NZ First's anonymous donation

So, NZ First got an anonymous donation of up to $100,000 in December which party president Dail Jones said yesterday went towards them paying back the $158,000 they overspent in the 2005 elections.

Owen Glenn said in December he'd given money to other political parties.. no problems there.

Winston Peters today says Glenn has never given money to his party.

So, does he know who the anonymous donor was or not? How can he be so sure it wasn't Glenn?

Or does he know Glenn well enough to know for sure?... in which case, do personal relationships this close help with one's chances of getting (honorary) diplomatic postings?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10493654

R

There's all sorts of levels to this Owen Glenn stuff.

Firstly - what is an "anonymous" donation? Presumedly it's when the donator wants to remain anonymous - even if they tell a party member they are going to do it then it should still remain anonymous.
I'm a little amazed that some of the same people who railed against the EFA and said people should be able to spend/donate as much as they want without disclosure, are now demanding that Owen Glenn tell everyone who he donated too.


As to whether or not his donations "bought" him the New Years honour - how would you know? This is a guy who has given $7.5million to our business school and undertakes a fair chunk of charitable work around the world - seemed to me to be sort of person we currently give honours too (regardless of whether you think we give them out too easily, he wasn't that different to others). So to claim he bought it without direct evidence that he wouldn't have received it otherwise seems like a pretty nasty smear. Unfortunately there is a matter of appearances - but again, should he have been DENIED an honour simply because he donated to the party currently in power (amongst others).

I agree, and this sort of charity work should be encouraged.

On the anonymous point though - a view could be: once you know who a donor is, how can it be recorded or commented that it is anonymous? It can't IMO.

Peter's categorically stated that Glenn didn't give the money. But it was anonymous, so how can he know? What does anonymous mean? If he does know then he is indicating that his relationship with Glenn is strong enough to be trusted with the info.

Peter's is a sifty one at the best of times - as usual he'll just berate some jounro and his own party president and deny deny deny without giving any satisfactory explanation (as per his refusal to pay back the $158,000).

R

The question for me around the anonymous stuff is how is it defined? Is a donation anonymous because the donator doesn't want it to be known about (in which case even if Peters knows, it's not his right to break the anonymity) or does it have to be anonymous to the party as well? This will be defined in the EFA I imagine.

If I gave the same % of my total wealth to the university as Glenn gave, I would not get the same award

Winston Peters... today...

I think he's losing his marbles. I met him many years ago, at Hotel De Bretts, and he was acting a bit senile back then, but his performance in the press conference was hilarious.

R

Oh yeah... It seems my crystal ball was bang on.

R

perfectly presented for his target market

if frequent bars in certain towns you'll eventually meet Winston its a given

this whole issue is very boring

buying honours- fuck me that would be shocking now wouldn't it... what political party would allow such a thing

answer - all of them