Archive
The Donghua Liu Affair – Damn lies, dirty tricks, and a docile media
.
.
Preface
“The style of political journalism is an important issue as increasing political resources go into controlling news and there are fewer news media resources available to cut through the spin. Such a situation plays into the hands of the Croby/Textor political manipulators. Their aim is not to create interested, intelligent and engaged citizens, because that is not in their clients’ short-term interests. Their job is easier if the public is ‘sick’ of politics, ‘bored’ by the election and not thinking hard about the issues – and not challenged by a strong, independent media. Vote winning can then be the science of winning people over via vague feelings of self-interest, indignation, fear or jealousy.” – Nicky Hager, p262, “The Hollow Men“
.
Timeline
11 April 2003: David Cunliffe writes to Immigration NZ, on behalf on his constituent, Donghua Liu;
“I have been approached by my constituent Donghua Lui [sic] who is concerned at the time it is taking to process his Investment Category application.
Mr Liu’s [sic] application was accepted for processing by the Business Migration Branch on 13 August 2002.
Mr Lui [sic] wishes to set up a joint venture including Well Lee Ltd, Equus Hawk o8 ltd and Tan Long Property Development Co Ltd who will export large quantities of agricultural and horticultural products to China.
It is hope that products from the company will be available to the market in July 2003.
I am aware of the difficulties facing the Business Migration Branch of New Zealand Immigration Services in coping with the overwhelming numbers of applicants that have applied for consideration under these categories and the time taken to verify documents. However it would be very helpful to Mr Liu to be advised of an estimated period of time period [sic] in which he could expect a decision on his case.
Your assistance in this matter is appreciated.
Yours sincerely
David Cunliffe
MP for New Lynn”
2004: Donghua Liu granted permanent residency by then-immigration minister Damien O’Connor, against official advice.
2006: Donghua Liu claims that he;
…visited Barker in Hawke’s Bay… having dinner with him at an exclusive lodge and then meeting for breakfast the next morning. Liu said he made a donation to Hawke’s Bay Rowing, which Barker was associated with.
(The claim is made eight years later.)
3 June 2007: Donghua Liu claims that he supposedly won a $15,000 signed book at a Labour Party fundraising auction.
In the same year, he also claims to have paid “close to $100,000” for four bottles of wine [‘Cold Duck’? – Blogger] at a 2007 Labour Party fundraiser.
(These claims are made seven years later, and the Labour Party says it cannot find any record of the alleged donations/payments. The date, 3 June 2007, is contained in a NZ Herald story, on 22 June 2014.)
Liu also claims;
That he spent $50-60,000 hosting then-labour minister Rick Barker on a cruise on the Yangtze River in China.
(This claim, also, is made seven years later.)
2010: Donghua Liu given NZ citizenship, by Immigration Minister Nathan Guy, against official advice, and after lobbying by Maurice Williamson, then Minister for Building and Construction, and John Banks, then Mayor of Auckland. Maurice Williamson performs the citizenship ceremony the day after it is granted, in his electorate offices.
2 September 2011: The first stage of a proposed $70 million hotel project is opened by Donghua Liu, with Prime Minister John Key attending;
The project, which is the brainchild of Remuera businessman Donghua Liu, will involve the development of open spaces, high-value residential apartments, education facilities and a new five-star hotel.
.
.
.
“My vision is to create buildings and open spaces that fit with Newmarket’s already proud heritage and community and help promote New Zealand tourism to visitors from China and elsewhere,” Mr Liu, a New Zealand resident since 2004, said today.
2012: A business, owned by Donghua Liu, donates $22,000 to the National party.
April, 2013: Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse meets with Chinese businessman Donghua Liu (which the Herald will report on 7 May 2014).
13 March 2014: John Key denies anything “untoward” in Donghua Liu receiving a ministerial waiver (from Guy Nathan) to become a NZ Citizen, which was followed later by a $22,000 donation to the National Party;
“I just don’t accept the proposition there’s anything untoward there.”
Key said a minister advocating a person for citizenship was “not at all unusual”.
Liu was a substantial investor in New Zealand and “lots of people get ministerial waivers”.
14 March: Donghua Liu arrested and charged with domestic violence assault on two women.
22 March: NZ Herald reports that Donghua Lui’s $70 million four-star hotel project has failed to materialise;
Liu also told Chinese media at the ribbon-cutting ceremony that his plans for the $70 million redevelopment of the former Carlton Bowling Club site was unlikely to go beyond the design stage unless the Government cut the $10 million threshold.
“Like many developers throughout the construction, our group is constrained by a lack of access to capital. An improvement to business migrant rules would allow the group to source the equity capital it needs from overseas, particularly from China,” Liu told a Chinese newspaper at the launch.
“Without that improvement, it is likely that stages two and three will be stalled indefinitely.”
The same Herald article refers to right-wing commentator; National Party apparatchik, and professional lobbyist, Matthew Hooton, being hired by Donghua Liu, to change business migration laws in this country;
Liu hired consultancy group Exceltium, run by political consultant Matthew Hooton, to lobby the Government over the business immigration rules.
1 May: National Minister, Maurice Williamson forced to resign after attempts by him to influence a police investigation into Donghua Liu’s alleged assault case, becomes public knowledge.
3 May: Donghua Liu signs statement claiming donations amounting to $150,000 were made to the Labour Party, which the NZ Herald will report on 22 June.
7 May: NZ Herald reports;
Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse has confirmed that he met with Chinese businessman Donghua Liu, and heard his requests for a change in immigration policy.
Mr Woodhouse said Mr Liu – who was involved in National MP Maurice Williamson’s resignation – lobbied him in April or May at the businessman’s Newmarket hotel.
The minister said Mr Liu lobbied him to change the rules of the business migrant scheme.
“We traversed a range of … issues about how the investor category could be improved, and I took on board those issues.”
Mr Liu was seeking a new immigration category in which non-English speakers could pay less than the $10 million threshold.
May 8*: Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse is questioned in the House and by media about his meetings and any National Party association with Donghua Liu. Mr Woodhouse requests information on the file to see if there is anything relevant that he needs to know about.
The Herald [also] requests Liu’s residency file under the Official Information Act (OIA)
May 9*: In response to file review, Mr Woodhouse is verbally advised – among other things – of the existence of two Parliamentary advocacy letters regarding Donghua Liu, one from Mr Cunliffe and another from the office of Chris Carter.
Weekend of 10-11 May*: Mr Woodhouse informs Prime Minister John Key’s Office of the existence of the letters.
Week 12-16 May*: Mr Woodhouse’s office receives hard copy of letters.
Mid-late May*: Mr Woodhouse’s office provides copy of letters to the Prime Minister’s office.
16 June*: The Herald run story on Labour donations and connections. The Herald’s OIA request is declined on privacy grounds. The Herald puts in a refined OIA request for MP representations for Donghua Liu to Immigration NZ.
17 June: David Cunliffe denies ever having advocated for Donghua Liu.
18 June*: Immigration NZ release Mr Cunliffe’s 2003 Donghua Liu letter to the Herald
19 June: John Key says he had previously known about the 2003 letter;
“Can’t exactly recall, I think it was a few weeks ago.”
A Radio NZ report quoted Deputy PM, Bill English;
19 June morning:
But hours later on Radio New Zealand’s Morning Report programme on Thursday, Bill English had a different story, saying no one in Government knew about it until Wednesday. “As I understand it, it’s a response to an OIA (Official Information Act request) to the Immigration Service and we wouldn’t know a lot about what’s on their files,” he said.
19 June afternoon:
However in the afternoon, Mr English told reporters the letter had been sent to Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse some time ago as part of information he received from the Immigration Service after Mr Williamson’s resignation.
“For a number of weeks there were questions in the House about Mr Donghua Liu and you would expect a competent minister to get together the relevant information.”
June 19*:
• 2pm Mr Woodhouse denies telling Mr Key about the letters
• 3pm Mr Woodhouse says officials from his office briefed Mr Key’s office on the letters.
• 7pm Mr Woodhouse’s office says the minister himself told Mr Key’s office about the letters and his office also gave copies of the letters to Mr Key’s office.
19 June: Shane Jones denies he is the source of revelations regarding David Cunliffe and Donghua Liu.
19 June: Key confirms he knows more about the revelations;
“I’ve heard the rumours and in the end we’ll see what actually comes out but I’ll be very very amazed if the amount is $15,000.”
Asked if it was hundreds of thousands of dollars, Key said: “We’ll see … that’s for the Labour Party to make clear to the New Zealand public.”
20 June: Blogger lodges formal OIA request to John Key, Bill English, and Michael Woodhouse;
This is a request lodged under the Official Information Act.
Please provide me with copies of all correspondence, minutes, notes, reports, and any other written or otherwise recording, relating to any and all activities surrounding the procurement; storage; and planned circumstances of the release of the letter between David Cunliffe and Donghua Liu dated 11 April 2003.
This includes a request for all communications relating to the letter between David Cunliffe and Donghua Liu dated 11 April 2003, which may have occurred between yourself; any and all staffmembers in your office; any member of the National Party; any blogger; any media person; and any other group or individual who was contacted on this issue.
Information may be emailed to me, or, if the file is too large, I can supply a postal address for hard copies.
Regards,
-Frank Macskasy
Blogger
21 June: Donghua Liu claims that he has donated money “equally to Governments of both colours”.
22 June: NZ Herald publishes claim that Donghua Liu has contributed $150,000 to Labour Party. The claim is made in a signed statement by Liu. The Herald report states that Liu paid $100,000 for a bottle of wine;
Millionaire businessman Donghua Liu spent more than $150,000 on the previous Labour government, including $100,000 on a bottle of wine signed by former prime minister Helen Clark at a party fundraiser.
However, a Radio NZ report on the same day states that the money was paid for four bottles;
General secretary of the Labour Party Tim Barnett said the newspaper told him it was $100,000 for four bottles, not one, but even so, he does not have record of such a transaction.
23 June:
7.32am: NZ Herald editor, Tim Murphy, interviewed in Radio NZ’s “Morning Report“, and says that the Herald received a copy of Donghua Liu’s 3 May signed statement “on Saturday”. Murphy confirms that the document was a statement, not an affidavit. Murphy refuses to say how the Herald acquired the statement.
11.05am: Mike Williams, past-President of Labour Party, states on Radio NZ’s “Nine To Noon” politics panel, that he is not aware of any donation from Donghua Liu, nor any fund-raising event of Liu’s description, on the date Liu asserts.
“This, this, supposedly happened on my watch. And I’ve got a lot of problems with that. I think if anyone had paid $100,000 for a bottle of wine, I would know about it.”
Williams says that he and Party General Secretary, Mike Smith, were assiduous in record keeping and a donation of that magnitude could not be over-looked.
Williams also referred to Liu claiming that he donated “equally to Governments of both colours“, and suggested that if that was correct, that National had failed to properly report and account for $130,000 in donations.
.
Questions
1.
If, as Mr Liu claims, he donated $150,000 to the Labour Party in 2007, why has no one come forward to confirm this event? $150,000 is a large sum of money and very difficult to forget. Even John Key, with the best of his brain-fades, could not help but recall such an event.
2.
Mr Liu has signed only a statement, not an affidavit. There is a great deal of difference between the two forms of documents. A signed statement has very little legal standing.
But a signed and witnessed affidavit is a legal document, as outlined in Section 197 of the Evidence Act 2006, to whit;
.
197 Solicitor may take affidavit or declaration
(1) It is lawful for any solicitor of the High Court to take the affidavit or declaration of any person in relation to any criminal proceedings that are certified in accordance with this section to be pending in any overseas court.
(2) An affidavit or declaration referred to in subsection (1) must be intituled
“In the matter of section 197 of the Evidence Act 2006”, and a declaration referred to in subsection (1) may be expressed to be made under the provisions of this section.(3) No affidavit or declaration referred to in subsection (1) may be taken unless the solicitor taking it has received a written certificate—
(a) from the overseas court that the affidavit or declaration is required for the purpose of criminal proceedings pending in the court; or
(b) from an overseas representative of the country in which the overseas court exercises jurisdiction that he or she believes the affidavit or declaration to be required for the purpose of criminal proceedings pending in the overseas court.
(4) A certificate for the purposes of subsection (3)(a) may be given by any Judge or judicial officer of the overseas court, or by any Registrar or other officer of that court.
(5) If a certificate is given under subsection (3)(b), the jurat or attestation of the affidavit or declaration must state the name and official designation of the overseas representative on whose certificate the affidavit or declaration has been taken.
(6) In this section—
affidavit means any affidavit or affirmation made before a solicitor of the High Court
declaration means any written statement declared by the maker of the statement to be true in the presence of a solicitor of the High Court.
Compare: 1908 No 56 s 48F(1)–(6)
.
Making a false declaration under the Act, is covered under Section 198;
.
198 False affidavit or declaration
(1) Every affidavit or declaration taken under section 197 is deemed to have been made in a judicial proceeding within the meaning of the Crimes Act 1961, and any person who falsely makes an affidavit or declaration of that kind is guilty of perjury or of making a false declaration accordingly.
.
Which infers that the signed statement which Liu made, and which the Herald claims to have in it’s possession, does not have the same weight as an affidavit.
If it can be proven that Liu was lying, he will suffer no legal consequences.
It may explain why Liu refuses, point blank, to swear an affidavit. Why has Liu not made an actual affidavit?
3.
On 19 June, Bill English, John Key, and Michael Woodhouse, offered varying accounts when and how long, they had been in possession of the 2003 letter between Cunliffe and Immigration NZ.
It was not until some hours later that they amended their public statements.
Can they explain their discrepancies in the varying times they gave?
4.
On 21 June, Donghua Liu claimed that he has donated money “equally to Governments of both colours“.
But according to him, he gave $150,000 to Labour, and only $22,000 to National. That is not “equally to Governments of both colours” by any measure or definition. He (supposedly) gave $128,000 more to Labour than to National.
Can he explain that discrepancy in his statement?
5.
On 22 June, NZ Herald journalist, Bevan Hurley, wrote that Liu paid $100,000 for a bottle of wine;
Millionaire businessman Donghua Liu spent more than $150,000 on the previous Labour government, including $100,000 on a bottle of wine signed by former prime minister Helen Clark at a party fundraiser.
However, this was contradicted by a Radio NZ report on the same day, stating that the money was paid for four bottles;
General secretary of the Labour Party Tim Barnett said the newspaper [NZ Herald] told him it was $100,000 for four bottles, not one, but even so, he does not have record of such a transaction.
Can Hurley, or any other person working for the Herald, explain that discrepancy?
6.
If, as a 22 March NZ Herald story stated, that Donghua Lui’s $70 million four-star hotel project has failed to materialise, what action has this government taken on what appears to have been a breech of the business migration visa conditions (?) of Liu’s residency and subsequent citizenship?
What guarantee can there be, that migrants given residency and citizenship, under the Investor Plus (Investor 1 Category), and Investor (Investor 2 Category), who promise to undertake specific developments, will carry out their obligations?
What sanctions and remedies are available, should migrants given residency and citizenship, under the Investor Plus (Investor 1 Category), and Investor (Investor 2 Category), who promise to undertake specific developments, fail to do so?
7.
On 22 June 2014, Labour Party president, Moira Coatsworth categorically stated;
“No-one has provided any documentary evidence to us that contradicts our records.
We continue to call on Donghua Liu and any third parties who might have information about these allegations, including the Prime Minister, to place what they know into the public domain or to refer to the regulators.
We have had no approaches from the Electoral Commission or any regulatory agency. We have always cooperated with regulators, and will always do so when required.”
The same Herald story reveals that the Herald refuses to provide a copy of Liu’s signed statement to the Labour Party, which Coatsworth says,
“We consider this to be a denial of natural justice.”
7a. Why has the Herald refused to provide a copy of Liu’s signed statement to the Labour Party?
7b. Why has Liu refused to provide evidence of a $150,000 payment/donation to the Labour Party?
7c. How was Liu’s alleged payment made? Cheque? Bank transfer? A suitcase stuffed full of money? (Even a cash payment could be proven by showing when and where a withdrawal of that amount was made.)
7d. Can Liu provide witnesses to the event?
7e. Why has the Herald not made the statement public?
8.
Liu claims he signed a statement on 3 May 2014, to the effect that he “donated” $150,000 to the Labour Party.
8a. Why did he feel the need to make such a statement?
8b. Did someone else prompt or request for him to make such a state?
8c. Why did Liu not offer a copy to the Labour Party?
8d. Who else has a copy of the statement?
9.
9a. Who else knew about the 2003 letter, before it was published by the Herald?
9b. Was the Herald ‘tipped of’ about the letter before it lodged it’s OIA request?
9c. What was the involvement of John Key, Bill English, Michael Woodhouse, and Key’s chief of staff, Wayne Eagleson, in this affair?
9d. What active role did Mathew Hooton have, in this affair?
9e. What active role did the head of Key’s media team, Jason Ede, have in this affair?
10.
How does Liu reconcile his claims for the date of the Labour Party fundraiser being held on 3 June 2007 (as reported in a NZ Herald story, on 22 June 2014) when the Labour Party can find no record of any such event occurring on that day?
11.
Will the Police proceed in their prosecution of Donghua Liu?
Or will charges for assaulting two women be dropped “for lack of evidence”?
12.
And perhaps the last question – the most important question – why hasn’t the media been asking these questions?
.
Conclusions
- Donations via Electoral Commission
If New Zealanders cannot stomach state funding for political parties, and the elimination of private donors to parties, then the next best thing – Plan ‘B’ – is that all donations, or fund-raising over a certain amount ($1,000? $5,000?), be channelled through the Electoral Commission. The Commission would duly record each donation and donor’s details, and pass it on to the relevant party.
This might not be the solution to the problem of unrecorded donations, but it might be a helpful tool. It would certainly give the Commission an opportunity to make immediate, further enquiries relating to a specific donation. Eg; a fund-raising dinner at Antoinette’s in 2010, which raised $105,000 from twentyone donors, but which was recorded only as a ‘lump sum’ donation from the restaurant – without naming all twentyone people who gave money.
This might offer an additional measure of transparency to the donations system.
Any party avoiding the system would do so at it’s peril, eventually being found out.
- Cancel Investor Visa (Investors 1 & 2 Category)
It is perhaps time for the Investor Visa (Investors 1 & 2 Category) to be reviewed, and dumped.
The system appears to be open to rorting, with a residency-for-donations system in place that has been exploited by National (and Labour?).
But it is not just that Donghua Liu gave $22,000 to National, and was subsequently granted citizenship.
We have also seen the case of Susan Chou, of Oravida Ltd, whose company donated $200,000 in two amounts in 2010, and $156,600 to the National Party in three lots, throughout 2011 (31 May, 22 November, and 30 November). A month later, on 27 January 2012, National Government ministers approved Shanghai Pengxin’s application to purchase sixteen Crafar farms in receivership.
Oravida, as many will recall, was the dairy company at the center of a recent scandal involving Minister Judith Collins and her husband, David Tung. Tung also happens to be a company director of Oravida.
If this is not corruption, then it certainly has the perception of it.
Whether Labour has also exploited the business migration scheme is unknown. Liu’s claims may be real – or an utter fabrication and part of a very cunning smear campaign against Labour, during an election that promises to be close-run.
The only way to eliminate any possibility of inappropriate activities such as citizenship-for-donations, and other favours-for-donations, is to dump the business migration scheme once and for all.
It is simply too open to abuse.
- Extreme caution with relations with business people
If the Oravida scandal; Kim Dotcom saga, and Donghua Liu mystery have shown anything, it is that ministers of the crown should exercise extreme caution when dealing with members of the business community. Especially businesspeople from cultures where “gifting” for political patronage is considered the norm.
After the wounds inflicted on Judith Collins and David Cunliffe, and the destruction of John Banks’ and Taito Phillip Fields‘ political careers, it would be a very, very foolish Member of Parliament or Minister of the Crown, to try his/her luck with secret dealings.
We are simply too small a country.
- The C.R.E.E.P.** Team
It is my sincerest, honestly-held belief, that the Donghua Liu Affair has been a carefully orchestrated dirty trick, designed to smear the leader of the Labour Party, David Cunliffe.
It is my sincerest, honestly-held belief, that it was not orchestrated by anyone within the Labour Party, such as the ABC faction. Their careers would be gone by breakfast if it could be shown that any of them were responsible, in part, or whole.
It is my sincerest, honestly-held belief, that this smear campaign was orchestrated deep within the National Party, and that at least two well known National Party apparatchiks were involved.
It is my sincerest, honestly-held belief, that Donghua Liu was persuaded to participate in this scheme around early May, when he signed his statement. It is my sincerest, honestly-held belief, that he was offered, in return, that charges against him for assaulting two women, would either be dropped, or “no evidence presented” at the Court case.
It is my sincerest, honestly-held belief, that this smear campaign was designed as ‘utu’ for the forced resignation of Maurice Williamson. Donghua Liu signed his statement two days after Williamson’s resignation.
Therein lies the clue: Donghua Liu signed his statement two days after Williamson’s resignation. Because Williamson’s resignation left some very, very angry people who could barely wait to exact revenge.
It is my prediction that the truth will come out very quickly on this issue, and it will destroy National’s chances to win this election – much like “Corngate” nearly destroyed Labour’s chances to win the 2002 general election.
This will end John Key’s career.
.
.
.
* Timeline info taken from NZ Herald story, Woodhouse ‘clarifies’ story on Cunliffe’s Liu letter. Hat-tip, Martyn Bradbury, from blogpost, Cunliffe can’t remember an 11 year old letter and has to resign but Woodhouse can’t remember a 6 week old letter he told Prime Minister about and isn’t resigning?
** CREEP – Committee to RE Elect the Prime minister (See: Watergate)
.
References
NZ Herald: David Cunliffe wrote letter supporting Liu’s residency bid
Fairfax media: David Cunliffe advocated for Donghua Liu
NZ Herald: Businessman ‘donated to Governments of both colours’
NZ Herald: Businessman gifts $150k to Labour Party
Fairfax media: Key – ‘Nothing untoward’ in citizenship waiver
NZ Herald: Businessman in citizenship row up on violence charges
Radio NZ: Labour has no record of reported Liu donation
NZ Herald: Labour Party hits back at donation claims
Otago Daily Times: Losing patience with politicians
NZ Herald: Citizenship, then $22k for Nats
Scoop Auckland: PM to open first stage of Donghua Liu’s $70m Newmarket redevelopment project
NZ Herald: Weeds choke $70m dream
TV3: Maurice Williamson resigns as minister
NZ Herald: Labour Party hits back at donation claims
NZ Herald: MP confirms meeting with Donghua Liu
TV1 News: Cunliffe – ‘I did not tell a lie’ about Liu
Radio NZ: Cunliffe accuses Govt of smear campaign
NZ Herald: Woodhouse ‘clarifies’ story on Cunliffe’s Liu letter
Radio NZ: PM and deputy at odds over Cunliffe letter
TV3: Shane Jones denies he is Cunliffe source
Fairfax media: David Cunliffe digs in amid rumours, poll woe
NZ Herald: Businessman ‘donated to Governments of both colours’
Immigration NZ: Migrant Investment categories
NZ Herald: Businessman gifts $150k to Labour Party
Radio NZ: Morning Report – New Zealand Herald stands by its story
Radio NZ: Nine To Noon politics panel
Legislation: Evidence Act 2006
Radio NZ: Labour dismisses Liu donation claims
Immigration NZ: Migrant Investment categories
TV3: Key not talking about fundraising dinner
Interest.co.nz: Govt Ministers rubber stamp Overseas Investment Office approval of Shanghai Pengxin’s Crafar farms bid
Previous related blogposts
National’s fund-raising at Antoine’s – was GST paid?
