Christmas Countdown: Boagan Dwarf Two – Kim “The Campbell Clown” Campbell

Kim_Campbell

 

There’s a bit of a change of plan.  Kim “The Campbell Clown” Campbell made such a goose of himself on Larry Williams last night we’re looking at him today rather than Michael Barnett.  But don’t worry, we will deal with all The Boagan’s friends soon enough.

For those just catching up, the story goes like this.  It looks like Michelle “The Boagan” Boag is working for someone like Hawkins to try to get Lyin’ Len’s trainset underway sooner rather than later.

The Boagan and John “The Dining Table” Collinge, now 104, have a decades-old feud with Warren Kyd and other members of the Auckland Energy Consumer Trust (AECT) – the outfit that owns $2.1 billion in Vector shares in trust for the people of Auckland and South Auckland, and which pays them a Christmas dividend of $335 a house each September.

So, The Boagan and The Dining Table have got The Campbell Clown to try to put together a group to try to steal the $2.1 billion in shares and give them to Lyin’ Len so he can sell them and build his trainset – potentially lining the pockets of the likes of construction firms like Hawkins.

The Campbell Clown called a meeting of The Boagan’s Ten Dwarfs for yesterday afternoon:

  1. Himself
  2. Michael Barnett – from the Auckland Regional Chamber of Commerce
  3. Tony Garnier – from the Auckland Business Forum
  4. Stephen Selwood – from the NZ Council for Infrastructure Development
  5. Barney Irvine – from the Automobile Association
  6. David Aitken – from the National Road Carriers Association
  7. Heather Shotter – Committee for Auckland
  8. Cameron Pitchers – from the Campaign for Better Transport
  9. Connall Townsend – from the NZ Property Council
  10. Jeremy Sole – NZ Contractors Federation

The idea was the put a few million in the bank for a big campaign to steal the shares.

The bad news for The Boagan is that a couple of these are longtime sources through the tipline, so Whaleoil knows exactly what’s going on.

Like, for instance, that the Automobile Associatiom, the Property Council and the Contractors Federation don’t want anything to do with The Boagan’s plans.  So the Ten Dwarfs are already only the Seven Dwarfs.

And like that Russell McVeagh is going to get a call today to be the lawyers for The Boagan’s campaign.  (Russell McVeagh and The Boagan go way back to the Wine Box days.)

But, back to The Campbell Clown.  After his big meeting, he had a chat with Larry Williams on NewstalkZB.  The Clown lived up to his name.  Take a listen just after 6.15 pm yesterday.

Here’s Whaleoil’s (lightly edited) personal highlights:

Larry:  Is there any possibility [of getting what you want]?

The Clown: I think it’s a remote one – because of the politics which of course are very difficult.

Larry:  So who’s driving this?  Is the Auckland Council behind this.  Are they in on the deal?

The Clown: No, not at all.

Larry: What’s this Auckland Committee?  What’s the self appointed group? Who are they?

The Clown: It’s not an Auckland committee.  It’s basically us and a few other people

Larry: Okay, the trust they say that this would be tantamount to confiscation and nationalisation.  Aren’t they right?

The Clown: I’m not suggesting nationalise. You couldn’t anyway.

Larry: Okay.  What would the deal be? That the shares would go to the council and they would sell all of those shares? – Is that a condition and then that would fund other infrastructure like the trainset?

The Clown: No well I don’t know – that’s too far down the track.  First thing you access the cash from the funds, you know, the cash flow or whether you sell shares, all of that is much much further down the track.  The first thing is who is going to have the benefit of what this trust produces.  And then we’ll decide what mechanisms there will be in place.

Larry: Isn’t another problem here Kim that you’ve got a council who won’t do the logical thing and sell some port shares or airport shares?

The Clown: I would argue the first point of call would be to sell those assets.  Absolutely.  No doubt. But also bearing in mind that this trust is owned for the people of Auckland and those folks who benefit can choose, they can choose to forgo that benefit.

Larry: Yeah, they’re not likely to do that are they?

The Clown: Well no.  I wouldn’t take it.  They’ve got to vote to do it.  And the point is in a very unscientific sample of our own in asking people what they think if you give them a choice between foregoing the $300 and actually seeing our transport network, every single person that I spoke to says hey I’d give it in a heartbeat.  So it depends who you’re talking to.  Now, if you compel people of course many of them would say no I’m not having nationalisation.  They need to choose to do this and the reason why they choose to do it is to make sure the transport network gets completed, and don’t kick things down the road.  That’s what this is about.

boag-grinch

Looks like The Boagan’s going to have to do the next radio interview herself.

And what ever happened to the Auckland Regional Development Board.  Kim? Kim?  Are you talking Kim?

 


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.

  • conwaycaptain

    PLEASE TELL US WHEN WE WILL BE FREED??

  • Alfred

    Didn’t that Barney Irvine from the AA use to work for Matthew Hooton? And according to the NZ Herald, Hooton is now working for the AECT – http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11375615

    So Irvine says there’s a big campaign going on, tips off his mate Hooton who sees $$$ in a counter campaign, and charges AECT $$$ for a campaign to counter it. Cosy.

    • mommadog

      Id be interested in knowing if the likes of Barney Irvine jumped on board as an individual without checking first with his employer or whether he had the associations blessing. Same question to the others involved. It may be why the AA don’t want anything to do with the Bogan’s plans. They may not have known that Barney was linking them to it until too late.

  • LabTested

    The Larry Williams interview is worth listening to. (Starts 3 minutes in). This guy is the Chief Executive of the EMA. I’m an employer & I would shudder if that was the quality of individual representing my interests. – or maybe he just can’t do interviews & string together a logical argument. The best he had was – the Turkeys will vote for Xmas + some people he spoke to agree with him.

    • Aucky

      ‘Turkeys’ is a most appropriate word to bring into this debate LT.

  • Wallace Westland

    Looks like a storm in a teacup to me.
    You only have to read the coments on here to see the turkeys are no way going to be voting for an early Xmas and that puts an end to that.
    Looks like those of us on the North Shore will not only get no power bonus but will continue to fund infrastructure and train sets we can’t use for those that don’t want to pay for it themselves.

    • Platinum Fox

      The then residents of areas such as the North Shore who are outside the boundaries for the AECT received their “power bonus” 20 years ago in the form of shares in their network company. Most sold the shares almost immediately and spent the cash on consumption.

      • Wallace Westland

        I’ll have to take your word on that, I’ve lived on the Shore for more than 20 years and owned homes back then. I can assure you I’ve never received a shareholding in anything. Which doesn’t of course mean it didn’t happen.

        • Platinum Fox

          I’ll repeat what I posted in Backchat on November 12, 2014:

          “Consumers connected in the area on the North Shore and in west Auckland served by the former Waitemata Electric Power Board received an entitlement to shares in Power New Zealand Limited (my memory is that there may have been a cash out option which I suspect was underwritten). Power NZ changed its name to United Networks in 1999 and was taken over by Vector in 2002.”

          That distribution would have occurred in 1993 or maybe 1994 – jonno1 posted in the same Backchat a recollection that the then value of the WEPB shares per consumer was circa $2K.

          I also noted back in November that it could be argued that the value of a property in the old AEPB area includes an implied value for the dividend stream and that this value should have been returned to the proprietors of those properties when Auckland Council was formed to avoid ultimately transferring value to property owners who were not and are not beneficiaries of AECT.
          Provided the capital distribution only occurs at the termination date in 2073 the present value of the transfer of value from consumers in the AECT district to other residents of Auckland is small. Any early termination of the trust results in a considerably larger value transfer. If AECT is to be terminated early, the only possible way I can think of to avoid a value transfer would be for the non-AECT income beneficiaries within Auckland Council’s district to make a one off matching contribution to Auckland Council (in addition to their regular rates).

    • Those on the North Shore got their power bonus when the council sold shares and wasted it all.

  • Timboh

    What “a very unscientific sample of our own” means is that we asked each other.

    • Aucky

      Over a few gins by the sound of Campbell talking to Larry Williams.

  • Bayman

    How on earth do these guys think that 1) a train set is a good idea for Auckland, and 2) that they can in effect steal the trusts $$ for their own ends??

    It really defies belief – but then somehow Lyin’ Len is still Akl Mayor which also defies belief!!!

  • LabTested

    I think the reference to big construction companies being behind this now makes sense. Only those with financial gain or vested interests support Len’s train set.

    Labour / Greens ran a power policy to nationalise power companies which would save every household $200-$300 a year. Now here we have big business trying to confiscate AECT so that many households lose a power rebate of $335 a year.

    Que Angy Andy & Russel getting angry about big business driving this theft. – Waiting….

  • JC

    There’s at least one group not represented there.. especially real estate, you need these guys to help work the graft, also you need the likes of Fletchers on board.

    Its the people who are not on the list we need to know about.

    JC

  • ‘between foregoing the $300 and actually seeing our transport network, every single person that I spoke to says hey I’d give it in a heartbeat.’ – These are the same
    people who Len talks to when he says ‘everyone I talk to tells me just to get
    on with it!’

    Bollocks, Len has never spoken to me, canvased my opinion; how about you, heard from Len, spoken to Len?

  • Platinum Fox

    Let’s be absolutely clear about this.

    The income beneficiaries of the AECT are the end consumers responsible for the payment for electricity supplied to connection points within the district formerly served by the AEPB. The income beneficiaries’ right to share that income runs until 27 August 2073.

    The capital beneficiaries of the AECT are the local authorities which, at the termination date, contain any part of the former AEPB district (if more than one, they share the capital distribution in proportion to the number of their electricity consumers relative to the total). If there are no local authorities at the termination date, the capital asset (the shares in Vector) goes to the Crown.
    In other parts of the Auckland Council’s district, electricity consumers received shares in their local electricity network (a capital distribution). It was up to them whether they held or sold their network shares and eventually they sold. Although they may now be within Vector’s network, those consumers do not receive a dividend from the AECT because in order to acquire those parts of the network Vector paid the previous owners.

  • Michael_l_c

    What ratepayer is going to vote to give the council another $335 each year for 40 years? Unfortunately non ratepayers get to vote.
    Think the Auditor General needs a phone call. Perhaps she could establish an office in the ‘new’ building.

  • Raibert

    Only those who are entitled to receive the disbursement can make the decision to keep it or forgo it for the Councils benefit. Everyone of these people must be allowed a say in this, no shonky consultation!!
    This is not a decision which can be left to elected representatives as other agendas come into play.

38%