PHOTO
Act New Zealand leader Rodney Hide has raised the stakes in the battle he is waging against New Zealand First leader Winston Peters by laying a complaint with the police against the party.
Mr Hide claims NZ First breached a section of the Electoral Act 1993 by allegedly filing a donations return for the 2007 year that was false.
Mr Hide said the issue was serious.
He said Spencer Trust trustee Grant Currie had realised the trust had been "disgorging" money each year to NZ First and, in his opinion, the party should have declared donations for 2005, 2006 and 2007.
Although returns for 2005 and 2006 had been filed, they were statute-barred from prosecution.
But the 2007 return was not.
"I look forward to an investigation of NZ First's donations return for 2007 and expect to be apprised of developments."
Mr Hide said Mr Peters had received donations of small amounts from NZ First supporters all over the country at the same time that he was criticising the major parties for soliciting donations from big businesses.
But what his supporters did not know was that Mr Peters was also receiving large sums from secret business donors.
Mr Peters was unavailable for comment, but issued a statement describing Mr Hide's complaint as obsessive-compulsive, grandstanding behaviour, and a waste of time designed merely to attract attention.
"It will be obvious even to the meanest of minds that Winston Peters cannot be the subject of the complaint.
"The party intends to clarify some very simple issues giving rise to a misrepresentation in the public arena," Mr Peters' statement said.
Asked why he continued to attack Mr Peters and NZ First, Mr Hide said Mr Peters had distorted the integrity and honesty of the Parliamentary process and was dragging everyone into the web.
Prime Minister Helen Clark had been drawn in and forced to defend her Foreign Affairs minister by attacking the integrity of the Serious Fraud Office after it had launched its investigation into donations made to NZ First.
Even while he was stood down, Mr Peters received his ministerial salary and privileges.
"Winston Peters has gone for years saying he would not accept the baubles of office, and now all he has left is his baubles. Helen Clark should have cut his baubles off," Mr Hide said.
Earlier yesterday, expatriate billionaire Owen Glenn produced fresh evidence backing his claim Mr Peters asked for a donation.
Parliament's privileges committee is investigating whether Mr Peters broke Parliament's rules by failing to declare a $100,000 donation from Mr Glenn towards his legal costs in 2005.
Mr Peters said previously he had no knowledge of Mr Glenn's donation until his lawyer Brian Henry advised him of it on July 18 this year.
In a new letter to the committee released publicly yesterday, Mr Glenn said he paid the $100,000 to Mr Henry on December 20, 2005.
Mr Henry supplied the ASB bank account details in an email from him addressed to Mr Glenn on December 14, 2005.
"That email from Mr Henry refers to an earlier telephone conversation between me and a person Mr Henry refers to as `my client' that same day.
"My recollection is that I was called by Mr Peters to seek financial assistance for his electoral petition challenge.
"I agreed to the request because I understood it would be of assistance to the Labour Party, which had the confidence and supply agreement with NZ First at the time we spoke.
"There is absolutely no doubt that the request came to me from Mr Peters. I would not have made the donation on any other basis through any intermediary. I did not do so," Mr Glenn wrote.
He will return to New Zealand to appear before the committee on Tuesday.
Mr Peters made a short appearance before the committee yesterday, but will give more evidence following Mr Glenn's testimony.
Peter Williams QC represented Mr Peters at the hearing and in a written submission he questioned Mr Glenn's recollection of events.