Doing ‘the business’ with John Key – Here’s How (Part # Rua)
Other blogposts
The Standard: The middle of Queens birthday weekend? Yeah right!
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen/Lurch Left Memes
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 23 June 2014.
.
.
= fs =
Doing ‘the business’ with John Key – Here’s How (Part # Rua)
.
.
Continued from: Doing ‘the business’ with John Key – Here’s How
Once upon a time, at the bottom of the world, there was a small country that prided itself on being a fair, open, and uncorrupted society.
I’m no longer sure about the last bit.
Last year, Transparency International ranked New Zealand as the #1 least corrupt nation on Earth. We ranked above Denmark (#2), Finland (#3), Sweden (#4), Singapore (#5), and Norway (#6).
I’m no longer certain we deserve that top ranking, either.
The further that the Sky City/Convention Centre and Crafar farm deals are scrutinised – the stronger the odour of something unpleasant fills our nostrils.
To recap, let’s start with the Crafar farms deal with Shanghai Pengxin.
.
Tahi: Crafar Farms/Shanghai Pengxin/National Government
.
The timetime of the Crafar deal runs something like this,
5 October 2009: Crafar Farms placed into receivership, owing $216 million to creditors.
22 December 2010: Government blocks bid by Natural Dairy to buy the 16 Crafar farms on ‘good character’ grounds.
27 January 2011: KordaMentha accepts offer from Shanghai Pengxin International Group Ltd to buy Crafar Farms.
13 April 2011: Shanghai Pengxin lodges application with the Overseas Investment Office (OIO) to buy the Crafar farms.
26 September 2011: Crafar farms receiver KordaMentha rejects a conditional NZ$171.5 million offer for 16 central North Island dairy farms from a group led by controversial former merchant banker Michael Fay.
27 January 2012: Government ministers approve Shanghai Pengxin’s application to purchase 16 Crafar farms.
15 February 2012: High Court delays sale of Crafar farms to Shanghai Pengxin.
20 April 2012: Government ministers , Land Information Minister Maurice Williamson and Associate Finance Minister Jonathan Coleman approve the Overseas’ Investment Office’s (OIO) new recommendation to allow the sale of the 16 Crafar farms to Shanghai Pengxin.
At least, that is the version for public consumption.
Recent revelations indicate that much more was taking place behind the scenes. If we take that timeline and add the revelations that have come out in the last few months, the picture takes on a murkiness and a hint on something decidedly shady,
5 October 2009: Crafar Farms placed into receivership, owing $216 million to creditors.
2 December 2009: KIWI DAIRY CORPORATION LIMITED registered. (Then changes to ORAVIE LIMITED, 20 December 2010. Then changes to ORAVIDA LTD, 20 January 2011. Then changes to ORAVIDA NZ LIMITED, 13 May 2011. ) Shareholders: Jing Huang, Julia Jiyan Xu, and Deyi Shi. (Source)
11 June 2010: National Party receives $50,000.00 donation from Susan Chou. (Source)
30 July 2010: National Party receives $150,000 donation from Susan Chou. (Source)
18 November 2010: MILK NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION LIMITED* registered. Directors: Terry Lee and Jiang Zhaobai. (Source)
22 December 2010: Government blocks bid by Natural Dairy to buy the 16 Crafar farms on ‘good character’ grounds.
27 January 2011: KordaMentha accepts offer from Shanghai Pengxin International Group Ltd to buy Crafar Farms.
31 May 2011: National Party receives $100,000 donation from Susan Chou. (Source)
22 July 2011: ORAVIDA LTD registered. Shareholders: Jing Huang, Julia Jiyan Xu, and Deyi Shi. (Source)
27 July 2011: ORAVIDA PROPERTY LTD changes name to KIWI DAIRY INDUSTRY LTD. Shareholder: Deyi Shi (Source)
13 April 2011: Shanghai Pengxin lodges application with the Overseas Investment Office (OIO) to buy the Crafar farms.
26 September 2011: Crafar farms receiver KordaMentha rejects a conditional NZ$171.5 million offer for 16 central North Island dairy farms from a group led by controversial former merchant banker Michael Fay.
22 November 2011: National Party receives $50,0000 donation from Citi Financial Group. Shareholders: Yan Yang and Qiang Wei. (Source) (Source)
22 November 2011: National Party receives $1,600 from Oravida NZ. (Source) (Source)
26 November 2011: NZ General Election
30 November 2011: National Party receives further $55,000 donation from Oravida NZ. (Source) (Source)
27 January 2012: Government ministers approve Shanghai Pengxin’s application to purchase 16 Crafar farms.
15 February 2012: High Court delays sale of Crafar farms to Shanghai Pengxin.
20 April 2012: Government ministers , Land Information Minister Maurice Williamson and Associate Finance Minister Jonathan Coleman approve the Overseas’ Investment Office’s (OIO) new recommendation to allow the sale of the 16 Crafar farms to Shanghai Pengxin.
* “Milk New Zealand Holding Limited” is the official applicant and purchaser of the 16 Crafar farms. It is supposedly a subsidiary of Shanghai Pengxin,
” Applicant
3. The Applicant is Milk New Zealand Holding Limited (“the Applicant”), a Hong Kong incorporated company which is an overseas person under the Act.
4. The Applicant will register as an overseas company under the New Zealand Companies Act 1993 prior to acquiring the Investment. The Applicant does not have any current interests in New Zealand as at the date of this Application.1
1 The 99% ultimate owner of the Applicant, Zhaobai Jiang, has a [redacted]% interest in a company ([redacted*])that has applied for consent to acquire development land at [redacted] . No decision has yet been made on this application.” – Source
(*Note: Despite OIO redacting the second company, this blogger has found that it is actually “NATURE PURE LIMITED“. Terry Lee and Zhaobai Jiang are both listed as Directors.)
Despite numerous company name changes; newly registered companies; and a lengthy trail of shareholders, the one link that does stand out between Shanghai Pengxin and financial donations to the National Party is Terry Lee.
Mr Lee, along with Deyi Shi and Xing Hong, registered KIWI DAIRY CORPORATION LIMITED on 2 December 2009, which, after several name changes, ended up as ORAVIDA NZ LIMITED on 13 May 2011. Xing Hong was also a one time Director of ORAVIDA NZ LIMITED and ORAVIDA PROPERTY LIMITED.
Deyi Shi is still a current Director of both ORAVIDA NZ LIMITED and ORAVIDA PROPERTY LIMITED.
On 22 and 30 November, 2011, the National Government received donations totalling $56,600 from Oravida NZ Ltd.
A further $300,000 was donated to National by Auckland businesswoman, Susan Chou, who, through her husband Zhaowu Shen, had a connection with Jack Chen and NZ Natural Dairy Ltd – the first unsuccessful attempt by Chinese investors to gain control of the Crafar farms.
Two months later, on 27 January 2012, National approved the sale of 16 Crafar farms to Shanghai Pengxin subsidiary, Milk New Zealand Holding Limited.
Readers are invited to draw their own conclusions from the facts presented.
Continued at: Doing ‘the business’ with John Key – Here’s How (Part # Toru)
.
*
.
Sources & References
OIO: Decision required under the Overseas Investment Act 2005: Milk New Zealand
Holding Limited
CAFCA: December 2010 decisions
Elections NZ: Returns of party donations exceeding $30,000
Elections NZ: Returns of party donations exceeding $20,000
Interest.co.nz: Govt Ministers rubber stamp Overseas Investment Office approval of Shanghai Pengxin’s Crafar farms bid
Acknowledgements
Adam Bennett, NZ Herald: Chinese cash flows to Nats
Adam Bennett, NZ Herald: China link to Nats’ $200,000
.
.
= fs =
First blogged 28 April 2012
News Archives
Crony Watch
Keeping an eye on dodgy government appointees, crony-by-crony!
Frankly Speaking... 