The answer is NO
February 29th, 2008 at 9:47 am by David FarrarWinston Peters has said the answer is No, with his comical NO sign as a prop yesterday. I did enjoy Guyon Espiner’s wit in stealing said sign after the press conference and holding it up on One News when asked if Peters had really answered all the questions satisfactorily.
Let us look at what Winston did and did not say. Please note I am not suggesting in any way that Peters has said anything which is not literally true. But it comes down to what one has not said.
First of all Peters insisted he would not provide any more information than required to by electoral laws. Now this “donation” was made prior to the passing of the Electoral Finance Ac, so will be governed by the provisions of the 1993 Electoral Act.
Now I suspect (for example) National has a similar policy – they will only release the information required to by electoral law. So what is the difference. Two things:
- Peters’ own party president has suggested there was a large anonymous donation
- Peters spent much of 2007 railing against such donations, and the need to change the law to prevent them. It would be sheer hypocrisy to rail against them, and also pocket one just a few hours before the law changes
Now the Herald reports:
Asked if he was saying he had never received one dollar from Owen Glenn or any associate of Mr Glenn, he hauls a sign out from under his table.
“NO”, it read.
Now again on face value, one accepts what Peters has said. However does this rule out Glenn having donated to say a local Tauranga trust, and that trust having donated to NZ First? This could be sorted out by having NZ First release their donations return to the Electoral Commission (due 30 April) early, so people can see if the auditors have signed off that there were *no* donations over $10K. If they were over $10K, then those who donated them can be asked if they were acting as an agent for anyone else.
Because you still have the statement from Owen Glenn that he has donated to parties in NZ other than Labour. And combine that with his refusal to deny a donation to NZ First, but his quick denial of offering a donation to the Maori Party, and the puzzle grows. Owen Glenn could solve all this speculation by just confirming on the record that he has never donated directly or indirectly to NZ First.
I also found it interesting that when asked if NZ First had ever asked Owen Glenn for money, he did not say no, but instead said “Oh, get lost Barry”. Possibly a more specific question could have been asked – did he ever meet with Owen Glenn in Sydney, and did they discuss donations at that meeting? Peters later says they never ask anyone for donations – now this can be true but doesn’t mean donations were not discussed.
But the part I find most amusing, is the denial that there was any large donations at all, let alone a large anonymous one in December. It seems Dail Jones is so stupid (according to Peters) that he could not tell the difference between money being transferred into their account from other party accounts, and an anonymous deposit. How very strange though that the bank could not trace the deposit, because if it is a transfer from another NZ First account – that should be simple to verify.
So if there was no large close to $100,000 donation as Dail Jones has said, where did all the money come from:
Where the $158,000 came from to “repay” NZ First’s unlawful spend at the last election:
“We’ve had anonymous donations at $10, and $20, and $50 for a long, long time because some people used to think – and it’s an attitude that still permeates New Zealand as a democracy – that one day the communists might take over and they will be all in the firing line.”
Oh I see. It’s all just a series of $20 and $50 donations from people worried about the communists. Hell I never knew Trevor Loudon donated to NZ First 
Related posts:
- Owen Glenn did donate to NZ First
- Clark also damns Peters
- Some facts about Owen Glenn
- What you have to believe in to believe Peters did not know
February 29th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Based on an average donation of $30.00 that would mean
NZ First has received 5 266 individual donations to cover
their $158,000 overspend.
…..Yeah Right!
PS David It would be interesting to review the last Electoral Accounts for
Vote:NZ First to see how many of these types of donations they received
February 29th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Has anyone ever seen Trevor Loudon and Redbaiter in the same place?
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:05 am
I saw the attempted interview by Barry Soper and Duncan Garner at Wellington airport on TV. Winston, the poodle, Peters was in very poor form: out of puff and out of answers.
This man knows no shame and will do whatever it takes to win in Tauranga, where the last of his forces are. With a bit of luck well see the back of this disgraceful and miserable politician, but this time for ever.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:10 am
The biggest laugh was when Winnie referred to NZ1 as a “major political party” that processed “tens of thousands of transactions through its bank accounts” and inferring that Dail Jones could have no concept of reality having “just emerged from” the relative obscurity of “his pharmacy”.
In itself the reference to that level of financial activity could be excused as an exaggeration but in the context of words meaning precisely what they mean, it must have been a blatant untruth if one is discussing the bank account activity in December 2007.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:13 am
Fair call Manolo but I’m sure that the thought was going thru his mind was:
“Yesterday Condi Rice, today Barry Soper. WTF did I do to deserve that?”
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Paul Henry’s interview with Winston was very entertaining. Don’t mean to link whore, but for those who are interested I’ve youtubed it and whacked it up here: http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=1254
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Tane, so you will take delight I’m sure in answering a question.
WTF is Paul Henry’s NP connection that Winston made so much of a play on during the interview?
He really did come across as a bit of a supercilious prat, perhaps the memory of Condi’s perfume was lingering in his flaring nostrils.
[DPF: Henry was National's candidate in Wairarapa in 1999]
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:39 am
i think the ‘snail-trails’ back to condi need to be explored further..
how deliciously ‘ironic’ it would be.. if that money was from ‘furrinner’ sources..?
and in that press conference..
..didn’t peters have the ‘air’ of a man who has just been (y’know..!)..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Damn that prick is a hypocrit.
“It will be anonymous so I don’t know where it came from – that’s the meaning of anonymous isn’t it…we’ve got to work it out roughly…it’s a five figure sum,” party president Dail Jones said, adding that the bank had been unable to tell him where the money had come from.
Peters and Labour go on and on about National hidding who is donating to them, and accuse them of selling policy to the highest bidder. Then Winston uses the anonymous excuse??? One of those journalists should have asked why is it OK for NZ First to get anonymous donations, but not National!
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am
I hadn’t seen the interview so thanks for the link Tane
I seriously think Winston has lost it!
I have watched him in the house recently, and he isn’t funny and he isn’t clever, he looks like he is in the early stage of some sort of mental impairement.
Rolling out trite little sayings that he had once used during the Winebox inquiry
But now it’s Winston that’s covering up the facts
This is a minister of the Crown for goodness sake – how often have you seen Condeleeza Rice holding up
placards during interview?
He’s like a silly schoolboy who has been caught out on a lie
He reminds me of …. oh I don’t know the PM who also looked unhinged this week blaming the media and the cartoonists for her own failings.
They are both a disgrace and making a mockery of our Government and our country
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Good to see FLG Tane taking vicarious pleasure watching HIS minister of Foreign Affairs ducking and weaving, but never answering any questions.
Winston practices attack as the best form of defense, and that approach has served him well over the years.
This time, Paul Henry former partisanship aside, Peters has provided no answers whatsoever to the nature of the funds donated to NZF. His explanation of “cake stalls” money cannot be taken seriously.
He’s a liar and has been exposed.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Bevan: Because Nationals anonymous donations are several orders of magnitude higher than the ones we’re discussing here? Or maybe because now National are the hypocrites for calling that everyone else but them expose the source of their donations?
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Let me work this out.
The Standard gets slagged because it has series of articles on what John Key DID SAY ( and his attempts cover it up)
And now we have DPF running a long article on what Winston Peters DIDNT SAY
(..But it comes down to what one has not said..)
Who is the fabulator here
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Bevan: Because Nationals anonymous donations are several orders of magnitude higher than the ones we’re discussing here?
So what? Why should NZ First’s doners get anonymity but not National’s?
Or maybe because now National are the hypocrites for calling that everyone else but them expose the source of their donations?
Nope – hypocrisy is when you rant and rave about one party and THEN it is found you are doing the same. NZ First and Labour were the ones who wanted to “clean up” the electoral system, they have been caught undertaking the same practises they accussed National of – that makes them hypocrits.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I think, in the eyes of many, especially Winnie supporters, Winston Bjeikle-Peterson came out well on top of Paul Henry in that interview. Hopeless interviewing, seemed shallow.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Also I think Guyon would’ve ruffled Winston’s feathers even more when he flung his NO sign at Guyon, and Guyon simply flung it back and said “Can I get a signature?” And have people seen TVNZ.co.nz homepage today?
It’s funny though, all the media has to do is totally ignore him and he’ll just dwindle in the polls never to be heard from again, yet he treats them as nothing more than undeserved, biased rats.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Good point Daniel, the media should stop giving him airtime.
I wonder if his fellow MP’s and party members are starting to tire of his behaviour.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Far out. I come to this thread, and more GWW off topic and drivelling. The Standard had a series of posts on what John Key was alleged to say (still haven’t seen any authoritative transcript), despite it being patently obvious that he did not, in fact, have an agenda to lower wages in NZ. Unless you’re one of those who pulls their tin foil hat right down to their eyebrows, there is no way you would possibly think this, hence the reason there is no traction. The Standard got slagged for being idiots.
Winston Peters, however, is getting hit because of the very clear discrepancies between what three people have said: Owen Glenn, Dail Jones and Winston Peters. Something clearly went on because the money went into the bank account. It is plausible and even likely that Winston was taking dodgy donations whilst decrying them and supporting legislation that was supposed to stop them and didn’t.
The Winston story has more substance and more interest than some fake beat up that the Standard is attempting to create out of nothing.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
So was it a case of Winnie giving Condi one and the CIA reciprocating via the NZ1 bank account Mmmmmmmmmmmm…….
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
still haven’t seen any authoritative transcript
Here you go:
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/key-clip.jpg
The publisher has also publicly backed the accuracy of the transcript:
Northern Publishing stands by the story published in the Bay Report on December 20, 2007 in which National Leader John Key was quoted as saying “We would love to see wages drop.”
Our reporter was at the meeting with the Kerikeri District Business Association President Carolyne Brooks-Quan and recorded the conversation.
We have a transcript of the meeting and we are happy that the quotes printed in the story are an accurate record of what Mr Key said.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
The Interislander ran aground in 1987, big business killed off a guy who found embarassing financial transactions on an old computer, Selwyn Cushing tried to bribe me, and he was doing it on behalf of the Business Roundtable, WINZ have a fleet of limosuines, and now ….
Owen Glenn didn’t donate to NZ First.
Given Winston’s track record, does anyone believe a thing he says?
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
NZ First received 130115 votes at the 2005 election. So 10s of thousand of small donations – 158000 over 10,000 = $15.80 – feasable perhaps – but that implies party financial support/membership of 7.6 of those who voted – questionable. 5 Figure donantion per Dail Jones – say $10001 less 158000 = 148000 divided by average $30 donation = 4900 donations – doubtful. 10s of thousands of donations – say 20,000 =$7.40 each – plausible, 100,000 donation = 58000 in $30 average = $1933 – quite likely. Winnie may be a lawyer but is a mathmetician? Still question marks over the inconsistiencies and Wiinies refusal to reveal anything beyond the bare minima leaves a big question mark, still there is still time to cook the books before return time, but will the auditors qualify the return and embarrass Winnie.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Lawyers are not good accountants as – they get comfortable in a sea of bullshit and new pin stripped suits.
Who in their right mind could believe anything Winny the Pooh says?
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Who in their right mind could believe anything Winny the Pooh says?
The Labour Party and its supporters firmly believe in Peters.
Vote:How couldn’t you trust the Minister of Foreign Affairs? Just ask FLG Tane.
February 29th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
I think the people of NZ have simply had it up to their necks with this obnoxious, swarmy, lying little creep who thinks he’s a cut above all and sundry. Peter’s is a disgrace to the people he represents;to his office and and to the country.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Foreign Affairs are so dysfunctional they let criminals in, who go straight into the non-existent systematic failure gummint nitwit’s services. These are welfare ghost agencies and taxpayer funded. These parasites stay until they reach the severely burdened justice system, which is totally fucked, unless you’re a lawyer. Bastards make me sick!
How long before a snap election?
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Surely if all he has done in answer to a direct question is to hold up a sign saying ‘No” he hasn’t denied anything.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Tane,
Thank you very much for providing a link to the transcript of John Key’s remarks in the far north.
All I can say is that the newspaper article and associated quotation is an appalling piece of English prose. It is extremely difficult to actually determine what it was he said and in what context. The most likely conclusion that can be drawn was that he was hoping that wages would drop in Australia.
It is an extremely long bow to conclude that he categorically stated that he wanted to see wages drop here in NZ. Mischevious but really the product of an appalling piece of written English.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Someone print up a whole pile of stick on NO’s to slap on Peters campaing billboards in Nov.
theres a marketing plan you can take to the bank.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
D4J – Refresh our memories on how much the taxpayer is getting charged to keep you. You note i say taxpayer not WINZ.
Vote:If you have a real job state it and i will quite happily apoligise.
Remember proof is needed.
February 29th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Dear John I have a real job and are less then impressed with the idea that some of my tax dollars could find the way into NZfst coffers. Love him or hate him I always enjoy watching Winnie on tv. Watching Winnie is like lighting a damp fuse on a skyrocket, you can never be sure if or when he is going to blow up but you can’t help but watch.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
SSB – if you are addressing this to me, i agree you say you have a real job and i will take your word about that.
Vote:Are you less than impressed that some of your tax dollars are also going to National or is that alright in your book?
I don’t particulary have a great deal of time for Winnie but i will wait with baited breath to watch the news media question National with the same vigor when the information from their secret trusts start leaking out.
I will expect them to be asking the hard questions of John Key about what he new and what he promised.
You know its going to leak out, my guess is somewhere about mid June. Right about the time National thinks they might might be safe.
Prediction for you SSB. John Key under pressure for less than truthful statements. That is lying to parliment.
Enjoy your discomfort as election year rolls on.
February 29th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
“If you have a real job state it and i will quite happily apoligise.
Vote:Remember proof is needed.”
I have proof just ask MSEP, since 2006 – Ouch that hurt girls!!
February 29th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Meh… refreshing to see journalists actually doing their job where Peters is concerned. Either Peters is a liar, or the president of his personality cult give a whole new meaning to the word incompetent. I don’t find either option particularly encouraging, and Winnie shouldn’t be allowed to bluster his way out of giving straight answers to straight questions.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
From the comments above what seems to have got lost here is that Peters once again has demonstrated his political skills learnt at the hand of the master, Muldoon.
That visual is what people will remember and what they talk about. The details don’t matter, whatever they eventually turn out to be.
First impressions count, in scandals as in life.
Imagine if Clark understood it. We’d not be seeing her current poll ratings, that’s for sure.
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
As vto says:
Content aside for a moment, technique-wise that was Winston doing what he does best – slapping down journalists who think they can nail him without any evidence whatsoever. The only thing that works with Winston is the technique he uses to such devastating effect himself… gather some evidence, put the question to your opponent without revealing what you know, and as soon as they deviate from the facts, you’ve got them. No matter that it might be one thing out of ten they’ve lied about and the other nine assertions are demonstrably true, no one is listening after the moment of denouement.
I went from interviewing Winston to briefing and debriefing him on interviews. On a good day he provides a greater challenge to any interviewer than does any other politician in NZ and he’s better at it than almost anyone I’ve seen interviewed on foreign networks.
Paul Henry over-estimated his own abilities as an interviewer, and got left with Winston’s boot prints on his trouser seat to show for it.
The sad thing is – aside from the fact that our taxes and the endless ads inflicted upon viewers can’t pay for better talent than that – is that by going in to battle against Winston and losing so profoundly, Henry has, as vto says, allowed him to win points for style over substance.
Almost makes me wish I was back working with Winston again. Almost…
Vote:February 29th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
It’s what you no to, which defines you …
Did National refuse money deposited into its anonymous donor funds from …
Vote:March 1st, 2008 at 6:37 am
This behaviour from Peters can hardly reflect well on anything to do with politics or its image. Whilst Peters supporters may get some satisfaction from his belligerent attitude to the press, his standing as a Minister of the Crown must be diminished even further by his petulant manner. This outburst of self-righteousness has been the hallmark of many of his displays in Parliament, a flailing fool with senseless Points-of-order and irrelevant supplementary questions. His hellbent desire to punish National for seeing his Ministerial charades in the 1990s for what they were, and his vengefulness following his defeat in Tauranga, are unworthy reasons for treating our Parliament as his personal sandpit.
Vote:Peters, in Opposition, can be a powerful weapon, but in Government is a buffoon.
March 1st, 2008 at 6:59 am
Gerry just goes to show how out of touch parliament is compared to the real world.
Vote:March 1st, 2008 at 7:48 am
Gerry said “Peters, in Opposition, can be a powerful weapon, but in Government is a buffoon.”
Buffoonery is as buffoonery does. Well said. That is exactly how he comes across. Wonder if he realises it himself? I suspect not actually and that is why he cannot understand why he is not held in high regard, and gets all grumpy. Is this an achilles heal perhaps?
Vote:March 1st, 2008 at 9:10 am
John Dalley, this may come as a surprise to you but I’m no more impressed with my tax dollars going into Nationals coffers as I was with them going into NZfst coffers. The corrupt Liarbore party has opened the flood gates to taxpayer handouts for political partys, to put it mildly, this fucking stinks. A political party should stand on it’s own merits. Has it not occur to you that if a party stands on a platform the the general population agree with then funding will follow. What we have now is another system like MMP where the useless and weak can sit on their arses and get a free ticket into parliament. I always believed parliament should be a place for leaders not some of the assorted tossers that grace the joint now.
Vote:March 2nd, 2008 at 11:00 pm
answer is no, but what was the question? If the question was as stated in the blog “are you saying….”, then the answer no, means, no, he’s not saying he never received any donation. So he’s not denying receiving a donation.
Vote: