Ross Jami-LeeJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): Last week I raised in the House matters involving the Counties Manukau District Health Board (DHB) and an internal audit into unauthorised and excessive uses of public funds at the DHB dating between 1999 and 2016. I'm going to continue raising questions in the House about that audit and how it's been handled by the Minister and the Ministry of Health. These are not so much allegations; they're questions based off reports that I hold in my possession.On 15 December last year the then chair of the Counties Manukau DHB Lester Levy wrote to David Clark highlighting concerns about management and financial practices which the board had commissioned an internal audit on. Dr Levy's memo to the Minister outlined that the board was concerned about a range of matters including how salary increases allowances and benefits paid to a former senior executive were authorised. The internal audit report was subsequently reviewed by a Ministry of Health - led review carried out by forensic accountants Beattie Varley Deloitte and the former Solicitor-General Michael Heron QC.On 12 December Dr Levy had also written to the State Services Commissioner and Ministry of Health asking for assistance. Dr Levy wrote that Because of the very serious and troubling nature of these issues we consider it of the utmost importance that the review process gains greater momentum." In reply to Dr Levy the State Services Commissioner wrote back on 20 December saying "The scope and nature of the review relies on utilising the Director-General of Health's powers." This is an important point.I raise these particular considerations because the Minister of Health has stated in the House that the acting Director-General of Health Stephen McKernan raised the Beattie Varley review with him as Minister. I've consistently asked in this House what steps the Minister took to ensure any conflicts of interest were appropriately managed. I'm going to continue asking those questions.The Beattie Varley review that Mr McKernan discussed with the Minister was a review of the DHB's own internal audit. Some of the very serious and troubling issues in that audit involved salary transactions that were not properly authorised or were excessive or inappropriate. Part of the suite of documents making up the internal audit was a document I tabled today entitled "Salary and Allowance Validation". It's essentially a list of every salary and allowance change relating to a senior executive that was audited. This document highlights every time a salary or allowance did not properly comply with the board's internal procedures or standard accounting practices. There is a specific column where the auditor notes if the salary or allowance received authorisation properly. For each year between 2002 and 2006 the auditor found salary increases that were approved by Mr McKernan and were not properly authorised. In 2003 and 2005 the auditor found at-risk payments that were approved by Mr McKernan and were not properly authorised. In 2005 the auditor found that 168 hours of annual leave and education leave for the senior executive were cashed in with approval from Mr McKernan which according to the auditor a legal opinion did not support. In 2006 the auditor found a one-time payment approved by Mr McKernan for the senior executive which the auditor labelled "unusual" as well as not being properly authorised.We know that all these issues were being reviewed by Beattie Varley because in the letter I tabled yesterday regarding terms of reference they specifically state that they believe their instructions to include "review the remuneration of the senior executive including the receipt of additional allowances travel allowances and other vehicle leasing arrangements without proper authorisation". These fundamental questions must be answered. If Mr McKernan was the chief executive during the time in question and he was named in the audit documents and those documents were then reviewed utilising the powers of the director-general when he became director-general did he take any measures to ensure the conflicts were managed appropriately?We also need to know why the Minister who was apprised of these issues as far back as December by Lester Levy did not ensure conflicts were properly managed. We need to know why Mr McKernan was discussing the review with the Minister given his name appeared in the audit documents.I've consistently asked in the House whether the Minister took steps to ensure conflicts of interest were appropriately managed. Dr Levy raised these with the Minister in December the Auditor-General raised these with the Minister in January Rabin Rabindran raised these in person in the Minister's office in March and Mark Darrow a former board member raised these in a letter with the Minister in April. The Minister knew as far back as December. The Minister has received information about the internal audit. The Minister has a responsibility to New Zealanders to ensure conflicts are properly managed. I submit that he answers these questions to New Zealanders."