-
Related
Winston Peters is likely to face a torrid time in parliament on Tuesday afternoon following revelations the Spencer Trust paid at least $50,000 to his New Zealand First party in 2005 that was never declared.
NZ First is being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in relation to allegations that donations from Sir Robert Jones and the Vela family were misused.
Those allegations have been spurred in part by the fact the donations have never been declared. Under electoral law at the time, donations of more than $10,000 from an individual or group in any calendar year had to be declared.
Sir Robert's $25,000 donation was paid to the Spencer Trust.
One its three trustees Grant Curry said on Monday that the only purpose of the trust, formed in August 2005, was to funnel money to NZ First.
The network said the books showed $25,000 donations from Sir Robert and another anonymous donor coming in and going out again to NZ First in 2005.
Curry said the books disproved allegations that money from Jones had not reached NZ First.
But ACT leader Rodney Hide said this just showed NZ First had broken electoral law by not declaring the donations.
The breach is technically illegal, but because it is outside a six month statute of limitations it cannot be prosecuted.
However, it could yet come back to haunt Peters, who in explanations to Prime Minister Helen Clark has said NZ First did not break the law.
Peters has stood down from his ministerial roles while the SFO investigation is conducted, but Clark has said he could be reinstated if cleared.
However, Clark may be forced to rethink that if she believes Peters has deceived her.
The trust's admission followed Clark accusing crown agencies of leaking the news of the SFO investigation to the National Party.
She said she was "almost certain" National knew the announcement was going to be made last Thursday, the day after leader John Key all but ruled out working with Peters after the election.
She initially accused the SFO, but after the office sought assurances from its staff and denied the leak, she said it could have been the police or Crown Law who also knew of the investigation.
Key said National was not told by any agency about the inquiry and Clark should apologise.
Clark said she was informed about the inquiry on Wednesday evening by Attorney-General Michael Cullen.
At the weekend Progressive leader Jim Anderton questioned the SFO's motivation, given a bill disestablishing it was now on hold until the NZ First inquiry was finished, but Miss Clark said she had confidence in the agency's integrity.
However, she repeated concerns about the privileges committee inquiry, saying Key had prejudged its outcome by ruling out working with Peters after this year's election.
Asked if she would appear if asked, Clark said she would cross that bridge when she came to it. She did not think she could add to evidence.
Meanwhile the SFO said its inquiry was substantial and could take a while.
