Frank Macskasy over at Frankly Speaking writes some very long posts that are often full of interesting information. This one does a good analysis of the recommendations from the Electoral Commission and various party positions on it. On the way through he has a good swipe at John Banks, who it would be safe to say, he considers to be political cabbage.
National Party campaign designer John Ansell and Invercargill-based racist Loius Crimp are planning a $2 million campaign to whip up racial hatred between Pakeha and Maori. I don’t think people will be fooled, even if anyone publishes their material. We’ve moved past the Owera days. Everyone will see this is about NACToids’ privilege, not Maori privilege.
There’s some interesting speculation that the Government could collapse within months. The theory goes that the Government could lose its majority due to 1) the Maori Party walking away over the water rights issue and 2) John Banks being forced to resign over illegally anonymised donations in the 2010 Auckland mayoral election. I don’t see it happening, yet.
The Police have concluded their investigation into John Banks’ donations to his 2010 mayoral campaign. The Police legal section will now decide whether or not to prosecute. There are two tests; the evidential test and the public interest test. There is no question that if the evidence is sufficient, prosecution is in the public interest. It comes down to credibility – best decided in court.
Banks is deadmeat. It’s just a matter of time before Key gives him the boot. Politically, he must. He has grounds, even on the limited ‘ethics while a minister’ test he has created. We’re now just waiting for something sufficiently new that Key can use it as justification for an about face. Then comes the question of a by-election. And that’s where it gets tricky for Key.
The media are doing a good job investigating John Banks’ donation history. The Police are presumably also doing theirs, and it seems clear that the matter must end up in Court and the issue of who is telling the truth will be decided by a judge. Some in the media have dismissed the question of any threat to National’s majority. Short-term maybe, long-term I’m not so sure.
Why did Banks lie about a discount hotel room where Dotcom was staying, then say he bargained it himself? Who made $15K of radio ad donations to his campaign? What did Nats on Banks’ ‘mentor group’ and ACT leaders know about the anonymised donations? How much info did Banks get from Williamson on Dotcom’s OIO application? Why has Key still not spoken to Banks to ask any of these question?
ACT Party President Chris Simmons – who opposed the Brash coup that lead to John Banks being ACT’s sole MP – ‘accidentally’ dropped Banks right in it on Radio New Zealand’s Checkpoint. He said “[Banks] made the suggestion to Dotcom” to split his donation into two $25,000 pieces and implied the purpose was to have a number of identically-sized donations he could claim were anonymous.
There’s the facts, the questions and the legal opinions. Today in Parliament John Key stuck to his lack of interest in detailed questions, and adherence to Banks’ reliance on legal opinions. He even alleged that the Labour Opposition agreed with these opinions. Not likely. The Police need to ask all the relevant questions that have so far not been answered by Banks or asked by Key, then their veracity and reliability should be established by a judge.
A by-election in Epsom. If ACT or National win, the Right retains 61 votes. But, between resignation and swearing in typically takes 3 months during which the Right would have 60 v 60. Legislation fails on draws. Asset sales, SkyCity, welfare cuts, even the Budget could all fail if the Maori Party wants. And what if the Conservatives win? They’re anti-asset sales and crony capitalism. You can see why Key is turning a blind eye.
According to 3 News, Kim Dotcom paid cheques into John Banks’ campaign account in Queenstown. Duncan Garner says this would show up on Banks’ bank records as “anonymous”. So how did Kim Dotcom get TeamBanksie’s account number? Two days after he had had a lunch meeting with Banks.
More questions for the Police to ask and Banks to answer.
Campbell Live showed us pictures of the Cheques by which Kim Dotcom’s company Megastuff made donations to Team Banksie 2010. How can John Banks argue that the two donations of $25,000 from Kim Dotcom’s company Megastuff Limited are anonymous when the company name is on the cheque? You could look up their address on the website. Game over, John and John.
David Cameron’s defence of embattled Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt has been called a “firewall” that’s failing to hold.
Cameron needs Hunt to stay or else Cameron is the next to go. It is the same for John Key.
As the stench of corruption around John Banks grows, he desperately needs him to stay or else all he loses legitimacy for asset sales and potentially his majority on the issue as well.
The indefatigable Idiot/Savant at NRT has been looking at the appointment of Isacc to head the Charter School Working Group. It seems to have been conducted with all the professionalism and integrity that we have come to expect of ACT.
Party donations for the 2011 general election will be published on Tuesday . One new provision in the Act provides for the declaration of the number of donations in two bands; $1500 to $5,000, and up to $15,000. It will be very interesting to see the number of upper level donations in National and ACT particularly. They could hide Banks-type split donations from asset-sale backers.
No Right Turn on another sad chapter for democracy in NZ.
ACT-crony Catherine Isaac will head the implementation of the government’s unmandated charter schools programme. Isaac has no relevant expertise to justify this appointment. She has been given the position (and a generous public salary) solely on the basis of ideology and party affiliation. That is not how our public service is supposed to work.
The tea tapes contain a pivotal exchange where John Banks and John Key talk about “restructuring” ACT – including Banks confirming his orders from Key to make Catherine Isaac the new leader. We also learn that National advisors called Key in a panic during the Brash coup calling on him to stage a snap election. It’s an insight into the cynicism of National and Key, and also Key’s poor political judgement.
The Teapot Tapes have leaked on to the internet.
You can torrent it and listen past all of the noise.
There are a couple of nice pieces in the Herald today on upstanding ACT MP John Banks – on his advising arrested Kim Dotcom on residency and the Overseas Investment Commission, and on his “National” billboards…
Brian Fellow wrote a piece in the Herald yesterday on how NZ has too many ministers. Hard not to agree. 28 ministers. Nearly half of the governing parties’ MPs. 90+ portfolios. Ministerial warrants are clearly being used to keep backbenchers and minor parties in line. Too many do nothing ministers on big salaries while the rest of us have to cut back.
Scott at Imperator Fish has kindly given us permission to syndicate posts from his blog – the original of this post is here
David Farrar applies some wonky logic in order to blame everything bad the Nats do on the left. If any group of voters is to blame for the National/ACT deal, it’s those voters who gave National their party vote and/or John Banks their electorate vote.
Once again, under National, we get to repeat an experiment that failed 20 years ago. All cooked up on the back of an envelope in a coalition deal. Education deserves much better.
Coalition agreements are expected to be signed today, with Ministerial roles expected for both Dunne and Banks. But it is the details of the policy gains that will tell us the mettle of these two. Did they achieve anything significant with their negotiating power?
For the sake of your neighbors in Auckland and your extended family throughout New Zealand, could the voters of Epsom please terminate the twitching corpse of the Act party. Once they may have had a purpose. Now they just have John Banks and that other failed politician. Let us look forward into the sunset without this zombie party being maintained by the misplaced charity of the voters of Epsom.
This will be one of the dirtiest political and anti-democratic tactics ever designed in NZ history. It has the potential of delivering a second John Key term, gifting Epsom to ACT and of discrediting MMP in one foul swoop: a true Tory Trifecta.
Bradley Ambrose, the cameraman widely maligned by John Key and his pudgey lapdogs David Farrar and Cameron Slater for daring to hold the PM to some basic standards of accountability, is demanding an apology from John Key or he’ll take the PM to court for defamation.
UPDATE: The final week of the campaign will kick off with a police raid on the Herald Monday morning.
We missed this at the time – thanks to toad in comments (and link to g.blog) for the heads up! Especially relevant now that John Key has personally tied himself to ACT with his endorsement.
The teapot tape fiasco has forced the Nats to pretend that they are interested in policy. It’s screamingly hypocritical of them, since they couldn’t even be bothered returning answers to Radio NZ’s policy survey. But let’s not waste this new opportunity. Let’s start with asking them why they’re endorsing a party of loony climate change deniers.
Winston Peters is suggesting that in the transcript of the PM’s meeting with Banks, John Key made some derogatory remarks about the older New Zealanders that tend to support New Zealand First, along the lines of “not to worry [about Winston’s support] they’re dying off”. Slagging off older New Zealanders (ie. the ones that always vote) is a sure way to lose an election.
Could Key really be so clueless? Well yes, when you look at the excuses he’s trotting out – probably.
John: “I hear you might be able to get your hands on something to get me through the Election?”
The tea tape didn’t interest me at first. Nats’ reaction seemed over the top but would Key and Banks be so stupid to discuss anything sensitive in a public cafe metres from the press mob? But then Key went to the cops. This said the Nats were really worried. It can only be something that cuts to the heart of Brand Key’s greatest weakness: Key’s honesty.
Oh to be an Epsom voter – what an enviable menu of options you have. A National candidate who cares so much about the electorate that he goes to extraordinary lengths to discourage people from voting for him, or a racist former National politician soundly rejected by all of Auckland after a dismal ‘Supercity’ mayoralty who’s actively campaigning to undermine his own racist former National politician party leader.
What a shonkey farce!
Well, that was a let down. The much-hyped ‘cup of tea’ climaxed in Key saying that he would be voting for Goldsmith but he “wouldn’t be unhappy” if other Epsom voters back Banks. A double negative? Hardly a ringing endorsement. I think it’s too little, too late, for a man and a party that are too unpopular. All Key has done is tie his brand to extremists.
