2. Question No. 2—Prime MinisterHon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime MinisterQuestion No. 2—Prime Minister2. Hon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all of her Government's statements and actions?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: On behalf of the Prime Minister yes particularly those actions which have seen our economy thrive leading to a rate of unemployment of 3.9 percent—the lowest figure since the Labour - New Zealand First confidence and supply Government a decade ago. Hon Paula Bennett: Will new information being looked at in the Karel Sroubek case include the burglary of his estranged wife's house just days after Sroubek learnt it had gone on the market? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: All the information will be looked at that was available at the time that he should have been exported from our country according to the evidence starting to emerge now and was not—and was not. And I can say that over 150 decisions were made by the previous Government of that nature—of that nature—and after 2014 those decisions were made not by the Minister but the same officials that advised Mr Iain Lees-Galloway. Hon Paula Bennett: Will the investigation look at whether police have questioned Karel Sroubek about a break-in at his estranged wife's house?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Again all the information that should have been available to this Minister and which will be available now and should have been available because of the way it was being handled by certain people in the bureaucracy clearly—maybe not—and which was the reason that the 19 September letter from the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway is loaded with caveats as to whether or not he's told the truth. Hon Paula Bennett: Has the Prime Minister changed her mind from yesterday when she declared it wasn't the officials' case and can we take it from her answers today that she is now blaming them?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Let me make it very clear: the Prime Minister is not one to rush to make a judgment on other people unlike some but she wisely pointed to the fact that there has to be a reason for this mistake and personally I think we've found it.SPEAKER: Order! I'm just going to do the reminder now on the on behalf"—we've got to get the persons right.Hon Paula Bennett: Has she been informed about any recent intimidation by Karel Sroubek?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The Prime Minister is relying upon the inquiry that has been appropriately ordered by the Minister of Immigration and when that inquiry is complete we'll all be au fait with the information which we must say should have been available to us from the word go but was not.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Why not?Rt Hon Winston Peters: Because you didn't do your job that's why.SPEAKER: Order!Hon Paula Bennett: Does as she described it today "absolute discretion" also mean "absolute responsibility"?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well I don't know why we're having this Philadelphia lawyer type of argument about what it means. We believe in common sense and plain facts and the plain fact is that the Minister was relying upon the same people that made over 152 decisions of the previous Government and he was entitled to rely upon an officialdom properly adequately and fully prepared to advise him. We are finding out now what happened and when we do rather than make some cheap political points we'll own up to the party who was mainly responsible and we're looking at it. It sits over there.Hon Paula Bennett: If as the Prime Minister just described they are looking at plain facts isn't it the plain fact that her Minister of Immigration didn't ask the right questions and instead has given residency to someone who has committed passport fraud forced a family into witness protection continuously lied to officials and has been convicted of drug smuggling?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The answers to those four questions are: no no no no. The one that is a yes—on behalf of the Prime Minister—is: which was the party that enabled him to travel offshore despite all of those matters of grave concern that they exhibit now? That party was the National Party."