Sunday, May 20, 2012

We love a challenge...

Judge Holden has been spending a bit of time here lately. And he laid down a challenge to us this morning with this comment:

Judge Holden said...
And what's Pansy Wong's involvement in all this?

Officials don't request that an individual's residence be revoked. That's not even close to their job. You really don't have any understanding at all of how these things work do you?

May 20, 2012 8:56 AM

We responded thus:

Sheesh; you Labour shrills must be worried if you have to keep raising the Pansy Wong defence.

Give me time later in the day when I have a proper Internet connection, and you'll get a full rebuttal. But when even Willie Jackson reckons that his mate Jones is in deep strife, it must be bad.

May 20, 2012 9:10 AM

Right; we're home now from a weekend working down the Kapiti Coast, and the WiFi at home is working a treat. So here we go.

Thus far, David Cunliffe's involvement in the Bill Liu dodgy passport case has been seen as secondary to Shane Jones' involvement. But that actually puts the cart before the horse.

Nine months before Liu was granted New Zealand citizenship, David Cunliffe received advice from Immigration New Zealand officials. That advise was that Liu was suspected of having multiple identities and multiple passports. On that basis, Cunliffe, then the Immigration Minister was asked to consider revoking Liu's permanent residence. Cunliffe chose not to take this course of action.

So here are some links to ponder:

NZ Herald 7/4/2010: The citizenship was granted nine months after officials advised the Immigration Minister at the time, David Cunliffe, that dual identities allegedly used by Yan were grounds to revoke his permanent residency. 

Stuff 19/5/2012: Three months later, bank accounts he held in Australia were frozen and in June 2007, $4m was sent to the Chinese Government. Yan was not convicted of any offence – he agreed to the repatriation without an admission of liability – but allegations swirling around him were so serious immigration officials suggested his permanent residency be revoked.

NZ Herald 31/1/2009: By 2007 Immigration officials recommended Liu's permanent residency be revoked on grounds that he had allegedly provided false information.

NZ Herald 4/7/2009: The citizenship was granted nine months after officials advised the Immigration Minister at the time, David Cunliffe, that dual identities allegedly used by Liu were grounds to revoke his permanent residency. 

Jones, as Associate Immigration Minister, was presumed to have seen immigration files on Yang Liu, in addition to his role as delegated Internal Affairs Minister. It was in that latter role that Jones gave Liu New Zealand citizenship, against the explicit warnings of officials who told him Liu’s identity was believed fake and that his citizenship application was fraudulent.
Internal Affairs sources have told TGIF that a recommendation also went to the Minister of Immigration recommending Liu’s permanent residency be revoked while it was still possible to do so, but the Minister overturned it.
TGIF spoke to then Immigration Minister Clayton Cosgrove who denied any involvement with the Liu case and said such cases would normally have been handled by the Associate Minister. Cosgrove subsequently told us this week he’d received a verbal briefing from officials confirming they believed Liu’s residency had been obtained fraudulently, and that he was under investigation. But Cosgrove reiterated he had never seen Liu’s file or received any written briefing.
Yet our OIA request to the Immigration Service for the file to Shane Jones recommending residency be revoked turned up a surprise answer:
“Papers of that nature were sent to a previous Minister of Immigration and are withheld,” confirmed Api Fiso, the Group Manager for Border Security at the Immigration Service.
With Cosgrove out of the picture, that left his predecessor David Cunliffe in the gun. It now appears Cunliffe was, like Jones, explicitly warned about Yang Liu’s fraudulent residency application, yet for inexplicable reasons chose not to revoke the Labour party donor’s visa when he had the chance.

There are plenty more links that we could list, but we reckon that we've risen to Judge Holden's challenge, and then some.

Had David Cunliffe followed the recommendation/request/advice from Immigration New Zealand officials (call it by whatever name you will) and revoked Liu's residence, the issue of citizenship would have been moot. But Cunliffe's actions are of now suprise; after all, he was the Minister who famously said "I'm running this show now Mr Ryall" around the same time, and who sacked the democratically elected Hawke's Bay District Health Board in 2008, a decision which he subsequently had to reverse or face a legal challenge.

So it wouldn't surprise if Shane Jones isn't too favourably disposed towards the MP for New Lynn at the moment; had Cunliffe done his job in 2007, Jones wouldn't be being left in the lurch even by his mates like Willie Jackson.

Oh; the unfairness of it all. Doubtless though Judge Holden will be able to brush it all off as "National good; Labour baaaaaad", and once again blame Pansy Wong. But with the news that David Shearer is keeping a watching brief on Jones' involvement, he may also have the opportunity to nobble on of his main challengers for the Labour Party leadership.




Delete



Delete

39 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why do you keep saying 'we' when clearly you mean 'I'? It is awfully bad grammar and undermines your credibility (and take it from me, you need all of that you can muster)

Anonymous said...

Heh, Ignore the pedant, IV.

I enjoy your blog just as you are..

db..

Keeping Stock said...

There's a simple explanation to that Anon (7.01pm); posts on here are a collaboration between three people; me, myself and I!

Gavin said...

I've also enjoyed your blogs they tend to be backed up by facts. Anonymous 1 above and Judge Hooten etc tend to attack the person not the subject and silly slogans like National good Labour bad show the lack of substance in what is being debated. Keep up the good work.

Judge Holden said...

Been hard at work I see.

Sorry, can you set out explicitly the allegations of improper/illegal conduct you're making against Cunliffe here? You're obviously insinuating something, but being terribly vague. I'm not sure if that's willful, or just because you're a poor communicator. All I can see is that Cunliffe received advice from officials and didn't act on the recommendations.

Do you have anything else? How is that improper? If that's all you have then most of the Nats should be in the dock. I mean it's not as if he told a donor how he thought he could get around electoral finance laws, receive a donation and then tell blatant lies to the public like John Banks did is it?

Anonymous said...

@7.36pm. What does that mean please? Can I conclude your multiple personalities affect the sincerity of what each of you might say on any given topic? A bit like wowser banks and relaxed key vs donation accepting banks and shut down the media key?

The Gantt Guy said...

The reason Sludge has been lurks here is because its been banned from everywhere else he used to invade and mess on the rug. Even John Ansell, a gentleman if ever there was one, has sent him packing.

Keeping Stock said...

Re-read this Holden:

With Cosgrove out of the picture, that left his predecessor David Cunliffe in the gun. It now appears Cunliffe was, like Jones, explicitly warned about Yang Liu’s fraudulent residency application, yet for inexplicable reasons chose not to revoke the Labour party donor’s visa when he had the chance.

If Cunliffe had follwed the advice and recommendation of his officials, Liu's residence status would have been revoked, and he would have been outta here.

But of course, that would have meant no more $200,000-a-night fundraisers at the Jade Gardens retaurant where invited guests dropped large sums of untraceable cash into buckets, so that the donations could not be identified and didn't have to be declared.

And therein lies the nub of this issue.

Judge Holden said...

"That would have meant no more $200,000-a-night fundraisers at the Jade Gardens retaurant where invited guests dropped large sums of untraceable cash into buckets, so that the donations could not be identified and didn't have to be declared."

You mean like the ones Pansy Wong had? Is that why she wrote letters of support for Liu?

Are you making a direct allegation of corruption against Wong and Cunliffe? That's pretty serious.

Gantt, shouldn't you be looking for Obama's birth certificate? It's in a corner of the Oval Office. Freak.

Keeping Stock said...

And you might like to have a look at this link too Judge:

http://www.investigatemagazine.com/tgif5dec08.pdf

Wishart asked a very pertinent question of Phil Goff in Dewcember 2008:

Can you please offer any explanation as to why a senior cabinet minister would not take
the opportunity to revoke Yang Liu’s residency when his officials discovered his identity (and thus original application) appeared to be fake?


Oddly, he's still waiting for an answer; what a surprise!

Keeping Stock said...

I'm not alleging anything Judge.

But are you thick, or are you just being obtuse? When all this happened, Pansy Wong was an opposition back-bench MP, with no influence whatsoever over these kinds of decisions. On the other hand, Dover Samuels was a former Minister and government MP, Chris Carter was a Minister (who received a $5000 donation from Liu) as was Rick Barker, who sensibly declined to act due to a conflict of interest. And then you had Jones and Cunliffe acting as lone wolves, overriding official advice. It's not a good look at all.

And to cap it all off, David Shearer is going to be considering Jones' future:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/6950786/Shearer-to-talk-with-Jones-before-deciding-his-fate

I'd say that there's definitely some major unease within Labour over this tawdry saga. And so there should be; NZ citizenship ought not be able to be purchased.

Tinman said...

Don't knock Holden for his "National good; Labour Baaaad" thing KS.

It's the only comment I've seen of his that is even slightly truthful.

Judge Holden said...

Ministers act like "lone wolves" as you so dramatically put it, by not acting on advice all of the time. You're not even alleging Cunliffe and Wong did anything wrong. What's you're point again? You're making some sly insinuations, and that's all you've got.

And residence can already be purchased. See your chum Dotcom.

Keeping Stock said...

Every time you mention Pansy Wong's name Judge, you show yourself as nothing more than a shrill for the dodgy Left who demand one standard of behaviour from the Right, but excuse their own mates being dodgy.

And dman right I'm alleging that Cunliffe did something wrong. As Minister of Immigration, he was duty-bound to strongly consider the advice/recommendation/request of his INZ officials (who know a heck of a lot more about the day-to-day minutiae of immigration issues than any Minister does), but he completely failed in his duty to New Zealanders by allowing a dodgy immigrant red-flagged by Interpol to stay here, and subsequently gain an NZ passport. He showed an appalling lack of judgment (as he did when he saclked the Hawke's Bay DHB which was later reinstated) whoch poses serious questions over his fitness to be a Minister again, or even worse, to be a party leader.

Keeping Stock said...

And Tinman's right; every time you say "National good; Labour baaad", it's probably the most truthful words you ever type.

Judge Holden said...

He did consider the advice, and like many many many Ministers before and since decided not to act on it (like Power over the Dotcom OIO application for example). You're not privy to the reasons why so all you're doing is using innuendo, second-guessing and assuming this was the wrong decision based on media reports. Gotcha politics at its lowest.

Guy gave to both parties anyway, and had support from both. You're ignoring that the way you ignore Banks' lies. Why are you such a tory shill?

Judge Holden said...

Compare and contrast these two statements from you on this thread:

"I'm not alleging anything Judge."

"And dman (sic) right I'm alleging that Cunliffe did something wrong."

Consistent much? Which is it? I think you just say things that you think will most assist the shilling you're doing at any given moment and you don't actually believe what you're saying.

TCrwdb said...

Read the following on the weekend, most apt when applied to JH:
" When dealing with activists of any stripe, be it racial, gender, sexuality, or a pet cause, be aware of one simple thing – They will almost invariably speak their subcultural allegiance first and the truth second if at all. This is a negative trait that is self-reinforcing because all of these causes preach a form of orthodoxy that requires such relegation of the truth to, at most, secondary standing as a metric of “authenticity” on the activists’ parts.

What this means for us is that, due to the activists’ mental and ethical deformity and the constant reinforcement of that deformity, they can rarely, if ever at all, be reasoned with. In some extreme cases, elder Black and Feminist demagogues being the most common example, you can’t even placate them because the war they have created in their minds is an end in itself and they couldn’t – not wouldn’t – recognize victory even if they achieved it.

Remember, since the truth is less than important to them than solidarity and orthodoxy in their cause, these activists and their core followers cannot be reasoned with. As such, there is no point or purpose in engaging with them.

Keeping Stock said...

Oh Judge; what a fickle web you weave, when first you practice to deceive; I was responding to this comment left by your good self:

Are you making a direct allegation of corruption against Wong and Cunliffe? That's pretty serious.

I stand by my comment. I have not made a direct allegation of corruption against David Cunliffe. I have questioned his judgment, and his fitness to be a Minister; big difference.

PS: What's with your obsession with Pansy Wong? Have you got the hots for her?

Judge Holden said...

So no allegation of corruption from you then, just some vague thing about judgment. Well, what's the basis of you questioning his judgment? That he didn't act on recommendations of officials. That's lame even by your standards. You're not privy to all of the facts, and just sounding off, making allegations, not making allegations and squawking. Wong came to the same conclusion Cunliffe did, so her judgment is likewise being unfairly impugned by you. You won't admit that though, because you're s shill.

Keeping Stock said...

"...because you're s shill."

You obviously have no idea how ironic that comment is Mr Holden. It's akin to the pot calling the kettle black...

And how many times do you have to be told? Pansy Wong was an OPPOSITION MP when this matter took place, and had no role or influence in the decision-making. Do you REALLY think that Shane Jones acted against official advice because an opposition MP wrote a letter? I guess that it takes a shill to know a shill...

Judge Holden said...

Wong and Cunliffe came to the SAME CONCLUSION. Their judgment was the same. That all you have. Deal with it.

Ciaron said...

Was Wong aware, as a back bench MP, of the concerns IA raised about Liu's character, or that he was of interest to Interpol?

Can one assume that being red flagged by Interpol would not normally result in granting citizenship?

What test was applied by the minister that enabled him to dismiss the concerns of IA?

TCrwdb said...

I've got a 10 year old that behaves like JH, or should I say that JH is behaving like said 10 year old girl.

Keeping Stock said...

@ Ciaron - there's no point in reminding Holden that Pansy Wong played no part in the decision-making of either Cunliffe or Jones. He's so trapped in the Pansy Wong is Asian/Pansy Wong is National/Pansy Wong is dodgy mindset that he can't see the obvious right in front of him.

Keeping Stock said...

@ TCrwdb - the difference is that 10-year-old girls grow out of it. But Judge Holden trolls around various blogs, eventually getting banned. For the moment, he is fixated on Keeping Stock; we'll see how long my patience lasts, before he joins Riverton's finest on the persona non grata list.

Ciaron said...

I have always thought Wong was dodgy, and I would like to know what she knew when she wrote her recommendation.

Judge Holden said...

As, so now you're resorting to ad hom attacks. Basically, you've been reduced to squawking "you're a girl". Sad, but standard tory fall back.

The facts are you're making no allegation of corruption, just "poor judgment", not for not taking officials' advice, but because you've concluded, without full possession of the facts, that the decision not to revoke residence was a poor one. The same judgment was displayed by Pansy Wong, then a National Party MP, in backing Liu. However, you're making no such allegation against her for some reason. The reason is you're a National Party shill and so every situation must be reduced to National good, Labour baaaaad.

Anonymous said...

Judge Holden, Riverton's finest, and their bloglice muppets are hell bent on making decent blogs unreadable for the rest of us. Just as has happened to Kiwiblog, flamewars generated by commenters with no following on their own blogs disrupt the flow of opinions of those who are open to genuine discussion. Tolerant hosts, such as Keeping Stock and Home Paddock, suffer these fools, perhaps not gladly, but with a generosity of spirit that these bloglice resent and makes them hell-bent on destroying such hosts.
Such destructive envy is a pitiable aspect of human nature.

Judge Holden said...

Hey, just pointing out the flaws and inconsistencies in the positions adopted by the stooges. It's called debate. If you want an echo chamber try the psychos at Crusader Rabid.

Anonymous said...

Or The Standard, or Red Alert, or Idle Thoughts of an Idle Fellow, or robertguyton.

Keeping Stock said...

To be fair Anon, Robert Winter at Idle Thoughts is the most moderate of the lot that you mention, and you can actually debate issues with him at a rational level.

Anonymous said...

Yes about Robert Winter to a degree, in the same civil manner of best of the left, Chris Trotter and Brian Edwards. But the promotion of class warfare and all that is not of the left is evil, venal, corrupt, whilst couched in prosy language, is possibly one of the most divisive blogs on the NZ internet.

TCrwdb said...

Incorrect JH, I said your BEHAVIOUR was that of a 10 year old girl.

Give a man enough rope...

Judge Holden said...

And I said "basically", you illiterate moron.

Ciaron said...

Who's busting out the Ad homs now.

TCrwdb said...

This is to easy.

Judge Holden said...

"This is to (sic) easy."

ROFL. Thanks for demonstrating your illiteracy, moron.

TCrwdb said...

The joys of auto-spelling phones :)

...and now the behaviour plunges to that of a 7 year old boy...