that it's odd that so much of Cosgrove's allowed donations came from one source. And Danyl at the Dim-Post calls it "fishy" noting: Here's the problem: While Clayton Cosgrove knows his own soul and is confident he did nothing wrong, there's no way for the public to discern between an honest MP who drafts a bill in good faith and just happens to receive a very large donation from a company which benefits from it, and a corrupt MP who takes a payment from a company for drafting a bill. Which is why MPs usually go out of their way to avoid this kind of confusion, and declare conflicts of interests when intersections of money, friendship and legislation pop up. Labour (rightly) demanded that Nick Smith stop down over the ACC affair, and that John Banks step down over the Sky City donations: I don't see how they can keep Cosgrove on the front bench. 8 comments: Judge Holden said... Well, he was open and transparent, and has acted legally and hasn't told any lies. He declared the donation and obviously the private members' bill was in the public arena and he stated in advance in public he was going to draft it. Unlike, ummm, John Banks, who failed to declare his SkyCity donation, told Dotcom how he though he could get around electoral laws, and then told a bunch of lies about his relationship with him. It's all right when tories lie and cheat though eh? Well, you can