Book of leaked emails to be thrown at Brash

Don Brash

Potentially damaging leaked emails to and from National leader Don Brash are expected to be published soon in book form as the election-spending war between the two main parties rages at Parliament.

And Labour last night released parliamentary rules which, it says, justify its spending, deemed to be unlawful, but National says closer examination of the detail blows Labour's case out of the water.

Both Prime Minister Helen Clark and Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen have foreshadowed the publication of a new batch of emails related to last year's election spending.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, due to return to Parliament today after a mystery illness, is believed to be behind the next tranche.

Dr Cullen said yesterday National had to "come clean" on its largely anonymous funding and on what Dr Brash and National's finance spokesman, John Key, knew about the Exclusive Brethren's $1.2 million anti-Government campaign.

"And on those matters, I understand, watch this space," he said.

Helen Clark said she understood there were "more emails lurking around".

"I don't have them. Somebody does.

"No doubt they'll see the full light of day in due course."

Both Labour and New Zealand First sources say that emails are being prepared in book form. There is said to have been some debate about whether quite personal emails should be included and it is not known whether they will be.

In Parliament yesterday, Helen Clark referred to an email, previously released under the Official Information Act, from a group of Exclusive Brethren businessmen to the Electoral Office setting out their intention to mount a $1.2 million campaign "with the goal of getting party votes for National". The email shows they were seeking advice as to whether their campaign and communication about it with National MPs would "compromise National's funding position".

The war between the two parties has reached a new level, with Labour's decision to try to match National's level of attack in recent weeks.

Four recent polls have shown Labour's support slipping and National's rising as well as an overwhelming public view that Labour should pay back any unlawful election spending - thought to have been about $800,000 in a draft report by Auditor- General Kevin Brady.

Dr Brash attracted no liability in the report, which examines the taxpayer- funded advertising by political parties in the three months before last year's poll.

Labour laid its own complaint yesterday against taxpayer-funded advertising by former National leader Bill English in 2002.

Labour and other parties have said that their spending was justified because it was authorised by the Parliamentary Service.

Labour is attempting to show that rule changes between the 2002 and 2005 election were minimal and that it was justified in behaving in the same way it had for previous elections.

Dr Cullen last night released a document on changes that were made between the elections.

Included was the move to add the parliamentary crest to taxpayer-funded material and to add "parliamentary political parties" to "members" in terms of those who were eligible to "advertise their services or activities".

Dr Cullen said he believed that Labour's pledge card fell within the definition of advertising "services or activities" and that therefore the rule change "made it clearer that material such as the pledge card was included".

National deputy leader Gerry Brownlee said Dr Cullen's release highlighted another change to the rules that completely blew Labour's argument out of the water.