Chadwick Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Chadwick Steve: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:665;Page:13302] 
11. 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Consumer Affairs 
: What are his priorities for the Consumer Affairs portfolio? 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Minister of Consumer Affairs) 
: 
 My priority will be to continue the work of my predecessor particularly the significant work already under way to rationalise consumer legislation as part of the One Law—One Door programme. Last night I received a briefing from my officials in the Ministry of Consumer Affairs and over the next few days I will be considering the matters raised. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does the Minister stand by his statement that “The ETS is already set to impose a significant cost burden on New Zealand households—a burden that may become crippling if opportunistic companies take advantage of the situation to inflate their profit margins”; if so will one of his priorities as Minister of Consumer Affairs be to protect consumers from opportunistic emissions trading scheme pricing; if not why not? 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: The Minister of Consumer Affairs has never made that statement. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Supplementary question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I say to the Hon Nick Smith and the Hon David Parker that I have been on my feet for some time and I am not as little as that. Members should be able to see that I am on my feet. Charles Chauvel has the floor for a supplementary question. That noise was just totally out of order. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a requirement under the Standing Orders that questions be true; members cannot ask a false question. The member asked whether he stood by that statement. In fact the Minister of Consumer Affairs never made that statement. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That point of order is totally unnecessary. The Minister said that and it was a perfectly good answer. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to the particular wording of the question. I asked the Minister whether he stood by his statement. There is no doubt that he made the statement. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. Ministers are not responsible for statements made previously by anyone other than the Minister. The member has been in this House long enough to know that. The Minister answered perfectly properly that the Minister of Consumer Affairs had not made that statement. Someone else of the same name as that Minister may have but that is irrelevant. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You raise an interesting point with the House. Is it in order for a member to ask whether a Minister agrees with the statement of a member of Parliament and whether those comments will be influencing a ministerial policy agenda that the Minister’s officials were briefing him on last night even if the member of Parliament being referred to is the same person as the Minister? Presumably it would be in order for a Minister to be asked whether he or she agrees with the comments of Gerry Brownlee or whoever it happens to be. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We do not need to debate this matter further by way of point of order. It is a very simple matter. Ministers can indeed be asked whether they agree with other statements but in terms of the precision of any answer that might be achieved Ministers are not responsible for statements made by other people. I cannot insist on any particular answer. The question can certainly be asked—the Standing Orders have been relaxed to allow that—but in terms of the precision of any answer gained often those questions do not really elicit much by way of answers. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does the Minister agree with the view expressed by John Boscawen MP in May 2010 that “The ETS should be scrapped or delayed but if the Government is dead set on imposing this ridiculous”— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The House has longstanding conventions about ministerial responsibility. It is very plain that if Mr Chauvel has concerns about the emissions trading scheme or issues in respect of it they are within my responsibility and not the responsibility of the Minister of Consumer Affairs. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I listened very carefully to the previous supplementary question. Although the answer given to it was perfectly in order I was listening carefully because initially I had the same impression as the honourable Minister that this matter could not be the responsibility of the Minister of Consumer Affairs. But then the questioner linked it to the responsibilities of the Minister of Consumer Affairs in terms of the impact on retail pricing and consumers’ interest in it. I believe that that is a legitimate area of interest of the Minister of Consumer Affairs. The Minister’s answer was perfectly in order. The member is now asking the Minister whether he agrees with a statement made by a person and that question is perfectly in order. I invite Charles Chauvel to start his question again. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does the Minister agree with the statement made in May 2010 by John Boscawen MP that: “The ETS should be scrapped or delayed but if the Government is dead set on imposing this ridiculous tax on the country then New Zealanders should be told exactly how it will affect their lives”; if so will one of his priorities as Minister of Consumer Affairs be telling New Zealanders exactly how the emissions trading scheme will affect their lives; if not why not? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If that question is to be included within the portfolio responsibility of the Minister of Consumer Affairs then frankly there is not a single question in respect of transport finance justice or anything that would not fall within his responsibilities. The reality is that if there are issues in respect of pricing and the emissions trading scheme Mr Chauvel is perfectly free to put down a question to me as the responsible Government Minister. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need further assistance on this matter. It is not up to other Ministers to claim that it is their area; it is up to the Minister being questioned to determine that it is not his or her responsibility. When it comes to consumer prices it is not for me to judge; the Minister of Consumer Affairs is the one to judge whether he has responsibility in that area. 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: As the Minister of Consumer Affairs I can tell the member that I am considering advice on this issue. As I said I had a briefing with my officials last night and I look forward to working with them on my priorities. But as a member of the ACT Party I absolutely agree with the statements made by John Boscawen last May— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister is not responsible for anything that a member of the ACT Party may have said. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: More more more! 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I fear that a fellow Northlander made that interjection. I feel somewhat embarrassed that a fellow Northlander could make such noises. I invite the House to come back to order. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Of the two following statements about the effect on consumers of the emissions trading scheme which should consumers believe: John Boscawen’s statement that “The ETS will have a profound impact on our economy raising prices across the board …” or the Prime Minister’s response to one of John Boscawen’s recent questions that “there will be no impact on prices as a result of the emissions trading scheme … and the member should stop making it up.”? 
Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN 
: Clearly there are different views on the emissions trading scheme. I look forward to taking advice from my officials and making future statements on this issue as they and I deem appropriate. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I accept that you have properly ruled that if the Minister considers matters to be his responsibility then he should answer but I think there is also a responsibility to ensure that questions are appropriately addressed to Ministers. In that case the Minister of Consumer Affairs was asked to arbitrate between two opinions taken by two different people. Firstly I do not know how that particularly assists consumers and secondly I do not know how it goes to his responsibility. He has no responsibility for any statements other than those statements made as Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need to hear anything further on the matter. The question was framed in relation to the impact on consumers. That is why I did not intervene in the question. It seemed reasonable to address the Minister of Consumer Affairs on a matter that related to consumers. However because it asked him to comment on two statements made by people for whom he is not responsible as Minister I would not insist on any particular answer. So the Minister’s answer was perfectly adequate in dealing with the question. As the Hon Gerry Brownlee points out he is not responsible for what either John Boscawen might have said or the Prime Minister might have said. He is the Minister of Consumer Affairs.