KEY POINTS:
New Zealand First is struggling to explain why it broke the law by not declaring a $50,000 donation from the Spencer Trust.
The Herald was yesterday given four different explanations of what the party calls an "administrative error".
The independent auditor blamed the party, the party blamed the auditor, and party officials blamed each other.
On Tuesday, the party was forced to admit it didn't declare a donation of over $10,000 in order to prove to the Serious Fraud Office that Sir Robert Jones' 2005 donation to the Spencer Trust made it to the party as intended.
Auditor Nick Kosoof issued a letter saying "the office of New Zealand First made an administrative error".
But MP Dail Jones, president when the return was filed in April 2006, yesterday said it was Mr Kosoof who "saw it [the donation] and forgot about it".
NZ First's treasurer at that time, accountant Brent Catchpole, pointed the problem back to the party, saying he could not give Mr Kosoof the full records as "a lot of the information wasn't handed over to me as it should have been".
Secretary Edwin Perry, legally liable for the return, had just taken over the job and submitted it not knowing of the "genuine mistake".
The three men were not on the party executive when the donation was made in August 2005. Kaye Urlich, the treasurer when it was banked, denied Mr Catchpole's claims that records were missing, saying "he got everything he needed".
MP Doug Woolerton and Margaret Green, the president and secretary at the time, could not be contacted.
Prime Minister Helen Clark said she was taking New Zealand First's explanation at face value.
"They're a small party with a rather amateur organisation. These things can happen."
New Zealand First's admission that it breached the law contradicts leader Winston Peters' public assurances almost six weeks ago that the party was not legally required to declare Sir Robert Jones' donation.
"Um, I've asked of my officials is there something to disclose here within the law, the answer is no there is not," Mr Peters said.
But Mr Jones yesterday said the party had checked only on Tuesday why the donation was not declared, after reading about the Spencer Trust records in the Herald.
The records showed Sir Robert's $25,000 and another anonymous $25,000 going to New Zealand First in a $50,000 chunk.
Mr Jones said the party had not checked the records when the controversy over Sir Robert's donations first arose six weeks ago because it had faith in Mr Kosoof's auditing: "You pay this guy and you expect him to get it right.
"Hindsight's a great thing."
New Zealand First used a similar excuse of having a changeover in the party's hierarchy this year when it blamed its late 2007 return on "officials that had not been through the donation return process before"and the communication between the treasurer and auditor "lacking clarity".
The breach cannot be prosecuted because under old electoral law it was required to be investigated within six months, but a successful prosecution could have resulted in a fine of up to $20,000 and/or a year in prison.
Meanwhile, Mr Peters' lawyer friend Peter Williams, QC, yesterday revealed that the Spencer Trust had received $80,000 from the Vela family and that New Zealand First had handed over records to the SFO.
Mr Williams told Radio New Zealand he "presumed" the Vela money had gone to New Zealand First in amounts under $10,000.
The Spencer Trust was formed only in 2005 so the Vela family's $80,000 is different from the reported $150,000 given to the party between 1999 and 2003.
TOP PICKS
Four ways to make an "administrative error"
Auditor: It was the party.
Party president: It was the auditor.
Party treasurer: It was the former treasurer.
Former treasurer: It wasn't me, the treasurer had what he needed.
