National's Budget leak documents 2019

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › National's Budget leak documents 2019

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 11

585 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 284

#2247515 29-May-2019 08:49

GV27:

tdgeek:

Like receiving stolen goods and keeping them? National has bought into this 100% by accepting illicit documents, advising publically that he wont divulge the source and dribbling them out over the course of a day for maximum effect . Coincidentally the same day they release their shocking discrimination report behind this white noise. It looks pretty pathetic and devious to me

* Treasury head Gabriel Makhlouf said he was not accusing National of being behind the leak of Budget information from Treasury's system.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

I guess it's like that time that journalist got hold of all those emails, wrote books about them and then everyone was quite happy to repeat whatever he thought strung them together as a political narrative. Unfortunately the left has made this bed, now they're sleeping in it.

Treasury are also refusing to confirm that the website hack attempts is where the budget leak occurred. Much more to this story.

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2247516 29-May-2019 08:52

tdgeek:

Off course he will say that. In fact no one can directly accuse National. My assumption is that they either masterminded this or happily accepted and abused this. My belief is the latter. Most of the blame I read is by National. If EVERY party that has access to the documents are all employed by and are Labour people, then yes, its their problem and cause, but that's not the case. So, its a bummer, it got leaked. Im surprised that you feel that Treasury security and security of the other parties is all Labour's fault. In conclusion, National is 100% innocent and are doing a great job, as I said, welcome to America. Id like to think politics here is many steps above American politics, clearly others see otherwise and enjoy that

Or...they legitimately thought it was a leak from a disgruntled Treasury staffer? Your assumptions are that there's no way they could possibly be caught up in this as much as Treasury or Labour is.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2247517 29-May-2019 08:55

Bluntj:

tdgeek:

Bluntj:

JaseNZ:

This has got to hurt if this is true, Seems to be a lot of leeks going on now days. Grant Robertson is saying some are true and some are not. If some are true then that must be a leak.

Clearly some folk within the powerbase are not happy.

If the leak came from the powerbase. There are a few other parties including Treasury. Your assumption for effect is premature

Its a coverup. For you to imply that National did anything wrong rather than doing their job well is not right either. It is the job of the opposition to take what they can get and to make a score of this magnitude is a top score, obviously as long as they did nothing illegal in the process. I would imagine that the material landed anonymously in Nationals hands, and that they probably also secured some legal advise. And..Treasury was hacked 2000 times over 48 hours and they didnt take their systems offline or investigate until now?

2nd hand dealers can and have been prosecuted for receiving stolen property.

National not only chose to accept material they KNEW they should not have but then used it to try and gain some benefit.

I DO NOT CARE which party does this, it is wrong, it is illegal, and this is hundreds of times WORSE than the cup of tea tape.

Just how do we know that information was not leaked to business people who could take material advantage of this ? We take the word of the people who should have known not to open it ?

The reason budgets are kept secret is to prevent anyone having a time advantage over anyone else, National knows this.

At my work I was accidentally send a high confidential email, I did not read the contents, I contacted the sender immediately so the mistake could be fixed and I securely deleted it.

Its like when you find a wallet, your only legal choice is to hand it to the police without opening it, its not finders keepers because THAT is theft.

What National has done is WRONG, its not doing their job any more than a 2nd hand dealer selling stolen goods is "just doing their job".

Bluntj

585 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 284

#2247523 29-May-2019 09:09

sir1963:

Bluntj:

tdgeek:

Bluntj:

JaseNZ:

This has got to hurt if this is true, Seems to be a lot of leeks going on now days. Grant Robertson is saying some are true and some are not. If some are true then that must be a leak.

Clearly some folk within the powerbase are not happy.

If the leak came from the powerbase. There are a few other parties including Treasury. Your assumption for effect is premature

Its a coverup. For you to imply that National did anything wrong rather than doing their job well is not right either. It is the job of the opposition to take what they can get and to make a score of this magnitude is a top score, obviously as long as they did nothing illegal in the process. I would imagine that the material landed anonymously in Nationals hands, and that they probably also secured some legal advise. And..Treasury was hacked 2000 times over 48 hours and they didnt take their systems offline or investigate until now?

2nd hand dealers can and have been prosecuted for receiving stolen property.

National not only chose to accept material they KNEW they should not have but then used it to try and gain some benefit.

I DO NOT CARE which party does this, it is wrong, it is illegal, and this is hundreds of times WORSE than the cup of tea tape.

Just how do we know that information was not leaked to business people who could take material advantage of this ? We take the word of the people who should have known not to open it ?

The reason budgets are kept secret is to prevent anyone having a time advantage over anyone else, National knows this.

At my work I was accidentally send a high confidential email, I did not read the contents, I contacted the sender immediately so the mistake could be fixed and I securely deleted it.

Its like when you find a wallet, your only legal choice is to hand it to the police without opening it, its not finders keepers because THAT is theft.

What National has done is WRONG, its not doing their job any more than a 2nd hand dealer selling stolen goods is "just doing their job".

Yet a lot of people in these forums actually support Assange and the crimes he undertook, when we actually knew the information was hacked. Bridges has confirmed that the budget leak did not come from a hack of Treasury. Maybe it was Mallard who leaked to move attention away from him. Who knows, but clearly it came from within the Labour Party.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247524 29-May-2019 09:11

GV27:

tdgeek:

Off course he will say that. In fact no one can directly accuse National. My assumption is that they either masterminded this or happily accepted and abused this. My belief is the latter. Most of the blame I read is by National. If EVERY party that has access to the documents are all employed by and are Labour people, then yes, its their problem and cause, but that's not the case. So, its a bummer, it got leaked. Im surprised that you feel that Treasury security and security of the other parties is all Labour's fault. In conclusion, National is 100% innocent and are doing a great job, as I said, welcome to America. Id like to think politics here is many steps above American politics, clearly others see otherwise and enjoy that

Or...they legitimately thought it was a leak from a disgruntled Treasury staffer? Your assumptions are that there's no way they could possibly be caught up in this as much as Treasury or Labour is.

No way? You did not read my post

They are all caught up. Who is the winner? Who is crying foul? Its not a case of we found this folder Labour left lying around, off course we read it, here is what is says, and we gave it back and told them to sort their security out. Its not like that, which is your take pretty much . Its hacking Treasury to access solely the budget by unknown person or persons or organisations. That is serious. Or it might be shrewd or a good job to do that/take advantage of that/deny all knowkledge of that

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247530 29-May-2019 09:14

Bluntj:

Bridges has confirmed that the budget leak did not come from a hack of Treasury. Maybe it was Mallard who leaked to move attention away from him. Who knows, but clearly it came from within the Labour Party.

Wow, case is solved. OMG, ok then.

Any screenwriters here??

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2247540 29-May-2019 09:32

Bluntj:

sir1963:

Bluntj:

tdgeek:

Bluntj:

JaseNZ:

This has got to hurt if this is true, Seems to be a lot of leeks going on now days. Grant Robertson is saying some are true and some are not. If some are true then that must be a leak.

Clearly some folk within the powerbase are not happy.

If the leak came from the powerbase. There are a few other parties including Treasury. Your assumption for effect is premature

Its a coverup. For you to imply that National did anything wrong rather than doing their job well is not right either. It is the job of the opposition to take what they can get and to make a score of this magnitude is a top score, obviously as long as they did nothing illegal in the process. I would imagine that the material landed anonymously in Nationals hands, and that they probably also secured some legal advise. And..Treasury was hacked 2000 times over 48 hours and they didnt take their systems offline or investigate until now?

2nd hand dealers can and have been prosecuted for receiving stolen property.

National not only chose to accept material they KNEW they should not have but then used it to try and gain some benefit.

I DO NOT CARE which party does this, it is wrong, it is illegal, and this is hundreds of times WORSE than the cup of tea tape.

Just how do we know that information was not leaked to business people who could take material advantage of this ? We take the word of the people who should have known not to open it ?

The reason budgets are kept secret is to prevent anyone having a time advantage over anyone else, National knows this.

At my work I was accidentally send a high confidential email, I did not read the contents, I contacted the sender immediately so the mistake could be fixed and I securely deleted it.

Its like when you find a wallet, your only legal choice is to hand it to the police without opening it, its not finders keepers because THAT is theft.

What National has done is WRONG, its not doing their job any more than a 2nd hand dealer selling stolen goods is "just doing their job".

Yet a lot of people in these forums actually support Assange and the crimes he undertook, when we actually knew the information was hacked. Bridges has confirmed that the budget leak did not come from a hack of Treasury. Maybe it was Mallard who leaked to move attention away from him. Who knows, but clearly it came from within the Labour Party.

So your argument is "other people have done this, therefore its OK if we do too".

The people I have the most respect for are the ones who will do the RIGHT thing even when its not in their best interest. We have words for that, Honesty, integrity.

At ALL times Simon could have taken the information to Jacinda without looking at it, no one had a gun to Nationals head, no one was forcing them to do they WRONG thing, they freely chose to do it.

Simon has lost credibility by doing the wrong thing, he can say what he wants, its probably even true, but there will always be doubt. You can try and smear Mallard and Labour, but here is the thing that will NOT change no matter the outcome, Simon and National did the WRONG thing. At all times they had the opportunity to display honesty and integrity and they willingly chose not to, and no amount of spin changes that fact.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247542 29-May-2019 09:33

Some important points here. Everyone can draw their own conclusions

From Stuff

That was quite the standup. Simon Bridges refused to give us any more info on the source of his documents - or even say whether or not they came from a third party - but was incredibly confident in saying that however he had got them was not illegal and was not hacking in any sense of the word.

He spent most of the standup attacking Finance Minister Grant Robertson, who he alleged was smearing the National Party in an attempt to gag them, implying Robertson had pressured Treasury into going to the police - a very big call. He directly called Robertson a liar, something rare in politics.

What Robertson actually said last night followed on from the Treasury saying they had evidence they had been "deliberately and systematically hacked". Robertson said that it was "an extremely serious matter and one for the police" and said he had contacted the National Party to "request that they do not release any further material, given that the Treasury said it has sufficient evidence that indicates the material is a result of a systematic hack and is now subject to a police investigation."

In other words, Robertson never directly said National hacked anyone, but he did draw the link between the material released yesterday and a "systematic hack". Bridges said that Robertson was implying the National Party were guilty of hacking.

Bridges was somewhat more cautious in his descriptions of Treasury itself, despite the fact it was that body which referred the matter to the police. He said Treasury had made multiple false statements in the last 24 hours but basically left it there.

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2247581 29-May-2019 10:08

sir1963:

Simon has lost credibility by doing the wrong thing, he can say what he wants, its probably even true, but there will always be doubt. You can try and smear Mallard and Labour, but here is the thing that will NOT change no matter the outcome, Simon and National did the WRONG thing. At all times they had the opportunity to display honesty and integrity and they willingly chose not to, and no amount of spin changes that fact.

No amount of spin changes that the figures for the budget got out either.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2247583 29-May-2019 10:08

tdgeek:

Some important points here. Everyone can draw their own conclusions

From Stuff

That was quite the standup. Simon Bridges refused to give us any more info on the source of his documents - or even say whether or not they came from a third party - but was incredibly confident in saying that however he had got them was not illegal and was not hacking in any sense of the word.

He spent most of the standup attacking Finance Minister Grant Robertson, who he alleged was smearing the National Party in an attempt to gag them, implying Robertson had pressured Treasury into going to the police - a very big call. He directly called Robertson a liar, something rare in politics.

What Robertson actually said last night followed on from the Treasury saying they had evidence they had been "deliberately and systematically hacked". Robertson said that it was "an extremely serious matter and one for the police" and said he had contacted the National Party to "request that they do not release any further material, given that the Treasury said it has sufficient evidence that indicates the material is a result of a systematic hack and is now subject to a police investigation."

In other words, Robertson never directly said National hacked anyone, but he did draw the link between the material released yesterday and a "systematic hack". Bridges said that Robertson was implying the National Party were guilty of hacking.

Bridges was somewhat more cautious in his descriptions of Treasury itself, despite the fact it was that body which referred the matter to the police. He said Treasury had made multiple false statements in the last 24 hours but basically left it there.

National got a document that was in embargo. National has done budgets, they KNOW the security and WHY.

So at ALL times Simon Bridges KNEW he had a document he was legally NOT legally entitled to have, the source is irrelevant at this stage.

The ONLY question that Simon and the National party need to answer was Why did they not had it over, unopened, to Jacinda. Its that simple.

At that point Simon could have made HUGE gains, he clearly too the high road, clearly showed honesty, clearly showed integrity , and if he knew it came from a Labour Party member he could have even said publicly that it came from someone within Labour, but unlike that Labour staffer, HE and National had integrity and handed it to the PM.

Simon made the WRONG choice, its that simple, he has smeared himself as someone who lacks integrity and lacks better judgement.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2247599 29-May-2019 10:15

GV27:

sir1963:

Simon has lost credibility by doing the wrong thing, he can say what he wants, its probably even true, but there will always be doubt. You can try and smear Mallard and Labour, but here is the thing that will NOT change no matter the outcome, Simon and National did the WRONG thing. At all times they had the opportunity to display honesty and integrity and they willingly chose not to, and no amount of spin changes that fact.

No amount of spin changes that the figures for the budget got out either.

Blame shifting is not working. The Budget was not going to be hidden , it would on budget day have become public and THEN Simon could debate the contents as could everyone else.

The contents of the budget are irrelevant to Simon doing the WRONG thing. He CHOSE to do the wrong thing. He has clearly displayed a lack of good judgement, honesty and integrity , Simon has smeared himself .

If he had done the right thing, the budget would still have been debated, but Simon would have come out smelling of roses.

Right and wrong are NOT dependant who who does it. I would be saying the exact same words no matter which party behave like Simon.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247602 29-May-2019 10:18

GV27:

sir1963:

Simon has lost credibility by doing the wrong thing, he can say what he wants, its probably even true, but there will always be doubt. You can try and smear Mallard and Labour, but here is the thing that will NOT change no matter the outcome, Simon and National did the WRONG thing. At all times they had the opportunity to display honesty and integrity and they willingly chose not to, and no amount of spin changes that fact.

No amount of spin changes that the figures for the budget got out either.

Got out. Seems they were taken out, not got out, left out, forgotten about. Its not a USB left on a bus, or an iPhone left in a popular bar in SFO just before media day, or a folder left in a mens/girls room. The data was taken it seems. Stolen. No accident.

That is one issue. Its either ALL Labours fault for their lack of their security or its a mix of other departments that are not Labour. Thats all yet to be found

Leaks are not new. The story here is who did it, why, and was there any abuse of using confidential information for political gain?.

Bluntj

585 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 284

#2247603 29-May-2019 10:18

sir1963:

tdgeek:

Some important points here. Everyone can draw their own conclusions

From Stuff

That was quite the standup. Simon Bridges refused to give us any more info on the source of his documents - or even say whether or not they came from a third party - but was incredibly confident in saying that however he had got them was not illegal and was not hacking in any sense of the word.

He spent most of the standup attacking Finance Minister Grant Robertson, who he alleged was smearing the National Party in an attempt to gag them, implying Robertson had pressured Treasury into going to the police - a very big call. He directly called Robertson a liar, something rare in politics.

What Robertson actually said last night followed on from the Treasury saying they had evidence they had been "deliberately and systematically hacked". Robertson said that it was "an extremely serious matter and one for the police" and said he had contacted the National Party to "request that they do not release any further material, given that the Treasury said it has sufficient evidence that indicates the material is a result of a systematic hack and is now subject to a police investigation."

In other words, Robertson never directly said National hacked anyone, but he did draw the link between the material released yesterday and a "systematic hack". Bridges said that Robertson was implying the National Party were guilty of hacking.

Bridges was somewhat more cautious in his descriptions of Treasury itself, despite the fact it was that body which referred the matter to the police. He said Treasury had made multiple false statements in the last 24 hours but basically left it there.

National got a document that was in embargo. National has done budgets, they KNOW the security and WHY.

So at ALL times Simon Bridges KNEW he had a document he was legally NOT legally entitled to have, the source is irrelevant at this stage.

The ONLY question that Simon and the National party need to answer was Why did they not had it over, unopened, to Jacinda. Its that simple.

At that point Simon could have made HUGE gains, he clearly too the high road, clearly showed honesty, clearly showed integrity , and if he knew it came from a Labour Party member he could have even said publicly that it came from someone within Labour, but unlike that Labour staffer, HE and National had integrity and handed it to the PM.

Simon made the WRONG choice, its that simple, he has smeared himself as someone who lacks integrity and lacks better judgement.

Wow really?

Bridges is the leader of the opposition and he did his job very well. His job is to hold the Government to account and trip them up whenever possible. It is how democracy works. If the Government cant keep a document secure for a few days then they deserve what they get. It isnt a state secret, its only embargoed until Thursday. What is wrong is the lies Robertson is telling to cover his bum, just like a lot of the current Ministers.

Despite what you believe, Bridges is no fool, and would not have done this if it was unlawful. Give the guy a little credit.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247605 29-May-2019 10:26

Yes, wow really. You advocate spying and hacking? Actually there was no hacking according to Simon, so he is calling Treasury a liar. And as well as Treasury lying, they are taking these lies to the Police. I know who I feel is the fool. Do you recall the denials over JLR? Then the tape? yesterday we had the report and review and that's a joke. There is a pattern here, and National would do well to get Judith Collins sworn in. SB has no reputation and again, he is falling well short, and again is digging himself a hole.

* National leader Simon Bridges insists there was no hacking behind the Budget information the party had, and has accused Finance Minister Grant Robertson of making "scurrilous, false accusations" over the matter.

* Treasury's systems were attacked more than 2000 times over 48 hours, with information from the upcoming Budget targeted, says Treasury head Gabriel Makhlouf.

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2247606 29-May-2019 10:27

The problem with blaming National unequivocally is the idea of a leak from Treasury is so believable. Certain Ministers have been dumping on them as 'kids' for just doing their jobs and not towing a party line.

Everyone here is falling over themselves to link Bridges' data with the data that was stolen. Treasury has not stated that was the case. By the look of it, neither has Robertson.

With this now being a police matter, Robertson doesn't have to comment, Treasury can't comment and all it does is feed people's desire to smear National any chance they get.

Then in six months time, there's a sudden "oh, the two were unrelated and there's no proof National did anything wrong".

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 11