All a bit cute

I’ve been out of, mostly, cellphone and internet coverage so missed all the furore over Cosgrove.

However, isn’t it all a bit cute that in the 2008 election year, Cosgrove received only $3000 from Independent Fisheries as a donation.

And as we now know, in the last election cycle Cosgrove received $17,500 from the same crowd.

What happened between 2008 and 2011?

Well, Cosgrove proposed a new piece of law that would allow his ‘mate’ at Independent Fisheries to develop land near Kaiapoi.

Coincidence? Fishy?

The pressure is now on David Shearer to do to Cosgrove what he demanded the Prime Minister do in both the Nick Smith and John Banks cases…

“He cannot continue to hold ministerial roles while such serious allegations are swirling around him.”

Petard, Hoist.

Cosgrove of course was very vocal in the House too when sledging John banks, often mentioning donations and dates and amounts…I think he may well get some of his own back when the House next sits.


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.

  • Mediaan

    I guess the fish company was thinking, no point donating so much this time, because Cosgrove’s lot is not in power. Yes, he’s a good mate (Cosgrove’s conceded this in interview) but this donation is not because of that.

    Which says, really, the donation was specifically aimed at influencing the workings of government.

    Doesn’t it?

    • Mediaan

      Looking at it again, I got it wrong. Ignore that.

  • At the very least, Clayton Cosgrove is guilty of a serious lack of judgment even to have put himself into a position where these kinds of accusations can be made. Let’s not forget; it was a lack of judgment which cost Nick Smith his ministerial warrant. What a furore the Left made then. This time around, the silence is deafening.

    • Troy

      Cosgrove is a parasitical leech – if ever there was a dodgy polly it’s him, known for his big mouth and attack dog tactics, I hope he gets what he deserves.

  • David

    And the pertinent question is the council and airport have viciously opposed any development in their noise corridor so they can keep their numerous midnight arrivals for many many years therefore devaluing the land. The only way you would even take a punt in the corridor is if you could get a tame politician to overrule a local council through parliament. I have never heard of parliament overriding a local authority on planning, Cosgrove got quite excited when Nick Smith dumped Ecan and gets most upset when Gerry gives the council a tickle up in the meantime he is taking donations to do the same thing.
    And Independent Fisheries having a reputation for being generous, piss off Cosgrove their reputation is the opposite, might explain why labour did nothing about foreign crews on fishing boats…

    • TravisPoulson

      In all honesty David, looking at the bigger picture I can kind of see the sense in opposing development in the noise corridor. last thing we need is another Western Springs type dispute over our nations largest airport. Prevention is better than cure. 

  • David

    And while we are at it how many donations did IF arrange for you from the other landowners. This is the guy who lost 3 lots of luggage which is unheard of and had the taxpayer suit him and boot him.

  • Sir Cullen’s sidekick

    Please do not forget the simple fact that if Labour does it, then it is not an long as we can remember this, we prosper as a nation.

  • Patrick

    here is a rule of thumb – if they make a big noise about it telling us all how terrible & wrong it is & we must do everything to stop it….then they are probably up tp their necks in it themselves aka Graeme Caphill & his way out Christian Heritage mates

  • Mediaan

    There are precedents for requiring developers and incoming settlers to sign a statement that they accept the presence of (name dirty or noisy neighbour) and will never complain or take action against it/ them.

    Done in relation to a housing development near a filthy, stinking, leaching dump near Hamilton. It’s been denied, but I have seen, and probably still have a copy of, the legal document they were required to sign.

    It’s been said that it wouldn’t stand up in court against the RMA, but it sure intimidated the settlers. And who is going to throw tens of thousands at a court case, to reverse its effect?