Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise more in sorrow than in anger and I reflect on the framing of that discussion by our colleague the Hon Andrew Little who has just resumed his seat. He spoke of lament which I think that all who care about this institution of Parliament and democracy must also feel. I think some helpful discussions have been had about why these kinds of issue matter and therefore why the resignation of the Hon Michael Wood as a Minister also matters. I think that it's right to describe the issues as being significant in themselves and if we're thinking about what they signify we should consider such distinctions as perceived versus actual conflict of interest the importance of office and institutions more so than the individual and so forth. But I don't agree with Mr Little's characterisation of this as something that is merely significant in itself but which has had no effect on the work of the Government or on the world outside this place because actually it's been perfectly apparent that the distraction that this has caused the Government is very real and it would be strange if that were not the case. If it were the case that Mr Wood's work programme was not significant then his resignation would be insignificant and if this was not a distraction to the Government then that would indicate that the work that he was doing wasn't significant. Well I think it should always be the case that the work of the Minister of Transport the Minister for Auckland issues the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety and so forth is significant. Surely it must be even—as we would say on this side of the House—that aspects of the performance of that role we wouldn't of course commend even as we might acknowledge in other respects that there have been good-faith attempts to improve the lot of New Zealanders according to the idea of that Minister and that Minister's Cabinet colleagues of what constitutes improvement for the lives of New Zealanders. There has been an element of distraction. If I can give an example from my own electorate and actually it's a positive one to the extent that it reflects on the willingness of Mr Wood to engage with the people of the Muriwai community. So in his capacity as Minister for Auckland issues Michael Wood came to that community. He's been there a couple of times and I've attended on both occasions along with other parliamentary colleagues including certainly Vanushi Walters. It was as recently as last week that we were all gathered in that place and hearing the very serious and real concerns of a community that has been torn apart by the movement of the ground and flooding issues following Cyclone Gabrielle and to lose the continuity to no longer have that particular Minister in that role and to lose the benefit of those personal relationships and connection with the community that have been gained is actually a highly significant matter. So I lament the distraction and the disruption that has been caused thereby along with the inevitable impact that changing of Cabinet roles will have which is to say that Cabinet colleagues will take on other of his work. No doubt that there'll be an opportunity cost there in terms of things that they should be turning their minds to to benefit New Zealanders. Again I say that regardless of whether we would agree with all the decisions being made it's an important thing for decisions to be able to be made for progress and for the view of the Government to be made and then New Zealand people can judge that on its merits at all times including in the face of a looming general election. I want to talk about also in my remaining time the importance of perception being almost as equal to reality. So of course we talk about conflicts of interest being perceived or actual and that's a fair distinction in the way that my colleague and friend Chris Bishop has explained that as far as he's concerned—and it's a view that I share—there's no suggestion that Mr Wood had acted in a way designed to improve his financial prospects. Indeed Mr Wood has said that he's been ignorant of his own affairs precisely because he has a disregard for those. Well that's fine as far as it goes but of course if the institution of Parliament and indeed Cabinet and our democratic mechanisms of accountability are important then in the same way that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done so too it's important that perceived conflicts of interest are considered no less serious than actual. Of course for that reason and the others that I've said and others have said it's appropriate that he resign. It's appropriate that that resignation be accepted. So more in sorrow than in anger we reflect on the disruption and the distraction that that has caused.