If Wong stays an MP will she be welcome in National?

Written By: - Date published: 8:40 am, November 17th, 2010 - 79 comments
Categories: accountability, corruption, john key, national - Tags:

The latest revelation in the Pansy Wong saga is a Chinese newspaper article where she, as Minister, endorses her husband’s company’s product. John Key says that it would be a sacking offence were she a minister but its up to her if she resigns from Parliament. Here’s a question then: is he going to let this corrupt MP remain in his party’s caucus?

Update: Whaleoil says Wong wanted to resign from Parliament last week but Key told her not to. Apparently, they don’t want her to go yet because the by-election would have to be over the summer break. I’m surprised they haven’t just changed the law under Urgency to let a minister appoint the new MP for Botany, it’s how they tackle every other problem.

79 comments on “If Wong stays an MP will she be welcome in National? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Nick K 1
    17 November 2010 at 8:51 am

    Corrupt?

    • freedom 1.1
      17 November 2010 at 8:53 am

      what would you call it Nick?
      Creative administration? Flexible role application? Serial tasking errors?

    • Eddie 1.2
      17 November 2010 at 8:54 am

      That’s what it’s called when a person in public office uses public funds and the privileges of office for private gain and in breach of the rules.

      • burt 1.2.1
        17 November 2010 at 2:19 pm

        That’s not corrupt – that’s justification to retrospectively validate and move on.

        • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1
          17 November 2010 at 2:28 pm

          ‘Retrospectively validate’ = Dictatorial rubber stamp after the fact then forget about it?

          Looks like that is where NAT is taking us.

    • felix 1.3
      17 November 2010 at 9:40 am

      Poor Nick, he’s been reading Kiwiblog so long he’s forgotten that the word actually has a definition.

  2. toad 2
    17 November 2010 at 9:04 am

    Eddie, Gerry can already appoint a replacement under the CERRA.

    • ianmac 2.1
      17 November 2010 at 10:32 am

      Can toad but he wouldn’t dare. Would he? But maybe McCulley would under RWC stability.

    • Lanthanide 2.2
      17 November 2010 at 10:33 am

      CERRA excludes the electoral act, which I’d imagine is what covers this sort of thing. Also, the actions under CERRA are required to be to do with the Canterbury recovery, it’s hard to swing this for an electoral seat in Auckland. Now if it were Jim Anderton, that might be another story.

    • Vicky32 2.3
      17 November 2010 at 1:56 pm

      Please, tell me you’re kidding. No, you’re not kidding are you? Yikes!
      Deb

  3. Craig Glen Eden 3
    17 November 2010 at 9:06 am

    Oh Gee when your a Tory that’s your birth right to rule and rip of the masses. Corruption heck that’s not very nice “true” but not nice,wrecks the taste of the cucumber sandwich old fella.

  4. freedom 4
    17 November 2010 at 9:07 am

    and another bs headline from TVNZ,

    wow i mean the story is almost a week old, must be tough being a journo in TV land

  5. Fisiani 5
    17 November 2010 at 9:24 am

    In the last parliament the only MP to be proven in court to be corrupt was Philip Field and he was never expelled from the Labour Party for this. Labour never even apologised for his abuse.

    • Kaplan 5.1
      17 November 2010 at 9:37 am

      Fisiani, here is a direct question for you. What would you like John Key to do about Pansy?

      • Tigger 5.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 9:49 am

        Clearly expel Wong from National and apologise for her abuse.

        Not sure why the party should apologise for the actions of one person though…but if Fisi wants it then National better jump.

        • Craig Glen Eden 5.1.1.1
          17 November 2010 at 10:46 am

          Fisiani we all know you don’t like the facts to get in the way of National Party spin, however just to remind you Field was not re-elected by Labour and he left the Party so they didn’t have to expel him.

          Wong however according to some in the media put out a press release saying she had resigned from Parliament, then subsequently she had only resigned from cabinet. While I am only speculating it may will be that Key doesn’t want a By-election in Botany and so has asked Wong not to resign until it is within six months of a general election in which case he could avoid a potentially embarrassing defeat.

    • Blighty 5.2
      17 November 2010 at 10:09 am

      Field was expelled from the Labour Party. He spent most of last terms as an independent.

      Do you think the same standard, or a higher standard, should be applied from your hero, John Key?

    • bbfloyd 5.3
      17 November 2010 at 10:17 am

      fisi… just a small point…knowingly making claims that can be easily countered by perusing public records, and indeed having read those same records yourself, is LYING!

      what part of your reptilian brain doesn’t register that your obnoxious attempts at political discourse are, at best, disgraceful and dishonest… if you are what national can rely on for support, then we are in serious trouble indeed!

    • Bunji 5.4
      17 November 2010 at 11:03 am

      The old NACT tactic of ‘if I repeat a lie often enough it will become true’.

      Philip Field was expelled from the Labour Party caucus on 14 February 2007. The wider Party moved to expel him as well the next day, but Field resigned before they could have a formal hearing to expel him. Much like Zimbabwe left the Commonwealth – ‘you can’t fire me, I quit!’

      captcha: nonsense.

      • Ari 5.4.1
        17 November 2010 at 2:01 pm

        Which is annoying, because if he hadn’t quit the party, they could have pressured him to resign from parliament.

    • David Lester 5.5
      17 November 2010 at 5:29 pm

      Fisiani – Field was expelled from the Labour caucus for his conduct and was facing expulsion from the party itself when he quit the party. National should apply the same high standards to Pansy Wong.

  6. dave 6
    17 November 2010 at 9:41 am

    Kaplan here’s a direct question for you,. What would you have liked Labour to do about Taito Philip Field?

    • Kaplan 6.1
      17 November 2010 at 9:49 am

      Dave, this post is very clearly about Pansy Wong and the fact Key has said these new revelations mean should would be sacked as a minister if she had not resigned. Now it is up to Pansy to resign from Parliament but National could expel her from caucus. The question posed is whether JK has the balls to do that.
      In reply Fisiani has predictably bought up the ‘but they did it’ argument so I am asking if what ‘they’ did was not palatable what would you like this lot to do. That is what is pertinent.
      If you want to contribute some substance then please, tell us what YOU think JK should do, given you clearly think he is better than your impression of that ‘last lot’. That’s the issue at hand.
      I’ll not hold my breath.

      • Blighty 6.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 10:11 am

        well put old boy.

        It’s very strange to see these righties damning the standards of the last government (as they see them) and then claiming that those same standards justify the behaviour of this government.

        • M 6.1.1.1
          17 November 2010 at 10:50 am

          What’s that spume around all the righties?

          Oh, just their autopilot reaction at being caught out again. They’ll need some serious wet weather gear to afford some protection before the next election or they’ll end up looking their usual wet selves.

      • ianmac 6.1.2
        17 November 2010 at 10:41 am

        In Field’s case it was not clear cut immediately that he was guilty. It took a long court case to establish the facts.
        It is right now pretty clear that Pansy Wong made mistakes though it might take police action to establish the extent of her problems. There is probably enough now or will be by the end of November for the Parliamentary action.

        • Jim Nald 6.1.2.1
          17 November 2010 at 11:12 am

          There is at least one thing I would like to see Jonkey do –
          that is to announce whether he is relaxed and comfortable about Pansy, with his and the National Party’s support, continuing to draw on taxpayer’s money while going on leave in order to disappear from the House .

  7. mickysavage 7
    17 November 2010 at 11:22 am

    Gee wizz supporters of the party which was meant to bring us better standards are trying to defend Key’s failure to do anything about Wong because Labour expelled Field but apparently for a different reason.

    If Key does not act to expel Wong his teflon coating will be well and truely under serious threat.

  8. Russell 8
    17 November 2010 at 11:36 am

    all this attention on Pansy Wong !!! Why doesn’t Labour focus on some REAL issues

    • pollywog 8.1
      17 November 2010 at 11:42 am

      corrupt politicians ripping off the system for their own benefit while the country’s in a funk is about as REAL as it gets.

    • Carol 8.2
      17 November 2010 at 11:54 am

      Why doesn’t Labour focus on some REAL issues

      Do you mean Labour, or The Standard?

      And for the Standard, do you mean topics that can be seen on the blog from recent days, such as :
      Whanau ora, neoliberalism, Maori seats, police chases, peak oil, criminal procedures bill, TransPacific Trade & free trade issues?

      And for Labour:
      http://www.labour.org.nz/news

      Employment relations, broadband, cost of living, putting children first?

      • Lanthanide 8.2.1
        17 November 2010 at 11:58 am

        Clearly he means why isn’t the media focussing on something that makes National look good, instead of National look bad.

      • Blighty 8.2.2
        17 November 2010 at 12:05 pm

        No, what Russell means is:

        ‘whaaa, please stop exposing how corrupt this government is and what a weak leader key is, whaaa’

    • freedom 8.3
      17 November 2010 at 11:59 am

      so private businesses being run from MP offices is not serious enough for you?

    • Bright Red 8.4
      17 November 2010 at 12:11 pm

      Meanwhile, at the home of real issues, Kiwiblog, in the past 24 hours:

      a post cutting and pasting a Herald article on that big Facebook party in North Shore
      a cut and paste job on a reuters article about threats to the life of Tanzania’s first albino MP
      a post on MP’s perks that fails to mention Wong
      general debate
      a post on Prince William’s engagement to Kate Middleton
      an announcement of new ipredict stocks
      a cut and paste job from the Dom on Terry Serepisos

      Gee, I wish The Standard was covering all these REAL issues.

    • Ari 8.5
      17 November 2010 at 2:04 pm

      Pansy Wong not resigning from parliament IS a real issue, genius.

    • David Lester 8.6
      17 November 2010 at 5:32 pm

      Why doesn’t Labour focus on some real issues? One good way of seeing what issues a party focusses on is to see what their leader is asking questions about in the House – and what do we see, cost of living, food prices, hikes in GP costs.
      These seem like real issues.

      • Colonial Viper 8.6.1
        17 November 2010 at 6:19 pm

        Pansy Wong abusing MP and Ministerial privileges while being shielded by the Prime Minister isn’t a ‘real issue’?

  9. Tanz 9
    17 November 2010 at 12:52 pm

    This is a Labour blog, is it not? Now tha’t it’s all gone wrong for Key and Wong, the left is chortling. Trouble is, Key is still in power and is super-coated by super Teflon, he is what the average Kiwi loves and dreams of, and will re elect again and again, because there is not a lot of true interest in politics by every-day New Zealanders. Survival is more important, and Chardonnay with Cheese, times.

    [lprent: You need to read the about. It is a blog of the broad labour movement. ]

    • r0b 9.1
      17 November 2010 at 1:05 pm

      This is a Labour blog, is it not?

      This is a blog of the Labour movement – see the about. It is not a blog of the Labour Party (for that you want Red Alert). The writers here support a range of leftie parties.

      • Tanz 9.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 1:14 pm

        Thanks. Do you support any Rightie parties, such as Act? I am weary of Red Alert, the moderators are rather frightening and rude, except for the personable Phil Twyford. But at least Red Alert is an interesting, honest blog, and does allow comments (unlike the National party blog, whatever its name is).

  10. Jim Nald 10
    17 November 2010 at 1:29 pm

    Act-shually (and this might surprise some readers here) I voted National in 2008.
    And I was an ardent, indeed audacious, supporter of Roger Douglas’ books in the 1980s but the partly baked ideas and implementation showed to be frightening and rather, erm, rude to the interests of the many.

    • Colonial Viper 10.1
      17 November 2010 at 1:42 pm

      Well we all get older and hopefully wiser huh 🙄

      • Jim Nald 10.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 1:55 pm

        I’m a bit slow but, thanks to key’s mantra about transparency, he has been helping me SEE THROUGH their modus operandi. The nacts keep taking us up the same path: 80s re Rogernomics, 90s re Ruthanasia and Shipley’s swanky wanky administration, and now their stealthy double standards, double face, double-dipping and double-speak methods.

        They haven’t changed; I am changing.

  11. randal 11
    17 November 2010 at 1:35 pm

    anyone who invests money in hoverceraft has to be a bit strange anyway.
    costly inefficient and noisy.
    put on a big show and back in the shed.
    you dont even have to deflect them.

  12. freedom 12
    17 November 2010 at 2:12 pm

    “Would it be easier to just give MPs a full wage and let them pay for their own travel costs?”

    I saw this on a newstalkzb comment tag and it struck me, on two fronts, as a particularly bizarre perspective of a MP’s income .

    Firstly, they do get paid quite a lot of money and to suggest there is something lacking in their renumeration, only highlights how surreal things have gotten. Most of the travel is unquestioned and let’s face it, not all of the domestic travel is strictly on MP business, especially that of the spouses. It is the international travel that people really wanted a clamp down on.

    Secondly, the subject of MPs abusing travel perks is a question of purpose not payment. The distinction between Official and Private business is quite simple, if it is unclear then we must question the suitability of the individual for the position of MP

  13. grumpy 13
    17 November 2010 at 2:12 pm

    Trouble is, with all parties struggling for the ethnic vote and putting up anyone who even vaguely looks electable, they finish up with the cultural baggage (in the form of corruption) that goes with them. Labour got tarnished in the Auckland local body elections and now National.

    At least we are not hearing the “cultural differences” excuse.

    • Colonial Viper 13.1
      17 November 2010 at 2:23 pm

      Not hearing about the cultural baggage excuse, except for you mentioning it that is?

      Ah, I do long for the clean green and non corrupt western civilisation who gave us Enron and the US Congress.

      Seriously where are the parallels here? An unelected no-body non-office holder with tenuous and recent links to the Labour Party gets found out in AKL local body elections vs an elected multi term MP and National Minister of the Crown whom appears to have exercised very bad judgement vis a vis tax payers resources over a long period of time with the PM still shielding her. Hmmm.

  14. Treetop 14
    17 November 2010 at 2:23 pm

    The PM is handling Wong rather differently to Worth’s resignation. PM could have done a Worth on this one and accepted Wongs resignation as both a minister and an MP. But PM cannot afford to be seen as not allowing due process to occur, this was inevitable with Field and needs to occur with Wong.

    • Colonial Viper 14.1
      17 November 2010 at 2:26 pm

      The PM believes in due process for Wong but not for Richard Worth?

      I don’t think so – the most likely explanation is that Key is doing what is politically expedient. Either that or he loves practicing his double standards.

      • Treetop 14.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 2:38 pm

        Worth too is entitled to due process. I do not disagree with the politically expedient either. A lot more ground needs to be covered in revamping parliamentary spending and were Wong’s full resignation accepted by the PM there would be no shutting up the Wong resignation issue due to it involving inappropriate parliamentary spending.

      • Pascal's bookie 14.1.2
        17 November 2010 at 3:00 pm

        Look JK is relaxed mate. He was a wall st banker at Merrily Fucking Lynch for chrissake (warning You tube link soundtrack quite possibly not safe for work). The PM is comfortable as with 99.9 of whatever petty-assed provincial lame dick excuse for vice or pissant financial scandal this country can produce.

        Richard Worth however? Well it clearly aint pretty my droogles. Clearly not. I fear, in fact, to speculate. And the bookie ain’t no vestal nuthin. He’s had his salad days and seen all sorts of dressings that go with I can tell you that much. As long as it’s consensual, you go for it has been my rule, and for me it was mostly about the drugs to be honest. I am just saying I’m no shrinking violet afeared of facing what people get up to.

        But a thing that a wall st merril lyncher finds too literally unspeakable?

        That has got to be sick sick shit. It’s just gotta be.

        I don’t want to know what Worth got up to

      • grumpy 14.1.3
        17 November 2010 at 3:03 pm

        Somehow I don’t think Wong will be found out to have demanded a blow job for a government position.

  15. KJT 15
    17 November 2010 at 2:56 pm

    This is a sideshow from the corruption that is really going on. The sellout of New Zealand to bankers, speculators, cronies and financiers which is being extended by their mate JK after it was started by Labour in 1984.

    Why is Douglas not in jail along with all the insider traders who made a killing in the fire sale.

    It was comical to see the dismay when their careful crafting of the attempt to burgle Auckland of public assets was upset when Auckland voted for Len Brown.

    Only trouble is Key will get his revenge by starving Auckland of funding until they toe the line.

  16. Jeremy Harris 16
    17 November 2010 at 3:27 pm

    There’s no way she can stay, they might as well take their medicine…

  17. Irascible 17
    17 November 2010 at 4:24 pm

    The revelations are stacking up against Pansy every day and the problem for Key is that as his permanent residence is in Hawaii rather than Helensville he is persistently out of touch with reality and the need to be more than “perfectly relaxed” about the behaviour of his “department managers” (Cabinet Ministers) and the rest of the company he uses to support his lifestyle.
    His excuse that he cannot act on the Wong case, that she is no longer a “Departmental Manager” so the issue is to be dealt with by a minion somewhat further down the line is what one can expect from someone who treats NZ as a small business rather than a nation state, treats Parliament as though it was a subsiduary that can be hocked off to a bigger conglomerate rather than a serious forum that legislates for the good of the state and typical of those who are creations of the glossed up CV and shonkey credentials.
    The Wong case is an illustration of all that is wrong with the Key NACT government.

