2. Question No. 2—Prime MinisterHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston) to the Prime MinisterQuestion No. 2—Prime Minister2. Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Does he stand by his decision to appoint Todd Stephenson MP as Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Associate Minister of Health (Pharmac)?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: How were Todd Stephenson's conflicts of interest managed in respect to his shares in Johnson and Johnson Chimeric Therapeutics and Commonwealth Serum Laboratories—all being pharmaceutical companies that stand to benefit from Pharmac's decision-making powers?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Appropriately and properly.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Was Todd Stephenson involved in writing the letter of expectations to the board chair of Pharmac?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: With respect to that questioner that answer does not belong with me; it belongs with the Minister in charge and I'm happy to redirect it because at a certain level of—Hon Ginny Andersen: You are the Prime Minister.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Beg your pardon? No with the greatest respect the Prime Minister has Ministers to help him. That's the difference on this side of the House: they're not one-man bands that are having their captain's choice taken off them which happened yesterday with another political party. No no we don't have a captain's choice over here. We actually consult and we cooperate and when a person like Mr Seymour is assigned a responsibility we respect that.Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order sir. Thank you very much Mr Speaker. If the Acting Prime Minister doesn't know then that's all well and good and he should perhaps say so but I'm not sure that's the responsibility of someone else when the Prime Minister ultimately has full responsibility for all Ministers and their actions.SPEAKER: Well that's true but as I've said before when you ask a question that's as general as Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?" then it would be an impossibility for the Prime Minister to know absolutely everything. I'm also aware of how the process goes around the construction of letters of intent and I think the Prime Minister's answers today are perfectly acceptable in that regard.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Is it acceptable that the Minister's main way of expressing his views to Pharmac were drafted in part by a person who holds shares in pharmaceutical companies?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The third answer given to that questioner covers the issue. I said that those issues were handled properly and appropriately.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Is it a conflict of interest for Todd Stephenson to be at meetings with Pharmac where details of drug funding will have been discussed while Mr Stephenson holds shares in pharmaceutical companies?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: With respect I don't think the questioner understands the actual construction of Pharmac and the independence of that organisation. We've all made—Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Do you? Why does your under-secretary go?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well with the greatest respect I think I understand it far better than you—you've only been here five minutes. Ha ha! No look this is not a full day's work to just come and ask a whole lot of stupid questions in Parliament to shout out and then then go home and call it work. Some of us work seven days a week and that sort of behaviour—[Interruption] No Mr—from the North Shore don't wave out to me. Don't wave out to me. My point is we all know how Pharmac operates and its operation is independent. Our job is to find it the resources and that's what we're doing.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Will he maintain the standards that New Zealanders expect of their Government and stand down Mr Stephenson from his role or is he unwilling to challenge David Seymour's exploitation of a loophole which allows a pharmaceutical industry plant to assist the Minister responsible for Pharmac?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No I think there is a—Hon Peeni Henare: Well he's not here for the arts! [Laughter]SPEAKER: All right. OK that's enough—we'll hear the answer in silence.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: There is an answer to that questioner which is that we reject the premises on which the question is based. But let's go further here. That questioner now made an allegation and without any evidence any proof in this House and is defaming someone without any care for her responsibility.Chlöe Swarbrick: You know a bit about that.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes I do and I've won a lot of cases—far more than you'll ever win right? I've won $7.5 million of cases so I might know something about it. She's defaming someone who's got no chance to defend himself.SPEAKER: I also just said we would hear the answer in silence and two people were very very rowdy during that time. Don't do that again while we are required to be quiet."