How can you forget $178,394 in campaign donations?

Written By: - Date published: 9:53 am, September 1st, 2024 - 16 comments
Categories: corruption, election 2023, election funding, national, Politics - Tags:

This is going to take some explaining.

The police have decided to take no action against National MP David MacLeod for failing to declare $178,394 in electoral donations. No this is not an Onion headline.

From Jo Moir at Radio New Zealand:

Police have decided not to take any action against National MP David MacLeod’s failure to disclose $178,394 in donations.

The Electoral Commission referred the matter to police in June after the MP for New Plymouth had a month earlier unveiled what he called an “inadvertent error”.

A police spokesperson said they had “completed their enquiries into this matter and no further action will be taken” in a statement to RNZ on Thursday.

The backbench MP had originally disclosed just $29,268 in donations from seven donors, but later amended it to $207,662 from 24 donors.

In May MacLeod said he thought he was filing a return for the 2023 year only, so left out 18 donations he had received when he became a candidate the previous year.

He also failed to disclose a $10,000 donation from 2023, which he said was a mistake he could not explain.

And one of the donations he *omitted* to declare was from someone possibly wanting to get on board the fast track consent waka.

As pointed out by Russell Norman at Greenpeace:

“One of MacLeod’s undeclared donations came from a major shareholder in the seabed mining company TTR that may benefit significantly from the Fast Track Bill. The fast track process is the only way the company has any chance of getting its destructive business off the ground,” says Norman.

“David MacLeod had a major undeclared conflict of interest while chairing the Environment Committee overseeing the Fast Track Bill. He had taken donations from someone with a significant financial interest in seeing the bill passed, yet he had unlawfully failed to declare these donations.

“This undeclared conflict of interest means that MacLeod has undermined the democratic process for considering the bill and may himself face charges of corrupt practice. How many submitters opposing the bill who were never heard by the Committee will now wonder if MacLeod had a role in the decision not to be heard?

The police had three options:

  1. Charge him with committing a corrupt practice by filing a false return knowing it to be false in a material particular.
  2. Charge him with committing an illegal practice by failing a false return even though he had no intention to conceal the donations AND had taken “all reasonable steps in the circumstances to ensure that the information in the return was accurate”.
  3. Do nothing.

He filed a false return. Filing an amended return is an admission of this.

When he signed the return I presume he read it. He would have noticed the words “[a] candidate return included any money, goods or services that are donated to a candidate, or a person on the candidate’s behalf, for use in the candidate’s campaign for election”. There is no time limitation. Donations made in 2022 are included.

And forgetting to mention a $10,000 donation received in 2023 is a mistake of its own. How can it be said that he took all reasonable steps in the circumstances to make sure this was disclosed?

The threshold for conviction for committing a corrupt practice by filing a false return is high.

But how can this not be an illegal practice? The level of ineptitude shown here is pretty extreme. How can it be said that he has all reasonable steps in the circumstances to ensure that the information in the return was accurate, when he managed to *miss* $178,394 in donations?

This brings back memories the prosecution of former Auckland Mayor and Cabinet Minister John Banks for filing a false electoral return.

Kim Dotcom claimed that he gave a donation of $50,000 split at Banks’ request, that the cheques were written out in the presence of Banks, and that Banks called him a few days later to thank him. The police investigated but declined to charge Banks. Accountant Graeme Mcready mounted a private prosecution and a Judge ruled that there was sufficient evidence for the case to proceed. The Solicitor General then took over the case. Banks was convicted but on appeal had the conviction quashed.

Because of limitation issues the option of charging him with the lesser offence of filing a false return and failing to take all reasonable steps in the circumstances to ensure that the information in the return was accurate was lost.

The IPCA considered complaints about the police handling of them matter. Very generously it declined to uphold the complaint.

Macleod may have breathed a sigh of relief at the news. But there is still time for this matter to referred to the courts.

16 comments on “How can you forget $178,394 in campaign donations? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Patricia Bremner 1
    1 September 2024 at 11:38 am

    Unbelievable, but far from surprising.

  2. Barfly 2
    1 September 2024 at 12:02 pm

    Hmm ….Anyone about able to mount a private prosecution?

    I will chip in $50 if there's a gofundme or even just an account number for it

    • lprent 2.1
      1 September 2024 at 2:51 pm

      “This undeclared conflict of interest means that MacLeod has undermined the democratic process for considering the bill and may himself face charges of corrupt practice. How many submitters opposing the bill who were never heard by the Committee will now wonder if MacLeod had a role in the decision not to be heard?

      I'd pay thousands to help start a private prosecution. In my view this has to be viewed as being corrupt behaviour regardless of it is 'inadvertent' or not.

      As Russell Norman points out, that he was the chair of the environment select committee briefly looking at the Fast Track legislation gave him a lot of control about what submissions got looked at. From memory, the time allocated to select committee for the fat cat legislation was minimal, most of the speakers selected were in favour of it, and most of the voices who put in submissions were against.

      There is an obvious prima facie case based on the 2023 $10,000 which was hardly inadvertent. I'd want to go through the 2022 donations to see which ones look like a corrupt practice in any way – by the candidate, secretary or promoter. Looks like the candidate has already accepted the responsibility for having signed off on the statements.

      I suspect we'd need a good accountant, and I suspect that discovery will require a lengthy set of hearings. a max prison sentence of 2 years under 224 (1) (a) would require the candidate to attend court under bail conditions.

      Anyone else keen?

      I am getting a bit pissed of with what has the appearance of corrupt vote and influence buying with this government. This looks like an ideal way to use the process of a private prosecution to send a harsh message about obeying the bloody laws (inadequate as they are).

      Besides, if we don't use the private prosecutions for the purpose that they were intended for – holding the police to account for inexplicable failures to prosecute – then the process itself will fall into abeyance.

      To be precise, I think that this is a case that the police should always put in front of a court. Their potential for self-interest is too high.

  3. Rodel 3
    1 September 2024 at 2:15 pm

    We have become a corrupt country

    • roblogic 3.1
      1 September 2024 at 3:59 pm

      Not the whole country. A corrupt cabal has fooled the public and seized power on a platform of fear and disinformation.

      3 wankers conspired with oligarchs and shadowy foreign assets to poison the discourse and purchase the election.

  4. Mike the Lefty 4
    1 September 2024 at 4:35 pm

    It is possible that the police decided against prosecution because they believed the case would be dragged out interminably in court (aided and abetted by the National Party war chest of course) so it simply was not worth the bother and would not be complete until near the next election.

    Of course, it also could be insinuated that there was political meddling in the judicial process and the police were told not to go ahead with any prosecution if they wanted the promised increase in resources to go ahead.

    We don't know and we will probably never find out because nobody will say anything. Nothing to see here, move on, business as usual – the usual National Party way of doing things.

    I definitely agree that the Electoral Commission needs more teeth and not just because of this latest National jiggery pokery. I have been saying this for years.

    • Ngungukai 4.1
      1 September 2024 at 9:01 pm

      Winston normally has some litigation going prior to each General Election, generally a Smear Campaign by the Right Wingers to destroy his credibility however now they have had to eat humble pie and have jumped into bed with him and NZ First.

    • Anne 4.2
      1 September 2024 at 11:26 pm

      Of course, it also could be insinuated that there was political meddling in the judicial process and the police were told not to go ahead with any prosecution if they wanted the promised increase in resources to go ahead.

      The police are certainly not immune from being bought. Indeed it would not be the first time they have turned a blind eye to corrupt political practices. Since such behaviour is, by and large, the province of the white, rich class, then it does not portray them in a very good light.

  5. Ngungukai 5
    1 September 2024 at 8:36 pm

    One rule for the Rich, one Rule for the Poor.

  6. thinker 6
    2 September 2024 at 7:17 am

    Let's accept the outcome for a moment.

    This man who can't understand the instructions in a simple return form is part of the highest level of strategic thinking and planning in the country.

    We should be very afraid.

  7. Nyx 7
    2 September 2024 at 8:15 pm

    Well they don't prosecute anyone for anything these days so it's a stretch to think they're going to push the boat out to prosecute a politician. Especially after JT has skated 2 or 3 times. Very hard to indulge in any 2 tier policing when you know the next cab of the rank is going to be used as a direct comparator.

  8. Dinky 8
    2 September 2024 at 8:24 pm

    Tip of the iceberg being going on for decades