Nats laundering donations (as ever)

28 comments on “Nats laundering donations (as ever) ”

• Comments are now closed

1. dv 1

   28 February 2015 at 10:20 am

   ALL donations over $100 to be published on a public web database within a month.
   NO trust donations allowed.
2. ianmac 2

   28 February 2015 at 11:15 am

   And I thought that that National Party Slush Trust Fund had been banned. Tricky stuff.
   • tc 2.1

     28 February 2015 at 11:26 am

     No they altered EFA to be able to get away with this and keep the backers largely annonymous.
3. tc 3

   28 February 2015 at 11:19 am

   Remember the EFA was evil and democracy was under attack till nact got in tweaked it to suit themselves so this practice would not get caught by the act.

   The herald is nothing more than an extension of the nact pr spin cycle, there is nothing here that surprises me at all even Browncoals ‘good will of the parties’ line which hed need to rehearse so as not to piss himself laughing at the delivery of it.

   Talk about rubbing nz’s noses in the deceptive behaviour they have elevated to a well honed delivery mechanism.
4. ianmac 4

   28 February 2015 at 11:41 am

   See also :”You can’t have it both ways
   by Andrew Geddis
   The National Party’s treatment of Donghua Liu’s donation is strikingly at odds with with how it treated all the other donations it received. That’s not only wrong, but it may even be illegal….”
   Andrew explains the dubious legality of this and suggests, ” I wonder if the Electoral Commission might not like to send a “please explain” letter to clarify exactly what went on … and consider whether perhaps someone has done this or this.” (Laws arround donations.)
5. Sans Cle 5

   28 February 2015 at 11:43 am

   Then to soften the blow for the National party, the Herald publishes a story about why businesses donate to political parties, (with a focus on Talleys), and puts a picture of Damien O’Connor to accompany the article……despite the majority of Talley donation going to National. I am really sickened that so much media is political propaganda.
   http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11409395
6. Kriss X 6

   28 February 2015 at 11:56 am

   80% of National Party donations are were channelled through party headquarters in a loophole.

   However, to give balance, we need to know how this compares with other parties.
   • Naturesong 6.1

     28 February 2015 at 12:03 pm

     Fill your boots: Herald Electoral Returns Project
     • ghostwhowalksnz 6.1.1

       28 February 2015 at 1:49 pm

       The reality is most MPs self fund their campaigns-
       I think the Greens have a very Mormon tithing arrangement thats compulsory but labours might be more informal.

       Nationals trick hides this , as being a very capitalist party, its a do it your self .

       It baffles me and others that Dongha Liu would give so much money to a minor electorate MP who has no significance, and is not his electorate MP ( he lives in Epsom)

       My guess is that he gave the money for Maurice Williamson, who was an important minister ( for Building) and was the go to guy for Liu.

       I think Williamson refused to play ball and wouldnt be the fall guy so a round about way was to use Ross, who surprise surprise is now a junior whip.
       • KJT 6.1.1.1

         28 February 2015 at 10:03 pm

         It is not the political funding that is at the root of the problem.

         It is the money and positions given to politicians by grateful corporate beneficiaries of their policies, after Parliament.
7. Peter Pan 7

   28 February 2015 at 11:59 am

   “Time to get all private money out of politics and state fund political parties.”

   While I completely agree that there should be 100% transparency within politics whether local, national or even a leadership campaign I could never agree with that the state should fund political parties.

   If a party’s idea’s/policies/performance isn’t enough to inspire its “believers” to fund it then those who don’t believe it shouldn’t have to be taxed to support it. Imagine the most objectionable political party that you can and now imagine being taxed to support it.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1

     28 February 2015 at 1:34 pm

     Better get your civil disobedience kit out then. Either that or learn something about the subject before commenting.

     The state already funds political parties.
     • ghostwhowalksnz 7.1.1

       28 February 2015 at 1:41 pm

       I understand its not funded for direct campaigning. Generally regarded as ‘asking for votes’

       What you fail to mention is the current process is for policy announcements, general publicity, pledge cards,polling, staff members etc.

       Its an absurd situation, they give money for politics but not campaigning
   • KJT 7.2

     28 February 2015 at 10:06 pm

     Then only parties of puppets of the extremely wealthy end up getting in.

