Murray McCully.
Eddie does a post
DPF responds
Eddie gets angry
Lynn gets angry
I will attempt to cover all these posts over the next few days.
First, some questions:
Why was Eddie looking at the Register of Pecuniary Interests?
If he was looking for conflicts of interest would he call this gutter politcs?
Does he accept that him doing this (just like Mike Williams and the cheque) shows that the left is desperate?
Does he think that Shane Jones having shares in Castlerigg Limited (who presumably pay tax) is a conflict of interest? If not, why not?
Does he think that should have withdrawn himself from cabinet discussions on tax?
Does he know see how stupid his allegations are?
I ask Eddie to think seriously.
So David Faraar decided to respond, good on him.
One of the anonymous authors at The Standard tried yesterday to smear Murray McCully over, well doing the right thing.
In a post they filed under the “corruption” category, they revealed that Murray McCully has shares in Widespread Portfolios. Except they did not in fact reveal it – McCully did in the MPs Annual Register of Pecuniary Interests. He’s declared every single year since the Register started in 2006.
Then in a piece of detective work worthy of Sherlock Holmes, they went to the homepage of Widespread Portfolios and managed to dig up (I a being sarcastic – it is at the top of their main page) the statement:
Widespread Portfolios Limited (stockmarket code WID) invests primarily in overseas-based mining and mineral exploration companies.
So this so called corrupt behavior from McCully was to declare he had shares in a company that declares it invests in mining companies.
Now not only has McCully behaved entirely appropriately, the value of his shares turns out to be $31.63. McCully has followed the PM’s lead and mooted giving the shares to the young Max Key. Poor Max must be wondering why he is becoming the target of unwanted share parcels. He should suggest to his Dad that he would rather have one of those Ministerial credit cards that Ministers have been disposing of
All good points.
Why did Eddie only discover this now?
Those who blog anonymously tend to use extreme language to smear people. They call them corrupt, crooked or racist or bigoted. They do so, because they don’t have to defend their comments in real life.
So here is my challenge to Eddie. Stop the extreme language against people just because their politics are not your own, or have the guts to blog under your real name.
All good points. I would use my real name if I was over 18.
to be continued.
Roger said,
March 1, 2010 at 6:01 pm
Guyon Espiner has a job to do.
It makes perfect sense to hold politicians to account. That is not Eddie’s job.
Words pregnant with fascism, KT. It’s the job of all citizens to hold politicians to account, I would have thought a young Nat like yourself would believe in a vigilant and questioning citizenry.
How is it a conflict? Explain it to me.
Minister has vested interest in a specific industry in which he is supposed to be making impartial decisions for the public good. That’s called a conflict of interest, it’s a widely known concept in the worlds of business and politics.
kiwiteen123 said,
March 1, 2010 at 6:34 pm
Yes. Not a good choice of words. I’ll see if I can weasel my way out of it. 1. Eddie can hold politicians to account (I was wrong) that is the job of all citizens. 2. Eddie is not, however, unbiased his research is not neutral. You win (this battle).
Zorr said,
February 27, 2010 at 2:13 am
Eddie was probably doing something called “research” and “investigation”. Ideas that you should probably look in to rather than just opening your mouth to change feet.
lukassoapbox said,
February 26, 2010 at 9:46 am
KT, you often end posts with “more to come” yet, nothing more seems to come… care to explain?
kiwiteen123 said,
February 26, 2010 at 3:52 pm
You’ve made the 100th Comment!
I beg you to wait… I’m busy tonight and most of tomorrow but I should have covered all the posts by the end of the weekend. Keep checking in.
kiwiteen123 said,
February 26, 2010 at 8:04 am
See Below
Roger said,
February 26, 2010 at 7:49 am
Man, this is retarded, even for you. Do you think the Guyon Espiner was desperate when he looked in the register for pecunary interests to find out about John Key’s ming shares? Do you think he’s just like Mike Williams? Or do you not think it makes perfect sense to hold politicians to account for potential conflicts of interests?
Do you think he might have been looking there because just a week or two earlier John Key had been caught on the same issue in the same way?
Your Parekura comparison is doubly retarded. Simply being a taxpayer doesn’t mean a conflict of interest, then everyone would have one. It’s a well known and well defined test – and the fact is, whether you like it or not, McCully has a conflict, it just happens to be insubstantial. That doesn’t change the fact it’s a conflict.
The stupid, it fucking burns.
kiwiteen123 said,
February 26, 2010 at 8:05 am
Guyon Espiner has a job to do.
It makes perfect sense to hold politicians to account. That is not Eddie’s job.
John Key was not “caught on the same issue”.
Where is this test? Is it just amongst then left or did everyone in NZ get together and sign it?
How is it a conflict? Explain it to me.
If you don’t like my blog: don’t read it.
Kind regards,
Kiwiteen123
Waynildinho said,
February 26, 2010 at 6:43 pm
And Parekura doesn’t have shares in Castlerigg anyway. It’s Shane Jones that does. I suppose they all look alike to you, KT?