Peters WinstonRt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): On the subject of the Offices of Parliament the Public Audit Act 2001 provides for the Auditor-General to give independent assurance to this Parliament and the public over effectiveness and efficiency waste probity and financial prudence. Our question is why has it taken 196 days—some 7 months—for the Audit Office to reply to a letter we sent it in October of last year. We raised serious concerns about Fuji Xerox and the uncomfortably close relationship it has with current and former high-ranking procurement staff in the Minister of Finance's former ministry—the one Songs of Bridges" now allegedly presides over. The Audit Office followed an extensive and exhaustive line of inquiry—well it met with Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) staff to discuss all-of-Government contracts it talked to MBIE's auditor and audit staff it has spoken to a person we identified in our letter and it has considered how these relate to MBIE's future procurements.But this honesty-box approach sums up this Government's entire approach to biosecurity. In order to send a clear message that under New Zealand First any post-border incursion like pea weevil or varroa or myrtle rust would trigger an independent inquiry to be led by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment we make that statement today. We will fund it to do this because the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) cannot be trusted to investigate MPI. That is axiomatic. Returning to the Audit Office 7 months of painstaking work yielded just this answer: "The issues outlined in your letter have been referred to the Minister of Education considered as part of our Audit Office work to date or are currently being considered as part of our planned future work." and that is it. We raised a serious concern about Fuji Xerox promising Northland schools the earth but delivering them dirt instead. Prima facie conflicts of interest—like the former deputy chief executive officer of MBIE responsible for procurement Peter Thomas jumping ship to Fuji Xerox just before it won a multimillion-dollar Government contract—attracted what? Just a Gallic shrug like: "So what's of interest here?". Within the last few weeks though Fujifilm Japan has delayed its annual report because of $285 million worth of accounting irregularities in its New Zealand operations. Sound familiar? Despite that Fuji—that is the one here—still won a contract worth tens of millions of dollars from the Ministry of Social Development under yet another of these suspect all-of-Government stitch-ups. Where there is smoke there is fire as the National Business Review and Fairfax to their credit have tried to expose. This week I was contacted by a major Japanese business journalist and I will quote you a sentence from one such contact. He said: "We are planning to run a story on Fuji Xerox New Zealand's fraud in the 15 May issue." That is really relevant. Way back in Japan they are concerned; here no one is. The Japanese media see this for what it is—fraud—yet the Serious Fraud Office the Audit Office and this Government see it as a business-as-usual approach. Soon 300000 of Japan's business elite will learn the ugly truth about how our once-high standards in this country have been eroded by this Government's "who you know" approach to deal making. In 2013 Transparency International found that 3 percent of Kiwis had paid a bribe with some two-thirds saying that corruption was on the rise and in 2017 under this National Government it is much worse. It is not acceptable for this Government to turn a blind eye to corruption at all levels from appointing retreads like Dame Jenny Shipley to boards to Immigration New Zealand's weekly Mumbai fraud reports fraud in the Artificial Limb Service and all-of-Government "who you know" stitch-ups. I could go on but my message to the Auditor-General is this. As an officer of this Parliament you must look behind the figures because your response to us indicates a serious lack of forensic accounting depth. It is going to be out of Japan in a few days' time. The question is—to that man laughing and giggling over there because he could not give a rat's Jerrière about integrity—what did New Zealand do about the scandal in its midst? [Interruption] There he is—there he is. He thinks it is a joke. What is his name again? Tracey Martin: Nobody knows. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I do not know. But he thinks it is a joke. It is a scandal that the Japanese are about to blow on their own operation in this country because they know that in this country something has gone wrong and that man over there—what is his name? Just give me his surname—Brett what? Hon Member: Hudson. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Brett Hudson. Brett Hudson—he thinks it is funny. I seek leave to table the Office of the Auditor-General's response dated 1 May 2017 to my letter sent to the Auditor-General on 17 October 2016 on this matter of extreme concern. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Leave is put for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Thank you very much. Motion agreed to and Address agreed to."