English Bill: General Debate 
English Bill: General Debate 
[Volume:637;Page:7973] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I seek leave to make a personal explanation. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? 
Hon Members 
: What’s it about? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: About what? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You have given me leave and the Government is continuing to interject. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No I have sought leave for the member but it has not been given because members of the Government want to know what the personal explanation is about. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: It is in regard to Dr Cullen’s allegations concerning the Exclusive Brethren. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is given leave. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Last week I carried out as I sometimes do a constituent clinic in Eric Roy’s office in Invercargill. I was seeing constituents when a journalist from the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 came into my office and said to me that he recognised some people out there who were Brethren. I told the journalist that they must be constituents whose names were on the list and were coming to see me with issues. The journalist with whom I have dealt with on other matters subsequently left. I continued seeing constituents as I do about their whole range of issues and thought nothing more of it until the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 decided that apparently some people because of their religious affiliations have no right to turn up to a constituency clinic. I explained to the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 that I do not screen constituents on the basis of their religious affiliation—in this case I had no idea what their religious affiliation was—and what is more I do not intend to. 
I regard it as a fundamental right of every New Zealand citizen—and in fact of people who are not New Zealand citizens who come to see me and who may be illegally in the country—to attend a constituent clinic without being harassed by the media. I want to take this opportunity to apologise to those constituents who came to see me about a completely normal constituency matter after making an appointment to come to my office and who found themselves on the front page of a national newspaper. Their confidence in the parliamentary system was violated. Their trust in the journalist—and my trust in that newspaper—has been violated. I assert in this House despite the fact that Helen Clark and the Labour Party do not like some New Zealanders that those people have a right to come to my constituency clinics and they will continue to be allowed to do so. I would hope that is the rule that all MPs in this House will follow and I believe they do. 
I informed the editor of the newspaper that in recent weeks I have dealt with people who have been subject to allegations of child abuse I have dealt with convicted rapists I have dealt with people who believe they are under surveillance by the police and I have dealt with people who live completely normal and blameless lives. It is unacceptable to me and very unfortunate that the media and the Labour Party believe that some New Zealand citizens must not talk to their member of Parliament. I want to reassure my constituents—all 55000 of them—that they are free to come to my constituency office if they ring up and make an appointment.