Robertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3449. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: Does his Budget 2015 speech include the statement “there will be a small surplus this year and increasing surpluses forecast over time”?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): The member will just have to wait one more sleep to find out.Grant Robertson: Why should New Zealanders tomorrow believe his making a promise for a surplus for next year and forecast surpluses for the following years given that he made that exact promise last year and will break it tomorrow?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well I am quite confident that New Zealanders will make up their own minds about that regardless of what that member says. In fact if that member criticises the Budget and our economic management most of them will conclude that we are probably doing the right thing.Grant Robertson: Is it correct that Treasury advised him that the surplus he will promise tomorrow for next year is possible only if there is a significant rebound in global dairy prices?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member will just have to wait until tomorrow but I hope tomorrow he uses the term “fiscal crisis” because—Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am going to invite the member to ask that question again.Grant Robertson: Is it correct that Treasury advised him that the surplus he will promise tomorrow for next year is possible only if there is a significant rebound in global dairy prices?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member will have to wait until tomorrow but I hope he uses the term “fiscal crisis” tomorrow.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member is saying that question has not been addressed on this occasion it has. He talked about the surplus that will be promised tomorrow in his question. It has been addressed.Grant Robertson: Is it correct that Treasury advised him that a surplus for 2015-16 is possible only with a significant rebound in global dairy prices?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member will have to wait until tomorrow.Hon Members: No no.Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well he will have to wait until tomorrow.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That is the third time I have asked a straight question to the Minister—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member will resume his seat. That is not the same question he has asked three times. On the second occasion he repeated the question he had asked the first time and on that occasion I ruled that because of the way it was framed that question had definitely been answered. Does the member have a further supplementary question?Grant Robertson: So you are saying that—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am on my feet and I am going to warn that member that if he interjects like that again while I am on my feet I will be asking him to leave the Chamber.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Are you telling me that the Minister addressed the question I just asked?Mr SPEAKER: No I am not. I am saying that when you rose and took a point of order and said you had asked the same question three times you are—[Interruption] I have a very good mind to do it. The point I was making was that the member was wrong with his first point of order when he said he had asked the same question three times. He had not. We are moving forward. If the member wishes to ask—[Interruption] I am not entertaining further questions on my—[Interruption] Order! I am not entertaining any further adjudication on that matter. If the member has further supplementary questions I will hear them.Ron Mark: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am trying to be helpful as an independent observer.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will simply raise his point of order.Ron Mark: The point of order Mr Speaker to assist you is that he—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order I hope but it will be heard in silence. It will be heard in silence.Ron Mark: I am not challenging you at all but—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member simply raise his point of order.Ron Mark: I am trying to. The point I want to raise with you is that he did not actually say those words. His words were “This is the third straight question I have asked.” not “I have asked the same question”—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member may not have heard me but I said that as far as I was concerned I had adjudicated on the matter and that was the end of the matter. The member may not have heard that.Grant Robertson: Is it correct that Treasury advised him that a surplus for 2015-16 is possible only if there is a significant rebound in global dairy prices?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member will have to wait until tomorrow.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. How is that an answer addressing that question? It is about advice he has received. He cannot tell me to wait until tomorrow. Amazingly enough Treasury do give him advice. He ignores it—Mr SPEAKER: Order! We have had a similar line of questions now on four occasions. It is not the way I would have hoped the Minister would answer the question but—[Interruption] Order! Grant Robertson will leave the House. I warned the member that—[Interruption] Order! The member will leave the Chamber.Grant Robertsonwithdrew from the Chamber.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! We have a point of order that I will hear from Chris Hipkins.Chris Hipkins: Repeatedly during question time today when there have been points of order from either side of the House you have admonished members on this side of the House for their interjections during points of order or when you were on your feet. I would like to know whether the same ruling is going to apply to Mr Brownlee Ms Parata and a variety—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough from that member. There were occasions when there were interjections from this side of the House when I called for order particularly when Mr Mark was attempting to raise a point of order. I could not identify the particular person who made those interjections. Frankly they were coming from a large number of people. On this occasion I specifically warned Mr Robertson that if he was to interject again when I was on my feet I would have no choice but to ask him to leave. He did not heed that warning. He gave me no choice but to deal with him severely. I say to all members that when I am on my feet and I call for silence and then a member specifically after being warned not to interject does so he leaves me no choice but to be severe.Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The colleague Mr Robertson in front of me used four supplementary questions to ask the same question as you have previously advised members to do when Ministers are not giving a straight answer. You have ejected a member who had absolutely understandable frustration. My point of order is to ask you what sanction will apply equally to Ministers who are deliberately thwarting the intent if not the letter of the Standing Orders and denying the people of New Zealand the opportunity to have a proper question answered in a proper manner.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I think that question might be reasonable if it were about a range of topics that any Minister should be able to answer about their portfolio. But 24 hours before a Budget is delivered being asked to give a commentary on what will be in a Budget text is completely unreasonable. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can understand the sense of frustration on this side. I have agreed with that. But that was not the reason Mr Robertson was ejected from the Chamber. I hope I do not have to point it out again to members. The reason was that he was given a very specific warning. He ignored that warning.Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Is it a fresh point of order?Hon David Cunliffe: It is because I did not question your ruling that you ejected a member for questioning your judgment. My point of order was given the circumstances and the understandable frustration on this side of the House and the thwarting deliberately of the intent of the Standing Orders at what point would any sanction be applied to any Minister who continued to make those types of tactics plain? That was nothing to do with the ejection of Mr Robertson.Mr SPEAKER: I accept that point. Ministers are responsible for their own answers and those answers are then judged not only by this House but by the public. On one occasion when I did not think that the Minister had answered the question correctly I asked Grant Robertson to repeat the question. That is a tactic I frequently use.Hon Member: Four times.Mr SPEAKER: The member now interjects and says that it was on four occasions. As I have pointed out to the House those questions were different. In one he quite specifically talked about a matter that would be addressed in tomorrow’s speech and that gave the Minister a perfect out to say he would have to wait for the Budget. As to the last question about Treasury advice it would have been a more satisfactory answer if it had been answered directly by the Minister but at the end of the day I am not responsible for the answers that are given by any Minister in this House. Ministers themselves are responsible for—[Interruption] Order! Ministers themselves are responsible. They will be judged both by this House and by the public.Hon David Cunliffe: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: No I have dealt with that matter from the Hon David Cunliffe.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just a minute. I just want to be clear to Mr Cunliffe that I have dealt with that matter. I have made a ruling. I do not intend to relitigate it here today but if it is a fresh point of order—Hon David Cunliffe: It is Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: A fresh point of order—the Hon David Cunliffe.Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. What is the definition of “addressing the question”?Mr SPEAKER: Now the member is attempting to relitigate the matter. I judge that on every occasion depending on the context and content of the question the context and the content of the answer. I am the one who makes that judgment.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: I am sorry—is this a fresh point of order?Rt Hon Winston Peters: Yes it is.Mr SPEAKER: The Rt Hon Winston Peters.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If one of the four questions with additional words gave the Minister of Finance an out what was the redeeming feature for the first three answers that did not give him a way out?Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member is now relitigating a matter that we have already ruled on in the House today. He is not raising a fresh point of order.Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Again I want to give the same warning to Tracey Martin to be fair to her. If she is raising an absolutely fresh point of order I am happy to hear it but if it in any way relitigates the discussion we have now had for the last 10 minutes then I will be asking that member to leave the Chamber.Tracey Martin: Thank you Mr Speaker. I appreciate your warning and I hope that I do not transgress but I seek your clarification on the last question asked by Mr Robertson—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member now—Tracey Martin: —not the content of the question not the content of the question but I am asking whether you could give a ruling later on about when it is appropriate if we ask a direct question about a report for a Minister to say we have to wait until tomorrow—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member is now very dangerously—should be about to leave the Chamber. She is relitigating the decision I have made. I have explained to Mr Cunliffe that I have got to judge every answer given as to whether it addresses the question. Mr Cunliffe sought more definition on that. I said it depends on the context of the question the content of the question the content of the answer and the context. There is no specific ruling I can give as to whether any question in the future will be addressed or not. I make a judgment to all; that is my responsibility in this House.