* Blog: Transparency lost in therapeutic medicines debate
* Blog: Resolving conflicts of interest

John Key has just issued a press statement saying my story in today’s Herald on the transtasman therapeutics regulatory agency misrepresents him.

I’m bloody angry because his press statement totally misrepresents what took place yesterday.

He clearly suggested that if Labour presented him with a proposal like the one Peters put up - one that carves out complementary medicines except for those who export to Australia and have a voluntary opt-in - he would sign it.

I can only suspect that Tony Ryall - his chief negotiator on the bill - has gone ballistic and Key has had to back away from the clear and repetitive suggestion he made yesterday in the company of three senior Herald journalists that if he was presented with a proposal like the one Peters put up that he would sign it.

I have checked with my other two colleagues, John Armstrong and Paula Oliver, who were there (we were interviewing him and Bill English ahead of the National Party conference this weekend).
They also came away with the clear view that National had not been presented with the Peters proposal - which is pretty appalling on Labour’s part - and that if he were, he would sign it.

But don’t take my word for it. Read it for yourself. Naturally I had my tape running in the interview - there were four tapes on it.

Here’s the best bits:

Key: It’s pretty straightforward isn’t it? It’s all very well people having a whack at us, but if they want to bring us a proposal in line with what Peters said on television, we’ll sign it. I keep asking for it. No one has shown it to me.”

Here is another extract where you’ll see that I was so flabbergasted that I asked him if he had heard the question. The most salient parts are in bold.

Key: The New Zealand perspective on how Australia views this is overrated. I think they’ve said `look it is an issue but there’s lots of other things out there.’

As for Winston Peters’ proposal, a press release does not make a proposal. If someone wants to show us a proposal and it does what it says and carves out complementaries with a voluntary opt-in, we’ll sign it.

Herald: If they came to you now would you sign it?

Key: Yep. It is parked on the order paper. Our position has always been carve out complementaries with a voluntary opt-in regime.

Herald: Did you hear her question?

Key: If they came to us now with that proposal we will sign it.

Herald: So it is a do-able deal now?

Send us Your Comments