"They Bought Three Parties With One Chequebook, and Called It Democracy" - 18 August 2026
The 2026 donations register is a shearing shed where the same six hands fleece the same three pens — and a Māori party surviving on its own president's overdraft.
I'm Ivor Jones. I'm Te Arawa, I'm Ngāti Pikiao, I've got Welsh whakapapa running through me too, and I have been analysing something the corporate press in this country apparently cannot be bothered doing: reading the Electoral Commission's own public donations register, line by line, name by name, cheque by cheque.
RNZ | Te Reo Irirangi o Aotearoa
What I found is not corruption in the cartoon sense — no brown envelopes, no midnight car parks. It's worse than that, because it's legal.
A white supremacist neoliberal coalition government is being bankrolled, in plain sight, on the public record, by a rotating cast of the same six or seven Rich List names — and they're not even bothering to hide that they're playing all three coalition parties at once like poker chips at the same table.
I am furious about this. You should be too. Let me show you the receipts.
A Law Designed by the People It's Supposed to Watch
Every time this donations law gets touched, it gets weaker, and it is always the same three parties doing the touching.
The Electoral Amendment Act 2025
— passed by National, ACT and NZ First over the objections of Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori
— raised the reportable-donation threshold and gave donors an extra ten working days before their name has to appear anywhere.
Same Act shortened the enrolment window to 13 days before polling day and banned prisoner voting.
You do not accidentally write a law that makes it harder to see who's paying you and harder for the poorest, youngest and brownest voters to enrol. You do that on purpose.
This is not new for this donor class.
Back in 2019, three companies linked to packaging billionaire Graeme Hart each donated exactly $14,995 — five dollars under the old $15,000 disclosure line. The Serious Fraud Office had to get involved. That's not an oversight. That's an accountant with a calculator and no shame.
The Deep Dive Podcast
Listen to a lively conversation between two hosts, unpacking and connecting topics in the sources of this essay. I apologise in advance for the AI's very harsh pronounciation of reo. Please dont shoot me, :).
Youtube Video
Like video? Here is a short video suppporting the essay. Again, don't shoot the messenger please because of AI's pronounciation. :)
Koha Consideration
Every koha you give signals that whānau are ready to support the accountability that Crown and corporate donor networks will never fund themselves. It signals that rangatiratanga includes the power to support our own truth tellers — the ones willing to read six hundred lines of a donations register so you don't have to.
Kia kaha, whānau. Stay vigilant. Stay connected. And if you are able, consider a koha to keep this ledger open and this voice going.
If you are unable to koha, no worries — subscribe or follow The Māori Green Lantern at themaorigreenlantern.maori.nz, kōrero about this with your whānau and friends, and share it. That is koha in itself.
Four pathways exist:
- Koha — Support: Support this mahi directly via the koha platform
- Subscribe: Receive essays directly and support through subscription
- Direct bank transfer: Ivor Jones, account number 03-1395-0099387-000
- Facebook: Follow and share
Analysis: Five Things I Found That Should Make You Angry
The Coalition Triplets — One Cheque Book, Three Political Parties, 48 Hours
Core claim: GMP Environmental Limited, a Greymouth Petroleum subsidiary drilling gas out of the ground, gave $100,000 to ACT, $100,000 to NZ First, and $100,000 to National — three identical cheques inside 48 hours in February 2026, verified against the Companies Office ownership record confirming they share a registered address.
Quantified harm: that's $300,000 — more than double Te Pāti Māori's entire annual income of $141,986.50 as filed with the Electoral Commission — handed simultaneously to the exact three parties whose ministers now control fast-track approval powers over oil and gas. This isn't a donor supporting a party. It's a gas company insuring three horses in the same race.
Solution: cap donations from any single entity per election cycle, and ban donations from any company holding, or seeking, a resource consent from the government it's donating to.
Impact on tikanga, explained for the Western mind: imagine a marae where the same visitor brings identical koha to three different hapū on the same weekend, then expects all three to owe him mana at once. That's not koha. That's buying leverage and calling it a gift.
I wrote about this exact machine — how billionaires get invited to "rescue" what the Crown deliberately breaks — in "The Billionaires' Salvage Yard: How This White Supremacist Neoliberal Government Lets Mowbray and Williams Strip Netball for Parts" — same billionaire donor class, different waka, same salvage yard.
National Takes Two-Thirds of Every Anonymous Dollar in the Country
Core claim: in 2026, parties banked $468,160 through the Electoral Commission's "protected disclosure" scheme — legally anonymous donations the party itself isn't allowed to trace. National took $316,160 of it, confirmed directly from Electoral Commission figures.
Quantified harm: I did the maths myself: $316,160 ÷ $468,160 = 67.53%. Two-thirds, exactly as claimed, going to a government whose own commissioned Independent Electoral Review recommended scrapping this scheme entirely. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith's response: "Abolishing protected disclosure donations is not a priority." Of course it isn't — it's funding him.
Solution: abolish protected disclosure, full stop, as the government's own reviewers already told them to.
Impact on tikanga, explained for the Western mind: whakapapa is the whole point of a gift — you know who gave, why, and what's now owed. An anonymous donation deliberately erases that whakapapa. It is designed, structurally, to prevent the very accountability koha assumes.
I've written before about a government that "found $298.4 million for private theatres in a heartbeat" while refusing to pay the Māori health debt its own Tribunal priced years ago — the same government finding creative accounting for billionaires and excuses for whānau is not a coincidence. It's a pattern.
An Insider Trader's Family Vehicle Bankrolls the Coalition
Core claim: Christopher & Banks Limited, the Huljich family's investment vehicle, gave ACT and NZ First a combined $195,000 ($145,000 + $25,000 + $25,000, confirmed against the Electoral Commission register). Director Peter Huljich had his insider-trading fine doubled by the Court of Appeal in Huljich v R [2025] NZCA 155 from $100,000 to $200,000, for conduct the court itself called "unduly lenient" at the original sentence.
Quantified harm: I checked the maths — $200,000 ÷ $100,000 is exactly double. That's the fine. Meanwhile the same family put nearly the same order of magnitude into two coalition parties. I am not asserting a link between the two facts — I have no evidence the donations and the fine are connected — but the coincidence of scale is worth every reader sitting with.
Solution: disclose whether donors or their directors have current regulatory sanctions, so the public can judge the coincidence for themselves.
Impact on tikanga, explained for the Western mind: mana is earned and can be lost through wrongdoing; it does not get quietly restored by writing a large enough cheque to the people who write the rules.
I explored this same pattern of reputation-laundering through boardroom proximity to power in "Bruce Cotterill and the Neoliberal Machine He's Paid to Polish" — different name, same machine, same laundering.
A Dying Man's Cheque, and a Rich List That Never Stops Circulating
Core claim: National's single largest 2025 donor was the late Robert (John) Wares, a Nelson philanthropist, who gave somewhere between $210,000 and $221,000 in the months before his death in March 2025. I'm not going to pretend the exact figure is settled — 1News and NewsBeep say $210,000, the PublicData.co.nz donor registry says $221,000, and the variance appears to span two separate annual returns I have not personally reconciled line by line.
Quantified harm: whatever the exact number, it's National's biggest single 2025 donation, from a man who did not live to see the election it was meant to fund.
Solution: none needed on this one beyond transparency — I raise it because it belongs in the ledger, not because I allege wrongdoing.
Graeme Hart Never Stops, and the Left Isn't Innocent Either
Core claim: Rank Group and Graeme Hart put $500,000 into National this cycle ($250,000 + $250,000, confirmed via RNZ's tracker) on top of a documented history stretching back to 2019 and the NZ First Foundation structuring scandal.
But — and I will not soften this because it's inconvenient — Les Mills gym magnate Phillip Mills spread $263,200 to Labour, $100,000 to the Greens, and $150,000 to the Opportunities Party, a combined $513,200 across three parties at once, the exact same hedging behaviour I'm condemning in the coalition's donors. My maths: $263,200 + $100,000 + $150,000 = $513,200.
Quantified harm: the scale gap is real — Mills's half a million is dwarfed by Cartmell's $706,992.91 solo effort, and Labour's entire 2025 haul of $2,403,241.93 is barely 38% of National's $6,275,234.46 — but a taiaha that only cuts to the right is a prop, not a weapon. I'm not here to launder Labour's donor list either.
Three Examples for the Western Mind, Summed Up
GMP Environmental → three coalition parties → fast-track gas approvals.
Harm: $300,000, more than double a whole political party's annual income, buying simultaneous access to the exact ministers who decide gas consents.
Solution: ban donations from consent-seeking entities.
Tikanga: it's koha stripped of whakapapa, given to buy leverage, not to build relationship.
See The Billionaires' Salvage Yard.
National → two-thirds of all anonymous donations → a scheme its own reviewers said to scrap.
Harm: 67.53% of $468,160 in money nobody, including the party, is legally allowed to trace.
Solution: abolish protected disclosure.
Tikanga: whakapapa erased on purpose.
See the surgeries essay.
Christopher & Banks → $195,000 to the coalition → a doubled insider-trading fine sitting alongside it.
Harm: not asserted as causal, but the coincidence of scale between a $200,000 fine and $195,000 in donations deserves scrutiny, not silence.
Solution: mandatory disclosure of directors' regulatory sanctions history alongside donation filings.
Tikanga: mana lost through wrongdoing doesn't get quietly bought back.
See Bruce Cotterill and the Neoliberal Machine.
Implications: What This Actually Costs Whānau
If this money buys even a sliver of policy deference
— a softened royalty, a fast-tracked consent, a capital gains tax that never arrives
— the damage compounds every year nobody fixes it.
Every dollar that could have gone to Whānau Ora, kōhanga reo, or the Māori health debt I've documented at $298.4 million and rising is a dollar this donor class helped keep off the table.
What you can do: demand your MP support scrapping the protected-disclosure scheme, exactly as the government's own Independent Electoral Review recommended. Submit on any Fast-track Approvals referral touching your rohe. And read the register yourself — it's public, I linked it, go and look.
I'm Calling It What It Is
This is not a "donations story."
This is a white supremacist neoliberal government, funded by a rotating cast of the same six or seven fortunes, writing the rules that decide whether your awa gets protected or your maunga gets mined
— while the party built to represent tangata whenua runs on its own president's chequebook.
I am not going to soften that sentence to make anyone comfortable. The evidence is the taiaha. I'm just the one swinging it in daylight, with the receipts attached.
Māuri ora!
Ivor Jones The Māori Green Lantern Fighting Misinformation And Disinformation From The Far Right
Public Interest Statement
Published under the Defamation Act 1992's public interest framing (Durie v Gardiner 2018 NZCA 278) and qualified privilege for quoted ministerial statements (Lange v Atkinson 2000 3 NZLR 385). This reflects a documented pattern of conduct, not an allegation against any individual, and is published without malice.
