Turei Metiria: Urgent Debates — Hon Peter Dunne—Report on Investigation of Review of Compliance Leak and Resignation as MinisterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Urgent Debates — Hon Peter Dunne—Report on Investigation of Review of Compliance Leak and Resignation as Minister[Sitting date: 11 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:10922. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green):That is all right Mr Assistant Speaker. Tēnā koe. The question is and it has been said before how low John Key will stoop to keep this little Government cobbled together. That is what we are seeing happen with this scandal around Peter Dunne. John Key is desperate to cling on to power and to keep people inside his tent despite the serious concerns about their integrity. This is certainly not the first example of this. It was certainly the case in the previous National Government and it is certainly the case in this one that John Key will do anything tocling on to power even if it puts the public at risk and there are serious questions of integrity for his Ministers.John Key needs Peter Dunne to keep supporting his unstable and unethical Government. He needs Peter Dunne for bills like the Skycity convention centre dirty deal. He needs Peter Dunne’s vote to get that thing through. He knows that it is unethical. He knows that the New Zealand public are opposed to it. He knows it will cause harm to hundreds of New Zealanders and to small businesses and community organisations but he is desperate to keep alive this $400 million monument to John Key. He will do anything including keeping Peter Dunne on side in order to see that it proceeds. That is a Prime Minister who has no understanding of the effects of his actions on ordinary New Zealanders in their everyday lives.John Key has said that Mr Dunne was replaced on the Intelligence and Security Committee because he is no longer a Minister. We would have seen that on television with John Key saying that it did not really have anything to do with the issue of trust; it was to do with the issue of no longer being a Minister. That is just not the truth—that is just not the case. In fact for membership on the Intelligence and Security Committee it is required that every person who nominates someone for membership of this committee this particular Intelligence and Security Committee “shall have regard to the requirements of security”—shall have regard to the requirements of security.Peter Dunne has not been tossed off this committee because he is no longer a Minister; he has been thrown off this committee because he is not trusted by this Prime Minister. The Prime Minister’s job is to nominate someone for this committee. He has removed that nomination because Peter Dunne cannot be trusted with the security that is required for this committee. That is a clear implication from John Key the Prime Minister that he does not trust Peter Dunne any more. Despite that and despite that clear statement he will keep him on in some form in the agreement that National has with United Future in order to be able to keep Peter Dunne’s vote—despite the fact that he no longer has any trust in Peter Dunne.The Prime Minister has to be up front and honest with the New Zealand public. That is his job. He has primary responsibility to the well-being of the New Zealand public—not to another person in his Cabinet not even to his own party but primarily to the people of New Zealand—and John Key is failing in that duty.It is interesting actually when you think about when that rule did change because we have other members on that committee—the public may not know this—who are not Ministers either. So for example Russel Norman and David Shearer who are not Ministers are on that committee. They are trusted with the requirements of security and they will continue to be members of that committee because they are trustworthy. Peter Dunne has been thrown off the committee by the Prime Minister because the Prime Minister no longer trusts him.I want to just raise an issue that has not been discussed actually very widely at all in the debate around Peter Dunne and his actions and his reasons for resigning as a Minister. Peter Dunne has been very clear that he himself cannot explain his behaviour or why it is that he is still withholding information from the Henry inquiry. As a result there has been a lot of speculation about this being a salacious issue about this being an infatuation as it has been described. The person who has no voice in this debate—the person who is subject to all of this rumour and innuendo—is the journalist involved. That journalist cannot talk about her sources. She is unable to defend herself against the accusations and innuendo that are being made against her. We have people like Michelle Boag a National Party toady making defamatory statements about the journalist on television—Rt Hon Winston Peters: And me.METIRIA TUREI: Well Winston Peters does have a voice in this debate so I would not consider Winston Peters to be a victim of what is going on here but the journalist I think is a victim. Because the journalist is a woman and because the journalist is young that means that there has been a deliberate inference that somehow that journalist has behaved unethically in the relationships that she has with members of this House. That accusation must be put down. It is not the case that this innuendo is accurate. This journalist has a real problem now because her reputation is at stake and she has very little opportunity to defend herself against the accusation. I would implore the rest of the media who are dealing with this issue to bear in mind what is happening here with one of their own and that this would not be acceptable to them if it was them or one of their own in their own media.Hon Gerry Brownlee: What about the Privileges Committee?METIRIA TUREI: Mr Brownlee talks about the Privileges Committee. The Privileges Committee is quite rightly investigating this issue. If there is an issue of a breach of the Standing Orders then absolutely the Privileges Committee should be investigating it. That does not give the journalist involved in this case a genuine voice to defend herself against the salacious and defamatory comments particularly from the National side about her behaviour. She does not have an option here.In essence this is a very clear story. John Key is desperate to keep his Government going because he has all sorts of legislation that he is desperate to get through on the basis of two votes from two MPs who have both had their integrity questioned and who are both teetering as I have said earlier on the edge of political oblivion. There is John Banks as a result of allegations that he lied about his donations return—he is currently in court over that issue—and of course now Peter Dunne who has resigned as a Minister but the policy agreement that he made in order for the Government to continue does continue. So he will keep on supporting this Government even though John Key has effectively said that he no longer trusts Peter Dunne with any matters of security or consideration.This Government is unstable it is unethical and it relies on the votes of disgraced men. Just like the last days of the Shipley Government—for those who are here and remember those times—John Key is having to cobble together another National Party coalition of the disgraced. Thank you.