The Kim Dotcom fiasco, in which no less than the Prime Minister is now embroiled (and apologising for a convicted criminal who should perhaps never have been in New Zealand in the first place), should have taught us all one thing: the likes of Mike Tyson should be kept out.

The rules are there for a reason; bend them in the favour of the rich and the famous, and you get what we have with Kim Dotcom.

His money has found him in the corridors of power; understanding very well the intersection between money, power and politics, Dotcom wasted no time ingratiating himself with the establishment (and the public. Everyone loves fireworks, except maybe some dog owners).

Doing so leads to awkward situations and requests for ‘friends in high places' to perform favours. Ask yourself a simple question: why else do the rich cosy up to the politically powerful? Better yet, we should ask for John Banks' opinion on that matter.

Bending of the rules in Tyson's case appears to have been done so that a charity might benefit to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. Worth it?

A simple reference to the increasingly marginalised concept of ‘principle' should very quickly settle any ethical sophistry which might be rolled out in justification. In most places, where money is paid for consideration, it's called ‘corruption'.

‘Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face'. That's a Tyson quote and he has quite rightly gotten punched in the face by Kate Wilkinson. More than that, sanity has prevailed and children's charity Life Education has unequivocally stated that it wants nothing to do with Tyson.

The bottom line is this. A convicted rapist on the motivational speaking circuit is absurd and should be treated with contempt. New Zealand's immigration laws are there for a reason, to protect its people from unsavoury characters.

And there must be more than a few in National's government who must be thinking a similarly rigorous application of the law to Dotcom may just have avoided considerable embarrassment.