Parker David: Urgent Debates — Justice Minister—Compliance withCabinet ManualText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Urgent Debates — Justice Minister—Compliance withCabinet Manual[Sitting date: 12 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16575. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Deputy Leader—Labour):The previous speaker Louise Upston said that we should feel sorry for the staff of the Ministry of Justice. Yes we should because they will be ashamed to have a Minister of Justice who allows conflicts of interest to put her own and her family’s interests ahead of the country’s interests and who uses her position to benefit her family and to benefit the National Party. That is what has happened here. That is why this is a conflict of interest. That is why the Prime Minister is wrong to continually pretend that it might be only the perception of a conflict of interest because it is a conflict of interest. The Cabinet Office prohibits conflicts of interest that benefit Ministers or their family members or close associates. That is what conflict of interest rules are meant to prevent. They are meant to prevent the private benefit going to a Minister or their family or close associates.We had the Minister of Police Anne Tolley another person in charge of the justice system and she said that the Minister of Justice has been open. What the Minister of Justice said was that she had a short cup of tea on the way to the airport. What the Minister did not do was put reference to that meeting which was not a short cup of tea on the way to the airport in her report back to Cabinet and she hid the fact that she had an additional evening meeting with Oravida representatives and customs officials—Hon Annette King: And dinner.Hon DAVID PARKER: —and dinner. She hid that. This conflict of interest is one in which the Minister has enriched her family through using her contacts for the benefit of Oravida. The first visit an endorsement of Oravida benefited it. It was used by Oravida to increase its sales—to make more money. That was a conflict of interest. That conflict of interest was for the benefit of Judith Collins’ family. A director of the company is her husband. That is a conflict of interest.This conflict of interest also arises from the donations that the National Party accepted from Oravida in return for the favours that it gave Oravida. The favours included turning up for dinner and meeting with customs officials and Oravida in China. There are the benefits which no doubt Oravida claims from the photographs of the Prime Minister having a round of golf with the main owner of Oravida.Hon Annette King: Not one.Hon DAVID PARKER: A number of games of golf. These are actual conflicts of interest. What other things do we not believe here? Judith Collins said today in the House that there were no matters of business discussed at that dinner. I do not believe that. It is incredible that you would have customs officials there against the background of melamine scandals and tainted milk coming from New Zealand and that those sorts of issues would not be discussed at that meeting. I bet you that Judith Collins was there saying: “You can trust New Zealand milk that’s coming from Oravida because we’ve got good systems.” Does anyone in this House really think that those discussions did not take place? I bet they did. These are real conflicts of interest.Then we have got the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister said: “The Cabinet Office didn’t consider that to be an endorsement.” But he will not release its advice. I bet that the Prime Minister is misrepresenting the Cabinet Office. I cannot believe that the Cabinet Office would tell the Prime Minister that even the first bit that was known to him was legitimate. The Cabinet Office would have been saying that it is wrong for a Cabinet Minister to be endorsing products in China from a company that her husband is a director of. The Cabinet Office would be saying that it is wrong to be out promoting a company that the National Party has taken donations from. I do not believe that the Cabinet Office said it was all kosher. I certainly now know that the Prime Minister said he was wrong when he said that the Cabinet Office had seen the translation from the Oravida website. He has since been forced to say that that is not the case and that the Cabinet Office had not seen it.This is an actual conflict of interest and if the Prime Minister says it is not then he is effectively saying to New Zealand that the only conflict of interest in this matter is a bribe and anything else is not a conflict of interest. There has got to be a bribe because there has been cash going to the National Party and favours back to Oravida. There have been appointments of directors that put money into the family of Judith Collins and that is a conflict of interest. But the Prime Minister says: “No it’s not because it’s not a direct bribe.” Well I am sorry Mr Prime Minister. It might not be convenient to him but conflicts of interest go further than just bribes and this is plainly one. To have the Minister of Police stand up and defend it the Prime Minister defend it and Bill English refuse to address it is disgraceful because this is a disgrace. It is an actual conflict of interest and this Minister should be forced to resign. Why is she not? Because this is business as usual for the National Party.This is the tip of the iceberg. We know that there is this cronyism rife within the National Party. Its members get these secret donations from their mates at the big end of town and they deal them back favours. This time they have been caught. But it is the thin end of the wedge the tip of the iceberg because this is business as usual under this Government where the rich get richer and everyone else gets a stagnant position. This is why inequality and fairness are the issues for this election. The electorate knows that that is what is happening in New Zealand. This Government serves the big end of town and everyone else can worry about themselves. Under Labour this will not happen. Everyone will get a fair deal and conflicts of interest will be called conflicts of interest.I have one final point. Why has Judith Collins not taken a call? I have been in a similar situation. In fact I resigned. I took a call. I was willing to come here and defend myself and put the truth out there. Judith Collins is not to be seen Bill English will not address the issues and the Minister of Police is defending Judith Collins saying that she has been open. What a disgrace—what a disgrace.I cannot understand that the Prime Minister will not concede that this is an actual conflict of interest not some perception of a conflict of interest. This is a situation where the Minister’s family benefits from Oravida doing better—it benefits from Oravida doing better. That is what the endorsement was about. That is what the meeting with customs officials was about. That is why they are conflicts of interest. It is truly that simple. This is improper behaviour by the Minister for the benefit of her family that she tried to cover up. The Prime Minister then tried to cover it up and the Prime Minister even now says it is only an alleged conflict of interest or an apparent conflict of interest and not an actual conflict of interest.There would not be any clearer case than this. I cannot think of a clearer case. The Prime Minister is saying that effectively there has to be a bribe before there is any conflict of interest. That is effectively the standard he is saying. I cannot think of a more clear case of a conflict of interest than doing something that benefits a company of which your husband is a director. As a Minister she went to China. She had these meetings. She did not put them in her report to Cabinet. That is quite in contrast to her earlier reports to Cabinet. She said: “Oh it’s because it was only a little cup of tea.” What about the dinner at night with the customs officials and her own ministerial staff whom she said were there as friends not as ministerial representatives? What a nonsense.This is a bit like Peter Dunne saying when he leaked the report that he was acting as a member not as a Minister and therefore the emails between him and others are not able to be disclosed under the Official Information Act. We have all this dissembling on behalf of the other side but the truth is that this is dirty. This is a conflict of interest. The Minister acted for the benefit of her family and for the benefit of the National Party. The National Party does not even think it is wrong because it is business as usual according to its standards.