Key’s ‘Speargun’ claims questioned

Documents obtained by NZ Herald under the Official Information Act suggest that claims made by Prime Minister John Key about the Speargun surveillance project may not have been accurate.

NZH: John Key, mass surveillance and what really happened when Edward Snowden accused him of spying

Sir John Key’s story of how and why he canned a “mass surveillance” programme are at odds with official papers detailing development of the “Speargun” project.

The issue blew up in the final days of the 2014 election with Key claiming the programme was long-dead and had been replaced by a benign cyber-security system called Cortex.

Key always claimed the Speargun project to tap New Zealand’s internet cable was stopped in March 2013.

But new documents show development of Speargun continued after the time he had said he ordered a halt – apparently because the scheme was “too broad”.

The NZ Herald has found – after three years of refusals and information going missing – that the former Prime Minister’s version of events doesn’t match that of documents created at the time.

The plan to develop Speargun began in April 2012 under the guise of “Initiative 7418” when Cabinet asked the GCSB to develop an advanced cyber protection strategy.

The GCSB has confirmed to the Herald that a warrant was sought and granted for “Phase 1” of Speargun between July 2012 and June 2013.

GCSB director Andrew Hampton said in one response: “This warrant was sought to ensure GCSB would be able to undertake any preliminary work as part of the business case Cabinet asked GCSB to prepare.”

Details released through the OIA show there was a meeting with the GCSB over Speargun in March 2013.

This was the point at which Key claims Speargun was canned with a press release issued between the Snowden claim and election day saying: “March 2013: PM tells GCSB not to bring business case forward. Informs GCSB it is too broad. Budget contingency funding will be rolled over and used for something else in cyber security.”

But new GCSB documents tell a different story, backed up by documents from the Prime Minister’s office.

It is a detailed investigative article by David Fisher, with a number of source documents included.

12 Comments

  1. Corky.

     /  November 29, 2017

    The reality is anyone who believes what the government and GCSB tell us regarding surveillance programmes is a fool.

    In fact, technology has moved forward so fast that a private citizen with enough money can buy equipment, or blue prints, that given them capabilities not too far removed from what our official spy agency has.

  2. Blazer

     /  November 29, 2017

    Just another lie in a huge scroll of them,from ex P.M …Key.’Nothing to fear…nothing to..hide’…indeed.

  3. duperez

     /  November 29, 2017

    Claims made by Prime Minister John Key about the project may not have been accurate.

    So does that mean the Prime Minister was lying?

    “But three years later, after the intervention by the Office of the Ombudsman, Eagleson admitted there were two sensitive security and intelligence documents which had been kept by the Prime Minister’s office.

    Eagleson said passing the request to the GCSB to handle meant those documents were overlooked – a fact he said was “regretted”.

    So the easy shoulder shrug and the “Oh dear, how sad, never mind.”

  4. Alloytoo

     /  November 29, 2017

    Hmmm squirrel……

    • Blazer

       /  November 29, 2017

      your word of the..week…month?..back in your …burrow.

      • alloytoo

         /  November 29, 2017

        Well you’re welcome to search for my other use of the word “Squirrel” here and elsewhere, should keep you out of mischief.

  5. lurcher1948

     /  November 29, 2017

    What, Sir Key lied, who would have thought….

    • Blazer

       /  November 29, 2017

      his former acolytes…conspicuous by their..abscence.

    • Corky

       /  November 29, 2017

      Just like Aunty and the painting…and the speeding…and the social agendas…and keeping a lid on that building issue in Dunedin

  6. robertguyton

     /  November 29, 2017

    Signature on a painting, mass surveillance, mass surveillance, signature on a painting – nah, can’t see any difference! Devout Righty, me!