It might be coincidence but I saw a rural accountant with a black eye, it is ski season, but I smiled. I know that means I'm petty.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/3832664/SFO-probes-Canterbury-millionaire-Allan-Hubbard

cabinet minister forgets to feed cat, perhaps?

Ministers shouldn't have to have $30K limits on their personal cards for a fortnight trip overseas

I ran up a bill of that level when I was a mere computer consultant and got sent on a 5 week stint in New York, accompanied by a credit cardless colleague.

Charge cards…

A sensible PM (and I'm surprised at Helen) would have insisted that no Minister got a card *and* that all expenses were run past a party/PMs office checker before being officially filed.

You've got to remember that some of these bills run into the thousands, they're paying for ministers and…

When I've been made to have a company credit card, the deal has typically been no personal use, but also that the user of the card is jointly liable with the business to pay the bill.

I also understand that companies (and…

Craig, I don't equate the public interests with National's interests.

And neither do I, but I think it would actually be in the public interest if we saw a Government more interested in accepting accountability for their (alleged) misdeeds even if their every political instinct screamed "hell no". And if…

Given that this behaviour crosses party lines, is the public interest actually served by prosecutions based on technicalities and, by dint of the legislation's wording, able to be directed at only the ruling party?

In a perverse way, I think it would not only be in the public interest but…

I quote this bit....

Quite right: good governance, not PFA illegality.

You're missing the point of ... the PFA: it is that public expenditure must be authorised ... not that private expenditure is prohibited.

I quote this bit, from the rules governing the use of the public money from Vote Ministerial Services:

__Operational resources are not provided and may not be…

As an IT person I feel that our team has somehow let them down if it is such a big trial for them to process a statement with clearly identified personal items.

Speaking as an accountant, it is not the IT person that has let us down, it is the…

So now it's all about semantics and the finer points of book-keeping? That's good, because I don't really care about that.

Not at all – my point was that the semantic argument others were tempted to use – that this mightn't fall within a technical definition of spending, so wasn't…

Still, saying that he's spent five dollars would stretch the definition of "spending" somewhat.
Ahh, but there is no definition of spending.

So now it's all about semantics and the finer points of book-keeping? That's good, because I don't really care about that.

I borrow five dollars from you, with the proviso that if I haven't paid it back within a month, Craig will pay you back.

I'm not disputing that as long as it gets paid back the workplace doesn't end up coughing up.

Using the fact that it's on credit to…

(ii) The improper use of any public financial resource.

Thankyou Graeme... I think that trumps my point...

Money wasnt spent but a financial resource was used...

Still, saying that he's spent five dollars would stretch the definition of "spending" somewhat.

Ahh, but there is no definition of spending.

We have section 4:

The Crown ... must not incur expenses ... except as expressly authorised by an appropriation, or other authority, by or under an Act.

And…

Bit of a pain, actually, because it doesn't seem possible to clear it in advance.

Ambiguity resolved + karma points.

No, actually until repayment is due the money simply hasn't been spent. It's abusing a line of credit at best.

But only on the basis that a bank has agreed to give your place of work a credit card and that's how credit cards work.

The goods or services have…

It seems quibbling in the face of precise rules and reiterated advice that it was not OK, however.

I agree that they certainly seem to have had very clear rules..... and it also seems that at least some of them were under an understanding that breaking those rules was actually…

We have the same advice at my work, and the accounts clerks sitting behind me routinely expostulate about another infringement. As an IT person I feel that our team has somehow let them down if it is such a big trial for…

> If the politician puts funds into the account before its due....
> did any public money get spent?

Umm. That's don't work.

Just because interest hasn't been charged yet, doesn't mean money hasn't been spent.

But if you put down a deposit when you got the credit card, and…

If the politician puts funds into the account before its due.... did any public money get spent?

Umm. That's don't work.

Just because interest hasn't been charged yet, doesn't mean money hasn't been spent.

Where is the authorisation of spending on golf clubs?

Was there any spending on golf-clubs? By the public I mean....

A credit card got used..... the credit card companies money goes into vendors account.

If the politician puts funds into the account before its due.... did any public money get…

3410: Around here, I'd get my arse righteously spanked if I couldn't do marginally better than "Liar-bore lawyer misses the point". Seriously.

BTW, if Graeme is a "Tory" stooge, I've got to wonder how he escaped from the re-education camp after supporting the Electoral Finance Act.

Maybe so but, either…

You're missing the point of both the BofR and the PFA: it is that public expenditure must be authorised (and, as a corollary, the diversion of public monies for private benefit is an offence), not that private expenditure is prohibited.

Where is the authorisation of spending on golf clubs?

But…

Goodness. That's quite interesting.

Indeed it is. But could I be cynical enough to suggest that various persons in Parliament who were quite happy to impugn the A-G's grasp of the law when expressing "our view" on *cough* various other matters shouldn't be allowed to cling to this too hard.…

NEWSFLASH TOM: Around here we usually do people the courtesy of presuming they're arguing in good faith.

Apart from all those times that you dismiss someone's argument as being made solely on the basis that they "don't like" the subject of it. :)

Now if I could find a legal basis for it, I'd be a happy man.

No doubt, but that would just be confirming your prejudices.

You're missing the point of both the BofR and the PFA: it is that public expenditure must be authorised (and, as a corollary, the diversion…

Russell. My thoughts exactly. It seems to contradict the implaccable "it is clearly always illegal" line.

Yes. Now if I could find a legal basis for it, I'd be a happy man. For the true emergency situation envisioned in the credit card contract, the defence of necessity would apply, and…

Goodness. That's quite interesting

Not really.

The AG is making the distinction between prohibited public expenditure (ie, including that which should be privately incurred), and the incurring of private expenses (ie, including on a public credit card in "circumstances").

To be clear, it's not an offence to put private expenses…

Noting that this is the considered report of the Auditor-General, never written lightly:

[Para 90, page 19] In our view, circumstances can arise from time to time where **it may be sensible to put items of personal expenditure on credit cards when there is a clear intention to reimburse the…

we usually do people the courtesy of presuming they're arguing in good faith.

I assumed we were. Arguing someone has missed the point can most certainly be an argument made in good faith – although I'm intrigued to know:

1. why there is only one point; and
2. what that…

But only for stuff in the last two years.

If you get in quick, you might just be able to get Jones. Otherwise it'll have to be Groser or Heatley.

NEWSFLASH: Tory lawyer misses the point.

NEWSFLASH TOM: Around here we usually do people the courtesy of presuming they're arguing in good faith.

Private prosecution...

But only for stuff in the last two years.

What actions would you suggest be taken to ensure as much as possible the wise, reasonable, proper, and importantly moderate use of public money?

Private prosecution, pour encourager les autres.

To his credit, Lockwood has kept his private life, private for most of his time in the public eye.

Tory lawyer misses the point.

Which is...?

Good luck with finding…

I mean he pissed in the marketplace as an independent philosopher, went…

I really like this idea of that Phil is floating of allowing a panel to keep an eye on this stuff
At the moment the checks and balances are supplied by the Civil Service who quite naturally have…

Certainly much of what happens already is legal, and some may not be. But is all that is legal also wise reasonable proper and moderate? And is anything that may not be legal…

But every constable knows, when faced with a vein-popping citizen at the counter who Demands The Law Be Enforced, that he has a ready answer in…

s95) For Vote Ministerial Services, we note that the expenditure by Ministers on the accommodation and meal costs of spouses or partners will be unappropriated if it is outside the rules.…

The auditor general also said that Heatley had been incorrectly advised by Parliamentary Services, as had other MPs.

That was about a specific use of the Parliamentary Travel allowance (the housing stuff, and wine etc. will have been Ministerial Services, not the Parliamentary Service). The allowance allows MPs to fly…

Ignorance of what?

Of the rules. I thought that's what you meant. IANAL, but in Italy proverbially you cannot use ignorance of the law as a defence. Sounds like you're confirming that it's the case in NZ as well.

Is ignorance a defence in New Zealand then?

It apparently was in Phil Heatley's case, although I'm buggered if I can see how anyone would think buying wine at a party conference (and reporting it as a meal), or paying for a family holiday, would be acceptable.

The auditor general…

Is ignorance a defence in New Zealand then?

Ignorance of what?

I knew this was Giovanni's car, but didn't know it was illegal to take it? No.

I thought this was Giovanni's car, and he'd given me permission to use it, but it turned out I'd taken his neighbour's car?…

if they erroneously thought they were entitled to it, it's not theft

Is ignorance a defence in New Zealand then?

Stupid quotes:-)