Key’s growing Dotcom problem

Written By: - Date published: 9:00 am, October 10th, 2012 - 29 comments
Categories: john banks, john key, Minister for Photo-ops - Tags: , ,

People don’t just vote for politicians because they like their policies. Just as important are trust and perceived competence. Key’s policies were never popular. He won on the other two – particularly trust. That’s why the Dotcom saga is so ruining for him. As more details of what Key knew or should have known come out day by day, perceptions of Key’s competence and trust in him plummet.

Take the latest. Key says he never heard Dotcom’s name until the day before the raid in January. This despite the fact that his spies (whom he is meant to “control” under law) were illegally spying on the richest person living in Key’s electorate, one of the few people who had come into the country on Key’s pet millionaire emigrants programme, who just so happens to be a large and larger than life flamboyant German who had dealt with several of Key’s ministers and his electorate office twice.

Now, we learn that Simon Power sent a message to Key in July last year when he declined Dotcom’s OIO request to buy the mansion in Key’s electorate. Key says he never saw the message and it wasn’t shown to him because it was “routine”.

Hang about. This is where the competence/trust questions come in. Are we seriously to believe that when this came to Key’s office, given that Dotcom was the richest person living in Key’s electorate, one of the few people who had come into the country on Key’s pet millionaire emigrants programme, and just so happens to be a large and larger than life flamboyant German who had dealt with several of Key’s ministers and his electorate office twice, no-one thought it was good political management to tell Key?

Really?

Not a two sentence note in Key’s papers to read on the way to the next photo-op: FYI, Power has denied Dotcom permission to buy the Chrisco Mansion. Dotcom’s that rich German internet guy who lives in Coatesville that Hollywood hates – Banksie knows him.

That’s the kind of general info the PM needs, so that he’s not caught out if a journo asks, or the issue suddenly blows up.

Either Key’s lying or he is running a spectacularly incompetent office. Neither option is good for him.

And what’s with the fact that this new information only just came out now? Why is there this steady drip, drip of facts, and a growing accumulation of inquiries, which will all produce their own new facts in time? Good political management, especially once this issue got big, would have been to release everything in one hit and kick for touch with a ‘full inquiry’ undertaken by a safe pair of hands.

Why haven’t Key and their staff managed that? Did they fail to understand how big and bad this issue would get? Did they fail to see it happening once it started? Do they still not see it? Or are they hoping that they will get away with keeping secret as much as they can?

Again, it goes to trust and competence. People don’t like seeing these stories drip out, it tells them that Key hasn’t been up front or isn’t on top of what’s going on.

29 comments on “Key’s growing Dotcom problem ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Kotahi Tāne Huna 1
    10 October 2012 at 9:24 am

    Not to mention Dotcom himself, who seems quite happy to drip feed the latest instalment as it suits him. The National Party should probably offer him a media consultancy role 😉

  2. Tiger Mountain 2
    10 October 2012 at 9:31 am

    Finally, a real world trickle down effect! Keep investigating everyone, did Dottie donate to the Nats as well? Who were the facilitators? it seems extraordinary that he would have first gravitated to minor player ACT while living in the Prime Minister of New Zealands electorate.

    • felix 2.1
      10 October 2012 at 8:07 pm

      Ah but he didn’t gravitate to ACT, he gravitated to the Mayoral candidate who was running on the “looking after rich guys” ticket for city Dotcom lives in, the biggest city in NZ.

      That’s not gravitating to a “minor player”, that’s going straight to the top, locally speaking. And something tells me Kim isn’t the kind of guy to stop there…

  3. mickysavage 3
    10 October 2012 at 9:32 am

    The Dotcom media strategy is quite brilliant.

    Time and time again he has made Key’s handling of the issue look both inept and disingenuous at the same time.

    We used to deride Key for the brilliance of the Crosby Textor reframing of reality for National’s benefit.  It looks like the Keystone Cops now have National’s media contract.

  4. vto 4
    10 October 2012 at 9:37 am

    .
    it is all over for keydotcom

  5. marsman 5
    10 October 2012 at 9:40 am

    Hands rubbing with glee all over the land and waiting for the next installment.

  6. Blue 6
    10 October 2012 at 9:49 am

    I’ve been thinking that even if Key’s staff were instructed to keep anything about Dotcom away from him to ensure he could deny everything at a later date, he still surely must have heard about Dotcom before he claims he did.

    With all the sucking up he does to the Americans, I’m sure someone had a word with him about Dotcom.

    It’s actually quite funny to picture Key being asked by Obama or some Hollywood fat cats about the flamboyant German internet pirate living in his electorate and Key having to say he’d never heard of him.

  7. shorts 7
    10 October 2012 at 9:53 am

    I’m not sure – the average voter has tuned out… they don’t care and are “over it”

    those involved and interested in politics and current affairs (myself included) are fascinated and think this the best respite from shortland street since forever…

    but this is NZ – will Key bow out, hells no… he’ll mimic Banks and just wait it out…

    hopefully enough people have got wind of this very transparent man and govt by then so we don’t have to endure any more time of their policies and mean spiritedness – his popularity just shows how blind and uninvolved the public are in politics and NZ life outside of sports

  8. ianmac 8
    10 October 2012 at 10:00 am

    Winston’s last word apart from “the stink of a Hobbit’s armpit in summer” was that there is more to come. Uneasy lies the crown John?

    • Tiger Mountain 8.1
      10 October 2012 at 10:22 am

      An excellent line from Winston re the armpit, it encompasses a lot in one sentence. Lord Jackson, Cur Richard Taylor and ShonKey have a lot to answer for.

  9. jaymam 9
    10 October 2012 at 11:18 am

    Here’s a pic of one of Dotcom’s inconspicuous cars:
    http://i42.tinypic.com/2cqh9nb.jpg
    Easy to miss that, in JK’s rich neighbourhood.

    • Anne 9.1
      10 October 2012 at 7:41 pm

      OMG I saw that car on it’s way to Devonport some months back. I wondered how the owner got away with the number-plate?

    • Colonial Viper 9.2
      10 October 2012 at 7:57 pm

      Well that’s assuming that JK spends much time in his own electorate.

  10. Penny Bright 10
    10 October 2012 at 11:19 am

    It’s not just the Kim Dotcom debacle that raises HUGE issues of ‘trust’ as far as NZ Prime Minister John Key is concerned?

    How’s this for an arguably corrupt ‘conflict of interest’?

    ____________________________________________________________________________

    Will NZ Prime Minister John Key personally profit from Bathurst Resources Ltd pressuring the Government to ‘make mining easier’?

    Whose interests is NZ NZ Prime Minister John Key looking after?

    His own, his corporate and bank$ter mates, or ordinary NZ ‘Mums and Dads’?

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/117697/pressure-put-on-government-to-make-mining-easier

    “Pressure put on Government to make mining easier

    Papers obtained by Radio New Zealand reveal the pressure being put on the Government to make it easier for mining companies to operate in this country.

    Mining companies pushed for a relaxation of rules governing their industry during a review of the Crown Minerals Act.

    The Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill, which will simplify and speed up the approval process for mining applications, was introduced to Parliament at the end of September.

    In a briefing paper to Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce, dated 20 July, officials told the minister that Australian mining company Bathurst did not like the resource consenting process.

    The officials observed that in an earlier meeting with Energy Minister Phil Heatley, Bathurst representatives had made clear their objections to the consent process.

    They argue it takes four to seven years to get a resource consent for a mine in New Zealand and that is a big disincentive to investing in new mines here.

    The officials themselves observed the process is ambiguous, time-consuming and open to numerous opportunities to appeal, sometimes on issues which have already been settled.

    Radio New Zealand’s political editor says this also fits with the view of the Government, which wants to cut through the planning process because it believes more mining is one way of boosting economic growth.

    But Forest and Bird spokesperson Kevin Hackwell says officials have got it wrong and the process does not take as long as Bathurst representatives allege.

    In the case of Bathurst’s proposal to mine on conservation land on the Denniston plateau, Mr Hackwell says once a Environment Court hearing has been held it will have taken two to two-and-a-half years for a decision to have been made on that mine.

    The mining industry insists it does not want lower standards for its mines, just more straightforward rules when it applies for the right to develop them.

    Chris Baker of mining and resources lobby group Straterra says industry has been lobbying to get a more efficient permitting process, so it can attract more investment.

    “We think it’s very important that we maintain health and safety and environmental impact standards, and all the companies I know agree with that very strongly.”
    RMA changes signalled
    Meanwhile, much of the Government’s intention to make it easier to mine in this country is reflected in the Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill.

    The Bill is aimed at promoting more mining of Crown owned minerals and also streamlining and simplifying future mining applications

    But mining proposals will still be covered by the Resource Management Act and the Government has signalled it intends making further changes to that legislation.

    Other companies have also raised concerns about the Resource Management Act, including Todd Energy which says it wants to see greater consistency in the approach taken by local authorities under the Act.

    It also appears large companies involved in both onshore and offshore deep sea oil exploration have a view on the planning process.

    But briefing notes prepared for a meeting Mr Heatley had with Canadian oil and gas company TAG and Houston-based Apache Corporation have been blanked out, apart from some very brief notes on the companies themselves.

    Copyright © 2012, Radio New Zealand ”

    ________________________________________________

    Is this a major ‘conflict of interest’ for NZ Prime Minister John Key – with the Bank of America being a significant shareholder in Bathurst Resources Ltd, and John Key being a shareholder in the Bank of America?

    http://www.bathurstresources.com/files/files/1150_20120621_Change_in_substantial_holding.pdf

    http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/DFA6C21E-69A8-433F-8BA9-956431281F7F/222223/register2012_3.pdf (Pg 33)

    Rt Hon John KEY (National, Helensville)

    Bank of America – banking

    _____________________________________________________

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption campaigner’

    http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com

    • felix 10.1
      10 October 2012 at 8:24 pm

      Hi Penny,

      Is Bathurst the same mining company that Key personally owns shares in too? The ones he “forgot” about a couple of years ago saying he’d already sold most of them (to his blind trust probably)?

      • felix 10.1.1
        11 October 2012 at 6:28 am

        No sorry, I was thinking of Jackson Mining, the uranium mining co that he lied to NZ about.

        Still a few unanswered questions there too,but it’s only recently that the media have started doing follow-up questions. Same pattern though: lie until you’re called on it, then change the story to another lie with slightly more info until you’re called on that too, rinse and repeat.

  11. Penny Bright 11
    10 October 2012 at 11:37 am

    MAJOR ‘trust’ issues for shonky John Key, with the Pike River Mine, and related matters…………………..

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10839388

    Pike River families: PM ‘doesn’t want to listen’

    By Laura Mills of the Greymouth Star
    3:48 PM Tuesday Oct 9, 2012

    An angry Pike River Mine families’ spokesman Bernie Monk said he was gutted after Prime Minister John Key refused to help with a mine re-entry, less than 24 hours after the mine’s owners agreed to an attempt.
    ……………………….”

    23 June 2011 – BACKGROUND

    http://pundit.co.nz/content/the-pms-pike-river-problems-time-to-stop-digging
    ………………………………….

    MY COMMENT:

    “New Zealand Prime Minister John Key will today propose a Royal Commission into the causes of deadly explosions at the Pike River Coal Co. mine, a probe that may determine the future of underground mining in the country.

    “The future of Pike River and actually underground coal mining in New Zealand rests on this,” Key told Television New Zealand’s Q + A program yesterday. “We can’t put people into environments that are dangerous.”

    Really?

    How convenient………….?

    The NZ TVNZ Sunday Programme on 12 June 2011 exposed very clearly significant safety problems with Pike River Mine.

    tvnz.co.nz/sunday-news/disturbing-questions-pike-river-mine-part-1-15-04-video-4222074

    tvnz.co.nz/sunday-news/disturbing-questions-pike-river-mine-part-2-8-34-video-4222107

    Seems that ‘whistleblower’ (‘Dr Jacob Cohen’ ) was correct about the serious safety concerns at the Pike River Mine.

    What else …………….?

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/47745564/Murder-at-Pike-River-Mine-SECOND-EDITION-With-Postscript

    Check out Chapter 9, pg 38,

    “SECRET PLAN TO OPEN UP PARKS TO OPEN CAST MINING: BATHURST RESOURCES and L&M COAL”

    So – would John Key stand to personally profit from open cast coal-mining in New Zealand , given his shareholding in the Bank of America?

    Arguably – YES.

    __________________________________________________________________________

    How is it that the NZ Prime Minister is allowed to own shares in ANY company?

    Particularly in New Zealand ‘perceived’ to be the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ according to Transparency International’s 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index’?

    Penny Bright

    • Wayne 11.1
      10 October 2012 at 12:27 pm

      Penny, You are being ridiculous. First, one would hope Prime Ministers have at least some stake in the economy, beyond their office. Second, a shareholding in Bank of America is so remote from a Bathhurst coal mine in NZ that it could only have a trivial impact on the Bank of America share price (if any at all). You might as well argue that the price of shares in Fletcher Buiding has an impact on the price of real estate in Auckland.

      • bbfloyd 11.1.1
        10 October 2012 at 5:35 pm

        Young wayne….So it’s a good thing that the prime minister is profiting personally from enacting new laws, and altering the regulatory framework to make it easier for mining by overseas companies??

        I have to ask, do you ever listen to yourself speak, or read what you’ve written , just to make sure you aren’t advocating for corrupt practice as defined by statute, and convention for as long as democratic governance has been the standard form of government in the western world?

        The rest of your comment amount to weasel words, so I won’t bother to even insult you for them….

        But I will thank you for exposing a willingness within the ranks of national supporters to espouse corruption, and graft as “normal and healthy practice”… Well done. An honest tory at last…

        • Wayne 11.1.1.1
          10 October 2012 at 6:54 pm

          The ownership of shares by legislators is completely unexceptional. On your standard no legislator could own anything or earn anything.

          For example changing say the top tax rate clearly affects income earners on the top rate. No one seriously suggests that a political party can’t reduce the top tax rate. Of course it is always raised in parliamentary debate that the Prime Minister or Ministers are giving themselves a big tax cut, but that is a political point, and recognised as such.

          A more pertinent example would be an MP who is a dairy farmer; they can participate in Fonterra legislation, though they would have to note that. That is a far closer interest than the Bank of America interest in Bathhurst mining. I suspect that the directors of Bank of America would not even know that Bathurst mining is applying for a licence in NZ – it is that far removed.

          • Craig Glen Eden 11.1.1.1.1
            10 October 2012 at 8:04 pm

            ‘I suspect that the Bank of America would not know that Bathurst is applying for a license in NZ.” Well they dont need to Cos shonkey is taking care of it Wayne get it. The directors arnt the one with the conflict of interest Shonkey is.

            • Wayne 11.1.1.1.1.1
              11 October 2012 at 10:36 am

              Craig, the Govts interest in the Bathurst mine is to get the mine going for the growth and employment opportunities, not any other reason. As a percentage of the Bank of America share price, the impact would be so small it could not even be measured. That is why the allegation of personal profit is absurd.

  12. JonL 12
    10 October 2012 at 3:34 pm

    Ah…The Bank of America – one of the more corrupt (of a corrupt bunch), banks in the USA…

  13. Puddleglum 13
    10 October 2012 at 9:06 pm

    When did Key first hear about Megaupload?

    When did he first hear that Megaupload was being targeted by the Americans for copyright infringement?

    When did he first hear that Government intelligence agencies were involved in attempts to surveil and, ultimately, close down Megaupload?

    When did he first have a briefing about Megaupload from New Zealand intelligence agencies (or the Police)? 

    When did he first wonder why New Zealand intelligence agencies were involved in investigations about Megaupload? Did he ever wonder why? 

    Watch Campbell Live here. We’re “easy … and eager to please”

  14. Pete 14
    10 October 2012 at 9:49 pm

    Another great piece from Campbell Live tonight

    • mickysavage 14.1
      10 October 2012 at 11:02 pm

      Aye and Campbell or Dotcom is holding onto a bit of information which will be released in the fullness of time.  I can hardly wait …

    • Draco T Bastard 14.2
      10 October 2012 at 11:35 pm

      Damn, that’s seems to be a whole lot of lies and misinformation coming out of our institutions that are supposed to protect us from lies and misinformation.

  15. starlight 15
    11 October 2012 at 10:48 am

    John Campbell’s investigation of the dotcom issue last night was great.
    Now questions need to be asked of power,why he turned dotcom down?
    Whom ok’d it after that,did the pm have any involvement in accepting
    the residency application,did key accept dotcom’s residency on the wishes
    of the usa as it would be easier to arrest dotcom in nz and in doing so have
    the pm’s help and support for the operation,also the help of nz intelligence staff.
    There is absolutely no excuse for the pm to hide behind the self belief
    that he just didn’t know what was going on,his banking days were always
    a person who was ‘hands on’,a manger,a ceo and yet he thinks nz’ers
    are gullible enough to accept his ‘denial of any knowledge’ in the biggest
    hoist in nz, ever.