Cash for Honours
December 31st, 2007 at 11:04 am by David FarrarThe NZ Herald reports on the awarding on a gong (ONZM) to Owen Glenn which makes you wonder if NZ Labour have not just copied the pledge card off UK Labour, they have also now resorted to cash for honours, despite the fact their sister party in the UK is in deep trouble for the same thing.
Now Owen Glenn was born in the UK, spent his childhood here and has not lived in NZ since 1966. His company does not pay tax in NZ (in fact it pays little tax full stop). He has given at least $500,000 to Labour – their biggest donor by a magnitude.
And one also has to look at what Labour have just done with the Electoral Finance Act, specifically Section 32(1). They had a proposed clause which would ban donations from anyone not living in NZ who is not on the NZ electoral roll. And as detailed in Parliament (and here also), Labour suddenly realised this would stop Owen Glenn from continuing to donate and they quickly recessed the Committee to “consult” and after the break then change the clause so expats such as Owen Glenn can still donate unlimited amounts even though he is ineligible to enrol or vote, not having lived here since 1966.
Now Owen Glenn has been a generous donor to Auckland University. He has donated $8 million, and funded 10% of their new business school building, which they named after him.
So since leaving here in 1996, he has done two significant things. Donate 10% of the cost of a business school to Auckland University and pay for over 25% of Labour’s 2005 campaign. I somehow doubt the weighting given by the Cabinet Honours Committee for those two donations were in that order 100%/0%.
No tag for this post.
December 31st, 2007 at 11:15 am
This is just so they can say he wasn’t buying the election – he was buying a medal instead!!
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:21 am
Can I call this liarbore stool pigeon a “rich prick” ?
Ouch that hurt the caustic school teacher and Miss Klark !!
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:25 am
What’s an ONZM in the old money?
This is truly unbelievable. The sad fact is that even if Owen Glenn was the most deserving person in the world Labour simply could NOT give him an honour because it would look like cash for honours.
It is just another example of a third term government getting further and further out of touch.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:29 am
NZ has really become a crap country under Labour where the only person they could find to give the award to left NZ 40 years ago.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:39 am
Geoffrey Palmer, Owen Glenn…what others will crawl out of the woodwork?
If it’s a gong or a plum job you want under this Labour govt, all it takes is…cold hard cash donation to the Labour Party (minimum $10K please – thankyou comrades).
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:40 am
This is astonishing.
A second of Labour’s large donors, who has contributed tens of thousands of dollars to the Labour Party, also got a knighthood-equivalent gong in this year’s honours list.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:46 am
Hi all
Owen Glenn typifies NZ now, he left years ago and made a fortune, good on him. To make a fortune now it is easier to go overseas, larger community, less red tape. He was a visionry.
He should get a gong from Australia, not NZ as his work was done from an Aust. base.
This is more bad news for Labour, real 2 finger stuff to the public.
Regards
Vote:Peter Bickle
December 31st, 2007 at 11:47 am
Astonishing is exactly the word. What on earth has happened to Labour’s political judgment? They must be desperate for cash to make the political cost of this decision worth bearing.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:47 am
Wonder what sonic has to say about this ?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:48 am
When the descending vultures have picked over the carcass of the reputation that once belonged to Owen Glen, they will inevitably get the indigestion which makes them all wonder – was it really worth it for a five minute snack?
[DPF: I don't think Owen Glenn has done anything wrong. But the Ministers who at the same time as they were giving him a gong and were also gerrymandering the Electoral Finance Act to allow him to keep donating I would not say the same about]
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:51 am
What contribution did the same Owen Glenn make to National (DPF)
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:52 am
pp “vultures” really, isn’t the red parrot looking more like it’s nailed firmly to the perch on blogosphere ? Nice cage . Love and kisses Peter xx
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:53 am
To clarify it would seem that Owen Glenn has done a number of very positive things and deserves recognition but this just stinks.
D4J – Sonic would be screaming that national takes cash for policies, is funded by the CIA with a secret agenda to place missile silos in the ureweras, the EB to make christianity compulsory and various corporates to line their own pockets whilst beating up the poor.
Scary thing is that he would believe it. Oh, and he would never refer to the original thread or address Labour’s arrogance.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:54 am
yup sounds like a norwegian blue to me!
