Labour Leaks – Explaining David Talbot

WhaleleaksAs you all know, I thought it important that New Zealanders were made aware of the?appalling treatment that?the Labour Party gave to people’s confidential information through their wide open website.

Google?and at least 9 other bots have?archived material on the same?open Labour site that has been in the news this past week and my post on how this occurred has generated unanimous condemnation of Labour?among the IT community.

I have decided?to withhold the vast bulk of material that I found, because I absolutely agree?that as the law stands, ?everyday?New Zealanders should be free to contribute to political parties without fear of their name being made public.

I have revealed only a couple of names in total. But I?have already said I will reveal hypocrisy and lies?if and when I see them.

The first name I revealed was Cactus Kate.? I asked her permission before publishing the details about the donation she made to Labour. [This surely is worse than any previous Saturday morning walk of shame she has experienced. I shudder to think of her reception at the next BRT function attends.]

She said that she won’t complain to the privacy commissioner about Labour’s cavalier approach to private information. I think her shame has addled her mid, I thought she was harder than this.

The second name I?revealed from the lists I legally accessed?was that of a?Parliamentary staffer.? In hindsight that was probably?a mistake.

I absolutely accept that David Talbot is employed on a?part-time basis by the Labour?Leader’s office?and divides?his?time between?Parliamentary Services (taxpayer funding)?and the seperately paid work he does for the?Labour Party (covered by their incredibly tiny donations).

Nothing wrong with that at all.

I thank?Annette King for?clarifying this.

So,?one last question to close off this part of my file.

Perhaps she could?explain why Mr Talbot was using a taxpayer-funded email address to process and test credit card transactions for the?Labour Party.? This is a Parliamentary funded address, and to me?this suggests he might be?processing donations?out of the Labour Leader’s office.? This would be against the rules.

From the transaction logs he also has a address. He processed some test transactions from that address so perhaps that was his part time work, but it is incredibly diffuclt to reconicle Annette King’s statement with the electronic evidence.

Sure?it’s not the crime of the century – but I’m curious – and I think Parliamentary Services might be too.
David Talbot processing Labour Party transactions