Illegal Use of Parliamentary Services Funds

Office of Stuart NashWith my post this morning I have already outed parliamentary services staff participating in and organising Labour party business, they will not be the only ones. National doesn’t have a clean slate either, neither do the Greens or the Maori party.

This coming week this blog is going to expose a massive rort of taxpayer money. New Zealand political parties have hidden behind a very shabby system that allows them to use Parliamentary Services funds to campaign, which is against the rules but a nod here and a wink there means they have gotten away with murder.

For those who don’t know parliamentary services provide MPs with money for an electorate office, even if they are scum list MPs. This includes an allowance for staff, staff who are not permitted to work for the party or campaign while working for Parliamentary Services. The bad news for taxpayers is there has never been an audit because all parties do it.

This rort is going to be outed on this site. It has many angles:

  • Using Parliamentary Services staff to work on campaigns
  • Using Parliamentary Services staff to do party work
  • Using Parliamentary Services funded electorate offices for party work
  • Using Parliamentary Services funded electorate offices for campaign headquarters
  • Using Leaders Budgets for Campaigning, especially campaign web sites
  • Using MPs travel allowances to get MPs to campaign in strategic seats or in by elections
  • Using Parliamentary Services money to pay the mortgage on buildings the party owns so they can build a property portfolio that they can leverage against
  • Using Parliamentary Services money to pay the mortgage on buildings MPs own, so they can use tax payer money to fund an investment property

Politicians and political parties hide behind not being covered by the Official Information Act so think they wont get caught out.

They use shabby tactics like cronyism and doing deals with lobbyists to raise funds or have their expenses covered.

They will be caught out. Rorters will be exposed.Official complaints will be made, and will be continued to be made until there is a full independent audit of Parliamentary Services and how MPs spend its money.

Keep coming back for details. There will be updates several times a day.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • monty

    the great / funny / interesting thing is that Labour never condemned the theft of the Brash emails a few years back. In fact they dined out on it. I suspect Cam has some major cannons in his arsnel and that there are going to be some very red faces.

    Pay back time for the left.

  • thor42

    I’m glad WO mentions the Official Information Act. What a ***JOKE*** that is.
    Damned near ANYTHING that the pollies deem to be “too sensitive” can be blocked.
    The Act should be redone from scratch, with the default position being openness. In other words, you would be able to ask ANYTHING of ANY department, and they would be compelled by law to reply. That INCLUDES Parliamentary Services, which (IIRC) has a dodgy-as-fuck exemption from the Act.
    The ONLY exception allowed – the only grounds for refusal – would be on the grounds of “national security”.

    • Graeme Edgeler

      Dear IRD,

      please provide me Thor42’s income details since birth, IRD number and birthdate; all the penalties, the bank account details to which their refunds are deposited, whether they’re paying off (or receiving) child support etc. Please understand that unless National Security would be infringed, you are required to give me this information.

      Yours sincerely,
      Graeme Edgeler

    • reid

      Graeme raises a good point but surely some categories of details would benefit from that default position and those could be explicitly stated.

      • thor42

        Yes, and I did say **damned near** anything. Note the use of the qualification.
        In any case, my point stands – it is FAR too easy at the moment for departmental information to be withheld.
        To cut a long story short – ***THE BALANCE IS WRONG.***

  • reid

    It’ll be interesting to see what happens over this, being across parties and all. Oh dear. Every one of their snouts caught like little piggies.

    How embarrassing.

    Why is it that politics attracts people who do this sort of stuff. How come the world over we always only get a few Ron Pauls and mostly simply get a lot of Weiners? Why is that?

    • royaloaks

      Because most are nobodies from nowhere that think they are somebodies. 97% of them are rubbish. Happens all over the world.

    • thor42

      @reid – “Why is it that pol­i­tics attracts peo­ple who do this sort of stuff?”
      Good question……
      Anyway, one thing is for sure. No-one will forget the night that the MPs voted themselves that gold-plated super scheme. Oh, and the container-ship-load of perks that they get. Then, of course, there is the seemingly-obligatory MPs pay rise every year from the Higher Salaries Commission.
      Anyone who reckons there’s no corruption in this country, I want to know which planet they come from….

      • reid

        Pork-barrelling isn’t the same as corruption. Using Parliamentary Services in the way they have if true. is corruption. Pork-barreling though isn’t illegal, it’s just reprehensible. Apparently that word isn’t in the political lexicon except when they use it to refer to other people. They never seem to use it on themselves. Isn’t that peculiar.

        • thor42

          You’re right, of course……
          I guess I was meaning “corruption” in the broadest sense of the word. Not only corruption in the legal sense, but also in the sense of “*morally* corrupt”. Pork-barreling is sure as hell “morally corrupt”.

          • reid

            As-in, they don’t serve us they serve themselves. Yes. Shame isn’t it, when they tell us all the time how much the other way round really it actually truly is. Really.

            It’d be good for politicians I think for them to know much much more about what we know, that they don’t think we know, about them. It would I think make them understand that no, you’re not just really special people in the ultra premium class of life and you deserve to be there through sheer talent. To the contrary you’re just a venal sychophantic little slime bucket prepared to smile and spin bullshit through your teeth as if it was chocolate-flavoured candy-floss. So you’re a salesman, that’s all you are. You’re not even very good, apparently, from the state of the country. I mean, just look around.

            Fuck it’d be funny if it wasn’t true wouldn’t it.

  • pwebb

    I have discovered a particularly egregious breach of PS funding policy. Details are here

    • Doc

      If it breaches the rules stick it to them, whatever party.
      The difference here is that WO won’t delete that link unlike what would happen over at the Low Standards (if it was a link they didn’t want)..

    • reid

      Yes agree with Doc, pwebb. Normally lefties don’t take that approach do they – criticise their own side for doing the wrong thing I mean. Why is that?

41%