The Wong Report
The report by Hugh McPhail on behalf of The Parliamentary Service over travel by Pansy and Sammy Wong is here. It is 46 pages long. McPhail worked in the public service from 1970 to 2008, retiring as a senior manager at SSC.
His primary findings are:
- There is no evidence of systemic abuse of the parliamentary international air travel entitlement by Pansy and Sammy Wong
- There is evidence that the trip from Beijing to Lianyungang, China, in December 2008, involved activity by both Pansy and Sammy Wong that, although unplanned and inadvertent, could be construed as private business purposes, and I therefore recommend that they should each refund the level of rebate attributable to that trip, being $237.06 each
- With regard to all of the other international trips investigated I have no reason to believe that Pansy and Sammy Wong have not acted in compliance with the conditions set out in the Speaker’s Directions regarding private international air travel
- I have no reason to believe that Pansy and Sammy Wong have not acted in compliance with the conditions set out in the Speaker’s Directions regarding domestic air travel
- There is no evidence that the use of the address 735 Chapel Road, Dannemora, Manukau as the registered address for two of Sammy Wong’s companies, has resulted in Pansy Wong’s electorate office, which is located in the building at that address, being used for commercial business purposes.
So it seems quite clear there will not be a by-election.
However I think it is unlikely Pansy will become a Minister again. The public don’t like a rotational policy to the Cabinet. And there are many other backbenches who have not yet had a chance at Cabinet.
The decision for Pansy is whether she wants to stand again for Botany, with no probability of being a Minister again.
Back to the report, a few extracts:
I would note that it is my impression that Sammy Wong’s business activities have been consciously limited, with priority given to his wife’s political career and the need to minimise potential conflicts of interest.
And:
- Sammy Wong’s overall business interests have been consciously limited, and are primarily located in New Zealand, with his Chinese business interests limited to the hovercraft company in Lianyungang
- Sammy Wong has paid for his own travel where it has related to his private business interests
- Pansy Wong has herself no private business interests that are likely to raise issues in relation to the parliamentary rebate.
The reports reviews the total subsided international air travel since 2003. For Pansy Wong it is $27,000 against the average for an MP of $60,000. And Sammy Wong’s travel is also below the average for a spouse – $26,000 against the average of $49,000.
With the trip in question that attracted all the attention, the review finds the trip was primarily holiday – in fact to follow on Little Pumpkin and her grandmother and see how they were doing. The travel to Lianyungang was an extra cost of only $263.40 each – which is the amount be be refunded at 90%.
There seems little doubt that there was no systemic rorting – that in fact normally Sammy was quite careful about keeping the business travel separately funded. They did inappropriately mix it on one occasion – and Pansy has paid a big price for that.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:18 pm
So we have an honest MP and her honest husband who, despite all the ethnic and other slurs that have been made, did their level best to comply with the rules.
Creepy Pete should apologise for his nasty attempts at muckraking and for besmirching the good name of the Wongs.
He won’t of course and this will always stick to her. I sincerely hope John Key finds something for her because in my view she has done no wrong even if there are some who will bang on endlessly about the $237 (shock horror!) they are both paying back. Why should she be punished for not doing anything wrong?
What a silly lot we are and what a nasty crowd Labour are turning out to be.
I note with pleasure that John Key never descends to this kind of crap and he must have plenty of it if he wanted to sink to Labour’s depths.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:20 pm
I’m guessing that the champagne in Pete Hodgson’s office has been taken off the ice, and returned to the cellar. There is nothing for Labour to celebrate here. Pete Hodgson looks again to be petty and small-minded.
That said, Ministers have an obligation to set the standard, not just to follow it. It is disappointing that Pansy Wong’s career will be remembered for all the wrong reasons, but she has no-one to blame other than herself.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:22 pm
I can only imagine the howls soon to unleashed over at The Standard and Red Alert…
I hope Hugh McPhail is prepared to be called a corrupt flunky in the pay of the National Party…
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:27 pm
@ Jeremy; thus far the silence from the left is deafening, just as it is about Matt McCarten and his IRD issues. But why would we have expected anything else?
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:31 pm
Fixed that for ya Inv.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:32 pm
@Inventory, They’ll kept quiet about Matt “Robber Baron” McCarten but they pushed the Wong issue as corruption so hard they can’t not comment…
No, no this investigation into Wonggate isn’t to be believe we’ll be told, however the 6 Climategate investigation with dubious independence – all totally above board…
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:40 pm
I don’t have a big issue here. Pansy Wong was showing herself to be someone who didn’t need to be in the Ministry anyway. She isn’t a big loss. Yes, this outcome is a very unfortunate one for her – a pretty small mistake with a big consequence. But the mistake is hers as is the consequence, and from a party viewpoint this hasn’t been a big problem – storm in a teacup in fact.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:42 pm
If she was minister in the Clark government caught driving pissed as a fart whe would be in a few months.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:43 pm
“LATEST: The report into former cabinet minister Pansy Wong’s use of her travel perks is a ”whitewash” and the case should be referred to the Auditor-General, Labour leader Phil Goff says.”
Excellent – keep it in high news rotation so the public can see just how petty Labour is with their muck raking. Middle NZ don’t like it Phil, so keep playing the same old song.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4420081/Pansy-Wong-investigation-finds-minor-breach
On the other hand, an email or three to Peter Dunne, Minister of Revenue, (p.dunne@ministers.govt.nz) could be helpful for ensuring the Unite tax fraud gets a bit of air-time.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:43 pm
Interesting, and all the more so that at one stage it looked so bad.
Hodgson must be relieved in a way – being right must have felt so unnatural for him
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:47 pm
According to Goff, this is now a “cover-up”. That is very close to an allegation of corruption against the author – is Goff is able to back up his assertion of a “cover-up”?
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:47 pm
The biggest shame is that she stepped down due to a personal mistake rather than as a result of John Key growing some balls and declaring the 2 ministries she headed as a complete and utter waste of taxpayer money and closing them down.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:52 pm
“There seems little doubt that there was no systemic rorting..”
Really? Ten (10) overseas trips, five (5) of them to China, are not considered a rort?
That’s why some politicians deserve to be considered the lowest of the low. Political colours aside, a majority of them are in for their own benefit.
Pansy Wong is no exception.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:52 pm
Jeez, you lot are amusing, not a word from any of you that ALL MPs are a self serving bunch who believe they are very special and should get taxpayer paid holidays that others who have done far more for NZ do not get.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:53 pm
The wording is ambiguous. When a public official finds “no evidence that xyz” that doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. It depends how hard they looked for evidence. From the summary of the report it is hard to tell whether or not anything actually happened, just that the investigator didn’t see any evidence that it occurred.
I still think a storm in a teacup. But if this were a Labour minister, I’m pretty sure some on here would be shouting cover up.
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:54 pm
Make that with the exception of Manolo
December 3rd, 2010 at 3:55 pm
Hugh McPhail left out a paragraph,
“Having extensively reviewed the risk management contingencies in place and assessed such against the ranked and listed outcomes that may be achievable at the present time the conclusions drawn would appear to lend itself to the obvious and somewhat compelling conclusion and to a degree a concurrence with the submissions of the press secretary of the department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, that Pete Hodgson is indeed a…fuckwit”
December 3rd, 2010 at 4:02 pm
This is report by Hugh McPhail is clearly written and easy to follow. Well done.
Incidentally, where’s the State Services Commission’s report into the SIS’s security vetting of Stephen Wilce?
That report was due out at the end of September, and here we are into December and its not been released. Another cover up?
December 3rd, 2010 at 4:21 pm
When you think it’s conspiracy theorists like Ian Wishart who smear left-wing politicians, you have to wonder why Labour is always so willing to sink as low when it comes to smearing right-wing politicians.
December 3rd, 2010 at 4:36 pm
BeaB says “and what a nasty crowd Labour are turning out to be” .. they are turning out to be nasty BeaB, they have been for about 10 years and getting worse .. Goff had a chance to move away from playing the person and indulging in gutter politics but has not done so.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:09 pm
slightlyright @ 3:55pm thanks for finding the missing paragraph.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Sammy is having a fairly good time on the taxpayer..as Cactus Kate said Chinese are always doing business. No doubt one or both of them will slip up again…Pansy is useless anyway.. just a token…women’s and Ethnic affairs should be scrapped..
