Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: #JohnDotBanks and all

282 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 12 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha,

    Just stumbled on Cunliffe's recent economic positioning speech. Interesting read (ta Danyl for pasting from Facebook).

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16500 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie,

    The reason Labour made that choice was that without UF and NZF, Labour didn't have a majority. Now you might want Labour to give up a term in power for ideological purity, but really that's daft, especially to Brash's National.

    Since Jul 2008 • 1321 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    I wonder if someone has checked if Dotcom gave to Banks' Epsom parliamentary campaign? One would imagine that Banks must've seen him as a cash cow - perhaps that's the other shoe waiting to drop....

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 4696 posts Report Reply

  • Ross Francis, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    Dotcom would presumably have mentioned any such donation...unless he's holding back.

    Banks should be sacked for mangling the English language! His repeated description of Dotcom as a "donater" last night on TV3 made me cringe.

    Wairarapa • Since Apr 2012 • 13 posts Report Reply

  • Ross Francis,

    It seems Banks lobbied his mate Maurice Williamson for Dotcom to be able to purchase the Coatesville property. Williamson approved the deal but subsequently changed his mind after Simon Power vetoed it. No doubt John Key will say that Banks wasn't in Parliament at the time, so there's no issue.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10802626

    Wairarapa • Since Apr 2012 • 13 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Hebe,

    Going with Winston and The Hair made good MMP sense for Labour

    Not long term.

    But the point is that the Greens couldn’t provide Labour with the votes to form a government – and Dunne and Peters, who refused to be part of a government with the Greens, could.

    I looked up what I wrote at the time, and it could have been different had the Greens achieved one more seat – they were 1426 votes short.

    Anyway, I'll try and write a post where we can have the Labour discussion ...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18718 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Ross Francis,

    The big story in the Herald this morning is the Editorial:

    Banks must resign over gift scandal

    Not just stand down during the inquiry -- resign.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18718 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Ross Francis,

    Banks should be sacked for mangling the English language! His repeated description of Dotcom as a “donater” last night on TV3 made me cringe.

    I checked my Oxford. Donator is a word. It means a person who receives a donation. And in a separate definition, it means a person who makes one.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2996 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    Donator is a word.

    Yeah, in America.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Martin Lindberg, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    Donator is a word.

    I think it's an abbreviation for detonator. Perfectly apt in this case.

    Stockholm • Since Jul 2009 • 790 posts Report Reply

  • JLM, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I looked up what I wrote at the time, and it could have been different had the Greens achieved one more seat – they were 1426 votes short.

    And one of them was mine, to my endless shame...

    Judy Martin's southern sl… • Since Apr 2007 • 227 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie,

    For as long as I can recall, right back to the days when he used to fill in for the ailing Muldoon on Radio Pacific, Banks couldn't open his yap without using the words 'disgrace' or 'disgraceful'. It seemed to suddenly stop when the yammering prissiness gave way to loony evasiveness.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 3386 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Sacha,

    Just stumbled on Cunliffe’s recent economic positioning speech. Interesting read (ta Danyl for pasting from Facebook).

    It's up on the Labour Blog . Was linked to in the comments part of his post for the non facebookers like me { :)

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6028 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    dunning the dunno donor...

    a person who receives a donation... (or) a person who makes one.

    either way it looks like Banks is prime meat for a donee-kebab....

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 4696 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Saint John... or Stain John?
    Poor Mr Banks, here he is getting the Spanish Inquisition, when he is just taking his lead from the Pope who quietly reintroduced Plenary Indulgences a few years back - a nice little earner, I'm sure!

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 4696 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Semmens,

    The big story in the Herald this morning is the Editorial:

    Banks must resign over gift scandal

    I guess when he opened the Herald this morning over breakfast Banksie got the same sort of feeling of abandonment Kim Dotcom felt in remand, but with the compensation of having china teacups.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1776 posts Report Reply

  • Richard Grevers, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I know this is local body rather than Government, but its still rather hypocritical from the paper that campaigned so hard for the repeal of the Electoral Finance Act. I thought the Herald's vision of democracy was that whoever had thew most money could influence the most voters.
    I'm actually hankering for the days when electioneering TV time and media space was rationed and paid for by the state.

    New Plymouth • Since Jul 2011 • 123 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX, in reply to Russell Brown,

    The Herald editorial states:

    Anonymous donations should not be permitted at all but they have been allowed under strict conditions because political parties say few wealthy or corporate donors would contribute if their names had to be made public.

    Are they seriously saying that if all donations had to be declared that wealthy or corporate donors would stop seeking to exercise influence via donations on elected representatives. Isn’t this the crux of the problem?

    That is nonsense - I am sure that wealthy or corporate donors and the vote for sale political parties Labour, National, Act and NZ First would experience some discomfort if the electorate knew what the stakes were/ or what was going on. I have no problem with any of these groups feeling slightly uncomfortable with voters having the opportunity to learn of their donations behaviour.

    A full (and honest) donations disclosure regime may result in political parties needing to engage on a regular basis with and seek donations from “voters” as opposed to the wealthy or corporates. Presently they are only interested in appealing to “us’ at election time and they are well less than honest.

    A comprehensive disclosure, along with other measures, may result in the nearly one million eligible voters who did not exercise a choice at the last election actually voting.

    The behaviour of Banks, Key (and even that of Len Brown) does not engender one with the confidence that one's vote amounts to much.

    .

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1186 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    News roundup:


    NZH: Banks: I briefed Dotcom

    John Banks says he kept political donor Kim Dotcom briefed on the progress of his application to buy 45 hectares of Kiwi land for $45 million.

    The statement has been backed by Dotcom - but Mr Banks' "good friend", Land Information Minister Maurice Williamson, denies any information came from him.

    DomPost: Banks admits 'obfuscating'

    Cabinet (sic) minister John Banks has admitted he was not "up front" over his relationship with Kim Dotcom because of legal advice.

    DomPost: Five questions Banks must answer.

    OPINION: If John Banks is serious about doing the right thing by National and his mate John Key, he should step aside now.

    NZH: Banks: I didn't lie, I simply forgot

    John Banks says he never lied about internet billionaire Kim Dotcom's $50,000 donation to his 2010 mayoral campaign but says he erred in not answering questions about the affair more openly.

    Listener: Banksie in the middle, Winston on the aisle

    Scandal-embroiled John Banks and Winston Peters were joined at the hip on the way to Wellington. Don't they make a sweet pair?

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie, in reply to 3410,

    Scandal-embroiled John Banks and Winston Peters were joined at the hip on the way to Wellington. Don't they make a sweet pair?

    I think it was Denis Welch who described them as the two horsemen of the socialist apocalypse back in their 80s opposition days.
    Back together again like Hall & Oates.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 3386 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    ODT: Splitting hairs over ethics and legality not a good look for PM

    There is the letter of the law, there is the spirit of the law and there is intent. Like the Prime Minister, I'm no lawyer but it seems to me most ordinary people do not have a high opinion those who behave with questionable intent to flout the spirit of the law, yet whose actions might not contravene the actual letter of it.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed,

    Say what you will of Trev, but this was a hoot:

    Slyest approach was Trevor Mallard's question to Mr Banks about charter schools in his capacity as associate education minister. Rolling several of the Government's problems together in an ingenious ball, Mr Mallard asked whether an application had been made to establish a charter school inside the SkyCity casino, thus eliminating the problem of gamblers' children being left outside in cars.

    Mr Banks tried valiantly to answer the question as though it had been genuinely intended, but his earnest advocacy for disadvantaged children was drowned out by laughter - on both sides of the House.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 4162 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming,

    Thing I can't understand: The cheques were made out to "Team Banksey" and drawn on Dotcom's account. They had to be deposited by someone - who was that? If they went through Boag's hands (as campaign manager) she had to know who they were from. Is Banks allowed to say that, because he didn't personally see the cheques, they were thus anonymous? Surely the candidate is responsible for everything that occurs during his campaign?

    Perhaps Boag has given Banks a message along the lines of "If you throw me under a bus, it will be the last thing you ever do?" because her role in this has been remarkably quiet.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 1893 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to nzlemming,

    They had to be deposited by someone – who was that?

    Apparently deposited in a Queenstown bank!
    Why there I wonder….

    It now transpires that two cheques for $25,000 were deposited in a bank account in Queenstown anonymously."

    Thinking about it: it may mean the account was in Queenstown
    not that the cheques were actually physically taken to Queenstown and deposited there. But still begs the question why would Banks have a campaign bank account in a Queenstown Bank?
    Maybe they meant Queen Street?

    and who gave Dotcom the bank account number details to deposit the cheques into said account?

    or did the cheques get to Team Banksie and were deposited by a minion while skiing - it's all downhill from here really...

    More smoke and mirrors….

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 4696 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to DeepRed,

    Say what you will of Trev, but this was a hoot

    It really was. Now if only that skill could be put to better use.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16500 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 12 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.