Gould on Nats’ sleaze and corruption

Written By: - Date published: 10:29 am, April 20th, 2016 - 138 comments
Categories: accountability, corruption, national - Tags: , , , , ,

Bryan Gould says words that need saying:

Niue contract damaging to Govt reputation

The bad news keeps coming. In the last couple of weeks, New Zealanders have discovered that our country is being touted to tax dodgers and other criminals as a good place to hide their money with no questions asked. Our Prime Minister’s initial response was to welcome the business, however disreputable it might be. …

Then, we were alerted by the Morgan Foundation to the fact that our response to international pressure for action on climate change is a sham. …  the credits we buy from foreign traders are not genuine but are issued by countries who are known to be scamming the scheme. Most countries have refused to sanction such a trade, but New Zealand, sadly, goes along with it, and is by far its biggest customer – another shady deal and another blow to our reputation as a good international citizen. We are, it seems, climate change cheats.

And then, we have the saga of the political donation and the Matavai resort on Niue. The facts can be simply stated. The owner of Scenic Hotels, Earl Hagaman – a well-known and perennial donor to the National party – made a donation of over $100,000 to the National party, and a month later his company was awarded the valuable contract to manage a resort on Niue.

The contract turned out to be even more valuable than had appeared at first sight when $7.5 million of taxpayer-funded aid money was paid to Scenic Hotels to upgrade the resort.

In any other country, and especially in those where such deals are commonplace, no one would be in any doubt as to what had really happened. In New Zealand, however, we are naively inclined to accept the blank-eyed, slack-mouthed assurances that it was all a coincidence and that nothing untoward had happened.

Worth reading the above paragraph again.

The government will treat the issue as business as usual – as, sadly, it has become. Its supporters will gladly believe that it was all an invention by political opponents. But this is an issue that transcends party politics.

There are good political reasons for supporting or criticising a government on a whole range of issues, but those issues surely do not include attitudes towards sleaze and corruption. New Zealanders of all political persuasions can surely unite in insisting that the highest standards are met in our public life. The government’s supporters have a special responsibility, since one hopes that the government will listen to them, to ensure that their government understands what is and is not acceptable. …

Sleaze and corruption as usual – hard to see why Nat supporters will be worried about this when they have already accepted so much.

And for those trying to drag Ardern in to this – the award of the contract is not in itself a problem. It is the award of the contract in the context of the donations to National. Who knew about the donations, and when?

138 comments on “Gould on Nats’ sleaze and corruption ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Anne 1
    20 April 2016 at 10:40 am

    In lieu of the rwnjs who have been trying to implicate Jacinda’s father in the sleazy Niue deal…

    a further except from Gould’s excellent summary:

    We are told by the office of the responsible Minister, Murray McCully, that he would not have been aware of the donation made by Mr Hagaman when the Niue contract came to be awarded. Mr McCully, however, is the most inside of National party insiders. It beggars belief that he did not know who was giving what to the National party coffers.

    But, say the apologists, it was not Mr McCully who awarded the contract to Scenic Hotels. The deal was done by an independent board – but the board was one appointed by Mr McCully.

    Mr McCully, after all, has form – think Saudi sheep. And the more worldly-wise will again recognise all too easily the tell-tale signs of a familiar device; when leaving fingerprints would be risky, set up an intermediary to distance the decision from the real decision-maker.

    My bold.

    What say the board members who appear to have been scapegoated by this dishonest, slimy foreign minister.

    • Anne 1.1
      20 April 2016 at 10:53 am

      ooops: “a further excerpt” – not except.

    • Mainlander 1.2
      20 April 2016 at 10:56 am

      So Anne are you insinuating McCully either coerced or manipulated the board to make this decision ? maybe Jacinda could ask daddy and clear this matter up rather quickly without yet more baseless allegations

      • greywarbler 1.2.1
        20 April 2016 at 11:06 am

        I don’t think much of your name Mainlander. It implies that you speak for South Islanders – you do not.

        Most informed people are aware of the penchant (you can look that one up) of pollies to appoint their own men and stalwart women to boards, tables, chairs and other House apparatus. They are called apparatchiks, which used to refer to Communists but now to any persuasion of pollies or huddles of strictly controlled, brainwashed groupies..

        • Mainlander 1.2.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 11:35 am

          Or (and I will type this slowly for you so you comprehend) it implies I am from the mainland, what a vivid wee imagination you have
          My rather obvious point being Mr Ardern could clear up this matter very quickly, I have no idea of his political affiliations or if he is indeed a “stalwart” of Mr McCullys but since his name is being bandied around the media shouldn’t he be the go-to man to clear up any perceived conflicts of interest by anyone involved, its not like any politician is going to be forthcoming with the truth

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.1.1.1
            20 April 2016 at 11:40 am

            If you tried thinking through your rote-learned drivel, you’d realise that the HC had no knowledge of National’s sleazy Cabinet Club deal, and therefore has no questions to answer.

            Turn a blind eye to money laundering while you’re at it. Oops, you already did.

          • framu 1.2.1.1.2
            20 April 2016 at 12:20 pm

            “My rather obvious point being Mr Ardern could clear up this matter very quickly, I have no idea of his political affiliations or if he is indeed a “stalwart” of Mr McCully”

            not really – the obvious bit was using that to try and make it about jacinda ardern and labour – yet you freely admit you dont know anything about Mr ardern

            • Mainlander 1.2.1.1.2.1
              20 April 2016 at 1:08 pm

              I think you will find this topic all over most forms of media Framu so its not really about what you perceive im trying to make it, or should we do as Draco has mentioned and ask Mr Blumsky, I would have thought the father of a high profile Labour MP might have a bit more credibility/less conflict of interest though maybe you would prefer no-one was asked and we just take McCullys word for it

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                20 April 2016 at 7:06 pm

                In your scenario, McCully would have informed the HC about the bribe? I just want to understand a little bit of what you’re telling yourself.

              • framu …
                21 April 2016 at 7:39 am

                “I think you will find this topic all over most forms of media”

                yeah – thats how dirty politics was set up to work

            • Nessalt 1.2.1.1.2.2
              20 April 2016 at 1:16 pm

              as opposed to the framing of national as being in cahoots with someone who founded, doesn’t run anymore….just founded, a company and their personal donation.

              Looks like the back peddlers are starting to trip up. thought you’d be a bit better at it after all these years?

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                20 April 2016 at 7:14 pm

                Who’s back-peddling?

                We know the model: as per the Skysore deal, there are meetings at which no official minutes are taken, because no officials are present. Let’s call them “apres-Cabinet Club”, because that’s what Cabinet Club is for: to buy access to government ministers.

                McCully has form, and not just the Saudi bribe. He had no motive whatsoever to let the HC in on the deal.

                Conflict of interest rules are very clear about perception, re: avoiding it. Why are you making excuses for criminals?

                • Nessalt …
                  21 April 2016 at 11:02 am

                  There has been no criminal action though? so you are just pontificating, out of your arse as usual, about something that isn’t correct.

                  Where is the bribe in this case? has the auditor general completed it’s investigation? has it found evidence of bribes? or are you just desperately jumping to conclusions as part of your KDS.

                  if there are no bribes, then there is no criminal action. the perception is in your mind because a national government minister in John Key’s national party cabinet is involved.

