It was always amusing when officials in the Soviet Union explained the absence of a prominent figure on account of a cold. In October 1983, after the nation’s leader, Yuri Andropov, had been absent from public duties for months, the Tass news agency released a letter attributed to Andropov that said, yes, he had a cold.
He didn’t appear atop the Lenin Mausoleum for the annual Revolution Day military parade in Red Square in November and it wasn’t long before the “cold” would prove fatal to the former KGB chief. He died in February 1984, of kidney failure.
Time magazine noted that “Colds are dangerous in Russia”, before citing the cases of Leonid Brezhnev and Konstantin Chernenko, who had also suffered from a “cold” before they disappeared entirely.
In the 21st century at the bottom of the South Pacific, when New Zealand’s politicians and government appointees disappear from their posts and duties it is more likely to be on account of a conflict of interest than from a “cold”. Indeed, several of our ruling class have recently discovered that such conflicts — although unlikely to prove fatal — can prove to be very dangerous to the health of their political careers.
In a foretaste of what was to come this week, Michael Wood didn’t appear at the official opening of the Puhoi to Warkworth motorway last Friday because he was suffering from the fallout of a conflict of interest. He had been the Minister of Transport from November 2020 until early this month when he was stood down indefinitely from that portfolio. Instead, Associate Minister of Transport Kiritapu Allan was at the Prime Minister’s side to help cut the ribbon — with golden scissors.
Wood had held onto $16,000 worth of shares in Auckland Airport despite being told 12 times over two and a half years by the Cabinet Office to sell them. He had also failed to properly record them on the register of pecuniary interests. The fact that he declined North Shore Aerodrome’s application for airport authority status while owning Auckland Airport shares sealed his fate.
Unfortunately, he now won’t be appearing anywhere at all as a minister. On Wednesday, he resigned from Cabinet after it emerged that he also had interests in shares through a family trust in Chorus, Spark, and National Australia Bank — holdings which had created conflicts with his ministerial roles, including the government’s inquiry into banking.
Although Justice Minister Kiri Allan appeared at the opening of the motorway last Friday, she didn’t front the media in the weekend over Meng Foon’s resignation debacle because she had her own conflict of interest after the Race Relations Commissioner had donated to her 2020 election campaign. Given Allan’s delicate position — including not having declared the donations to the Cabinet Office when she took up the Justice portfolio last year — Associate Minister of Justice Deborah Russell had to deal with the matter in her senior colleague’s place.
Allan had received $1500 in donations from Foon and his wife for her campaign, as well as a rental subsidy for an electorate office worth $9185. The Justice Minister appoints the Race Relations Commissioner and is responsible for reappointing or sacking him or her. (Foon was appointed in July 2019 by Andrew Little.) Consequently, Allan was obliged to step away from handling Foon’s apparently forced resignation.
Foon tendered his resignation last Friday after it was revealed he had a conflict of interest too. It was alleged he hadn’t adequately declared the $2.3 million in government funding given to a company of which he was a director for emergency housing between 2018 and 2023. A conflict of interest arose after he had contributed to a Human Rights Commission inquiry into emergency housing.
Former Police Minister and Minister for Economic Development Stuart Nash is nowhere to be seen these days either, because he has also suffered the fallout from a conflict of interest. He tipped off wealthy donors with information about sensitive Cabinet discussions over a rent relief scheme related to Covid-19 management. He was sacked from Cabinet in March for breaching the Cabinet Manual principles of confidentiality, and will disappear permanently as an MP at October’s election.
This spate of the high and mighty suddenly being felled by conflicts of interest, perceived or real, might seem unusual, but it is worth remembering that such allegations dogged the government — and Nanaia Mahuta — last year.
Media publicity over government contracts being granted to companies owned by Mahuta’s husband, Gannin Ormsby, and other members of her whanau led to a review in September by Public Service Commissioner Peter Hughes.
Mahuta was cleared of any conflicts of interest but Hughes’ remit could only cover the actions of the Public Service and not those of the minister herself. For that reason, Hughes could not investigate the appointment of Mahuta’s young relative by marriage, Waimirirangi Ormsby, to the He Puapua Working Group in 2019 when she was Minister of Māori Development.
When she was quizzed briefly by a journalist last September about the appointment, Mahuta tried to shift responsibility for the decision-making to the ministry. However, in late October, details received under the Official Information Act showed Mahuta had put Ormsby on a list of candidates for the paid position herself.
She declared the conflict of interest late in the process at Cabinet’s Appointment and Honours Committee, saying: “One of the candidates I intend to appoint is related to me by marriage.” But the minister said she didn’t believe the connection was “significant”.
In the 21st century at the bottom of the South Pacific, when New Zealand’s politicians and government appointees disappear from their posts and duties it is more likely to be on account of a conflict of interest than from a “cold”. Indeed, several of our ruling class have recently discovered that such conflicts — although unlikely to prove fatal — can prove to be very dangerous to the health of their political careers.
In a foretaste of what was to come this week, Michael Wood didn’t appear at the official opening of the Puhoi to Warkworth motorway last Friday because he was suffering from the fallout of a conflict of interest. He had been the Minister of Transport from November 2020 until early this month when he was stood down indefinitely from that portfolio. Instead, Associate Minister of Transport Kiritapu Allan was at the Prime Minister’s side to help cut the ribbon — with golden scissors.
Wood had held onto $16,000 worth of shares in Auckland Airport despite being told 12 times over two and a half years by the Cabinet Office to sell them. He had also failed to properly record them on the register of pecuniary interests. The fact that he declined North Shore Aerodrome’s application for airport authority status while owning Auckland Airport shares sealed his fate.
Unfortunately, he now won’t be appearing anywhere at all as a minister. On Wednesday, he resigned from Cabinet after it emerged that he also had interests in shares through a family trust in Chorus, Spark, and National Australia Bank — holdings which had created conflicts with his ministerial roles, including the government’s inquiry into banking.
Although Justice Minister Kiri Allan appeared at the opening of the motorway last Friday, she didn’t front the media in the weekend over Meng Foon’s resignation debacle because she had her own conflict of interest after the Race Relations Commissioner had donated to her 2020 election campaign. Given Allan’s delicate position — including not having declared the donations to the Cabinet Office when she took up the Justice portfolio last year — Associate Minister of Justice Deborah Russell had to deal with the matter in her senior colleague’s place.
Allan had received $1500 in donations from Foon and his wife for her campaign, as well as a rental subsidy for an electorate office worth $9185. The Justice Minister appoints the Race Relations Commissioner and is responsible for reappointing or sacking him or her. (Foon was appointed in July 2019 by Andrew Little.) Consequently, Allan was obliged to step away from handling Foon’s apparently forced resignation.
Foon tendered his resignation last Friday after it was revealed he had a conflict of interest too. It was alleged he hadn’t adequately declared the $2.3 million in government funding given to a company of which he was a director for emergency housing between 2018 and 2023. A conflict of interest arose after he had contributed to a Human Rights Commission inquiry into emergency housing.
Former Police Minister and Minister for Economic Development Stuart Nash is nowhere to be seen these days either, because he has also suffered the fallout from a conflict of interest. He tipped off wealthy donors with information about sensitive Cabinet discussions over a rent relief scheme related to Covid-19 management. He was sacked from Cabinet in March for breaching the Cabinet Manual principles of confidentiality, and will disappear permanently as an MP at October’s election.
This spate of the high and mighty suddenly being felled by conflicts of interest, perceived or real, might seem unusual, but it is worth remembering that such allegations dogged the government — and Nanaia Mahuta — last year.
Media publicity over government contracts being granted to companies owned by Mahuta’s husband, Gannin Ormsby, and other members of her whanau led to a review in September by Public Service Commissioner Peter Hughes.
Mahuta was cleared of any conflicts of interest but Hughes’ remit could only cover the actions of the Public Service and not those of the minister herself. For that reason, Hughes could not investigate the appointment of Mahuta’s young relative by marriage, Waimirirangi Ormsby, to the He Puapua Working Group in 2019 when she was Minister of Māori Development.
When she was quizzed briefly by a journalist last September about the appointment, Mahuta tried to shift responsibility for the decision-making to the ministry. However, in late October, details received under the Official Information Act showed Mahuta had put Ormsby on a list of candidates for the paid position herself.
She declared the conflict of interest late in the process at Cabinet’s Appointment and Honours Committee, saying: “One of the candidates I intend to appoint is related to me by marriage.” But the minister said she didn’t believe the connection was “significant”.
Act Party leader David Seymour, however, concluded that the appointment meant Mahuta was in “clear breach of the Cabinet Manual, overseeing the appointment of her niece to a paid position for which she [Mahuta] had ministerial responsibility”.
Journalists have not closely investigated this alleged breach of the Cabinet Manual. Michael Wood, however, was not so lucky. Last Friday, he had to endure the humiliation of AM host Ryan Bridge asking him for an explanation of his tardiness in selling his Auckland Airport shares — with National’s Erica Stanford sitting beside him trying to look magnanimous but barely able to suppress her glee.
Wood did himself no favours, revealing just how cavalier he has been about conflicts of interest — as indeed this week’s revelations about further undisclosed shareholdings have confirmed.
He told Bridge that not getting around to selling the shares was like forgetting to do a household task such as “replacing an outdoor lightbulb”. In fact, he had told Jacinda Ardern in March 2021 he had sold the shares — which, to extend his analogy, is like telling his wife he had fixed the light when he knew he hadn’t.
Hipkins said on Wednesday that he had asked Wood, when he stood him down as Transport Minister a fortnight ago, if there was any other relevant information he should know about. Wood had told him there was not. Clearly, there were more outdoor lightbulbs to be fixed than Hipkins ever guessed.
Between the indiscretions of Wood, Allan and Nash, observers may wonder if some of Hipkins’ ministers — former or current — have ever actually read the Cabinet Manual. Wags have suggested that although the government says it has a copy it’s probably an uncatalogued book in the Beehive basement that would take even a dedicated librarian several hours’ fossicking to find.
All of this rebounds directly on Hipkins’ ability to manage his ministers. When he became Prime Minister in late January, the mainstream media promoted him — however preposterously — as a new broom who was politically astute and had a ruthless streak. They thrilled to images of him turning up to a media interview in Napier wearing wraparound sunglasses, cap and hoodie as evidence he was a working-class lad from the Hutt Valley with a bit of mongrel in him.
Who would guess from media coverage that Prime Minister Chris Hipkins is the very same Chris Hipkins who was Jacinda Ardern’s lieutenant for five years and that he is just as weak-willed and erratic in disciplining his ministers as she was? It took him far too long to demote Nash and he took no action over Kiri Allan breaching the Cabinet Manual — and the Radio New Zealand Act 1995 — after her ill-judged comments in April at an RNZ farewell for her partner, Mani Dunlop.
On Monday, journalist Martyn Bradbury predicted on his Working Group podcast that another major scandal over a conflict of interest connected to the government was about to break. Who would be at all surprised if Michael Wood’s departure wasn’t the one Bradbury was referring to and there are yet more scandals to come?
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist. This article was originally published by ThePlatform.kiwi and is published here with kind permission.
Journalists have not closely investigated this alleged breach of the Cabinet Manual. Michael Wood, however, was not so lucky. Last Friday, he had to endure the humiliation of AM host Ryan Bridge asking him for an explanation of his tardiness in selling his Auckland Airport shares — with National’s Erica Stanford sitting beside him trying to look magnanimous but barely able to suppress her glee.
Wood did himself no favours, revealing just how cavalier he has been about conflicts of interest — as indeed this week’s revelations about further undisclosed shareholdings have confirmed.
He told Bridge that not getting around to selling the shares was like forgetting to do a household task such as “replacing an outdoor lightbulb”. In fact, he had told Jacinda Ardern in March 2021 he had sold the shares — which, to extend his analogy, is like telling his wife he had fixed the light when he knew he hadn’t.
Hipkins said on Wednesday that he had asked Wood, when he stood him down as Transport Minister a fortnight ago, if there was any other relevant information he should know about. Wood had told him there was not. Clearly, there were more outdoor lightbulbs to be fixed than Hipkins ever guessed.
Between the indiscretions of Wood, Allan and Nash, observers may wonder if some of Hipkins’ ministers — former or current — have ever actually read the Cabinet Manual. Wags have suggested that although the government says it has a copy it’s probably an uncatalogued book in the Beehive basement that would take even a dedicated librarian several hours’ fossicking to find.
All of this rebounds directly on Hipkins’ ability to manage his ministers. When he became Prime Minister in late January, the mainstream media promoted him — however preposterously — as a new broom who was politically astute and had a ruthless streak. They thrilled to images of him turning up to a media interview in Napier wearing wraparound sunglasses, cap and hoodie as evidence he was a working-class lad from the Hutt Valley with a bit of mongrel in him.
Who would guess from media coverage that Prime Minister Chris Hipkins is the very same Chris Hipkins who was Jacinda Ardern’s lieutenant for five years and that he is just as weak-willed and erratic in disciplining his ministers as she was? It took him far too long to demote Nash and he took no action over Kiri Allan breaching the Cabinet Manual — and the Radio New Zealand Act 1995 — after her ill-judged comments in April at an RNZ farewell for her partner, Mani Dunlop.
On Monday, journalist Martyn Bradbury predicted on his Working Group podcast that another major scandal over a conflict of interest connected to the government was about to break. Who would be at all surprised if Michael Wood’s departure wasn’t the one Bradbury was referring to and there are yet more scandals to come?
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist. This article was originally published by ThePlatform.kiwi and is published here with kind permission.
5 comments:
The whole government is in conflict with the Country.
I’m toying with the idea of voting Hipkins back in , just so I can see him downtrodden and dejected as the dross he selects as cabinet ministers let him down again and again.
Now he feels what we feel everyday!
Kakistocracy.
Maybe, just maybe if, like Mahuta and Allen, Nash and Wood had been maori (or claimed to be) then they like Mahuta and Allen would still be there?
It is a point to ponder how their indiscretions were frankly, pretty much ignored by media and parliament.....
The naivety of politicians amazes me (and not just in NZ). It possibly relates to the relative youthfulness cf years ago. They seem to have no memory of scandals of the past, or ability to relate one situation to an analogous other. They seem to have negligible knowledge of the past. Makes for litle faith in their political actions generally.
(In UK Boris seemed unaware of the basics of the Profumo deaprture despite it being a hugely publicised event)
Quite simply, they are now all toast, and deservedly so. In times gone by, rather than defeat, it would be the gallows beckoning.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.