Standard Scoop: Key exposed again on secret shares and Tranzrail

Written By: Steve Pierson - Date published: 9:00 pm, October 26th, 2008 - 145 comments
Categories: corruption, election 2008, john key, national, slippery - Tags: corruption, Flectcher Challenge Forests, shares, tranzrail

When the Tranzrail shares came to light, Key was asked whether he had any other undisclosed shares entailing a conflict of interest. He said he didn’t. That was not true.

National Party Leader John Key failed to disclose his conflict of interest arising from his share holding in Fletcher Challenge Forests while using his privileges as an MP to obtain information and make public statements relevant to that company’s industry and its major contractual relationships with Tranzrail.

Research I conducted exclusively for The Standard shows Mr Key owned 40,000 F-class shares and 60,000 S-class shares in Fletcher Challenge Forests (which is now called Tenon) when he became an MP after the 2002 election. He owned these shares in his own name, not in a trust.

Standing Order 166 states that “a member must, before participating in the consideration of any item of business, declare any financial interest that the member has in that business.” In other words, conflicts of interest must be disclosed. It was violating this rule that got Key into trouble over his Tranzrail shares. And it is this rule that he has broken again by failing to reveal his FCF shares when talking issues that related to FCF’s share price.

Every time Key had a conflict of interest with Tranzrail he also had one with Fletcher Challenge Fletcher. FCF had a contract with Tranzrail for moving timber and pulp around its logging sites, milling operations, and to ports. Because of this major contractual arrangement, what happened to Tranzrail also affected FCF and vice versa (FCF needed that lease of Tranzrail stock to move its timber, the contract was a major revenue source for Tranzrail).

FCF was also part of the Rail Freight Action Group, which was campaigning for the Government to buy the rails off Tranzrail. FCF believed such a deal would improve rail services for its logging, boosting its profitability, and, thereby, its return to shareholders. Key asked a number of questions in his capacity on the potential for a government deal with Tranzrail.

The information Key sought by asking questions about the potential sale of Tranzrail could have been used by him to make a gain on both his Tranzrail and his FCF shares. His shares in FCF alone meant Key had an interest in Tranzrail’s ownership. This means each one of Key’s statements and the questions he asked as an MP relating to Tranzrail’s ownership also created a conflict of interest in relation his FCF shares, which he failed to disclose.

In March 2003, Key spoke against a Bill that removed the cap of $6,000 on redundancy payments, at the same time Fletcher Challenge Forests was laying off workers at two mills and planning further redundancies. Key failed to disclose his conflict of interest.

Key also spoke on the Te Uri o Hau Claims Settlement Bill. This Bill gave Te Uri o Hau ownership over Pouto forest and 45% of Mangawhai forest in Northland. The logging rights to these forests may have been held by FCF (FCF logged many forests in the region but I’m still trying to get the documentation to confirm they logged Pouto and Mangawhai). Here’s the exchange from Hansard, October 2, 2002:

Key: Jim Peters declared his ancestry and his conflict of interest, if there is any, in this settlement process. I am happy to declare I have none….
An Hon. Member: The member is absolutely positive?
JOHN KEY: I am absolutely positive of that.
Ron Mark: You don’t know what skeleton is in your wardrobe.

If FCF was logging those forests, Key had a very real conflict of interest. By denying it, he will have misled Parliament, a serious offence.

Key was a shareholder in FCF during each of these incidents. Each of these failures to disclose his conflict of interest is a breach of standing orders and could be grounds for Key to be brought before the Privileges Committee in the next term of Parliament.

Key did not sell his Fletcher Challenge Forests shares until June 2003, the same time as he sold his Tranzrail shares. He sold them in four parcels, on the 11th, 12, and 16th of June, for total of around $105,000 [share price]. As Key sold both his Tranzrail and FCF holdings at the same time, it may be that he sold his entire New Zealand share portfolio at this time This matches with his statement on Sunrise that he hasn’t owned any New Zealand shares since 2003. Why he chose to sell then and what other companies he held, we don’t know.

Key may have had other undisclosed conflicts of interest arising from shareholdings in other companies as well as Tranzrail and Fletcher Challenge Forests. My research was not, and could not be, a search of all New Zealand registered companies’ registers during the relevant period; only eight registers were examined. The fact that this search of just eight potentially interesting companies turned up another conflict of interest (and more information, which I will be releasing in due course) suggests that there is more waiting to be uncovered.

Key failed, on multiple occasions, to reveal his shares in Fletcher Challenge Forests while using his privileges as an MP to ask questions that were pertinent to the value of those shares. And he misled the public, just four weeks ago, when he claimed he had no more skeletons in his closet.

145 comments on “Standard Scoop: Key exposed again on secret shares and Tranzrail ”

Comments are now closed

Steve Pierson 1

26 October 2008 at 11:34 am

I have documentary proof of Key’s shareholdings that I am happy to forward to journos but nothing that can be publicly released until Tenon gives me a copy of the share register, under s118 of the Companies Act they have five working days from the time of my request to provide it.
Janet 2

26 October 2008 at 11:41 am

Let’s guess

No journos will be interested. The media will not pick it up. No one will hold Key to account.
travellerev 3

26 October 2008 at 11:46 am

Why am I not surprised?
Felix 4

26 October 2008 at 11:56 am

What a scumbag.

Can we ship him off to the failed-nat-leaders graveyard with all the others now please?
travellerev 5

26 October 2008 at 12:01 pm

Janet,

You’d be surprised.
TV 3 has some pretty spot on journalists very interested in John Key.
Dancer 6

26 October 2008 at 12:03 pm

The only way we will really know whether Key has behaved appropriately as an MP who holds shares is if he releases a list of what companies he held shares in during 2002/2003. He clearly has side stepped questions from numerous journalists on the issue of ownership – we should expect more from a man who would be our PM. Great work Steve – shows what some commitment can achieve.
Quoth the Raven 7

26 October 2008 at 12:08 pm

I don’t expect you’ll get any real traction on this from the MSM. It’s them who should be finding this stuff out in the first place, but they’d rather parrot party lines. Shameful.
Ianmac 8

26 October 2008 at 12:10 pm

Great piece Steve.
I will be able to say to other lay people (as I am a person unskilled in Shares etc):
John Key had shares in Fletcher Challenge Forestry.
John Key asked questions in the House regarding said Forestry.
John Key did not declare a conflict of interest.
He said in the House (Hansard ) that he had no such interests.
This could be a case for “misleading the House” and a job for a (non-partisan) Privileges Committee.
(Ironic this would be given the Peters case.)
Steve: Have I got the simpler version about right for we ignorant ones?
mike 9

26 October 2008 at 12:15 pm

“Research I conducted exclusively for The Standard shows ” lol – you take yourself far too seriously pierson.
I think you need to do much better than this as its all about sound bites at this stage of the campaign and “five headed monster” has much more impact than 14 paragraphs of unproven waffle.
travellerev 10

26 October 2008 at 12:16 pm

Ianmac,

I wish you would not call yourself ignorant. You are curious and willing to learn and that makes you a hell of a lot smarter and less ignorant than some of the truly stupendously ignoramusses thinking they know it all trolls. That is what real ignorance looks like.

Ok mate?
Felix 11

26 October 2008 at 12:26 pm

mike, where’s the unproven stuff?

All I can see that you could be referring to is the stuff concerning Pouto and Mangawhai forests. The rest of it is all there in black and white.

Then again, I did read the whole post…
higherstandard 12

26 October 2008 at 12:38 pm

True Felix nothing un-proven more just completely irrelevant, banging on about Key having shares in NZ companies seems to be a bit of a weird side show unless you believe that he’s gone into parliament only to manipulate the share price of certain companies.

What next the Green party only wants insulation in houses because they have a pecuniary interest ?

Clinton is also starting to having worrying Winstonesque delusions of self grandeur.
Steve Pierson 13

26 October 2008 at 12:40 pm

Ianmac, that’s the nub of it. except “He said in the House (Hansard ) that he had no such interests” depends on who had the contract for felling those forests. I’ll be able to prove that one way or the other on Tuesday.

