Lee MelissaMELISSA LEE (National): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I'd just like to take my stance against what Tracey Martin was actually saying. She was trying to correct something that doesn't actually exist. It was the Rt Hon Winston Peters during the 2015 I believe by-election of Northland where he actually said and stated and campaigned saying that Shane Jones was in fact the chair. So I would like to correct the member on that. I think she should go and check her facts.Once again we are in this House debating about the secrecy the shambles and the shoddy deals of the most I quote open and transparent" Government in New Zealand history. This Government has claimed to be that a pledge that they have actually given to New Zealanders which lies in tatters. We thought that they may have learnt something from last year's events. I'm reminded of those events that actually happened in this very House during oral questions that I personally had given to a Minister a former broadcasting Minister where she had failed to tell the truth. This Minister has also done similar things where written questions were asked of him and he had declared that there was nothing to see here and we find out today—well I find out today—that we do have something to question him on.The Minister should come to this House—and he is in the House—and should actually answer questions on why he was present at that meeting. He declared a conflict of interest. Actually it was Grant Robertson who said that he was a little bit concerned about that. He was concerned about it so much that he actually got assurances from the honourable gentleman sitting at the back of the row the Hon Shane Jones and it was Shane Jones who actually gave the Minister of Finance the reassurance of this group. What would you call that Madam Deputy Speaker? I'd call that influence. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Don't bring me into it. MELISSA LEE: I'd call that influence. It was Shane Jones who reassured the Minister of Finance about this group. If it wasn't about Mr Jones' convincing the Minister of Finance this group would not have been funded to the tune of millions of dollars and we have a Minister who is responsible for hundreds of millions—actually $3 billion. The issue is particularly critical for the future in my own portfolio. I'm quite worried because this Minister is responsible for the regional digital hubs and the rural connectivity. I am really worried that this Minister will be getting into all of these meetings when he has actually declared a conflict of interest himself identifying that he does have a conflict. I mean he's not a silly man. He's a learned man who knows the difference between a conflict or not I would guess—I hope. He laughs at the back of the room. If he has actually declared it then he knows that there is a conflict. There might be family members who are involved in this project. He should have removed himself from the meetings where the decisions were being made. Where the decisions are being made and where the discussions are actually happening this Minister having declared a conflict should not be in the room where he is actually influencing the other Ministers who are making the decision to give the group millions of dollars. So Mr Jones I say that I think this Government is actually not very transparent nor is it open and this Minister certainly has not been open about his relationships. He should come clean about what kind of an influence he had and what kind of a role he played where the decision was made to fund this group. I certainly believe that there was influence. I certainly believe that he had a conflict of interest and he should not have actually been in that room and convincing the Minister of Finance or giving reassurances to the Minister of the Finance that there was nothing to see there because there certainly was. He himself declared the conflict."