PM's credit downgrade claim under fire

Email
Print

Mon, 10 Oct 2011 6:35p.m.

John Key

John Key

By Patrick Gower

John Key has been forced to back-pedal over a claim he made to Parliament that international credit ratings agency Standard & Poor's said a further credit downgrade was likely if Labour became government.

It turns out Standard & Poor's never actually said that at all, with Mr Key admitting it was just an inference taken by one of his friends.

The Prime Minister has been on the defensive big-time when it comes to the credit ratings downgrade. That's included going on the offensive, telling Parliament Standard & Poor's made out a further downgrade would be "much more likely" under a Labour government.

"They did go on to say though if there was a change of Government, that downgrade would be much more likely," he said last week.

The big problem for Mr Key is the agency says it said no such thing.

"At no stage have we said that a rating downgrade was more likely if there were a change of Government," the agency said in a statement today.

So, time for an admission.

"I can't confirm that, I wasn't at the meeting, it's not for me to say," says Mr Key. "I wasn't there… I didn't say I was at the meeting. I said 'there was a meeting'."

Turns out, it was an anonymous source of Mr Key's who met the agency and took "an inference" that Mr Key could "use" as a quote, or a "one-liner", and sent him an email.

"I didn't speak with [Standard & Poor's]," says Mr Key, who wouldn't say who told him what Standard & Poor's deny they ever said.

"I don't release my sources."

The email read: "S&P said that there was a 1/3 chance that NZ would get downgraded and a 2/3 chance it would not, and the inference was clear that it would be the other way around if Labour were in power."

Labour say Mr Key has lied to Parliament, and will take a privileges complaint to the Speaker.

And if they want an explanation from key - it goes like this.

Mr Key has received what's effectively a personal credibility downgrade from a clearly unimpressed Standard and Poor's. His actions on this one can easily be judged by that old saying in politics - explaining is losing.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

19 Dec 2011 06:02p.m.

Chris wrote:

In the next 5 years Denise, you will understand fully how very wrong you are. Good luck.

20 Nov 2011 12:12p.m.

Denise wrote:

Sorry 'David'. The two main parties are not the same. On one side we have a nanny state party who likes to control and strip the guts out of us through various uneven types of tax to fund their socialistic fancies while forcing changes on us that affect the very moral fabric of our society. Labour with Goff in full support sold off 100% ownership of Air NZ for M$600 & when it was almost broke, bought back 79% of it for $M$800. Goff then helped sell Sell 100% of Yellow Pages Printing, Post Bank and Telecom. All collectively worth over 10 times more than all the other parties combined, have ever done in their entire political history. Labour also asset stripped NZR and closed down railway workshop centers nation-wide with the loss of 1000s of apprentice and tradesmen jobs, leaving national no option but sell the remnants to tidy up Labour's mess. National on the other hand has proposed to sell off some current assets but retain a majority controlling interest in all these, together with over 50% of the profits. Taxes under National have also been made more equitable, but the top 5% income earners still pay over 90% of taxes collected. To be fair, everyone should pay the same tax rate. David, I find the two parties are poles apart and certainly not the "SAME THING" as you put it.

17 Nov 2011 11:48a.m.

David wrote:

Congratulations Keith and Denise for proving that National and Labour are much of the same and have been for about 3 decades.

09 Nov 2011 02:41p.m.

Denise wrote:

Keith. While I am reluctant to call you thick, you unfortunately fail to acknowledge it was a Labour administration with Goff in full support at the time, who prepared, NZ Rail for sale and closed NZR workshops all over NZ with the loss of thousands of jobs and apprenticeships. (I know this as I was involved in NZ Govt apprenticeship administration at the time.) National when they came to power shortly after, had no option but to complete the privatisation process for NZR which had gone too far by Labour to back-track. This was much the same as National had to tidy up after Clark & Cullen left the cupboard bare only 3 short years ago. Also Keith, if you aren't prepared to acknowledge Labour has sold off many times more NZ strategic assets than National ever has in it's entire history, you live a lie.

06 Nov 2011 08:43p.m.

Keith wrote:

Denise your recall of history is ammazing. Yes labour sold assets in the 1980s. You seem to forget that national sold them in the 1990s but from your point of view i suppose that dosent rate a mention. The stupidity of these sales is obviously lost on you. Do you not recall what happened to new zealand rail. Sold to overseas buyers run down so badly it had to be re bought. That to you must of been a brilliant sale. I see you say that mums and dads will buy shares. In your infinite wisdom other than mums and dads in Fendalton, Remuera and thorndon who can buy these shares. These shares will eventually be bought on the stock exchange by overseas investors. These 49% of shareholders have the right to sue the government if profits are not maximised. That will be good for the country. Dont be duped by the torrie hype.

04 Nov 2011 10:53p.m.

ninteynine wrote:

Denise its "there's none so blind as those who will not see" and it truly does apply to you.

04 Nov 2011 10:45p.m.

ninteynine wrote:

Denise what would happen to those whom are poor and struggling to survive when the market crashes like that or small businesses are forced to fire someone because they can't afford the wages? What about the school that gets closed down forcing students to travel 77km one way (154km total) to get to a school. All because the government thinks 48.000.00 could be better spent somewhere else. the system of money and investments and corporations is all just a method of stealing money. it is evil and it is wrong. we call it tax we call it gst we call it GDP(an economies health can not be measured by how much it sells, because that would be how much money its making, doesn't matter what the health system is like, doesn't matter that there is homeless on the streets, it doesn't matter there's violence and crime, they don't matter no! The amount of money that country makes that's what matters... thats what the people with all the money want you to believe. that they aren't the reason theres violence there is poor pockets of society there are people who no matter how hard they try never succeed. People wake up it is a statistical impossibility to get out of debt for the country. all money is created at a debt therefore someone out there will be unable to pay their debt. they took out a loan and can't pay it back for whatever reason. but that is because banks ask for interest on debt. which means that the banks ask people to create money out of thin air. that's impossible so someone gets behind in debt unable to pay. doesn't matter how skilled you are its all just like a race there are people who come first and those who come last.Its all just part of the system designed to siphon money from the very poorest employee so that it may benefit the elite at the top with the big pay checks and the big corporations.

01 Nov 2011 07:03p.m.

Denise wrote:

'Keith' As they say, "There's none so blind as those who cannot see" which appears to apply to you. It was a Labour administration with Goff in full support when Labour sold off 100% of State asset shares in Telecom, Post Bank, Govt print and Air NZ - (which they were forced to buy back later at a loss). These sales were more than 50 times the value of the total asset sales National has ever offered in its entire history. The current proposal by National is to sell only a minority of holdings with the NZ Govt still retaining control. Yes, I will be one of the Mums & Dads taking advantage of the partial sale to share in both the dividends from our personal investment and the advantage of the retained State control shares. In effect the best of both worlds.

31 Oct 2011 01:00a.m.

Keith wrote:

Denise you have to be admired for your blind faith but unfortunately you will have to get used to the idea he lied you can try and spin it any way you like but he lied. zac labour at least can see the error of there ways on asset sales unfortunately your torrie mates cant see the errors they made in the 1990s under ruth richardson. There is none so blind as those that cannot see. Why are national going to sell shares to mum and dad investors in products they allready own.Looks like a con to me

29 Oct 2011 09:02p.m.

Denise wrote:

'David Foote'. Feel free to continue voting for the Greens but they will have no input into any current Govt decisions. The Green MPs you may vote into Parliament will only be a drain on the tax payer and a drain on society. I suggest you would be better off voting for a more meaningful party where your vote may actually contribute to putting the policies you value into law because the Greens wont be able to achieve more than create some meaningless hot air.