Peters: “I live and die by what I say on this matter”

Winston Peters said “Well the same proof that’s behind my making the statement on day one, and I live and die by what I say on this matter“. He has already substantially changed his claims since day one. And he again showed fairly obviously that he has no proof.

Last night in a farcical interview John Campbell  took Winston Peters to task on implied email evidence. Peters avoided, evaded and blustered, and failed to provide a straight answer. He has done this every day since Friday – see Winston Peters evades questions on evidence.

Peters has changed his story on evidence of Peter Dunne leaking. He originally claimed that “all the evidence is in those phone records”:

5. Government Communications Security Bureau—Investigation into Review of Compliance Leak
[Sitting date: 30 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:10577. Text is subject to correction.]

Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the Deputy Prime Minister is going to keep drawing me into the inquiry, then I am going to short-circuit things by saying all the evidence is in those phone records, and your Minister is gone.

Since the Henry report revealed no phone evidence and pointed at the emails that Dunne refused to hand over Peters has changed his implied claims to emails and “electronic records”. There has been no sign of anything other than email evidence so “electronic records” looks to be simply covering himself in case different evidence surfaces.

Last night on Campbell live Peters’ evasion reached farcical levels – Video and transcript:

Campbell: What has Peter Dunne done wrong, what exactly has he done wrong as you see it?

Peters: Well, he breached National security, not just once, but more than once, and the Prime Minister knows it, and so should you.

Campbell: How did he breach national security?

Peters: Well he leaked information on a very important report, to do with the malfunction of the GCSB, that’s the Kitteridge report, and then there’s the matter of moral within the GCSB, a separate matter, no no no, let me finish, you want to know how I’m going to give you a snapshot, just three, not all of them, just three. And the third one was he made reference to someone he should not have made reference to on the question of the GCSB appointments.

Campbell: Ok, let’s go through these things one at a time. The Kitteridge report, it was going to be made public.

Peters: I know what you’re trying to say, and some of your colleagues are doing the same, they’re saying…

Campbell: No wait a minute, I’m not trying to say anything, it’s a statement of fact

Peters: …over the last twenty four hour, a repetitive argument he just broke the embargo…

Campbell: You’re hearing fact, you’re hearing fact…

Peters: …let me tell you why it’s not fact, and I’m sure you’re interested in that, the ah Fairfax outlet said it was a secret report, and it was, the second thing is it was described in the State Services and parliamentary record of being such a document in it’s past precedence. Then you’ve got the fact an investigator appointed by the National Party, said as well it was classified and highly sensitive…

Campbell: Mr Peters, look, I can’t sit here and let you spout nonsense to me, absolutely, I’m going to read what David Henry said, verbatim quote. 

“On the afternoon of 27th March Mr Dunne was given a numbered copy of the Kitteridge report” – which was going to be made public – “but not the classified appendices”.

In other words he didn’t have classified material. No, you know that. Why are you sitting here tonight saying that he did?

Peters: Because you haven’t asked any questions about what happened by way of conversation within five MPs, including the Prime Minister who sat on the Intelligence and Security committee, you don’t know that, and I don’t think Mr Henry bothered to ask as well which is why I raised questions about the way he was conducting this inquiry.

I’ve been on that committee, I know something about what I’m talking about and I know what international ramifications are, and I’m not going to stand by while cynical people who said from day one there was nothing in this, now repeat that he merely broke an embargo. I’m sorry, this is out number one security agency, it interrelates with international agencies and our respect and integrity is on the line, and it’s important.

Campbell: Ok, what evidence do you have that Mr Dunne is responsible for leaking anything other than a report that was about to be made public anyway?

Peters: The same evidence I gave from day one.

(Peters has given no evidence from day one)

Campbell: Ok, what evidence is that?

Peters: That’s the evidence that backs up what I’m saying, and every day it unfolds, you will find that out.

Campbell: What evidence is that?

Peters: Well it’s evidence of, ah, improperly liaison meetings with disclosure of secret, confidential, private information, not just in one area but in a number of areas.

Campbell: Do you have the emails?

Peters: I’ve told you from day one that I have the evidence sufficient to make allegations, both to you, inside parliament because you wouldn’t publish it otherwise, and outside parliament…

Campbell: Yes or no, do you have the emails?

Peters: Well of course I’ve got information I need to back up my…

Campbell: Yes or no, do you have the emails?

Peters: No no no, you’re not going to know, what I want you to tell me is why you aren’t asking the Prime Minister, Prime Minister, why can’t we see the information that you won’t show the public.

Campbell: What would you have done then? In other words, what would satisfy you now?

Peters: Well look, what would satisfy me, first of all I’m not saying that it was not just one leak, it’s not just the Kitteridge report, it’s other issues to do with the GCSB and wider as well.

Campbell: What proof do you have of that?

Peters: Well the same proof that’s behind my making the statement on day one, and I live and die by what I say on this matter, and every day you’re hearing more. Look, I knew what was breaking tonight in the media outlets, I knew that from day one.

Campbell: Who’s your source?

Peters: Well, am I going to disclose my source? I’m not required to. Look if that person had behaved legally, and they did, then you’ve got no reason to ask my source any more than I would ask you.

Campbell: Why are you asking who Peter Dunne, who the source of this leak is?

Peters: Because it was illegal. It was totally improper. And that is spanned through a very soft report by David Henry. Why are you asking questions when the investigator said these things were all wrong, outside of criteria, outside of the propriety of the events, categorises the fact that this was serious enough for him to come to just one person.

My question I’m asking you is, and John Key is why did he stop from not getting the powers to disclose to you how wide this was?

Campbell: Have you seen the emails between Peter Dunne and Andrea Vance?

Peters: You can sit here and ask me until the kingdom come, I’m asking you, go and ask the Prime Minister…

Campbell: Wait wait, hold on a sec..

Peters: Can I ask you a question…

Campbell: I’m not interviewing the Prime Minister tonight, I’m not interviewing the Prime Minister tonight…

Peters: I’m giving you a few guidelines the next time you do…

Campbell: …Thanks so much Mr Peters..

Peters: The GCSB is the prime Minister’s department, now if you ask the Prime Minister, have you seen those emails, he’s going to say no, isn’t he.

Campbell: Yeah, I’m asking you, I’m not asking the Prime Minister…

Peters: Well I’m going to tell you what you should do because it’s his job to disclose them…

Campbell: Thank you very much, I’ll make a note of that immediately this interview’s over, I promise you when I interview the Prime Minister if he’s seen the emails, now I’m asking you…

Peters: …for the first time that you’re doing that, let me tell you this…

Campbell: …I’m doing the interview, and I am asking you, have you seen the emails…

Peters: It’s no use being repetitive, I’m not going to disclose, I am not going to disclose who my source is, I am not bound to tell you anything other than I’m utterly confident in what I’m saying, that I have the electronic records sufficient to come to some conclusions far wider than yours and far wider than the Prime Minister’s trying to sell to you, and far wider than the David Henry report. Is that enough for you?

Campbell: Let’s accept all of that then. What would you like to see happen to Mr Dunne?

Peters: Well first of all I want a full scale inquiry to realise and find out what is the level of damage to my country in this, and the second thing is, I do not think it’s acceptable to say to the civil service, if you leak a document you’re gone, it’s not just just demotion, it’s dismissal, but in the case of a minister, it’s just demotion, this is two standards here.

This is an issue of national security, I’m staying focussed there, and I’m not going to answer questions which take to focus off that to the demise of Mr Dunne. Mr Dunne is gone. Now I want to know what the Prime Minister’s doing about it.

It’s fairly obvious from that, Peters doesn’t have and hasn’t seen the Dunne-Vance emails. He is bluffing and lying about it.

Key has said he doesn’t believe Peters and has called him to release the emails if he has them.

And it’s a widening perception:

Kirsty Johnston@kirsty_johnston
So can we assume Winston hasn’t got the emails? Or what? Slippery bugger @CampbellLiveNZ

Andrea Vance@avancenz
@kirsty_johnston
@CampbellLiveNZ he no more has them than he had the teapot tapes.

Peters said “I live and die by what I say on this matter“.  If he is lying should that mean the demise of his political career?

Leave a comment

9 Comments

  1. Darryl

     /  11th June 2013

    This is a classic Winston Peters. He told the public absolutely nothing in that interview. As soon as he was feeling trapped, he pushed the onus on to the Prime Minister. Winston Peters, YOUR the one that is making the accusations, show us your proof, and tell us your source. I just wish we had good Journalist who would stand up to Peters, and not let him intimidate them, because that is what Peters does. Can’t stand the man, and to think we voted for him years ago, and after his holding the country to ransom for circa 3 months, would never vote for him again. He is worse now than he was then.

    Reply
  2. I have tried to read between the lines of the interview and something tells me he may actually have seen the emails But how? is definitely a serious question. Read the below from the transcript:

    QUOTE: Campbell: …I’m doing then interview, and I am asking you, have you seen the emails…

    Peters: It’s no use being repetitive, I’m not going to disclose, I am not going to disclose who my source is, I am not bound to tell you anything other than I’m utterly confident in what I’m saying, that I have the electronic records sufficient to come to some conclusions far wider than yours and far wider than the Prime Minister’s trying to sell to you, and far wider than the David Henry report. Is that enough for you? UNQUOTE

    Reply
    • I think there’s no way he’s seen the emails. He’s bluffing and he’s increasingly being called on his bluffing – by John Key, and by media.

      If he had incriminating evidence he would at least be drip feeding some substance. In two weeks he has produced nothing at all.

      Reply
  3. Naah, Winston’s onto something here. Otherwise the story would have died by now.

    Reply
    • Naah, if he was onto something he would have given some sort of evidence by now.

      It’s just taken the media five days to realise he has been all bluster and no substance.

      Reply
  4. robertguyton

     /  11th June 2013

    He’s onto something alright. Dunne wouldn’t have pulled the pin, given away all he had, just because he was afraid to have his sweet-talking revealed to the public. He’s mentioned other things and Peters knows. The emails will remain suppressed because Key stands to lose if they are revealed. Dunne took the bullet. Maybe he deserves a little respect for that. Or not. Why should a Green like me respect Dunne in any way at all?

    Reply
  5. paul scott

     /  12th June 2013

    thats right dude join the brigade but try to accept that NZ First will take 7% next election have balance of power, thats the way it is

    Reply
  1. Campbell vs Peters | Kiwiblog
  2. The fickle fictions of Winston Peters | Your NZ

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s