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 | 9 | ... | 11

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2247607 29-May-2019 10:28

tdgeek:

* 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.

You post these summary points without this additional bullet point a couple of lines further down:

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

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247610 29-May-2019 10:34

GV27:

tdgeek:

* 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.

You post these summary points without this additional bullet point a couple of lines further down:

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

already discussed, and not relevant. What is relevant is that someone is lying. There was hacking or their wasn't. Treasury say there was, aimed at the budget, Simon says there wasn't. He actually said he didn't get it via hacked budget documents. Now, if Treasury was hacked for these budget documents, it becomes far less circumstantial dont you feel?

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2247612 29-May-2019 10:36

tdgeek:

already discussed, and not relevant. What is relevant is that someone is lying. There was hacking or their wasn't. Treasury say there was, aimed at the budget, Simon says there wasn't. He actually said he didn't get it via hacked budget documents. Now, if Treasury was hacked for these budget documents, it becomes far less circumstantial dont you feel?

No, because you're discounting the possibility that those documents made their way to Bridges in a way that was unrelated to the hacking? In which case, Treasury's comment isn't 'irrelevant' at all, more 'inconvenient' for some people here.

Bluntj

556 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2247615 29-May-2019 10:38

tdgeek:

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.

Who is spying and who is hacking?

Treasury hasnt stated at all as to if they were responsible for the leak. They said that their website had 2000 hack attempts, and it isnt clear if any hacking attempts were successful.

Bridges has stated that the info didnt come from this source.

It is Roberston who is making all the accusations.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247616 29-May-2019 10:39

GV27:

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".

You keep repeating that, no one is saying that. Its not a stretch to say its looks HUGELY suspicious and non circumstantial. Same re your later comments. No one has said Bridges did it. But if you line everything up, it doesn't look good. Now as well as implying that Treasury are liars he said Robertson is scurrilous and a liar.

You are correct, leaks happen, they happen everywhere. This story is every hour, becoming more about behavior than leaks. Suspicion. And ultimately it may NOT be a leak, it may be data that was stolen, not leaked. Thats the issue

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247619 29-May-2019 10:44

GV27:

tdgeek:

already discussed, and not relevant. What is relevant is that someone is lying. There was hacking or their wasn't. Treasury say there was, aimed at the budget, Simon says there wasn't. He actually said he didn't get it via hacked budget documents. Now, if Treasury was hacked for these budget documents, it becomes far less circumstantial dont you feel?

No, because you're discounting the possibility that those documents made their way to Bridges in a way that was unrelated to the hacking?

That is quite possible. But when you weigh it all up, unlikely.

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2247620 29-May-2019 10:45

tdgeek:

You are correct, leaks happen, they happen everywhere. This story is every hour, becoming more about behavior than leaks. Suspicion. And ultimately it may NOT be a leak, it may be data that was stolen, not leaked. Thats the issue

It may well ALSO be a leak. You keep ring-fencing this in a way that it can only reflect poorly on Bridges. Literally no one has produced any proof or even an accusation tying the exact data that Bridges leaked to the 'hacks' on Treasury.

The only things we know are:

1. Treasury believes they were hacked. They have referred this to the police.

2. National has some data they think is from the Budget. Robertson disputes that.

That's literally it at this point. As long as the story is about 'suspicion' it gives people licence to tie those to things together to grind axes against National/Bridges without any actual proof whatsoever.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2247622 29-May-2019 10:49

At the same time I 100% do not buy the insane theory that is circulating on Twitter that Roberston instructed Treasury to refer background hum cyber attacks to the police in a bid to diffuse attention away from the leaks.

I mean.... come on.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247628 29-May-2019 10:52

Bluntj:

Who is spying and who is hacking? You tell me.

Treasury hasnt stated at all as to if they were responsible for the leak. They said that their website had 2000 hack attempts, and it isnt clear if any hacking attempts were successful. No one has an issue as to if Treasury was responsible, the security issue will come to light in due course. If there is hacking its not a leak is it.

Bridges has stated that the info didnt come from this source. Again, a true fact, problem solved

It is Roberston who is making all the accusations. Not sure why. His budget was leaked, they say it was hacked. I agree that if Robertson gave to to Bridges he has no cause to feel grief

Best Simon Buttons it. He could have got great mileage on tbis, now every time he speaks more eyes look at him. JK would have laughed it off. JC would have laughed it off. SB is out of his depth, again

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247630 29-May-2019 10:57

GV27:

tdgeek:

You are correct, leaks happen, they happen everywhere. This story is every hour, becoming more about behavior than leaks. Suspicion. And ultimately it may NOT be a leak, it may be data that was stolen, not leaked. Thats the issue

It may well ALSO be a leak. You keep ring-fencing this in a way that it can only reflect poorly on Bridges. Literally no one has produced any proof or even an accusation tying the exact data that Bridges leaked to the 'hacks' on Treasury.

The only things we know are:

1. Treasury believes they were hacked. They have referred this to the police.

2. National has some data they think is from the Budget. Robertson disputes that.

That's literally it at this point. As long as the story is about 'suspicion' it gives people licence to tie those to things together to grind axes against National/Bridges without any actual proof whatsoever.

I agree fully thats all it is, but the more he says the more it looks dodgy. Smoke without fire? He keeps feeding it, so it looks more and more suspicious. That hacking has been mentioned and not idly, does ratchet this up a great deal, thats hard to deny. He should be quite, be calm, be confident, tell everyone he looks forward to what the Police or anyone uncovers. But he has done the complete opposite

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2247634 29-May-2019 11:02

tdgeek:

I agree fully thats all it is, but the more he says the more it looks dodgy. Smoke without fire? He keeps feeding it, so it looks more and more suspicious. That hacking has been mentioned and not idly, does ratchet this up a great deal, thats hard to deny. He should be quite, be calm, be confident, tell everyone he looks forward to what the Police or anyone uncovers. But he has done the complete opposite

I guess had Winston and Labour not needled Bridges over the expenses leak and the JLR saga, they might have a leg to stand on there.

Or Labour didn't keep repeating the phrase 'Dirty Politics'; a phrase born out of a saga started by stolen emails.

This bar has been pretty low for some time. All that's changed is someone else is on the receiving end.

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2247636 29-May-2019 11:04

Also, it sounds like everyone is retrenching at this point. No more stand-ups, live blogs or comments being made.

People are perhaps finally getting legal advice, or perhaps there is another development we are not party to that everyone is digging into.

I kind of feel sorry for the teachers in all this; this has kind of taken a lot of focus off their megastrike.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247640 29-May-2019 11:10

GV27:

Also, it sounds like everyone is retrenching at this point. No more stand-ups, live blogs or comments being made.

People are perhaps finally getting legal advice, or perhaps there is another development we are not party to that everyone is digging into.

I kind of feel sorry for the teachers in all this; this has kind of taken a lot of focus off their megastrike.

Agree on both counts. When hacking instead of leak is mentioned, its serious, so best to get some facts.

And yes, poor teachers, its news 6 minutes after the hour now, it should be headline news

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2247643 29-May-2019 11:13

GV27:

tdgeek:

I agree fully thats all it is, but the more he says the more it looks dodgy. Smoke without fire? He keeps feeding it, so it looks more and more suspicious. That hacking has been mentioned and not idly, does ratchet this up a great deal, thats hard to deny. He should be quite, be calm, be confident, tell everyone he looks forward to what the Police or anyone uncovers. But he has done the complete opposite

I guess had Winston and Labour not needled Bridges over the expenses leak and the JLR saga, they might have a leg to stand on there.

Or Labour didn't keep repeating the phrase 'Dirty Politics'; a phrase born out of a saga started by stolen emails.

This bar has been pretty low for some time. All that's changed is someone else is on the receiving end.

In the US the low bar is part of daily political life, it isn't here. Here we get a drama, they are infrequent. Every one screws up, it happens, but its not entrenched, IMHO.

sir1963

3260 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2247651 29-May-2019 11:30

Bluntj:

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.

No he did NOT do his job.His job as far as a budget goes starts when he was given legal access. His JOB, the one he has sworn an oath to do, would have demanded he hand it over unopened. He is privy to a lot of information that is never made public, he should have a very clear understanding of confidentiality, honesty and integrity, he clearly displayed poor judgement trying score a cheap political headline. This is NOT Simon bashing, this is NOT National bashing, I would be saying exactly the same things no matter which party did it.

The budget IS a state secret until the time it is released. The reasons are obvious, what if someone found out in advance what the policies were and were able to buy and sell shares/property etc with that advanced insider knowledge ?

Simon has smeared himself as untrustworthy and an idiot, by his own choices and his own actions. He had all the opportunity in the world to hand it over unopened, do you understand that ?, do you understand that what he did was a choice ?, do you understand that his position demands honesty and integrity ?, do you understand that right and wrong do not change on who does it ?

Your position is "Its not my faulty the check out operator gave me too much change back, they gave it to me, its my score", me I hand the extra back.

Simon is trying to become PM, he wants to lead the country , TRUST is a big thing, can we TRUST him and the national party to do the right thing, the answer is currently no.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 11