Labour leadership contenders will have to disclose donations

February 22nd, 2014 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Claire Trevett at NZ Herald reports:

leader David Cunliffe and MPs Shane Jones and Grant Robertson could be forced to publicly declare who gave them donations of more than $500 during last year’s leadership contest despite the party’s attempts to keep them confidential.

The rules for the official register of MPs’ financial interests require them to declare all gifts and donations of more than $500 other than donations for an election. Those returns are due by next Friday.

Sir Maarten Wevers, who oversees the Register of Pecuniary Interests, said the rules appeared to cover money received by the MPs in the Labour leadership primary.

“I would expect them to declare it because it is a donation for something other than an electoral campaign.”

Yep it is a donation that benefited them personally.

It could cause some concern for the three Labour MPs if they had assured donors their contributions would not be made public. The MPs would not have to disclose the value of donations, but would have to provide the donors’ names.

Labour’s rules for the contest stated that donations would be confidential, and the party has refused to release a list of them on those grounds.

That will be hugely embarrassing if donors were assured their donations would remain confidential, but they end up being required to be disclosed in the Register of Pecuniary Interests.

What would be hilarious is if it was disclosed that a donor to Shane Jones was Foodstuffs (competitors of Countdown) :-)

Tags: , ,

8 Responses to “Labour leadership contenders will have to disclose donations”

  1. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,903 comments) says:

    Jeeeez! Have they got DotKom running their strategy on this one????????

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Souvlaki (45 comments) says:

    If the “word in jest” last paragraph came to fruition…..it would bury Labour at the deepest level of Olduvai !

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Duxton (651 comments) says:

    I would be very surprised if they do disclose their donors’ names. Labour has never worried about rules (witness pledgecard-gate): they will simply say their own party rules forbid them to release the details, and refuse to do so.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    If these donations are not made public, then Banksie best be exonerated, as it would show how rules are interpreted to favour left-wing losers, such as the three in this leadership debacle.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Monty (977 comments) says:

    So they have to disclose the names. If they resist it will be a distraction and the whole Labour Party will suffer as noise is made. I guess we will see how much the unions backed each candidate.

    Oh such fun!!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    It’s all falling apart for the failed ideology of socialism…. The lefties using other people’s money might need to play by the rules they say others should abide by… It’s about time !

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Liberty (267 comments) says:

    Who would be silly enough to donate to a pack of loses.
    Maybe they have more money than sense.
    Even then it begs the question why donate to party that despises wealth.
    Maybe he is working on the assumption. Labour pissed of the Americans
    to appease its green faction in the 1980s.
    Maybe labour will piss off the American once again if it given the right amount of support.
    after all he already had the greens in his pocket.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Liberty

    Who would be silly enough to donate to a pack of loses.
    Maybe they have more money than sense.

    Unions fund them… so yes there is more money than sense. Who else would think it sensible to extract fees from often minimum wage and part time workers to donate to highly paid politicians.

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