The Dim-Post

March 2, 2014

Slightly more thoughts on the Taxpayers’ Union

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 6:54 pm

Jordan Williams has posted about the Mojo Mathers story. He writes:

The Taxpayers’ Union did not seek media attention on this story. There is no associated press release. The Herald called yesterday evening asking for comment, as happens often.

Here’s how I’m guessing this works. The (taxpayer funded) opposition researchers in the National Party find a smear story they like. They pitch it to an editor at the Herald and – because they can’t provide comment themselves for obvious reasons, such as John Key’s taxpayer funded golf game – they say, ‘Call Jordan Williams at the Taxpayers’ Union and he’ll give you comment.’

So, that’s sort-of how political media works. All political parties come up with stories and pitch them to journalists. And I’m guessing that when we see some unionist endorsing the Labour Party line or some environmental organisation endorsing the Green Party line its because they’ve been supplied to the journalist by the party pitching the story.

The important difference, I think, is that groups like the CTU or Greenpeace are actual groups with members and values that might coincide with those of a political party in some areas, while the Taxpayers’ Union is basically just a scam that ACT and the National Party have set up. It’s not a union. You can donate to it but you can’t join it. You can’t vote for the leaders or have any input into its actions. It’s a web-site and a bunch of National/ACT activists pretending to speak for ‘the taxpayers’. So a Green MP spending $550 on travel is of huge concern to them. Items not of concern to the Taxpayers’ Union in recent weeks:

  • The National government paying Paula Rebstock $290,000 for her failed inquiry
  • Gerry Brownlee spending $1500 to lease an SUV while watching the America’s Cup race in San Francisco.
  • Tim Groser and a private secretary spending over $8500 to stay at the Four Seasons Hotel Washington for a week, during a month in which Groser spent $18,200.
  • John Key, DPS bodyguards and staffers flying down to Queenstown for the New Zealand golf open, at an as-yet unknown cost.

You get the picture. There are hundreds more examples. Patrick Gower actually sought a comment about the Rebstock inquiry from Jordan Williams on twitter and Williams replied that he was too busy to look into it. $290,000.

I remember when the Taxpayers’ Union was set up. There was general hilarity at the idea of a bunch of ACT Party activists and National staffers setting up a ‘non-partisan union’ because they were SO worried about taxpayer waste, while simultaneously stuffing their own pockets with taxpayer funds. Who would be dumb enough to take such an obvious scam at face value?

62 Comments »

  1. “…Accusations that the Taxpayers’ Union are partisan are also silly…”

    I guess that is why David Farrar is a director then. To bring some balance. LOL. Farrar must be furious. He is oh so careful to play down his role as palace courtier for National party and present as the affable guy who knows everyone, and here he is being dragged into a petty bit of bullying because his mate in their little astro-turf union shot his mouth off.

    Probably won’t bother Jim Mora though.

    Comment by Sanctuary — March 2, 2014 @ 7:12 pm

  2. Groan, so its OK for the CTU to pimp some Oz union hacks to try and fuck with LOTR production and score some cheap left media points, or for Greenpeace to grandstand with Lucy and Robyn ‘luvies forbhire’ to score some cheap left media points because they stand for some lefty labour/green supporting positions aka they fund the parties but the right aren’t allowed to play that game?

    Ooooookaaaaaay.

    Comment by bart — March 2, 2014 @ 7:16 pm

  3. I think it’s time for David Farrar to show the NZ tax payer how much Curia has been paid for the past 10 years.

    Comment by Oh Busby — March 2, 2014 @ 7:24 pm

  4. Bart, are CTU and Greenpeace lying about being “non partisan”?

    Comment by pete — March 2, 2014 @ 7:32 pm

  5. The conventional wisdom is that there’s no such thing as bad publicity. In the case of the Taxpayer’s Union, this particular blow-up is an exception.

    Comment by deepred — March 2, 2014 @ 7:33 pm

  6. Among other lies they peddle, yes.

    Comment by bart — March 2, 2014 @ 7:33 pm

  7. The four examples given in the OP may well be waste, but they do not have the same stench of hypocrisy that accompanies the Mather’s expenditure.

    Comment by Redbaiter — March 2, 2014 @ 7:35 pm

  8. Deep red, to a beltway geek like you while holding your head askew with eyes squinted reading the standard sure, you can make that leap.

