Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:633;Page:4688] 
2.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Did his department grant work or residence permits following immigration assistance from Taito Phillip Field to any of the eight Thai immigrants or their partners who allegedly attended a meeting with Taito Phillip Field on 2 October 2005 shortly after the launch of the Ingram inquiry? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 Yes. I am advised that the cases in question were the subject of the Ingram inquiry. I am further advised that Mr Ingram had full access to all of those departmental files. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is the Minister concerned that of the eight Thai immigrants at that meeting on 2 October who were assisted by Taito Phillip Field with either their own or their partners’ immigration applications only three cooperated with the Ingram inquiry—one of whom Mr Srikaew claimed he had not seen Mr Field at that meeting when Mr Field claimed he recalled seeing him—and why if there were no immigration issues to hide at that meeting does he believe most of those new immigrants refused to talk to the Ingram inquiry about it? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I have no idea nor should I have any. However I am aware—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the Minister please continue. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I have no idea because it is not for the Minister to be inside the head of witnesses to an inquiry that has already taken place. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is the Minister concerned that the Serious Fraud Office conveyed to the Ingram inquiry allegations that the purpose of the meeting on 2 October 2005 between the Thai immigrants and Mr Field was to establish who within the group was the leak to the media in relation to Mr Field’s assisting those persons with applications for work and residency permits in return for their working on houses owned by Mr Field; if that was not the purpose of the meeting why would most of the group refuse to talk to the inquiry about it? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The Serious Fraud Office lies outside my ministerial responsibilities. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is the Minister concerned that the police information provided to Noel Ingram stated that Mr Field had alleged at the meeting that one of the attendees—understood to be Mr Chaikhunpol—was the leak to the media; if the meeting were not part of a cover-up around immigration issues why did Mr Ingram find Mr Field’s recollections of it shortly after the meeting to be “not particularly helpful”? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I do not have access to the background behind the police statements. I am not the Minister of Police. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Given that in response to questioning by Mr Ingram Taito Phillip Field said in respect of the meeting on 2 October 2005 that he possibly called in to Ms Thaivichit’s place to say hello that he could not recall what prompted the visit or the number of people present but that he did concede that there may have been some talk about allegations involving Thai immigrants that had featured in the media if the meeting was not part of an attempted cover-up of what went on in respect of the immigration cases promoted by Taito Phillip Field what other explanation does the Minister have for Noel Ingram’s inability to establish what went on at that meeting? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: Misrepresentations to any inquiry or to the department are a serious matter. I am aware that a member of this House in July 2005 made representations supporting a bid for residence by a foreign national who married a New Zealand resident soon after arriving. The representations stated the couple were “living as man and wife” but they had already told the New Zealand Immigration Service that the marriage had broken down irreconcilably and the husband had withdrawn his support for the wife’s immigration application. Regrettably the member presented false and misleading information to the Associate Minister and exercised very poor judgment in assessing the case. The Associate Minister declined to intervene. That member was Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith PhD. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I thought you might take some interest in that. In respect of the question before us which is around a meeting involving Taito Phillip Field on 2 October the Minister has no details whatsoever in order to be able to provide an answer to any of the queries of the House but he is able to provide a huge amount of detail on a case completely disconnected from the question on the Order Paper. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is the Minister concerned by Noel Ingram’s claim that his investigation into the meeting on 2 October had been unsatisfactory leaving several immigration issues unresolved including whether the purpose of the gathering was to identify the source of the allegations involving Mr Field and Mr Chaikhunpol that had appeared in the media whether Mr Chaikhunpol’s move from his former accommodation was as a result of an effective edict from Mr Field and whether those identified as being part of the gathering also did work on houses owned by Mr Field in consideration of Mr Field’s assistance on immigration matters; if he is not concerned by this apparent cover-up on immigration matters why is he not? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I repeat that Mr Ingram QC has had access to all information held by the department on those eight cases.