The honourable member

Finance Minister Bill English has done the honourable thing in removing doubts about his ministerial housing allowance.

He has elected not to take up any housing allowance; has received no housing allowance since July 28 when he paid back the difference between the allowance paid to ministers and other MPs; and has repaid to Ministerial Services all the housing allowance he received since the election.

He also received an opinion from a QC, confirming that changes to his family trust arrangements did not affect his eligibility for the previous ministerial housing allowance.

 He said:

“What I’m announcing today reflects a set of personal decisions I have made about my own situation. It is in no way setting a precedent for others although I make the point here that I believe Parliament does have to think how it can accommodate the families of long-term politicians.

 “At all times my decisions have been driven by my desire to keep my family together and provide them with as much stability as possible. It’s now clear that the system has struggled to deal with my circumstances.

 “This has been an unnecessary distraction. I now want to move on and focus on building our economy and ensuring that New Zealanders have jobs.”

Politics can be a dirty business and Labour were out to get Bill. Regardless of the fact that successive speakers -from Labour and National, have accepted that Dipton is his primary residence as defined by the parliamentary Services – and regardless of what the Auditor General finds, they were going to keep at him.

The perception – and it was only a perception – of wrong doing was a distraction. Bill’s focus, rightly, is on the more important issue of getting the country back on the right economic track. 

This has been expensive, financially and politically, for him. But he’s shown once again that the term honourable member isn’t just a title, it’s a reflection of his behaviour.

That is more than can be said of Jim Anderton who gets a party leader’s allowance though he’s only running a one-man vanity vehicle.

It’s also more than can be said for the Greens, as Kiwkblog  points out:

I look forward to the same level of scrutiny on the Greens renting of houses owned by their superannuation scheme to themselves, to maximise the taxpayer subsidy. They have done exactly what Mallard accused Bill of – using a trust or fund to maximise eligibility. If they owned the properties in their own names, they would only be eligible to claim the interest off any mortgage. get more from parliamentary services by renting flats from their pension fund than they would if they were in their own houses.

Bill has said he’s not setting a precedent but what others do will be measured against his actions. That will be good if it inspires them to act honourably but it will be bad if it makes it puts even more pressure on the family life of MPs.

12 Responses to The honourable member

  1. gravedodger's avatar gravedodger says:

    A very good summary H P but I wont hold my breath on your suggestion of exposing the legal but immoral rorting of our money by Mr Anderton over his farcical claim to be leading a party that he has said wont contest the next election and his call for progressive party members to transfer to labour and seek positions there. There is also the clear use of the same rules that Mr English worked under by the oh so transparent green party to maximise their superannuation fund that directly benefits them personally. The inadequacy of the effectiveness of the mainstream media in exposing these matters is mind boggling, they seem only to be able to reproduce attack points supplied by party machines and perhaps the National party need to ramp up the stakes here.

    Like

  2. pdm's avatar pdm says:

    Audrey Young has a column on this in todays Herald – sorry I don’t know how to link. I emailed her a while ago and suggested her next target should be Anderton.

    Perhaps others could do so as well.

    Like

  3. rayinnz's avatar rayinnz says:

    That is all very well Elle but when did Bill actually spend the majority of his time in Dipton
    I would suggest since that when he left to go to boarding school he has spent his time elsewhere
    It may be his “legal” home and his turangiwaiwai but that is not what normal people call their home
    Home is where they and their family live
    Great that he has “manned up” as I would expect someone of his genuine integrity to do

    Like

  4. murrayg1's avatar murrayg1 says:

    The above comment about the media is correct – but not for these petty political reasons. These things are just deckchairs.
    The real issue isn’t a few thousand dollars, legit or not. That’s just indicative of a collective cognitive dissonance.
    The real story: Mr English has six children. If everyone followed his example, we’d have a trebling of the world’s population. Impossible.There will be the inevitable cries of ‘New Zealand isn’t overpopulated’, and the rest of the predictable ‘don’t think too hard, just worship endless growth’ stuff, but from my perspective we have a finance minister who can’t count.
    We should really be discussing whether religions which demand such nonsense, should be forbidden from doing so.
    The media miss it heaps. When a coal-ship washed ashore at Newcastle, the shock horror was about the ship. There were 58 ships waiting at anchor. One in 59 washing ashore is a statistic. 58 waiting is a conveyor-belt – a classic example of doubling-time – and from a country stricken by drought, fire and dust storms. We don’t report the connection because we don’t want to know.
    Happens all the time.
    Currently we have ‘green shoots’, and ‘an economist believes’. Facts? Nary a one….