                  Get some treatment, you are unhinged.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    21 April 2016 at 3:57 pm

                    Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, actual National Party insiders contradict you:

                    As Blabbermouth Lusk informed us, the National Party is a bunch of self-interested individuals “trading on their time in Parliament to build a lucrative business career”.

                    As for your Stalinist assertions of the state of my health, why are you cuddling up to Stalin?

              • framu …
                21 April 2016 at 7:42 am

                Ok – theres two things in play

                1) a big donation to the nats then a contract awarded soon after
                2) the father of an opposition MP is involved

                Which of those is the issue that most urgently needs to be confirmed as above board?
                What conclusions can you draw about those who are focusing on issue number 2 instead?

                pretty simple logic exercise that

                • Nessalt …
                  21 April 2016 at 11:34 am

                  you forget about the third thing, scenic circle hotels may have gone through a very robust tendering process with many other companies tendering and the board awarding the contract with no input from McCully because it’s an operational matter. You know, the likely option. don’t know why it has to be third one.

                  • framu …
                    22 April 2016 at 12:25 pm

                    all youve done is described a plausible outcome to issue 1 – well done

                    what your saying isnt an issue as such – its an explanation for the issue

                    but regardless – what does it say that people arent persuing your valid argument and are instead focusing on arderns father?

                    cmon – are your logic and language skills that bad?

          • Keith 1.2.1.1.3
            20 April 2016 at 3:09 pm

            Did Adern get a cut of the “donation” or did he facilitate donations to National for this deal?
            I’m guessing this is what you are suggesting. If so I hope he tells us how National does it, we would all love to know!

      • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.2
        20 April 2016 at 11:09 am

        You really don’t understand what a conflict of interest is. What else can we expect from people who cuddle up to terrorists and money-launderers?

        • alwyn 1.2.2.1
          20 April 2016 at 12:45 pm

          “What else can we expect from people who cuddle up to terrorists”.

          What on earth has Phil Goff got to do with this? His relationship with Yasser Arafat was a very long time ago and I am sure he has repented.
          Leave the poor guy alone.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.2.1.1
            20 April 2016 at 4:33 pm

            Labour did it too? Well, no, Labour didn’t turn New Zealand into a money-laundering and terrorist finance system. National did.

            You’re in complete denial of that, I expect.

        • Magisterium 1.2.2.2
          21 April 2016 at 12:42 am

          You really don’t understand what a conflict of interest is. What else can we expect from people who cuddle up to terrorists and money-launderers?

          Don’t forget paedophiles

          And the Church

          But I repeat myself

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.2.2.1
            21 April 2016 at 7:02 am

            Oh, so you don’t like the phrase “cuddle up to” as a euphemism for passing enabling legislation? Will you be ok?

      • Draco T Bastard 1.2.3
        20 April 2016 at 11:49 am

        How about we ask “former High Commissioner Mark Blumsky, who was formerly a National MP” who is also a member of the board when he told the National Party and Hagaman about the deal.

        I know, I know, he’ll say that he didn’t but I feel certain, as I do understand how business networking works, that he did. There’ll be no documentation but National and its donor knew about the deal from the get go.

      • Gabby 1.2.4
        20 April 2016 at 12:44 pm

        Munter McMutton may’ve merely murmured musingly, Mainliner.

    • Chuck 1.3
      20 April 2016 at 4:21 pm

      Anne your first sentence of “In lieu of the rwnjs who have been trying to implicate Jacinda’s father in the sleazy Niue deal…”

      It was not rwnjs who implicated Ardens father, it was Andrew Little in calling the appointment of Scenic Hotels to manage the resort something along the lines of “stinking to high heaven”.

      Clearly Little had no idea that a trustee was the father of a high profile Labour MP (at least I hope he did not!) his back peddling last night was worthy of a Oscar.

      And for the record, by all means have a AG inquiry…the process the trustees would have used to make the appointment will be clearly laid out in documents. And hence easy to see if any “favors” were done by the trustees.

      • Anne 1.3.1
        20 April 2016 at 4:41 pm

        I was referring to the rwnjs on this site who have been going ballistic for the past 36 hours! I’m beginning to think they’ve been offered double time for their distraction efforts. After all, we don’t want to talk about the donor, the foreign minister or the PM do we rwnjs. The oppo. is getting dangerously close to the truth.

        My own personal view is that the members of the board (at least two of them including Ross Ardern) were probably unaware of the large donation made to the National Party in the weeks prior to the awarding of the contract. Had they known about it I suspect there may have been a different outcome.

        • Gosman 1.3.1.1
          21 April 2016 at 12:56 am

          Ummm… surely they shouldn’t have been made aware of any political donation and should just look at the competiting tenders based on their respective merits. Bringing political donations in to the equation would be corrupt.

          • Anne 1.3.1.1.1
            21 April 2016 at 8:28 am

            Making political donations to the National Party at the same time as competing for a government contract IS CORRUPTION.

            • Nessalt 1.3.1.1.1.1
              21 April 2016 at 3:38 pm

              Anne, your poor old thing. it’s perfectly legal to compete for a contract and make a donation to a political party. Corruption is when the outcome of the contract is made beneficial to the donor. it hasn’t happened in this case.

              • joe90 …
                21 April 2016 at 3:50 pm

                it hasn’t happened in this case.

                Perhaps you could tell us how you know it hasn’t happened in this case?.

              • Anne …
                21 April 2016 at 3:52 pm

                Man oh man…are you trying to be funny? So, you’re saying the “donor” – having been awarded the contract soon after making his $101,000 donation to the political party in government – isn’t a beneficiary of the process?

  2. Smilin 2
    20 April 2016 at 11:11 am

    The point about this is so alarming is that this has occurred and 2 elections have past .What does this say about our govts accountability to the voters and the number of voters who are prepared to vote for this kind of corruption .

  3. ge 3
    20 April 2016 at 11:18 am

    there is no corruption in NZ as there is no one to safely report it to and corrupt activities have no NZ laws against them.. so NZ is spotless!! Yes!!!

    • Draco T Bastard 3.1
      20 April 2016 at 11:52 am

      +1

    • Penny Bright 3.2
      20 April 2016 at 12:17 pm

      New Zealand does not have an Independent Commission Against Corruption (or the like).

      As I understand it – in a Memorandum of Understanding between the NZ Police and SFO – it is the SFO who are supposed to be the ‘lead’ agency to whom one is supposed to make complaints about alleged bribery or corruption.

      However – in the underpinning SFO Act – the words ‘bribery’ and ‘corruption’ are not even mentioned.

      On more than one occasion – I have made complaints to the SFO of alleged bribery and corruption, only to be told by the SFO – that they see no evidence of ‘serious or complex fraud’.

      Which was NOT the basis of the complaint.

      Anyone else had that experience?

      In my view New Zealand desperately needs a genuinely Independent Commission Against Corruption.

      Anyone else agree?

      Penny Bright
      2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

      • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 3.2.1
        20 April 2016 at 1:35 pm

        On more than one occasion – I have made complaints to the SFO of alleged bribery and corruption, only to be told by the SFO – that they see no evidence of ‘serious or complex fraud’.

        One of you is wrong then. I wonder who?

  4. Puckish Rogue 4
    20 April 2016 at 11:49 am

    Ok lets try some sarcasm here…as a National voter I wholeheartedly support Labour attacking National over these matters as it helps secure John Key a fourth term

    Now seriously speaking, how many times has John Key been mentioned in the Panama Papers: zilch, how many NZers have been mentioned: zilch, how many laws have National broken: zilch, is there any proof of wrong doing in Niue: nope

    This thing that Labour has of attacking every single thing National/John Key does without any evidence is not helping Labour, its not helping the left its only helping John Key

    Get some evidence or proof and then go for it but all Labour is doing is they’re becoming (have become) the Boy That Cried Wolf

    • Draco T Bastard 4.1
      20 April 2016 at 11:59 am

      Now seriously speaking, how many times has John Key been mentioned in the Panama Papers: zilch, how many NZers have been mentioned: zilch, how many laws have National broken: zilch

      Wow, you’ve read all the terabytes of information already?

      is there any proof of wrong doing in Niue: nope

      What we have is prima facie evidence of corruption being performed by National. Considering the Saudi sheep deal, another corrupt action, and the ongoing lies of National we should be investigating thoroughly.

      Even you RWNJs should be calling for an investigation over this as the evidence we have is so overwhelmingly in support of corruption. So, why aren’t you?

      • Puckish Rogue 4.1.1
        20 April 2016 at 12:25 pm

        Wow, you’ve read all the terabytes of information already?

        – Fine if it makes you feel better, has John Key been mentioned in any of the Panama Papers releaded thus far: Nope

        Even you RWNJs should be calling for an investigation over this as the evidence we have is so overwhelmingly in support of corruption. So, why aren’t you?

        – Because people like you are seeing what you want to see and you (and the other members of the KDS society) desperately want to take down John Key bya any means so you see corruption where there is none.

        But fine lets have an investigation (lets not worry about the cost) and when theres found to be nothing will Andrew Little apologise on behalf of the Labour party?

        • adam 4.1.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 1:16 pm

          Saying people have a mental health disorder (KDS) because they don’t worship John Key, is really quite a pathetic.

          So I have LDS because I don’t worship Andrew Little?

        • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.2
          20 April 2016 at 4:03 pm

          But fine lets have an investigation (lets not worry about the cost) and when theres found to be nothing will Andrew Little apologise on behalf of the Labour party?

          Why?

          Under the evidence that we do have, be it National or Labour, an investigation should be automatic. That’s how bad it is.

          You keep denying that it is that bad because you always defend the corrupt actions of this government.

        • Phin 4.1.1.3
          20 April 2016 at 5:15 pm

          Keys name may not have been mentioned (yet) but it has been implicated. If you think this lot are squeaky clean then why do the Panama papers mention New Zealand over 60,000 times? And New Zealand is the country that Key is in charge of isn’t it? Suck it up mate National are as dirty as a pig in mud!

    • Gabby 4.2
      20 April 2016 at 12:05 pm

      Have you read these Panama Papers, Purple Knob?

    • reason 4.3
      20 April 2016 at 3:40 pm

      John Key did not set us up NZ to be a tax dirty little tax haven ??????

      ….. or was it Judith Collins the ex tax lawyer who drafted that law to help rich criminals.

      New Zealanders love rich criminals which is why Puckish predicts a fourth term for the dirty nats 🙂 …..

      • Puckish Rogue 4.3.1
        20 April 2016 at 3:43 pm

        You’re half right, I do predict a fourth term but its not because of rich criminals (not to mention KDC) but rather because the economy is chugging along nicely, mortgage rates are low and the opposition is ineffectual

        So in the minds of the voters why would you change anything?

        • McFlock 4.3.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 3:49 pm

          Mortgage rates are low, but you’re fucked if you want to buy a house.

          The economy is chugging along nicely if you ignore the fact that hundreds of thousands are struggling, and our national(tm) debt is astronomical.

          Oh, and dead babies. There’s always them.

        • Expat 4.3.1.2
          20 April 2016 at 7:29 pm

          Puckish Rogue

          Lying again, interest rates in NZ are the highest in the developed world, and the Govt has little if any control over it.

          Any guesses why the interest rates are “higher” or have you forgotten about the loss of trilple A credit ratings achieved by the previous Govt.

          Just remember, history says John is gone in the next election, you may as well start making the necessary changes now.

          The only people who think John is the most popular PM are the ones who believe what they hear in the MSM, but the reality is that John will go down as the most divisive PM NZ has ever had, and I don’t really think that’s something to be overly proud of.

  5. travellerev 5
    20 April 2016 at 1:26 pm

    Remove if not appropriate bu Vinny and I will be talking to Bill Black. One of the foremost banker hunters and the person to coin the phrase Control Fraud. If you want to know what that is here is were to go and listen:

    Today between 2-4 pm NZ time Vinny Eastwood will be interviewing William “Bill” Black. I will be joining Vinny in the second hour to have a chance at quizzing Bill and I am mighty exited about the prospect!

    For those of you who have never heard of William “Bill” Black you are in for a treat!

    Bill Black is what you might call the original Banker Hunter!

    Bill Black is an American lawyer, academic, author, and a former bank regulator and during the 90s he was responsible for jailing literally thousands of bankers involved in the savings and loans scandal that rocked the US banking world in the 90s.

    He has recently joined the Sanders election campaign together with Robert Reich, the Nobel price winning economist in a sign that Sanders is serious about addressing the immense fraud committed by the global banking system and the corporate takeover that is the TPPA.

    Bill Black wrote the book: The best way to rob a bank is to own one

    William Black developed the concept of control fraud.

    Here is a quote from Wikipedia on the subject:

    Control fraud occurs when a trusted person in a high position of responsibility in a company, corporation, or state subverts the organization and engages in extensive fraud for personal gain. Wikipedia

    The concept of control fraud is based on the observation that the CEO of a company is uniquely placed to remove the checks and balances on fraud within a company such as through the use of selective hiring and firing. These tactics can position the executive in a way that allows him or her to engage in accountancy fraud and embezzle money, hide shortfalls or otherwise defraud investors, shareholders, or the public at large. A control fraud will often obtain “investments that have no readily ascertainable market value”,[1] and then shop for appraisers that will assign unrealistically high values and auditing firms that will bless the fraudulent accounting statements.[2]

    Some control frauds are reactive in the sense that they turn to fraud only after concluding that the business will fail.[3] Opportunistic control frauds, by contrast, are attracted to a criminogenic environment where it is harder to detect fraud, e.g., as a result of deregulation.[4]

    For those of you following the revelations of the Panama papers and the descent of New Zealand into corruption and a tax haven shadow world this should be one of the most interesting interviews you could ever hope to listen too!

    Here are the links to hook up too!

    Listen LIVE at http://www.americanfreedomradio.com
    SMART PHONE: http://tunein.com/radio/American-Freedom-Radio-s102922/

    http://www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com
    http://www.youtube.com/mrnewsguerillamedia

    Like American Freedom Radio
    https://www.facebook.com/americanfreedomradio/?fref=ts
    Join AFR’s Group
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/952799288134355/

    Like Vinny Eastwood https://www.facebook.com/Vinny-Eastwood-205204582848164/…
    Join Vinny Eastwood’s group
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/1410539889213406/

    • alwyn 5.1
      20 April 2016 at 2:40 pm

      “together with Robert Reich, the Nobel price winning economist”.
      Perhaps you can inform an interested on-looker as to just when Reich collected this gong?
      I hope the rest of what you are saying has a little bit more of a connection to reality?

      • Matthew Whitehead 5.1.1
        20 April 2016 at 6:33 pm

        Just to clarify, Robert Reich is in fact award-winning, but from what I can see that award is the VIZE 97 Prize, not the Nobel Prize for economics. He’s not exactly a lightweight though, being the former US secretary for labour under Bill Clinton.

        • travellerev 5.1.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 7:09 pm

          Matthew Whitehead you are right. I confused the names. I was referring Joseph Stiglitz who also is supporting Sanders. All good men but Alwyn just likes to ridicule instead of educate himself.

          I had an amazing chance to talk to one of the most prominent Bankster hunters in the world for a whole hour!

          For those of you wanting to know who I’m talking about have a listen to this:

          http://sinclairnoe.com/william-black/

          Oh, by the way he had some choice things to say about John Key, the Cullen fund and Control fraud here in NZ.

          And all of that is recorded and will be out there in the next couple of days with or without me around!

  6. International Rescue 6
    20 April 2016 at 2:49 pm

    Wonderful attempt to sideline the Ardern embarrassment, but no cigar. If there is corruption here, then the entire Board is deep in it, because the Board made this decision. That means Ardern’s daddy was in on this. Oh and ACT, because they got donations as well.

    So let’s summarise. Little smears, with no evidence, the only NZ owned bidder, owned by a man who has lived in NZ for decades, and who employs thousands of people here. This is going to be worth at least 1-2% for the Nats.

    • Sabine 6.1
      20 April 2016 at 3:25 pm

      so a board to manage a “foreign aid’ resort in Nuie is appointed by Mr. MC Cully – who as is said handpicked the members of the board. Handpicked!

      a business man gives a private donation of 101.000 $to a political party that Mr. McCully is a. a Member of and b. represents said Party in Parliament, and c. is a Minister of Parliament

      a contract worth 7.5 Million NZD to run the ‘foreign aid resort in Nuie’ is offered for tender by the Party who is leading Parliament of which Mr. McCully is part of

      the business men who gave a large private donation to the Party Mr. MCCully belongs too, the same party that is running the government of which also Mr. Mccully is a Member, wins the contract worth 7.5 NZD from the National led Government

      but the contract was handed out to the business man by the board of the “foreign aid resort in nuiue’ that Mr. McCully appointed – so clearly this shows that Mr. McCully has no conflict of interest what so ever, and that any conflict of interest is solely the fault of the board. The same board that was handpicked by Mr. Mccully

      But one of the board members personally appointed by Mr. McCully is the Father of Jacintha Ardern who is a MP for the opposition Party

      and the leader of the opposition party is calling out for National to explain the coincidence of donation and award of said 7.5 million contract, like seriously?

      but of course there is no conflict of interest by McCully, nor the National Party, nor the National Party led government in regards to a. receive 101.000$ in a single private donation and b. the awarding of the 7.5 million $ contract to the Man who gave the largest donation in a long time to National and who happens to be the CEO of the company that won the award to run the resort

      But Jacintha Ardern and the Leader of the opposition party have to explain how or why or something? Jacintha Arderns Father (handpicked by McCully ) together with other handpicked by McCully board member appointed the man who gave one of the largest donations ever to run the ‘foreign aid resort in nuie’. Cause obviously Labour is doing it and not National. Cause National?

      Clearly, as everyone can see McCully is the aggrieved

      party in all of this, and He and the National Party and the National Party led Government should sue the Labour Party (does it too TM), Jacintha Ardern and Andrew Little for something.

      Obviously.

      Seriously, that is awesome mind fuckery.

      I hope the National Party pays the guy / gal that came up with that line a good amount of money, cause you have to be fairly bent to make someone who has nothing to do with anything the cause of all evil.

      But then one could argue that National is responsible for nothing as they are the do nothing Government and are simply paid for showing up. And handing over sheep, abattoirs and sheepfarms to Saudi Arabian businessmen.

      • Puckish Rogue 6.1.1
        20 April 2016 at 3:51 pm

        https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/answer-question-mr-little-labour-leader-gets-repetitive-wont-straight-ardern-link

        – Tell you what though if I was Jacinda I’d be pretty miffed at Littles not very subtle insinuation that my father was bought off

        • McFlock 6.1.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 4:13 pm

          A case study in deflection: substantial nat donor gets contract from board stacked with former nats, debate ensues about non-nat on the board. 🙄

          Meanwhile, at least this nat crony got government dollars via a stacked tender process – a few years back McCully just straight-out gave another nat crony a cushy post in Nauru.

          Of course, that previous nat crony was on the board that awarded the contract to the company owned by the latest nat crony, but what they hey, at least there was an attempt to make it look less than totally corrupt.

          • Puckish Rogue 6.1.1.1.1
            20 April 2016 at 4:22 pm

            Hey Andrew Little wants to keep crying wolf then good on him, it won’t work of course

            • McFlock 6.1.1.1.1.1
              20 April 2016 at 4:30 pm

              By “work” you do mean “get the nats to actually respect due process in appointments and manage conflicts of interest in such a way that their actions clearly cannot be corrupt, rather than the current situation where decision after government decision coincidentally favours the relatives, partners and businesses of tory cabinet members, be it Canterbury water, Nuie resorts or ministerial detours on trips to China”?

              I agree, not much chance of that.

            • Matthew Whitehead 6.1.1.1.1.2
              20 April 2016 at 6:40 pm

              How exactly does this resemble crying wolf?

              There really was a government tender awarded to a company controlled by McCully, that donated to his political party.

              You can either work for the government or donate to political parties. You don’t get to do both without creating a perception of a conflict of interest. Ministers should be taking measures to prevent such conflicts. McCully, in addition to all his other scandals, has not. He needs to be sacked.

            • Naki man 6.1.1.1.1.3
              20 April 2016 at 7:37 pm

              “Hey Andrew Little wants to keep crying wolf then good on him, it won’t work of course”

              Chicken Little needs to stop shooting his gums off.
              Earl Hagaman is looking into taking legal action against him.

          • alwyn 6.1.1.1.2
            20 April 2016 at 6:12 pm

            “board stacked with former nats”.
            Please identify all the former nats on your “stacked board”
            As far as I know there is precisely one former Nat, Mark Blumsky.
            Who are all the others? Surely you are not suggesting the very senior rep from Foreign Affairs is a former Nat?
            Or is Jacinda Arden’s father in this category? Actually if he has met a few of his daughter’s Caucus colleagues he probably would become a Nat supporter.

            • McFlock 6.1.1.1.2.1
              20 April 2016 at 7:12 pm

              Fair call – stacked with a Nat crony a former senior cop (and.they’re known for leftist tendencies) and a senior civil servant who might or might not have an eye on future private sector employment. All voting to give a Nat donor a substantial contract.
              Lol

        • alwyn 6.1.1.2
          20 April 2016 at 6:07 pm

          You repeat four times in the comment phrases like “a contract worth 7.5 Million NZD to run the ‘foreign aid resort”

          Please provide a source for this claim.
          The only $7.5 million I have heard of is the money provided to extend the hotel.
          I have never seen any figure for the management contract.
          If you know the value of the management contract please provide a link.
          Alternatively are you confusing two totally different things?

          • Sabine 6.1.1.2.1
            21 April 2016 at 8:26 am

            http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/301746/call-for-inquiry-into-resort-contract
            “Businessman Earl Hagaman made a large donation to the National Party two years ago, and a month later his company announced it had secured the luxury resort contract in Niue.
            Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully said there was no link between the two events, nor $7.5 million in aid funding to expand the resort a year later.”

            but from the same article you will see that these 7.5 million of NZ Tax Payers funds are just a top up, previously our national led government spend

            Quote: “It had spent more than $10m over previous years developing the resort.” Quote End

            but will it benefit the peeps of Nuie you may ask or eve n pretend to care about?

            Quote: “Terrence Wood runs New Zealand Aid and Development Dialogues, which analyses and critiques New Zealand’s aid programme.
            He said the funding could benefit the Scenic Hotel Group more than the people of Niue.
            “You’d really need to see a strong case made that the spillovers from the hotel were actually going to benefit the Niuean economy more broadly, and Niuean people more broadly, before you’d feel confident that this was aid really being given to benefit Niue rather than a private company,” Mr Wood said.
            “It’s possible the case could be made, however there’s no publicly available evidence that this analysis has been undertaken or that this spending is warranted.”” Quote End.

            Quickly lets check if this guy is a Labour supporter because obviously if he is is opinion and knowledge abour foreign aid and development is worse nothing.

            next and I really like this bit here 🙂

            Quote: But Mr McCully said the aid funding was requested by the government of Niue.
            “Premier (Toke) Talagi challenged the New Zealand government to work with him by channelling a good chunk of the development cash due to Niue over several years into the development of the Matavai Hotel,” Mr McCully said.
            Political parties’ donations records show that Lani Hagaman, Mr Hagaman’s wife, also donates to the government’s support partner ACT.
            In 2013, she was ACT’s biggest donor – giving $25,000 to the party.
            Repeated calls to the management of the Scenic Hotel Group went unanswered and unreturned.” Quote end

            But maybe you think that a NZ source is not trustworthy enough and would show a labour leaning bias or something. So here something from China 🙂

            http://www.china.org.cn/world/Off_the_Wire/2016-04/18/content_38266362.htm

            Quote: The main opposition Labour Party on Monday asked the auditor-general to investigate New Zealand government funding of 7.5 million NZ dollars (5.18 million U.S. dollars) to upgrade Niue’s flagship holiday resort as part of a program to build the island’s tourism industry.
            The call for a probe followed revelations that a New Zealand businessman made two large donations totaling about 100,000 NZ dollars (69,040 U.S. dollars) to New Zealand’s ruling center-right National Party before his company was awarded the Matavai Resort management contract in 2014.”Quote End.

            Jacintha Arderns involvement in the whole process? O yeah, nothing other then being related to one of the Members of the board, hand picked by MCCully. And may i remind you, we choose friends but not family.

            Quote:”Foreign Minister Murray McCully had personally appointed the trustees on Niue Tourism Property Trust which awarded this contract, he said.” quote end.

            OF course as MC Cully said, all is kosher……and we are hoping that the investigation into how the contract was awarded will show MCCully to be an honest man and such. 🙂 And because he is just such an honest man and all he will of course welcome an investigation in the doings of this business as it will show that the business conducted was in the interest of the People of Niue and NZ (after all this money is ours:) )

            Quote: McCully said there was no link between the winning of the contract, the aid funding and the donation to the National Party.
            “I can tell you that I had no involvement in the appointment process, conducted purely by the trustees and commercial management they appointed,” said McCully.
            McCully announced in 2011 that New Zealand would invest 15 million NZ dollars (10.36 million U.S. dollars) in helping to develop Niue into a “boutique tourism destination.”
            Announcing the additional funding in 2014, McCully said tourism was “the key to putting Niue on a path towards self-sufficiency.”
            The funding would see the development of a further 20 rooms at the Matavai and conference facilities that would accommodate an average increase of 2,000 visitors per year to the Matavai.
            Niue was annexed to New Zealand in 1901, but in 1974 the island became self-governing in free association with New Zealand.
            Niueans are New Zealand citizens and 24,000 Niueans live in New Zealand, compared with about 1,500 living in Niue. “Quote End.

            Now be a good boy, and show us how good your reading and writing skills are, you have to earn your keep today and surely you would not want MR. English to think you are one of these hopless Kiwi blokes that can’t get jobs, or hold on to them. 🙂

            • alwyn 6.1.1.2.1.1
              21 April 2016 at 10:30 am

              I am sorry to have to say it but all that typing didn’t answer the very simple question I asked.

              You said, in the previous post I questioned that.
              “a contract worth 7.5 Million NZD to run the ‘foreign aid resort in Nuie’ is offered for tender ”
              and then
              “the business men who gave a large private donation to the Party …… wins the contract worth 7.5 NZD from the National led Government”
              and then
              “explain the coincidence of donation and award of said 7.5 million contract,”
              and then
              “the awarding of the 7.5 million $ contract to the Man who gave the largest donation in a long time”
              All of these things appear to be claiming that the management contract was for $7.5 million.
              It is your evidence for that claim that I was questioning.

              I am very well aware that the NZ Government supplied an additional $7.5 million toward the hotel, and that it was on top of a previous grant. If you had read my comment carefully you will see that I referred to that grant.
              However that money DID NOT go to the Hagamans.
              It went to the owners of the hotel who ARE NOT the Hahamanns. Why are you claiming, apparently without evidence, that they got the money?
              Now do you have any evidence for your repeated claim that the contract awarded to the Hagaman’s hotel business got this money and that the management contract was for $7.5 million?

              I really don’t care very much whether there may have been alternative, possibly better, uses for New Zealand’s aid money. Aid is like advertising. Whether it is the best use of our aid is an extremely subjective opinion. I am certainly not an expert and I doubt that you are either.
              As US department store magnate John Wanamaker said
              “Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don’t know which half.” Aid is exactly the same.

              “Now be a good girl, and show us how good your reading and writing skills are, you have to earn your keep today and surely you would not want MR. English to think you are one of these hopless Kiwi blokes that can’t get jobs, or hold on to them”

              Answer the question I asked, not the one you are imagining.

        • Sabine 6.1.1.3
          21 April 2016 at 7:54 am

          YOu know what, if the Father was bought of then he too should be hit with the book of law, square in the middle of the face. Just like Carmel Sepuloni Mother was found of wrong doing and got her sentenced handed to her by the court of law.
          I don’t care.
          Full stop.
          IS that so hard to understand for you, that I as a citizen, as a taxpayer don’t give a flying fuck about how is related to whom, shacks with whom or all, is married too and so on.

          I don’t care.
          I want my politicians, of all sides of the spectrum to be honest. I want them to act in the best of the country, i want them to look after all citizens of our fair country and not just a few that are rich enough to shovel money up some washed up politician arse.

          I don’t care because at the end of the day, Taxpayers will always have to foot the bill, and we are footing the bill for this “foreign aid resort”. Every single cent of it.
          And yes, i would like to know why we are paying it, what is the outcome for the nation of Nuie, and has the population benefited from it. And i don’t think that shoveling away the shit of rich overseas tourists will leave behind means benefiting the local populace in any which way, considering that the tiny nation of Nuie would be responsible for the sewerage and trash collection.

          So no, Mr. Little does what is expected of him as leader of the Opposition. He is demanding to see the thought process and tender process to make sure no bribes have been handed out and that the government and the populace of NZ is no being screwed out of several Million dollars of Tax Payers funds, that could have other wise put to good use in our own country.

      • Mark 6.1.2
        20 April 2016 at 4:09 pm

        I am all for an Auditor General investigation to put this to bed.

        There is some uncertainty as to whether the trustees made the decision or the directors appointed by the trustees made the decision.

        But think about what is required for there to be corruption.

        If it is the trustees, then three trustees, voting unanimously to make the decision as is required under trust law:
        – One the father of a Labour MP and now diplomat;
        – One a career public servant; and
        – One an ex National MP, businessman and ex local body mayor

        Would have had to have been motivated enough by the National Party receiving $101,000 to risk their careers and reputations to award Scenic Circle the concession when it was not warranted??

        Does not look plausible on any level. Perhaps one could argue the ex National MP might have been inclined to do a favour for a friend of a friend, but the father of a Labour MP, and the public servant???

        If the Board of directors appointed by the Trustees made the decision, then the trustees still have a fiduciary responsibility so it come back to them.

        I don’t really understand this attack by Andrew Little. No doubt someone who is closer to Labour’s internal working can decipher it, but for me it reeks of Labour internal politics.

        Think about it, for their to be corruption then:
        – The Deputy Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and
        – Jacinta Arden’s dad
        Would have had to have acted inappropriately. The probability of this being the case is very low.

        So why if you are planning on being the next Prime Minister do you call into question the integrity of one of your senior public officials, whom you probably will have to interact with and a family member of one of your senior MPs?

        I am wondering if this is Shearer holding a fish part 2. Or else, Little stamping down on leadership challengers.

        • Puckish Rogue 6.1.2.1
          20 April 2016 at 4:17 pm

          Oh you and your silly logic 🙂

          • adam 6.1.2.1.1
            20 April 2016 at 4:22 pm

            That’s a bit rich coming from you. Mr calls anyone mentally unwell who disagrees with them

            • Mark 6.1.2.1.1.1
              20 April 2016 at 4:23 pm

              Que?

              • adam …
                20 April 2016 at 4:25 pm

                KDS is Puckish Rouges fall back 9/10 slanders

              • Puckish Rogue …
                20 April 2016 at 4:26 pm

                Don’t mind Adam, hes a bit of a fan of mine 🙂

                • adam …
                  20 April 2016 at 4:30 pm

                  Fan – no son, I just don’t like spin and lies. I just comment to your oh so many dribbles, to reminding people how much you lie.

                  Yes dear

                  • McFlock …
                    20 April 2016 at 4:31 pm

                    PR is a tory. Any attention is good attention – they lack the emotional ability to experience shame.

                • Mark …
                  20 April 2016 at 4:31 pm

                  Very good children 🙂

                  • adam …
                    20 April 2016 at 4:38 pm

                    You seem to speaking dribble as well Mark.

                    Nice attempt at a PR spin though, except you missed all the times before when it’s looked corrupt. The lies, and misdirections. And the utter desperation from this national government for any good news.

                    Oh and do you realise this is not a labour party web site?

                    Why don’t you just add labour did it too? I mean, we know you want too.

                    • Mark …
                      20 April 2016 at 4:43 pm

                      Wowwww partner!!!

                      That’s some super-duper logical twisting/ imaginating going on there!!!

                      I am obviously not as intelligent as you so please point out for me precisely the bits in my post which were the:
                      – Introductory dribble
                      – Dribble point 1
                      – Dribble point 2
                      – Dribble point 3
                      – Conclusionary dribble

                      Dribbly yours
                      Mark

                    • adam …
                      20 April 2016 at 5:08 pm

                      Mark, the poor me routine – really?

                      How about some Boo Hoo’s, and the bad man is picking on me?

                      You just reshaped what was said above, that others have already put to demolition. But feel free to believe you poor excuses for spin in the face of a collection of traits this minister, and government having displayed just to regularly – the traits which looks like corruption. I think we at this point we can pull Occam’s razor, and say with some certainty – corruption.

                      Are we not at the shame on you stage of all this? I mean we fell for lies and spin over the whole sheep thing.

                • Stuart Munro …
                  20 April 2016 at 6:27 pm

                  He’s not a fan – you’re a tr0ll – he’s the billygoat that butts you back under the bridge.

          • Stuart Munro 6.1.2.1.2
            20 April 2016 at 6:18 pm

            No surprise there – logic interupts your incessant shilling. You’re a pretty pathetic excuse for a RWNJ – real right wingers don’t like corruption.
            Terminal case of KSS – Key sycophancy syndrome, with complicating serious giddy McCully partiality – usually only found in headless chickens.

        • Draco T Bastard 6.1.2.2
          20 April 2016 at 4:36 pm

          the father of a Labour MP

          You do understand that that makes no difference here right? Just because Jacinda is a Labour Party member/supporter doesn’t mean that her father is.

          And two could have persuaded the third to vote the same way even though they were kinda against it.

          The circumstantial evidence is enough that an investigation should have been automatic and not needing anyone to call for it.

          • Mark 6.1.2.2.1
            20 April 2016 at 4:53 pm

            True, I don’t know her fathers’ politics.

            I would assume as a father he would not want to act in a way that would impact on a daughter in a public life – but who knows?

            I agree that enough stink has been raised that its best to let the AG have a look. It still leaks weak and circumstantial to me. Unless there is a smoking gun piece of paper somewhere I don’t think it will come to much.

            If it was me who was the leader of the opposition and all I knew was what has been put into the public sphere so far, I would not have gone there.

            There is too much downside for me compared to the low probability that something dodgy has actually taken place.

            • Draco T Bastard 6.1.2.2.1.1
              20 April 2016 at 11:18 pm

              It still leaks weak and circumstantial to me.

              To me the evidence we have is enough to institute an investigation simply because corruption at this level is far too damaging to society. If it doesn’t find any corruption then good, if it does then it will be seen to.

          • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.2.2
            20 April 2016 at 5:48 pm

            The question is whether Little knew about the Ardern connection before launching this line of attack.

            Doesn’t make a lot of sense to fire off a load of bullets when the father of one of your most prominent MPs was at the very centre of the decision making you are attacking.

            • alwyn 6.1.2.2.2.1
              20 April 2016 at 6:18 pm

              “Doesn’t make a lot of sense”
              It makes a great deal of sense if he knows, or at least suspects, that Grant and Jacinda are doing the numbers to overthrow Andrew as leader.
              With the way Labour are polling they are probably very worried about whether they can stay in the House. A lot of the other Labour MPs are likely to be just as worried.
              If he can cut her off at the knees I suspect Andrew will go for it.

              • Colonial Viper …
                20 April 2016 at 7:04 pm

                Now that’s an interesting angle I hadn’t fully considered.

              • Hanswurst …
                21 April 2016 at 6:09 am

                Nah, that doesn’t stack up. Firstly, a hit on her father wouldn’t even nearly “cut her off at the knees” – especially since the very worst that could even vaguely stick to him at the moment would appear to be “letting himself be nudged a bit by a National minister”. Secondly, Little’s fortunes are heavily dependent on his party’s polling, and landing a hit on one of your more popular MPs is a recipe for losing votes. It would be far too risky for him with basically no upside at all.

        • Chuck 6.1.2.3
          20 April 2016 at 5:23 pm

          Mark your comments make perfect sense, and I agree lets have a AG investigation.

          Andrew Little thought he had the prefect headline…shame he dumped one of his senior MP’s head first into the headline instead.

          I think most people would of been ok if Andrew Little had simply asked for it to be “looked into”. However by going full retard – “Stinks to high heaven” he has lost any potential traction he may of gained otherwise (and in the process gone from 7% to 5% in PM stakes).

      • Colonial Viper 6.1.3
        20 April 2016 at 4:41 pm

        Didn’t Jacinda Ardern come from a working class town and a working class family? At least that’s what I got from Labour’s campaign advertising.

        • Mark 6.1.3.1
          20 April 2016 at 4:46 pm

          Mother I don’t know
          Father was a policeman, then senior policeman then diplomat

          Had to say from that what her family life was like

      • International Rescue 6.1.4
        21 April 2016 at 7:57 pm

        “Seriously, that is awesome mind fuckery.”

        Yes, the way you have presented this is certainly mind f**(ery. But then you have no idea what you’re talking about, so that’s not surprising.

    • Draco T Bastard 6.2
      20 April 2016 at 4:11 pm

      http://thestandard.org.nz/gould-on-nats-sleaze-and-corruption/#comment-1162863

      It seems that it’s the RWNJs that are trying to side line the issue which as apparent corruption in the National Party.

      • Puckish Rogue 6.2.1
        20 April 2016 at 4:28 pm

        If its so apparent then there’s obviously plenty of proof, lets see some evidence

        • adam 6.2.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 4:34 pm

          Nope no sheep here, nope nothing about swamp Kauri.

          Oh I think we are in the realms of when a government acts once or twice, or in this example three times looking corrupt, I think it perfectly acceptable to call them on it when it looks like corruption again.

          Or are we going to go with your logic PR – call anyone mentally unwell who does not agree with you?

          • Ian H 6.2.1.1.1
            20 April 2016 at 11:09 pm

            If you are going to go around accusing people of corruption you need to have evidence to back it up. If Little lacks such evidence he is a fool, especially if he repeats his allegations out of the house. So far he has not shown us any evidence and has been very cautious about what he has said outside the house. So does he have evidence or is he a fool? We’ll have to wait and see.

            Brian Gould is not a fool. He is a clever man with a lot of experience in politics and the law. He knows how to use the English language to accuse someone of corruption while carefully avoiding statements that might put him in the wrong end of a lawsuit for libel. Read it very carefully. It is all speculation and insinuation – nasty stuff but probably safe.

            However most of the people in this forum who are loudly jumping about screaming “corruption” definitely are fools. They clearly don’t have any evidence of their own to back up what they are saying. Nor are they as clever as Brian Gould at weaselling around to imply corruption without ever explicitly saying so. If accused of libel they would have absolutely no defence.

      • Expat 6.2.2
        20 April 2016 at 7:49 pm

        Draco T Bastard

        +1

        There hasn’t been a National govt in my lifetime that wasn’t “corrupt”, and if any rwnj’s can name one, good luck, they’ll have the very same problem naming a single policy they have implemented that benefits “all” NZers.

  7. Jenny Kirk 7
    20 April 2016 at 3:40 pm

    and interestingly, the Herald online seemingly meant to be NZ ‘s major newspaper doesn’t have a word to say about any of this – except for Bryan Gould’s opinion article.

    Of course, I don’t have a pay-walled version of the Herald, just the ordinary website version – so maybe that’s why I can’t find anything about it…… nothing to do of course with keeping the peasants ignorant.

    • Expat 7.1
      20 April 2016 at 7:55 pm

      Yeah, I used to have the ap on my phone, but the level structured BS in most stories led me to uninstall it, I found it insulting.

  8. The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 8
    20 April 2016 at 3:51 pm

    You lost me at “Gould on…”

  9. Sabine 9
    20 April 2016 at 9:08 pm

    but of course it is Jacintha Ardersn fault for McCully hand-picking and appointing her father to the board of the resort trust. I mean clearly her father has no life on his own, and would never make any decisions on his own, nor would he never even consider to maybe just maybe be of a different political persuasion than his daugher. or grasp accept the position as a board member when offerd one. And clearly Jacintha Ardern has sway over McCully and his choice in choosing people to work with. Damn, that is one powerful labour Lady, maybe she should replace Andrew Little 🙂

    No only Dames like Mrs Shipley are allowed to accept posts as board members for companies like Oravida – even after teh fuckery that was MainZeal, but then she is a Dame and we would not want to know what her role was in the demise of MainZeal. Oravida, (http://www.oravida.com/ourteam.aspx) coincidentally is owned / co owned by the husband of one Mrs. Judith Collins, National Party Member and something like Minister of Justice when she is not condemned to the back benches for trying to overthrow dear leader. And if that company Oravida were to buy rights to pump millions of litres of water for export at no expense than that too would have got nothing to do with washing / greasing hands, but would only be showing good commercial sense to get something for free to make a huge profit on – hard work its for suckers.

  10. save NZ 10
    20 April 2016 at 9:32 pm

    You can see by the amount of Trolls on this post, that the McCully and the corruption is a serious worry to the National party!!

    Keep it up, the more trolls, the more Labour does it too, the more threats from the Nats about suing Labour, (fab we can have a fantastic public trial and hear more about the donation thanks Natz, plus I’m sure give-a-little would be successful for Labour to raise some cash), the more the Natz fight dirty, we all know the Natz are SERIOUSLY worried.

    The polls must be rattled by the revelations for the Natz to be hissing about like angry rattle snakes.

    The lead story on One News, what a joke, about Mr Corruption suing Little, GO FOR IT , would be great publicity for Labour and we would all like the documents made PUBLIC so everyone can hear about the 7.5 million of tax payers money given to a private hotel chain in a tax haven by the Natz after Earl Hagaman gives a $101,000 “donation”!

  11. mikes 11
    20 April 2016 at 9:46 pm

    The very fact that political parties can receive donations, especially large ones and anonymous ones means that there will always be corruption.

    No individual or company donates a huge sum of money to a political party and expects nothing in return. They are essentially purchasing favorable policy.

  12. Matthew Hooton 12
    20 April 2016 at 9:51 pm

    I think Gould has misinterpreted events here. Obviously there will be something dodgy about this deal – after all, McCully is involved. But it is pretty clear Little’s real objective was to fire a warning shot against Gracinda. I think he has shown he is willing to play a very tough game if necessary to keep the leadership. After all, he has been a union boss whereas Jacinda and Grant are soft parliamentary staffers in comparison.

    • Tautoko Mangō Mata 12.1
      20 April 2016 at 9:54 pm

      What a load of codswallop, Matthew!

    • Stuart Munro 12.2
      20 April 2016 at 10:07 pm

      Never at a loss for a Machiavellian slur are we Hoots.

      There is something dodgy about the deal. Little brought it to light. Journalists will be interested to investigate the dodgyness.

      Speculations on Little’s motives are neither here nor there – except for people trying to change the framing from “National steals public money” to “Let’s make jokes about Labour”.

      McCully appears to be a crook. Prison awaits. End of story. Unless he has an innocent explanation, in which case we are all very interested to hear it.

      Perhaps you want to argue that people stealing public money should not go to prison? Not impossible – but not a vote-winning discourse.

    • Psycho Milt 12.3
      21 April 2016 at 6:37 am

      Obviously there will be something dodgy about this deal – after all, McCully is involved.

      Correct. And what’s dodgy about it is fairly obvious, which means Gould hasn’t misinterpreted events at all.

      But it is pretty clear Little’s real objective was to fire a warning shot against Gracinda.

      Oh, sure – because a Labour leader wouldn’t otherwise take the opportunity to highlight corrupt practice by a National Party politician, I mean why would he, right? It just has to be about internal Labour Party issues, because otherwise how’s a Nat spin doctor going to spin it?

  13. Incognito 13
    20 April 2016 at 10:29 pm

    Fascinating comments so far.

    I think AL was aiming for McCully and not for the Board or Mr Ardern specifically.

    Should AL have held his “fire” because Mr Ardern is on the Board? Would that not make him kind of complicit into any alleged dodgy going-ons? Isn’t this exactly what AL (and NZLP, the Greens, as well as NZF) are trying to fight? It makes no sense to me at all to not launch this ‘attack’ because of Mr Ardern. The Opposition needs to hold this Government to account and we have to be eternally vigilant …

    The thought that AL was trying to undermine Jacinda Ardern (and GR as well!?) and thus have the NZLP caught in ‘friendly fire’ and ending up as collateral damage is so absurdly Machiavellian that only Murray McCully could think of it! I don’t believe AL has the Machiavellian gene in his genome.

    • Incognito 13.1
      20 April 2016 at 10:34 pm

      Well, my comment crossed that of another person @ 12 who’s got the homozygous double-dominant Machiavellian gene.

      • Colonial Viper 13.1.1
        20 April 2016 at 10:42 pm

        Should AL have held his “fire” because Mr Ardern is on the Board?

        I feel that this is the wrong question. The right question is: Did AL know that Mr Ardern was on the Board before he opened fire.

        If not – why not.

        If so – why did he think it beneficial to proceed.

        • Pat 13.1.1.1
          20 April 2016 at 10:52 pm

          wrong…the right questions were the ones asked…..irrespective of who was on the board and who their offspring are

          • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.1.1
            20 April 2016 at 11:13 pm

            My questions seek to understand Labour’s current internal leadership status.

            • Pat 13.1.1.1.1.1
              20 April 2016 at 11:22 pm

              would have thought it far more important to ascertain whether McCully is up to his old tricks or not….the Labour leadership can take care of itself(or not)

              • Colonial Viper …
                20 April 2016 at 11:38 pm

                Of course McCully is up to his old tricks. Part of my question is around whether or not Labour figured out the play before diving in to this.

            • Psycho Milt 13.1.1.1.1.2
              21 April 2016 at 6:40 am

              My questions seek to understand Labour’s current internal leadership status.

              You and Matthew Hooton both just trying to focus on what’s the really substantive issue at hand, huh?

        • Incognito 13.1.1.2
          20 April 2016 at 11:06 pm

          You’re free to frame your own questions.

          Whether AL knew about the Board members is irrelevant IMHO. This deal stinks and AL did the right thing by asking the AG to investigate. Perception of wrongdoing at Government level is almost as bad as actual wrongdoing, don’t you agree? Obviously, National disagrees but they have skin in the game because they are ‘governing’ at the present time.

          Any other ‘rationales’ have huge entertainment value and I particularly enjoy the hypothesis of corruption by osmosis.

          • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.2.1
            20 April 2016 at 11:14 pm

            My questions seek to understand Labour’s current internal leadership status.

            • Incognito 13.1.1.2.1.1
              20 April 2016 at 11:48 pm

              Fair enough but then you might not want to post them here because they might distract and derail the discussion initiated by the OP, which was on Nats’ sleaze and corruption; OM is better suited for your questions IMO or, even better, write your own post.

              That said, to me, your questions seem to be leading questions and framed in a biased manner. You slightly worry me when framing your questions in a remarkably similar way as Mr Hooton; are you a seeker of the truth and do you offer viable alternatives for consideration? Hooton is and does not, which makes him a stirrer, at best.

              My questions seek to understand your current internal TS status.

              • Colonial Viper …
                21 April 2016 at 12:00 am

                distract and derail the discussion initiated by the OP, which was on Nats’ sleaze and corruption;

                To be honest, I’m tired of the endless years of stories re: NATs lied about this, lied about that, hid this, hid that, paid off their buddies here, paid off their buddies there, got paid off by their buddies here, got paid off by their buddies there, were incompetent here, were incompetent there, were hypocritical here, were hypocritical there, spun this, spun that, lived it up on this junket here, lived it up on that junket there, etc. etc.

                None of it serves or achieves anything in moving the true Left forward in NZ.

                That said, to me, your questions seem to be leading questions and framed in a biased manner.

                Of course. I’m not even trying to pretend that there is such a thing as fair and balanced in this game.

                PS Roy Morgan released on Friday. No doubt with all this National Party corruption their ratings will take a hit.

  14. logie97 14
    20 April 2016 at 11:32 pm

    Can you imagine if the rolls were reversed in this. Imagine if it had been a Labour Government receiving the donation and the contract awarded – the Penguin, Hooton, et al would have been all over it like a rash.

    • Colonial Viper 14.1
      21 April 2016 at 12:15 am

      Absolutely true. And its been absolutely true for the last 8 years of National rule. So what? The MSM is steadfastly pro-oligarchy. It has been the same forever. When will we find a new track to run in?

  15. MARY_A 15
    21 April 2016 at 8:24 am

    How many other contenders for the contract were there? Or was the deal sealed after the $100K donation was handed over to NatzKEY?

    • Roflcopter 15.1
      21 April 2016 at 10:25 am

      Contract negotiations began 6 months prior to any donation… this gets funnier by the minute.

  16. Observer (Tokoroa) 16
    21 April 2016 at 9:35 am

    Spilt beans and Stupidity.

    . The Nats have their big guns out on this little playhouse. They absolutely positively do not want the miraculous government (tax payer) funding of a Pacific Resort to go before an Auditor.

    Not even the main stream misinformation crowd wants to give it air.

    All the usual protectors of the dodgy nat palace, are out with boots on kicking the guts out of Mr Little’s request for an investigation of the ‘miracle’ funding.

    Colonial Viper that wide ranging sprayer of constant stupidity, has even joined the Hooton Inc. They can have him lock stock and demented. The Greens will be very undelighted with his two timing murky nonsense. Poor chap

    Why has a simple request from the very credible Andrew Little caused such a flurry in the National bunker?

    The tax payer wants to know.

  17. Mike Bond 17
    21 April 2016 at 11:26 am

    TVNZ had a good segment on this morning about how Andrew Little is perceived by the wider public. That he has not seen how he damages his own reputation and that of Labour is beside me. The general public is so sick of the accusations that always turn out to be nothing! As was said this morning. Dirt is not going to overthrow this government. The left have tried on how many occasions and come up short. Time to do something different and be seen as a possible future government. Little however is not PM material. He can’t win his own electorate, so how does Labour even think he can lead them to victory?

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.