PM and the Vineyard
May 26th, 2010 at 7:36 pm by David FarrarTV3 had as their lead story tonight an item on how the PM had said at a dinner he is a part owner of a vineyard, yet how all his assets are meant to be in a blind trust.
On the face of it, there seems to be a contradiction between the two. The PM’s Office put out a press released saying:
“As is well known, after becoming Prime Minster I established a blind trust,” says Mr Key.
“The trustees of that blind trust have full control of the management of all the assets not listed in my pecuniary interest register.
“I am not aware of any of the assets contained in the blind trust. I have no rights to either acquire assets, dispose of assets, or to instruct those who manage them. Nor am I able to be informed of what is in the trust.
“Quite appropriately, this continues to be the case.
“I set up the blind trust after becoming Prime Minister so I didn’t have any conflicts of interest through my investments, and that is the case because I don’t know what my investments are.
“To the best of my knowledge, the only people who can be certain what assets the blind trust owns are the trustees, and anything else is mere speculation.”
However this didn’t quite answer in my mind how then did the PM seemingly know the blind trust owned a vineyard. So I e-mailed the PMs Office asking for more info. They gave me a call, and this is the situation as I understand it:
- Nov 2008 – Key wins election as PM
- Dec 2008 – Key had the blind trust set up and existing assets transferred into it. This included the part-share in a vineyard.
- Jan 2009 – this is when Key was at a dinner and mentioned he has part-shares in a vineyard – just three weeks after he transferred them in. So he was assuming that in the three weeks since the blind trust was set up, the shares had not been sold
The PM correctly says today he has no idea if the blind trust still owns a part-share in the vineyard. I don’t really see what the story is then. If his dinner comments had been made a year or two after the blind trust was estblished, that might suggest an issue, but it was a reasonable assumption to make just three weeks later that the shares were still there.
TV3 also tied into the story the bottles of Pinot he gave away at Xmas time, and had branded JK Pinot. However this wine did not come from Highwater (the vineyard that he previously (and the blind trust may stll currently) but another vineyard.
I really can’t see anything at all the PM has done wrong. He correctly put his assets into a blind trust, and to this day doesn’t know whether its investments have changed or not from two years ago.
At worse he may have been imprecise in his response to the question “You’re a vineyard owner yourself aren’t you,” in January 2009. Instead of saying “I am”, he would have been more precise to say “I probably am, but I transferred the shares three weeks ago into a blind trust, and I am not sure if the trustees have sold them or not“.
No doubt Labour though will get terribly excited and demand a commission of inquiry or some such.
Related posts:
- How is this different to what Governments do?
- Martha’s Vineyard
- The 10% cap for SOEs
- John Key and Tranz Rail shares
May 26th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
The stupidity of the Labour party seems to be endless.
At what stage do those knuckle draggers realise that the way to beat Key is not by attacking his credibility or through personal attacks, that tactic is ALWAYS going to bite them on the arse.
Labour may not like it but John Key is the most popular PM this country has ever seen, all but the most rabid pinko’s like the guy, hell, I am not his biggest fan but Key is a chap who you would love to sit down and have a beer with or invite over for a BBQ, he comes across as a genuinely nice guy and the public can see that.
Labour would be far better advised to forget about the next election, the Nat’s are going to win that with ease but Labour must change direction and start having a crack at the government in other areas, if they persist with the tired old socialist ranting and rhetoric then they are doomed to be in opposition for a very, very long time.
[DPF: To be fair to Labour, they have not yet commented on the story - it was done by TV3]
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
Whitechapel Limited looks interesting, doesnt look like a trust though
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Lead story on TV3!!??
FFS!!! Some people really need to get a life.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
The story is only about one thing – jealousy.
Might go and buy a bottle of that wine. I am always happy to support NZ wines.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Given this question in the house today, (Hon PETE HODGSON to the Prime Minister): Does he stand by his statement to the New Zealand Herald last year that he has put certain assets into a blind trust that is “so blind I haven’t a clue what’s in it”? Can we assume that Labour is still attempting to dig for dirt, and feeding little tidbits to TV3?
Seriously, if their journos can’t even check the facts, what use are they?
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:08 pm
TV3 must be trying to soften the blow for Labour, it must be getting close to the release of the expenses for the Labour Party’s nine years of absolute Power and Confusion.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:11 pm
“[DPF: To be fair to Labour, they have not yet commented on the story - it was done by TV3]”
There’s a difference?
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
Doug – Will “absolute Power and Confusion” become Absolute Power and Corruption?
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:25 pm
I’ve noticed quite a bit of bias from TV3 news against this National government lately. Some of the reporting is really piss poor and not very balanced at all.
Vote:So I’m wondering why they don’t make a complaint with the broadcasting standards about it? Is there a perception that to do so might look petty or something?
May 26th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
Brian Marshall
Vote:TV3 ran at a loss of $320m if they keep this up thet might just hit $400m.
May 26th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Ha Ha.. capitalist entrepreneurs just can’t stop talking about their investments.
Vote:and it looks like tv3 has caught honest John out on this one… bragging about his Otago wine investments upward trends to private dinner guests and later when questioned by the media saying he has no idea if he has a part-share in any vineyard.
What were we saying about Goffs political history catching up with him… Johns political history has been 5 min and he’s already in trouble… blind trust my arse.. blind trusts are like name suppression orders in this country.
Goff could have a 3 course meal on John on this one… but who am I trying to kid Goff has trouble unwrapping fish n chips.
May 26th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
rkbee- grasping at straws much?
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
The knuckle dragger’s over at the Standard are wetting themselves about this story.
Despite it being a huge non event some of them seem sure it will lead to the downfall of the Nat’s and Key.
Go and have a read, their desperation is hilarious.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
As so often in politics, trouble can come not from the original story (and DPF’s explanation above seems plausible), but from the response. Especially when a politician is so loose with language, as John Key tends to be.
TV 3 reports: ‘Asked about the other vineyard investors, he said “I don’t know those guys.”‘
If he did know them, it wouldn’t matter much. But if he says he doesn’t know them, and it turns out he does … then he’s made a rod for his own back.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
There is one way to make a small fortune in vineyards, start with a large fortune. Seriously though this is just the
Vote:journalistsreporters being their typical lefty bias muppets. Take no notice and keep your fingers crossed that Labour muppets send their party stooges to Otago to dig up the non existent dirt just before the next election.May 26th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
I heard Gollum in Question time yesterday – having a little wank under his desk – This must have been what he was all excited about. Wow – they really are desperate – maybe Gollum was planning a BBQ at his place in Dunedin.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:12 pm
Can’t you see that this is a consequence of all the fuss made of Clark’s (and others) personal indiscretions. The National Party and its supporters (including DPF) were quite happy to highlight issues like paintgate/corngate/speedgate and refer to them over and over again. So you create this stupid politics whereby these sort of issues dominate coverage and are heavily investigated by journalists. It becomes not a matter of whether you have done anything wrong, but how it can be twisted to show a perception of untrustworthiness. No matter what you think about the individual incidents and what level of ‘scandal’ they constitute, the shift to personal scandal politics is a bad one. But if you want to go round fueling fires and then complain you that you have been burned then I have no sympathy, you reap what you sow.
p.s – yes the stupid attempts by Labour to smear Key during the election campaign slot into this as well, but who turned scandal politics into our national sport? Take a look in the mirror!
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
As Dirty Rat observes we all know that on 22 December 2008 John Key et al transferred 10 shares in what was then called Devils Creek Limited (changed name to HIGHWATER VINEYARD LIMITED on 6 Nov 2009) to Whitechapel Ltd that continues to hold those shares til today. It’s all in the public domain.
If you are bored you can trace the ownership of Whitechapel, see what it owns etc etc through the NZ Companies’ register.
I note in passing that Blind Trusts don’t prevent their beneficiaries (or the general public) from knowing what is going on in terms of their assets, just that they can’t do anything about it.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
The National spin doctors will be working late tonight… while Labour and the Greens are counting chickens before they hatch…
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
John Key has a vineyard, The Standard has sour grapes!
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
What George said.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
I also agree with George, the sad face of the green eyed monster.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Are these the same TV3 journalists that had that wonderful story on Paula Bennett offering hush money to the beneficiary?
Large pinch of salt over here please!
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
Simon Arnold @ 9:14 pm
Your missing the point.. its not what John can and can’t do… its about what John said he knew..then later denied … that the left will be having a field day over.. but don’t worry John’s a big boy he will turn up to their field day tomorrow high and dry wearing gumboots leaving them in wet shit..
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
George Patton
I was tempted to flog your line, but hey you should add that classic comment here;
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/keys-wine-excuse-hard-to-swallow/
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
TV3 continues to miss the boat. The TV market gap is for a channel on the right, Fox News style, or a milder NZ equivalent.
Instead TV3 folk bash their heads on the wall trying to match the lefties at TTVNZ (Tabloid TeleVision NZ) portraying the world view of the lefty minority of this country.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:03 pm
And National wouldn’t have if it was Helen Clark in the gun? There were a ludicrous number of calls for ministerial resignations or stand-downs in the last Government from the then National opposition – perspective is needed from all side of the political sphere.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:07 pm
I’d like to know how many Bank of America shares are in that blind trust
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:09 pm
And National wouldn’t have if it was Helen Clark in the gun? There were a ludicrous number of calls for ministerial resignations or stand-downs in the last Government from the then National opposition – perspective is needed from all side of the political sphere.
Yeah, on the one hand the TV3 story is pretty silly but on the other hand DPF is the guy who blogged about Chris Carter catching the ferry. Reap what you sow.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:12 pm
Greame Edgeler
If we let Key get away with the standards the previous Labour-led govt enjoyed then there could be phone records of him checking with a trustee moments before shares were brought or sold and we would give the benefit of the doubt that the calls were a coincidence.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:16 pm
Graeme Edgeler
Oh and the special tax cut for the wine industry would also have nothing to do with large donations to a trust that he knows nothing about as well.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:17 pm
@burt 10:12pm – indeed. A ‘blind’ trust with bat-like sonar, white cane, digitial-eyes with voice feedback, guide dog and personal assistant. But still ‘blind’. Tui …
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:43 pm
I trust Key boy gets blind at a wine tasting party? He always can rely on the English Seeing Eye Dog Guide.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
I really appreciate blogs. I now look at news items and consider what angle the reporters are coming from and who is really controlling what they are wanting us to hear or believe. This news item had Labour written all over it and is nothing more than a mountain out of a molehill, a bunch of sour grapes so to speak. They have been trying to dig up dirt on John Key and all they seem to find are crumbs. Here they have a nothing story. They know they have a nothing story, but lack the ability to do anything better. Some may consider it chipping away at John Key’s credibility, but here it may simply chip away at their own credibility.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
Just curious as to who the trustees are on Key’s blind trust…would his wife be one of them ?
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 11:01 pm
“The PM’s Office put out a press released saying…”
That was a pretty piss-poor press release in that it completely failed to answer what was the very obvious central question raised by the story and considering the matter could have been cleared up very simply as DPF later discovered, it’s fucking appalling.
What the fuck else does a press secretary do if not to manage media stories like this. And he/she could have done it very simply by telling the truth – no complicated spin required.
Vote:May 26th, 2010 at 11:26 pm
It’s amusing when the private sector broadcaster is more left wing than the public-private one. Makes puny minds like Bradbury’s explode because it doesn’t fit into his cosy ideological bubbles.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 12:20 am
was this on facebook? how did they find out?
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 12:47 am
The NZ populous is financially illiterate, so this is another typical media attempt to muddy the waters. Compare this ‘story’ with the total lack of scrutiny of the financial companies that are going bust … no scrutiny whatsoever about what these firms were up to.
Aren’t taxpayers luck to now be providing guarantees.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 5:31 am
Forget about the vineyard. It’s minor stuff that does not warrant any effort.
The more important question to ask Key is if he will benefit from an ETS implementation? Does he have financial interests in companies dealing with carbon trading, a la Al Gore? By the way, the same question should be asked of his minister Smith.
Otherwise, how do you explain their stubborness in proceeding with the July 1 implementation?
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 6:09 am
If this is the biggest sin that Labour can find against John Key, they are in worse shape than I thought they were. This is real grabbing-at-straws stuff.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 6:54 am
Storm meet teacup!
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 8:02 am
“Labour would be far better advised to forget about the next election, the Nat’s are going to win that with ease but Labour must change direction and start having a crack at the government in other areas, if they persist with the tired old socialist ranting and rhetoric then they are doomed to be in opposition for a very, very long time.”
What country are you living in..? NZ is one of the most socialist leaning in the first world, most people still oppose every last privatisation from the 80s and 90s even the ones that lowered prices and improved services…
Why do you think there has been such protest over even a partial float of Kiwibank and why does National have to implement every last one of Labour’s policies from the last 10 years..?
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 8:04 am
Rule #1 in politics – politicians always accuse others of their own worst faults. Labour pollies know that if they owned a vineyard then they would make sure that government policy didn’t impact on that investment, so they can’t imagine that John Key could own one without interferring in policy development.
This also explains why the top entreprenuers amoungst the Greens and Labour did nothing about the housing bubble – with housing, including rentals their only assets (I told you they were entreprenurial wealth creators) they were quite happy to see the whole sector spiral upwards. This also explains their support for the “smart city” policies, which drove up land values, and hence property values.
It’s time to have another look at how Labour and Green politicians’ investments and failed policies have caused so much grief for us all.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 8:14 am
So, I’ve just heard Pete Hodgson on NatRadio claiming that he has “irrefutable evidence” that Key not only lied to the House (a serious breech of Parliamentary privilege) but must have made a false statutory declaration to the Register of Pecuniary Interests. Haven’t we been here before?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10459365
Back in ’07 when Hodgson and Trevor Mallard were claiming they had similarly “irrefutable” evidence that Key made false statutory declarations to both the Companies Office and the Registrar of Electors. Oddly enough, their evidence wasn’t handed on to anyone who could actually prosecute Key for serious breeches of the Electoral and Companies Acts… Funny that.
[DPF: They're probably still searching through the H Fee papers also!]
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 8:22 am
If TV3 are making a $300m loss then that company is heading for bankruptcy. I suppose being anti government they will make their news show popular with anti Government people.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 8:23 am
burt (10.16pm)
What is the ‘special tax cut to the wine industry’ you mention?
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 9:02 am
The fundemental difference between Key and Clark is that Key smiles and is polite.
Thats not an argument in favor of voting Labour by the why, Simply reinforces my opinion that regardless of who we vote for we get someone dishonest.
Regardless of the actual situation I found Key entirely unconvincing.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 9:25 am
“Regardless of the actual situation I found Key entirely unconvincing.”
Murray, you’re very charitable. Key has shown to be a consumate liar, a master of the double-speak, an artist at recanting electoral promises, a champion at distorting the truth, an olympic gymnast when comes to flip-flops.
He’s lost all credibility with me.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 9:25 am
keys next statement should just be
“HA HA HA i dont think the new zealand people could care less about something i said 2 years ago. time to move on”
then it just goes unchallenged
or maybe just start speaking total shit:
the blind trust portfolio was on the desk, but i didnt read it
one of the directors read out a list of my shares, but i had my ipod on
i heard the list of shares but i didnt know they were talking about my portfolio
etc etc
Helen style!
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 9:55 am
At least Key invested in New Zealand industry. Unlike Anderton who invests in Aussie bank shares.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 10:04 am
How wet! Don’t the lefties realize that money is no longer JK’s motivation?
He doesn’t need any more than he has.
He has a shit load of money. Congratulations to him. I don’t care what he does with it. So what if he does have ownership of a vineyard? I’m more impressed with that than if he owned a property speculation business full of leaky homes!
At least a vineyard is fun.
For goodness sake. Pathetic.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 10:11 am
One suspects that the people at that “private dinner” may not be invited back.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 10:42 am
Oddly enough, their evidence wasn’t handed on to anyone who could actually prosecute Key for serious breeches of the Electoral and Companies Acts… Funny that.
Yeah, its less about prooving Key has breached anything, and more to do with hoping any mud sticks. Guarenteed any opposition MP that raises this in the house will do so under the protection of parliamentary priveledge.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 11:07 am
Head Line News. Shock Horror. Prime Minister is a wealthy man.
All this hot air based on a comment he made less than a month after forming a blind trust?
TV3 is heading for the same fate that has befallen other media which have alienated 50% of their potential readership and advertisers. Oblivion. People can see through this tawdry crap being run by Labour and TV3, more of the tired old same.
Oh BTW, for the commenter who thinks you can be kept informed of the assets in a blind trust:-
What Does Blind Trust Mean?
Vote:A trust in which the executors have full discretion over the assets, and the trust beneficiaries have no knowledge of the holdings of the trust.
May 27th, 2010 at 11:08 am
More like setting Key up for a ‘gotcha’ moment, the ‘gotcha’ being caught lying to the house.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 11:31 am
How wet! Don’t the lefties realize that money is no longer JK’s motivation?
He doesn’t need any more than he has.
Just for shits and giggles: having more than one needs doesn’t stop a lot of people from striving to make quantities of money which makes Key’s fortune look like a drop in the ocean.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 11:40 am
Note to any TV3 advertisers:
I don’t watch anything on TV3 except Underbelly. This is because I can’t stand their politics of envy and class driven hate, as well as their infantile reporters and presenters, especially one Oliver Driver.
There are so many other people I know that have exactly the same opinion of them it is astounding. I do not know anybody who watches TV3 news or that limp wristed idiot Campbell.
p.s. TVNZ are not much better, but marginally better that I will watch their news over TV Pravda.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 12:42 pm
the big problem here for key is if labour/hodgson can prove key has lied to parliament…
..that is deep-doo-doo…
lying to parliament by anyone is ‘the big one’..
..even more so for a prime minister..
it’s pretty much ta-ta..! time..
as farrar well knows..and which makes his ‘pshaw..!..nothing to see here!’..
just confirmation that there could well be something to ‘see’ with this one…
i just know that for the first time ever..i am in agreement with murray..
in that in his denials to camera…
..key was totally ‘unconvincing’…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
one-term john becomes half-term-john…?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
This could explain his reluctance to follow the recommendations of the Law Commission:-)
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 12:58 pm
prime minister english…?
..or an early election..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Sure Adolf. That doesn’t Key picking up the phone to the executors and saying “time to exit any [blah] type holdings and think about picking up some [blah2]“.
All the ‘blindness’ does is cloak favourable investment outcomes in plausibly deniability.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
bobux
I was referring to the tax cut for the racing industry in 2006 which Winston Peters managed to get into the budget. This occured the same year as circa $100,000 donations into the trust he “knew nothing about” (spencer Trust) was made by the Vela family. I was saying that if we applied the same standards to Key as the Labour-led govt had all Key would need to do is deny any connection between owning shares in [xyz] vineyard and special treatment for the wine industry and we would just move on.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
and if keys’ enemies in national…or those ambitious….
if they have any ‘dirt’/the -goods on key that they have been saving for the right moment…?
…now looks good…
..eh..?
(you’d think..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
You want an early election Phool…bring it on
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 1:50 pm
“I probably am, but I transferred the shares three weeks ago into a blind trust, and I am not sure if the trustees have sold them or not“.
It just rolls off the tounge at an after dinner speech doesn’t it?
I don’t think Labour really care about the blind trust issue – they will know it is nothing – but it will 1. appeal to their hard core supporters and 2. (from their POV) remind New Zealanders that John Key is a rich prick. I suspect point 2 is the Labour focus.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Now TV3 has footage of John Key claiming he owned the winery in 2009. So the blind trust or not he still knew he owned the shares.
Several options
Key mislead parliament when registering his interests
Key is very stupid
The Trustees for Key’s used are incompetent
The Trustees for Key’s Trust sold most of it assets to a single company connected to one of the Trustees. Which suggests possible corruptions of the Trustee
or any combination of the above
A valid story but one that should have come up after the flooding.
I am not surprised that Key wealth is in conflict with his role as PM. I’m not claiming he’s corrupt like several PMs in Israel and Italy however in NZ the perception is bad.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 2:21 pm
Note to Tv3 producers – uncovering National Party lies and deceptions is totally biased and will result in you losing the patronage of the kiwiblog-right.
Vote:May 27th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
key loooked positively queasy on tv3 news tonight….
and hodgson has lodged an official complaint with the speaker..
alleging key has been bullshitting/misleading parliament…
..no wonder key looked queasy….
(‘it’s the little things’…eh..?..)
not only is the honeymoon well and truly over..
..a divorce is on the cards…
i reckon if he is forced to fall on his sword…
..that he will go into exile in hawaii…
he’ll be able to market his ‘pm’s pinot’ from there…
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: