Dotcom blames Simon Power for pulling fireworks display

Email
Print

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 6:40p.m.

Screenshot from coverage of the Dotcom-funded New Year celebrations

Screenshot from coverage of the Dotcom-funded New Year celebrations

By Patrick Gower

Prime Minister John Key is defending granting Kim Dotcom New Zealand residency after a split in his Cabinet, where one minister saw fit to let him stay in the country, but another decided he wasn't good enough to buy property here.

Dotcom's rejection seems to have cost Auckland an annual fireworks display.

For New Year's Eve 2010, Dotcom shouted Auckland $500,000 worth of fireworks. There was plenty to celebrate - he'd just been granted New Zealand residency.

Dotcom had convictions for computer hacking and insider trading, but after putting up $10 million for the 'investor plus' category, Immigration NZ approved him as of "good character", and Immigration Minister Jonathan Coleman chose not to intervene.

But residency meant little last year when Dotcom tried to buy the Chrisco mansion.

The "good character" question came up again. This time the Overseas Investment Office waved him through, but ministers Simon Power and Maurice Williamson vetoed the application.

And Dotcom certainly didn't like getting told no.

He said he was going to spend over $1 million on fireworks for Auckland every year, but had stopped because of what he called the "superhero Simon Power… the one-man show stopping New Zealanders from having too much fun".

So no there's more Dotcom fireworks, but plenty of questions about his immigration status.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

30 Jan 2012 10:09p.m.

nigel wrote:

Dave Dotcom was of fine character when they took his money, but as soon as it suited them he was of bad character. The hypocrisy is on the part of the Government because Dotcom acted in good faith, whereas the government insofar as they approved of him and then did not for no reason. Presented with capriciousness and bad character, therefore they are hypocrites and this was succinctly pointed out by Johnmillan. The details of who did what when are unimportant as the overall impression is one of hypocrisy on the part of the Government, actually I would have thought that was obvious.

30 Jan 2012 04:37p.m.

Dave wrote:

'Nigel' / 'johnmillan' you need to check your facts. I see no "hypocritical" inconsistencies of Government departments as you put it, because each made decisions based on the guidelines they had to work to for two totally different questions. On one hand 'Dotcom' met the requirements for 'Residency' based on NZ and German law guidelines (Please refer to - http://www.3news.co.nz/Megauploads-Kim-Dotcom-may-have-faked-clean-slate/tabid/412/articleID/240797/Default.aspx?src=3NewsELetter The only inconsistency, is with 'johnmillan' claiming quite wrongly that Coleman "...saw the dollars and did nothing about it then." There was no need to do anything about it then, and no reason to do anything about it now as each department made decisions on two totally different rulings based on the criteria they had to work to, to reach two totally different unrelated outcomes.

30 Jan 2012 03:31p.m.

nigel wrote:

Paora, Johnmillan’s statement is entirely accurate as he points out the hypocritical inconsistencies of Government departments over Dotcom. You make no attempt to debunk his point you simply attack him personally. Under normal circumstances I would not debate with a hot air, but I will make an exception in your case!

26 Jan 2012 01:35p.m.

Paora wrote:

'johnmillan' you are nothing but an anti establishment nutter making negative comments against the current legally elected Government. People like you only increase support for abortion if it could be backdated to before your generation.

26 Jan 2012 10:16a.m.

bOb wrote:

My vote would be for stop letting 1 million dollars go up in smoke and spend it in a better way.

25 Jan 2012 10:50p.m.

johnmillan wrote:

Yes take the money and the fireworks then shoot him down.Coleman saw the dollars and did nothing about it then.

25 Jan 2012 07:16p.m.

Erm... wrote:

My vote would be for no fireworks and no Mr Dotcom.