“Clover Moore ‘a hypocrite’ on donations from developers”

Here’s a very interesting story by Imre Salusinszky in The Oz:

QUESTIONS have been raised about independent MP Clover Moore’s source of electioneering funds, with a former campaign insider accusing her of hypocrisy over donations from property developers.
Norman Thompson, who volunteered three days a week as Ms Moore’s office manager during her successful 2004 campaign to become Lord Mayor of Sydney – a role she holds alongside her state parliamentary duties – said he became concerned at a $30,000 donation from a group called Living Sydney.

Living Sydney, a registered political party that has backed a number of independent candidates for Sydney city council, is financially supported by about 15 large property firms, including Mirvac, Meriton, Leighton, Westfield, Transfield and Lendlease.

The group reported $139,000 in donations from developers in 1999 alone.

“When I heard she was relying on Living Sydney, I went to one of her advisers and said, ‘Do you realise that a lot of the money is from property developers?’ and he just shrugged his shoulders,” Mr Thompson told The Australian yesterday.

If this is true, it’s interesting given Clover’s claim that she doesn’t accept donations from developers.

5 Responses to “Clover Moore ‘a hypocrite’ on donations from developers”

  1. Chris Masters says:

    Clove was the biggest supporter of the Cross City Tunnel and actually wanted three time the original road closures at the behest of her supporters. Since the CCT has become a disaster she is running around town trying to convince everyone she had nothing to do with it.

    She has a history of this, against fox studios then for it when it was a success. For years has said that Labor and Librals had to much power and it should be shared, but on becoming lord mayor instigated a centralist regime denying anyone power except herself.

    At a council meeting she had a 6:30 agenda item which she secretly put in to on the CCT and informed her friends to come and support her. The anti-CCT group got wind of this and turned up in force with the media, She quickly reshuffelled it to 10:30. There were mums with kids having to wait 4 hours, it was awful.

    Clover has done nothing but throw stones all her life, but in the end she is just a pathetic politian like the rest of them. Imre is right, she is a hypocrite.

  2. Mr Local says:

    If this is the worst you can find against Clover after nearly 20 years in politics, I suggest she’s clean as a whistle.

    Re the Cross City Tunnel, she wanted local streets closed to protect local residents from through traffic, and also to make cycling safer. They were good moves.

  3. Mr Local says:

    And she returned the donation on discovering its source. It’s pretty clear we’re dealing with someone pretty honest.


  4. Cameron Herbert says:

    It’s hard to avoid the thought that all of the political players will be tainted by developer donations if you dig deep enough.

    The thing I like best about Clover is the ‘twice the value, twice as effective’ argument – which works well if you happen to agree with the Clover position, but unfortunately fails dismally if you don’t.

  5. Sacha says:

    It’s interesting that being a member of the Legislative Assembly and being Lord Mayor are quite different jobs, but that Clover seems to think that it doubles her effectiveness.

    I’m not sure why developers’ contributions, as opposed to non-developers’ contributions, as such a prime focus of anxiety. The obvious response is that developers may expect obvious quid pro quos, but I can imagine that all kinds of contributors might expect quid pro quos.

    Perhaps one way of dealing with any problems with contributors is for all contributions to be made public – I don’t know what the current rules are.

    In Clover’s election leaflet mailed out to Sydney voters, one of her policies is “Banning developer donations to political parties and candidates”. She may think that this is genuinely a good idea and/or may think that it’s a way to differentiate herself from the major parties and a nice electoral platform on which to give the major political parties some stick, but I think that, like so much of Clover’s policies, it’s more a slogan than anything else.

    Say that developer donations to political parties and candidates were banned. How easy would it be for developers to indirectly donate money to political parties and candidates? About the only change that Clover’s policy would result in is that there may be fewer developers’ donations, from those developers who do not wish to donate money in a roundabout way, and developers’ deductions wouldn’t be tax-deductible if they otherwise would be.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: