, were you the communications director?

    You’re right, you have moved on, to be an independent candidate for the Wellington City Council. But in 2006 David Farrar called you ACT’s “friendly insider”.

    In 2008 you said “it’s a greener, nicer ACT now.” Only about 3% of New Zealanders agreed with you at the polls.

    “It’s a greener, nicer ACT now – While the media focused on Roger Douglas and his spats with Michael Cullen and others in the past fortnight, the story of ACT’s subtle repositioning has gone largely unnoticed. I wasn’t at ACT’s annual conference (I have never attended any of their conferences), but I did join more than a hundred others at a meeting in Wellington this week where Heather Roy and Roger Douglas repeated their conference presentations. ACT is now about being free, prosperous and green, and it’s out to capture voters’ minds. Already one can see the impact of the advertising thinking coming from John Ansell.”

  10. Johnny, if you look at the comments on those articles you will see this one: “What a fascinating insight – and mirroring many of the comments I have made about organisation within ACT. Bishop has accurately described ACT, perhaps better than anyone else, as the “point, look and scream party”. Hardly a flattering or friendly assessment even four years ago.

  11. I do see John’s pay-to-play suggestion putting him as the most far to the right candidate in Lambton Ward. I might be being unfair on Cunningham here but it’s pretty impossible to see what he stands for through all the fluff.

  12. So to understand Mr Bishop’s articles we need to read what other people think about the articles and what they think he might mean rather than the actual words written such as “a greener, nicer Act”. Of course Farrar has already called John ACT’s “friendly insider” and put him as 2 on his preference vote the same as former ACT MP Stephen Franks, who thinks that anyone who doesn’t vote right wing is “low grade”. What a lovely bunch of …

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s