All posts tagged John Banks

Split vote on Intelligence and Security Committee

Unusually a vote of the Intelligence and Security Committee public has been made public.

@RusselNorman

historic moment. I can tell you something that happened on the Intelligence and Security Cttee tonite: I moved a motion for an inquiry into appt process for Fletcher. Key recused himself. Vote was tied 2 each so motion lost. That’s it.

It was agreed by the committee’s chair (the Prime Minister) that the vote could be disclosed.

It’s not hard to work out how the vote was split (between Dunne, Banks, Shearer, Norman).

Shearer and Norman could be painting themselves into a corner on this, putting petty party politics before serious security matters.

The Auditor General has already ruled that an inquiry into Fletcher’s appointment is unnecessary – see Auditor-General will not investigate GCSB appointment:

 The Auditor General has turned down Labour’s request to investigate the appointment of Ian Fletcher as head of the Government Communications Security Bureau, saying the Prime Minister was entitled to have “considerable discretion” over how the appointment was made.

Labour had asked the Auditor General to investigate it after Mr Key confirmed he had sounded out Ian Fletcher – a childhood family friend – for the post himself before directing him to speak to the head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

However, the Auditor General said that the Prime Minister had responsibility for the appointment and, unlike chief executives of other government departments, there was no specific process set out in making that appointment.

“The person appointed serves at the Prime Minister’s pleasure. As with many other ministerial appointments, the responsible Minister therefore has considerable discretion about how appointments are made. He or she is accountable to Parliament and the public in the usual way for those decisions.”

Last week State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie said Mr Key had done nothing wrong.

The Intelligence and Security Committee and the security services of the country require a high degree of secrecy which in turn requires a high degree of bipartisan responsibility from the MPs on the committee.

Shearer and Norman seem to put more effort into attempting political point scoring on things they have already failed at.

Today Winston Peters agreed to back Government changes to GCSB law and oversight, leaving Labour and Greens out on a limb on this issue.

by Pete George on April 16, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 16, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/16/split-vote-on-intelligence-and-security-committee/

Act II, John Boscawen

After being an observer at the ACT Scenic South Regional Conference I’ve posted my impressions of one of the John Bs – see Act I, John Banks.

The other ACT John B is party president John Boscawen. He also gave a speech at the conference, and I was able to have a good chat with him afterwards.

Boscawen was one of the five ACT MPS last term. He decided not to stand again in 2011 for genuine family reasons.He had a reputation of being down to earth, a hard worker, reliable – but was described as being not so good in the arts of communication.

I thought he gave a good speech. He wasn’t as animated or funny as the other John B. He didn’t drop any media H bombs like Rodney Hide. But he was clear and informative, giving a good explanation of his aims and priorities, and where he hoped to help take the ACT party.

My impression is that Boscawen is a very capable speaker, he’s just not flashy, nor is he an attention seeker.

I’ll deal more with his speech in later posts.

Afterwards he had a long talk to myself and another non-ACT observer, Hamish, who is a Young Nat. I was interested in asking, listening and learning what I could about Boscawen and what he was doing.

And Boscawen was interested in asking, listening and learning about what I was doing – unusual in my experience with politicians (although I have had a similar long talk and listen with the United Future president).

Boscawen has taken on the job of ACT president and has committed himself to working full time for the party up to next year’s election, doing what he can to help ACT return to Parliament, hopefully with several more MPs. He is financially self supporting so is able to put substantial time and effort into this.

He sounds very determined and clear about the required tasks. The Banks John has a heavy workload being an electorate MP, party leader (something he said he hadn’t aspired to be), and Government Minister. He returned to Parliament in 2011 after an absence of many years and with a gutted party in disarray. Then last year he had to weather substantial targeted attacks by opposition parties.

So the role of the Boscawen John is very important. He has the time and determination to rebuild support for his party. And he’s not shy about recruiting new party members, he asked both Hamish and I what it would take to get us to join ACT. He couldn’t afford me.

ACT has had a very difficult few years, with MP misteps, revelations, party takeovers and cups of toxic tea.

But despite this with John Banks they survived. And he will probably ensure they will survive until the next election – unless Kim Dotcom is holding a bomb in reserve. It is up to Banks to keep the party running.

John Boscawen is in a position to rebuild the party and regain support. He seems a genuine nice guy, but very focussed and determined, has lived through and learnt from past mistakes, and has success in his background.

ACT have John Banks to thank for having hung on. If they are to become a significant force in New Zealand politics they will have a lot to thank John Boscawen for.

I’m not and have never been an ACT supporter, but I do want to see a strong presence of a range of large and small parties in Parliament, including ACT. Diversity strengthens democracy.

I see hope for ACT, and for Parliament, in the two John Bs. And that must be a hope shared by National, for different reasons.

by Pete George on March 5, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on March 5, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/03/05/act-ii-john-boscawen/

Act I, John Banks

I was invited to be an observer at the ACT Scenic South Regional Conference held in Dunedin on Saturday. It was interesting to hear the two John Bs in person, Banks and Boscawen.

I’ve seen John Banks many times on TV, and I think he can to be too much of a “same old” political reciter of phrases (Winston Peters and Phil Goff can sound like that too).

As a more relaxed free flow speaker he came across much better than as edited soundbites. This isn’t uncommon, I’ve seen the same from John Key and Peter Dunne (I’d love to see David Shearer and Russel Norman in person to get a better idea of what they’re really like too).

Banks is a consummate politician, he knows the well worn ropes, and he has a clear idea of what his job is. His main task is to put the tea party media fiasco, donation and Kim Dotcom issues as far behind him and focus on leading ACT to a much better performance in next year’s election.

His base philosphy was clear and simple – every child should have two things, unconditional love and a good education. If that can be provided it will flow through and address many problems. It’s something that may take generations to bear fruit but the end harvest is worth it.

Banks reiterated the importance of providing National with a reliable coalition partner, and is targeting at least 5% party vote next election (far more realistic than the Brash target in 2011). Holding Epsom is crucial but getting a half dozen or so MPs would make a huge difference – for ACT obviously, but also for National’s chances of staying in Government.

Alongside this he stressed the alternatives:

  • the Maori Party being able to decide which of left or right formed Government – and he is cerftain if they had the choice they would choose Labour over National
  • a Government of Labour, Green and NZ First with either or both the Maori Party and Hone Harawira.

Banks also promoted the key ACT policy that will differentiate the party – what they are calling Partnership Schools (aka charter schools). I’ll address this more in a separate post.

I can’t say I’m a John Banks convert, to be frank I’ve never been a fan of his. But seeing him speak in person and being able to take in the whole performance – including his rapport with the small audience and his interaction with people before and after – I certainly have a better idea of what his public persona is like, and my impression was improved on decades of media fed snippets.

I’d have liked to have talked to him directly but apart from him introducing himself  time ran out, while it had been suggested that joining them for lunch would be possible Banks was keen to take the other John B and do a walk through Saturday shoppers in the Dunedin CBD.

I’ll post in more detail on his speech.

ODT coverage: Act must perform, Banks says

by Pete George on March 5, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , ,

Posted by Pete George on March 5, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/03/05/john-b-act-i-banks/

Banks should resign himself to back bench

John Banks shouldn’t force a decision on his future on John Key.

It’s been Bank’s laxity on campaign donations, it’s been Banks who has not been upfront and honest with his responses, it is his ethical standards that are being questioned.

So Banks should take responsibility, make his own decision and send himself to the bank benches.

That would make it harder for Act this term.But it would repair some of the damage and give them a slightly better chance of surviving the next election.

If Banks clings on to his ministerial position now Act’s cling on Parliament will be precarious.

Banks continues to get savaged by media. Today’s ODT editorial:

Politics and smelling a rat

But in terms of Mr Banks, and the Prime Minister’s support of him, it seems the accusations, denials, ducking and diving and semantics will continue until someone – all that remains to be seen is who – gives in.

To avoid such doubts and clear the air, the Prime Minister should stop playing politics, and send Mr Banks to the back benches.

And John Armstrong’s column at NZ Herald:

Backed into a corner, so come out joking

Banks maintained his Churchillian facade. There was no sign of contrition or meaningful apology.

In that context, his joke about fundraising was a conscious effort to retrieve a few crumbs of dignity in the face of what amounts to a humiliating and very public dressing-down.

But it was also a two-fingered salute to those disturbed by his seemingly cavalier regard for the laws on campaign donations.

The end of Banks’ political career probably, and the end of Act?

At least it can be said that $50,000 bought Dotcom absolutely nothing by way of influence over Banks.

But that is about as good as it gets for Act’s sole MP – and by implication for Act itself.

The latest revelations have made certain that his dream of retaining “Fortress Epsom” and using it as a platform for Act’s regeneration is now pure fantasy.

Banks now has not a snowball’s chance in hell of holding the seat. Although he insists otherwise, it consequently seems highly unlikely he will stand again in 2014.

And in the meantime?

Act’s leverage – minute as it already was – has been heavily discounted accordingly.

Banks is now essentially an irrelevance. His only other options are to resign his ministerial warrant and go to Parliament’s backbenches, where he could choose to vote against the Government on some measures – something which would lead to even more scorn being heaped upon him.

Alternatively, he could resign from Parliament. No one would bet against that happening.

But the more immediate question is how much damage Banks’ remaining a minister is doing to Key’s reputation.

Banks has dragged Act lower, but the longer he remains a Minister the greater the risk of dragging National down with him.

It may well be too late to save Act, but the least Banks could do in his last significant political act is to give National a fighting chance of success in 2014.

by Pete George on September 22, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on September 22, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/09/22/banks-should-resign-himself-to-back-bench/

Shearer’s vulnerability on standards

David Shearer already seems to have turned his back on his own words. In February, in Stuff’s Shearer not buying into ‘gotcha’ politics:

“I’m not the kind of leader who believes in rival tribes playing ‘gotcha’, where bickering and partisanship are prized. Of course that’s what a lot of people look for. They want to score the game, give points for the best smart remark in Parliament. But that’s not what most New Zealanders want,” Mr Shearer told an Auckland Grey Power meeting yesterday.

He made it clear he would not be pushed into changing his timetable, or turn himself into the sort of politician he dislikes.

“I want a new kind of politics, pragmatic and attentive to what works, not tied up in the squabbles of the past … our future policies have to pass this test: `Does this idea help us achieve the New Zealand we want to create 10 years from now?”‘

He is now fully involved in  Labour’s ‘gotcha John Banks’ campaign. Has he already become ‘the sort of politician he dislikes’?

And is Shearer setting himself up for more exposure? He is pressing John Key to sack John Banks:

Key’s credibility damaged by clinging on to Banks – Shearer

“John Key is clinging onto John Banks for political convenience because he needs his vote. He’s doing that despite the fact three witnesses have given sworn testimony that John Banks knew about the Kim Dotcom donation. That is just not credible.

“The Prime Minister’s claim that he has no option but to rely on John Banks’ word is utter nonsense and desperate political spin. John Key is risking his own credibility by taking the word of a Minister whose reputation is in tatters.

“The Prime Minister has an obligation to get to the ‘bottom of the facts’, just like he demanded Helen Clark do in 2008 over Winston Peters. At that time, he said she should stand Winston Peters down because he had failed to put up a ‘credible explanation’ and had ‘misled the New Zealand public’ and the Prime Minister.

“It’s the same story today, but John Key isn’t applying the same standard. It’s absolute hypocrisy for him to turn a blind eye given his previous political attack on Helen Clark and Winston Peters.

“What he should do is summon John Banks to the Beehive and ask him face-to-face whether he has lied. Ask him why he told media and his own Chief of Staff that he didn’t know about the donation and yet Kim Dotcom, his bodyguard and his lawyer all say he did.

“John Key has no option but to sack John Banks or lose the respect of New Zealanders for failing to show the integrity expected of a Prime Minister,” said David Shearer.

And Shearer has clearly defined what he thinks what action Key should take, albeit confusingly saying Key should “get to the ‘bottom of the facts’” but regardless of those facts “has no option but to sack John Banks”.

John Key has found that claiming high standards can come back to haunt you (with the help of willing opposition ghosts).

How long will it take for David Shearer’s standards to be focussed back on himself?

by Pete George on September 20, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on September 20, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/09/20/shearers-vulnerability-on-standards/

John Banks bad, Labour and media worse?

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?

by Pete George on September 18, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on September 18, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/09/18/john-banks-bad-labour-and-media-worse/

Slippery slopes and Banks

As more is revealed of John Banks and his dealings with Kim Dotcom it is looking increasingly like Banks hasn’t been straight with us.

And it’s looking increasingly like either Banks hasn’t been straight with John Key or Key hasn’t been straight with us on what Banks has told him.

Pressure goes on Key to jettison Banks

The documents say that Mr Banks told Dotcom’s lawyer in February that he could not help Dotcom get medical attention in prison, because “that may backfire on Kim if it became known about the election support”.

In a sworn statement, Dotcom also said Mr Banks told him: “I want to help you Kim and I can help you more effectively if no-one knows about this donation.”

I don’t think this is something that Key can just shrug off and hope the country moves on and forgets. If he does he’s on a slippery slope – a slide in expected coalition partner standards.  And an apparent slide in Key’s political standards. And this risks putting Key on a slippery slope off popular support.

In May, Mr Key pledged to fire the small business minister if he had lied over the donations to his failed 2010 campaign to be Auckland super-city mayor.

Yesterday he insisted: “Nothing has changed. He hasn’t broken the law … there is no charge against him.”

But known information has changed. And Key’s standards seem to be changing.

It all looks like a slide of slipperyness. Time to down Banks. If Key just lets things slide he will be dragged down too.

by Pete George on September 14, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , ,

Posted by Pete George on September 14, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/09/14/slippery-slopes-and-banks/

Religion, science, charter schools and John Banks

Stuff reports on School faith plan raises doubts. It certainly raises doubts about religious versus science education.

The philosophy, used at other Christian schools, encourages every subject to be taught so students discover how God made the world, and upholds and governs it.

Science and culture modules are taught to equip students to recognise what the In God’s World document calls the wonder of God’s creation, and that God is the God of history.

This deserves repeating: “encourages every subject to be taught so students discover how God made the world”.

How can they teach science so students ‘discover’ that?

It also raises questions about the potential for John Banks’ religious beliefs and his (non) scientitific beliefs to flavour his approach to charter schools and faith based education.

Education Minister Hekia Parata would not comment, but associate minister John Banks said the ministry had received a lot of correspondence, including complaints about public funding of faith-based education.

He would not comment on the trust’s charter plans.

Banks recently revealed in a Radio Rhema interview:

Banks: I believe Bible’s account of how life began

Associate Education Minister John Banks says he believes the Genesis account of the start of life on Earth.

According to the Bible, God made the world in six days, with Adam and Eve being his last act of creation.

John Banks told Radio Rhema that he has no doubts the first chapters of Genesis are true.

While I’m puzzled why in this day and age people would still believe in things that are demonstrably disproven by science Bank’s faith is his own business – as long as it doesn’t affect his decisions as an MP.

John Banks should make it clear he keeps his beliefs separate from his charter schools crusade.

by Pete George on August 22, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on August 22, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/08/22/religion-science-and-john-banks/

John Banks: no to minimum alcohol price

John Banks is opposing Labour’s call for setting minimum prices for alcohol.

Minimum alcohol price penalises everyone

ACT Leader John Banks today urged Opposition Parties to dismiss Labour’s Alcohol Law Reform Bill SOP which would introduce a provision for a minimum price for alcohol.

“Labour’s SOP is far too broad. Rather than target those who drink excessively, it punishes the hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who drink responsibly,” Mr Banks said.

“Under Labour’s policy, buying a relatively cheap bottle of wine to go with dinner would be a thing of the past.

“And because a minimum price is not a tax, all the additional revenue from a price increase will flow straight out of consumers’ pockets, into the hands of liquor companies and retailers.

“So who is this policy going to benefit? Not the Government, who would receive no additional revenue, not the majority of responsible New Zealanders who would have to fork out more for a drink and it is least likely to impact on problem drinkers, who are the least responsive to price increases. The main beneficiary of Labour’s policy will be the those in the alcohol industry.

“We do have an issue of problem drinking in New Zealand. But punishing everyone is not the way to go about solving it.

“A minimum price on alcohol will penalise responsible drinkers and is a policy that should be dismissed,” Mr Banks said.

by Pete George on July 4, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Issues
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on July 4, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/07/04/john-banks-no-to-minimum-alcohol-price/

John Banks: leave alcohol purchase age at 18?

The Alcohol Reform Bill will be back in parliament this month. One of the main proposals is to raise the alcohol purchase age at off-licence retailers such as liquor stores, dairies and supermarkets. This will be decided by a conscience vote instead of along party lines.

John Banks had been reported as undecided, but it was thought he would have a conservative view.

Act on Campus are claiming that Banks is now backing no change to the alcohol purchase age.

ACT on Campus pleased with Bank’s alcohol position

ACT on Campus is today praising ACT Leader John Banks’ announcement that he believes blanket measures against alcohol are unfair and ultimately ineffective.

“We do have an issue of problem drinking in New Zealand. But punishing everyone is not the way to go about solving it.” said Mr Banks.

“We are extremely pleased that John has come around to our argument that changes to alcohol law must be targeted at those acting illegally and carelessly, rather than punishing the thousands of New Zealanders that enjoy alcohol responsibly,” said ACT on Campus President Hayden Fitzgerald.

“Just as with minimum pricing, raising the alcohol purchase age is a blanket measure that will only succeed in punishing responsible 18 and 19 year old drinkers – myself included,” continued Mr Fitzgerald.

“Addressing our binge drinking culture requires better education, more involvement from family and communities and sensible targeted law changes; not poorly thought out policies that only punish responsible drinkers.”

“ACT on Campus is looking forward to John Banks’ vote to Keep It 18 and we encourage other MPs to listen to his well thought out and reasoned position”, said Mr Fitzgerald.

I can’t find confirmation on this, but if it’s correct then Act on Campus have done a good job getting their MP to listen and agree.

by Pete George on July 4, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Issues
Tagged , , ,

Posted by Pete George on July 4, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/07/04/john-banks-leave-alcohol-purchase-age-at-18/

« Older Posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 75 other followers