KEY POINTS:
Without wanting to rub salt into National's therapeutic medicines wound, I would note that that estimable blogger and sensible person and National activist David Farrar concedes the Herald staff were justified in drawing our conclusions about Key's statements on the transtasman therapuetics agency.
Key conceded last night that his comments in an interview on Tuesday had caused confusion but he would not retract his statement that the Herald had misrepresented him.
The also estimable Russell Brown pondered the Key change yesterday and National's stubborn hold-out position on a joint agency.
"When presented with what is a reasonable compromise, on a very important piece of law, it just isn't good enough to ignore the detail and repeat your position. National knows damn well the havoc it will procure by refusing to play ball," Brown says.
I blogged similarly a few weeks ago and while it is still unfathomable why National has taken the position it has, Labour has escaped too lightly for its failure to properly consult National on the Peters compromise. And King must shoulder the blame.
Yesterday she seized on a statement John Key made in a 45 minute interview with the Herald to say he appeared to have changed his view and was accepting the Peters compromise.
Key says he has held that view all along. I wonder if King had had 45 minutes with Key herself six months ago, she might have discovered that for herself, or another factor that might have made the difference, and saved everyone a lot of grief. Maybe it is time to pass the baton to Pete Hodgson.
My colleague John Armstrong has written a great commentary today on what has been Key's first big blunder since becoming party leader.
It is still puzzling as to what was behind Key's more conciliatory attitude to the agency. I suspect though that he has been getting so much grief since Labour parked the bill.
A damning column last week on his failures by Colin James, for whom he has a great respect, would have stung him deeply.
