Clark says nothing to do with her

NZPA reports:

But Miss Clark today said it was a party matter and did not relate to Mr Peters’ foreign affairs portfolio, in which he conducted himself with integrity.

Um, how does she know unless the conflicting statements are reconciled? Is she saying the appointment of Consuls is not relevant to the foreign affairs portfolio?

Meanwhile, Mr Peters today said he was prepared to hand over NZ First’s audited accounts to the Herald, which he has accused of fabricating the email, so it could see there had been no donation from Mr Glenn.

“I have had the records searched when this allegation was made at the beginning of the year,” he said on Radio New Zealand.

“I’ve had them searched again and these records have all been audited as well and there is no such record at all.”

Mr Peters said Herald reporters could look at the audited accounts and talk to the auditor, but if their story was wrong they should resign.

This is a useful offer. Peters though should not be angry at the Herald but (if Glenn is wrong). He says the e-mail is fabricated by one of the participants has confirmed it is basically true.

I would make the point though that summarised annual accounts will not tell you anything about who donated and how big a donation was. For that one would need access to the bank statements and associated raw documents. If Peters is willing to have some independent body scrutinise them, then that would clear he matter up.

Comments (51)

Login to comment or vote

Add a Comment

%d bloggers like this: