Who did it, and Why?

This from Jane Clifton (see Bryce Edwards link):

In an electorate of four million, there are very few secrets and, given our somewhat chippy national character, people who throw money around in politics are more likely to be despised than applauded. It bears repeating that the religious sect’s attempt to influence voters by anonymous leafleting was busted wide open within 48 hours, and that National did not, as a result of the campaign, get to form the government. Some analysts believe the Brethren scandal actually harmed National’s vote.



This from Wayne Hope: http://www.pjreview.info/issues/docs/13_1/PJR13_1_7_hagerpp197-204.pdf

As we now know, Brash attained nothing, and was bedevilled out of public office. His advisors scattered out of sight, with tainted reputations. According to Hager, certain National Party figures were always fearful about the Exclusive Brethren connection. This partly explains, I think, the deluge of National Party leaks. They came from experienced tacticians, concerned about the lack of acumen in Brash’s inner circle.

So, did National Party insiders sacrifice power out of a desire to maintain honesty in politics?

Has it been properly established that 'big money' wins elections?

Is the last election proof that the New Zealand electorate do not need protecting from people like the EBs, because they are sensible enough to make their own decisions?

Is the EFB based on a faulty academic basis, an ideologically unproven premise, and a partisan desire to insult the intelligence of the electorate?