Complaint to Auditor-General re Anderton
No Minister has a copy of a letter to the Auditor-General asking them to investigate the extra funding Jim Anderton gets (both personally and for expenses) by purporting to be the leader of a political party.
Sadly it will not be successful. Standing Order 34(1) is clear:
Every party in whose interest a member was elected at the preceding general election or at any subsequent by-election is entitled to be recognised as a party for parliamentary purposes.
So under the rules of Parliament, Anderton is entitled to still be seen as a Progressive MP (and Leader) even though he has announced they will not stand a party list in 2011, and has endorsed Labour and encouraged all his members to join Labour.
But as with Bill English and his housing situation, it is not just about the “entitlement”, it is about the perception and Anderton fails on the perception front. He gets an extra $13,500 a year salary and no doubt an extra $2,700 a year superannuation. And his office gets an extra $100,000 a year budget. Total extra cost to the taxpayer over three years is $348,600.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Hypocrisy of the highest order for one who puports to represent the peasants.
Peter Dunne is not much better.
[DPF: While United Future is a one MP Party they have not effectively wound up by endorsing another party and announcing they will not contest the party vote.]
September 25th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
His party created kiwibank.
A Progressive Party effort it was.
And what a brilliant effort compared to the useless twats who too often inhabit parliament.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Well written, Rodney. I note Mr Farrer’s (and others) attempts to divert attention from Mr English, but, in his case, the hooks are well and truly set. I doubt if the country is remotely interested in the fate of the Progressives as a party. They are, however, firmly engaged with Mr English’s affairs, if only because he’s stirred up the media against him.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
yawn….
More apologists for champagne socialist trough snufflers.
Move along..
September 25th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
And the AG is now moving on the English case……..more reason for champagne perhaps? But not for me – I would prefer to see a wounded Mr English in position than a strong Mr Joyce.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
THe Auditor General has however decided to investigate Blinglish according to the Standard.
The link is at http://www.thestandard.org.nz/auditor-general-to-enquire-re-english/
September 25th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
As much as I would like to see English held to account if he has rorted the system I fear the Labour party set a precedent that the interpretation by the AG is not worth the paper it is written on when it is inconvenient for the govt to be bound by it.
The lovers of corruption will get behind National if National decide they know the rules better than the AG.
It will be good to get it cleared up though, lets hope National set a higher standard of accountability than Labour did. Would be shame to see English stand in the dock over this, but that would be more palatable than having national validate his actions because it is expedient to do so.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Exactly burt.
Micky and Robert, your position is one of huge irony seeing the contempt Labour had for the A-G.
Are you going to start listening to its reports now they are against your political enemies?
September 25th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
nickB – of course they will. They have no moral compass.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I wonder if one should ask the Auditor General to make his investigation retrospective, and assess if all allowances back through to 2005. Maybe he should also have a wee look into the Green’s rental practises.
The old phrase about throwing stones in glass houses comes to mind.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
But I thought that you all liked the AG to intervene? Personally, I have no problem, and haven’t had in the past, with the AG doing his/her job. And maybe you should ask for all issues to be addressed back to 2005. My bet is that no-one, on any side, in Parliament will want to go there. And let’s make sure that we include all funding of parties (open and secret, domestic and international) too, if we do ask.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Bevan
That would be even more hysterical. See if there were others doing it too and the rules are confusing then parliament would have no choice but to validate…. well that’s the way the lovers of corruption framed it re: 2005 election spending.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
The difference, lefty trolls, is that we don’t fall into ‘protect the leaders at any cost no matter what they have done’ mode and I would suggest most on the right would want English gone if he has been shown to have done anything against the rules.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
It would seem appropriate that English is stood down while the investigation is conducted. rOb at the standard pointed this out and I agree with him in this instance.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Brian
I agree, be sad to see him leave but it would be a disgrace if National decide the ref made a bad call and validate English.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
He should resign if he has done anything wrong. Would he though? I think nine years of Labour has lowered the bar on personal repsonibility, even on the right.
September 25th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Resign… resign…. He should be charged if he has broken the law…..
September 25th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
burt – agree. The Greens have been very quiet on this as have a few Labour MPs who I thought would have got stuck in. Could be interesting.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Burt, I could just imagine the opposition ranting about the validation!
September 25th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Any idea, DPF, on what (or perhaps on whom) our extra $100,000 is being spent? I suspect an enquiry might produce some enlightening information.
[DPF: Probably staff mainly]
September 25th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Instead of focusing on what is technically legal and what appears to look ok it would be refreshing if ANY of the politicians were to just stand up and do the right thing. The whole thing about what “they” did 5 years ago is irrelevant to me personally.
Key has my total respect (apart from ignoring the referendum result) because as far as I am aware he gives a substantial part of his salary to charity? Yes I know he can afford it but still he is doing the right thing. As time goes on Bill English is looking more and more like he is doing something he should not. That is my perception.
September 25th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
I wonder how much Jim Anderton has been paid from the public purse over the course of his career? Does anyone have the stats? I am sure he gets far more than the struggling small businessman who is risking his life savings in a business and employing others in the process. The drivel he spouts is poisoned by hatred for anyone who improves their own lot by their own ingenuity and hard graft. The irony is that this “eat the rich” socialism is one of the main reasons NZ has such a poor record of business success (and thus a lower standard of living for the people Anderton claims to represent). What a complete plonker he is.