Peter Dunne versus David Henry on Vance’s phone records

I have known about Peter Dunne’s claim that the Henry inquiry accessed both Dunne’s and Andre Vance’s phone data for a month. On 29 June he told me via email:

He certainly checked both our office landline records through the Parliamentary system, because he told me.

Peter Dunne tonight…

…told Radio New Zealand’s Checkpoint programme on Tuesday that his conversation with David Henry implied that Mr Henry would be accessing Andrea Vance’s phone records, as well as his own.

When I met Mr Henry on the 31st of May, he asked for access to my landline records for the period 27 March to 9 April because he wanted to compare those with Andrea Vance’s records.

David Henry:

Statement from David Henry in relation to the Henry Inquiry

The Inquiry I led never requested the phone records of journalist Ms Andrea Vance.  The Inquiry recorded this fact immediately the information was received.

“Quite simply, we did not request this information; we did not access this information; and consequently we did not use it in any way”, Mr Henry said.

I welcome the confirmation by the Speaker that the Inquiry had not requested Ms Vance’s telephone records.

With regard to the media reports of Mr Dunne’s comments today, I believe that Mr Dunne is mistaken, as  I did not request nor was I seeking the phone log records of Ms Vance.

I am currently overseas and not available for further comment at this stage.

Dunne:

Despite Henry’s denial tonight, I stand 100% by my comments.

There’s a possibility there is a different interpretation of how the conversation went between Dunne and Henry, but Dunne has been clear and consistent whenever he has told me his version, and his story has always stacked up with other facts.

For Henry’s version to be correct:

The private contractor, either acting on their own or on the instruction of Parliamentary Services, thought to extract and provide data of one month’s phone data of Andrea Vance to the Henry inquiry unsolicited.

Or

Someone with some perceived authority other than ‘we’ instructed the private contractor/Parliamentary Services to provide the Henry inquiry with the data.

Or

Henry or someone acting for him or his inquiry implied or hinted they would like specific phone data without actually requesting it.

Or ??

 

 

Leave a comment

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