Winston Peters during the privileges committee hearing. Photo / Mark Mitchell
The privileges committee will meet today to finalise its report into the treatment of Owen Glenn's $100,000 donation to Winston Peters' legal fund, in a week when the New Zealand First leader is also poised to fight back against the Serious Fraud Office.
Although a strong, unanimous finding
against Mr Peters by the committee appears unlikely, the report has far wider political implications - particularly if it passes judgment on the credibility of the suspended Foreign Affairs Minister versus the expat billionaire Mr Glenn.
The committee has been looking into whether Mr Peters should have declared the donation as a gift.
Central to this question is whether Mr Peters knew about the 2005 donation. He has always maintained he didn't until this year.
Email and phone records presented by Mr Glenn strongly suggested Mr Peters discussed the donation with Mr Glenn in 2005.
The committee's report is expected to be debated in Parliament tomorrow afternoon and if it contains recommendations these will be voted on in the House.
The make-up of the committee is crucial to its findings. National's representatives are expected to want to issue a report that is critical of Mr Peters, and so is Act.
United Future and the Greens appear more likely to be critical of Mr Peters than not, while the Maori Party's position is not clear.
Labour's MPs have seemed more supportive of the New Zealand First leader during hearings, and one vote of support Mr Peters will be able to count on is his own party's representative on the committee, Dail Jones.
Meanwhile, the Serious Fraud Office's decision to present evidence to the committee could lead to a police complaint this week.
The Herald understands Mr Peters' lawyer Peter Williams, QC, is considering laying a complaint over what NZ First views as the breaching of section 39 of the Serious Fraud Act.
It requires the Serious Fraud Office to observe secrecy in relation to any information that is protected under any act, except the Inland Revenue Department Act.