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:55 am
Good one GPT1. 10/10 for view on sonic thing .
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:55 am
Problem with pricks like Owen Glenn is that they have so much money politics is of no importance to them. They are not generally affected by ill conceived policies and especially when they don’t even live in the countries that they are funding. I have no problem with people being successfull and self made and good on Owen for doing this. However if you don’t live in our country and have to reap what you sow stay the hell out of it.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 11:55 am
I think it would be hard for National to ignore such a large doner in similar circumstances. What gets me most are the political manouverings DPF refers to – they deserve to be given the widest possible exposure.
Do we have legislation banning the selling of honours? How would you prove mens rea?
There is also a wider issue here: how do we prevent politicians awarding taxpayer-funded positions and honours on the grounds of self-interest? Could we have a confirmation process for nominees?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 12:22 pm
“cash for honours” implies that the donor paid cash for the receipt of the honour – I would say that this is NOT the case with this. However, it does look very stupid.
Let’s not forget that we haven’t been able to have the same discussion re National because of the “anonymous” donations.l
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Tamaki Resident, there’s nothing preventing such discussion. As another commenter remarked, you could start with some speculation, at least. So, who do you consider might be a major contributor to the National Party who has been rewarded with a gong during the last say fifteen years?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Cat got your tongue?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Adolf – Don Mackinnon and Jim Bolger both made major contributions to National and received much worthier honours (membership of the ONZ).
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Speculation is just that. Labour have been very open about the donations from Owen Glenn. The same cannot be said about the National Party big donors. Perhaps the discussion re National should not be about cash for honours, but rather cash for policies.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Talking about cash for political parties . How much do the Unions give Labour ?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:06 pm
I have heard that it is likely Owen Glen benefited by more than a gong for his donation. It was said that his company in Aussie has benefited by Labour trade deals with China. I have only heard this and am not saying it is a fact. Does anyone know anything more.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Why are we giving New Zealand awards to rich prick foreigners anyway?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:20 pm
TR, you are at it again. All froth and no substance. Just who do you suggest gave money to national and was rewarded with a gonG?
GE, your two examples are a bit precarious. Don McKinnon has just been honoured by Labour, not National and Jim Bolger is a turncoat ex National Party PM to whom I doubt the party today would give the time of day. You’ll have to do better than that.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pm
Has Rt Hon Trev Mallard hassled Clark to come clean and admit that NZLabour Party is bankrolled by US “bagman” Owen Glenn?
Trev really gets results: a New Years honours list gong for Owen… can’t be more transparent than that!
Next question: what’s NZLabour Party now owin’ to Owen? Or does this bauble clear the slate (for the time being)?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Tamaki Resident
Excellent defense, National did it to and therefore it OK that Labour did it. Typical 4 year old response to being caught doing something you know is wrong. Point the finger at somebody else and shout “they did it too”.
Excellent, Labour are excused for all “cash for policy” scandals because you claim National have also done the same.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I feel a bit of a fool as I have commented on this matter on the next thread…That said perhaps Mr Glen could offer a few mill to Winston First to help his party survive. A few baubles will get you everywhere with his mob.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Adolf – my examples clearly weren’t intended as examples of anything bad. You asked a question – which wasn’t quite specific enough – and I answered it. You also mentioned the time-period of the last 15 years. If you actually meant the last 15 years of National’s hold of the Treasury benches you have to go back to early Muldoon… before my time, I’m afraid.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Tamaki Resident
As I understand Owen Glen donated to Labour before 2005. They did not disclose he or one individual made such a large donation. Someone found out about it. I do not call that being open.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Not only was it cash for honours, it was also cash for policy for personal enrichment.
At the time of the first installment he said he gave it to Labour because they supported free trade with China, something Glen would make a lot of money out of. Gnats also had such a policy but were not in a position to enact it and Labour would be more likely to bail under pressure from the Greens.
The implication was clear, abandon this policy and the next installment will not be forthcoming
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 2:22 pm
This used to be called corruption. But the scary thing is that this government is so baltantly in our faces that there are onbly two conclusions – they either think they’re bulletproof or they are bulletproof! I really hope its the former.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Chuck Bird. Dipshit. Why don’t you check Davids links before you come up with false speculations and you will see that in 2004 Owen Glenn donated to Labour $199.960.00 and in 2005 $300.00.00 so unless you can prove your allegation, you need to pull your head in.
