KEY POINTS:
Winston Peters has not done what he said he would do.
Last Saturday during a press conference with Condoleezza Rice, the Foreign Minister was asked by TV3 what he thought about Bob Jones having accused him of lying.
[Bob Jones says Peters solicited a donation for New Zealand First: Peters says he didn't. In any event Jones wrote a $25,000 cheque to the Spencer Trust and doesn't know what happened to it.]
Peters said at the Condie press conference: "I can't wait to get down to Parliament next week and to deal with the three versions of Bob Jones' stories from Bob Jones. But I want to deal with this matter today which is so much more important.
"Next week you'll get all the answers you need. But all I would ask you to do in the meantime is find out which of the three versions that Bob Jones has given you believe and today I would like to concentrate on a very, very serious visit to this country and on important issues to do with our relationship in the 21st century. "
As he was leaving the room in Government House, he looked at Duncan Garner and said "Got that sunshine?'
It was that promise to give "all the answers you need' that led to an expectation today that Peters might actually give Sir Robert the reassurance he wants that his $25,000 donation was actually spent on the party despite it not being disclosed as a donation.
Peters revealed nothing today on the matter enveloping his party that we did not know yesterday.
It is sounding familiar. He also said he would return from Singapore last Friday and deal with the allegations but instead held a press conference.
NZPA has done a transcript of part of it which I'll run at the end of this - and you'll see why Helen Clark yesterday described as The Greatest Show on Earth.
The Herald received a rare honourable mention by Peters in question time today because of a comment we ran this morning from Professor Malcolm Wright. He used to work for Bob Jones and was witness to conversations between Peters and his former bagman Roger McClay about a donation to the party.
The discussion took place over drinks at Jones' Wellington office in August 2005.
Peters was thrilled that someone had reported the fact, unknown until today, that he was not in the room at the time the donation was raised.
My colleague Patrick Gower talked to Wright yesterday in Adelaide. What Peters didn't mention was the other thing that Wright said, however - that once he came back in the room and quite aggressively asked who had raised it, Peters tried to get $50,000 rather than the $25,000 Jones settled upon.
Peters came out of question time today and refused to answer most questions by reporters but he did promise more tomorrow. He has made those sorts of promises before.
This is the link to today's exchange in the House over Peters' secret donations.
What follows is the NZPA transcript of last Friday's press conference held in Peters' Auckland office a few hours after he returned from Singapore.
Reporter [Q]: What did you use the Spencer Trust (ST) for?
Peters [A]: I've just given you the total answer to that.
Q: What was the reason for the ST?
A: I've just told you if you want to know that ring up the ST. I have
no involvement in that trust.
Q: But you solicited the money for the trust.
A: Again that is a false allegation.
Q: So who solicited the money Mr Peters?
A : With great respect I'm asking you to deal with the allegations
that you've made that are on the table now and I'm happy to answer
those
Q:: I am dealing with them
A: But please don't come on a fishing expedition without any
evidence to what your saying. I don't intend to answer any of those
allegations.
Q: Bob Jones said you solicited the money.
A: With respect Bob Jones went public on NZ television months
before he gave any notice to New ZEaland First (NZF) and told the whole wide world he
was going to finance NZF or rather Winston Peters if he started a party.
You all know that.
Second he made it public well after that as well. I did not solicit
money from Bob Jones, he announced as you well know from the TV
transcript, if I were to start a political party or Mike Moore were to
he was going to fund it.
Q: And you tell us what that money from the ST was there for?
A: Well you've got to ask the ST that, second thing you've got to
ask..
Q :Who are we going to ask from the ST Mr Peters?
A: Well you're not going to go beyond the veil of the law with
respect. We all have the same protections as you have, if you want
to know the facts ask the right people, don't expect someone who
doesn't know to answer your questions.
Q: So you have no idea what the money was used for.
A: My officials would and they have said there is nothing to
disclose.
Q: Mr Peters are you seriously saying that people are meant to
believe that you don't know what the ST is used for?
A: Yes I do. You know why? Because those are the facts.
Q: We asked your brother yesterday and he wouldn't answer the
question.
A: Well Audrey you should show a bit of knowledge, experience
and a bit of commonsense, right? Go and ask him again.
Q: Who should we ask?
A: You're entitled to ask it all the questions you like.
Q: But you're not answering them.
A: How can I answer them if I'm not in charge of the trust.
Q: Because you know what that trust is using the money for.
A: Sorry I don't.
Q: Really?
A: Well I just said no I don't.
Q: So do you believe it was used for paying any of NZF's bills?
A: Um, I've asked of my officials is there something to disclose here
within the law, the answer is no there is not.
Q: But the question is do you think it has been used to pay NZF
bills.
A: I want to make it very clear to you you're not going to go beyond
the law as respects every political party and its leader on a wild
fishing expedition and get a response. If you want to make
allegations you provide the facts behind what you're saying.
Q: is Bob Jones (BJ) lying then when he said he gave money to NZF at
your request?
A: BJ gave to the best of my knowledge and I think I'm right here,
not the sum he said but he gave a sum in 1993 he announced months
before that he would do that and I went to him and said every
potential subscriber to NZF all those people think that you have
financed this party, it's not true but you went public and said that to
which he provided a cheque of $50,000 I do not believe I solicited
because he announced it and since then has told countless people
that he has paid money to NZF.
Q: But he said he gave a cheque a month before the 2005 election,
he had drinks with you and you approached him.
A: Let me say that is laughable, if you think about it with all sort of
political parties in the room, is this likely to be the case? Bob's
memory is failing him here however he paid a cheque and he says to
the ST, he did not pay a cheque to NZF, the details are important.
Q: He's confused about this because he thinks he paid a cheque to
the ST who were acting on behalf of NZF.
A: With respect you've got one of NZ's most wealthy men who has
enormous experience about many things but most of all how to make
money. Do you think he could have gone back and examined the
facts before he said that?
Q: He's done that and he says he has a cheque prior to the 2005 general election
for the ST which he believed was acting on behalf of NZF, he's now
written to your party president because he is bewildered now about
where that money went.
A: Lets get a few things sorted out first of all, Dail Jones was not
president at the relevant time. Second Mr Jones has had an
independent person examine the details behind what he has said and
has sent an email back to that person acknowledging the fact. That is
where we are today. Not with innuendo and misrepresentation.
Q: So you're saying he didn't give that $25,000 to the ST?
A: No what he said what he related to the cheque is a fact but what
the allegation was somehow the money wandered off somewhere else
that was clearly the libellous and defamatory inference taken by
certain journalists. He now knows today as he did last night that it's
not true.
Q: What is not true?
A: That the inference taken by one Phil Kitchen as interpreted from
his conversation with Bob Jones is absurdly not true.
Q: So what does he know?
A: What he knows is what I've told you.
Q: Where did the money go?
A: Well BJ wrote a cheque to the ST that's where the money went.
Q: And what was it spent on?
A: Well you've got to ask the trust that. But as to Mr Jones' concerns as so widely misinterpreted by the media they have been put to rest.
Q: Is it $25,000, do you know how much it was?
A: Well Bob says it was $25,000.
Q: What do you think it is? You don't know?
A: Well with respect if Bob says its $25,000, then its $25,000.
Q: Have you talked to him?
A No I have not, I don't intend to talk to anyone outside the party
on this matter so that you can say I am trying to collude with your
independent witnesses.
Q: isn't it in your interest though to find out where that money went
and what it was spent on?
A: It is in my interest to find out if the law has been complied with
and I have.
Q: How much has BJ given over the years to NZF?
A: I can't confirm that amount, we've never been the beneficiary of
that sort of money and Bob seems to not be certain himself but i
don't believe it is anymore, and don't quote me on this, but I think
it's $75,000 all up since the party has been going.
Q: Does that include the $25,000?
A: Well it must do if BJ just said that. It's $50,000 to NZF back in
1993 and no other money but I just don't know that and Bob hasn't
given me any details on that. If it was in anyway disclosable we
would have done what we first did or if it wasn't then it leaves me
with a bit of difficulty but i want you to go and ask Bob Jones that.
Q: So why isn't it disclosed?
A: Excuse me you're suppose to be a senior journalist that's what
the law says.
Q So if it was a political donation over $10,000 why wasn't it
disclosable?
A: I've got somebody here you hasn't understood the first facts. He
made the cheque out to the ST ok? That's why it's not disclosable,
Audrey. I'll go over it again one more time very slowly. He made the
cheque out for $25,000 from a company I believe he is in control of
to the ST that's why it is not disclosable.
Q: It's a backdoor donation to the party isn't it and you've
campaigned against secret trusts.
A: No I haven't. What I've campaigned against is those massive
donations that are there to buy policy and buy favours and Bob Jones
will tell you one thing that all the time I started NZF before and after
he's ranted and railed against my policies. That's the fact though.
Q: Can you tell us if any of that money from the ST was used in any
way to fund NZF?
A: What i can tell you what the officials who were in charge then
say there is no thing to disclose. And you're not going to treat NZF
different from to ...
Q: it's a simple question Mr Peters was the ST used to fund NZF?
A: It may be a simple question but that would represent a simple
mind. You're not going to go beyond the law here and get away with
the kind of innuendo that some of your colleagues have. You're
required to treat me and my party the same as any other leader.
That's all I've ever asked for.
Q: You're not addressing the facts. you're saying it didn't need to
be disclosed but can you say if any of the money was used to pay..
A: What I've told you is I've been to NZF, the people at the time,
and that's my advice. Have I gone through all the books, no.
Q: You must know if one dollar of it has gone to NZF?
A: Sorry that is for my officials to disclose and if it's not disclosable
then like every other political party that's the way you'll treat us.
Q: But why haven't they told you, you've had a week knowing
what the allegations were surely you should come out with that
information?
A: What, for some questions that are not based on the law?
Q: No because you said you would clear this up today.
A: With respect Mr Garner you come and base your questions on
the law and the facts but you're not going to get away with a wild
fishing expedition that goes well beyond the entitlement of New
Zealanders to support political parties if that is there wish and
anonymously if that is there wish.
Q: Whose idea was the ST?
A: Well go and ask them.
Q: I'm asking you because you've known about it.
A: I'm saying go and ask them.
Q: Who?
Q: Your brother hasn't had a conversation with you about the ST
at all?
A: You go and ask them?
Q: I'm asking you, have you had a conversation with your brother
about the ST?
A: No I have not, now you go and ask him.
Q: Whose idea was the ST?
A: I'll say this to you one more time Mr Garner, you've asked it
four times, for the fifth time here is my answer, go and ask him.
Q: When did you first find out about the ST?
A: When this issue was raised at the moment.
Q: This was the first time?
A: The party has a lot of association over many years a lot of people
but if you were to ask me when did you first hear of so and so then I
can not answer you.
Q: Correct me if I'm wrong but did you say you only heard of the
ST when it was raised in the media in the past couple of days?
A: I'm saying to you, I will correct you because you're wrong.
Q: when did you first hear of the ST?
A: No when you're wrong you're wrong.
Q: When did you first hear of the ST?
A: Next question.
Q: You've asked that question a thousand times.
Q: We're waiting for an answer.
A: I said it came to my attention in the last few days and that's why
I'm answering it.
Q when did you first know about the ST?
A: I'm sorry Mr Garner, my barrister and I have no involvement
with the ST full stop.
Q: Did the party have any involvement or know about it?
A: Ask them.
Q: I'm asking you.
A: with respect I'm leader of the party. I don't do all those sorts of
things at all. No leader can do that.
Q: Was the ST news to you over the past 24 hours or did you know
about it before then?
A: I'm going to say one time Mr Garner you go and ask them
because I've already answered your question five times and please
don't waste this press conference.
Mr Jones has made a number of statements which on hindsight, he
will admit are not factual. One is to the amount, two is where it
went, three as to any idea that it might have gone into my pocket
which is the inference that was made by the journalists of this
country. They never called me about this did they, just said it, now
that where it rests. The fourth thing I've set out the facts now if you
want to make any allegations give me the law and we'll have a
conversation but we're not going on a fishing expeditions.
Q: How can you make a donation to the ST and it not be a political
donation?
A: I gave you the answer.
Q: I'm not sure you did.
A: Listen very carefully again because of the facts he has presented
you with that is my total answer.
Q: Who are the trustees?
A: I believe my brother is one of them but he has not told me that,
so there you go.
Q: Do you think you've been straight up with the NZ public about
where NZF gets its money?
A: Of course I've been straight up with the NZ public, more
importantly we've complied with all the laws.
(In relation to the Waitemata Trust) I was a frontbencher for the National Party and was concerned about what I was seeing but I'm not here to answer those allegations,
they'll wait for another time ...
The ST has been around for a number of years, I can't tell you
when it was formed or what its construction is.
Q You've known about the trust for some years?
A: Well since then someone has let me know how long its been
around, I can't tell you what that is I really don't know.
Q: Can you just clarify, have you known about the trust for years
and years or did you just find out from the media?
A: Look I'm aware of the Waitemata Trust but I've got no idea
when it was formed.
.. One doesn't known when a trust is formed. That's the nature of a
trust, that's one of the features of it.
Q: But you haven't just learnt about it in the last fortnight?
A: These circumstances yes.
Q: But the existence of the trust, you've known about it for
sometime?
A: The existence yes, but as to its details, who they are, what there
purpose is, that is not within my purview, please ask them.
Q: So how long have you known about it?
A: How long have you known about the alphabet?
