SFO to investigate donations made to Labour in 2017

Serious Fraud Office launches investigation into donations made to Labour in 2017; Party hasn't been told of the specifics of the inquiry

13th Jul 20, 4:25pm by Jenée Tibshraeny

Jacinda Ardern

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is launching an investigation into donations made to the Labour Party in 2017.

It will not however say exactly what it is investigating.

Labour Party President Claire Szarbo said the party hadn't been told "the specifics of the inquiry", but would fully cooperate.

The SFO said: "The fact that the SFO has commenced an investigation is not an indication of guilt. In order to commence an investigation, the Serious Fraud Office Act requires that the Director must have reasonable grounds to believe that a relevant offence may have been committed. The Director does not have to be satisfied that an offence has been committed."

Its Director Julie Read said: “We consider that making the current announcement is consistent with our past practice in this area of electoral investigations and in the public interest.”

While Szarbo wouldn't make further statements while the investigation is underway, she said: "For completeness however, we note that we have already made statements to media in February confirming that two men who were then being investigated by the SFO and had made donations to the National Party, had also made donations to Labour."

Shijia Zheng (Colin) donated $1,940 to Labour in 2018, and Hengjia Zheng (Joe) donated $10,000 in 2017 by buying a piece of art at an auction. Labour said both transactions were included in the party's returns.

Zheng and Zheng have been charged alongside former National MP, Jami-Lee Ross, and Chinese businessman, Yikun Zhang, in relation to donations made to the National Party Botany Electorate in 2017 ($100,000) and 2018 ($100,050).

The case will go to trial in September 2021.

The SFO also has investigations underway in relation to donations made to the New Zealand First Foundation, as well as in relation to Auckland Council and Christchurch City Council mayoral electoral funding.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

53 Comments

by Yvil | 13th Jul 20, 4:39pm 1594615181

Nothing matters but that beautiful smile on the photo, Labour will win the election in a landslide

by mlpc | 13th Jul 20, 4:42pm 1594615336

Sorry, but that toothy grin gives me the shivers.

by Uninterested | 13th Jul 20, 7:37pm 1594625842

I am no Ardern fan but this is how a child would comment.

by Nzdan | 14th Jul 20, 7:09am 1594667364

That and the "name blending" insults such as Taxcinda. It's the sort of stuff we used to do at primary school.

by gingerninja | 14th Jul 20, 8:21am 1594671698

So the same men who gave National over $200k gave Labour $12k but somehow this is a slight on JA personally? I think perhaps we should wait for the investigation before jumping to conclusions that she was personally aware of a $12k donation that she agreed to some corrupt agreement for.

I think we should perhaps consider that there is something more broadly wrong with NZ politics and its relationship to Chinese money and that they are all in on it and whilst Labour are far from perfect, clearly National have their snouts much more firmly in that particularly trough.

by my2c | 14th Jul 20, 4:29pm 1594700974

You say "wait for the investigation" and then assert your own biased opinion.
Lets hope those in charge aren't as biased as your unproven assertions.

by Foxglove. | 13th Jul 20, 4:47pm 1594615660

An interesting point to make and likewise an interesting photo selection to caption as this is surely more of a question for the Labour Party itself, than the PM. Still it is natural, and she is very good at being that in my opinion, compared to some of her predecessors that is.

by Houseworks | 13th Jul 20, 5:37pm 1594618657

Open and transparent ... but only if comparing something non-transparent

by J.C. | 13th Jul 20, 4:50pm 1594615840

Christchurch City Council is rotten to the core. Dalziel should be in chains.

by Foxglove. | 13th Jul 20, 5:18pm 1594617512

It’s only July J.C. but do believe you have just won the understatement of the year category, hands down.

by Davo36 | 14th Jul 20, 9:30am 1594675801

Hahahahahaha, you obviously haven't heard of Auckland Council.

"One Council to rule them all, One Council to find them, One Council to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them"

by oldbloke1 | 13th Jul 20, 4:59pm 1594616399

Interesting timing - a complaint must have been laid some weeks ago, and the obvious beneficiaries would have been making a meal of this, except that last week Boag happened.

by bw | 13th Jul 20, 5:12pm 1594617132

It was a man dressed as a homeless bloke, who was seen dropping a paper bag; obviously stuffed full of illegal donation cash, at the front entrance to the Labour Party headquarters. I can't tell you who the source of that information is on the grounds of confidentiality. But it's someone whose an impeccable source who has never lead me astray. But it needs looking into. Isn't that right, Michael?

"However, the SFO did not elaborate on the particulars of the investigation, which appears to have blindsided the party.'

by Houseworks | 13th Jul 20, 5:42pm 1594618927

And the size of the said paper bag ?

by powerdownkiwi | 13th Jul 20, 5:15pm 1594617345

Good point upthread; it's a sad day when Int.co has to trot out a picture of a Parliamentary leader, to represent a political Party. Speaks volumes.

As to the 'news'- it appears they are all trying to push the boundaries. As are those who would influence by donating. Time we funded and capped campaign advertising, completely.

by Foxglove. | 13th Jul 20, 5:27pm 1594618026

What is incredible is that we are represented in parliament by those who make our laws. Is that not for gawds sake a reasonably solemn & serious responsibility? Yet here are such laws being immediately defeated by the very people who created them! It sucks!

by Jenée Tibshraeny | 13th Jul 20, 10:39pm 1594636787

I don't understand what "speaks volumes", powerdownkiwi. When you write breaking news, you use whatever picture you can source in about 30 seconds from your database, which best suits the story. This story is about Labour, and the picture selected is of the party's leader. Alternatively, I could've used a Labour Party logo, but didn't have a current, properly formatted one on file. There's no conspiracy here.

by powerdownkiwi | 13th Jul 20, 5:49pm 1594619373

Didn't say there was.

But I do challenge you that journalism could have halted/resisted the reduction to presidential, simple sound-byte spin-doctory at ever-lower intellectual levels, and that part of that would have been widening the lens.

by Houseworks | 13th Jul 20, 5:49pm 1594619377

One "d" in powerdownkiwi. I misread his/her name too until recently.

by Noncents | 13th Jul 20, 6:19pm 1594621168

You shouldn't have to defend yourself on the choice of picture. Particularly when it is the leader of the Labour party being used. As with all leaders - ultimate responsibility sits with her. Her photo is used enough for all the "good" news stories without issue, so I see no problem with this in the slightest.

Further, Labour was openly struggling with donations up until she was annouced as leader. When she came on board so did the donations. So I think it is entirely relevant to the story.

by Uninterested | 13th Jul 20, 7:42pm 1594626126

Apart from just bad photos, like the ones we all delete immediately (ourselves) and should not be used, the only time you should choose not to use one would be when handed one which is clearly photo shopped like the old Helen Clark one was.

by GV 27 | 14th Jul 20, 7:36am 1594669018

I'm confused, is this a bad photo? She looks fine?

by sharetrader | 13th Jul 20, 5:17pm 1594617449

it looks like all the parties were using structures to try to hide donations, its time the whole lot was cleaned up

by Logicthinker | 13th Jul 20, 9:58pm 1594634304

Why is the SFO investigating National, NZ First and Labour just prior to the election. Its Madness.

by RickStrauss | 14th Jul 20, 9:23am 1594675401

True. Am glad it's being investigated across all parties. Auctions have been used for years to record donations coming in. I guess the concern is that if people are donating massive amounts for trivial items then much more transparency is needed. I would heartily agree.

Parties have had to record the results of these auctions for decades, at least, so wonder what the specifics of the issues are these days.

by Hook | 13th Jul 20, 5:34pm 1594618452

Another smokescreen, more distractions. Give everyone a hug and it's all good, smile for the camera, and let's have an enquiry.. As far as I'm concerned we should just not vote en masse, as a protest.. This country is slowly but surely slipping into mediocrity, championed by the retards we have been saddled with thanks to this absolute bastardization called MMP. "Goodbye and thanks for the fish" has some relevance.

by Houseworks | 13th Jul 20, 5:48pm 1594619312

"Slipping into mediocrity" man you got that right. We're working on several rma land use applications. Heaps of lengthy reports to pay for and more than likely will not be approved. On one, we've been strongly "advised" by council to have discussions with the local hapu/iwi. Does that mean that if the iwi say no then council will oppose... What exactly is the point of having a council.

by Foxglove. | 13th Jul 20, 7:10pm 1594624249

Down here in ChCh our family building a replacement EQ home 40mm one corner over the recession plane, $3,500.00 to get approval under existing rights. Yet a new school in the same district is 2 metres over. Oh no one checked, noticed or reported and the council says it doesn’t really matter now because the building is up and who cares. Go figure, hells bells was not not the site surveyed, who interpreted that? We had to get ours done twice. Ref J.C. post as above at 4.50pm.

by Houseworks | 13th Jul 20, 8:10pm 1594627838

The size of the friggin fee is criminal, what justifies it. Funny thing, that the mayor is ex-labour mp

by Foxglove. | 13th Jul 20, 8:23pm 1594628611

HW it gets worse. The second survey they requested revealed that the 40mm overreach was incorrect. There was in fact no need to have applied for an exemption. There was no refund, but there was a $500.00 charge for withdrawing the application.

by Houseworks | 13th Jul 20, 10:44pm 1594637090

Either you'd scream or would laugh, no in between there FG

by Audaxes | 13th Jul 20, 6:25pm 1594621500

Who can I vote for in this banana republic?
Is the SFO interfering in the outcome of an election with this disclosure at this time?

by solardb | 13th Jul 20, 6:59pm 1594623590

Maybe you could wait to see what the outcome of the investigation is. But yes , these investigations in all parties need to be wrapped up quickly in an election year .

by Foxglove. | 13th Jul 20, 8:24pm 1594628650

Who the heck do you vote for then? Swamp hens or porcine long snouts the lot of them. Could you trust any single one of them?

by Uninterested | 13th Jul 20, 7:44pm 1594626265

"porcines". haha!

by Lapun | 13th Jul 20, 6:35pm 1594622152

Surely it is time to finance our political parties. The idea of giving my hard earned money in tax to pay for our political parties goes against the grain but (a) either we do or the CCP does (b) the cost of subsidizing our political parties is likely to be less than paying for the SFO and its multiple investigations.

by mogador | 13th Jul 20, 7:29pm 1594625391

Not to mention the eye-watering costs of a fully-corrupted legislature like in USA.

by Uninterested | 13th Jul 20, 7:46pm 1594626385

The problem arises, how much weighting do you give the individual parties. And its interactive. Pay more, get a higher ranking in the polls. And as we have seen in the US and Oz and UK, do you trust the polls?

by Lapun | 13th Jul 20, 7:59pm 1594627161

Certainly not based on opinion polls. I would leave it to voters - when I vote I'm given a voucher that can only be cashed by a registered political party. That way I can vote Lab or Nat to run the next govt and give my $10 voucher to say TOP or ACT or Cannabis Now (if there is such a party) or even Destiny NZ - all parties with no hope at the election but maybe deserving encouragement.

by mfd | 14th Jul 20, 9:41am 1594676517

This kind of challenge is nothing compared to the problems with the current system.

by Foyle | 13th Jul 20, 7:48pm 1594626497

Agree, counter to principle, but some malign financing with too much power at moment. Base on average polling in year leading to election

by Lapun | 13th Jul 20, 7:56pm 1594627015

Wasn't an issue when politics was left -v- right and financing was unions -v- businesses. Now it is precisely the wrong people who are financing our parties.

by Beanie | 13th Jul 20, 8:54pm 1594630498

Getting rid of bribes (let's face it, that's what the donations are intended to be by the large donors) is the single biggest improvement we could make to New Zealand. Think about the improvement in policy and the the life of the average Kiwi Battler that would result.

by Uninterested | 13th Jul 20, 7:35pm 1594625744

The Crown vs Zheng, Zheng, Zhang and Ross...
Interesting how some of them donate to both major parties. I wonder what they want in return.

by Lapun | 13th Jul 20, 7:58pm 1594627098

Surely the money comes from the goodness of their heart; they merely want to support democracy in NZ.

by Davo36 | 14th Jul 20, 9:34am 1594676043

What you do is donate to both parties, then it doesn't matter who wins, the winner will have to do your bidding.

by SmoKey | 13th Jul 20, 10:03pm 1594634605

A bogey arises ?

by Brock Landers | 14th Jul 20, 6:30am 1594665058

Yeah I made some donations to Labour in 2017 based on their manifesto.

It's about time the serious fraud office got involved over their "aspirational" lies. I'd like my money back.

by Nzdan | 14th Jul 20, 7:46am 1594669602

While you're at it, you should also calculate the 10 years of 2.5% additional GST you have paid and send a bill to the National Party. That was one big lie.

by Brock Landers | 14th Jul 20, 8:02am 1594670549

I never voted for them though.

by Nzdan | 15th Jul 20, 11:01am 1594767694

Nope, but they made a promise to all New Zealanders that if elected they won't increase GST.

by SmoKey | 14th Jul 20, 8:04am 1594670682

Todd Muller quits as Leader of National. Bring on the Crushed.

by mfd | 14th Jul 20, 9:40am 1594676412

When are we finally going to shift to public funding of the parties to remove dirty money from the system? We either pay a few dollars each, or pay with corruption at the heart of our political system.