McCully Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
McCully Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:4135] 
8.  
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (NZ National—East Coast Bays) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Justice 
: In light of her description of the former Race Relations Conciliator Mr Gregory Fortuin as unwise and inappropriate when he involved himself in the affairs of the Alliance Party does she agree that the same description applies to the actions of the current Race Relations Commissioner Mr Joris De Bres who communicated with selected politicians and political parties in relation to his “Taleban” speech; if not why not? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 No because under section 16 of the Human Rights Act it is the function of the Race Relations Commissioner to lead discussions on race relations matters. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Does the Minister agree with the Deputy Prime Minister’s description of Mr De Bres’ Taliban speech as “unwise and unnecessarily provocative to many New Zealanders”; if so how does she square those characteristics with the role of the commissioner as spelt out in the Human Rights Act? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: Yes because it is the role of the Race Relations Commissioner to stimulate debate. Whether one likes the views put forward or not that is the job. 
Dianne Yates 
: Is it the duty of the Race Relations Commissioner to check all statements with the Minister? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No. Section 19 of the Act requires members of the commission to act independently in the performance of their functions. This Government understands and respects the independence of statutorily appointed members unlike Mr McCully who was forced to resign following complaints on this matter from the New Zealand Tourism Board in 1999. 
Dail Jones 
: Is the Minister capable of distinguishing between a person who leads a discussion and a person who purposely creates and foments problems in society; a person who leads discussions does not foment debate by way of introducing the Taliban and making comparisons between it and New Zealand society; surely a person who wants to lead debate makes information available to everyone not merely the United Future party the Labour Party the Greens and Tim Barnett? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The question had three parts to it. The Minister may comment on two of them. 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No. I cannot make the distinction. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does the Minister think it wise that a person in the position of Race Relations Commissioner should pre-circulate a controversial speech such as the Taliban speech proved to be only to selected members of Parliament and selected parties and will she be suggesting to the Race Relations Commissioner that in the interests of democracy he should tell the public of New Zealand all the names of the people to whom he gave a pre-circulated copy of the Taliban speech? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: I understand that the Race Relations Commissioner had pre-circulated his speech to people including myself but unfortunately I never got it; or if it was in my office I never read it. 
Ron Mark 
: That’s par for the course. 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: Yes it is par for the course because of the independence of the position which I have just explained to the member. However I do understand that in future the commissioner will be circulating copies of his speeches to all members so they will have no difficulties reading them in the future. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Can the Minister confirm that the Race Relations Commissioner circulated a draft of the speech almost 2 weeks prior to its delivery and that some of the recipients of that draft were public servants who were potentially involved in Ministers’ offices and can she explain why the Race Relations Commissioner felt it necessary to selectively delete names from the list of people who received that circulated copy? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No I cannot confirm that.