Shearer David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Shearer David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1141. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
2. 
DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he expect all his Ministers to comply with the responsibilities set out in the Cabinet Manual? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. Ministers are expected to comply with the guidance set out in the  
Cabinet Manual 
 and to seek advice from the Secretary of the Cabinet as necessary. 
David Shearer 
: Did he ask Nick Smith to resign; if not why not? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No; the Minister offered his resignation and I accepted his resignation because as the Minister said himself he exercised poor judgment in supporting an ACC claimant while he was Minister for ACC. 
David Shearer 
: When did he first become aware of Nick Smith having written inappropriate letters on behalf of his friend Bronwyn Pullar? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: The first letter—the reference—I was made aware of on Monday evening and the second letter the one that the Minister made reference to in the House today which was back to another former member of Parliament I was made aware of this morning. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When did the Prime Minister or those in his office know of Ms Pullar’s frustration with ACC that she was pressing his Minister for help and that Dr Smith had told Ms Pullar that his helping would be inappropriate? When did he first learn of that? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I am not in a position to answer that question. I simply do not know. I know the claimant and in my early days as a member of Parliament I was aware right back then that she was frustrated with ACC. I understand she has sent significant correspondence to ACC over the years but I am not in a position to know when the Minister was first made aware. You would need to put that question to I guess the ACC office. 
David Shearer 
: Does he still stand by his statement yesterday: “If you are going to sack Ministers for what I think he would accept as an error of judgment but not a terribly significant one you’d be sacking a lot of ministers.”? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes and that was because in relation to the first error of judgment when the Minister wrote a reference for the claimant although I consider that to be unwise and although I consider that to be an error in judgment I did not consider it on balance in relation to everything else the Minister had done to be a sacking offence. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Will the Prime Minister cause to be released the long trail of emails and correspondence between Dr Smith and Ms Pullar; if not why not? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I think the Minister has made it clear that he is prepared to release those particular four letters. The member if he wants any other correspondence should ask for it under the Official Information Act. 
David Shearer 
: Does he still believe in light of today’s events that this is “an error of judgment but not a terribly significant one”? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I consider the first instance to be exactly that. I consider the second to be one too many. 
Kevin Hague 
: Does the Prime Minister stand by the repeated assurances given in this House yesterday by the Minister for ACC Judith Collins that the matters concerning Dr Smith’s conduct will be covered by the Privacy Commissioner’s investigation given that it is now clear that those matters fall well outside the powers and functions of the Privacy Commissioner? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I think the member is at the risk of paraphrasing the Minister but anyway if the member is asking whether there will be any further inquiry I have not seen any information that would indicate to me a further inquiry is necessary. There are inquiries that will be undertaken by the police and the Privacy Commissioner but I do not see the need for any further inquiry.