[ad_1]
The Elections Commission is “investigating” claims made by Hutt South Labor candidate Ginny Andersen, who has failed to properly disclose her donations, Andersen says.
The Commission received a complaint from the Taxpayers Union, a low-tax lobby group, on Friday morning. You are investigating the matter before deciding whether to investigate or refer the complaint further. In the past, she has preferred to refer matters related to donations to the police, as was the case with donations to the NZ First Foundation.
“We received a complaint this morning on this matter and we will be investigating it. Of course, we cannot comment further at this initial stage, “said a commission spokesman.
Andersen said the deal meant good value for money for the taxpayer.
“Any complaint is a matter for the Electoral Commission. Parliamentary Services has stated that the rental agreement is a very good deal for the taxpayers and has not raised any concerns with me about it, ”Andersen said.
READ MORE:
* Ginny Andersen, Unreported Donations, and the Mysterious 1993 Property Transaction
* Taxpayer pays the bill for Labor electorate funds in decades-long sublease agreement
* Weston Frizzell ‘Aroha’ posters ruled to be Labor Party advertisements
Thursday, Stuff exposed a scheme in which the local Labor Party sublet office space to include MP Andersen at a much higher cost than it paid to the original owner, the New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union (NZPFU).
The Parliamentary Service pays the rent for Andersen’s office space, as it does for all MPs. That money goes to the Labor Party, which can pocket the difference as profit for the expenses of its electorate.
The arrangement, while seemingly unusual, is legal from Parliament’s perspective.
Where things get complicated is on the issue of donations.
PINK WOODS / THINGS
Questions about Labor MP Ginny Andersen’s donations have been referred to the Election Commission
Accounts viewed by Stuff show that at least as recently as 2018 and 2019, the NZPFU was charging just $ 1,500 a year for rent, well below the market rate for office space in Petone. A store at 264 Jackson Street, just down the street from Andersen’s office, is currently leasing at $ 18,200 per year.
That deeply discounted rental could qualify as an effective donation, as it is a good or service received at a rate below its full market value.
The Election Commission’s rules, published in the candidates’ handbook, say that goods and services received at a discount are treated as donations.
The rules say: “[I]If you get a discount on goods or services from a New Zealand person with a fair market value of more than $ 300, the difference between the market value and the price you pay is a donation. “
Andersen denies that any rent should be treated as a donation, saying the low rate dates back to a “business agreement that workers reached with firefighters in 1993.”
The Labor Party used to own the building, but it was sold in 1993 to the fire brigade union.
Andersen said the low rent was part of a business agreement negotiated between the NZPFU and the Labor Party when the building was sold in 1993. That would mean that the rent is not a donation, but simply part of a business agreement between a tenant and a owner.
“The continued provision of office space for Labor was part of a business deal when Labor sold the building to the firefighters union in the early 1990s.
“This provision was reflected in the sale price of the building. As such, that trade agreement does not constitute a donation, ”Andersen said.
Andrew Geddis, a law professor at the University of Otago, said it was unclear what the support agreements negotiated as part of the 1993 sale of the building would have on donation disclosure requirements today.
“It depends on whether we are talking about the fair market value of the immediate transaction, the rent that the candidate or the party has paid to the firefighters, or if you see it as part of a larger transaction going back to the sale. of the building, ”he said.
The law was “ambiguous” on this point, he said.
“It can be read either way,” he said.
“The only real question would be whether the sale of the Labor Party building to the union was a genuine arm’s-length transaction or whether the union paid as much as they would have paid for the building anyway and added a benefit to the party which was to say ‘ We’ll give you this cheap. ‘
If the cheap rent should have been revealed, it could mean that Labor has failed to report thousands of dollars in donations, dating back years and affecting multiple elections.
The Commission said it had contacted Andersen to ask if he could provide information to help with the initial consultations.
The Commission said it did not have investigative powers, but that it would seek information about the complaint before deciding what to do.
“As a general point, we do not have investigative powers, although we seek information from the complainant and the accused. As already noted, it is too early to talk about possible outcomes, ”said a spokesperson.
