The NZ First Foundation
Guyon Espiner reports:
A mysterious foundation that loans money to New Zealand First is under scrutiny, with a university law professor saying although it’s lawful, it fails to provide the transparency voters need in a democracy.
Records show New Zealand First has disclosed three loans from the New Zealand First Foundation. In 2017, it received $73,000. Then in 2018, it received a separate loan of $76,622, in what the Electoral Commission says was a loan executed to “replace the first loan”. In 2019, it received another loan for $44,923.
NZ First are using a loophole to hide their donors.
If you donate to an external organisation that then donates to a political party, then the law requires you to name the ultimate donors who supplied the money.
But the law on;y applies to donations, not loans. So what NZ First has set up is that its donors give money to the NZ First Foundation, and the Foundation loans money to NZ First, meaning no disclosure.
New Zealand First’s party secretary, Liz Witehira, said she knew nothing about it.
“I don’t know and I don’t need to know,” Mrs Witehira told RNZ.
“I understand there was a loan prior to my time but I didn’t have anything to do with it. I have not been involved in any loans since I have become the secretary general.”
Under electoral law, only the party secretary can enter into a loan on behalf of a political party.
Electoral Commission records show Mrs Witehira signed an Electoral Commission document – Return of Party Loan Exceeding $30,000 – on 26 April.
That document says New Zealand First received a loan of $44,923 from the New Zealand First Foundation on 24 April 2019.RNZ asked Mrs Witehira for an explanation and she responded by text: “I haven’t signed any loans. Get your facts right.”
After being provided a copy of the Return of Party Loan document with her signature on it, she said, “There’s nothing further to explain. One entity provided a loan to another entity. It was documented, declared and repaid.”
So the party secretary lied.
The only information known about the foundation is the names and addresses of the two men who are trustees. They are Brian Henry, who acts as a lawyer for the New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, and Doug Woolerton, a former New Zealand First MP.
When contacted by RNZ, Mr Henry said, “There is nothing to talk about. That’s the end of the conversation,” and hung up.
As well as his role as a trustee for the New Zealand First Foundation which loans money to the party, Henry is also the “judicial officer” for New Zealand First. The position means Mr Henry gives legal advice to the board of the party, serves as a member of the constitution committee and chairs the disputes committee.
Mr Woolerton left Parliament in 2008 and now runs a lobbying firm. His company is called The Lobbyist and its website offers media strategies, services in “drafting changes for legislation” and “personal introductions” where appropriate.
So businesses donate money to a foundation run by Winston’s lawyer and a former MP who is now a lobbyist who says he can draft changes for legislation and do introductions.
Mr Woolerton said RNZ should contact National and Labour about their funding because they used similar structures.
Labour said it didn’t have any arrangements similar to the New Zealand First Foundation and didn’t take loans to fund the party.
National said it had an entity called the National Foundation which gathers money for the party. A spokesperson said it didn’t loan the party money and all donations to the National Foundation were treated as donations to the National Party and the ultimate source of funding was disclosed in its return.
So Woolerton is wrong. Only NZ First operate in such a way to hide the ultimate donors.
Prof Geddis believes that given the role of New Zealand First in government it was particularly important to know where the party funding came from.
“We want to know that so that we can then trace any public decisions that this party and its ministers are making back through and see, is it benefiting people who’ve helped fund them? And that’s a fundamental question in any democracy.”
If this was National, Labour and Greens would be calling for law changes and for an investigation. But as it is the party keeping them in power, they’ll look the other way.