Nick Smith

TV3

Pedro Gower has written a blog post that won’t make the left wing happy. he explains why John Key still holds all the cards:

ᔥ Stuff.co.nz

Nick Smith makes some telling points. The Meat Workers Union may think the Talleys are ripping them off, but as Nick points out they have not relocated off shore.

Nelson MP Nick Smith describes them as tough but fair. “They are very patriotic New Zealanders and very loyal to Nelson. If they were driven purely by profit, they would have relocated long ago.”

Interesting choice of word, patriotic. My understanding is the Talleys have been massive benefactors to New Zealand, and care passionately about the direction New Zealand is going in.

The union movement might like to consider Peter Talley’s campaign to keep fishing jobs in New Zealand.

But at the same time he was outspoken against foreign-owned trawlers plundering New Zealand waters.

Peter Talley took an ethical stand that other prominent New Zealand companies like Sanfords have not.

ᔥ NBR

Another of the tight six has been convicted. I reported details of this complex corruption and fraud issue at ACC.

A second player in an ACC property fraud has pleaded guilty.

Gregory Alexander Hutt (54) today admitted in the Wellington High Court to a Crimes Act bribery charge brought by the Serious Fraud Office.

He was a co-offender with Malcolm David Mason (51), who was sentenced last year to 11 months’ home detention and ordered to pay the courts $160,000 he had corruptly received.

Mason’s role was to procure premises for ACC, tendering for their development and negotiating lease terms.

Hutt was involved in property development.

When the story broke in 2010, the blog site, Whale Oil, made allegations naming a well-known, close-knit group of property players in Wellington.

The charges arose after ACC reviewed the lease of 47 Collingwood St, Nelson, for $346,320 per annum.

This review culminated in the dismissal of Mason after the deal prompted complaints to ACC minister Nick Smith about rentals other tenants felt were too high for the area.

Eddie/Mallard at The Standard is writing up a storm about a civil war that simply doesn’t exist and dreaming up factions that are a figment of Eddie’s fevered imagination…or is it Trevor Mallard’s fevered imagination.

Eddie/Mallard believe that the factions are:

• the Collins faction – socially conservative, the party’s Christian wing, economically pure (ie neoliberal) but not overly strong economically apart from on decreasing government spending;
• the Brat Pack – socially conservative but also more economically conservative, incrementalists who see the object of politics as being in power, transforming the country gradually, as a glacier carves a valley;
• the Boag/Key faction – socially liberal, economically neoliberal, old guard, who also want power for the long-run – their next star after Key is Hekia Parata;
• the Joyce faction – socially liberal, small business mentality that the rules should be bent or discarded when they get in the way, not really ideological economically but probably tending to the libertarian way.

Where to start…The Brat Pack ceased to exist a long time ago. Tony Ryall does his own thing these days, Nick Smith is damaged goods, Roger Sowry left parliament three elections ago leaving Bill English as the last man standing. The Brat Pack was also a creature of Michelle Boag’s but she is about as popular as herpes right now. Bill English fell out with her a long time ago.

Bizarrely Eddie/Mallard suggest that there is a Boag/Key faction…this is specious. John KEy is his own man and not one to fall for the machination of Michelle Boag, even if she continues to claim that it was she and not my old man that recruited John Key to National. There simply isn’t a Boag/Key faction as Eddie/Mallard presumes. If there was then Bill Birch wouldn’t have been dispatched with a message for Boag telling her to wither and die, and to do it quietly, which was delivered last week.

There isn’t even a Collins or a Joyce faction. Again these are largely a figment of Eddies/Mallards imagination.

Anyway the post suggests that Stephen Joyce and Hekia Parata are the dream team to take over from John Key.

There is are several major flaws in that thinking.

Neither is liked by their peers which is more important than the wishes and dreams of Eddie/Mallard. Also both are List MPs. Stephen Joyce won’t stand in an electorate due to his campaign manager duties and Hekia Parata has tried and failed twice to win a seat.

hard working electorate MPs won’t countenance a duopoly of List MPs leading the party. If they can’t win seats then they shouldn’t be leaders.

Like Trevor Mallard, The Standard never lets the truth get in the way of a good story. Basically The Standard exists in a parallel universe inhabited by few others beyond the deluded Trevor Mallard.

ᔥ The Listener

Jane Clifton writes about the ACC leaks and Judith Collins. Clifton wonders why the opprobrium for the leaker when in fact they should be hailed:

Ordinarily, leaks of information from government agencies are held to be a good thing – by pretty much everyone except the Government, which is typically embarrassed by them. In fact, the embarrassment of governments has become a positive incentive for those privy to useful information to tell all early and often. We greet whistle-blowers as heroes, and declare, “Sunlight’s the best disinfectant”, and “What have they got to hide?” – a far cry from the patrician days when Rob Muldoon tutted that folk shouldn’t worry about secret economic and fiscal data because voters “wouldn’t know a deficit if they tripped over one”.

Since 1982’s Official Information Act, we have come to expect that unless there is some drastic menace or injury to be feared from information coming out, then out it must come, if someone asks for it. So, it has been a horrible, almost cultural shock to realise that recent weeks’ leaks from ACC and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade have not been the usual wholesome exposé of information we need to know but a vicious form of warfare in murky ­sectorial wars.

The ACC is a veritable water feature of leaks, as who knows how many different agendas are at play. But it’s hard to overlook the probability that a lot of the leakage is not wholesomely motivated, but aimed at putting various parties’ pots on covertly. Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff is excavating the murk, and one can only wish her luck.

It has to be said quickly that the leaking of documents in which former ACC Minister Nick Smith made improper intercessions in the case of his friend and National Party colleague Bronwyn Pullar was by any measure a righteous act. That he had to resign over it showed just how badly we deserved to know about those letters.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant..and now we all know about the Pullar/Boag standover schtick. New Zealand politics is all the better for it.

ᔥ NZ Herald

Audrey Young picks up on the whisperings of Nick Smiths mates and talks about his possible return to cabinet just two weeks after he resigned.

John Key’s reshuffle yesterday promoted Simon Bridges and Chris Tremain and leaves the way open for Nick Smith to come back if the Prime Minister deems he has been punished enough.

Frankly anyone who is touting that hypothesis is dreaming.

David Farrar lists a soft sell reasoning about why Nick Smith probably won’t return to the ministry.

He has however left off two other possible reasons:

• John Key is unforgiving of people who lie to his face. He axed Richard Worth when he caught him out and it was one of the reasons Nick Smith had to go. This reason alone would prevent Nick Smith returning.
• Who knows what other documents or letters of information is contained in the ACC files relating to Bronwyn Pullar from Nick Smith. The Privacy Commissioner and the Police are currently investigating and I can well imagine that numerous media agencies have dropped rather complete OIA bombs on the Minister’s office for correspondence between Boag, Pullar, and Smith, not to mention Collins. If even a single new letter emerges then refer to my point above regarding the lying.

OneNews

It looks like Labour hasn’t learned that smears and attacks on innocent people aren’t well received by the voting public.

The first ONE News Colmar Brunton poll taken since the General Election last november reveals that National’s popularity remains intact, despite the on-going ACC controversy.

The polling was done in the period of Nick Smith’s resignation, the on-going ACC controversy, and questions being raised over the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) restructuring.

Despite this, National’s party vote support is at 51%, up 1% since the previous Colmar Brunton poll. This would see the party with 65 seats, enough to govern alone.

The Labour Party was up one percent too, to be at 29%. The Green Party rose one percent, to be at 11%.

Tim Watkin is scathing:

The latest One News-Colmar Brunton poll is a kick in the pants for Labour. After a ministerial resignation and a fortnight where the whiff of cronyism was never far from National’s door, it can still command more than 50 percent support in the polls. That’s astounding.

…

The real pain must be felt by Labour. While National is under attack from within and ministers are looking rugged, to say the least, the opposition isn’t benefiting. Voters clearly don’t yet see Labour as a viable alternative government. David Shearer is not the ‘go to’ guy for voters to run to. Some inside Labour may say ‘give us a chance, it’s only April’. But if they can’t make hay now, when can they?

The problem is that even a damaged National Party still looks more attractive to most voters than Labour. Voters are looking at National in turmoil and still ticking their box. If that’s not a signal that Labour needs to up its game dramatically, then I don’t know what is.

The problem with Tim Watkin’s assessment is that contrary to what Labour would like to think the party isn’t warring with itself. It is united and there isn’t some sort of internecine warfare going on.

In fact a mass membership party like National will always have robust discussions. Right now it is pretty much one way traffic in an almost unanimous rinsing of Michelle Boag and those who call her a friend…a precious and thankfully small number. Everyone is united in making sure National remains the government despite the silliness of corrupt bullies like Michelle Boag and Bronwyn Pullar.

Labour can put this poor result down to the fact that Trevor Mallard decided to ignore his leader and run a baseless smear against me and Simon Lusk in parliament, and defame Judith Collins outside of parliament.

ᔥ NZ Herald

John Roughan has described the leaker as a hero for outing Bronwyn Pullar and her stand-over scam with Michelle Boag:

Somebody in or near the Accident Compensation Corporation deserves a medal. I was going to award it to the minister, Judith Collins, but she is suing those who suggest it was she who ensured the name Bronwyn Pullar was brought to public notice, so it can’t have been her.

I hope my hero is the case manager at ACC who accidentally emailed that file containing personal data on 6700 people to a persistent claimant last year. When news of that “massive privacy breach” hit the papers, I couldn’t summon much concern. Email accidents can happen in an instant.

But when the corporation then accused the recipient of an attempt to use the accident to advance her own claim with threats that she would go to the media if her claim wasn’t met, I rejoiced. It is so rare to see a public body return serve.

They didn’t name Ms Pullar but the Herald on Sunday got hold of an email to the minister from the indomitable Michelle Boag that identified her, along with Ms Boag’s own supporting role.

Ms Boag plays hard ball too. She said it was the ACC staffer they met in December who had made any benefit conditional on the return of the data.

Well, all we know is that three months after that meeting ACC’s security lapse was made public. That suggests the ACC staff resisted Ms Pullar’s injury claim, unlike its previous minister, Nick Smith, who succumbed eventually to her appeals to intercede.

ACC staff were not swayed by their minister’s interest in the case. And when the information that Boag says they did not threaten to release was released, someone fought back, putting the whole story out. Brilliant.

Rare, brave, refreshing and brilliant.

He is scathing of the integrity, or lack of it from Bronwyn Pullar:

If a few of the 6700 ACC claimants whose details were inadvertently sent to Pullar’s computer were reportedly victims of sexual abuse, their cases would have offered her no comparison with hers, a physical injury 10 years ago.

I prefer to assume she would have the decency not to peer into their details, but then she didn’t have the decency to return or destroy the file as soon as she realised what had happened.

That failure disgraces her I think, regardless of what the police might decide about her subsequent dealings with the ACC.

Despite leading National to its biggest ever failure, Michelle Boag still tries to put across that she is very well connected and well liked within National.

Her connections with the brat pack have waned, and after bringing down Nick Smith are non existent. She is still close to former MPs like Wayne Mapp, but has very few friends left in caucus. Murray McCully is big Boag supporter, and a man reputed to admire her total shamelessness.

Most of the last three intakes have seen through Boag, although she is known to have been close to Paula Bennett and shaken down donors for Nikki Kaye. Unfortunately for Nikki much of Boag’s stomp on everyone to get to the top has rubbed off on her, which is why Nikki is not liked or respected by her peers. Campaigning to get Wira Gardiner to be president built some links with Hekia Parata, but these links apparently soured when Boag was outed as a liar and Wira lost.

Boag’s major influence in the last few years has been over the board. Though she lost the fight to install Wira Gardiner she has propped up the failing regime of Peter Goodfellow. When Peter was going to be voted off the board by the members who regarded him as being next to useless, lazy and not a patch on the loved previous President Judy Kirk, Boag got hold of the PMO and told them as the PM had installed Goodfellow it would be a big defeat for him if Peter was kicked off the board.

Word was then put around MPs that Peter was to be saved and they were to tell their delegations they should vote for him. Boag is known to continue to trade off this relationship.

Boag has positioned an ally to take over from Goodfellow.  Alastair Bell is one of the leaders of the Buggers Muddle. Alastair is an amiable but useless twit of a man who served in the Prime Ministers Office in the 1990’s and was regarded by his peers of having a particularly good day if he managed to complete the Dominion Post crossword by 2pm. Given the rest of the staff managed to finish the crossword within 10 minutes Alastair was not a highly esteemed member of the team. It is reported that David Farrar could finish the crossword inside 5 minutes and complete a new Powerpoint presentation before Alistair had even found “two down”.

More to come tomorrow.

Graeme Edgeler is a frequent commenter on all sorts of election issues, and I have yet to find him to be wrong on anything. He has been kind enough to clarify some points following a post about National needing to look after Nick Smith or he could leave, force a by election, and a hung parliament.

As with all guests posts this is unedited. Those invited to write guest posts are assured that posts will be published in full, whether I agree with them or not. I might comment in a subsequent post, but I will leave this unedited.

When New Zealand adopted the mixed member proportional (MMP) voting system, Parliament had a bunch of choices to make about the detail.

One of the choices it made was that proportionality only mattered at the general election. This means that if an electorate MP from one party resigns (or dies, or otherwise leaves Parliament), and an MP from another party wins the resulting by-election, the overall proportionality of the House changes. Usually this won’t make much difference – the Government’s majority might be reduced from nine votes to eight – but if the House is close to evenly divided, it might make a difference.

This has happened under MMP already. When Labour electorate MP Tariana Turia resigned, Maori Party candidate Tariana Turia won the resulting
by-election, and the number of Labour MPs fell by one, and the number of Maori Party MPs grew by one. And the same principle applies if the replacement is a different person.

You might think that in the event a candidate from a different party from that which previously held the seat won a by-election, the party winning the by-election should lose a list MP, and the party which had the MP resign from it should gain a list MP, so that overall proportionality is maintained with the party vote at the preceding general election. There are good reasons why you might do this, especially if the proportionality of the party vote is considered particularly important.

But the simple point is that we don’t. If you look at Section 55 of the Electoral Act, you will see all the ways in which a seat can become vacant in Parliament. The seat of a list MP cannot become vacant because a candidate for their party won a by-election in a seat they didn’t previously hold. Look through the rest of act, and you simply will not find anything that says we ensure proportionality remains after a by-election is held.

There are also good reasons why we don’t do this. Sometimes it simply can’t work, for example, when a party not previously in Parliament wins the by-election (which the Maori Party and the Mana Party both achieved). And redoing the list seat allocation after a by-election could also completely muck around Parliament.

What would we have done if Winston Peters had won one of the by-elections held during the term of the last Parliament? The current rule we have is that he would
simply have become an MP, replacing the person who previously held the seat, but if we re-did the list allocation, then National would have lost three MPs, and the Greens and Labour one each, so that New Zealand First could have gotten five MPs. This could easily be very destabilising to Parliament. Of course, in a very close Parliament, like the one we currently have (where, for example, the government’s partial sale of various assets is being passed 61 votes to 60), not doing it can have the same effect.

There are any number of different ways we could treat by-elections. The way we do it is probably the easiest, but if people want to suggest alternatives, then they can propose them to the Electoral Commission’s review of MMP. It’s going to look at some of the other rules around by-elections, such as whether list MPs should be able to run in them, and there’s no reason for them not to look at this as well.