Vote:Looking through the list, i missed your name Chucky babe, may be you donated to National through one of their front trusts, or may be you have not done anything successful enough to make such a donation.
At least Owen Glenn had enough balls to put his name to the amout and not hide behind secret trusts.
December 31st, 2007 at 3:29 pm
So John Dalley, this Owen Glenn has a set of rich prick balls?
Take it away lefty turd tossers .
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 3:40 pm
John Dalley
So large donations from foreign interests are OK and justify being slapped onto the honours list?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 3:50 pm
And being a rich prick capitalist is OK as long as you do it outside NZ and donate large sums of money to Labour?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 4:10 pm
No Burt, I have not said that it is ok – I said that it looked stupid (in my first post). I think that both parties are as bad as each other, so no one has the right to try and take the moral high ground on this issue.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 4:40 pm
So Tamaki Resident, if what you say is true, then it just makes it all the better for a new political party that is not tainted by such deception and corruption ?
Roll on 2008 !!
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 4:47 pm
I think that both parties are as bad as each other, so no one has the right to try and take the moral high ground on this issue.
Except maybe the voters?
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 5:20 pm
and vote for no-one?!
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 6:29 pm
TR,
You can’t point to a single major National Party donor who was awarded a gong after donating to the National Party, despite not living in New Zealand for forty years. Both parties aren’t the same as each other. Labour clearly feels this is the last chance to award its biggest donor before it gets pinged at the next election. That is a scandal, by any measure.
Vote:December 31st, 2007 at 8:36 pm
IP – You miss the point – we don’t know who the National Party donors are!!!
Vote:(I was also out of the country for most of the nineties, so I don’t know who got the honours under National)
December 31st, 2007 at 11:30 pm
TR – Michael Fay was honoured by the then National regime.
[DPF: Bzzt wrong. His 1990 knighthood was processed by the Labour Government]
Vote:January 1st, 2008 at 6:40 am
But the 7.5 million to the UoA is essentially a donation to Labour too because now they have an extra 7.5 million to bribe us with at the next election!
Vote:January 1st, 2008 at 9:21 am
if that’s what you think petermcc, then you have no idea about how Universities are funded.
Vote:January 1st, 2008 at 11:09 am
<i>TR – Michael Fay was honoured by the then National regime.
[DPF: Bzzt wrong. His 1990 knighthood was processed by the Labour Government]</i>
Let’s try Selwyn Cushing, then, knighted in 1999, I think. He was not only a National Party donor, but a <b>party fundraiser</b>. I don’t recall the same mean-spirited, defamatory accusations then. There are quite a few other examples.
One of the things New Zealand universities lack in comparison to those in the US is the generosity of alumni — this not only deprives of of funds, it robs them of independence. Glenn has now made two major donations to Auckland University (he gave the university’s Leigh Marine Research Laboratory $500,000 in 2003) and has committed himself to future support for a chair in logistics. And he didn’t even bloody go to university.
Judging by this morning’s editorial, the Herald seems to be having second thoughts about its choice of lead story yesterday. Some of the rest of you might also wish to pick yourselves up out of the gutter.
[DPF: I am not going to do tit for tat but Cushing lives in NZ, and over several decades has contributed to both NZ business and various good causes. Also he deserved a gong simply for sucessfully suing Winston for libel
If Labour had not bent over backwards to change the law to protect Glenn as a donor, then I doubt there would be so much fuss over his honour. But the timing stinks]
Vote:January 1st, 2008 at 11:12 am
“gutter” – rather ironic coming from you Russell . Who the hell do you think you are !!
Vote:January 1st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
A typical lazy left wing response from the left… if the right honours anybody it MUST because of money.. which is obviously evil. But if the left get the money, either from Owen or more likely stolen from every single Kiwi, the it must be good and ok.
Last time I saw, Bolger, Fay and Mckinnen were honoured by Labout and in Bolgers and McKinnens cases they were rewarded with cushy jobs by Labour too…. thanks to the generosity of the taxpayers that Labour like to screw over every day.
Vote: