PM: Peters leak wasn’t from us
It would have been better if two of his ministers had not been told of Winston Peters’ superannuation overpayment under the ‘‘no surprises policy’’, says the Prime Minister.
And he confirmed a third investigation into how the information was handled out of the ministers’ offices had been launched. ‘‘I believe that the leak did not come from within the Beehive or the National Party,’’ Prime Minister Bill English said.
‘‘The two ministers and my chief of staff have assured me of that. I would take any leak very seriously.’’
But Ministerial Services – who are responsible for ministerial staff as their employer – would also look at how the information was handled within the relevant offices, English confirmed.
The head of the public service had earlier confirmed two separate investigations were launched by the Ministry of Social Development and Inland Revenue, into the possible leak of Peters’ superannuation overpayment.
State Commissioner Peter Hughes has also warned that any such behaviour from a member of the public service would be met with ‘‘zero tolerance’’.
Peters said he had no interest in an ‘‘in-house’’ investigation.
‘‘It’s a bit late off the mark now, because complaints are going in initiated by me to ensure that (investigations) happen. Where do they get off thinking they can correct their absolute mess they’ve been involved in?
‘‘We’re not going to have an inhouse inquiry to political rumour and dirt ... that’s not the way democracy and accountability work,’’ he said.
‘‘The last thing I’m going to have is the State Services Commission investigating their own untoward behaviour.’’
Peters says English did know about the superannuation leak and he was briefed by National campaign manager Steven Joyce and chief of staff Wayne Eagleson.
He says let’s stop the ‘‘bulldust and pixie dust’’ and find out why they were engaged in this ‘‘dirty politics’’. ‘‘There’s no reason at all why they should have been briefed.’’
Peters said he would get to the bottom of the leaks himself.
It was revealed on Sunday that Peters had been overpaid his superannuation for a number of years because of an error. He repaid the amount within 24 hours of being alerted to it.
English confirmed that since the information had become public, he had been briefed that his ministers Anne Tolley and Paula Bennett were informed under the ‘‘no surprises’’ policy.
‘‘Minister Tolley advised my chief of staff, who made the judgment that it was not necessary for me or anyone else to be informed. Chief executives make the decision on what to advise the minister under the no surprises policy. They do this carefully and in good faith,’’ English said.
The ‘‘No Surprises Convention’’ is set out in the Cabinet Manual and requires departments to inform ministers promptly of matters of significance within their portfolio responsibilities, particularly where the matters may be controversial or could become the subject of public debate.
Inland Revenue acting commissioner Cath Atkins has confirmed her department was investigating to make sure a leak did not emanate from there, but she noted an ‘‘allegation was made, and then publicly withdrawn yesterday, by a journalist’’, that the IRD was the source of their information. ‘‘ And it’s important to point out that under the tax secrecy provisions of the Tax Administration Act, the Minister of Revenue would not be briefed, and had not been briefed, on this matter as it relates to an individual taxpayer. We are looking into the allegation even though it has been withdrawn.
‘‘To preserve public trust and confidence, we need to be satisfied that there is no evidence of wrongdoing. That work is ongoing.’’