Mike. what’s unproven? Are you saying he didn’t hold the shares? I’ve sent my proof on to several journos so far.
Steve Pierson 14

26 October 2008 at 12:44 pm

I included this phrase “Research I conducted exclusively for The Standard ” because we know what the line from mike and HS would be otherwise ‘who got you this info, who are you working for?’ etc… now it’s a delusions of grandeur line…they’re imaginative, i’ll give them that.

HS. as with the Peters affair or anything of this ilk, it’s the conflict of interest that matters, not whether that conflict was exploited. You know that, conflicts of interest come up in your work too,
Felix 15

26 October 2008 at 12:50 pm

hs,

By that logic if I walk to the shops this avo to buy some beer (hypothetical but quite likely) and on my way there I decide to kick the neighbour’s cat (less likely) then you’d say the cat-kicking was largely irrelevant because I wasn’t really on a cat-kicking mission.

(oh, and when I get home if the neighbour says “did you kick my cat?” and I say “no” then that’s another matter.)
Sarah 16

26 October 2008 at 12:51 pm

Don’t you have anything better to do? Seems quite pathetic to me.
jaymam 17

26 October 2008 at 12:57 pm

Edward Gay of the NZ Herald would rather write articles like “John Key voted best nappy changer and student homestay host” (on Oct 25, 2008) than write about John Key’s undisclosed shares and insider trading.
Steve Pierson 18

26 October 2008 at 12:58 pm

Sarah. that’s about the weakest response i can think of.

felix. that’s a great analogy.
higherstandard 19

26 October 2008 at 12:59 pm

Felix with a name such as yours the act of feline abuse would be an outrage.

My take on the share thing with Key is he had large numbers of shares in a trust and he asked questions in the house as part of his job as an MP not to gain any advantage personally.

And I take the polar opposite view to Clinton – I don’t think it is the perceived conflict of interest that matters it is whether it was exploited – and by the way when was kicking cats the same as owning shares ?
rave 20

26 October 2008 at 1:01 pm

Well done Steve!

My bet is that Key’s backers will be getting cold feet by now. This stuff should clinch it.
The MSM cannot ignore this if Labour adds it to the ‘lack of trust in John line’.

What has Key got to offer? RB has guaranteed depositors. Now done a securities swap with the commercial banks that keeps them in business, which is also a lot better than a wholesale guarantee for NZ workers who will ultimately pay the bill for any bank collapse. Cullen has the track record of a safe pair of hands for business.

The big powers governments everywhere are pulling their Keynesian texts off the shelf and throwing their Friedmans and Hayeks into the bin to save the ‘system’.

What’s more the money boys know that when workers begin to wake up to the huge con job perpetrated on them by the ‘system’ they are going to need worker-friendly governments to try to keep the lid on our outrage.
Janet 21

26 October 2008 at 1:02 pm

That aging swinger Peter Dunne has just got engaged to National again and has rejected Labour as partner. Will anyone on the left be sad? I doubt it – means one less impediment to the Greens having a greater influence. I must say that the one time I was embarrassed by the presentation by a Minister at a public event in recent years was when the speaker was Peter Dunne. Boring and uninspiring.

I wonder if he will be lobbying for the role of speaker at some stage?
Steve Pierson 22

26 October 2008 at 1:04 pm

hs. they were owned in his name. i’ll edit the post to make that clear.

not revealing a conflict of interest is a violation of standing orders and can get an mp before the privileges committee. It was wrong when he failed to declare his conflict of interest on Tranzrail, and worse when he lied about it, and it is wrong that he failed to declare his conflict of interest on Fletcher Challenge Forest and lied about it
Sarah 23

26 October 2008 at 1:05 pm

Not really SP. A simple question: have you ever looked into Helen Clark’s background at anywhere near the extent that you’ve looked into Key’s?

The bias of this blog is unbelievable. Any self-respecting journo would have to be mad to take this post seriously, especially since Clinton’s input in anything but discriminating Key is minimal.

[lprent: Read No – you must…. I also notice that Tumeke has us at number 2 these days. Guess we must be doing something that the readers and commentators like. Of course that isn’t hard, getting rid of the mindless and un-amusing trolls is probably sufficient. But personally I blame it all on the quality of the posts and the discussion. I’m not sure that you help much.

Incidentally, also read the policy about attacking the site or posters. You’re heading towards a ban]
higherstandard 24

26 October 2008 at 1:10 pm

SP – You go for it – I find this little story about as compelling as those of Wishart and his ilk.

Janet Peter Dunne would be a cak speaker – I’d be happy with perhaps Brownlee or Cullen ? Both have an excellent knowledge of the rules of the house and a suitable amount of gravitas for the position unfortunately we haven’t had a good speaker for a long, long time. I think it’s a position that with the right person there could have a very positive effect on parliament and the publics perception.
Steve Pierson 25

26 October 2008 at 1:18 pm

Sarah, this is not a research blog, it is a pro-Left, anti-Right political blog and we’ll write about what we choose.

When I saw Key lying about his Tranzrail shares, I wondered if there was more to it. So, I compiled a list of 10 potentially interesting companies and when I was up in AUckland I exmained the registers of 8 of them for the eyars 2002-2003… total serach time, 4 hours… then I spent a day or two researching and writing this post based on what I found.

It is Key’s fault that he didn’t reveal his conflicts of interest on Tranzrail and Fletcher Challenge Forests, it is his instinct to lie got them uncovered.
Christopher Nimmo 26

26 October 2008 at 1:19 pm

I’m not really sure you’d want a speaker who’d spend all their time mocking one side of the house (that’s Brownlee OR Cullen).

How ’bout Tizzard? Give her something to do.
higherstandard 27

26 October 2008 at 1:24 pm

Chris

I dunno – I reckon Cullen and Brownlee would take the job pretty seriously – I’d like a strong speaker in there with some sort of authority to compel people to actually answer questions in the house and their knowledge of standing orders would be as good if not better than virtually anyone.

Don’t even joke about Tizzard being speaker – I think that people on both sides would see Tizzard being given the speakers position as a sign to abandon all hope.
Sarah 28

26 October 2008 at 1:25 pm

Clinton – I totally understand that, but the problem is that the bias of this blog hurts its credibility. If you were to say, lose the double standards and the useless dio-tribes, then the blog would have a greater impact.

[lprent: Read No – you must…. I also notice that Tumeke has us at number 2 these days. Guess we must be doing something that the readers and commentators like. Of course that isn’t hard, getting rid of the mindless and un-amusing trolls is probably sufficient. But personally I blame it all on the quality of the posts and the discussion. I’m not sure that you help much.

Incidentally, also read the policy about attacking the site or posters. You’re heading towards a ban]
Janet 29

26 October 2008 at 1:29 pm

John Key got a pretty easy ride on Agenda and Eye to Eye this morning. Jane Clifton in the Listener says he is text buddies with a lot of journos. None of them will be wanting to risk that chumminess.
higherstandard 30

26 October 2008 at 1:30 pm

“Sarah, this is not a research blog, it is a pro-Left, anti-Right political blog and we’ll write about what we choose.”

And there’s the problem with politics – any thing the other side does will be demonised and disregarded
whether it makes sense or not.
Akldnut 31

26 October 2008 at 1:46 pm

Ka pai Steve, stirling job – Is going up before the privilages committee to hold him accountable the only action possible or are further options availiable?
Akldnut 32

26 October 2008 at 1:59 pm

Janet – I actully though that Willie Jackson did a pretty good job (some might think otherwise), he is the only interveiwer that I’ve seen in this campaign willing to ask the hard questions, he didn’t just sit there listening to the usual BS being spun and he spoke over the top of Key when the spin started (and I’m not even a fan of Jacksons).
Ianmac 33

26 October 2008 at 2:09 pm

Akldnut:
Surely the Court of Public Opinion will decide the importance of telling lies and lack of disclosure. I have no doubt John Key will have got wind of this post:
So what would John’s defence be when confronted?
I didn’t know that I had shares. (Shades of Winston?) It was left to my broker.
It was a long time ago when I was new.
We have far more important things to worry about in the World.
I didn’t know the (gun was loaded oops) rules of disclosure.
And……….
bobo 34

26 October 2008 at 2:22 pm

Nice research,I was watching agenda and key gets pampered by the “political commentators” he did slip up mentioning about the super fund being invested into nz with such things as Road Tolls. I was watching TVNZ on demand and they cut the dam interview where he was talking about rogernomics not sure what else I missed..
dave 35

26 October 2008 at 2:34 pm

Nobody cares about the shares anymore, Steve. They`re more concerned about whether the Maori Party will join UF/ National/ Act in govt.
Janet 36

26 October 2008 at 2:34 pm

Even if Key is asked a mild question about this he will say sorry and everyone will say what a nice guy for apologising.

But taking a long term view there will be a time when the media and the public will not so enthralled by him. I just hope he hasn’t had a chance to do too much damage to NZ by then.
Robin Grieve 37

26 October 2008 at 2:36 pm

You guys are obsessed with Key, This election campaign has failed for labour because you keep attacking Key, it doesn’t work so you keep on attacking Key, brilliant, not.

Helen Clark, lied to get rid of Doone, lied in corngate, lied about a painting, lied about speeding, and hung a couple of good cops out to dry to save her own neck, lied about what she knew about Owen Glenn and Winston Peters.and lied about goodness knows what we don’t know about.

No wonder National isn’t obsessed with digging the dirt on her because it is there for all to see.

But heh you just keep on digging and National will keep on winning.
Felix 38

26 October 2008 at 2:38 pm

hs,

Just to be clear, I don’t condone the kicking of cats or any other animals 😉 The cat-kicking wasn’t analogous to owning shares, but rather to the non-disclosure of said ownership and any hany panky which may have ensued.

Janet, “aging swinger Peter Dunne”. eeeeewwww what horrible imagery.
randal 39

26 October 2008 at 2:39 pm

sarah…you are a jealous ugly old hag
Lew 40

26 October 2008 at 2:42 pm

So Dunne’s not a swinger any more – he’s gotten himself engaged while still in another relationship. here’s the link – http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/events/election2008/peter_dunne_rules_out_supporting_labour-led_government

L
randal 41

26 October 2008 at 2:43 pm

sarah…and if this blog has no credibility then what are you doing here?
if that is the case then you have no credibility either
but it is not the case
this blog has more political cred than any other in New Zealand
but
you still dont have any crebility yourself
q.e.d.
randal 42

26 October 2008 at 2:43 pm

lew
you are a creep

R

[lprent: Stop pointlessly attacking other commentators. Adding you to moderation until I see an improvement]
Lew 43

26 October 2008 at 2:45 pm

randal, the depth and eloquence of your arguments never fails to underwhelm me.

L
bobo 44

26 October 2008 at 2:48 pm

Don’t mention cats to John Tamihere..
Ari 45

26 October 2008 at 2:55 pm

Once could be an honest mistake.

Twice, at best, is a monumental blunder. Do we really want someone capable of repeatedly failing to declare potential conflicts of interest as our PM?
KiwiGirl 46

26 October 2008 at 3:23 pm

“Once could be an honest mistake.”

Ari, for a few seconds, I thought you were going to talk about Helen’s lies over the years.

Sorry.
lprent 47

26 October 2008 at 3:33 pm

Robin:

You guys are obsessed with Key, This election campaign has failed for labour because you keep attacking Key, it doesn’t work so you keep on attacking Key, brilliant, not.

Yeah right – look at the trend line. Personally I find that people from the ‘right’ whinging about this just makes me feel that more should be done on this. I find that the stance of the whingers to be as hypocritical as hell, bearing in mind the crap from the puerile right that has been running as a whisper campaign against Helen as long as I’ve known her.

Besides he turns out to be an easy target.
Ianmac 48

26 October 2008 at 3:36 pm

Robin G: Focus on Key? No surprise really. The focus was directed to him by Key. He has chosen to be the smiling face and the spokesman on everything. For some reason other spokesmen have seldom been heard or seen, or when they do, they get over-ruled. On top of that I for one, still do not know what Key stands for, or what his values are. I watched him on Agenda (and was cut off at Douglas too Bobo) and tried hard to understand his character. Still don’t know but very aware the Guyon Espinor failed to follow-up the questions that we need answers for. So Key is the Key because he made it so. And I understand my cat better.
IrishBill 49

26 October 2008 at 3:37 pm

Nice work Steve, I think you should tack this one to the top of the page for the rest of the weekend.
Akldnut 50

26 October 2008 at 3:48 pm

Robin Grieve Helen Clark, lied to get rid of Doone, lied in corngate…blah blah blah. Same old shit, nothing new – just like nats front bench
No wonder National isn’t obsessed with digging the dirt on her because it is there for all to see.
Unlike Slippery John who has hidden everything and lies about it when it’s found.
Thats why we keep attacking Key because theres so much (I assume) that even you wouldn’t know about or bring to light, and that makes it easier for us because it shows him to be untrustworthy.

Surely even you aren’t that naive to think that if National had the wood on HC that they wouldn’t put it in the public forum.
Janet 51

26 October 2008 at 3:59 pm

Sometime I hope that someone does a critique of the so called lies of Helen Clark. For example the painting. This was a fundraiser for a school. She was handed the back of a board to sign to help the school. MPs are often handed things to sign for fundraising such as bottles of wine. They are not claiming to have produced the wine. She never claimed to have painted the picture.

The speeding near Waimate. These decisions are made by the professionals who assess the situation and take action. Nothing to do with the person inside the car.

These Helen hating myths are kept alive by people with their own agendas. But when real dishonesty is revealed by those they support they cry foul.
Ianmac 52

26 October 2008 at 4:09 pm

Janet too true: I suggest that for the so-called Speed-gate thing, that the next time the taxi driver gets a ticket for speeding, I will do the honourable thing and step up, take the blame and pay the fine. Well I would wouldn’t I ? You? HaHaHa.
ziuzou1 53

26 October 2008 at 4:15 pm

Nice work in exposing this…

Robin Grieve – lanmac is right in saying that the focus on Key has been bought on by Key himself. His pithy slogans and inspid shallowness on Agenda highlights a lack of firm values. Espinor could have been more assertive in his line of questioning on Agenda today. I didn’t get a clear answer form Key re his trading of NZ dollars. Further to that, why didn’t Vernon Small have a chance to critique Key’s performance?
Janet 54

26 October 2008 at 4:15 pm

Ianmac – only if you had asked the taxi to speed. There is no evidence that Helen asked the drivers to speed to get to the airport. She probably wouldn’t have minded missing the rugby game – after all she’s a league follower and has been patron of the local club for many years.
Ianmac 55

26 October 2008 at 4:37 pm

Janet: S’OK. Just having a little ridicule at poor old Robin Grieve. I agree totally with you over the nonsense he/they trot out. “As that your best shot???” I say to them after 9+ years ??? Wow!
Janet 56

26 October 2008 at 4:57 pm

By the way I have just realised how much the bird life has come back during the last few years. In 1999 there were hardly any birds around here and the sparrows and cabbage trees were dying. Now there is a large and healthy bird population, and the cabbage trees are thriving. They must prefer a left government too.
Dan 57

26 October 2008 at 4:57 pm

Obsessed with Key? I would agree with the writers who ask who else in the National caucus has been allowed to comment to allow analysis. None of the potential cabinet ministers-in-waiting have been allowed to parade their policies, or maybe there are none. The other implication is that the National leadership is very aware of how vulnerable they are if they let the potential leaders out of the pen. Lockwood…we know his honesty; Ryall who announced the increases in doctor’s fees so cheerfully; Williamson, who announced the road taxes that gobbled up all the tax refunds; McCully, the Darth Vader of the Nats. The only Nat with star value who was respected across the board was Katherine Rich, who was dropped because her views on welfare and education did not fit with the hidden policies proposed.
Bloggers on the Left are fixated on Key because the MSM would annoint an unknown whose background is at best vague, and who has been promising policies for months without any of substance being available for debate.
Janet..you are exactly right. If Key had been caught speeding to a test match, he would have been deemed a hero, a good ole boy for getting his priorities right. And, for goodness sake, most countries of the world allow their leaders the occasional speeding motorcade. That the noddies on the right still need to dredge up so called scandals speaks volumes for their substance.
Steve Pierson 58

26 October 2008 at 4:58 pm

Irishbill – I don’t know how to do that. We could do that though, and put in a page break below the first par.
Janet 59

26 October 2008 at 5:20 pm

Don’t forget the Nat’s educ spokesperson who apparently told school support staff that they were unskilled workers on rehab.
higherstandard 60

26 October 2008 at 5:21 pm

Dan

“None of the potential cabinet ministers-in-waiting have been allowed to parade their policies, or maybe there are none.”

Indeed and there has been a similar absence of current and potential Labour ministers in the public eye which is a shame – however, both Clark and Key are campaigning in a presidential fashion and have been very open about that’s the way they want it.
higherstandard 61

26 October 2008 at 5:25 pm

Indeed Janet and let’s not forget the Nat’s shadowy think tank researching better ways to bend the population to their will and eat babies.

It must all be part of the vast right wing conspiracy.
Dan 62

26 October 2008 at 5:31 pm

HS,
I would disagree completely. David Cunliffe was interviewed in depth last weekend and showed himself very competently; Cullen is on regularly. People such as Annette King and Phil Goff are regularly interviewed in local newspapers where they show total confidence in their portfolios.
Key keeps repeating his mantra “Time for something new!” He is the only new thing in National; the rest are tired old 90s sloggers.
Ari 63

26 October 2008 at 5:46 pm

HS- just because the mainstream media doesn’t cover something prominently doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened. Labour and the Greens have been issuing ridiculous amounts of press releases, even before their campaigns started.

National seems to regard press releases as an opportunity to drop as many talking points as possible, rather than a method for vigorous commentary.
Danny 64

26 October 2008 at 6:13 pm

Hi Steve,

How is it that “every time Key had a conflict of interest with Tranzrail he also had one with Fletcher CF”?

You stated that “FCF had a contract with Tranzrail […]. Because of this major contractual arrangement, what happened to Tranzrail also affected FCF and vice versa.”

My question is: what was so significant about that specific contract that meant the ownership of a controlling stake in TR somehow changed the rights and obligations under that contract so as to have a material effect on the share price of FCC?
travellerev 65

26 October 2008 at 6:22 pm

Sarah,

If I’m not mistaken National had a private dick investigating Helen Clark and her husband and he couldn’t find anything on her before the last election.

So perhaps she just is who she says she is and John Key meanwhile is so much more fun to investigate because whenever you look, and yey even private citizens get to join in the fun, under one of the rocks in his garden you find another slithery little secret.

I hear that kiwiblog has discussions that are more up your alley. They never ask questions critical of that nice John Key so perhaps you would feel more at home there.
KiwiGirl 66

26 October 2008 at 6:34 pm

Janet – just to clarify.

APR 2002
Clark admits signing a painting that was not her own work while Leader of the Opposition. A subsequent police investigation into a fraud complaint finds a prima facie case against her but police decide not to prosecute.

Motorcade
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10340035

Go google if you want more info.

My point? One can find anything on the Internet to support one’s point of view on any side of any debate.
Much like the Bible actually.
Alexandra 67

26 October 2008 at 6:51 pm

Well done Steve…great stuff. Im guessing the mud this time might stick. I hate the idea that someone who (god forbid) may be our PM has done nothing in his former life, other than feathering his own nest. His preoccupation with wheeling and dealing on the sharemarket., sickens me. I doubt if his interest in politicals is anything more than to serve the interests of himself and his rich greedy mates.
Oh, Sara….why dont you go somewhere more in keeping with your point of view, someplace where mindless tory drivel is the norm…try trademe opinion!
DeeDub 68

26 October 2008 at 6:55 pm

KiwiGirl – The Herald article explicitly states that Clark’s Press Secretary made the call to catch the early flight and NOT Ms. Clark. And are you really suggesting that and an autograph done in the name of charity is anywhere near as ethically dodgy as Key misleading parliament about pecuniary interests? Surely not?
travellerev 69

26 October 2008 at 6:58 pm

These links are not for HS because clearly he’s loaned out his one functioning brain cell to someone needing it even more than he does.

And he’s clearly stuck on the conspiracy thing (perhaps that’s what his one brain cell does, looping on that word maybe he should go to sleep and reboot).

As has been pointed out there is nothing new about the group behind John Key and even John Key is beginning to look like old news. He’s been peddling Nationals labour lite now for 7 years and all he has to show for is the vote for change crap line and judging from all the little and not so little secrets and secret meetings and recorded conversations showing that the policies of National are as rabidly right wing and pro big business as always and even Ruth “Ruthanasia” Richardson is still very active in the background. CIS Sidney is the pre eminent right wing think tank in Sidney and since 2006 (must have been after the Don Brash debacle (can’t have that happen again) they now even have a New Zealand sub-think tank and who do we find on the board of directors? None other than Ruth Richardson and a gentleman by the name of Robert Champion de Crespigny AC. He is a mining tycoon and very in with the Tories and his fellow tycoons.

Robert Champion de Crespigny AC also the chairman of the board of, Yep none other than John Key’s PR firm Cosby-Textor.

The others on the CIS board?
Higher ups representing JP Morgan, Rio Tinto, Macquarie to name a few.

HS,

The moment these people open their mouths in their little private back rooms they are conspiring. That’s what they do and they are good at it. And they’ve got idiots like you believing all their crap. They conspire, that makes them rich and the punters poor. All because they have told us that those asking critical questions and investigating them are “conspiracy nutters”.

They want what this country has and which so far they have not been getting their greedy sweaty palms on. The Black sands, Coromandel gold. Our gas and our oil.
And what ever else they can come up with we’ve got it and they want it.
sophie 70

26 October 2008 at 7:05 pm

Anyone else of the opinion that Guyon must be looking for a job after the election?

captca: Mr naivety
Chris G 71

26 October 2008 at 7:10 pm

I know we should avoid such talk,

But Sarah, with regards to all your whining about this site. Just curious, considering you seem to be the great crusader of objectivity… do you go and ask the same questions of kiwiblog and/or whaleoil?

riiiiight.

Back in your box
Ianmac 72

26 October 2008 at 7:15 pm

Sophie: Guyon would make a good spin-doctor for John Key and he has been practising for a long time on TV1 so he would be able to skip the interview. His brother Colin Blog on Fairfax is a different level altogether.
Chris G 73

26 October 2008 at 7:15 pm

And, by the way. How intriguing is it that the tory spin artists have turned this entire thread in to a discussion about Paintergate of all things!

The point that I see very clearly here is:

Key asked about a million (yeh i counted) questions in the house of Clark banging on about Peters and the donations saga…. THEREFORE:

You reap what you sow Johnny Friendly.

I hope some media get a hold of this and do something, oh but thats right, they barely made a whisper over ‘Tranzrail eyes’ yet over Winston they bring out the artillery. Liberal Media though… Right??
Gooner 74

26 October 2008 at 7:17 pm

Sophie – yes. He is shockingly biased and is obviously pro Labour. His performance tonight was disgraceful: “Peters edging towards 5%” (just over halfway is the reality); “…Key won’t have the numbers on election night” (the centre right has 63 seats and can govern on tonight’s poll).

He must have been promised a good bonus for these lines. He ran some great Winston Peters publicity last night and the night before too – lead stories and all!
Ianmac 75

26 October 2008 at 7:22 pm

Good point Chris G. Of course during Question Time National prepared the questions and handed them to Wodney and gave him their question time so that Wodney would collect the credit/blame.
Danny 76

26 October 2008 at 7:34 pm

Sorry to be a pain and bring the thread back to the topic … but how is this a conflict of interest?

As stated it seems a stretch, and less than bullet-proof. And you can forget about the MSM showing any interest unless it can be packaged into a dumbed-down-bite-sized-goody for ease of dissemination.
mickysavage 77

26 October 2008 at 7:43 pm

Good stuff Steve

I wonder if there is more to come. I hear that Australia may be the lucky country.

Kiwigirl.

You fret about a painting that was not very good given to a school to help them with operational expenses and you cry foul. I would be much more worried about insider trading, which is all but what Key did and he lied when asked about his shareholding.

You also complain about a driver transporting Helen driving too fast. I am much more concerned about world peace and climate change. When I think of what John Key has said over the years I am confused, because he has said two entirely different things and I get the impression that he is saying not what he actually thinks but what he thinks will be popular.

Of course one can find things to support one’s prejudices. The only thing is that Helen’s “shortcomings” are minor in the extreme whereas John’s shortcomings go to the essence of his ability to be PM. Why would you want a currency trader to be PM especially if you consider recent events?

JK was a really good currency trader. That meant that he was good at making a profit over a three month period and that he did not give a dam about the effect on the citizens of the affected countries of these decisions. This is the last person that I would want to be in charge of my country.

Go Helen!! Sorry Sarah but if you want to beat up on lefties you should go to Kiwiblog.
randal 78

26 October 2008 at 7:45 pm

snakes and ladders danny boy. go back to the top and read the original post. it is quite obvious that keys had an interest in several of the questionsa tissue and what is odd that he sold his shares pretty soon after he realised that parliament has rules and is not dog eat dog liek the commercial world where slight of hand and telling untruths is the norm when seeking advantage.
Sarah 79

26 October 2008 at 8:12 pm

travellerev – I have no desire to visit the gits over on kiwiblog. It’s like talking to a bunch of immature retards.

I like some of the stuff on this site, but sometimes it can get so partisan that it’s frustrating (ie. when there are 4 or more posts a day smearing Key). But when it’s balanced and both sides of the spectrum can voice their opinion then its one of the best blogs on the market. But I wish someone would start up a popular run-of-the-mill intelligent centre blog.
Christopher Nimmo 80

26 October 2008 at 8:12 pm

@hs (waaaay above)

Oh, Tizard couldn’t be THAT bad as Speaker, just ask whoever wrote her wikipedia article:

“Judith Tizard (Born 3 January 1956) is a New Zealand politician. She is a member of the Labour Party. She is nice. And loves tangerines.”
KiwiGirl 81

26 October 2008 at 8:13 pm

DeeDub and MickeySavage

Janet wrote: “Sometime I hope that someone does a critique of the so called lies of Helen Clark. For example the painting.” And –
“Ianmac – only if you had asked the taxi to speed. There is no evidence that Helen asked the drivers to speed to get to the airport.”
Geeze – I was trying to show Janet that information or opinion is very easy to find on the Internet – and that you can find ANYTHING to support your point of view. [which is something you’re not allowed to have around here, evidently.]
I think I’ll go back to GREENER pastures.
travellerev 82

26 October 2008 at 8:13 pm

And he was a good derivatives trader too. Oh oops, aren’t those the same financial products now collapsing the entire western financial world?

And didn’t the FRNZ just announce (nice touch, Sunday morning 8:05 in the first Holiday weekend of the year, what you reckon? They really wanted to tell the NZ punters that our financial system was as contaminated with these crappy SUV’s as the rest of the world) to buy billions of dollars worth of mortgage-backed securities.

Captcha: left maintain. Way to go left!
Felix 83

26 October 2008 at 8:28 pm

Immature retards, Sarah?

Do I even have to finish this thought?
deemac 84

26 October 2008 at 8:41 pm

well done Steve – the scandal is of course the lie, not the conflict of interest. That could have been sorted by an “oops, sorry”. Incredible how the same berks who keep trawling through the distant past to try to find any scrap to attack Helen with (her driver was speeding, how is that her fault?) are SO touchy about the left digging the dirt on Key. If he were just a member of the public it would be excessive but – he wants to be PM, FFS! People want to know whether he can be believed or not and on this evidence alone, he can’t.
Ianmac 85

26 October 2008 at 8:42 pm

Sarah I agree with you over the Kiwiblog place. Seldom a dialogue. But I am not sure that there are smears against (or about) John Key here exactly. He is a bit of an enigma. Tonight on Sunday TV1 they were examining the history of Obama and the concerns were raised that he had only been in politics for 12 years and there was insufficient info about the “real” man. Our John has been visible for 6 years and we do not really know who he is. The tactic to remain in the mists is deliberate I believe. Hence lets find out about him ourselves. Do you really know who John is – what he really cares about? Do tell.
travellerev 86

26 October 2008 at 8:46 pm

Hi Sarah,

There is hope for you yet.

It is actually very easy to start a brandspankin free of charge blog. And it’s great fun too. Just go here and register.

You seem to be endowed with intelligence and perhaps you could add a valuable bipartisan and intelligent blog.

If you comment here, while I’m sure that most people will stay staunchly entrenched within their political views, I’m sure people would be more than interested to hear your opinions on the issues presented even if you do not support the partisan clobbering of John Key.

Maybe you don’t think so and you are entitled to your opinions but Slippery John is so eminently clobberable.
travellerev 87

26 October 2008 at 8:55 pm

See Ianmac,

Again not a very ignorant remark at all, in fact rather insightful. LOL.

If someone shows up on the stage of national politics out of the blue and no info is forthcoming than that should make us curious.
If this person is closely guarded and prepped by some of the most mercenary of PR consultants with a big industrial tycoon in the background and this person can’t help himself in the stock market casino using his political connections for his own personal gain than our level of curiosity should go ballistic.
lprent 88

26 October 2008 at 8:59 pm

IB & SP: Tweaked the database to push it up…

It will stay at the top until tommorrow night. BTW: I can’t believe that when I looked at the net that some clown was wanting to charge for a utility to do this. All that was required was that the post date was changed. I suppose there ia sucker born every minute.
Janet 89

26 October 2008 at 9:59 pm

Just listened to the 10 o’clock news. No one has picked up this story yet. I’m sure there must be journos out there spending their Sunday trying to find some good stories and who must drop into the Standard if they have any sense. But this might not meet with the approval of their bosses at this sensitive time.
Nomestradamus 90

26 October 2008 at 10:02 pm

Steve Pierson:

I have documentary proof of Key’s shareholdings that I am happy to forward to journos but nothing that can be publicly released until Tenon gives me a copy of the share register, under s118 of the Companies Act they have five working days from the time of my request to provide it.

Section 118 of the Companies Act actually says this:

118 Shareholder may require company to purchase shares
Whereâ€”
(a) An interest group has, under section 117 of this Act, approved, by special resolution, the taking of action that affects the rights attached to shares; and
(b) The company becomes entitled to take the action; and
(c) A shareholder who was a member of the interest group cast all the votes attached to the shares registered in that shareholder’s name and having the same beneficial owner against approving the action; or
(d) Where the resolution approving the taking of the action was passed under section 122 of this Act, a shareholder who was a member of the interest group did not sign the resolution,â€”
that shareholder is entitled to require the company to purchase those shares in accordance with section 111 of this Act.

Not a great look on a thread called “Key exposed”!

What section were you intending to refer to?
Quoth the Raven 91

26 October 2008 at 10:38 pm

Janet – There are far more impotant stories for them to cover like celebrity marriages. Go back to sleep New Zealand, your corporate overlords are taking care of everything.
jaymam 92

26 October 2008 at 11:28 pm

Nomestradamus you didn’t have to copy all that out. Just a typo. It’s section 218. I found that easily enough. Did you mean to spell your name as Nostradamus?
Nomestradamus 93

26 October 2008 at 11:55 pm

Jaymam:

Great, thanks for clearing that up.

My name is a bit of a piss-take really – long story.
Danny 94

27 October 2008 at 12:25 am

Hi Randal,

I did read the original post. I don’t see the FCC conflict. The questions Key asked concerned another company.

SP indicated the contract between TR and FCC sufficed for a conflict by way of his FCC shares. He may be correct. However he may also be incorrect, which is why I asked what the significance was about that specific contract.

It is not at all obvious that the identity of the majority shareholder in TR would change the rights that FCC enjoyed under the contract (or the likelihood of the contract being renewed etc), so as to cause a material effect on the share price of FCC.

I am not saying SP is wrong, I am just saying that there is nothing in his post that is obviously problematic for Key. One needs to add their own speculation in order to be outraged.

Cheers,
D
Rex Widerstrom 95

27 October 2008 at 4:39 am

It’s a bit too late and I’m rather too tired to properly absorb all of this but on the face of it Steve it looks like a decent piece of invetigative work. If I were still an editor I’d certainly assign a journo to first fact-check your stuff and then follow it up (with due credit of course) but prima facie, as the lawyers say, there’s a story here.

Meanwhile Akldnut comments:

Helen Clark, lied to get rid of Doone, lied in corngate blah blah blah. Same old shit, nothing new… No wonder National isn’t obsessed with digging the dirt on her because it is there for all to see. Unlike Slippery John who has hidden everything and lies about it when it’s found. [my emphasis]

Not sure that’s quite the implication you were aiming for, Akldnut 😉 If it was, then it seems we’re in agreement. Because I see on the one hand an Emperor in clothes long since tattered, getting increasingly septic as bits fall off; and on the other a would-be Emperor in a flesh coloured bodysuit… or possibly naked… but who keeps moving around so you really can’t tell, all the while smiling reassuringly and hoping you won’t get a good look before he passes by.

Such is the choice facing NZ voters. No wonder they’ve had a gutsfull.
Deedub 96

27 October 2008 at 8:34 am

KiwiGirl
October 26, 2008 at 8:13 pm

“Geeze – I was trying to show Janet that information or opinion is very easy to find on the Internet – and that you can find ANYTHING to support your point of view. [which is something you’re not allowed to have around here, evidently.]
I think I’ll go back to GREENER pastures.”

OK. But that wasn’t really clear in your post. That’s why you’ll notice my whole reply was a question not a statement.
Ianmac 97

27 October 2008 at 9:03 am

Last night Johnkey was on Bill Ralston’s meet the Leader on Prime. Odd that since Bill is John’s media trainer he is also the compere? Interesting body talk from John. When the few times Young or Soper asked searching questions John went very still -impassive. Patsy questions were met with cheerful boyishness. But nothing new. Nothing explained like how would John choose to bail out those in need through losing their job? How exactly would the Law and order policy work? No specifics that added to answers. Interesting. Surprised that 75% can trust him on the computer poll??? Ha!
Janet 98

27 October 2008 at 9:15 am

Anyone else notice that while Key is saying something he shakes his head? Which bit should you believe – the words or the body language?
forgetaboutthelastone 99

27 October 2008 at 9:49 am

Ianmac:

i saw a bit of that last night – Ralston asked him a question about the perception of his leadership in relation to the Lockwood and Williamson remarks. I recall the look on Ralston’s face when he was asking that question: ‘Apologetic’ i would call it.

Also – when they were discussing Key wanting the tourism portfolio over other more important ones. Key said something like “meh, i could do education…” in such a dismissive and casual way as if education would just be too easy for him.

One interviewer was concerned that Key was prepared to go with the maori party when he didn’t even know what “Te rangatiratanga” meant. Key replied ‘yea well’ and waffled on about something else.
randal 100

27 October 2008 at 10:23 am

the really disappointing thing about this whole affair is that the national party has not been able to gow their own candidate i.e. that there is no local person who can espouse the right wing ideology and is acceptable to the electoratge at large.
the only reason John Keys has been able to get traction is because he has been adopted wholesale by the media and he is more or less their candidate and their creature.
the media has managed to succesfully infantilise the population for their own ends and now they look to be finishing the job off by promoting a “SQUARE” to bludgeon any last resistance.
Anita 101

27 October 2008 at 10:38 am

randal,

the really disappointing thing about this whole affair is that the national party has not been able to gow their own candidate

Yeah; first they parachute in Don Brash, then John Key. What does it say about their caucus that they have no leadership material?

So, if National lose the election and Key goes, who replaces him? I can’t imagine him sticking around for another three years.
travellerev 102

27 October 2008 at 11:07 am

Anita,

He’ll go were all bankers go after they retire and in this day and age with the banksters killing the world financial system he will go were no people other than his rich prick mates can get to him. He will depart in disgrace and go golfing with the selfsame rich prick mates and watch the sky while the world burns from the windows of his 5 million dollar Hawaii condo.

And we’ll be left holding the bag in a financially ruined world. The only good thing is that we are doing it from an island too so the only chaos we’ll have to deal with is the one we create here and not the mayhem which will erupt oversees.

As for National? The good news is that most NZ rich pricks made their money in either speculative finances or the equally speculative real estate bubble. They will be cut to size and have to learn to live like the rest of us and than all of a sudden their greedy grab what you can and run is not so attractive anymore. Hell, you might need a doctor and where are you going to find one if you have no money? Aaah ooo oops all of a sudden it’s a good thing that labour still has a free healthcare in place
higherstandard 103

27 October 2008 at 11:12 am

Anita

Simon Power will likely be the next leader of the Nats, who do you think will be the likely next leader of Labour.
randal 104

27 October 2008 at 11:19 am

yes ev
I can hear the fiddles tuning up now
randal 105

27 October 2008 at 11:23 am

sorry hs.
simon power is a lightweight and he is still fixated on the easy money of the 90’s
somehow or other there doesn’t appear to be anything substantial about him
as for labour they have a great team of MP’s any one of them who would make a good fist of it and more importantly be seen by the electorate as capable of doing the job.
higherstandard 106

27 October 2008 at 11:29 am

Randal – The only one making a good fist in the Labour party is Trevor Mallard.

Eve what absolute drivel – you really remind me of the loons that walk the street screeching the end is nigh the end is nigh repent repent ye sinners.
DeeDub 107

27 October 2008 at 11:40 am

Kind of frivilous and a bit off topid, but also illuminating… did anyone see this on Key?

Liked this bit:

“He may, however, have been slightly happier if he’d ended up in the “leader” camp (the category reserved for those who are extroverted planners who favour ideas over facts and their head over their heart).”
DeeDub 108

27 October 2008 at 11:42 am

And the bit about not likeing to follow rules……well OBVIOUSLY!
Hamish 109

27 October 2008 at 11:58 am

Peters was alluding to another share scandal in relation to Key (besides the one presented by The Standard) this morning on sunrise. Does anything know anything about it?
travellerev 110

27 October 2008 at 12:32 pm

HS,
Eve what absolute drivel. LOL.
It must be hard having only one brain cell or alternatively needing to be so in denial that even as the Federal Reserve bank is now buying the crap John Key traded in in order to prop up the NZ economy you are not prepared to face the disaster created by assholes such as John Key. This is what Wayne Lochore had to say three years ago it seems I’m again in excellent company while you have to make do with the likes of vto, Lew and d4j.
Anita 111

27 October 2008 at 12:35 pm

hs,

I heard Power talked about as leadership material in the dim distant past, but not more recently. I thought the general opinion was that he had not lived up to his potential. That’s true of a number of people who’ve been touted as future leaders of National, when they were young and fresh people could see potential, as they rose up through the ranks and took on responsibility their flaws became too evident. I’m tempted by the idea of English having another try.

As for Labour, I think it’ll depend a lot of why and when. When Clark goes the battle between the right and left within Labour will determine the new leader; if the right is in ascendancy it will be Goff, otherwise it will depend on when she goes as to which of the more leftwing Labour MPs is placed for it. There’s speculation about Cunliffe, but he’s not positioned for it yet.
Lew 112

27 October 2008 at 12:38 pm

Eve, why do you persist in roping me into your idiotic personality and popularity battles?

L
travellerev 113

27 October 2008 at 12:41 pm

Lew,

Feel free to ignore me.
Danny 114

27 October 2008 at 1:31 pm

Some “scoop” that was …
randal 115

27 October 2008 at 1:43 pm

hi ev…whatcha doin’ later?
rave 116

27 October 2008 at 3:10 pm

Trav.
I don’t think the (no Federal in NZ) Reserve Bank funding the banks is such a big deal. Also I see it as the alternative to a wholesale guarantee which would be a nightmare to administer and a massive 300 billion underwriting of Aussie owned banks. I think that Cullen has been having talks with Bollard about this.

It would only be a problem if the RB took these securities at inflated values. I think they will revalue them to market value and let the banks take the losses in falling property values. That means if a bank defaults these securities will amount to a first call on the banks assets and hence a nationalisation. That is where we will end up and its better to have the Aussie subsidiaries nationalised so we can then demand that they become state banks run in the interests of the people.

The bigger worry to me is that Key is now saying he will use 100 million from the banks paying for depositors guarantees to fund his “deserving poor handups”. He can continue to berate the ‘underclass’ and at the same time buy the votes of rednecks and greedies without blowing the budget. He now has money to throw at his cynical politics of greed and envy.

What is Labour’s answer to this? Seems to be on automatic pilot. Where’s the crisis? Wishlists like Health = attacking obesity, smoking etc. won’t hack it against Key’s rampant opportunism and vote buying spree.
.
Labour needs to advance its Keynesian mini-budget now before the election. Take a leaf from the crisis management of UK Labour and EU social democracy. Say the free market is over John Key, the state is back, and stop prostrating itself before the Reserve Bank Act , Fiscal Responsbility Act etc. These are the instruments of monetarist economics which are a dead donkey.

Where’s the vision? Its a stupid economy, smarten it up.
Rodel 117

27 October 2008 at 3:14 pm

National’s proposal to help those made redundant is nothing new.

We should note that the Labour led government already has processes to assist those who lose their jobs when a major outfit like a meat processing company closes down.These involve assistance with housing and relocation to places where workers are needed.

Given the world’s economic situation, now is NOT the time for a change.
Meg 118

27 October 2008 at 4:21 pm

Great work SP.
Fact is with Key, the more you dig, the more you’ll find.
randal 119

27 October 2008 at 4:21 pm

If bill ralston is john keys media trainer then he stands exposed for double dipping and further bringing the media into disrepute.
how long is this going to go on for. people rely on the media for fairness and telling the truth but this matter needs exposure in the press so all can see what the hell is going on!
absolutely no apologies for the mild profanity in case some of the namby pambys are offended.
KiwiGirl 120

27 October 2008 at 4:23 pm

Sorry, Folks, I’m back. Couldn’t resist. LOL

One question I forgot to ask.

When the search was done for Key’s shares, what other MP’s were found to hold shares in Fletcher Forests?
DeeDub 121

27 October 2008 at 4:38 pm

He Kiwigirl

I don’t think they were looking at other MPs. Just Slippery John.

If anyone wants to check out anyone other MPs it’s all on the record. Go for it.
Janet 122

27 October 2008 at 5:35 pm

If Key does win this time he will have such little credibility his government will be a laughing stock. I can’t see it lasting very long.
Anita 123

27 October 2008 at 6:06 pm

Janet,

Really? If National wins then hasn’t he regained all his credibility (at least temporarily) by proving he has a mandate?
Janet 124

27 October 2008 at 6:48 pm

If he becomes PM he will only be mandated in that he has managed to patch up a temporary agreement. I imagine fall out between and among the parties won’t take long to emerge.

But only hypothetical because I think the Nat P vote will collapse in the last few days as the left surges.
randal 125

27 October 2008 at 7:36 pm

anita… a mandate is generally associated with a landslide and I dont think Natoinal is anywhere near obtaining one of those.
In fact they are very much liable to be back in opposition again.
they dont seem to have very much integrity and the people know it
Akldnut 126

27 October 2008 at 8:16 pm

Randal… I think mandate means majority not necessarily by a landslide. (be it 1 seat or 20 – 1 vote or thousands)
I agree that Gnats being back in opposition is a very real possibilty, in fact thousands of us are trying our best to make sure it happens because we’ll all be better off (well the majority of us) without Slippery John anywhere near our tamariki or mokopunas futures.
Steve Pierson 127

27 October 2008 at 8:21 pm

Kiwigirl. I couldn’t do a search of all sitting MPs. I did find a couple of interesting holdings by other National MPs, we’ll be looking at one of those tomorrow.
RedLogix 128

27 October 2008 at 8:33 pm

Just finished listening to an excellent BBC doco on RNZ about the global fiscal crisis. I’ve been aware of the doomsayers telling us about the collapse of capitalism for decades, and I’ve always said yes one day will happen, but there is no point in living scared and you do have to get on with what is in front of you. But that day now appears to have arrived.

The reality is turning out to be every bit as frightening as I might have imagined. When you hear sober, credible banking people describe what has actually happened, the magnitude of the frackup….and that “the losses are potentially unending”… there is nowhere to hide anymore.

Maybe, just maybe guys we could start being a little more polite towards Travellerev… the chances of her being more or less 100% correct are getting short by the day.
Lew 129

27 October 2008 at 8:40 pm

RedLogix: My problem with Ev isn’t in what she says about the banking and finance systems – she’s switched me on to a few useful (and some totally unuseful, it must be said) sources of information. The problem is the length at which she does it, and how it seems to be inseparable from every other event involving the neoconservative elite of the past three decades. And how she persists in believing anyone who doesn’t agree 100% with her and think she does a wonderful job of everything is themselves a neocon roader.

In short: sometimes less is more.

L
randal 130

27 October 2008 at 8:40 pm

I like evs analysis. she is on the right track but nothing is reaaly going to happen till there has been a bit more major depletion of the oil stocksl
randal 131

27 October 2008 at 8:46 pm

more: this bubble is ljust he others.
it has been engineered to let the air out of the inflated banking system and bring the world to heel in a post modern practice run oh yes.
and the smart money knows that the masses are adventitious to the system and not the driver and therefore expendable.
has everyone got that?
bad luck for the bourgeoisie
erkkkkkkkk
Lew 132

27 October 2008 at 8:47 pm

RL: Sorry, I neglected the initial point – was it Michael Robinson’s `Failure or Fraud’?

L
RedLogix 133

27 October 2008 at 8:59 pm

Lew,

Yes it was. Another interesting item is on a 10:15pm.
Lew 134

27 October 2008 at 9:05 pm

RL: Yes, it’s particularly good. It’s relatively conservative, authoritative and calm-headed, which are the primary qualities lacking in the bulk of wild-eyed Chicken Little material on this topic.

L
Ianmac 135

27 October 2008 at 9:07 pm

I am informed by Travellev analysis and hope there are many more whoever he/she is. Thanks.
Who is Michael Robinson?
Lew 136

27 October 2008 at 9:21 pm

Ianmac: A BBC World Service journalist who has (of late, at least) been focusing on the credit crisis. Also look up `The Trouble With Money’. It should be on the BBC website.

L
travellerev 137

28 October 2008 at 11:50 am

Lew,

There is a saying that goes like this: if you don’t lie you don’t have to have a good memory to which I would add if you see the bigger picture it all makes sense.

(You can stop reading here if you wish.)

Our world is ruled by an invisible elite. Well, not invisible but most certainly not elected by us.

This is what Amsel Rothchild said about his power; I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.

In fact Cullen goes as far as admitting that he is not allowed to give financial advise. How strange is that? He is the bloody minister of Finance what else is he going to do?

(You can stop reading here too.)

1% of the worlds population owns 40% of its wealth and 10%. 30% of that elite lives in the US and most of them live in Britain and Europe and the predominant group of them is in the finance business. In other words the banksters own us and they have done for the last threehundred years.

You really should watch the Money Masters which details the history of the fractal banking history and the way the elite bankers manipulated world history.

(Perhaps here is were it becomes really interesting so I would stop here if i were you and please don’t watch the Money Masters because it would take up three hours and a half hours of your time. Yuk, three and a half hours of very interesting information who needs that?)

What is unfolding is what you might call Endgame (warning this is a terribly dark movie and I don’t necessarily subscribe to the documentary makers conclusions as to if we really heading that way because I’m what you might call the eternal optimist.)

This endgame was brought to pass with the stolen election in 2000 which brought to power the third generation Nazi/Bankster?Oil tycoon G.W. Bush. In the US the ~~Concentration~~ FEMA camps are ready. The army is brought in to assist in “crowd control” and the coffins are ready to receive it’s first bodies.

In other words this very small group of very rich elitists don’t need us “the sheeple” any more and we are about to be culled. They know our species has reached critical mass and we need to be brought back to a more manageable population.
It is that simple.

And if you think they give a flying fuck about you or me, think again.

They killed three thousand of the worlds citizens (not all of the victims of 911 were Americans) they allowed more than 4000 of their own citizens to die in Iraq, killed more than 1.5 million Iraqies and polluted their country for 4.5 billion years with over 2500 thousand tons of DU and they did the same in Afghanistan.

They don’t give a toss about the hundreds of thousand of soldiers from all over the world who have been contaminated and the spread of DU over the entire world and 50.000 heroes and first responders who gave everything on 911 and in the aftermath are sick and dying from the toxic dust they swallowed and inhaled and their plight goes unheard in Washington. Another 20.000 to 30.000 New Yorkers are also ill or dying, many of them children and they too don’t get any help whatsoever.

(Uh ooh, next is a little bit of 911 stuff, so perhaps now would be a good time to stop reading)

Whether you believe that 19 hijackers were able to stand down the worlds best air defence system for two and a half hours (ridiculous in its own right) and that 3 huge steel framed high rises could collapse in the freefall speed of 6.5, 10 and 11 seconds into pyroclastic flows into their own footprint because two off them were hit by the very planes they were designed to be able to absorb and that passports of two of the hijackers could have the impact of the planes in the two towers (Am I the only one here or is this beginning to sound ridiculous) or you, like me, have serious questions about the events of that day the fact is that two weeks later every American lost most of their “freedoms” because the congress voted the patriot act in which none of them had time to read and the US dragged our asses into two unwinnable and illegal wars because we had to catch Osama bin Laden and his merry band of al CIAda. And with the previous should leave you in no doubt as to their cruelty and utter and utter callousness.

If you have watched the Money Masters you will understand how the financial elite uses easy credit to build bubbles and the contraction of credit to create depressions.
In effect allowing us “the cattle” to create real world wealth during the easy credit part of the cycle and the depression part of the cycle is used for the transfer of that wealth into their hands.

We are their cattle, they milk us, manipulate us and we are taught that to ask question makes us Conspiracy theorists.

(Now we get to the John Key bit and perhaps we’ve lost Lew. LOL)

This bigger picture makes it also possible for us to see were John Key fits in.
John Key even with all his money is not a very rich banker really.

His masters take that home as quarterly bonuses. John Key is nothing but a foot soldier and he has been send to do a job.

Aunty Helen and Cullen don’t tow the line and his masters don’t like that.

That is why he has to meet with his masters in London, that is why he is on a short leach with Cosby and Textor as his PR minders and Merrill Lynch Bankers and rich Tories keep pooping up that is why he wants to borrow for “infra structure”.

Remember! built bubble and collapse bubble to transfer real world wealth to the banksters.

It’s simple really until the plan comes apart at the seams. That’s when you get revolutions and mayhem. It is “when the horses bolt” to put it in John Key’s own words (Or was that Bill English)

While this has been going on none of the real big boys has ever had to pay for this mass manipulation. They not suffer any consequences for their daylight robbery of the masses. Have you noticed?

The masses to stupid and dumbed down have not caught on (I noticed how in Anglo Saxon countries real curiosity is discouraged and the masses actually turn on people asking questions. They call them up him/herself, is to smart for his own good and of course conspiracy nut. Amazing)

Carroll Quigley was an historian (he actually taught Bill Clinton) who wrote a book called Tragedy and Hope about the role of the bankers in the background. It has 1300 pages so Lew if you are still with us don’t bother you might actually learn something.

To those of you who commented in support, thank you.
travellerev 138

28 October 2008 at 11:52 am

Wow it got trough links and all. Awesome
travellerev 139

28 October 2008 at 12:48 pm

Randal,

I hope you are right but it doesn’t look good. Oil is going down but the crisis gets worse.
What this means is is that when the price went up Americans the biggest consumers of oil started to cut their consuption. Now that the price of oil has gone down in a normal situation you would expect their consumption to go beack up again but this is not happening.

This is because the “real” economy is crashing. The US economy was only tagging along because of second mortgages and credit debt since the 2001 recession.

People are losing their homes and their jobs and their cars become unaffordable. That is what you are seeing and that is scary shit.

Because if the Americans can’t spend their $ 7 trillion a year on food and consumer goods that will be the end of China, India and us.

Anybody out there in the farming community living on the North Island were NZ used to grow their own wheat. No would be a very good time to start growing it again. And any farmer on the west coast fearing for the beef export to the US wondering what to do next with his land, flax (linen) thrives on land close to sea.
And we are going to be needing fibers because China will collapse spectacularly too.

Added to that several of the big sea transport contractors are collapsing due to reduced demand and the credit crunch.
travellerev 140

28 October 2008 at 1:01 pm

Rave,

The Federal Reserve will not be buying a couple of mortgages it will be buying Mortgage Backed Assets. That is a whole different cattle of fish.
That is a bundle of mortgages put together and sold on as a sound investment.
These bundles contain mortgages from all over the planet and a lot of them are the mortgages of Americans who are now defaulting on their mortgages. In other words these bundles contain subprime mortgages. And since nobody knows how bad these bundles are contaminated they are basically worthless because nobody wants them anymore.

So in effect the Federal Reserve is taking the mortgages that international bankers invested in out of circulation and paying the banks top dollar for them to keep them afloat.

Why is the NZ federal reserve buying fraudulently created MBA’s from international banks who exposed themselves to these hyper speculative derivatives and with whose money.
If they are doing it with our tax money I would call that theft since we did not give them permission to give our tax dollars to international banksters who behaved reckless with their money and if they are creating money out of thin air I would call that counterfeiting and dilutes the money value which causes inflation again stealing money out of our pockets.

Both are criminal actions and I would like to get an explanation as to why they think they can get away with it.
rave 141

29 October 2008 at 10:39 am

Trav

The good news is I don’t think the RB is buying bad debts from the banks. They are only accepting mortgages on NZ housing as securities. I see this as a partial nationalisation of the real assets of the Aussie bank subsidiaries.

The bad news is that the depositor guarantee looks like it will be extended to a wholesale guarantee that will join us to the giant sucking machine extracting our wealth into the pockets of financiers and foreign banks.

Labour hasnt got the guts to say to the Aussie banks you ripped us off for years, you have your own wholesale guarantee, if you don’t value your NZ subsidiaries enough to onloan the funds, recognising that the NZRB has had its offer for immediate cash for securities taken up by three banks, and probably all of them before long, if that’s not enough, then write off your bloody banks and we will nationalise the lot.

If Labour hasnt got the guts maybe a massive switch of depositors to Kiwibank will give them the boot up the bum they need. Those snooty businesses who want state socialism for their private profits might be advised to do the same or join the flight of the fuckwits.
Swampy 142

30 October 2008 at 2:25 am

“Standard scoop” = The mainstream media have long since moved on from this issue that is “older than Colin Mead’s rugby boots”