Are Labour playing dirty pool?

Today's Dominion Post "Letters to the Editor" section kicks off with two well written letters - one from Holly Reardon, the other from Michael Hughes. Both criticise National about tax cuts.

On re-reading the two letters I couldn't help but be struck by the similarities between them. Both use similar messages:

Michael Hughes.	Holly Reardon.
It's time National fronted up with honesty and integrity	It worries me when someone won't front up about their intentions
Remember hospital part charges, bulk funding, the iniquitious student loans scheme, the neglect of our rail and roading networks and the cuts to welfare benefits and superannuation in real terms?	This says to me that National knows its tax cuts for the rich and business will actually cost "mainstream" New Zealanders in very tangible ways.
What's National Hiding? Why is it so afraid of our scrutiny? Perhaps there are unpleasant surprises in store that it would rather not disclose.	Why is National scared to be honest about what it is offering? Is it because most New Zealanders stand to lose out under its policy?

The letters both have a similar structure -
Statement of concern by the writer;
A rhetorical question about how bad National was when in government previously;
A statement criticising tax cuts as a bad idea for middle New Zealand
A statement criticising Don Brash or National as either untrustworthy or unworthy of government.

It looks to me that the letters were written by the same person, probably a Labour Spin Doctor, then sent to selected Labour activists who are willing to submit the letters for publication.

This has all the hallmarks of the British Labour Party's campaign strategy for dominating Letters to the Editor - Get a professional to write the letter then get a local activist to publish it under their name. This was uncovered, along with a host of other Spin Doctor tactics to avoid real scrutiny by the media, in Britain's Channel 4 Documentary "Undercover in New Labour"*.

I Googled both Holly Reardon (I drew a blank there) and Michael Hughes. While "Michael Hughes" is not an uncommon name there was a "Michael Hughes" who worked in Mark Burton's Ministerial Office in 2001. Coincidence?

If you're involved in politics, you might think "so, what!". For years all parties have encouraged activists to send in letters to the editor. Labour are just taking this to a new level. But do you want elections to be won on who can tell the best lies and who fights the dirtiest?

(A scanned image of the letters is below.)

* Channel 4 Journalist Jenny Kleeman worked as a volunteer at the Labour Party media unit and recorded her experience with hidden cameras. Among her findings:

Letters were drafted and sent out to Labour activists to sign and send to local newspapers. One time, an identical letter was published two weeks in a row in the same paper, but under different names. (Kleeman had written the letter.) Other letters were drafted for spokesmen of certain Labour-aligned organisations praising government organisations within their area of interest for how well they were run, but not mentioning their links to the Labour Party.

She was used as part of rent-a-crowd at one media event where journalists were told the crowd was part of the local community. At another event, she was used as part of a crowd to act as a physical sheild to prevent Tony Blair being questioned by the national media present.

Labour would orgainise "Spontaneous Protests" at Conservative events. The protesters would show up with banners created by the local Labour media unit (usually with the same handwriting) then disappear once they had gotten media coverage of the protest.

Tony Blair would not announce where his publicity events were until the morning of the event - only television, which had their own helicopters and do not do in-depth pieces because of time restraints - and local papers based in the same region - who did not have experienced political reporters able to see past the spin - would cover the events.

For more details on the documentary see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/22/nlab22.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/05/22/ixportal.html and http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1622515,00.html