English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7900] 
1. Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she stand by her reported statement that Hon Harry Duynhoven’s comments were the symptom of a man under stress made when she responded to his reported comments that he was happy to have a by-election but that issues around “the foreshore and seabed” may have meant Labour would “have taken a hammering”; if not why not? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 My comment was a general one and said: “Harry Duynhoven has been distressed by this issue since July 4.” I stand by that comment. Whether he made the remarks attributed to him in this morning’s media is a matter of contention. 
Hon Bill English 
: Is it correct that the Government passed legislation to avoid this vacancy because it was in the words of Harry Duynhoven worried that on the issue of the foreshore and the seabed it would have taken a hammering and is it correct that in Harry Duynhoven’s words his by-election could have triggered a chain of by-elections? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: It is unlikely given the present state of the polls that the Government would have taken a hammering on any issue and certainly not in New Plymouth. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does the Prime Minister think that some of the anxiety on the part of Mr Duynhoven was because there were other Labour members in his situation who were not prepared to have their names disclosed in this House as evidenced by the fact that every other party leader gave an assurance that none of his or her members was affected by section 55 of the Electoral Act but she was not prepared to do that; why has she treated this House with such contempt? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I believe that the reason Mr Duynhoven was distressed is—my having known him for many many years—there is no more honest member of Parliament in this House than the member for New Plymouth. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Would the Prime Minister like to comment further on Mr Peters’ question. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: If I could comment on the second part my understanding is that at the Privileges Committee the Leader of the House sought a proper survey by the committee of all MPs which was denied by National and ACT representatives. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We have a bit of a dilemma here. The Prime Minister is not a member of the Privileges Committee and she is not responsible for it which I guess is the reason that she has just given the House a false answer. I mean that actually is not even correct and she should answer for her own actions and not for the Privileges Committee. The chairman of the Privileges Committee has told this House and he is a member of the Government that he ruled that the Privileges Committee could not do such a survey. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Let me just say I heard the Prime Minister and she said it was her understanding. Then it is up to any member to challenge that in questions. 
Rod Donald 
: Could the Prime Minister confirm that the purpose of suspending section 55(1)(b) and (c) was to ensure that the legitimacy of dual citizenship is not undermined for any member of Parliament rather than to avoid a by-election notwithstanding that Harry Duynhoven would have won one hands down given that over 2000 National Party voters supported him at the last election? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: That is exactly my understanding. I might say that all current issues come up in by-elections and certainly in this one the feeble state of the National Party would have been an issue. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Does the Prime Minister not now realise that the Government is taking a hammering for having changed the law retrospectively; if it really is her view that the Government would easily win a by-election despite the foreshore issue and that Mr Duynhoven is an honest man why does she not tell him to resign and put it to the test? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I see no evidence whatsoever that the Government would take a hammering at a by-election. I suggest that if the National Party is keen to have one it create one by triggering the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act over Pakuranga. 
Hon Bill English 
: Will the Prime Minister give the House an assurance that apart from Harry Duynhoven none of her Ministers or members had breached section 55 of the Electoral Act prior to its amendment last week? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I know of no other member. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why did the Prime Minister rise in this House a short while ago and tell this House that at the Privileges Committee such a survey had been ruled out by members of the Opposition when that is demonstrably and palpably not true? Why did she say that and why could she not give this House the assurance that no Labour member was caught by section 55 of the Electoral Act before her saying that she does not know of anybody? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: In respect of the latter point I do not know of anybody. In my earlier answer I was quoting from Dr Michael Cullen’s  
Hansard 
 for Thursday. He said: “At the Privileges Committee I said”—that is Dr Cullen—“we should have a proper survey by the committee of all MPs if necessary on oath to find out the facts. But Mr Prebble immediately said no and the National Party said no.” 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It does not make the answer valid to quote from a previous Minister and that answer was not correct as was confirmed by the chairman of the Privileges Committee. The chairman of the Privileges Committee ruled that the Privileges Committee had no such power a fact that you were no doubt aware of as well Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister read out the statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister as a reason for her understanding of a particular issue. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why does the Prime Minister think that Mr Duynhoven made the statements that he made and if she believes that he is so badly affected by stress that he said things that she believes are untrue why is he fit to hold a ministerial warrant? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I said that whether Mr Duynhoven had made the comments was a matter of some contention. Indeed I am very doubtful that he could have made such a comment given the great unlikelihood that the current Opposition could give anyone a hammering. The current Leader of the Opposition was just judged by only 27 percent of the population to be capable.