Red Alert

Finlayson digs deeper?

Posted by on June 23rd, 2010

It wasn’t the Watergate burglary that resulted in Nixon’s resignation – it was being caught in a cover-up.

Yesterday I posted on the fact that for four years running, including two while he has been Attorney-General, Chris Finlayson has on the face of papers available made false declarations to the Registrar of Pecuniary Interests.

Finlayson, in a grudging way appears to have accepted that that is true. He appears to be preparing to resign, but not as Attorney General for repeatedly misleading Parliament in his declarations, but as a company director.

But in the same article :-

“He has been a director and shareholder of Te Puhi Trust since 2006 but he said yesterday that the incorporation owned no assets”.

But on the face of the publicly available documentation that is not true. I’m not suggesting that Finlayson has a beneficial interest given his explanation yesterday. But it is very important that he is precise and he has been playing fast and loose with the rules to date.

Terralink makes it clear that Te Puhi Trutee (2) Ltd is the legal owner of  two properties in Underhill Road Tauherenikau. Can’t do link for copyright reasons but not hard to find for a small fee.

And a reminder of what the then Leader of the Opposition said about the role of and standards against which an Attorney General should be measured.

Lawyers are the professionals we depend on in our society to ensure the accuracy of the documents that they sign. They should not sign documents knowing them to be false under any circumstances. For the most senior law official in the land, the Attorney-General, to have done so not once but on several occasions, is a serious matter. Mr Parker was right to tender his resignation. I commend him for that.

If Finlayson repeatedly made false declarations as a lawyer then the Law Society would deal with him. Is there a lower standard for the Attorney General?  That is a matter for Key to decide.


26 Responses to “Finlayson digs deeper?”

  1. Spud says:

    Keep chasing this up! :-D

  2. Ianmac says:

    Possible excuse No 10:
    “This was just a minor technicality and to avod confusion I have resigned my directorship and the PM is happy with that.”

  3. Tracey says:

    I dont get that this kind of integrity is unimportant in our Attorney General (media-wise) but Shane Jones paying for adult movies is? Coupled with Nationals calls around David Parker (?) and his dealings under question when he was AG.

  4. Loota says:

    Rope, give the man lots of it.

    And set a long slow fuse to burn…

    Labour don’t be in a rush to get an immediate result let’s just let the stink build.

    And for gawd’s sakes make sure that the wider legal profession and law schools understands whats at stake here – the credibility of their profession.

  5. Tracey says:

    I dont knnow where I can comment on this but I thnk it significant that Hubbard has said that if KEY were in the country he would not have been put under statutory management, one reason being that Key “knows” him. He then says he was denied natural justice.

    he may well have been denied natural justice ( as all workers are when the 90 probation period was pushed through under urgency) but natural justice doesnt mean getting special treatment from the PM

    Its yet more example to those who doubt it of the power of the lobby groups in NZ, the netwroking of money, and that it is not one person one vote.

    I have asked for OIA info in relation to a legal claim I am taking. I have been told it will cost me $148,000 to get it.

    Meanwhile Ministers expenses cost taxpayers 50k and Mr hubbard expects his relationship with Key to give him preferential treatment.

    As far as I am concerned mr hubbard is guilty of NOTHING until it’s proven, but his suggestion vis a vis Key leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

  6. Craig Glen Eden says:

    I agree Tracey when I read this I thought it says more about our PM than we already know what a disgrace.By the way natural justice is taking place that’s what the investigation is for.

    Finlayson should go Trev no brainer but what will happen aye, probably nothing.

  7. peter says:

    Isn’t the concept of Credible Lawyers an Oxymoron ?

  8. Tracey says:

    peter, less so than credible politician ;)

  9. Loota says:

    Well watch NZ’s pristine standing in the international corruption index slide back a couple of places. Perhaps no actual corruption per se by international standards, but plenty of playing with the rules and non-enforcement = fertile soil for corruption to develop.

  10. Tracey says:

    Interesting listening to the new chair of the finance thingy-ma-jig this morning.

  11. ghostwhowalksnz says:

    So I guess that rules out the QC moniker for the Hon Finalyson after all.

  12. Chris73 says:

    If hes been shown to have broken the rules and down wrong then he should resign

  13. Chris73 says:

    Um of course that should be done wrong not down wrong…

  14. Spud says:

    Agreed Chris :-)

  15. Chris73 says:

    @Spud

    If you’re shown to have broken the rules then you deserve to have the smacketh laid down, regardless of which party you belongto

  16. Spud says:

    Agreed Chris :-) !

  17. Loota says:

    So – not even a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket?

    Oh, there’s some mileage to be wound out of this, yet methinks.

  18. paul says:

    Looks like he is going to be coming out of this with a ‘smile and a wave’ – I have to say I don’t mind him in comparison to others but one does wonder how often thing like this just get brushed aside…

  19. Chris73 says:

    The main point to me is:

    “While he has a directorship in a corporate trustee of a family trust, he has no pecuniary interest in either entity.”

    I’d send him to the naughty step for awhile then bring him back

  20. Chris73 says:

    By naughty step i mean stripping him of his responsibilities

  21. Loota says:

    Certainly Chris73; I think if nothing is done the position of AG will be damaged. Any scoundrel who signs false parliamentary papers can do the job.

  22. Chris73 says:

    @Loota

    I actually don’t think its all that bad but its a good way for John Key to show why hes a leader

  23. Tigger says:

    From Finlayson’s wikipedia page “has presented New Zealand Law Society seminars on High Court practice, conflicts of interest and limitation.” Can’t have been a very good conflicts of interest paper…

  24. Tracey says:

    Has anyone quoted Key back at Key over this? You know, over the David Parker thing?

  25. Loota says:

    Chris73 – perhaps its not all that bad for a standard backbench MP…although for such a one it would still be a reprimandable offence.

Leave a Reply