Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:647;Page:16362] 
6.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Can he confirm that he was briefed on the Oughton report on 14 December last year? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 As I have advised the member on a number of occasions I was advised in general terms for the first time on 14 December 2007 about historical individual employment matters. I was advised that there had been an independent investigation carried out by David Oughton and that the matter had occurred under been dealt with and closed by previous chief executives. I repeat once again that I did not receive a copy of the Oughton report or the covering letter until they were publicly released by the chief executive on 24 April 2008. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When briefed on 14 December was he briefed about the terms of reference to the Oughton inquiry the first of which relates to Government residence policy and not employment matters and was he briefed on the recommendations of the Oughton report the first of which required ministerial action to consider “special treatment” for applicants for residence who had missed out as a consequence of unlawful decision-making by his department? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: On 14 December I was briefed on the following points: that there had been an independent investigation into historical employment matters; that it concluded that Mary Anne Thompson had not sought to influence decisions about her family residence application; that disciplinary action had been taken against another Department of Labour official; and that the matter had occurred been dealt with and been closed by previous chief executives. That was all I was briefed on. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If it is a fact that he was never briefed on the Oughton report until 24 April 2008 how given the last question could he have been briefed on the references from that report in December of last year; is that chronologically logically or rationally possible? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am not qualified to make analysis of the rationality or lack of rationality of members but I think the member is correct in the statement he made. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is it correct that the Minister told Parliament on 14 May: “I was briefed on 14 December 2007 by the chief executive for the first time. I expressed my concerns to him but I also noted quite properly that these were employment matters”; if so what made him note as an employment matter Oughton’s first recommendation that special treatment was required to deal with applicants who missed out on residence because of the unlawful decisions of his department since such special treatment to grant residence outside policy requires his specific intervention? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I will try again. I was not briefed on the issues that the member raises. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Yes you were. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: If the member in the front row would just keep calm I will take him through it again—I know that calmness is a difficulty for that member. I have advised the member— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Just tell the truth. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I take exception to Dr Smith’s rather incoherent and illogical comments. I am insulted by them and I would be grateful if he could withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member withdraw and apologise please. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Earlier in the Minister’s answers he advised the House that indeed on 14 December he did receive a briefing on the report. For him now to stand up in response to my colleague Dr Lockwood Smith and say that he was not briefed is a contradiction and requires clarification by the Minister. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Well if the Minister can just give his answer without interruption we might get that clarification. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I will repeat again: I did not receive the Oughton report. I will go through what I was briefed on on 14 December and I will do it slowly for the member’s benefit. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Got any pictures? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: No I do not have any pictures. Firstly that there had been an independent investigation into historic employment matters. Secondly that it concluded that Mary Anne Thompson had not sought to influence decisions about her family’s residence applications. Thirdly that disciplinary action had been taken against another Department of Labour employee. Finally that this had been dealt with and closed by previous chief executives. That was the sum total of the briefing. The member tries to assert otherwise. That is his spin and his assertion; it is not the facts. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Did his chief executive officer Christopher Blake brief him adequately on the Oughton report; if so why did he find that it contained wider issues than just employment issues when he read it after its public release in April this year? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am pleased that finally we have got through to the member and he acknowledges that the first time I saw the report and its attachments was when it was publicly released. We have indeed made progress. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: We don’t believe that. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Well that is what the member said so I take it that it has finally got through. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: He is giving you a chance to get your story right. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Well if the blunderbuss in the front row could cool down we will get to the point. The bellows do blow in the front row. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please sit down. We have had the chipping across. Let us have an answer now in a way that we can all hear it. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I have confidence in my chief executive and I note this. He was appointed about 2 weeks I think before me and my estimation in terms of what he advised me was that he was in the process of wading through all sorts of information for the first time and coming to grips with it and he briefed me as he believed to be appropriate. I also note in the  
New Zealand Herald  
of 23 May a piece written by Christopher Blake and I quote from it—it may help the member distinguish between the accountabilities of the chief executive and the Minister: “There has been much debate about appropriate roles responsibilities and accountabilities in these matters. Let me make it clear that in all these operational issues responsibility rests solely with me as the chief executive.” 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is it correct that the Prime Minister expressed concern that her Government was being blindsided—I think to use her words—by these issues and does the Minister consider when the Prime Minister considers it a serious problem for her Government that it is being blindsided that if his chief executive officer has not properly briefed him he should be disciplining that person; if so what has he done to rectify this matter with his chief executive officer? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: The Prime Minister like me and other Ministers has a number of people looking at those issues including the Auditor-General’s inquiry. I think the Prime Minister in her reference to being blindsided noted that she was blindsided by a range of new information that has since come to light. I as Minister was not briefed on that information and previous Ministers were not briefed on it. As to Mr Blake’s conduct I think Mr Blake as a new chief executive officer trying to get to grips with a range of historic issues that had been dealt with and closed by his predecessors acted as best he could and I have confidence in him. I also note that when Mr Blake briefed me on 14 December he noted that he had been—and I will say it again slowly for the member—in contact with the State Services Commission. Later on when he briefed me further he noted that he had taken rather an extraordinary step to seek— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Oh he briefed you again. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
—keep calm—to seek legal advice from the Crown Law Office as to whether he could open the matter if he were of a mind to do so. He was advised he could not. Further that chief executive officer then embarked on a robust review of the Pacific branch. Then there was further State Services Commission involvement a police inquiry and now there is an Auditor-General’s inquiry. I would say that Mr Blake has acted appropriately. The question for the Auditor-General and others is whether previous chief executive officers have. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When his chief executive officer Christopher Blake—as he has just now reminded us—advised him that he had taken legal advice from the Crown Law Office as to whether he could reopen the matter did his chief executive officer let the Crown Law Office see the Oughton report prior to its giving him advice that the matter had been dealt with.? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I have no advice on that particular point. What I can confirm to the member—unless he would like to answer his own question which might be physically impossible—is that Christopher Blake the chief executive officer after the 14 December advice to me advised me that he had taken the extraordinary step of asking the Crown Law Office for an opinion as to whether if he was of a mind to he could reopen the matter. The advice he got was that he could not unless there was further new information.