Wood vs Key share scandal compared
The Herald reports:
The Prime Minister wasted no time in standing down Michael Wood as Transport Minister yesterday after the Herald revealed he owned $13,000 of Auckland Airport shares that he was told to sell “half a dozen times” since 2020.
The Herald can also reveal Wood declined North Shore Aerodrome’s application for airport authority status while he owned shares in Auckland Airport, a potential competitor.
The aerodrome is in the Whangaparāoa electorate and its MP, National’s Mark Mitchell, said the situation appeared “dodgy” and that Wood’s actions were a sackable offence.
Chris Hipkins described Wood’s ownership of the stock while he was regulating the aviation industry as “not acceptable”.
This revelation changes things for Wood. As a shareholder in Auckland Airport, he should have recused himself from making a decision on North Shore Aerodrome’s application for airport authority status.
This revelation changes things from a potential conflict of interest to actually having made a Ministerial decision where he had a financial interest in the outcome.
Now again I would say I don’t think that was his motivation. $13,000 of shares to someone on $250,000 a year is not a lot of money. But when John Key had some shares in Tranzrail, Labour insisted he was acting corruptly and was motivated by his shareholding, even though they represented a minuscule amount of his holdings.
It is worth comparing the two situations of Key in 2003 and Wood in 2023, so I have done a table.
| MP | Key | Wood |
| Company | Tranzrail | Auckland Airport |
| Shares value | $100,000 approx | $13,000 |
| Est % of wealth | 0.2% | 2%+ |
| Owned by | Family trust not managed by Key | Wood directly |
| Breached standing orders | No | Yes |
| Breached Cabinet Manual | No | Yes |
| Alleged conflicted action | Asked questions in Parliament | Declined authority status to a competitor |
| Role | Associate Opposition Transport spokesperson | Minister of Transport |
| Sales of shares | Done within 12 months of being an MP for a loss of over $100,000 | Not done despite six twelve reminders from Cabinet office over 2.5 years |
Now with the Key situation, Labour insisted this was an egregious breach of standards. By their own rhetoric, what Wood does is clearly much worse.
Also Hipkins has just revealed that the Cabinet Office asked Wood not six times, but 12 times if had sold the shares. This means surely he can’t continue as a Minister?
No tag for this post.The post Wood vs Key share scandal compared first appeared on Kiwiblog.