A comparison of statements made by John Key with those of others, largely the Gwyn report (Gwyn quotes can all be found there).
Key: “In fact, the report does not show that my office was deeply involved. There were a series of claims made and not a single one of them has stacked up.”
ONE news: “An independent report has confirmed one of the Prime Minister’s staff disclosed Security Intelligence Service information to blogger Cameron Slater for political purposes.”
3 News: “The report goes inside Mr Key’s ninth-floor office and shows how Phil de Joux, his former deputy chief of staff, took information he learned off former spymaster Warren Tucker and worked with Mr Key’s taxpayer-funded dirt-digger Jason Ede to give a tip-off to Slater to ask for specific information …”
Key: “Absolutely it was nothing to do with my office.”
Key: “The basic claim that somehow my office was either pressuring the system, speeding up the process, injecting itself in the process, all of that is flatly incorrect …”
Gwyn: “The then Deputy Chief of Staff in the PMO, Philip de Joux, was the principal point of liaison between the Prime Minister and the Director of the NZSIS and other NZSIS staff. In that role, he was regularly briefed by the Director and by NZSIS staff and had substantial discussions with them, including discussions that bore on the OIA request and the subsequent release of information. At the same time, in his role as a senior political adviser in the PMO, Mrde Joux was involved in the political management of these events. Information which he received from the NZSIS was used by Jason Ede, a senior adviser within PMO, to assist Mr Slater in making the OIA request. In both of these roles, Mr de Joux’s actions had the potential to affect the maintenance or failure of political neutrality by the NZSIS.”
Gwyn: “Under previous administrations, the relationship between the NZSIS and the Prime Minister was conducted almost exclusively between the Prime Minister and the Director, with very little involvement by officials or advisers. After the change of government, the contact between the Service and the Prime Minister’s Office became more diffuse and Service staff engaged directly with political advisers in PMO.”
Gwyn: “Dr Tucker indicated to Mr de Joux that he didn’t know what they would do if Mr Goff did not accept that he had received a briefing, including the March SIR and that it might well be that he, Dr Tucker, would simply have to “wear” the allegation. Mr de Joux told Dr Tucker that because there was a written record of the briefing having occurred and because it was a matter of Dr Tucker’s statutory responsibility, PMO and/or the Prime Minister would not let that happen.”
Gwyn: “I did, however, find that Mr Ede had provided the details of the relevant documents to Mr Slater and was in fact speaking to Mr Slater by phone at the exact time that Mr Slater submitted his OIA request.
Gwyn: “Mr Slater also later provided a series of emails to and from Mr Ede, in which Mr Ede expressed his concern that he “might be in the shit” over his use of the NZSIS information.”
Gwyn: “Mr Ede … advised that the emails had been permanently deleted prior to the commencement of the inquiry and could not be recovered”
Gwyn: “Mr de Joux provided that information to Mr Ede with the suggestion that it might prompt an OIA request for those documents. Mr Ede then provided that information to Mr Slater, discussed the terms of the OIA request with Mr Slater and provided Mr Slater with draft blog posts concerning the issue.”
Key: “they [the SIS] were not used for political purposes”
Gwyn: “The New Zealand Intelligence Security Service information was disclosed by a member of the staff of the Prime Minister’s office to Cameron Slater for political purposes.”
Key: “The report is absolutely crystal clear. It says I played no role.
Gwyn: “The Director, as part of the 22 July briefing, advised the Prime Minister that the Leader of the Opposition had received a briefing on the Israeli allegations. The Prime Minister made a public comment that the Leader of the Opposition had been briefed on the Q&A programme broadcast on 24 July.”
Gwyn: “The Prime Minister later stated in a television interview, broadcast on 24 July, that the Director had told him that the Leader of the Opposition had been briefed and had been “shown the same note and report” as the Prime Minister. … The Director said that he was “taken aback” by the Prime Minister’s statement, but he explained that was not because the information was classified but because he saw the statement as continuing a public controversy over the issue.
Gwyn: “The NZSIS disclosed incomplete, inaccurate and misleading information in response to the Official Information Act requests by Mr Slater and others. It also provided much the same information, along with some further detail, to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister’s Office.”
Gwyn: “However, the Director asserted to PMO, the Prime Minister, Mr Slater and other requesters that the briefing had been read and discussed.”
Key: “I am very proud of the way this Government operates, and I am very, very confident that the discussions and briefings that political staffers and politicians have on this side of the House are absolutely consistent with the other side of the House.”
Armstrong: “The Key administration has plumbed new depths of arrogance and contempt for the notion of politicians being accountable for their actions in its response to today’s hugely embarrassing report by the independent watchdog who maintains oversight over the Security Intelligence Service. Rather than take the findings of the report by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Cheryl Gwyn on the chin, National sought to bury the report.”
RNZ sums up:
Prime Minister John Key is refusing to accept there was a link between his office and right-wing blogger Cameron Slater, despite the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) watchdog finding his official passed on information.
Key thinks he can simple lie and refuse to accept facts. He can’t get away with it. Can he?