Home > The Body Politic > Conflicts of Interest?

Conflicts of Interest?

.

.

It appears that having had a “taste” of selling our state assets, Dear Leader is continuing the process. Will he personally  benefit from the partial privatisation of SOEs,  by buying shares?

Because it seems that members of parliament may already be lining up to buy state assets that we, the people, currently own.

Minister for Courts, Associate Minister of Justice, and Associate Minister for Social Development, Chester Borrows has admitted his intention to  buy shares, according to comments he made on the last episode of ‘Backbenches’, on 27 June,

.

[click on image above to carry through to TVNZ video – See comments @ 4.45 ]

.

The exchange between Host Wallace Chapman and Chester Burrows;

CHAPMAN:  “Will you be buying shares in Mighty River Power?”

BORROWS:  “Yes, probably.”

CHAPMAN:  “Ok.”

BORROWS:  “I’m a mum and dad investor, well I’m half of a mum and investor partnership.”

CHAPMAN:  “So you will be.”

BORROWS:  “Yep.”

It appears that all pretences of avoiding conflicts of interest between National MPs and investments, have been done away with. With the wealth that many National MPs possess, it is not hard to see that they stand to benefit from state asset sales.

National Ministers will no doubt have a deep understanding of which ‘Mixed Ownership Model’ corporations are good investments. They will also know which  ‘Mixed Ownership Model’ corporations will benefit from future government policy-decisions and infra-structure development – all of which will boost the value of any shares they hold.

Is this a vested interest in partial-privatisation?

Is this a conflict of interest?

Is this verging on self-serving corruption?

In this blogger’s opinion, it is hard not to arrive at these conclusions.

.

.

= fs =

  1. Theodore
    2 July 2012 at 9:20 pm

    Conflict of interest? Hell yes! What else would be be? The crooks are already lining up it seems.

  2. Taura
    2 July 2012 at 9:27 pm

    Frank, you can guarantee he will profit personally from all this. He does own shares in mining companies and others. It’ll take some digging to discover the true extent of his financial involvement, but I reckon there will be a nice trail through one or two shell companies and back to his bank account.

  3. 2 July 2012 at 9:37 pm

    I reckon 🙂 Just read this little article as well …

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10765463

  4. 2 July 2012 at 9:39 pm

    Taura, that’ll be routed through his blind trust no doubt as well 🙂

    • Taura
      2 July 2012 at 9:48 pm

      Thing is, if we get all this out, we blow him out of the water. He can’t say he was acting in the best interests of the country if he is seen to be making a personal profit from the selloffs. Kinda looks bad. Perception is an evil mistress

      • 2 July 2012 at 9:54 pm

        Indeed, perception management is what it is all about — “The Manufacture of Consent” and all that 🙂

        It’s a pity these types are clearly fairly adept at this sort of thing!!!

        I did notice that Herald link was an article of some time ago, but, was worth a re-read. If only because I will have to attend a gathering whereupon I will no doubt get into an argument over this sort of thing 🙂

    • Theodore
      2 July 2012 at 10:06 pm

      Would that even work? Blind trusts are only good for not knowing certain things about companies you’ve got no direct involvement in. But if you have shares and you’re a government minister, you can make damn sure those SOEs/MOMs get state funded benefits.

      This is starting to smell like something my dog threw up.

  5. Jena
    2 July 2012 at 10:10 pm

    Haven’t checked because we know the loop-holes will all be there, but the Legislation was supposed to stop Ministers, if not MP’s purchasing shares. But as we all know, family trusts, blind trusts etc won’t stop them snaffling up huge quantities of shares. I yearn for the likes of the days of the French Revolution when traitors had a public execution.

  6. Taura
    2 July 2012 at 10:24 pm

    He does seem to have created a certain perception of control and power. Albeit through lies and deception, threats to the media after the whole phone hacking thing, that can easily be turned when the general public hate him. One good bustup should do it. Through media he cannot control.

  7. 2 July 2012 at 10:36 pm

    @ Taura – “Thing is, if we get all this out, we blow him out of the water. He can’t say he was acting in the best interests of the country if he is seen to be making a personal profit from the selloffs. Kinda looks bad. Perception is an evil mistress”

    I like the way you think, Taura. I’m about two minutes away from emailing a link to my blogpiece to the msm. Hopefully at least one will pick up the story and run with it!

    @ Alan – “Indeed, perception management is what it is all about”

    Spot on, mate.

    • Taura
      2 July 2012 at 10:47 pm

      That’s the one Frank. I’ll share the article in other groups and let’s see how hard we can kick the hornet’s nest.

  8. 2 July 2012 at 11:07 pm

    Cheers, Taura. And that’s how we Little People make politicians sit up and take notice…

  9. Rocket Girl
    3 July 2012 at 1:00 pm

    Obscene. Lining their own pockets at our expense. No wonder Key is so determined to see the asset sales go through. He should be charged with insider trading.

    • SpaceMonkey
      3 July 2012 at 3:44 pm

      Insider trading would just get a fine… pocket money for John Key. He should be charged with economic treason instead… bringing jail-time or, as Bob Jones has suggested in today’s NZ Herald, a hanging.

      John Key is spearheading a financial attack on NZ on behalf of Wall St and the City of London, just like in 1987 when he aided Andrew Krieger’s assault on the NZ dollar. That day earned then-Bankers Trust some $338 million in just a few days. This time John Key’s doing it from the inside, and the payoff will come for him when he leaves office.

      It is obscene. NZ should be rioting in the streets over this… a la Springbok Tour 1981.

  10. 10 July 2012 at 3:32 pm

    It’s not you Frank, or me, it’s everyone else. It’s a definite conflict of interest; “Me and my mates are doing alright so who cares if these peasants have jobs or not.”

  11. 10 July 2012 at 5:36 pm

    Who the peasants katherine me???

    • 10 July 2012 at 5:52 pm

      The lower socio economic classes (not sure if it includes you Toko – lol!) it includes me though, and all unemployed and low income people, it means that Key and his rich mates are doing ok and really couldn’t care less about the people who are finding it hard to get a job and couldnt care less about job creation because he’s selfish.

  1. 5 July 2012 at 6:27 pm
  2. 26 March 2013 at 9:49 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: