$150,000 from the Velas to NZ First
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 am by David FarrarPhil Kitchin’s investigative prowess is at work, as he reveals up to $150,000 of donations to NZ First from the Vela family to NZ First or Winston Peters.
A special investigation by The Dominion Post can reveal that a series of donations from accounts linked to the Vela family – heavyweight operators in the racing and fishing industries – and totalling at least $150,000 were made to the party.
But NZ First sources say nothing like that much Vela money was deposited in the party’s bank account.
Well they seem to have so many. Their main account. Then the secret one that not even Party President Dail Jones knew about. And then the other secret one for Winston’s legal expenses.
The Vela family has an estimated wealth of $180 million, according to the National Business Review’s 2007 rich list.
The cheques from Vela family fishing and thoroughbred companies were written out to NZ First from around the year 1999 to 2003.
Hmmn isn’t Winston Minister of Racing? And hasn’t he delivered a massive amount of money to the industry? And he has been very involved in fisheries issues also as an MP.
The Vela donations were made in accordance with electoral laws, which allow sums of less than $10,000 to be donated anonymously.
Yes and no. If over a calendar year they exceeded $10,000 from the same source then they must be disclosed.
It is understood most of the cheques were collected by Ross Meurant when he worked for NZ First as an adviser to Mr Peters.
Mr Meurant, a former National MP, was at that time also a fellow director and shareholder of Digital Global Maps Ltd with Philip Vela, a senior family figure.
It is understood Mr Meurant sometimes worked out of Vela’s offices at Te Rapa, Hamilton, while advising Mr Peters.
Meurant was actually employed by The Parliamentary Service, not NZ First. It is an usual situation to have a parliamentary employee collecting money for a party. It is also unusual to ave a barrister touting for money to pay his own legal bills!
The cheques were understood to be for amounts of $10,000 or less – which meant they did not need to be declared, unless the party knew it was receiving more than $10,000 from the same company or person in a calendar year.
Yes.
The Dominion Post understands the cheques were written out to NZ First from Vela bank accounts including PJ Vela, PM Vela, Vela Fishing, Vela Quota Number 1 and Number 2 accounts and Pencarrow Stud.
Now if these were all seperate legal entities – ie seperate companies and people, then they avoid disclosure. But if they are just seperate bank accounts for the same entity, then you have to add them together.
The ones I would be interested in are Vela Quota Number 1 and Number 2. Are they seperate companies or seperate bank accounts for the same company?
Related posts:
- Meurant, the Velas and Peters
- A time-line of corruption
- Jones vs Peters
- $200,000 more from the Velas
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:17 am
I’d have loved to have seen Winston’s face when his press sec came into his office: ‘I’ve just got Phil Kitchin on the line . . .’
[DPF: heh indeed]
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 8:21 am
Peters must be fired. See Dunan Garner’s call for him to be sacked: http://decision08.co.nz/Blogs/DuncanGarner/tabid/125/Default.aspx
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 8:27 am
great post by Duncan well worth a read
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 8:30 am
Companies Office site always worth a look. Particular to see who is behind the Corporate veil of Vela No 3 and other companies – Thesaurus Trustees Limited – Director John Gregory Collinge – a familiar name?
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 8:39 am
New Zealand First – Keeping them honest.
Why do the words “yeah” and “right” keep coming to mind?
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 8:46 am
yeeha Kitchin is the Dark Knight of journalism and the Joker of politics will finally get his come uppance.
I could say I told you so – it was all about the scampi.. always…
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 am
I love it = The gift that keeps on giving and giving.
My kids are wondering why I am so happy – I tell them that finally the parasite of New Zealand politics is getting his just deserts. What is a parasite they ask? I tell them it is an thing that attaches itself to a host and sucks the life out of it. But this time the host is fighting back and is going to kill the parasite.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 9:17 am
A quick search of the companies register reveals no such company as Vela Quota (No 2) Limited. However there is a No 1 and a No 3.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 9:19 am
Hoist, petard, own. Make a sentence. There is something quite satisfying about seeing the sanctimonious getting their comeuppance (even if, like the scampi affair he will probably survive). Bastard.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 9:30 am
this one could be the one that topples him..
i see him sliding easily out of the owen one..
but that one is almost zen-like..in its’ simplicity…
..whereas this new story has ‘more legs than a marathon’..
..’racing industry’..mmmm!!!
but..dpf..should you ‘win’…and peters’ falls..
..wither (potential) coalition partners..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 9:30 am
Winston fixed the dreadful mismatch between totalisaor operators and, say, blackjack operators. Casinos were taxed at 4.5% of their gross profit, whereas The Tote was taxed at 20% of its gross profit. Winston fixed that up by making them both 4.5%. Common sense won out on that one. And numerous Ministers of Racing could not grasp how unfair the old system was. Winnie could!
Vote:But I was amazed at the unbelievable concessions for the breeding industry. The big increase in available write downs on mares and stallions was surprising. Then when you see the influence of the bloodstock industry’s biggest auction house you wonder.
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 am
casinos only pay 4.5% on their profits..?..
w.t.f!/whoar..!
there’s a good populist campaign for someone..
why should workers pay such a high rate…(just on income..)
..and casinos only pay 4.5% profit on what they leech out of us..
..and that 4.5% isn’t on income..(c.f…’worker’)..
..but on their feckin’ profits..(!)..
w.t.f..!
green party alert..!
(you were looking for some poll traction..?
go stand russel norman outside sky-city..and let him fulminate..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 9:41 am
Well said Monty and phil. But don’t count on it. The typical Winston First support has an attention span of a gold fish. By the time election comes around, they would have completely forgotten about this whole series of “mini-scandals”. The bright side is, the typical Winston First supporters are not getting any younger.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 9:53 am
Phul
“and casinos only pay 4.5% profit on what they leech out of us”
WTF do you mean “us”, when you earn your own money you can make statements like this, until then keep out of it.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:05 am
Yip Winstons been the best stayer for the racing industry.. He was asked if he could help with the tax issue a couple of years back and he whispered in a good womans ear ” show me the money”
The odds on an early election are shortening .
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:08 am
Surely that is a 4.5 gambling tax on top of normal tax?
Vote:Tauhei, you used the word “wonder” in your well written comment. I would suggest that the word wonder is now redundant when discussing Luigi.
He has created a whole new meaning for the expression Surf n Turf.
Taking a bung from Glenn and the Velas is bad enough, but when it is by the self styled kiwi battlers champion we have crossed the rubicon. Both Glenn and the Velas have benefited enormously under this regime.
I am now leaning towards state funding for poiltical parties. I have always been against this but it is quite clear to me now that labour and Winston First are the biggest thieves and cheats. This is a situation that has come about due to their incompetence at fundraising.
Winston will come back and shout and scream but will anybody believe him anymore? Perhaps the 5.000001% of the population who smell of piss and eat cat food but nobody else.
Clark would probably get a lift in the polls if she called time on Peters, but has she got the stones to risk it?
A sure sign that she is about to hang him will be if the salaried bloggers at the Standard actually stop “tossing the salad” of H1 and H2 and post on the Peters situation. To date they have not mentioned the biggest story in NZ this month.
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:20 am
philu (2380) Add karma Subtract karma –3 Says:
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 am
“casinos only pay 4.5% on their profits..?..
w.t.f!/whoar..!
there’s a good populist campaign for someone..
why should workers pay such a high rate…(just on income..)
..and casinos only pay 4.5% profit on what they leech out of us..
..and that 4.5% isn’t on income..(c.f…’worker’)..
..but on their feckin’ profits..(!)..
w.t.f..!
green party alert..!
(you were looking for some poll traction..?
go stand russel norman outside sky-city..and let him fulminate..!”
Philu, philu, philu………there, there, there. I know, it is an awful reality, but be brave and face it. Leftwing governments in historical reality, are MORE prone to corruption than rightwing ones, not less prone.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:24 am
And philu, you hit on another awful truth there. Most leftwing governments actually do not care about the TAXES they levy on low income earners. Strangely enough, it is “right wing” parties, again, that would limit or abolish altogether, the tax paid by the lowest income earners.
But that wouldn’t mean anything to people who are constitutional bludgers. Some beneficiaries might decide it is worth working after all if they get to keep a few more grand of what they earn. Is that you, philu………? Or not?
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:25 am
Filu-U
(at least that’s what we seem to do with our money!)
Clearly you were one of those who rated “not achieved” in school, so here’s a simple explanation for you.
First, economics. The terms “Profit” and “Gross Profit” are different, both in the number of letters they use (more about grammar later) and their meaning. “Profit” is a broad generalisation in economics and accounting, that might even be referred to as a ‘collective noun’ (not finished with grammar yet, but this is a start). It covers all the layers from Gross Profit (a.k.a. EBITDA), through pre-tax profit (PTI), down to retained earnings (a.k.a. net profit). In an industry that probably books a vast amount in interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation, 4.5% of “Gross Profit” might be close to 45% of PTI, an unusual approach to taxation, but not a totally stupid one.
Now. Back to grammar.
Sentences are the standard construct of the English Language, and punctuation is what make those sentences intelligible. For instance, the sequence of words :
Dave where Phil had had had had had had had had had had had the examiners approval
is a perfectly normal and intelligible sentence when appropriately punctuated.
The key to a sentence is that it has at least one noun (that’s a ‘naming’ word,) and one verb (an action word) and explains the relationship between the two. A series of sentences, that deal with a single subject (for instance grammar,) is called a paragraph and is the heart of good communication. Where a verbal presentation of a subject is being given, it is reasonable to support the discourse (speech in low-speak) in writing through incomplete expressions, usually referred to as bullet points.
I suggest you give ‘writing to express yourself’ a go. You might be more persuasive; you will certainly be more intelligible!
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:32 am
“.. Most leftwing governments actually do not care about the TAXES they levy on low income earners. Strangely enough, it is “right wing” parties, again, that would limit or abolish altogether, the tax paid by the lowest income earners..”
wrong again..!..but brownie points for consistancy..eh..?
it has long been green party policy the first $15,000 be tax-free..
will you withdraw your false statement/claim..?
0didn’t think so..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:35 am
um..!..dave strings..
has anyone ever called you ‘a tad anal’..before..?
how do you fold/organise your socks..?..eh..?
whoar..!..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:41 am
btw..
yagottaluv all this moral indignation about slush funds/secret payments..and the like..
..from the followers of the party of ‘the hollow-men’..eh..?
irony-alerts are flashing..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Philu.
Again you miss the point. There is a difference to operating anonymous trust accounts, and actively campaigning against said trust accounts, while operating those very type of accounts.
National have never hid the fact that they operate trust accounts for party funds, and Winston and others have lambasted them for such actions. Personally I see nothing wrong with prudent financial management. However we have seen since ’05 much wailing from the left with regard to transparency with regard to open electoral financing. We now see those who have vociferously argued against certain practices, engaging in exactly these practices, and compounding this with arrogant bluster, libel and lies.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 11:08 am
Not disputing that Peters is a scumbag and deserves to go, but could we have an assurance from DPF that the National Party has never taken donations of a little less than the $10,000 limit from multiple sources and not declared them. Oh yes, it operated the Waitemata Trust to circumvent that, didn’t it? How about letting us have a look at the Waitemata Trust’s accounts before throwing any more stones in this glasshouse?
[DPF: I am not privy to who donates to National and/or the Waitemata Trust. I would be most surprised if there hadn't been the occassional husband and wife give $10K each. However National has not spent 15 years campaigning against large donations and demanding more transparency around them. It's that hypocrisy angle.]
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 11:14 am
mmm..!!!!..”waitemata trust accounts.!”…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 11:29 am
Interestingly, the Companies Office has Vela Quota No 1 Limited and Vela Quota No 3 Limited listed as separate incorporated entities, but not Vela Quota No 2.
There are also Vela Developments Limited, Vela Enterprises Limited, Vela European Trustees Limited, Vela Farms Limited. Vela Fishing Limited, Vela Group (NZ) Limited, Vela Holdings Limited, Vela Landscaping Limited, Vela Limited, Vela Luca Limited, Vela Management Limited, Vela Nautical Marine Limited, Vela Seafoods (Whitianga) Limited & Vela Taiyo Fishery Company Limited.
Seems like quite enough separate legal entities to rack up $150K through separate donations each under $10K and stay with the letter of the law – but not a good look!
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 11:58 am
Philu:
“it has long been green party policy the first $15,000 be tax-free..
will you withdraw your false statement/claim..?”
I SAID: “Most leftwing GOVERNMENTS actually do not care about the TAXES they levy on low income earners.”
What LEFTWING party are the Greens going to go into government with, that will actually put this policy into law?
How do you feel about a multi-party agreement including the Greens and ACT, making this a reality? Would that be a “right wing” policy or a “left wing” policy?
And how would it affect you anyway? You are strangely quiet about my question above on this point………
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Philu: “irony-alerts are flashing..!”
…..he says, without a trace of shame……….
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
and what i may or may not think about act and greens being in govt together..matters not a jot..
..but i can’t see it happening..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 12:36 pm
“and what i may or may not think..”
Whoar, don’t be presumptuous and overly ambitious. You don’t think, you vomit!
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 12:37 pm
way to contribute.
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
While I know nothing of the Vela Brothers business activities I am aware that they probably saved the Racing Industry from complete colapse when they took over the loss making National Yearling Sales and established the Karaka Sales. As Peters was racing minister they would have had to deal with him….Still hard to see the difference between what is alleged against Phillip FEILD and the allegations against Peters except that Peters operates on a higher scale
Vote:July 22nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
The 4.5% tax I referred to above is actually “Gaming Duty”.
Vote:Casinos are taxed on their nett profits as are all other companies.
At the risk of boring you all;
——-Gaming Duty on poker machines in Clubs and pubs is 20%. So in my club when the pokies make $45, Michael Cullen says give me $5 being one ninth thereof for GST; and give me another $9 being the 20% gaming duty. So you can see that the Government gets 14/45 of all money lost on the pokies; nearly one third of what is lost. No wonder they like them so much. Note how the gaming duty is 4.5% on blackjack and other table games, but is 20% on the poker machines.
My use of the term “tax” earlier may have confused people.