Webmail: PlaNet www.pl.net
0800 752638
Planet Communications— delivering socially and environmentally conscious internet and media services since 1992.
PlaNet News & Views
|
|
|
Posted on 5-11-08 This Key's For Turning
By Penny Bright, 5 November 2008
Is John Key shonky? Private prosecution filed in Auckland District Court.
Because neither the Police nor the Serious Fraud Office have decided to
investigate my complaint against John Key - I have taken a private
prosecution myself.
I allege "just cause to suspect, and do(es) suspect, that John Philip
Key, Member of Parliament for Helensville, dishonestly and without claim
of right, attempted to use documents with intent to obtain pecuniary
advantage, being an indictable offence under section 228 (b) of the Crimes
Act 1961, 'Dishonestly taking or using document', the liability for
imprisonment being a term not exceeding 7 years.
What concerns me, is that John Key, who is supposed to be a very
experienced business person, not only did not disclose his pecuniary
interest in Tranz Rail shares at a time it was an 'item of business'
before the House - but he attempted to flush out commercially sensitive
information by means of an Official Information Act request to the
Minister of Finance, Michael Cullen. When the Minister of Finance,
declined (on the advice of Treasury) not to give this 'commercially
sensitive' information, John Key then made a complaint to the Office of
the Ombudsman, in order to try and flush out this commercially sensitive
information.
John Key is the man who wants to lead the 'least corrupt country in the
world' - yet the evidence available over the Tranz Rail matter - shows
that he bought and sold 50,000 Tranz Rail shares and doubled his money
over a five week period. He also appeared to be quite single-minded about
trying to flush out commercially sensitive information at a time he had
this undisclosed shareholding in Tranz Rail.
New Zealand spends at central government level nearly $60 billion per
year. The exact amount being spent on private sector contracts - I'm not
sure - but it would be significant. Who decides who gets these contracts?
Do New Zealanders really want politicians who appear to use public office
for private gain?
National supports Public-Private-Partnerships (PPPs), for infrastructure.
PPPs are internationally the most common form of privatisation -
effectively contracts with multi-national companies where the
infrastructure is still publicly owned - but the income stream flows to
the private sector through 'long-term leases'. How would it be decided who
was to get the PPP contracts?
Isn't it time that the books were opened and the facts about the
'contractocracy' were revealed? Who has the contracts? Where is the
cost-benefit analysis that the contracting-out model represents a more
cost-effective use of public monies compared when services were provided
'in-house' through public works departments and the like? Isn't it time NZ
had our own 'Independent Commission Against Corruption' and we learned
from 20 years 'best practice' in fighting corruption, eg the New South
Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption (www.icac.gov.au)?
New Zealand is, according to Transparency International - the least
corrupt country in the world (along with Denmark and Sweden). Apparently -
this status is based on the number of prosecutions. However - I believe
this case raised questions about the legitimacy of New Zealand's
'corruption' status. The problem, in my opinion, is that there is no body
in NZ which is tasked with trying to prevent corruption or corrupt
practices - all which usually stem from conflicts of interest.
The Police, SFO, the Office of the Ombudsman, and Office of the
Auditor-General are all complaints-driven. But what happens when they get
complaints about allegedly corrupt practices and they do not even
investigate - let alone prosecute? How many other cases are there - such
as mine - are simply not even investigated?
To read a copy of my complaint go to www.uncensoredmagazine.co.nz/news
This private prosecution was filed in the Auckland District Court on
Monday 3 November 2008. A District Court Judge will decide whether or not
there is 'a case to answer'. I look forward to the communication trail
between John Key and his sharebroker being disclosed under discovery.
An outline of this complaint is now available on 'You Tube' - "Is John
Key shonky?"
|
