Jones case referred to Auditor-General

May 23rd, 2012 at 5:19 pm by David Farrar

Labour have worked out that the reasons given by for granting Liu citizenship are so weak that no one seriously believes them.

So they have stood Jones down and referred it to the Auditor-General.  About time. Helen Clark should have done this in 2008.

Tags:

63 Responses to “Jones case referred to Auditor-General”

  1. wreck1080 (3,864 comments) says:

    yes, but helen clark was power hungry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Armotur (31 comments) says:

    Now perhaps the MSM may take this issue seriously. Thank God for Bloggers!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. m@tt (630 comments) says:

    Key’s excuses for keeping Banks on look weaker by the minute.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Elaycee (4,351 comments) says:

    Haha – the funniest thing now will be the spin put on this from the usual leftards.

    And right on cue…. :D

    Bahahahahaaaaaaaaaa

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. jaba (2,118 comments) says:

    Matt .. you are such a hoot .. the pathetic Labour Party will try to pass this off as Shearer being a strong leader .. too late mate.
    The Banks thing is plain silly and Labour know it

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. AJP (20 comments) says:

    Longtime reader, first time poster.
    Shane Jones and the Auditer General.

    The problem with this investigation is that the auditer general cannot look into the relationship between Bill Liu and the Labour Party. The inquiry will be very narrow in terms, most likely only looking at the process and the official advise.

    This is more like a pre-emptive strike by Labour to divert the public attention from the real issue in this case, possible corruption.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. petal (705 comments) says:

    Thanks Auntie Hulun. You’re a gift that keeps on giving.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Yvette (2,763 comments) says:

    Who is Jones replacement to attack the Budget tomorrow.
    The timing indicates neither Jones nor Shearer decided to do this, they were forced.
    Tomorrow’s court result on Liu will be interesting.
    How much of this can pre-empt Budget item coverage?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Chuck Bird (4,825 comments) says:

    “Helen Clark should have done this in 2008.”

    Helen Clark should have stood herself down when she was being investigated for a serious crime. Instead her off organised for the evidence to be destroyed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Pete George (23,426 comments) says:

    Shearer said no RadionNZ that no information had changed his mind, it was just felt that it needed to be cleared up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Keeping Stock (10,264 comments) says:

    So Jonesey was fine on Monday, and fine on Tuesday, but he’s poison today; hmm; has Labour been doing focus groups today?

    And sadly for Shearer, he’s just killed off any chance of getting Budget publicity tomorrow; all anyone will be talking about is Bill Liu, Shane Jones and dodgy passports. Oh dear; how sad; never mind…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Daigotsu (454 comments) says:

    The question is, what information did Jones fess up to Shearer behind closed doors?

    And will Shearer reveal it in an inquiry?

    Dodgy stuff. Still, that’s Labour for you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,875 comments) says:

    Whaleoil, quite rightly, has pointed out the terms of reference are narrow. The AG is to inquire into ‘the process’ involved in reaching the decision.

    Sounds to me and him like a rerun of Clark’s tame QC inquiry into the ratbag Phillip Field.

    When will they ever learn?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. mikenmild (11,246 comments) says:

    It’s not like opposition politicians can constrain the scope of an enquiry by the Auditor-General though, is it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. trout (932 comments) says:

    Whoa there. As W/O has pointed out Shearer has only asked the AG to look at process. No problem with the process; the Minister has discretion to approve or disapprove citizenship. The isuue is whether Lui influenced the decision by crossing palms with silver. The AG will not look at this; but an independent enquiry would (with the right instruction); just don’t use Noel Ingram QC (did the Field enquiry).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    So if the A-G clears Jones, DPF will apologise unreservedly to him? Thought not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Psycho Milt (2,404 comments) says:

    So, Banks still has his arse on a cabinet chair, then? Way to take the high ground, guys…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Pongo (371 comments) says:

    How much was supposedly raised at the restaurant fundraiser, be pretty easy to raise say 100k for citizenship and hide it through a fundraiser.
    Shearer seems to object strongly to Chinese buying farms but when they buy citizenship well that is fine.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Colville (2,248 comments) says:

    What is to stop Key from asking AG for a wider scope?
    who can ask AG to do an enquiry? can I ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Mark (1,471 comments) says:

    It certainly takes the heat off Banks who has being lying low waiting for the dust to settle like a seasoned polly does. Jones must be gone now and labour has screwed itself for the budget debate. Genius!

    Talking of Banks I wonder whether he will be trumpeting the lower class sizes in charter schools as an added benefit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Nostalgia-NZ (5,093 comments) says:

    If old Jonesy simply had convenient amnesia he would have been right, at least with JK.
    Helicopter ride anyone?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. cows4me (248 comments) says:

    Must tune into Willie & JT tomorrow. Well go a bit like this. Willie “those nasty honkys will be persecuting poor old Shane while the evil Banks gets a get out of jail free card.
    JT “yes willie the hypocrisy is unbelievable”

    Wasn’t Jones the great brown hope?. Oh dear how sad never mind. Liarbore are slowly self destructing, more please, lol,lol,lol,lol.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Colville: My very thought sir…Have they “got in” with narrow terms of reference before someone else initiates an enquiry?

    I can’t help noticing that Jones has admitted to knowledge that Liu had at least two and possibly several identities, but was unconcerned about it. I seem to recall that my crime – committed 27 years before – was almost grounds for bringing back the death penalty and making it retrospective. Funny that…

    Nostalgia: If you really think we have seen the end of the Banks affair I think you are much mistaken…notwithstanding that the two matters are vastly different…to whit the positions of the two men at the relevant times.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. jaba (2,118 comments) says:

    David .. you didn’t have a machine in your corner run by H1 & 2 .. you were always going to be cannon fodder

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Yvette (2,763 comments) says:

    David Garret – Nostalgia: If you really think we have seen the end of the Banks affair I think you are much mistaken…notwithstanding that the two matters are vastly different…to whit the positions of the two men at the relevant times.

    And both men gave assurances.
    But if Banks unravels, Key can dump him like a proverbial hot potatoe.
    “The honourable Christian gentleman gave me his word, but shit, he lied – so he’s no longer a Minister of mine and as his own leader perhaps he should stand himself down.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Kimble (4,443 comments) says:

    Very grown up, Milt.

    A Labour MP does something stupid and unethical and all you can do is respond, “Hey look, John Banks did something too!”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. calendar girl (1,213 comments) says:

    What does “standing down” Shane Jones actually mean? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10807904

    He’s an opposition MP, not a person with governance responsibilities. He has no “portfolios” to administer. As a List MP he doesn’t even have an electorate to represent. It seems to me that Jones has just been awarded a holiday on full pay at our expense. Political smoke and mirrors, especially when David Shearer purports to define the limits of the AG’s inquiry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Yvette: Yes, that is indeed a point…I meant of course that at time of the “actus reus” as we lawyers say, Jones was a Minister of the Crown, and Banks….wasn’t….but he certainly was when he gave those assurances to Key…

    Coville: May I respectfully suggest that you bring your Quiz of Infamy over to this thread! Suddenly seems like the place for it…

    Does anyone know whether the terms of reference of the enquiry can be broadened on the application of someone else? If it stays as it is, it is totally meaningless..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    The crook has been stood down. At last!
    For waiting this long, the invisible Shearer has shown how weak he is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Monty (974 comments) says:

    I think Shane Jones is only guilty of being too helpful?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Griff (7,262 comments) says:

    It will be a brown wash
    Jones has got semen ops I mean shit on his hands
    the clarkists will insure their great brown hope “comes”out clean

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Griff: Assuming you are not already a comedian, you have missed your vocation sir/madam…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Nostalgia-NZ (5,093 comments) says:

    DG
    6.39

    No I don’t think the heat is off Banks. I think it is off Shearer.
    A ‘better late than never’ position fades eventually, Shearer has popped a balloon which nobody will be able to inflate again. That’s smart, doing it yesterday might have been smarter – but in the end the result is the same.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Colville (2,248 comments) says:

    What I asked over on the GD thread was….

    OK pop quiz.

    What MPs have been found guilty of a criminal offence say in the last 20 or 30 years?

    I mean for things that did while in office not before or after, even if they were snapped for it while in office, if ya get what I mean.

