Obviously, no-one gave the Labour Party such a warning; over at Gotcha, Cameron Slater blogs:
There are three rules anyone who runs a website handling credit cards lives by:
- PROTECT YOUR CUSTOMER’S INFORMATION
- PROTECT YOUR CUSTOMER’S INFORMATION
- PROTECT YOUR CUSTOMER’S INFORMATION
These are the only three rules to running any website that accepts credit card information in exchange for goods or a service.
On this score the New Zealand Labour Party has failed appallingly.
Oh dear; it seems as though the NZLP has been lax in its information security. But that's not all.
It seems that a staff member in Phil Goff's office has been assigned the job of handling online donations to the New Zealand Labour Party. That raises a small problem; staff in Phil Goff's office, known colloquially as The Goffice are employed by Parliamentary Services, not by the NZLP. And Parliamentary Services rules expressly forbid staff employed by the service doing party work at the taxpayer's expense.
It would appear that there Cameron Slater has unearthed major conflict of interest. He said yesterday that he intended making a formal complaint to both the Speaker and the head of Parliamentary Services. We reckon that this is exactly how this matter ought be dealt with. If there is a problem, Labour needs to acknowledge it, and to put things right. If other parties are similarly abusing taxpayer funds, they too must be held to account. It's our money after all.
14 comments:
And one of the rules of conduct for the legal profession provides;
"A alwyer has a duty to protect and to hold in struct confidence all information concerning a client, the retainer and the clients business and affairs acquired in the course of the professional relationship."
Client information is sacrosanct.
Pity the NZ Labour party don't see that in relation to it's own members information.
Gosh!
What a winner that Slater is onto!
'Customers' information has fallen into the wrong hands and the body attached to those hands is... Slater.
Those 'customers' are going to despise:
1. The party that had the information taken from them?
2. the receiver of the information?
It's a puzzle!
Were you so morally outraged when Nicky Hager wrote The Hollow Men based on stolen e-mails Robert?
Oh and I'm pleased that I've never taken up my banks kind offer of eftpos and card facilities.
I'm not morally outraged Inv2. Barely interested in fact. This is a dull issue.
However, I don't think Slater will be looked upon favourably for being in possession of information about people that ordinarily he shouldn't have. I just think people will think him odious.
rg,
Many people do find Cam odious.
But he doesn't care what people think of him.
Many more then alex.
Seems the initial hack attempt came from within the National Party.
Crumbs!
This is getting a little more interesting after all!
"seems" being the operative word Robert; then again if you believe The Standard's unsubstantiated claims, you'll believe pretty much anything.
From my tour of the web today Inv2, it seems that Slater is looking both shabby and scabby in the eyes of many, and that the National Party's involvement is becoming apparent.
Just my impression Inv2.
You have long criticised the Labour Party for its gutter politics, but here we have your team right down there amongst the butts, chewed gum and hoiks, and you're as gleeful as can be!
Odd!
If Labout have done nothing wrong they have nothing to worry about, as long as Whale does nothing wrong.
Is everyone else having problems getting through to WO's site?
Overloaded, I daresay.
maybe Sir Bob dislikes the Whale as his own blog has only a doz fellow tree huggers .. just a thought.
Sir Bob is correct about the backlash, I would suggest all those outed will now vote Labour.
Mmm, are you saying the National Party are behind this Sir Bob, if so, prove it or go back to your beansprouts?
I have a dozen followers jabba? That is exciting!!
I have no idea who accessed the data, nor do I care. I do think though, that the person holding personal information about people, information that they'd not willingly give him, information that some say was stolen or otherwise obtained through devious means, that person will be regarded as less-than-admirable and will be seen that way by people who do not know the details of the situation. Slater, in my opinion, already looks dodgy as a result of his activities. No one here seems to think that he is stained by association with this dirty-tricks behaviour, but I do.
Btw - if I had but one supporter on my blog I'd be a very happy man. As it is I have, according to you, a dozen, therefore I'm over the moon!
Post a Comment