The Dom-Post reports that New Zealand First is going to apologise to the Electoral Commission for the party's serial breaches of the Electoral Act. Isn't it too late for that? With the Serious Fraud Office investigating, and new donations coming to light seemingly every day, isn't it a bit like making a lame excuse to a cop when he stops you doing 80km/h in a 50km zone?
And if NZ First, via its erstwhile former president Dail Jones is going to apologise, shouldn't that apology be directed to the public of New Zealand? After all, it is the public that has been deceived by the Keeping Them Honest party, who had us believe they were above secret trusts, anonymous donations and receiving money from "big business". If NZ First's remorse is genuine, and not just a lame attempt to curry favour, immediate repayment of the $158,000 the party stole from the taxpayer in 2005, plus three year's interest would be a start - but only a start.
Meantime, elsewhere the Dom-Post notes that the Spencer Trust paid $87,648 worth of bills on behalf of NZ First in 2006, talikng the sum channelled through the Trust to more than $234,000.
9 comments:
80Km/hr? More like the 170Km/hr his cohort was calculated to be doing some time ago.
No amount of late gestures like repayment of $158K with interest will ever finish this chapter of corruption in NZ politics.
A long jail sentence for all of NZ First and Liarbour's corrupt top echelon would go some way to reparation.
170km - very good PM - wish I'd thought of that!!
As fay as the $158k goes, you'll note that I said:
"immediate repayment of the $158,000 the party stole from the taxpayer in 2005, plus three year's interest would be a start - but only a start."
They could follow that up by declining to take part in the next three elections - one for each year that they have transgressed by using a secret trust!
See today's NZ Herald:
"Democrats for Social Credit's late return referred to police
1:42PM Friday September 05, 2008
The Electoral Commission is to go to police over a late 2007 donation return by the Democrats for Social Credit party.
The commission's chief executive said the party had given no reasonable excuse and the matter would be referred to the police.
New Zealand First also filed its donation returns late, but managed to convince the commission it had a reasonable excuse."
Who says the Electoral Commission is wishy washy now, eh?
"More like the 170Km/hr his cohort was calculated to be doing some time ago."
If this was an apology for a traffic ticket - then it is an apology given after abusing the cop, driving over his foot and crashing into his car in the process of escaping. When finally stoped by road spikes and tackled after a long chase on foot - you then try to avoid a charge by given a sincere and heartfelt apology.
With apologies - like humour - timing is everything.
Serves the Democrats for Social Credit right for trying to rort our electoral system.
A long jail sentence for all of NZ First and Liarbour's corrupt top echelon would go some way to reparation.
precisely!
Actually, Winston could "apologise" by resigning - along with all his MPs, paying all the money back with interest, and surrendering to the police.
They are all list MPs, so they should then appoint 7 more MPs as directed by John Key
At which point, Parliament could finally act to return democracy to NZ: finding Winston & Helen & Labour in contempt of parliament and jailing he lot; closing down Labour & the Greens; postponing the election
until the electoral system, EFA, ERA, etc can be fixed and NZ can actually have a free-and-fair election.
Because if Helen is forced - somehow - to go to the polls, we can be sure, as in 2002 and 2005 - this election will be as "free and fair" as Zimbabwe or Georgia
I2, Where were you doing 80km/h in a 50km zone?
BTW, NZ First didn't "transgress by using a secret trust!" Otherwise, National would be in a lot more hot water than NZ First.
Quite right JP - NZ First didn't trangress, as you so rightly say, by using secret trusts. Nor did National, and nor did Labour by accepting anonymous donations via solicitors's trust accounts.
However NZ First is guilty of gross hypocrisy for having pretended to be above such things, when they have clay feet just like the rest. And National and Labour, unlike NZ First disclosed their donations from such sources, which makes them completely legal under the law as applicable at the time.
and nor did Labour by accepting anonymous donations via solicitors's trust accounts.
no but labour stole millions from the taxpayer & retrospectively change the law to keep themselves out of jail and keep the party from being banned for corruption!
never ever forget that: in Australia even, much less the UK or anywhere else - the labour party would have been banned and closed down for what they did last time around
Post a Comment