    What is the score like Lab Vs Nat?

    I have Field, Huata and Mallard, who else?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    You missed Dyson Colville…drunk driving while a Minister…and entitled to a Ministerial car with driver…

    Nostalgia: I see your point but I’m not sure…does “better late than never” count when you are the leader of a political party, and it is this blatantly obvious the decision was crooked?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. OneTrack (2,970 comments) says:

    Seconded on calendar girl – standing down Shane Jones is meaningless and an easy way of diverting attention away from what possibly happened.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Colville (2,248 comments) says:

    so 3 Liarbore and 1 ACT?

    any more?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. tom hunter (4,671 comments) says:

    m@tt (416) Says:
    May 23rd, 2012 at 5:27 pm

    Key’s excuses for keeping Banks on look weaker by the minute.

    Shorter m@tt
    For christ’s sake! I’m dying here guys!

    DYING

    Come on. I need reinforcements.

    Anybody

    Bueller? Bueller?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Colville (2,248 comments) says:

    as to the terms of reference for the Jones investigation It cant just be a done deal coz Shearer asks for narrow tearms…it MUST be possible for someone to expand on them, the AG (Finlayson?) must be able to expand and re target the enquirey?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. jaba (2,118 comments) says:

    calendar girl says it all .. Jones has been stood from fk all .. a token suspension that only opposition parties can do without upsetting the MP in question

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    I guessing there’s a bi-partisan ‘gentleman’s agreement’ about matters like this. The AG wil be left with a narrow ToR allowing lots of wiggle room and the matter will just go away.When the red socialists return smelling of watermellon, and the boot is on the other foot, the same agreement will be honured.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Another forced ejaculation for Jones. . .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Nostalgia-NZ (5,093 comments) says:

    DG
    7.37

    First of all Shearer’s was not the original decision on this, but I think the other point is that’s he’s taken the heat off himself now because of the apparent ‘blatancy’ of the original decision, or concern about it now. Soon however, in the public mind, it reconciles that he acted on day 2 of his process of ‘getting to the bottom of it.’ It’s the lumpy start of a diesel engine that should have been started sooner (Jones demise) but the diesel finally runs and Jones is on the outer. You might see it differently? But as I said earlier, and despite Manolo’s position above, it will hard, probably impossible, to pump air back into this dead fish.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Simon Arnold (107 comments) says:

    I’d wait and see what the CAG says in response to this request for an investigation myself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    I’m very happy to not be the leader of any parliamentary team – or member of any parliamentary team, come to that.

    Sheesh, what a cesspit!

    Say, any Green MPs been under the hammer like this, ever?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Colville (2,248 comments) says:

    Luc, the Gweens are too cowardly to take any power so have never been in any position of trust so have never been able to abuse that power!
    quite unlike Field, Jones or Huata.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    I think Shane Jones is only guilty of being too helpful?

    Indeed. All he was doing was giving someone else a hand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Chuck Bird (4,825 comments) says:

    “so 3 Liarbore and 1 ACT?”

    How about the Nat for driving the tractor up the stairs at Parliament and Nick Smith for something like contempt of court?

    Also Clark and Benson-Peep would have been done it Clark and not replace Peter Doone with a Police Commissioner beholden to her.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Chuck: BARP! Listen up boy! We set the terms of reference before you got here…No, the only transgressions that count are actual criminal prosecutions for offences committed while a serving MP or Minister…Clark, as you say, would have been on the list but for the happy coincidence that the Attorney General at the time was one Michael Cullen, who was able to overrule Police HQ and say a prosecution was “not in the public interest”…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Keeping Stock (10,264 comments) says:

    @ Cows4Me (6.38pm) – acyually despite the fact that Jones is a mate of Jackson, Willie was refreshingly honest last Friday. Two things he said; “Make no mistake; this is serious business” and “Shane Jones could be in big trouble here” suggest that Willie can see through all the bullshit that Shearer and co have spouted. I despise Jackson’s politics, but can’t fault his honesty on this one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    even funnier was Radio Pravda’ “editorial insight” into this tonite aka soft pedaling the story on all fronts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Mark (1,471 comments) says:

    If Jones is cleared by the AG and Banks is not cleared by the inquiry into his alleged efforts to hide donations from Kim Dotcom then where to does Jones go back to a spokesman role and Banks get pushed down the road.

    For Labours sake they will be better of if Jones goes and you have to think there are a few Labour caucus members with their fingers crossed :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Pete George (23,426 comments) says:

    David Shearer has been handed a Shane Jones lemon – when the skin is scraped off will there be any zest left for Jones? Alas Shearer and Jones.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Bogusnews (476 comments) says:

    And the Herald is finally putting some space to this… better late than never I suppose. I can’t imagine how much space they would dedicate to it if it was a National MP under the hammer. But then, I guess they have a bit of egg on their face too if Shane is found to have done something illegal. After all, it happened under their noses in 2008.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. tvb (4,315 comments) says:

    No sure whether this is the right place. I want to see whether Jones had all information before him but side stepped that and made his own decision. Reminds me how an Immigration Minister granted visas on dinner napkins at some function and the Department was left cleaning that mess up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Lawrence Hakiwai (119 comments) says:

    Bill Liu not guilty on all charges….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Hmmmm…so what now? Shearer looks even more “cack handed” as my father used to say…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Paulus (2,594 comments) says:

    Was Mary Ann Thompson was a Senior Immigration Official at the time ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Shearer could hardly have handled it worse…having dragged the chain – if he was going to something he should have done it immediately – he “stands him down” the day before the verdict….which he, along with everyone else, obviously thought was going to be guilty ….only to have Shane “vindicated” – or that’s what he will claim.

    So…no judgment in the first place…not able to hold his nerve having made his decision, gives worse interview ever in recent history…barbecue at whose place?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Francis_X (149 comments) says:

    David, David, David, you are so missing the point here. In your rush to judgement, you’re just not getting it, are you? There is a great deal of dis-similarity between Banks and Jones (neither who I have little time for, I’ll admit).

    When Banks was questioned, his responses were shocking; “I can’t recall; I can’t remember”. WTF?! Since when does one forget a chauffeured chopper ride to one of the biggest goddamn estates in the country to meet one of the biggest goddamn entrepreneurs in the country? Gimme a break here. The reason Banks’ response was so abhorrent was that he treated us all as fools. He came up with patently absured ‘amnesia’ and that was insulting.

    As for Jones, at least his memory is better and has given us a response. It is credible? Dunno. Do we believe him? That depends on whether one is a hard and fast Nat or Labour supporter. Me, personally, I’m comfortable leaving it to the Auditor General to look into it and I’ll reserve my verdict till then. As for Shearer, he should’ve flicked this on to the AG on Day 1. But let’s cut him the same slack we cut for the Prime Minister in his first year. But if Jones is found guilty of some mis-deed (or crime), then his arse is grass, and rightly so.

    As for Mr Garrett, above, yes, well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Pete George (23,426 comments) says:

    As for Jones, at least his memory is better and has given us a response. It is credible?

    No, not credible at this stage there are to many anomalies with what he’s said, and too many unanswered oddities.

    Banks’ responses were shocking.

    Jones’ response (what he’s said so far) sounded semi plausible – until you examined it and compared it to facts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. David Garrett (6,952 comments) says:

    Francis: “Yes, well..” means what exactly? To the extent they cover the same ground, my comment largely agrees with yours…

    Why are you lefties so averse to using your real names? At least you aren’t abusive, and have a good command of English…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. backster (2,140 comments) says:

    I took from the JONES/HOSKINGS interview this morning that JONES actually wanted the enquiry to be the whole deal right back to the beginning. HOSKINGS commented that CUNLIFFE had said JONES made the wrong decision and JONES snapped back that CUNLIFFE gave LUI residence…My conclusion is that JONES may be being set up to be the fall guy for the wider Labour misdeeds.

    Re LUI Not Guilty, I have only seen a little Newspaper Testimony but the Labour stooge LePOU (or similar) admitted (or claimed) to have filled in the application forms (for $10,000) and put N/A to the question re previous convictions, a question that required a yes or a no.LUI claimed not to understand English and if that was the basis of the fraud charge small wonder the Judge found the charge inconclusive.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.