  18. felix 18
    17 November 2010 at 4:51 pm

    Key was on RNZ the other morning talking about this. Audio (Key comes on about half way through I think).

    This is the sound of a man out of his depth with a poor grasp of the issues fumbling, mumbling and fudging his “performance”.

    His babysitters must’ve been pretty upset with him after that.

    • Lanthanide 18.1
      17 November 2010 at 4:58 pm

      He didn’t front this morning to talk about the housing expenses rort. Neither did English or whoever their chief whip is – so Pete Hodgson did.

    • Jim Nald 18.2
      17 November 2010 at 6:01 pm

      John Key – O. M . G.
      I don’t know whether to weep or medicate myself.
      Still collecting myself to try to post a comment.

      I’ll have to step away from the computer to recover my composure.

  19. Herodotus 19
    17 November 2010 at 5:13 pm

    Fotr my sake, how late can Pansy remain as an MP and resign and there be no by-election? and if Botany has no MP( Basing on PW resigning) who represents the interest of this electorate. Or do we have 40k voters not represtened in parliament.
    Just some Q of interest to me 😉

    • gobsmacked 19.1
      17 November 2010 at 5:32 pm

      By law, if Wong resigns from Parliament, there has to be a by-election. Or the PM has to commit to a general election.

      Key wanted Worth out, because he was a list MP. i.e. no by-election needed.

      At that time, I asked Key’s cheerleaders on here, if the PM would have shown the same “leadership’ (as they called it) if Worth had been an electorate MP. I didn’t get an answer.

      We’re getting an answer now. It’s revealing.

      • Herodotus 19.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 5:44 pm

        List MP’s are expendable, that is why when Lab refreashed themselves only the list MP’s retired early (or were gifted jobs), and why some think that Field was granted greater room. The power of having a strong electorate support you. Mana and Mt Albert are safe seats and have no bearing on any change that the public has towards Nat, Botany is very different and personnally it would be great if Pansy decided to board the hovercraft to distance shores, even if she would still be elidgible for legit use of travel until the day she ceases to be.

  20. gobsmacked 20
    17 November 2010 at 6:19 pm

    On the choice between a by-election versus general election, the relevant law is here:

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0087/latest/DLM309461.html

    Key (sic) number: 75%

    That’s why Key is stalling on Pansy Wong fronting up. He doesn’t want to have to ask Labour for “permission” to call the election, and he doesn’t want to cut six months off National’s term.

    Eventually the press gallery will work this all out! They’re a bit slow on the uptake, bless ’em.

    • felix 20.1
      17 November 2010 at 7:09 pm

      The press gallery don’t want to cause a scene so close to the end of the year. They don’t want Key to cancel the xmas piss-up or anything now, do they?

    • Herodotus 20.2
      17 November 2010 at 7:30 pm

      So all that has to occur is for the Christmas recess then Parliament will not resume until mid Feb(?) + 6 months we enter the tradional Sept-Nov time span + there will not be an election during the RWC. Imagine party political broadcasts at the same time as the A.Bs playing a 1/4 final scenario or an election on the semis or final !!!

  21. Shazzadude 21
    17 November 2010 at 6:32 pm

    Hmmm, there’s another question, what chances would an Asian party have of getting 5%?

  22. The Voice of Reason 22
    17 November 2010 at 7:17 pm

    About the same as a Polynesian party, I’d say. Too many different identities (cultural, ethnic and political) to get the unity needed to get to 5% with the current population. An electorate seat is possible, I guess. Just need the candidate and the issue.

    • ianmac 22.1
      17 November 2010 at 10:59 pm

      And the word Asian covers a very wide range of ethnicity. Chinese is only one of them.

      • Colonial Viper 22.1.1
        17 November 2010 at 11:20 pm

        And worse than that, ‘Asians’ frequently have deep seated cultural biases, historical grudges and suspicions of each other. Chinese vs Japanese, Pakistani vs Indian,…

  23. Drakula 23
    17 November 2010 at 10:52 pm

    I tell you that they (NAT/ACT) have all got their snouts in the trough.

Links to post