25 March
06 Lowering
the Bar Printer
friendly version (PDF) View >>>
When
governments become embroiled in scandal, there comes a point
where the confidence of the public, begins to wane. If the
scandals continue, a “tipping point” approaches whereby
voters begin to question the capability of an administration
to govern effectively.
With
the paper-thin majority that Labour has cobbled together by
relying on unlikely political bedfellows, the potential for
government collapse has never been higher. That instability is
being further exacerbated by a litany of scandal that is fast
becoming the hallmark of this administration, with eleven
Government Ministers having resigned, been sacked or stood
down for lies,
forgery, misrepresentation, disloyalty, abuse of power,
assault and drunkenness:
On
the 28th of June 2000, following the launching of a
Police investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct by
Dover Samuels, the Prime Minster stepped in and sacked him
stating that it was impossible for him to be effective in his
ministerial role as “allegations, controversy and public
debate swirl around him".
On
the 31st of October 2000, Ruth Dyson resigned from
Cabinet on drunk driving charges, having been caught with a
blood alcohol level that was almost twice the legal limit.
On
the 23rd of February 2001, Marian Hobbs and
Phillida Bunkle were forced to resign as Registrar of Electors
and the Auditor General undertook investigations into their
enrolment status and accommodation allowances.
On
the 23rd of July 2003, Harry Duynhoven was stood
down while the Government passed a legislation to prevent the
MP, who had broken the electoral act law by renewing his Dutch
citizenship, from having to resign from Parliament.
On
the 20th of February 2004, Lianne Dalziel resigned
from Cabinet after admitting that she had lied regarding a
controversial immigration case.
On
30th of April 2004, Tariana Turia resigned from
Cabinet and quit Parliament over disagreements regarding
Labour’s controversial foreshore and seabed legislation.
On
the 3rd of November 2004, John Tamihere resigned
from Cabinet following investigations by a Wellington QC and
the Serious Fraud Office over controversial claims of
irregular golden handshakes.
On
the 16th of May 2005, David Benson-Pope was stood
down, while police investigated historic allegations of
assault against students. A prima facie case was established,
but the police decided against prosecution.
On
the 20th of September 2005, the Prime Minister
ordered an investigation into allegations that Philip Field
had abused his power in a visa application case. She later
removed all of his ministerial responsibilities.
On
the 20th of March 2006, David Parker resigned as
Attorney General over revelations that he had filed false
company returns. The next day he resigned from his
other ministerial posts following an announcement by the
Companies Office that an investigation into the case was being
launched.
Meanwhile,
as the scandal unfolded, the Prime Minister tried to claim
that filing false company returns was just a minor matter even
though it is punishable by up to five years imprisonment. That
view is
now symbolic of moral gulf that has emerged between the Prime
Minister and her citizens over the basic values of right and
wrong.
This
gulf, caused by Helen Clark’s ruthless determination to hold
onto power at all costs, first became apparent during the
“Paintergate” scandal: following a news story in April
2002, alleging that Helen Clark had passed off as her own work
a painting that she didn’t paint, the Prime Minister
vigorously denied any wrongdoing. She claimed that she could
see nothing wrong with signing and selling a painting that she
didn’t paint.
A
Police investigation that was subsequently undertaken, found
that a prima facie case against the Prime Minister did exist,
but the Police, in their wisdom, decided that it was not in
the public interest to prosecute.
A
second case in which the view of the Prime Minister was even
more at odds with that of the general public was with regard
to the “Speeding-gate” scandal: during a high speed dash,
on the 17th of July 2004, when the Prime
Minister’s motorcade travelled at speeds of up to 172km per
hour to get her to a rugby game on time, the public felt that
her claim, that she was not aware that her vehicle was
travelling at such excessive speeds, was simply not credible.
Further,
when the Police brought charges against a driver and
accompanying police officers, it was widely felt that she was
making them take the rap for something that she should have
taken responsibility for.
A
more recent scandal, which has the Prime Minister’s
fingerprints all over it, is the illegal spending of $447,000
of taxpayers’ money on Labour’s election pledge card.
After an Electoral Commission inquiry into the case, and a
Police investigation, the Labour
Party has escaped prosecution, in spite of the Police finding
there was a prima facie case to answer. With this being the
third prima facie case against the Government, which the
Police have decided not to pursue, there is now a growing
perception that this Labour Government is above the law.
This perception has, of
course, been reinforced by the Minister of Conservation’s
highly controversial decision to over-turn a court ruling,
thereby breaching the historic separation of powers on which
our Westminster democratic system of government is based.
Is it any wonder that there
are a growing number of New Zealanders who are not only losing
confidence in Labour’s ability to govern, but are becoming
increasingly concerned about the appalling example that they
are setting for our young people?
Your comments and contributions are welcome. Send your comments here
>>>.
Opinions expressed are those of the contributors, and do not
necessarily reflect those of the editorial staff.