[continued from previous message]

entirely composed of private foundations and individuals) that they
have locally focused projects worth our investment.”

Williams accuses Walker, the Australian academic, of making claims he
knows to be dishonest.

His views won’t be a surprise to Walker, who confirms Williams has
sent emails to himself and his institution in an attempt to intimidate
his freedom of inquiry and expression.

(This is something the Taxpayers’ Union executive director has done
before, as the NZ Herald detailed about University of Otago
nutritionist Dr Lisa Te Morenga, who called Williams a “twat” but
later apologised after a string of complaining emails to the
Vice-Chancellor’s office.)

The pair had a Twitter exchange in December last year, in which Walker
said opposition to Three Waters “is being whipped up by dark money
neoliberal think tank NZ Taxpayers Union, linked to sister org. the
New Zealand Initiative and both to the NZ oil and gas peak body,
should be central to understanding the politics here”.

Walker shouldn’t make stuff up and smear, Williams retorted. The
Taxpayers’ Union doesn’t do a thing with oil and gas, he said, but he
did confirm a link: “The only link to oil and gas peak body is that
one of my ex staffers works there. So what?”

Both will probably claim victory.

Walker noted on Twitter last year Williams confirmed a link to oil and
gas: “Making deceptive claims and amplifying them are what
professional PR agents working for oil and gas (your staffer?) and
associated 'think-tanks' are sadly well known for. So why don’t ‘free
market’ Atlas think tanks like NZI and NZTU declare their funding
sources?”

Williams says the Taxpayers’ Union is not “mostly funded” by US dark
money. (That didn’t appear to be what Walker was claiming.)

“It is a shame academics aren’t as interested in truth seeking as
playing cheap political point scoring.”

With Walker’s journal article, Williams says the academic “simply
projected his views about some Australian groups (who are also members
of Atlas) to the Taxpayers’ Union despite the shoe clearly not
fitting”.

It’s ridiculous to suggest the Taxpayers’ Union’s position on climate
change has been influenced by Atlas or industry, claiming it has “one
of the strongest positions on tackling climate change in New Zealand”.

(Newsroom asked the Green Party for comment but it didn’t respond.)

Williams isn’t just sensitive about claims made by academics.

Last week, after we sent him Baxter’s claims, errantly mentioning her association with Coal Action Network Aotearoa, he rang her in the
evening.

In a subsequent email, he said: “I am absolutely sure [original
emphasis] that they have had zero influence on the Taxpayers’ Union’s
approach to how New Zealand should respond to climate change or how
best to meet our emissions targets.”

Baxter says some of the Taxpayers’ Union’s ideas come from its
collaboration with the Atlas network and its coaching.

“That's the point – these are not a Kiwi thing.

“They’re the product of an international neoliberal network that’s not
designed to help the average Kiwi.”

Williams says: “David and I founded the Taxpayers’ Union before I had
even heard of the Atlas Network,” Williams says.

“To suggest the union is a ‘product’ of some American effort is
nonsense on stilts.”

Money and political influence

Beyond the claims and counter-claims, Grant Duncan, the political
commentator, believes New Zealand needs to have a conversation about
money and political influence.

What if, for example, a powerful offshore influencer like the gun
lobby National Rifle Association, in the United States, started
becoming involved in New Zealand politics? How would the public know?

“We do need to have a critical eye – particularly with the digital
environment – on who’s influencing whom, and what kind of vested
interests are using their financial clout, and economic muscle, or
just sheer networks to unfairly tilt the playing field in their
favour.”

That’s an argument for more state funding.

Third-party promoter rules are better than they were in 2005, when the Exclusive Brethren anonymously inserted its financial muscle into the
general election campaign. But Duncan says they should be improved
further.

“We should be able to see who is making the donations,” he says.
“Personally, I’m in favour of looking at a cap on donations – on party financial donations, as well as these third-party promoters.”

That shouldn’t particularly worry Sarah Pallett, Labour’s former Ilam
MP, who will be looking for a new job outside of politics.

She won’t comment specifically on the Taxpayers’ Union, but says
generally: “We need to be asking some very hard questions about the
influence of big donors, whoever they are, on political campaigning
and on elections at the moment.”

Isn’t that sour grapes from a defeated candidate?

No, she says. “I’m only asking for transparency – I’m not
complaining.”

---


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

[continued from previous message]

development, and scholarships. In 2018, Williams was made a Smith
Fellow, and travelled to Washington DC for training in marketing, >fundraising, management and other relevant skills.

Williams rejects descriptions of Taxpayers’ Union as a dark-money
think tank.

(The definition of dark money on Dictionary.com is: “Money donated to >politically active non-profit organisations or anonymous corporate
entities, which spend this money to influence political campaigns or
other special interests but are not required to reveal their donors.)

“I can’t think of a single specific policy initiative they’ve
facilitated that I or any of my staff have been involved in.”

Atlas Network’s director of marketing and communications Adam Weinberg
says it’s a non-partisan US-based non-profit that provides training,
grants, and networking opportunities. It doesn’t support or oppose
candidates or political parties, or contribute to political campaigns.

Of ‘The Voice’, Weinberg says: “We had no involvement in the campaign
in any capacity.”

