0 The Herald gets defiant

The NZ Herald has faced accusations of political bias many times before. Labour List MP Jill Pettis, voted out by the good folk of Whanganui in 2005, described Granny Herald in 2007 as "a Tory rag". Others complain at the paper's left-wing leanings.

This week, it is Labour and its supporters crying "foul". And that has prompted the Herald to tell its side of the story. In ad editorial headed Cries of bias will not stop reporting the Herald's response begins thus:

It is common in election years for political parties under pressure to attempt to shoot the messenger. In 2005, the Herald was stridently criticised and accused of bias by National supporters for our reportage of Dr Don Brash and the Exclusive Brethren. In 2008 it was the turn of Winston Peters and his New Zealand First people to call for resignations of the editor and political editor for the inconvenient revelation of funding from millionaire Owen Glenn, despite his "No" sign. Last election it was National partisans again, livid at the Herald on Sunday and Herald for John Key and John Banks talking openly before a microphone accidentally left on their "cup of tea" table in a cafe.
This year it is the turn of Labour and its leader, David Cunliffe, incensed at reporting on the donations to the party and its MPs by the controversial Chinese migrant Donghua Liu -- and that party's connections to him.

Mr Cunliffe is considering unspecified legal options against the Herald. Party supporters have weighed in with accusations of political bias and complicated right-wing conspiracies.
The noise obscures the validity of the Herald's reporting. Investigations editor Jared Savage began his reports in March on Donghua Liu and the circumstances of his being granted citizenship. The focus then was on Liu's donations to National after his citizenship was approved by a National minister against official advice. Savage then revealed Liu had been charged with domestic violence, followed by the revelation that National's Maurice Williamson intervened in Liu's case by contacting the police -- which led to Williamson's resignation as minister and criticism from some in National of the Herald's story.
Savage then learned Liu had made donations to Labour as well in 2007, the party claiming no record of such funding. Next we revealed Mr Cunliffe, a day after denying any advocacy for Liu during his residency application, had, in fact, sent a letter to the Immigration Service outlining Liu's investment intentions and giving them a hurry-up in making a decision.
This was all very inconvenient for National and then Labour but pertinent to the public interest in an election year.

Maurice Williamson is probably wishing these days he had never heard of Donghua Liu. But so is former Labour Party Minister Rick Barker. Interesting, Mr Barker seems to be recovering his memory with regard to the Chinese businessman; we'll have more on that later today.

But the Herald is right; the public interest is of more importance than the reputation of MP's who may or may not have acted according to Hoyle.

The leader writer concludes:

At the weekend, the Herald on Sunday reported from a signed statement by Liu in which he appeared to claim he spent $100,000 on wine at a Labour fundraiser and $50,000-$60,000 hosting former Labour MP Rick Barker in China. The paper verified the document was from Liu and put its claims to Mr Cunliffe and the Labour Party.
On Wednesday, Liu provided the Herald with another statement, after being pressed for more detail, in which he corrected his previous implication that $100,000 was paid for a bottle of wine and limited his total spend on Labour and its MPs when it was in power to "close to $100,000".
The Herald immediately published his clarification, with prominence on our website, where it remains, and amended the Herald on Sunday story online. The Sunday paper will publish a clarification this weekend.
Liu's mis-statement, however, has been grasped as proof of Herald complicity in a plot against Labour. The claim is risible, across the range of political coverage but also explicitly over the Herald's investigation of National and Labour and their damaging cosiness with Donghua Liu.
We regret having reported inflated and conflated dollar figures.
The core issue remains, however: At a minimum, removing Mr Barker's China trip and a donation to a rowing club the MP's daughter belonged to, Labour faces Liu's claim that he made $38,000 in donations to the party and anonymously through MPs.
We make no apology for seeking the truth behind political parties' donations and possible cronyism. Inevitably, that hits raw nerves in election year.

The Herald did the right thing by publishing Donghua Liu's amended statement as soon as it was received. And Mr Liu is standing by his statement that he donated to the Labour Party.

As the Herald notes, around $38,000 remains unaccounted for and undeclared. That's almost twice as much as National declared having received from Mr Liu. Given the political capital Labour tried to generate from the donation declared by National, the possibility that its own house may not be in order is an obvious issue.

As we noted above, the public interest demands that the Herald publish information it receives on any politicians or parties which may have done something dodgy. New Zealand faces an important decision in twelve weeks' time, and voters need to be informed of anything which may be relevant to the way they cast their votes.

On this occasion it is the Labour Party and its cheerleaders feeling aggrieved. Doubtless at some point the boot will be on the other foot. But that's why we have a free press, which follows the old maxim to "publish and be damned". 

Instead of threatening Mr Liu and the Herald with legal action, David Cunliffe, Moira Coatsworth and Tim Barnett should go digging , and find where Mr Liu's money went.

0 The Liu/Labour saga deepens

Donghua Liu's partner Juan Zhang and Rick Barker at a Labour fundraising auction in 2007. (NZ Herald photo)

The links between Chinese businessman Donghua Liu and the Labour Party are becoming more obvious; the Herald reports:

A Labour Cabinet Minister presented a bottle of wine to the partner of businessman Donghua Liu at a fundraiser for the party.
The Herald has obtained a photograph of Rick Barker with Juan Zhang, who has two children with Liu, after he won an auction for the bottle at an Auckland restaurant in June 2007.
It is not known how much Liu paid for the wine - believed to be signed by then-Prime Minister Helen Clark - and Mr Barker said he presented auction prizes several times at Labour fundraisers.
He was the Minister for Internal Affairs at the time, and visited Liu in his hometown of Chongqing in China earlier that year, although he did not know Liu was a donor to Labour.
Two sources have told the Herald that Liu paid $15,000 at an auction in 2007 for a book signed by Helen Clark.
Labour general secretary Tim Barnett said a check of the party's records showed no donation from Liu under his name.

However, he said it was possible he made donations at the local electorate level and had not been recorded by the party's central administration.
The Labour Party has previously accused the Government of making "cash for access" deals with Donghua Liu, who received citizenship after lobbying from National minister Maurice Williamson and whose hotel was later opened by Prime Minister John Key.

So now, even though Labour cannot find any record of even ONE donation from Mr Liu, there is evidence from more than one source that the Chinese businessman made at least two donations to Labour in 2007. This was AFTER he had been approved for NZ residence by Damien O'Connor.

Rick Barker appears to be the common denominator here, as he was with the other Mr Liu; Dover Samuels' mate Bill Liu, about whom we have commented frequently. The Herald story continues to detail Mr Barker's involvement:

Mr Barker, now a regional councillor in Hawkes Bay, said he was a guest of Liu at the dinner in Chongqing and visited his cement company while on holiday in China. But he had not known Liu was a Labour donor and he was not in China on official business as a minister.
"I went to China to catch up with some friends of mine, see some sights ... and I made a side trip to Chongqing - I had not been to the city before.
"I was in the city a short time. Mr Liu showed me his business and that night, I attended a dinner which seemed to be a dinner he had put on for all his staff."
Mr Barker could not remember how he came to be invited to visit Liu in Chongqing.
He said it was "probable" he also had dinner with Liu in New Zealand.
"I am trying to recall events of over seven years ago, so it's a little challenging.
"But it can't have been a regular event, because if it was I would recall that. In fact, my contact with Liu fell away quite quickly."
At the time of the donation and dinner with Mr Barker, Liu had permanent residency - granted in 2005 by Labour's Associate Immigration Minister, Damien O'Connor, against official advice - but was not yet a New Zealand citizen.

We've heard some numbers bandied around for the price paid for the bottle of wine shown above. The figure of $100,000 has been mentioned by several sources. If that is indeed accurate it is a serious donation, and even an organisation as inept as the Labour Party would have some record of it, you would think.

Mr Barker's "side-trip" to Chongqing is also interesting. We've heard media reports that Chongqing was 1800km from where Mr Barker was holidaying in China; almost the distance from Auckland to Sydney. That's a long way to travel to visit a cement factory and have dinner with a casual contact. It puts Judith Collins' 30km "side-trip" to Oravida for a glass of milk into perspective!

But what is really interesting here is the political background against which these events took place. Labour introduced the insidious Electoral Finance Bill in July 2007, the month after Donghua Liu made a substantial donation to the party at a fundraising dinner. Wikipedia reports this of the Bill:

 

The Electoral Finance Act 2007 was a controversial^[2][3] act in New Zealand. The Electoral Finance Bill was introduced by the Fifth Labour Government partly in response to the 2005 New Zealand election funding controversy, in particular "third-party" campaigns.
The proponents of the bill generally held that it was required to prevent wealthy private parties from "buying elections" anonymously via advertising campaigns or other financially costly lobbying, while the opponents considered it a serious restriction of civil liberties, and further considered that spending private money on political campaigning was a democratic right.

It is already apparent that Donghua Liu made two donations to the Labour Party via items purchased at fundraising auctions. There seems to be no dispute over the value of the first donation; $15,000 for a book signed by Helen Clark. At the time that donation was made, the threshold for donations requiring declaration was $10,000. On that basis, it can be reasonably alleged that Labour, whether at branch or national level has broken the law. If the second donation was also over the threshold, that's two breaches; at a time when Labour was about to introduce a draconian law to restrict political donations.

This looks very bad for the Labour Party, and must be investigated. Labour has railed against National receiving a donation from Donghua Liu (which WAS properly declared), but is Labour's own house in order? It would appear not.

David Cunliffe will continue to distance himself from this scandal, but he cannot do that. He was a senior member of the party's caucus at the time, and now that he is party leader, the buck stops with him. He cannot simply move on as though nothing has happened. He, party general secretary Tim Barnett and president Moira Coatsworth need to provide answers as to whether Labour has broken the law.

But the consequences for Labour do not end there. Labour and Green MP's are fond of saying that certain things don't meet the "sniff test", a phrase that was thrown around with some considerable abandon with regard to Judith Collins.

Having accused Mrs Collins of corruption, and having accused National of accepting cash for access from Mr Liu, Labour now faces a sniff test of its own. And the stench of hypocrisy is overwhelming.