0 "Technically legal" but "not right"

The Greens are upset that people are prepared to pay money to dine with the most popular Prime Minister in New Zealand's history. Whilst we all know that the Greens are pushing hard for taxpayer funding of political parties, the Green-eyed monster is also at work here; the Greens are openly jealous of John Key's popularity, and National's ability to fundraise.

Even Russel Norman concedes that fundraising dinners break no rules. He was quoted in the Dom-Post yesterday as saying they were "technically legal". Forget the word "technically" Dr Norman; dinners such as that run by Chris Parkin are 100% legal, and the money raised and donated to the party has been declared as required by law; end of story.

But Dr Norman himself doesn't have to look far for something that, whilst it may have been "technically legal" certainly stretched the bounds of right and wrong. Bear with us as we tell this little story.

It all began with the death of Green Party co-leader Rod Donald. We suspect that Mr Donald would have been horrified with what followed his passing.

In June 2006, the Greens elected Russel Norman as co-leader, by-passing Nandor Tanczos, the party's most senior male MP. 

Mr Tanczos was clearly disappointed by his rejection. At the beginning of election year 2008 rumours began to surface about the likelihood he would retire. His decision was confirmed in this presser on 17 January 2008. There was no mention of a successor.

And that's where the fun began; the "technically legal" but "not right" fun. It was assumed that Russel Norman would saunter into Parliament, but there was one slight problem; he was not the next MP on the Green Party list. Mike Ward and Catherine Delahunty had been ranked ahead of him in 2005.

Mike Ward, to his eternal credit, wasn't playing the game. So the Greens had to paper over the cracks that were appearing; check out this story from 3News in April 2008:

One of parliament's more colourful MPs is still refusing to say exactly when he will walk away from politics, despite a bill in his name gaining the traction it needs to become law.

Green MP Nandor Tanczos announced earlier this year that he's to quit politics, but wants to see his Waste Minimisation Bill passed first.

That is now likely to happen later this year after it came back from a select committee with the support of National and Labour.

His resignation would create an opening for the party's co-leader to enter parliament - but Mr Tanczos is not committing to a date.

With all respect to Mr Tanczos who we believe to be a principled man, despite a very different worldview to ours, we don't buy that excuse. The reason that his departure was delayed was the unholy bun-fight going on for his seat in the House; before it had even been vacated!

The the story changed again; check out this story from the Otago Daily Times of 22 May 2008:

Green MP Nandor Tanczos will stay in Parliament until the election after his attempts to let co-leader Russel Norman take his seat ran aground. Mr Tanczos is retiring from Parliament at the election and had hoped to go earlier.
He wanted Dr Norman to take his seat but for that to happen, the next two people on the party's list had to step aside to let Dr Norman through.
Candidate Catherine Delahunty was prepared to, but former Green MP Mike Ward was not.
A seat in Parliament would have helped lift Dr Norman's profile going into the election campaign and also given the party access to more resources in the lead-up to the election. 

We've highlighted that last sentence, because this is what this story is all about. Getting Dr Norman into Parliament BEFORE the House rose for the election would have allowed him to campaign for the Greens on the public dime, using his access to taxpayer-funded travel and accommodation. But Mike Ward stood in his way wanting to claim the seat in Parliament that was rightfully his according to the rules by which the Greens ranked their Party List. 

It was all too good to last. The Herald reported on 4 June 2008:

The Green Party member who refused to step aside so his party's co-leader could become an MP has backed down.
Russel Norman will now enter Parliament before the election after the surprise about-turn by party member Mike Ward, who had previously blocked Mr Norman's bid to replace Nandor Tanczos.
Mr Ward's change of mind comes after the party said Mr Tanczos would stay until the election because Mr Ward was refusing to cede his list ranking.
The party had planned that Mr Tanczos would quit Parliament and Mr Norman would take his place by leapfrogging Mr Ward on the party list.
"While there are plenty of people who support my stand, it seems to me if Nandor would rather not be there, then Russel would probably be better off in his place," Mr Ward said.
"I just decided that it was time to just move aside."

One can only wonder what pressure was brought on Mike Ward between 22 May and 4 June 2008 to make him change his mind. But one thing is clear; the Green Party's principles went out the window in the quest for power at all costs.

DPF called it as he saw it. In a post entitled The fix is in he blogged:

Mike Ward has succumbed to the pressure and has agreed to refuse his place in Parliament so Russel Norman can use taxpayer funded resources to campaign.
I blogged a couple of weeks ago that the Greens were trying to do two things – both of which work sit badly with me. The first is having MPs resign before for their term in Parliament is up, purely for tactical partisan reasons. You rejuvenate a party at elections, not between them.
The second is changing the order of the list post election. The Greens put a lot of stress on the fact their members rank the list, yet they have ignored the will of their members who ranked the 2005 party list – the only one which the public have had a chance to vote on with their party vote.
There is no way one can stop an MP resigning early, but one could have a simple law change to remove the ability for a list candidate to refuse to become an MP. They could still be elected and then resign, but that extra step might stop them from doing private deals to change the effective order of a list post-election.

DPF is absolutely right to call this a "fix". The Green Party rulebook, principles and statement of values went out the window for a chance to rort the taxpayer of a few more dollars to promote the party. Mike Ward became the sacrificial lamb.

You're not ever likely to see a complete rehash of this sad episode in the mainstream media. The irony is, of course, that it took us five minutes on Google to compile the links referred to above. We are by no means "decent journalists,trained and skilled"; we're just a keyboard warrior who is sick of Dr Norman's sanctimony when there is a very large skeleton in his own closet.

So next time you hear Dr Norman say that something is "technically legal" but that it is "not right", remind him via whatever medium you have access to that he himself is far from squeaky clean, and that his own entry to Parliament was essentially on the back of a rort. 

The Greens may claim to be the party of principle, but when there's a bag of Other People's Money to be grabbed, principles disappear very quickly, and the Greens are exposed as being as venal and unprincipled as any of the parties they criticise.

0 We can't help but wonder...

Kim Dotcom is doing a sales pitch to the Mana Party today. After that the party faithful will vote on whether to move forward into some sort of unprincipled alliance with Dotcom and his Internet party which as yet has no candidates, no policy and no hope.

So we can't help but wonder; laying aside the issue of Dotcom's wealth, his poor treatment of staff, and the fact that he's facing criminal charges in the USA, will Mana embrace him. And we also can't help but wonder how the likes of Annette Sykes, Sue Bradford, Missy Harrison, Angeline Greensill, Val Irwin and Sharon Stevens, all Mana candidates in 2011 will feel about jumping into political bed with a man who is alleged to have run this website:

Is the Mana Party a party of principle, or a party of convenience provided the price is right? It's judgment day folks.