At some stage an inquiry is going to have a look at the government’s actions in the Hubbard group case.
I don’t want to get into too much detail while there are ongoing investigations, and hopefully even new investigations to be opened.
and on Power :-
don’t think he had a real choice. Received advice. Could not ignore it in my opinion. Needed to pass regulation. Then it must be announced and he was Minister responsible. Statutory management can never be a secret.
Bernard Hickey got into the Hubbards yesterday. He asks some fair questions.
But the blogger who has got closest to the core issue is Cactus Kate. She points out :-
Bill English is incorrect (well let us face facts – teling porkies) in this interview. The taxpayer did not have to pay SCF anymore than they would have had to for Hanover or Blue Chip. SCF took deposits for and moved $700m (or 41% of total) of their lending to more risky criteria even into the the hyper-risk of mezzanine lending. They breached the guarantee and their own CEO said so.
It seems that English knew that SCF did not meet the criteria when its guarantee was renewed. If that is the case he is gone.
Please JMH, the scheme gives the Government a wide latitude of power over who is chosen to be covered, to the extent they are to be covered, and the conditions of that cover.
The Standard has plenty to say on this.
http://thestandard.org.nz/the-silence-of-the-lambs/
I think Cullen’s original plan was for the scheme to cover only retail banks like ANZ and Kiwibank. And then came the dire warnings from “financial consultants” of runs on finance companies if they weren’t included.
So now Cullen’s a caving, corrupt, theif, metering out charity and setting up a welfare system for the “rich pricks”..?
Or could the reasons he included the finance companies be the same reasons English extended their coverage..?
Well, SCF didn’t have to be payed out the way it did, plus there where investor who where will to invest in the company but the government and management at SCF said no to them. They where offerd good money but turned them down.
What really need to happen is to have all the books and info on SCF made public. So us taxpayer can actually see what went on inside. It 1.8% GDP the bail out worth. They should so why we have to bail them out.
I see JMH has adopted Crosby Textors (or is that Fox News’?) modus operandi of asking innuendo questions.
I see Loota has accepted the Standard’s modus operandi of believing any conspiracy theory about the right that’s bandied about as the gospel truth…
JMH – look man, follow the money.
How can it be a simple conspiracy theory when the billion dollar wealth transfer has occurred for a fact?
Although tax payers got the smile and wave for free.
I’ve noticed whenever a NAct apologist wants to discredit a particular discussion on this site – and The Standard – they always introduce the word “conspiracy” as though commenters here are indulging in hyperbole that has no bearing in reality. A very real C/T inspired counter measure to combat justifiable criticism and concern of Government actions!
Forget JMH Loota. He’s doing a Rebecca. You’re just encouraging him… he has no intention of arguing this particular subject on valid grounds.
Isnt the crux of this issue that English renewed the guarantee (regardless of who instigated it)when he may have known they had already breached the criteria? If true,isnt that more important than what Cullen did or didnt do prior to renewal?
Good advice as always, Anne
That the payout is happening isn’t the conspiracy, the conspiracy is the supposed reason why…
Not a chat room Spud. She might get moderated if she did. Trevor