4. Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) Link to this
to the Minister of Justice
Is it the Government’s policy that the value of substantially more favourable than commercial terms and conditions for credit is considered a donation to a political party?
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) Link to this
Yes, and the Government made the law specific in that respect in the recently passed Electoral Finance Act—something that was opposed by the National Party. It also made the law specific in terms of identifying previously secret donations from trusts.
Does the Minister agree, then, that the Labour Party president, Mike Williams, was completely incorrect as chief administrator of Labour Party funds when he said yesterday: “An interest free loan is not a donation under any electoral act, it is an interest free loan and we have a lot of them, mainly from rich branches of the Labour Party … it shouldn’t be treated as a donation”; if she does not agree with him, why not?
I am not going to comment on Mr Williams’ comments, but I will say to the member that under the previous Act, the old regime, that was very unclear, and, of course, what this Government has done is to make it very clear indeed. Of course we have also made it clear about secret donations from trusts, because that was not clear at all, not to most people—except for those in the National Party, which was very, very keen to use secret trusts whenever it possibly could in order to garner as many votes as it could without people knowing where the money was coming from.
Sue MoroneyYes, I have. Like most people I read with amazement the story in the Sunday Star-Times where Ruth Laugesen reported that a former major anonymous donor to the National Party told the Sunday Star-Times that the party president had approached previous anonymous donors, seeking donations before the law took effect. So that party, which says it believes in transparency, wanted to thwart the Act before it came into effect by gathering as many anonymous donations as possible. Well, so much for transparency!
Why is the Minister not aware that the Electoral Act 1993 makes it quite clear that an interest-free loan would be counted as a donation, and that the Electoral Finance Act 2007 simply re-enacts similar wording; and how come the president of the Labour Party, as of yesterday, still did not know that an interest-free loan is a donation and should have been treated as a donation under the law that we have had during the past 15 years?
Madam SPEAKERBefore the Minister responds, I am seeking to find where the ministerial responsibility is on this. Could the member please paraphrase his question. The Minister has no responsibility for party matters, but would the member please clarify the question for me. Thank you.
Is the Minister not aware that the Electoral Act 1993 makes it clear that an interest-free loan is a donation and should be treated as such, and that the 2007 law she has just referred to does not change the law in any significant manner; and will she get the Ministry of Justice to advise the president of the Labour Party that for the last 15 years interest-free loans have counted as donations?
First of all, I disagree with the member’s interpretation of the old Act and the new Act. I can tell the House—and I know that New Zealand First will be interested in this—that the new Act makes it clear that the sort of activities that Mr Clarkson was involved in at the last election would not be able to occur now.
Is she concerned that in the light of Mr Williams’ statements yesterday about both the status of interest-free loans and the extent of the use of interest-free loans by the New Zealand Labour Party, the Labour Party may have been failing to report such donations for up to 15 years; if so, will she be asking her officials or those of the Electoral Commission to investigate?
I have no responsibility for the actions of the Labour Party, and I have no evidence to back up the claim made by the member. But perhaps we could go back and say “Let’s disclose all those people who donated anonymously through secret trusts.”—up to $1.2 million through one particular National Party trust. Perhaps we should break that open and show what has been going on in New Zealand.
Hon Phil GoffIs she aware the comments made by the president of the Labour Party referred to interest-free loans, mainly from rich branches of the Labour Party; and does she think that her officials should advise the president of the Labour Party that he should declare all pledge card loans, so the public can know whether one of New Zealand’s major political parties is complying with the law?
Given her view, stated to this House, that an interest-free loan is, in fact, a donation, does she believe that the comment made by the president of the Labour Party after Owen Glenn received his New Year’s honour, saying that Mr Glenn had not made a donation, was misleading, and probably deliberately misleading?
My name is not “Mr Nasty”, like that member’s; he is always throwing insults around people. To say that people deliberately mislead is not something I am going to comment on.
Gerry BrownleeDo you seriously consider that that was an answer to the question, or even an attempt to address it? She simply said: “My name is not ‘Mr Nasty’ ”. Perhaps she would like to tell us what her middle name is, inside the Labour Party?