Last Updated:

Letter of Complaint to Jo Booth (Internet Party Secretary) 10/06/2019

masonbee Internet Party

I have been informed that Suzie Dawson has taken a substantial personal loan from a party member and refused to pay it back. If this is true then every person on the Executive who knew about it should resign in disgrace and Suzie should be removed from membership and the Party. It is unbelievable that she has not been already. This is disgusting, this man is retired. I can't believe that that the Executive have continued to support her and defend her by action and inaction.

Also, these complaints are just going to keep on coming and you not replying to them is not helping matters. You may call yourself the interim Secretary of the Party but in fact you are the Secretary for the Internet Party and should be able to adhere to some basic standards, including replying to communications.

Below is a copy of the conversations between Suzie and Fred that have been sent to me. They can also be viewed here .

Also, attached is a copy of the Party Expenses where Suzie was paid by the Electoral Commission.

Yours sincerely, xxxxxxxxxx

Me, 10th June, 2018

Amazingly, the Party Secretary replied within a day with,

Thanks xxxx, while I am aware of the loan, and had previously brought it to the attention of the then Executive - I was informed that the loan was a personal loan between Fred and Suzie and at no stage was the Internet Party or executive involved or liable.

I did however receive agreement that any outstanding party loans, held over invoices and back wages would be first to be paid when the party was funded, and intend to follow that instruction if and when the Internet Party is funded. To date all funds have been disbursed as shown on the 2017 return to cover party digital advertising election expenses - this did not include wages or contractor invoices, which remain unpaid as a non current liability.

I hope that explains it. I don’t wish the Party to get involved in this personal dispute, and once again don’t see how it is at all constructive for you to be involved in it either.

As I have previously explained, I’ll attempt to respond as I am able - usually weekly as I am able to spend an hour or two every few weeks.
Jo Booth

Internet Party Secretary Jo Booth, 11 June, 2018

The back bending efforts involved in this email to defend Suzie are incredible but not unexpected.

Somehow the Secretary has decided that a loan between two people on the Executive of the Internet Party, who met through the Party, where the loan is to support the other so they can do work for the Party has nothing to do with the Party. Legally it is possible he is correct. Not morally though.

The Secretary also appears to have decided that what a member does in their personal life cannot bring the party into disrepute. That is wrong.

To say that the Party had not been funded when the Party was funded for the election expenses with invoices from Suzie from the 10th July, 10 August and the 12th of September. Remember that this money is not Suzie's, it is money given to the Party to fund the 2017 Election expenses. In English this is called funding. In any reading of what the Secretary says Fred Look should have been repaid by Suzie Dawson as she was paid out of the Internet Party funding allocation.

Just to add to the muddle, the election expenses does include contractor expenses. Ronald Villanueva would, no doubt, be horrified to find that he didn't have a contract when he worked for the 2017 Election. Especially since his invoices are called invoices.

The use of the term, non current liability also is of concern. It seems to point to some agreement that if the Party does get funding everybody will get back paid for their time there. I may have inadvertently referenced this in a rebuttal to Suzie Dawson when I said,

"I am glad you have offered to resign multiple times. It shows responsibility. You are owed no funds by the Party however. The executive creating a contract for you that relied on paying you without the funds to do so could be called fraud and should be dealt with as such. If you were a party to the decision then it is called hope and you knew that they didn’t have the funds when you signed it."

There also appears to be an ongoing theme with the Secretary saying things are suddenly personal when complaints are raised. He has done this with me and he is doing it here with Fred as well. Fred not being paid by Suzie Dawson is not a personal matter. It is a fact. Suzie Dawson took a loan from Fred Look and refused to pay him sighting everything from defamation. That it was a personal loan just means it was coming out of his pocket and was to be paid back to him, not that they had a personal relationship outside the party.

The Secretary has played the same spin with me in the past. Accusing me of having a beef with Suzie when in fact I don't know her from a bar of soap. All my interactions with her were within or about the Internet Party until it became apparent that she was incapable of fulfilling the Party objectives. I never needed to deal with her at all except for the fact that each time I brought up failures of the executive they ran for Suzie.

Finally, it appears this has happened again. When going to reply to the Secretary's letter Thunderbird told me the font it was in wasn't installed and was from an Apple system. Jo has never sent me an email with Apple fonts before, Suzie is the one who uses Apple. I had assumed Suzie would be micromanaging the interactions between the Secretary and I but now it looks as though she might be editing (or writing) them as well.....bizarre.

Where did that font come from?