     Sound familiar.
     • Draco T Bastard 7.2.1

       28 February 2015 at 10:24 pm

       +1
8. saarbo 8

   28 February 2015 at 1:18 pm

   As the influence of large corporations increases, the need for state funding of political campaigns becomes more important. It also come as no surprise of the Labour MP’s that were funded by the likes of the Vela’s and Bob Jones.
   • KJT 8.1

     28 February 2015 at 10:07 pm

     No mystery that both major parties work for their funders.
9. Michael 9

   28 February 2015 at 4:27 pm

   Interesting to see that Michael Woodhouse received 3 donations, of $5,000 each from his Party’s slush funds. I wonder whether those donations stipulated payment to Woodhouse after laundering took place? I wonder, too whether Crest Cleaning Services or interests associated with the McLauchlan family donated to the Nats?
10. Paul Campbell 10

    28 February 2015 at 6:47 pm

    Aren’t many of these ‘donations’ from ‘Cabinet Clubs’? money paid by the rich for preferential access to our cabinet ministers, and as we’ve discovered, people like mr Liu to Key himself.
11. HumPrac 11

    28 February 2015 at 7:50 pm

    Quote by Gerry Brownlee – “We have always relied on the good will of parties to not abuse the system”
    That is either naive or just an excuse.
    It could translate as “Parties have always abused the system”.
12. RedBaronCV 12

    1 March 2015 at 11:42 am

    I too read the story about the companies making donations – ( 5).

    Now how many of these donations are being deducted from income before tax is paid (so that us taxpayers are stumping up) and does the IRD intend to investigate.

    Could any of these donations be construed as bribes and should some other action be taken in those cases.
13. irascible 13

    1 March 2015 at 1:18 pm

    NATIONAL PARTY DIRTY TRICKERY LETS DOWN BOTANY VOTERS

    The Botany electorate has been let down by the National Party ever since the electorate was formed.

    Botany voters are fed up with MPs who repeatedly show both poor political judgement and questionable ethical behaviour.

    The short lived career of Pansy Wong ,who was forced to resign over allegations of the misuse of taxpayer-funded travel while furthering her family’s business interests in China, and the current MP, Jami-Lee Ross, who has featured prominently in Hager’s book : Dirty Politics and is deeply embroiled in the ongoing Cabinet Club- Cash for Access scandals swirling around the discredited Chinese businessman, Donghua Liu does not present a positive image for the National Party in Botany.

    Jami-Lee Ross’ unashamed willingness to act as the Botany Bagman for Donghua Liu and the conduit for John Key to solicit largesse for his local election campaign and the National Party coffers amply demonstrate to the Botany electors that he lacks sound political judgement and ethical behaviour. In other political environments soliciting cash for access to the Prime Minister from individuals like Donghua Liu would result in immediate calls for disciplinary action by Parliament and the member’s party organisation. It would even result in a resignation.

    In keeping with the calls by The NZ Herald opinionista, John Armstrong, and those made by John Key during the election campaign, for David Cunliffe to resign over an eleven year old letter of enquiry into Mr Liu’s application for residency we believe that as Mr Ross’ involvement with Donghua Liu’s of greater significance involving both providing access for John Key to Donghua Liu and an active solicitation of money that he should follow the example of his predecessor, Pansy Wong, and offer his resignation both as a National Party whip and as an MP.

    Links provided to:
    TV3 Brook Sabin report: 23.February .2015
    NZ Herald: News item: 14 December 2010
    NZ Herald: John Armstrong column. 14 June 2014.
    MickySavage. The Standard. 22.February. 2015
    • Sacha 13.1

      1 March 2015 at 11:00 pm

      “Botany voters are fed up with MPs who repeatedly show both poor political judgement and questionable ethical behaviour”

      If that was true they would have voted differently, for many elections. Whatever they are looking for, it sure isn’t honesty, integrity, etc..
14. mary-a 14

    1 March 2015 at 6:31 pm

    ALL donations to ALL political parties must by law be transparent, open to scrutiny and published, including donors’ details.

    At the moment, too much dirty money is being laundered, allowed through ‘legal’ loopholes.
15. English Breakfast 15

    1 March 2015 at 9:42 pm

    Can you name the precise law, and relevant section, that National have broken here? It seems to me they’ve just found a smart way to apply donations. There’ no Electoral Finance Act scandal here as far as I can see.
    • McFlock 15.1

      1 March 2015 at 9:53 pm

      You obviously didn’t read the post. Pity. You might have learnt something.
    • te reo putake 15.2

      1 March 2015 at 9:55 pm

      The post doesn’t say they’re breaking the law. But they are making John Key’s 2008 statement about having “higher standards” look like the complete tosh it was.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 15.3

      1 March 2015 at 10:31 pm

      That’s settled then. No, wait…

      It turns out uncritical fawning counts for less than nothing.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS