The slowly burning fuse

**Artemis** · 05-03-2012, 03:03 AM

Most of you will be aware that Kim Dotcom was arrested in New Zealand. Charmingly they timed the arrest to happen during his birthday, the police knew this full well but American federal agents just love their shock and awe so the raid was timed that way. There has however been a continuing political wrangle over extradition of Kim Dotcom to the U.S. and whether he was even arrested legally in the first place, time will tell, but in the midst of the ongoing court battles our government (New Zealand) has become embroiled as well).

A bit of background for you. New Zealand has an MMP (Mixed Member Proportional) system of Government, so there isn't just one ruling party, and to gain a majority coalitions between parties are formed. This makes for a wider view point and a more representational parliament (in theory at least). One of the ruling National parties coalition partner's, the Act party's leader, is deeply embroiled in a scandal over donations from Kim Dotcom and it just will not go away.
It seems back when he was trying to become mayor of the new supercity of Auckland (Auckland used to have 6 separate mayoralties - a silly bureaucracy gone mad) he ultimately failed in his bid, but during this bid he met with Kim Dotcom who wished to donate $50,000 to the campaign (a large amount here) John Banks the leader of the Act party said break the donation into two $25,000 cheques which he then wrote down on his campaign forms as anonymous donations.

It has since come out that he knew full well where the money came from, and that it wasn't an anonymous donation at all, his current tack is that he took legal advice that the donations should be described as anonymous.

It also transpires that John Banks interceded on Kim Dotcom's behalf with Maurice Williamson the Minister for Land to see if Kim Dotcom, a foreign national without permanent resident status could purchase a $30million villa in Coatesville against government regulations.

Out of this whole saga at the moment it looks like to ministers of parliament maybe stood down from their posts within the next two weeks, and in all probability with how much skullduggery John Banks has done over the donations scandal he may not be a member of parliament much longer either.

**mjmacky** · 05-03-2012, 03:11 AM

So what's supposed to be the takeaway from this? I kept phasing out during the parts about NZ politics.

**Artemis** · 05-03-2012, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by mjmacky

So what's supposed to be the takeaway from this? I kept phasing out during the parts about NZ politics.

So since I'm not an American I should give the drawing room a miss since the only topic up for discussion is American politics, (bar the London riots) or are you simply xenophobic?

**ckrit** · 05-03-2012, 08:10 AM

I think mary means that there appears to be a red thread through this we're just not seeing.

1. Kim Dotcom's arrest was an arsehole move, and might not even be legal.
2. Someone accepted money from Kim Dotcom, hid the fact, and may be ousted from power because of it.

I'm assuming that when the donations were accepted, Dotcom's business was more or less still seen as legit, if bordering on the shady. So it seems strange that it'd be a big scandal-

Was the same dewd who accepted the donations and helped Dotcom in favour of the arrest? And where does the public stand on the megaupload issue? Is the government at large in favour of it?

Something to compare with: In Sweden, a majority of the public either engages in piracy or doesn't really care that much about the legality of it. Whereas the government (and parliament) considers it a bad bad thing. Is there a similar split over megaupload in NZ?

**Artemis** · 05-03-2012, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by ckrit

I think mary means that there appears to be a red thread through this we're just not seeing.

1. Kim Dotcom's arrest was an areshole move, and might not even be legal.
2. Someone accepted money from Kim Dotcom, hid the fact, and may be ousted from power because of it.

I'm assuming that when the donations were accepted, Dotcom's business was more or less still seen as legit, if bordering on the shady. So it seems strange that it'd be a big scandal-

Was the same dewd who accepted the donations and helped Dotcom in favour of the arrest? And where does the public stand on the megaupload issue? Is the government at large in favour of it?

Something to compare with: In Sweden, a majority either engages in piracy or doesn't really care that much about the legality of it. Whereas the government considers it a bad bad thing. Is there a similar split over megaupload in NZ?

The United States has tried to 'advise' New Zealand to tighten it's copyright laws still further from where they are at present, even threatening darkly about withholding an FTA agreement which is on the horizon in an effort to tighten laws here.The government really shuffles it's feet and goes that is really terrible but has other fish to fry and does not do much about it. The majority of the populace doesn't care or does engage in piracy.

The point of the thread was that the arrest of Kim Dotcom has caused far reaching consequences in New Zealand politically, what may have been an acceptable donation before now suddenly isn't, that plus the fact that the politician concern lied about the donation and said it was an anonymous one when he knew the source but was told to keep it anonymous 'on legal advice' (bullshit).

The dewd who accepted the donations (John Banks) is leader of the Act party a hard right wing party in favor of strong sentencing laws and prison terms amongst other ultra-conservative agenda's so would have been probably cringing at the arrest considering his involvement.

The big scandal is not so much Kim Dotcom himself, although it is his arrest which has highlighted this, the scandal is that John Banks accepted donations from Kim Dotcom, lied about the source, then went on to intercede on his behalf with another government minister to purchase a property outside of the law. This smacks of collusion and this is actually what the scandal is all about.

**ckrit** · 05-03-2012, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by Artemis

The dewd who accepted the donations (John Banks) is leader of the Act party a hard right wing party in favor of strong sentencing laws and prison terms amongst other ultra-conservative agenda's so would have been probably cringing at the arrest considering his involvement.

Now, I like irony and things like irony, so this part especially I can appreciate

Other than that, it's a sad situation where a government is pressured into and/or willing to go against the public's interests. I think the word is undemocratic. And the US is a driving force behind it (in Sweden too, for that matter). Shocker

**mjmacky** · 05-03-2012, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Artemis

Originally Posted by mjmacky

So what's supposed to be the takeaway from this? I kept phasing out during the parts about NZ politics.

So since I'm not an American I should give the drawing room a miss since the only topic up for discussion is American politics, (bar the London riots) or are you simply xenophobic?

Hey now, I've started plenty of universally-themed threads in the Drawering Room.

I was just getting at what's so special about this Banks character. I'm just saying pictures with funny captions or something could help, aren't there millions of corrupt politicians? Does he mean something to you personally? Did he do some major cunt like thing and now he's getting fucked by due diligence? I mean, there has to be something that struck a chord with you to create this thread.

Me not being into NZ politics, I just don't get it.

banks2012.jpg