Those hoping for a change in government this September have been smiling ear to ear watching the National Party self implode in spectacular fashion today.

Todd Barclay’s secret recording of Glenys Dickson has the potential to lose National the election following an excellent piece of investigative journalism from Newsroom and the resulting fallout from the new revelations.

Bill English this morning only hours after publicly stating he couldn’t recall who alerted him to the secret recordings came clean and confessed it was Barclay; also directly contradicting Barclay’s claims the recordings did not exist.

Barclay conveniently refused to co-operate with the 10 month police investigation, which was later dropped by police citing lack of evidence.

$2 million dollars in taxpayer funded hush money was paid out of the “leader’s budget” to Glenys Dickson fearing a successful police complaint could take down the National Party, as part of threats made by a National Party board member.

On top of this, an investigation has been launched into Barclay’s Clutha-Southland selection following detailed complaints from within the National Party to the rules committee on improper voting process and “delegate stacking” by those close to Barclay.

Barclay has also been accused of falsifying his party declaration, having signed an oath that no previous incidents may damage the party only four months after the investigation started into the illegal recordings made in the Gore office begun.

All of this raises very real questions about a complete National Party orchestrated cover up.

How can a list MP falsely gain his selection through improper voting, lie under oath and still have the confidence of his party and leader Bill English? How can he use his political status to avoid police investigations with no repercussions, therefore evading New Zealand law?

Otago University Law Professor Andrew Geddis reveals that under section 116 of the Crimes Act 1961:

Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who conspires to obstruct, prevent, pervert, or defeat the course of justice in New Zealand or the course of justice in an overseas jurisdiction.’

It was also found in R v Dewar (HC Hamilton CRI-2005-019-3213, 21 June 2007) at [38]–[39]:

‘An attempt to obstruct the course of justice may also occur where the defendant discourages a potential complainant from pursuing allegations of wrong-doing.’

If any member of the public refused to co-operate with police investigations they would promptly be arrested. It is obvious Barclay with the support of National have broken the law by obstructing the course of justice.

Barclay is now a massive political thorn in National’s side, and only months out from the election we can see this having to end with nothing less than Barclay’s resignation.

The New Zealand public should not accept anything less than a full police investigation to examine the new evidence, while voters get to decide on the 23rd of September whether the blatant lies and corruption exposed today is the future we want for politics in this country.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.