Some M.P.s upset by assets idea

Press, 10 February 1986, Page 1

Some M.P.s upset by assets idea

By

DAVID WILSON

The Government’s plan to have all members of Parliament declare their assets publicly has met a mixed reaction among Christchurch politicians. The Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Palmer, has proposed a system similar to that in the British House of Commons, where members must declare their assets within 28 days of an election. The information would be recorded on a register and kept up to date. The proposal has found favour with the Labour member for Christchurch North, Mr Mike Moore, who put a bill before Parliament some time ago seeking the same legislation.

“I believe the public have a right to know of the investments made by its M.P.s,” he said.

“It is also in the selfinterests of M.P.S and will help to clear up any suspicions. I have known of accusations of politicians holding shares and secret holdings that were just not true and did a lot of harm.

“I believe it is in the interests of the political system, and it is not asking much of M.P.s to make this sort of declaration,” said Mr Moore. “The more : we can do to open and clear the system the. better.”./. /'

Mrs Ann Hercus, the Labour member for Lyttelton, said she would have nonobjection to de-ciarihg-lierassets. .“The public interest would be best served by financial disclosures,” she ' said,

But another Labour member, Mrs Mary Batchelor (Avon), does not go along with the idea. “I don’t see what good it will do,” she said. “If we have M.P.S declaring their assets it would have to be the same at local body level and for heads of Government departments. They have as much say in making legislation as M.P.S.” The National member for Selwyn, Miss Ruth Richardson, vigorously opposes the idea. “I find the proposal offensive in that it suggests that M.P.S cannot be trusted to exercise judg-

meats fairly and without favour or influence,” she said. “Mr Palmer should be putting the Executive under this sort of scrutiny, but instead he hits below the belt by spreading the net to backbenchers. “I find this a reprehensible attitude and politically pious in the extreme,” she said. The National member for Rangiora, Mr Jim Gerard, totally opposes the proposal. “I don’t see anything but mischief coming out of it,” he said. Opposition to the plan has also come from further afield, and the National member for Pahiatua, Mr John Falloon, sees it as an “unwarranted intrusion on privacy,” the Press Association reported. Mr' Falloon said it —> appeared the declarations would need to include a member’s liabilities, mortgages and so. on, and family transactions. “I think the families of politicians are owed some privacy. M.P.s don’t make decisions of pecuniary interest. If they did they would soon be found out,” he said. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Mr Bolger, said the plan seemed to be a “frolic of intervention in personal lives.” ■ “I would invite Mr Palmer to identify any past M.P. who took an action motivated by his or her personal position. “If he can’t show cause, .I.would have to askjSWhjp the enthusiasm?”’ Mr Bolger said the system would inevitably mean that the interests of members’ spouses would also have to be declared, "or the register is meaningless.” It would not be accepted that the spouses of members should also become public figures. Mr Bolger said he was aware of many members on the Opposition benches who would not be happy with the proposal. On the other side of the argument, the Labour member for Ohariu, Mr Peter Dunne, said it was important for the public to know "where people (M.P.s) were coming from on some of the major issues.”