    Comment by bart — March 2, 2014 @ 7:35 pm

  9. BTW Sanctuary- Why is this “bullying”?

    Comment by Redbaiter — March 2, 2014 @ 7:36 pm

  10. “Items not of concern to the Taxpayers’ Union in recent weeks:”

    The big daddy of them all would be the Holiday Highway.

    Comment by deepred — March 2, 2014 @ 7:39 pm

  11. You mean the motorway linking the northern part of nz to Auckland, yeah that’s terrible that transport infrastructure

    Comment by bart — March 2, 2014 @ 7:43 pm

  12. “but they do not have the same stench of hypocrisy”

    So the current government hasn’t been talking about keeping spending under control then? Gosh.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — March 2, 2014 @ 7:44 pm

  13. “the same stench of hypocrisy that accompanies the Mather’s expenditure”

    whatever

    Comment by Sacha — March 2, 2014 @ 7:47 pm

  14. So Tau Henare’s having ago at NZTU on Twitter. Does that mean he’s not part of the Collins faction?

    Comment by pete — March 2, 2014 @ 7:53 pm

  15. Looks like Danyl hit a nerve with this one … redbaiter’s crawled out of his cave, and someone has taken the trouble to create “bart” to spray diversionary slop all over the place.

    Comment by Flashing Light — March 2, 2014 @ 7:54 pm

  16. so its OK for the CTU to pimp some Oz union hacks to try and fuck with LOTR production and score some cheap left media points, or for Greenpeace to grandstand with Lucy and Robyn ‘luvies forbhire’ to score some cheap left media points because they stand for some lefty labour/green supporting positions aka they fund the parties but the right aren’t allowed to play that game?

    National can play that game and they do all the time. The EMA, companies like PWC, the NZ Initiative will all stand up and applaud their policies on command, just like other organisations do with Labour and the Greens.

    But the EMA is an actual organisation with its own agenda. They’re not going to run a smear campaign against a deaf MP. That’s where the Taxpayers’ Union comes in.

    Comment by danylmc — March 2, 2014 @ 8:31 pm

  17. …so its OK for the CTU to pimp some Oz union hacks to try and fuck with LOTR production…

    I guess you either didn’t read the post or your reading comprehension is so shockingly poor that you missed this bit:

    The important difference, I think, is that groups like the CTU or Greenpeace are actual groups with members and values that might coincide with those of a political party in some areas, while the Taxpayers’ Union is basically just a scam that ACT and the National Party have set up.

    In other words: union group calls on another union for support on a union issue? No problem. NACT set up a front organisation pretending to speak for us taxpayers on an independent, non-partisan basis? Yes problem.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — March 2, 2014 @ 9:10 pm

  18. Milt, Greenpeace is just a scam these days and has been for many years.

    The union movement, well, I guess there’s some worth in there at some level but they mostly suck up dues to fund union hierarchies, the CTU and the Labour Party.

    Comment by bart — March 2, 2014 @ 9:26 pm

  19. “the Taxpayers’ Union is basically just a scam that ACT and the National Party have set up. It’s not a union. You can donate to it but you can’t join it. You can’t vote for the leaders or have any input into its actions. It’s a web-site and a bunch of National/ACT activists pretending to speak for ‘the taxpayers’.”

    I was curious about this because societies.govt.nz lists The New Zealand Taxpayers Union Incorporated as an Incorporated Society, registered 11th March 2013. [Sorry, I don’t know if it’s possible to deep-link into that database but it’s organisation number 2576763.] As a society it can be joined. The website states how to do this, and then goes on about how members can show up to AGMs, and so on. It’s more interesting to read the society’s rules, though.

    The Incorporated Society Act says that it has to have rules for becoming members — furthermore you can read its rules from the incorporation document, which say “membership” is open to any NZ citizen or permanent resident (rule 4.1). In rule 6, though, it defines the initial Board of Directors as three specific people (David Farrar, Jordan Williams and Gabrielle O’Brien), states that up to 15 board members can remain on the board until their 3 year term expires, and they become eligible for reappointment. The only way someone can get onto the Board is if the existing Board appoints them. Then they can’t be forcefully removed until their term expires, or if they miss too many meetings.

    And AGMs and SGMs which involve all those people who faithfully paid $5? Well, they’re to discuss… (rule 9.2)… “any business the board puts before it”. So members get to vote at an AGM or SGM — they just have no say in what to actually vote about. Nice for a company or a lobby group or most political parties. Hardly typical of a union or a society in my own [limited] experience.

    Changing the rules of the society? Requires two thirds of the board majority.

    So yes. It’s basically 3 people and their friends with total control between them, pretending to represent members with everything they say and do yet giving those members zero actual influence into the operation of the society, including an ability to choose their own representatives. More like a fan club than anything else.

    DPF claims that the Taxpayer’s Union was modeled on the UK’s Taxpayer’s Alliance. It’d be interesting to know if that organisation is as autocratic, or if it actually provides its membership with an ability to influence things.

    Comment by izogi — March 2, 2014 @ 9:56 pm

  20. …they do not have the same stench of hypocrisy that accompanies the Mather’s expenditure.

    Right now the TPU are breathing a sigh of relief. “Redbaiter has explained why we weren’t being ridiculous and unreasonable after all.. Whew! We’ll be okay guys, we’ll be okay.”

    Comment by Steve Parkes — March 2, 2014 @ 10:21 pm

  21. “It’s not a union. You can donate to it but you can’t join it. You can’t vote for the leaders or have any input into its actions.”

    So its structure is similar to that of Family First; perhaps that’s where they got the idea from.

    Comment by D'Esterre — March 2, 2014 @ 10:44 pm

  22. bart at 8.

    Are you seriously suggesting that seeing this as a case of bad publicity for the TPU is a “leap”?

    Comment by Steve Parkes — March 2, 2014 @ 10:45 pm

  23. What I find particularly ironic is the Taxpayer’s Union’s stated intention to become “New Zealand’s biggest union”. Do they really think they can attract that many people willing to pay Jordan and DPF to push the ACT/Nat agenda by running petty attacks on minor travel expenses for opposition MPs?

    Comment by kalvarnsen — March 2, 2014 @ 10:59 pm

  24. They pitch it to an editor at the Herald…

    Or a journalist just asked a question and the TPU replied in an extremely ill-informed and insensitive manner

    I hardly think Key spends his time plotting against minor MPs.

    Comment by NeilM — March 2, 2014 @ 11:05 pm

  25. So how exactly are taxpayers funding the Taxpayers Union or it’s directors? To the tune of a million dollars? That’s quite a claim and if true…

    Comment by nigelsagentinthefield — March 2, 2014 @ 11:13 pm

  26. Title should be “A few more thoughts…” or “Slightly more thinking…” Sorry to be the grammar nazi but the whole number vs amount confusion in general conversation and print is getting worse and worse and I have to draw a line in the sand wherever I encounter it.

    Comment by mutyala — March 2, 2014 @ 11:37 pm

  27. @nigel: DPF’s polling company’s main client is the National Party, which in turn receives public money.

    Comment by kalvarnsen — March 2, 2014 @ 11:40 pm

  28. I remember when the Taxpayers’ Union was set up. There was general hilarity at the idea of a bunch of ACT Party activists and National staffers setting up a ‘non-partisan union’ because they were SO worried about taxpayer waste, while simultaneously stuffing their own pockets with taxpayer funds. Who would be dumb enough to take such an obvious scam at face value?

    It’s a scam that Judith Collins appears more than happy to exploit. Want to abolish industrial safety measures when worker deaths and accidents are reaching third-world levels? That’s what the Taxies are gagging to help out.

    Comment by Joe W — March 3, 2014 @ 6:48 am

  29. So how exactly are taxpayers funding the Taxpayers Union or it’s directors? To the tune of a million dollars? That’s quite a claim and if true…

    DPF is a pollster, John Bishop does media training and communications advice and Jordon Williams is a lawyer. Their work seems to be mostly – if not entirely – political and funded by the taxpayer. I heard from someone in National that DPF’s company was paid about a million dollars from the National leaders’ fund back, in 2010 or 2011.

    Which is fine. I mean, I work for a university. That’s funded by the taxpayer. But I’m not pretending to be a ‘classical liberal’ who thinks the government should stay out of the economy, nor am I running around accusing a deaf MP of rorting $550 from the taxpayer by not doing phone interviews while (allegedly) charging the taxpayer a million dollars a year to do political polling.

