Pressure continues on John Key to do something about John Banks regarding his mayoral campaign donations from Kim Dotcom.

Banks didn’t deal very well with donation law that doesn’t deal very well with political realities. And Banks didn’t deal very well with questions put to him about this. And the recently released police report doesn’t show Banks in a very good light.

But Key continues to refuse to deal with Banks on this. Andrea Vance sums this up:

Master of Keyvasive action

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. And in John Key’s case, read no evil.

The prime minister is resolutely refusing to take a look at the 126-page dossier from the police investigation into “anonymous” donations to Mr Banks’ 2010 mayoralty campaign.

It all looks very messy politics. So why is Key tiptoeing through the murk? He made this clear on Q+A on Sunday. First, he made it clear that he thinks the law is at fault for allowing the pronblem in the first place:

So, in my opinion, that law is very badly drafted, which is why my government’s going to fix it up.

He then repeats this, and then points to the real issue as he sees it…

What I can tell you is the law doesn’t work. What I can tell you is this is a politically motivated attempt by the Labour Party to get at the government.

And then again:

I accept that the law is very ambiguous, and I accept that the Labour Party are using this as a politically motivated attempt to get to the government. Because they’re not going after – this is a guy that lost the mayoral election. They didn’t try and test this out after he lost. They didn’t test it out for every other candidate. They’re not testing it out around the country.

And, by the way, when they changed the central government law around donations, they didn’t bother to do it for local government. But today they care about it, and that’s because it’s politically motivated.

There has been some justified criticism of Banks, and there has been some legitimate questioning of Key on ministerial standards. That’s where all the media attention seems to have been aimed.

But I think it’s also important to question the politics involved here.

The Labour Party has waged an ongoing  deliberate campaign against Banks for one reason – they want to destabilise Government, and they have seen Banks as a vulnerable part of the Government.

It’s a political hit job. Labour’s aim is to destroy Banks as a minister, and to destroy the Act Party. And their ultimate aim is to bring down the Government.

This is dirty politics. Labour see their best way to gain power is to destabilise Government, which will destabilise the country. They don’t care about the damage they might inflict, as long as they win power.

And some of the media keeps playing along with this. Presumably messing up the country would be good for ratings.

What’s worse – Banks’ bumblings to try and avoid trouble? Key’s resolute blind eye to try and avoid trouble?

Or the trouble makers?

I disagree with Key on one thing. He said:

Fair enough. That’s called politics.

Some in politics think that the dirtier the better, especially when in opposition. All’s fair in power and war.

I don’t think it’s fair enough. From what I see and hear dirty politics repulses many people outside of politics. They want politicians to do their best for the country. Not their worst.

Politics should be about running the country, not ruining it. Shouldn’t it?