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:30 pm
There is no evidence that the use of the address 735 Chapel Road, Dannemora, Manukau as the registered address for two of Sammy Wong’s companies, has resulted in Pansy Wong’s electorate office, which is located in the building at that address, being used for commercial business purposes.
uhhh..except the mere fact of having it as his registered business address means it is being used for a commercial business purpose… ie receiving business letters and mailing business letters with that address on Sammy’s letterhead.
Its the companies head office for fucks sake, he only has to type one letter from there for it to be used for a commercial business purpose !!!
…unless he’s not in the business of commerce and there is a distinction between say Unit 1 735 Chapel road and another Unit which is Pansy’s electorate office then the truth becomes self evident and that is her office/building was and is being used for her husbands commercial business purposes !!!
apart from that how about ZERO FUCKING TOLERANCE ???
she defrauded the taxpayer, abused her privilege and made a false declaration…
DOWN THE ROAD WITH HER LYING CHEATING ASS !!!
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Phil Goff didn’t like the independent report’s conclusion so he’s going bananas, including a personal attack on a highly respected former public servant who cannot respond in defence of himself. Surely it’s lower than low to attack someone who cannot fight back? I’ve known Hugh McPhail professionally for the 40 years of his public service career – which included diplomatic, policy and regulatory roles across several govt depts – and he is a traditional apolitical public servant of the highest integrity and intelligence. For Phil Goff to impugn his character, his professionalism and his honesty is appalling.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:40 pm
pollywog, where’s your proof that the building at that address isn’t used by multiple parties on a cost-share basis?
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:41 pm
I’ve known Hugh McPhail professionally for the 40 years of his public service career BLAH BLAH BLAH
You might want to send him a business letter from Sammy with 735 Chapel Rd on it and a political one from Pansy with the exact same a dress on it and tell him to pull his head out of his arse then !!!
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:42 pm
grumpy (and manolo) – the travel is over a 10 year period so is actually much less than oh, Phil Goff for example.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:46 pm
apart from that how about ZERO FUCKING TOLERANCE ???
There is zero tolerance – she lost her ministerial position. It’s doubtful she will get back in. More proof that this Government is setting far higher standards than the previous one. There is, however, always room for improvement.
It should be case closed, but for the serious allegation by Phil Goff that there has been a cover-up (his actual term). What he is alleging is that the truth was discovered, but has been deliberately hidden. Against who, exactly, is Phil Goff levelling this accusation? Against the civil servant who wrote the report? Against someone higher up in the Parliamentary Service? Did the Government perhaps doctor the report? This is an important issue – hope the media asks!
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:47 pm
Read the full report – there was a distinction between 735 Chapel Road Upstairs (Pansy’s electoral office) and 735 Chapel Road Downstairs (empty but which Sammy came to a verbal agreement with the landlord to use as a mailing address for his two companies).
In any event a registered office does not mean that business is being conducted there. Many companies have their registered office at their accountants or their lawyers, and although those locations are clearly having business conducted there (namely accountancy or lawyering), it does not follow that the business of the *company* is being conducted there.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Uncompetency – you’ll spoil their day if you present facts, they prefer baseless smearing.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:48 pm
cost share, schmost share…the evidence is, he’s registered commercial enterprises there, so it’s safe to assume he conducts commercial enterprises by way of correspondence there as well and if he’s part paying the rent then thats even more proof.
there is no distinction in the business address being separate from the electorate address if they both get sent to the same mailbox cos it’s the same fucking address !!!
upstairs, downstairs doesnt make a difference if they weren’t separate unit addresses.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:54 pm
no pollywog, the evidence is you’re desperate for there to be more wrong doing, just like Phil Koff. The reality is Wong has committed what seems to be a minor infraction and in all of her other dealings she’s made extensive efforts to follow the rules. I can tell you’re disappointed, but get real – it’s not the end of the world, she’s basically innocent.
December 3rd, 2010 at 5:59 pm
Bit unfair to kick Hodgson too hard on this, he saw or was provided with an opportunity and took it. Actually I was surprised he did it given he is standing down. Chris Trotter summed it up very well here
http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2010/11/perfect-sting.html#comments
That’s just the nature of politics.
I am not sure that Wong is out of the running for cabinet Key has shown himself to be a very real proponent of natural justice and I can see many advantages in having Wong in the executive. I don’t see this as a hanging crime rather one of being a bit careless. Wong needs to work her bum off for the next year, increase her majority and give Key a justification for inclusion in a post election cabinet.
How ironic a centre left wing guy arguing for a right wing politician with a right wing blogger over her inclusion in the inevitable next National led government.
@BeaB I agree the slurs have been bad my confrontation with Spud on Red Alert
http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/11/23/keys-position-not-credible/
Spud says:
November 23, 2010 at 6:29 pm
” Richard the First – Hi
J abba – Hi
Hiding her away from facing up to her Wong doing is not what I consider to be democracy! ”
Puerile puns on her name from the puerile. I called him a racist idiot and got this response
Spud says:
November 23, 2010 at 6:50 pm
” 1, there’s nothing racist in my comment! \
2, If you are referring to the pun of her name, well, I’d do that to any person of any race!
3, I don’t care if you think I’m an idiot, I’m not here to nerd off!
4, I’m not laughing either, she stole my tax payer money!
5, Offensive to you obviously, but really is anyone else here offended? Mmmm? Tell me if you are, come on hoards of people. ! ”
My response was IHStewart says:
November 23, 2010 at 8:07 pm
” 1) yes there is.
2) Yes I am and that is racist that you fail to see that is amazing.
3) Yes you are an idiot enough said.
4) She what ? Let’s have a debate on screwing the system. We on the left should bow our heads in shame.
5) I am always offended by racial bullshit. You feel that you can select communities and mock them speaks volumes for Labour. ”
IHStewart I’m letting this comment through, but can you please be careful. Clare
( Ouch. I am a huge fan of Clare. )
I thought it was generous of Clare Curren to let my comment stand. Spud is fully aware of how to find me but doesn’t want to play for some reason.
To be fair he was on the mild side.
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:03 pm
nah bro…basically innocent my arse. ZERO TOLERANCE !!!
she’s been proven guilty otherwise she wouldn’t have had to pay back anything !!!
and do you think anyone sending a letter to one of Sammys companies or Pansy’s office made the distinction of
Pansy Wong
Upstairs 735 Chapel Rd
Dannemora,
Manukau
or
Sammy Wong
Downstairs 735 Chaple Rd
Dannemora,
Manukau
PFFFT…
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:04 pm
I have to be honest IHStewart – I didn’t think that counted as particularly racist. I mean I regularly make fun of names like Wayne Kerr, and there’s not a shred of racism involved. Puerile – sure, racist – stretching it.
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:05 pm
pollywog – I can run an office from my home, pay a share of the rent based on percentage of floor space used, and claim expenses for it back from IRD.
You really are clutching at straws, get yourself off to a garden bar somewhere, it’s too nice a day to waste your time flinging shit that won’t stick.
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:09 pm
pollywog – I can run an office from my home, pay a share of the rent based on percentage of floor space used, and claim expenses for it back from IRD.
yeah…so basically you’d be using it for a commercial business purpose, running an office from the same building !!!
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:12 pm
yes, but the point is it’s absolutely legal for it to have dual purpose, just as it is for a single building to be shared by multiple commercial businesses, or in this case as a commercial office in one part and an electorate office in another.
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:16 pm
in normal circumstances sure, but this is an electoral office being used for commercial business by the husband of an MP and not their private residence.
a big fat NO NO !!!
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:17 pm
report says the tax payer does NOT pay for the part of building used for mr. wong’s company registration address.
so what’s the fkn problem? /shrug
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:19 pm
I guess you have your ideas pretty well set in stone on this pollywog, and I mine. I’m off for a beer in the sun, the great leveler! Enjoy your evening.
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:29 pm
there was a distinction between 735 Chapel Road Upstairs (Pansy’s electoral office) and 735 Chapel Road Downstairs (empty but which Sammy came to a verbal agreement with the landlord to use as a mailing address for his two companies
seems like he doesn’t pay anything and theres no documentation if it’s a verbal agreement.
so if his office was empty, then all he had to do was sit down, open a letter, use her fax, phone or wi fi internet and correspond from Pansy’s office and he’s guilty
and of course theres absolutely no chance he did that eh ?
the point is, even having 735 Chapel Rd as a registered address for his companies is evidence of use for a commercial business enterprise if theres no distinction of having upstairs or downstairs on any correspondence/letterhead to and from that address
now if it was a non profit making charitable trust or incorporated society then that might be different.
and cheers RightNow, have one for me
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:39 pm
Hodgson reminds me of an undertaker, partly because of his cadaverous look. And “The right honourable gentlemen’s smile is like the silver fittings of a coffin” (Disraeli on Robert Peel).
On the other hand, Hodgson is a grave robber: the problem is that he digs up the wrong bodies.
Have another slurp of embalming fluid, Pete.
December 3rd, 2010 at 6:45 pm
so does the taxpayer pay for the internet at Pansy’s office and is the building on a wireless network ?
and has Sammy ever sent a business email from his office using the shared taxpayer funded network ?
how hard did this McFAIL fuckwit look for evidence ?
December 3rd, 2010 at 7:04 pm
Lets all as a nation face it its the fact she is Chinese. Her offence was nowhere near as bad as English, Brownlee, Heatly and probably the whole of the labour caucus. How many sites have had to switch on their moderation because of the comments ? Homepaddock, NBR etc.etc.
December 3rd, 2010 at 7:13 pm
@ Pollywog; are you saying that you know more than Hugh McPhail, who viewed the evidence, when all you have are suppositions that you’ve pulled from an orifice?
December 3rd, 2010 at 7:22 pm
@pollywog, If the info was pulled from the companies office (as I assume it was), it’s actually not unusual to have the registered address as your home address, a related business address or the address for service as an address you rarely visit, your lawyer’s or accountants office is good… Basically any address where there is a good likelihood someone will be present during regular business hours and has a knowledge of your business is fine (as Husbands and Wives often do)…
Run many companies have you..?
December 3rd, 2010 at 7:26 pm
BTW Pollywog; did those Labour Party staff members whole STOLE wine after the Press Gallery Christmas party two years ago ever get prosecuted? D’you think that Phil Goff thought THAT police investigation was a whitewash?
And what about Shane Jones watching blue movies on yours and my taxexs (presuming that you pay tax)? Oh, and have you played golf with Mita Ririnui with those clubs he put on his ministerial credit card?
December 3rd, 2010 at 7:29 pm
RightNow hold on, are you saying that Goff and Wong are not self serving types ?
They are politicians.
December 3rd, 2010 at 8:07 pm
Pollywog
I guess Mr McPhail’s 40 years as a NEUTRAL civil servant wasn’t partisan enough for you. Boy if you can’t tell the difference between a ground floor and first floor office, God help us. And if straining at this gnat is the core of your argument against Wong’s offending then it shows the difference between a National PM who had his Minister resign over a $263 travel indiscretion vs a Labour PM who allowed her party to rort $800k off the taxpayer and wouldn’t apologize or pay it back until essentially forced to by the Attorney General AND who still to this day refuses to condemn her corrupt MP Philip Field who languishes in jail for in her words doing nothing more than trying to help his constituents too much.
This brings a whole new meaning to the word disproportionate.
December 3rd, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Key has fucked up here, I don’t care what the report says this is still a bad look.
He should have demanded her resignation and made a point of putting ALL ministers on notice.
We on the right just have to have better standards than the thieving, cheating, troughing left, it is not good enough for us to say “but labour MP’s did much worse” (and they did), we must show that we are better than the left and we must keep on showing them.
Wong should have gone and she should have gone two weeks ago.
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:25 pm
So now anyone who take something that isn’t there’s only has to pay some money and everything will be alright! Is this the high standards of John Key’s government?
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:32 pm
@ Pollywog; are you saying that you know more than Hugh McPhail, who viewed the evidence…
let me break it down for you sherlock… how hard did this McFAIL fuckwit look for evidence ?
and now let me answer it for you… about as hard as Chris Carters peepee in a roomful of playboy bunnies
NOT EVEN OWWWW !!!
it’s actually not unusual to have the registered address as any address where there is a good likelihood someone will be present during regular business hours and has a knowledge of your business is fine
which means that address/building is being used for commercial business purposes, if only to recieve correspondence and act as the registered office
run many companies ?
yeah, a couple…you heard of cows ?
Boy if you can’t tell the difference between a ground floor and first floor office, God help us.
not if it’s not mentioned on a letter i can’t. It’s why couriers dont get confused when they deliver shit to high rises.
and its a waste of time running the ‘Labour are just as shonkey’ line on me either cos i don’t exactly bat for team red either.
ZERO FUCKING TOLERANCE !!!
she’s guilty of ripping off the taxpayer on one occassion, shes guilty of ripping off the taxpayer FULLSTOP, shes no rookie shes a 14yr veteran who knows the rules !!!
same as the dipton dipshit should have been down the road when he was renting his own house off his ‘wifes trust’ cos he supposedly didnt have any pecuniary interest in it, so should Pansy be turfed out on to the street, investigated for fraud, chucked in jail and stripped of her lifetime perks cos she’s guilty as.
make all the excuses you like but she has to payback some money she wasn’t entitled to cos she was found guilty of abusing her travel privilege…end of story
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:42 pm
The reports reviews the total subsided international air travel since 2003. Sammy Wong’s travel is also below the average for a spouse – $26,000 against the average of $49,000.
Yeah..but what about Dunkin Donut Garner going on about 93k worth of domestic travel ?
What the hell can Sammy be doing racking up them dollars and clocking up that mileage, if not on business ?
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:43 pm
Pollywog said
So tell me Pollywog; does ZFT apply to Shane Jones? To Mita Ririnui? To the Greens MP with their dodgy super scheme? To Jim Anderton, who gets paid to lead a party that doesn’t exist? To Winston Peters? Or does your warcry ZFT only apply to the right?
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:54 pm
So tell me Pollywog; does ZFT apply to BLAH BLAH BLAH
if in the same instance, if those fullas let their spouses abuse parliamentary privilege rip off the taxpayer and use the position of their spouse as a minister of the crown to further their commercial business purposes then…
…FUCK YEAH !!!
look, i’ve got no time for dodgy politicians of any leanings and and their spouses looking for a free lunch and travel in perpetuity
December 3rd, 2010 at 11:30 pm
On Nov 11, Sammy Wong was reported as saying it was wrong to involve his wife in an NZ-China deal about hovercraft that went sour. The problem seems to be Sammy rather than Pansy, but her performance as a Minister has been quite mediocre any way.
There are obviously problems with some immigrants from fairly different cultures coming to grip with NZ and general Western standards of commercial behaviour.
Politicians aren’t the only ones affected.
Consider the pressure on universities and other institutions to pass substandard foreign students – good Radio NZ discussion Friday – http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon
December 3rd, 2010 at 11:32 pm
What I find worrisome is that she undertook 10 overseas trips in two years – on average that’s a trip every 10 weeks.
We pay these Ministers a handsome salary to live and work in New Zealand, yet they are off around the globe on full pay every couple of months.
December 4th, 2010 at 12:32 am
There are obviously problems with some immigrants from fairly different cultures coming to grip with NZ and general Western standards of commercial behaviour.
awww poor wee fatcat sammy, my heart weeps for his ignorant commercial behaviour…
…and pansy, 14 years in the job and she still doesn’t understand western political standards
somebody pass me a hanky, i’m cryin’ fucken rivers here…
…these lying scumbags need to be shown the kerb and have their arses kicked to it !!!
December 4th, 2010 at 3:57 am
There is a underlying tone of racism here. It seems Pansy and Sammy Wong have been restrained in their use of the spousal perk. I would like to who who has been abusing it. I bet it was a LABOUR MP. John Key needs to stand by Pansy Wong and send a strong message that the racist comments will be slapped down. There is NO reason for Pansy Wong to be held to a higher standard for to do so smacks of racsism. She should be readmitted back to cabinet to send this message,
December 4th, 2010 at 8:48 am
There seems little doubt that there was no systemic rorting…
After all, we have the suspect’s word for it – what more could anyone ask from an investigation?
December 4th, 2010 at 8:51 am
There seems little doubt that there was no systemic rorting
And Phillip Field was guilty of nothing more than being a hard working MP.
December 4th, 2010 at 8:52 am
Indeed there is little more except the circumstantial evidence is the Wongs have used this perk much much less than others. I would like the biggest users to be named and shamed. I bet they are Labour MPs.
December 4th, 2010 at 9:18 am
I can’t understand why only refund the one internal trip in China. Does that mean they had already paid to get there (China) and back themselves without using tax payer money?
December 4th, 2010 at 10:06 am
There is a underlying tone of racism here.
no there isn’t. there is an underlying tone of denial, obfuscation and distraction here.
no one gives a shit that she’s chinese. It’s more that her and her husband abused the privilege afforded them by the NZ taxpayer.
it really is that simple. they are guilty of one proven instance and i suspect if McFAIL had dug a little deeper they would be found guilty of a whole lot more.
only the most ardent Key fan could possibly believe the Wongs didn’t know they were systematically ripping the system off.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Gosh Pollywog you must have to keep an umbrella over your keyboard!
What on earth is going on in your life that this trivial matter gets you so agitated?
Just remember the perk was there to be used, the Wongs actually used it less than others and there is no evidence of wrongdoing despite Phil’s hysteria.
I know there’s often no smoke without fire but sometimes there really is just smoke and it seems it is choking you!
December 4th, 2010 at 11:35 am
No one gives a shit at all! This has lost all its steam.
December 4th, 2010 at 11:39 am
Why should she be punished for not doing anything wrong?
What a silly lot we are and what a nasty crowd Labour are turning out to be.
Just remember the perk was there to be used, the Wongs actually used it less than others and there is no evidence of wrongdoing despite Phil’s hysteria.
uhhhh you might wanna get your facts right to start with…
it’s got nothing to do with Labour or who used it less and the Wongs HAVE been found guilty of doing something they knew was wrong…using the travel perk for personal business purposes!!!
trivialise it as an unfortunate accident all you like, if it makes you feel better, and i’ll just rant on to satiate my frustration…mmmkay !
cos aww golly gee, systemic corruption and glossing over the facts by an inept prime minister and his bunch of crony ministers might seem trivial to you but it’s representative of a festering boil on the butt of democracy that needs a jolly good lancing.
we only have to tolerate it once, look the other way and do nothing for it to develop into a cancerous growth affecting all walks of life, though i fear it’s already to late
what Huge McPhailure’s report does is essentially give the Wongs a free pass to conduct business as usual and Key has once again been content to do nothing but smack his cheating ministers wrist with a limp airline ticket and smile and wave as they, in this instance, truck off for another taxpayer funded holiday jaunt to China…oh and while they’re there they might just ‘accidentally’ do some business again without realising it cos yeah they are just totally culturally ignorant immigrants eh .
yeah nice on BeaB, if you’re so supportive and don’t think it’s a big deal, how about you fully fund their next trip all by your lonesome and count the rest of us out ?
December 4th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Do you really think having documents dropped off at an MPs office for her husband’s company is a big deal..?
December 4th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Do you really think having documents dropped off at an MPs office for her husband’s company is a big deal..?
yes if they share the same office/building and there is no distinction in the mailing address between her electorate office and his registered comapny address, thus making it in contravention of the rules of parliament and when taken in conjunction with their proven misuse of the travel perk points to a wider abuse of privilege !!!
so do you think isolated instances of circumstantial evidence can lead to a greater indication of criminal behaviour ?
English > Heatley > Wong…how many more is team blue gonna be forced to apologise for and that’s not even including the ACT perkbusting hypocrite himself
if this gov’t were operating on 3 strikes of corruption and they’re out, they’d be locked up with no chance of parole by now.
enough is enough. wheres the higher standards Key was promising ?
ZERO FUCKING TOLERANCE !!!…500 dollars or 500 000 it doesn’t matter.
they broke the rules, they dont deserve to keep doing the job, though what the fuck Pansy ever did for the money and the perks defies me.
Key’s protestations of Labour muckraking just shows what a morally bankrupt weak leader he is that he cant even own the mistakes of his own team without pointing the finger at others.
i’m fucken disgusted at how y’all can keep apologising for his ineptitude and how the rest of the country still thinks the sun shines out his arse.
December 4th, 2010 at 2:20 pm
I’d pay for philu to come back if he replaced pollywog. Not a lot mind you but at least I could pass his inanity off as amusing rather than tiresome.
December 4th, 2010 at 2:24 pm
Pollywog.
If Sammy is running a business from that office, then that business is covering a percentage of the costs of running that office, theoretically SAVING the taxpayer money.
December 4th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
Ayo labrator…
PHWEEEEEEEEEET…GET IN BEHIND !!!
If Sammy is running a business from that office, then that business is covering a percentage of the costs of running that office, theoretically SAVING the taxpayer money.
if that were so it’d still be breaking the rules…
…but it looks like he’s got a verbal agreement with the landlord to use it as a mailing address with the ‘assigned’ downstairs bit registered as his companies address being empty
so one assumes he pays nothing and jacks power, phone, internet and rent of his wifes free taxpayer funded ministerial expenses to go along with the cheap travel…
…theoretically, nah not theoretically, ACTUALLY COSTING the taxpayer more !!!
December 4th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
John Armstrong from the Herald thinks the report is a load of bollocks and there should be an auditor-general investigation.
His article is here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10691970
December 4th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
Fake islander troll – “we only have to tolerate it once, look the other way and do nothing for it to develop into a cancerous growth affecting all walks of life, though i fear it’s already to late”
Referring to Philip Field no doubt. Too late troll, your party tolerated Field and your leader tried to whitewash it and still none of them will admit he did anything wrong. I agree it is already too late for labour, your cancer has already hopelessly metastasised and your election prospects are terminal.
December 4th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
I just love the thin end of the wedge argument.
Or – “miss, he broke the rules”. Or – I hate and foam at the mouth at the thought of rich guys who are more successful and charming than me.
Time to shut up shop, Pollywog, when that’s all you can dredge up.
Or else sit and wait for the end of civilisation as we know it.
In the meantime I am going for a swim in my pool in the wonderful Waikato sunshine.
December 4th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
PFFFFFFT…so many shades of wrong i don’t know where to start colouring you right, Put it away…
but let’s see…not fake, not troll, not referring to Field, not too late, not my leader and not lost in the election, not by a long shot
what i am is sick of the lying, the cheating, the cover ups, the lack of jobs, the half arsed policies, the rushed law changes, the lack of direction, the petty political point scoring, the smiling, the waving and the bumbling do nothing but manage the media attitude of Key and this current government
and if they had any clues they’d be worried cos come election time cos there’s gonna be a hell of lot more people like me than them or you !!!
December 4th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
heh…time to give up the ghost BeaB when all you can come up with is a false sense of superiority that wealth equals success and charm equals integrity
cos yeah…the end is nigh and God help you if you’re too stupid to see it. so make the most of your pool as pretty soon you won’t be able to fill it for lack of water or go outside in that wonderful Waikato sunshine without a radiation suit.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:16 pm
At least the Poms don’t piss about with MPs’ and their expenses: David Chaytor pleads guilty to charges.
Chaytor had claimed £12,925 between 2005 and 2006 for renting a flat in Regency Street, near Westminster, which he owned – producing a fake tenancy agreement which said he was paying £1,175 a month rent.
He also falsely claimed £5,425 between 2007 and 2008 for renting a home in Castle Street, Bury, which was owned by his mother. He admitted he had not paid his mother, who had moved into a home because of illness. Under Commons rules he was not allowed to rent from a family member.