Metiria Turei
John Key double standard over John Banks

We put out a release today comparing John Key’s demand that Helen Clark stand Winston Peters down over the Owen Glenn donation, to his own failure to take his own advice over John Banks. We said that during the 2008 Privileges Committee inquiry into Winston Peters’ electoral donations, John Key called on Prime Minister Helen Clark to stand Mr Peters down, stating: “That is what I would do if I were Prime Minister”.

There are some other startling similarities in the statements between the two Prime Ministers over their mutual failures, when the votes were down:

Clark: “I’ve made it clear all the way through this round of allegations that I accept an honourable member’s word as his bond unless I have reason to doubt it. I don’t have reason to doubt it at this point.” (29 July 2008)
Key: “I have to believe what they tell me or how can I possibly enjoy their confidence? I’ve dealt with John a lot over the last couple of years and I’ve found him to be honest.” (30 April 2012)

Clark: “What I have to be assured with respect to Mr Peters as a minister is that he is acting lawfully and I’ve got no reason to doubt his assurance on that” (29 July 2008). “I’m not a private police force” (14 July 2008)
Key: “I know John well, I’ve known him over a number of years, he’s never misled me … if people don’t like it, go to the police, that’s their job to go and do an investigation. (30 April 2012)

Clark: “…there is a distinction between whether someone gives to a party, whether someone gives to a person and whether someone gives to their expenses. On that basis the donation did not appear to have broken any rules” (21 July 2008)

Key: “I’ve asked directly the question, I’ve been given an assurance by Mr Banks that he complied with all the local government regulations and laws and I accept him at his word” (30 April 2012)

John clearly needs Banksy on board. And if the history runs true, this will go on for a while yet.

9 thoughts on “John Key double standard over John Banks

  1. Metiria,

    You shouldn’t be surprised. John Banks is captain Key’s greatest asset. Via Banks he has ACT, and the liberal right, on a leash – exactly where he wants it. Key will do what he can to protect his poodle.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 (+8)

  2. Great post, Meyt. Really highlight’s John Key’s hypocrisy.

    Helen Clark should have stood down Winston Peters, just as John Key should stand down John Banks, until the allegations are resolved.

    This must be Key’s worst nightmare. #johndotbanks is trending on Twitter for the third day in a row, and what’s worse for Key ACC is trending again.

    Must be time for another story about Key’s SkyCity dirty deal to give him the trifecta of sleaze.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 (+9)

  3. Good Onya Metiria

    This whole issue, highlights that this Key-party & their ‘attack dogs’ dont seem to respect these laws. They seem to be saying “because we are wealthy MPs.. we can get away with anything”
    Banks is just laughing it off as though he thinks Key will protect him at any cost (dodgy deals, done dirt cheap)

    What does this say to the people of Aotearoa/NZ who believe that people who break the laws, should take the consequences of their actions ?

    Kia-ora HONEST Kiwis

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 (+4)

  4. “John Key’s hypocrisy” ? isn’t that a bit redundant?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 (+1)

  5. I have had many discussions with ACT members over several years and in many instances we have had common ground over certain liberal issues. Although I thought many of their policies were BS, they were still often challenging and forthright debaters, who had key points of difference with National’s conservatism. I can’t see the ACT party surviving it’s conversion to National #2.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 (+5)

  6. Why are you not demanding that Len Brown do the ethical thing and release the details of his fund raising?
    Len set up a trust fund to receive very large amounts of money for his campaign. He was, in law, allowed to know who contributed to that fund. He then passed over half a million dollars to his campaign without revealing where any of it came from! Do you consider that to be unethical, or it is OK as he is on the left hand side of the political fence?
    Can we expect the Green party to demand that Len release ALL the details of who contributed to the trust fund?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 (+1)

  7. “Honesty is the best policy” ??

    Its $50k not 50c.. wheres your cred. Mr Banks ?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  8. Metiria – you omit the obvious glaring difference.

    The money for Banks was a donation to a local body mayoral campaign when he wasn’t even an MP, and is allowed if it complies with the rules.

    The money to Peters was to a sitting govt minister for his PERSONAL USE in legal action – which is not allowed under any circumstances.

    AND he kept $100,000 when the rules state he must relinquish any amount over $500.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 (+1)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>