    Like

  5. frog's avatar frog says:

    While I agree that Mr English has done the right thing, it has been a long time coming. Previous speakers notwithstanding, it is clear to all that his primary residence is in Wellington. The fact that he does this to keep his family together is laudable, but doesn’t change the fact. The same cannot be said of the Green MPs, so your effort to cast aspersions is misplaced.

    Like

  6. homepaddock's avatar homepaddock says:

    Frog – The Greens receive more public money by renting accommodation from their super fund than they would if they owned their own flats or rented from someone else.

    Like

  7. frog's avatar frog says:

    Not true Homepaddock. Market rates is market rates, no matter who owns the flat. There is no more money involved.

    Like

  8. homepaddock's avatar homepaddock says:

    If they owned the property they could only claimt he interet for mortgage payments.When the pension fund owns it they get the market rent which goes to the pension fund which eventually comes back to them.

    Like

  9. gravedodger's avatar gravedodger says:

    Mr English has ably represented his electorate for many years and his substantial majority is testimony to how this is regarded in Clutha Southland today. As he has served his country and his party at higher levels I applaud his commitment to the stability of his family. History is sprinkled liberally with the tragic breakups that have occurred when such emphasis is not placed in this area. I think your comment on family size, murrayg1, is a cheap shot. Mr English is a catholic and if his religious beliefs or his personal beliefs are a problem for you then by all means pass judgment but for the sake of honesty please widen your attack on all those who for whatever reason wish to enjoy the great love that emanates from this lifestyle choice. Mrs G D and I would have loved to have had more children but after our honest assessment of our financial position and with due regard for our prospects, made a conscious decision to stop at two. I am certain that Mr English and his wife will produce a family, with good values and attitudes. They will in all probability contribute greatly to this country and the world at large. Might I humbly suggest that you direct your energy on the control of family size to the social disaster that the indiscriminate breeding occurring within the unstable relationships, the welfare fueled breeding and the large multisired family lifestyles among the people of say South Auckland.There is a joke doing the rounds at the moment; “what is the most confusing day of the year in our lower socio economic areas” answer ; “fathers day”. Funny it may or may not be but alas there is a significant amount of truth.
    One thing I suspect you and I will agree on, murrayg1, is that the growth of the worlds population will present one of the greatest challenges to our collective future.
    I repeat it was a cheap shot and it demeans you.

    Like

  10. murrayg1's avatar murrayg1 says:

    It seriously wasn’t meant as a cheap shot.
    If my partner (of 30 years) and I could sit down and decide that we could be cheeky and have two, or responsible and have none (we chose cheeky!) and do that 23 years ago, I don’t think that anyone who hasn’t got to that stage should be in political control.
    It goes with the ‘economic growth’ mantra, a code as demonstrably flawed as ‘pie in the sky when you die’.
    See the exellent op/ed piece by economist Peter Lyons in today’s ODT, parallel – absolutely about this. I was thinking as I read it that the rest of the economic community would probably do to him what the Pressy’s did to Lloyd Geering….
    When it comes to ‘the environment’ or ‘the economy’, English will go with ‘the economy’ every time. That way of thinking is in it’s last doubling -time, and taken to it’s illogical conclusion, will kill off our species.(wait for the howls!)
    At what point does chosen ignorance become criminal? It’s a rhetorical question, Neville Chamberlain was never hauled up in a court of law, but few think what he did with his silly little piece of paper was helpful, or even intelligent.
    Seriously, this is so imperative that it is equally as deficient of the media to waste their investigative (there’s a joke) efforts on so tabloid a subject. I genuinely don’t give two figs for the rental thing, and am saddened that while we face such bigger issues, such topics take up so much space. A curse on all their publishing houses.
    I’d argue that South Auckland is to a large extent a result of us requiring cheap labour in the phase when we had factories, and didn’t want to do it ourselves. Have you ever considered China’s rise, and compared it to the stages from Watt to the ‘dark satanic mills’, to organised labour, to non-productive consumer? China is near the end of Victorian times, in equivalent. Watch for them to get unions! The question is, what do you do with the redundant labour when you’ve moved on to being a consumer society? I’d suggest night-classes…..
    It was no cheap shot, I assure you. I just think we’re doomed with such mindsets in control.

    Like

  11. murrayg1's avatar murrayg1 says:

    gravedodger – here you will see I’d said it some time ago:

    http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/72347/biggest-crisis-facing-planet-numbers

    Like

  12. ThamesSt Farmer's avatar ThamesSt Farmer says:

    Bill got it wrong….He was in the right and should have stuck to his guns.

    He is not the family trust. They are two different legal entities; a practice many of us take advantage of. It is not illegal or disceptive.

    Curtailing to a media/labour beat up is weak.

    Like

Leave a comment