Atlas’s name is sometimes invoked in “disinformation campaigns”, he
says.

“Sometimes these attacks are driven by authoritarian governments that
invoke Atlas Network’s name with the goal of making dissenting voices
in the country appear disloyal, and sometimes – as in the case of
Australia – our name is used in conspiracy theories by activists who
believe these stories will help them discredit their opponents or
explain why their policy views aren't winning.”

The network supports aspirations of its partners in advancing their
own policy solutions “and that adhere to our common values”. “It’s not
our role to decide what the policies of Australia or New Zealand
should be.”

Weinberg says Atlas thinks highly of the Taxpayers’ Union, which
competes “vigorously” in its professional development and grant
programmes.

“They are a very good example of an organisation that has built a
grassroots following, is a peer and mentor to similar organisations
around the world, and has persuaded our donors (which are almost
entirely composed of private foundations and individuals) that they
have locally focused projects worth our investment.”

Williams accuses Walker, the Australian academic, of making claims he
knows to be dishonest.

His views won’t be a surprise to Walker, who confirms Williams has
sent emails to himself and his institution in an attempt to intimidate
his freedom of inquiry and expression.

(This is something the Taxpayers’ Union executive director has done
before, as the NZ Herald detailed about University of Otago
nutritionist Dr Lisa Te Morenga, who called Williams a “twat” but
later apologised after a string of complaining emails to the >Vice-Chancellor’s office.)

The pair had a Twitter exchange in December last year, in which Walker
said opposition to Three Waters “is being whipped up by dark money
neoliberal think tank NZ Taxpayers Union, linked to sister org. the
New Zealand Initiative and both to the NZ oil and gas peak body,
should be central to understanding the politics here”.

Walker shouldn’t make stuff up and smear, Williams retorted. The
Taxpayers’ Union doesn’t do a thing with oil and gas, he said, but he
did confirm a link: “The only link to oil and gas peak body is that
one of my ex staffers works there. So what?”

Both will probably claim victory.

Walker noted on Twitter last year Williams confirmed a link to oil and
gas: “Making deceptive claims and amplifying them are what
professional PR agents working for oil and gas (your staffer?) and
associated 'think-tanks' are sadly well known for. So why don’t ‘free
market’ Atlas think tanks like NZI and NZTU declare their funding
sources?”

Williams says the Taxpayers’ Union is not “mostly funded” by US dark
money. (That didn’t appear to be what Walker was claiming.)

“It is a shame academics aren’t as interested in truth seeking as
playing cheap political point scoring.”

With Walker’s journal article, Williams says the academic “simply
projected his views about some Australian groups (who are also members
of Atlas) to the Taxpayers’ Union despite the shoe clearly not
fitting”.

It’s ridiculous to suggest the Taxpayers’ Union’s position on climate
change has been influenced by Atlas or industry, claiming it has “one
of the strongest positions on tackling climate change in New Zealand”.

(Newsroom asked the Green Party for comment but it didn’t respond.)

Williams isn’t just sensitive about claims made by academics.

Last week, after we sent him Baxter’s claims, errantly mentioning her >association with Coal Action Network Aotearoa, he rang her in the
evening.

In a subsequent email, he said: “I am absolutely sure [original
emphasis] that they have had zero influence on the Taxpayers’ Union’s >approach to how New Zealand should respond to climate change or how
best to meet our emissions targets.”

Baxter says some of the Taxpayers’ Union’s ideas come from its
collaboration with the Atlas network and its coaching.

“That's the point – these are not a Kiwi thing.

“They’re the product of an international neoliberal network that’s not >designed to help the average Kiwi.”

Williams says: “David and I founded the Taxpayers’ Union before I had
even heard of the Atlas Network,” Williams says.

“To suggest the union is a ‘product’ of some American effort is
nonsense on stilts.”

Money and political influence

Beyond the claims and counter-claims, Grant Duncan, the political >commentator, believes New Zealand needs to have a conversation about
money and political influence.

What if, for example, a powerful offshore influencer like the gun
lobby National Rifle Association, in the United States, started
becoming involved in New Zealand politics? How would the public know?

“We do need to have a critical eye – particularly with the digital >environment – on who’s influencing whom, and what kind of vested
interests are using their financial clout, and economic muscle, or
just sheer networks to unfairly tilt the playing field in their
favour.”

That’s an argument for more state funding.

Third-party promoter rules are better than they were in 2005, when the >Exclusive Brethren anonymously inserted its financial muscle into the
general election campaign. But Duncan says they should be improved
further.

“We should be able to see who is making the donations,” he says.
“Personally, I’m in favour of looking at a cap on donations – on party >financial donations, as well as these third-party promoters.”

That shouldn’t particularly worry Sarah Pallett, Labour’s former Ilam
MP, who will be looking for a new job outside of politics.

She won’t comment specifically on the Taxpayers’ Union, but says
generally: “We need to be asking some very hard questions about the
influence of big donors, whoever they are, on political campaigning
and on elections at the moment.”

Isn’t that sour grapes from a defeated candidate?

No, she says. “I’m only asking for transparency – I’m not
complaining.”

---

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)