Personal Explanations — Tabling of Documents—Accuracy of Description of Documents 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Personal Explanations — Tabling of Documents—Accuracy of Description of Documents 
[Sitting date: 27 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5742. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Personal Explanations 
Tabling of Documents—Accuracy of Description of Documents 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I seek leave to correct a misrepresentation that has just been made— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Is the member seeking leave to make a personal explanation? 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: Yes that is right to correct a misrepresentation made by the senior Government whip. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think we have got to be a little careful here. We have got to be a little careful with seeking leave to make a personal explanation. We had a situation yesterday where a member was granted leave and then started to talk about another political party. If the member is clear that he wishes to make a personal explanation because something has been said that is personally offensive to him then I am perfectly happy to seek leave from the House for that. If the member wants to contest what another member has said for its accuracy the member should write to the Speaker. There is a procedure about that. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: I think the difficulty we have is that the senior Government whip has made an allegation about me by way of a point of order. 
I have now had the opportunity to consult the document that I tabled yesterday and it is incorrect. That was raised— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member is now by way of a point of order trying to—I think if the member is going to exclusively speak about his situation I am prepared to put the leave to the House for the member to make a personal explanation. Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: Yesterday in question time I sought leave to table a document and I paraphrased from the document what I believed that it contained. The document is in fact itself a series of paraphrases of the discussion that took place at a meeting that was run by the Ministry of Education and therefore it does not necessarily follow a logical flow. Questions were raised regarding special education but questions were also raised regarding the time frame that schools would be required to take. For the benefit of the House I quote directly from the document which I did not do yesterday but I will do now: “The advice from National Office regarding the likely timeframe for community consultation was that a recommendation would go to the Minister suggesting five to six weeks.” The following paragraph then goes on to say that if the board decided it needed more time or the Minister decided it needed more time there can be a further 28-day period. I am of the understanding from people who were at the meeting and from the context of the rest of the document that that does not in fact refer to special education but refers to the— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member is now starting to debate what was said by another member. I think he has made his position fairly clear in the personal explanation that he has made. 
Question time resumed.