    Comment by danylmc — March 3, 2014 @ 6:58 am

  30. Wow! $1million in a year is an awful lot of polls!

    Comment by Andrew — March 3, 2014 @ 7:31 am

  31. Actually… On second thoughts… If they poll continuously I guess that’s not unreasonable.

    (Telephone fieldwork has a fairly low margin, and is really expensive due to the interviewer hours involved. DPF has commented publicly that his interviewers are paid above the industry average.)

    Comment by Andrew — March 3, 2014 @ 7:38 am

  32. @Andrew: “DPF has commented publicly that his interviewers are paid above the industry average.”

    Whereabouts? The TaxPayer Union’s rules have all this stuff about (themselves) not paying for work at any higher than “normal commercial rates” (19.5) whenever they commission work from anywhere. I guess DPF might be taking a big pay-cut so his staff can be paid extra?

    Comment by izogi — March 3, 2014 @ 8:18 am

  33. This is how NZ rolls. Usually its industry who fund “nonprofits” to promote govt policy that favors their industry. The finance industry for eg have non profits that lobby government and influence public opinion. Kiwi saver was one result. Dont have time to look it up but the finance indusrty non profit is regularly quoted in the Herald.

    The building industry are currently running non profits to promote massive govt infrastructure spending in Auckland, The payout to industry will be huge.

    It is a massive racket but it is how the game is played in NZ.

    Comment by Simon — March 3, 2014 @ 8:31 am

  34. So the two opposing conspiracy theories are: double cushion shot from National or triple cushion shot from the Greens.

    Comment by NeilM — March 3, 2014 @ 9:00 am

  35. @izogi I think I saw him mention this on Twitter. I’m 99% positive it was there.

    Comment by Andrew — March 3, 2014 @ 9:03 am

  36. @izogi Here you go: https://twitter.com/dpfdpf/status/391811753656336385

    Comment by Andrew — March 3, 2014 @ 9:23 am

  37. So the two opposing conspiracy theories are: double cushion shot from National or triple cushion shot from the Greens.

    I suspect I’m not alone in wearing a wft face right now, NeilM.
    Can you please cast light upon the aformentioned conspiracies?

    Comment by Gregor W — March 3, 2014 @ 9:59 am

  38. Thanks, Andrew. Also if anyone was looking for it, Jordan’s tweet to Patrick Gower re the Rebstock Inquiry, which Danyl referred to, is here.

    Comment by izogi — March 3, 2014 @ 11:08 am

  39. Who would be dumb enough to take such an obvious scam [as the Taxpayers Union] at face value?

    if a pretense looks implausible to anyone who doesn’t want to believe it, you have to consider that it exists to fool people who actively want to be fooled by it. People who have a motive to want to believe something can be convinced to believe it very easily.

    Comment by kahikatea — March 3, 2014 @ 11:20 am

  40. You are right, they aren’t a PROPER group like Greenpeace. With Greenpeace, you can give money and be a SUPPORTER. But according to the TPU’s website, “Joining the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union Inc. costs only $5 and entitles you to attend our annual conference, AGM and other events.”
    Research, peoples.

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 3, 2014 @ 1:05 pm

  41. “The building industry are currently running non profits to promote massive govt infrastructure spending in Auckland, The payout to industry will be huge. ”

    It’s called Agenda 21, lol, anyone can participate, maybe even receive EU funding, if they like the cut of your jib.

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 3, 2014 @ 1:07 pm

  42. Oops, omitted:
    http://taxpayers.org.nz/account/register

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 3, 2014 @ 1:08 pm

  43. Greenpeace aren’t pretending to be a union, Fist. (Research!) But according to their site they have about three million members worldwide and membership revenues of NZ $5 million which suggests that they have some support outside of the political system.

    Comment by danylmc — March 3, 2014 @ 1:47 pm

  44. True. As of June 1999 if you’re not on Greenpeace NZ’s Voting Assembly, you can attend AGMs as a member but you can’t vote. Compared with the Taxpayer’s Union where you can vote, but only on matters which the Board of Directors deems worthy enough to be put before you. (ie. Matters which they don’t care which way you vote, they just want to give you something to help you feel empowered.)

    Both groups are basically targeted lobby groups, which probably don’t want to enable a coordinated group of haters to suddenly join so they can vote out the executive and radically change the society’s direction from what was envisioned by its founders.

    Compare this with something like the New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union (a real union), which has a bunch of stuff in its rules to empower its financial members to elect delegates (regional in this case) who vote on the union’s business.

    Comment by izogi — March 3, 2014 @ 1:52 pm

  45. It’s kinda weird to compare massive international NGO Greenpeace, which is about as democratic as any other fifty year old institution with millions of members, to the Taxpayer’s Union, which is apparently Jordan Williams, his girlfriend, and a guy on work experience.

    Comment by Keir Leslie — March 3, 2014 @ 2:55 pm

  46. izogi: as Danyl says, Greenpeace doesn’t claim to be a union.

    Greenpeace members are not paying fees to gain control over the organisation (in the form of a vote). Greenpeace members are paying fees to enable the organisation to do stuff.

    If prospective/current members don’t like what Greenpeace is doing / proposes to do, then they can simply stop paying. To a limited extent individual members (or outsiders) can, of course, propose that Greenpeace does something different — but like any organisation you need to convince the leadership that you have a good / better idea. And everything that Greenpeace does was at some point merely the good idea of an individual member.

    Comment by RJL — March 3, 2014 @ 2:59 pm

  47. Speaking of Masterton, what was Trevor Mallard doing there yesterday?

    Comment by Ross — March 3, 2014 @ 3:45 pm

  48. RJL, never said it did and didn’t mean to imply that either. The only disagreement I have with Danyl is where he stated that you can’t join the Taxpayer’s Union. You can, but its constitutional rules make that about as meaningful as signing a petition to state that you blindly support whatever the TU’s self-appointed executive chooses to say and do, so I don’t think it really dissuades from what Danyl’s point was. ie. The Taxpayer’s Union is completely different from a real union, which typically has constitutional rules that actually involve its members to at least some extent.

    Comment by izogi — March 3, 2014 @ 3:46 pm

  49. izogi: Oh, I agree. The USSR was a more democratic and representative union than the Taxpayer’s Union is.

    Comment by RJL — March 3, 2014 @ 4:15 pm

  50. I’m old enough to remember the Australian Workers Party, which “did not represent workers so much as redefine them”. At the time of the Whitlam dismissal, a Porsche with a plain black “I’m A Worker” bumper sticker had a certain unsettling creepiness. While the Taxpayers’ Union probably shares some of the same claimed ideological justification, the attempt to own and redefine the meaning of union seems to be mostly someone’s idea of an ACT on Campus splendid wheeze.

    Comment by Joe W — March 3, 2014 @ 4:58 pm

  51. @izogi: Exactly.

    I do wonder what their first AGM will be like, though. It might result in a member revolt… or it might be extremely scantily attended. They don’t publish their membership figures, after all.

    Comment by kalvarnsen — March 3, 2014 @ 7:09 pm

  52. Doesn’t Greenpeace basically run publicity stunts to support their chugging activities which raise money to support more publicity stunts?

    Give your money to the Sea Shepherd – I don’t think they have any kind of internal democracy, but they do a job on whalers.

    Comment by richdrich — March 4, 2014 @ 10:08 am

  53. “43.Greenpeace aren’t pretending to be a union, Fist. ”
    Wierd strawman, Danyl, I never said they were…
    But YOU said:
    “The important difference, I think, is that groups like the CTU or Greenpeace are ACTUAL groups with members and values” (my emphasis)
    Which, of course, is EXACTLY THE SAME as the TPU… (except we then have to allow for the fact that GP members aren’t “members”, they’re “non-voting supporters”, so maybe you are right, in a wrong kinda way. I ain’t done no research on the CTU, but I guess they don’t have fee paying members as such, either, they probably have delegates from the unions that comprise the CTU?)

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 4, 2014 @ 1:23 pm

  54. Joe @50 “the attempt to own and redefine the meaning of union ”
    Err, don’t get too upset about their use of the word union, or you might make some maths teachers, HM the Queen and rugby players nervous. Oh, and many happy couples.
    From an online dictionary:

    un·ion [yoon-yuhn]
    noun
    1. the act of uniting two or more things.
    2. the state of being united.
    3. something formed by uniting two or more things; combination.
    4. a number of persons, states, etc., joined or associated together for some common purpose: student union; credit union.
    5. a group of states or nations united into one political body, as that of the American colonies at the time of the revolution, that of England and Scotland in 1707, or that of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801.

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 4, 2014 @ 1:28 pm

  55. izzogi @ 44 The New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union probably has Greenpeace-like checks in place, like you actually have to be working or recently have worked in the fields of engineering, printing or manufacturing? Usually called “membership criteria”. (Sorry, haven’t had time to research, making an assumption. For the union’s sake, I hope I’m not wrong.)

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 4, 2014 @ 1:35 pm

  56. Atrocious piece of disingenuity that the Taxpayer’s Union is, what easier way to set them up than to get a tame reporter to ask them about a small expense by the closest thing to an untouchable MP in the house.

    Just my cynical nature that I think something like this might have happened of course.

    Comment by Rick Rowling — March 4, 2014 @ 1:37 pm

  57. Clinking Fist, yes it does. It’s a union for representing Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing employees, so of course it requires that its members actually work in those industries. If the Taxpayer’s Union wanted to say that only taxpayers could join, it would also seem completely reasonable. What’s your point?

    You can read the rules for all these incorporated societies easily online. They’re not secret.

    Within its membership, all members of the New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union get to elect regional delegates to represent them and their issues to the rest of the Union. If those members decide that the union should be going in another direction to represent them properly, then it damn well should be.

    The Taxpayer’s “Union” purports to be a union for taxpayers, but its rules make absolutely sure that it’s entirely controlled by a self-appointed board of directors, which could be as few as three people and the only way to join it is by invitation from inside. Even if you join, those people cannot be dumped nor changed nor directed by anyone except themselves for the rest of time (much like the Greenpeace structure), probably because the founders were afraid that their claim to represent “taxpayers” might tempt some actual taxpayers who disagreed to make the union more representative, and the founders could have find that rather annoying.

    This is fine for a society or lobby group generally. Some groups are formed with specific purposes in mind and it makes sense to have restrictive rules. But it’s stupid for the Taxpayer’s Union to try and claim that it actually represents taxpayers in a ‘union’ sense with that type of structure, which is nothing like the traditional type of industry union that it’s obviously trying to associate itself to seem relevant in popular media.

    Comment by izogi — March 4, 2014 @ 2:11 pm

  58. An alternative hypothesis of at least equal equal probability to Danyl’s is that this was a set up or sting, with the Greens prompting the reporter to ask his question of Jordan Williams and thus reveal the inner self of the TU and the selfless purity of the Greens. They did something similar when they framed the Speaker after a discussion with him on how to provide for Mojo Mathers in the Parliamentary chamber. It was well done, as – perhaps – this has been.

    Comment by Tinakori — March 4, 2014 @ 4:58 pm

  59. It could be a set up, but just as a con won’t work if the victim is scrupulously honest, this set up couldn’t work if the victims weren’t genuine arseholes.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — March 4, 2014 @ 8:00 pm

  60. Agreed Milt – if a group has a habit of denouncing people in situations they know nothing about, they don’t really get to complain.

    Comment by kalvarnsen — March 4, 2014 @ 8:31 pm

  61. Izo, I have read the rules. And I’m somewhat familiar with Incorporated Societies. They reserve the right to decline membership applications, or turf out agitors. So, when you apply, resist the urge to write “I hate you, you right-wing, baby-eating, Nazis arseholes and want to Trojan your organisation like we did to the Green Party” on the application. Not even with invisible ink.
    And wait until you and your mates have got yourselves into a majority on the Board BEFORE you propose an objects change to the AGM.

    You are, however, missing my point: that TPU ARE (sorry: IS) actually a group or society in the manner that the lass on the street might think of a group or society. And quite different from the non-participatory groups like Greenpeace, or the delegate-manned CTU (I assume, someone here must know. Anyone? Anyone?). Compare and contrast with the European Commission…

    So, welcome to Agenda 21. And freedom of association: arseholes get it as well as angels.

    Comment by Clunking Fist — March 5, 2014 @ 1:44 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: