Scrutiny on Independent Together’s Wellington campaign after leaked bank statements
Thursday, 8 January 2026
Leaked bank statements appearing to show significant undeclared spending have put Wellington City councillor Ray Chung’s Independent Together group under fresh scrutiny.
The Post has obtained what appear to be the Wellington political group’s bank statements from the opening of the account in March, through a flurry of large donations in April after it launched its key policies, to two weeks after the October 13 local body election.
The group’s figurehead was Chung, who failed in his mayoral bid but was the only Independent Together (IT) candidate to win a council seat. Despite questions over its spending, it appears all donations above $1500 - the legal limit - were declared.
A $40,000 donation Chung claimed in The Post mayoral debate was from Vlad Barbalich ‒ a property developer who bankrolled freedom party DemocracyNZ and now supports NZ First ‒ is nowhere to be seen in bank statements or declarations. The cost of the Independent Together headquarters on the corner of Wakefield and Chaffers St in central Wellington, which are owned by Barbalich through his Messenger Holdings, do not appear to be included either.
Read more:
The bank statements show IT spent $36,777 with billboard company Jolly and $17,434 with software development company Bidbuy. The combined declared spending for IT candidates, plus backing group Better Wellington, was $6913 with Jolly and $11,695 with Bidbuy.
Election rules state all campaign spending during the three-month election period must be declared. Money spent before the election period has to be apportioned out if the benefit still exists in the election period ‒ a billboard up for the final four months would have to have about three-quarters of the cost declared. Donations made in-kind have to be declared at “reasonable market value”.
Candidates knowingly exceeding spending limits ‒ $60,000 for Wellington mayoral candidates and $20,000 to $30,000 for ward candidates ‒ can be jailed up to two years or fined up to $10,000. Unwitting breaches can attract a fine up to $5000.
Chung this week said he “didn’t have anything to do with how any of the donations were spent”. He said he was mistaken in The Post debate when he said Barbalich had donated $40,000.
Alistair Boyce, from Better Wellington, was approached for comment.
Local Government Minister Simon Watts, who was sent screenshots of the accounts, said he would “be concerned if a candidate had deliberately taken actions that undermine the integrity of elections and are offences under the Local Electoral Act”. Breaches should be referred to police, he said.
“I cannot intervene in how an election is run or in enforcement decisions. However, I am closely monitoring the situation to ensure the integrity of the electoral process is upheld.”
Green councillor Rebecca Matthews said it was “very clear” the IT campaign spent more than any other 2025 Wellington mayoral campaign. The accounts left “unanswered” questions about whether spending was properly accounted for, she said.
“The rules are there for a reason and it's the responsibility of every candidate and party to follow them openly and transparently.”
Green Party Local Government spokesperson Celia Wade-Brown, a former Wellington mayor, said her party planned to remove big money from politics.
“Large undisclosed donations reduce transparency. Breaching the spending limits or under-reporting, as may have occurred here, is unfair and undemocratic,” she said.
“People should not be able to buy an electoral outcome.”
Labour duty MP Rachel Brooking said electoral laws had to be complied with to “ensure transparency and maintain public trust”.
Electoral officer Warwick Lampp said he had received no complaints about IT’s declarations. He would refer any complaints to police.
Police could not immediately confirm if any complaints had been made.