Here's a couple from WhaleOil:
* If no debt is incurred because Mr Henry never billed for it then how did you manage to “pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal bills from your own pocket”?
* If no debt was incurred because Brian Henry didn’t bill them, then what exactly was Brian Henry soliciting funds for?
Adolf at No Minister asks:
* Will it be the IRD which finally takes down our very own dapper, dandy, dwarf?
and notes..."The more he and his smart arse lawyer open their mouths, the deeper they dig themselves into trouble. After last night's revelations to the PC, it would seem a thorough income tax and GST audit of both WInston Peters and Brian Henry would be in order."
And Keeping Stock has many questions, too many for one post, but really thinks this one may present problems for the former MP for Tauranga
* Given that Winston Peters was aware of the award of costs of $40,000 against him after the Tauranga, and given that Bob Clarkson acknowledged in the House the payment of the costs, and given that Brian Henry told the Privileges Committee that he PERSONALLY paid the $40,000 costs awarded against Winston Peters:
i) Why has Winston Peters not paid the costs awarded against him? and
ii) Is Winston Peters surprised that no enforcement action has ever been taken against him, given that he has had an outstanding bill of $40,000 for almost three years, and allegedly had no knowledge of the costs having been paid on his behalf?
Brian Henry's revelation to the Privileges Committee last night may end up having unintended consequences for his "blood brother".
UPDATE: DPF at Kiwiblog expresses incredulity that Winston Peters, former Treasurer, would not know that a $40,000 PERSONAL DEBT had been paid on his behalf.
And here's what Bob Clarkson told Parliament on 5 April 2006:
Tauranga Court Case—Payment