McCully MurrayHon MURRAY McCULLY (Minister of Foreign Affairs): I want to take the opportunity today to make some brief remarks in relation to the release of the Auditor-General's report today. To those members of the public who listened to the contribution by Mr Parker and who feel confused can I simply say to them that they should read the report. I cannot do justice to it in a few remarks in the House today; I will just make a few points. I do say to those who are concerned about this matter: read the full report. The best bits were not in fact quoted to the House today by Mr Parker.It is an important report and I welcome it because I was on the receiving end of some very colourful allegations by Mr Parker and by some of his fellow travellers who decided to use words like bribery" "corruption" "facilitation payments" "dodgy" etc. to describe a genuine attempt by the Government and by senior ministry officials led by myself to deal with a situation that we inherited. This is not a situation that the National-led Government created for itself; it was a situation that we inherited from our predecessors. Mr Parker can obfuscate all he likes but anyone who reads the Auditor-General's report can draw their own reasonable conclusions about the situation that was inherited by me by my then colleague Tim Groser and by members of this Government.The first reason that I am pleased to welcome this report today is that the allegations of bribery and corruption made by Mr Parker and others—very serious allegations to make in a constitutional democracy like New Zealand—have been shown to be completely baseless. After full cooperation from members of the Government members of the New Zealand Public Service and all parties involved in this interesting period of recent history the Auditor-General has said very clearly and I quote from page 54 "We found no evidence of corruption bribery or a facilitation payment … The arrangements entered into were a lawful use of public resources and public money was spent with appropriate financial authorities in place." That is exactly what the Auditor—Grant Robertson: Read the next paragraph—read the next paragraph.Hon MURRAY McCULLY: I am going to talk about the next paragraph. The Auditor-General has made a full-frontal finding that the very colourful defamatory accusations being made by some members of this House are simply baseless and false.Can I say that nobody listening to this debate should be surprised by that. This was not a process that was conducted by three or four people in a dark room; this was a process that involved months and months of discussion involving the most senior officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade—senior officials from the Middle East and Africa division senior officials from the trade division the most senior legal people available to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and indeed external legal advice on aspects as well. It should come as no surprise to anyone that there is a full-frontal finding by the Auditor-General today that there was no bribery that there was no corruption that there was no facilitation payment that there was a set of arrangements that were "a lawful use of public resources" and that "public money was spent with appropriate financial authorities in place."I want just to go back to the Cabinet paper that has been the subject of some comment by the Auditor-General—and I will make some references to that in a minute—and just read the first paragraph because it is important to remember the history: "This paper updates Ministers on progress in resolving a serious bilateral relationship issue with Saudi Arabia that poses a major threat to New Zealand's trade and economic interests." For the past 4 years this issue has spilled over into the wider Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and has been asserted by the GCC to be the only obstacle to ratification of the New Zealand - GCC free-trade agreement (FTA). This was an FTA that was fully negotiated—completely negotiated—by negotiators on both sides and the Saudi Government put in place a block on further interaction because of offence that had been caused by the history which I invite members who are interested to read in the Auditor-General's report.It is true—and I am going to be more even-handed than Mr Parker and concede—that there are some areas of this history that the Auditor-General gives the Government less than approval for. The report does suggest that some aspects of this process were less than perfect. It describes first of all the use of a contract for services as "problematic". Can I say to the House today that I agree with that—I agree with that. In fact what I would also say is that there were simply no non-problematic responses available to the Government. It is notable that the Auditor-General makes no suggestion as to what a non-problematic course of action available to the Government might have been. Can I be quite clear that the course of action that could easily have ensued one of simply letting matters fester even further would have been even more problematic to the Government more problematic to New Zealand and more problematic to our long-term trade and economic interests. That is why members of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and I took the steps that are outlined carefully in this report.As Mr Parker has told the House there is a comment in the report that suggests that additional analysis should have been provided in the Cabinet paper that went to the Cabinet committee and to Cabinet. I want to say first and foremost that I am not going to comment on those findings of the Auditor-General. It seems to me to defeat the whole purpose of having as independent an exercise as this if people are simply going to give it their own analysis and spin. I just want to say to the extent that there are matters that the Auditor-General suggests could have been undertaken better and to the extent that there are procedures or processes that could have been improved that as the Minister responsible I will that take on the chin. I believe that we did our best in some very difficult and some very trying circumstances. To the extent that there were some blemishes in the process along the way they have been identified by the Auditor-General and those comments should be treated with respect and I certainly will do so.The most important point that I want to make to the House today is that the objective that the Government set in embarking upon these proceedings has been substantially achieved. I would refer to a press release here which was released by my colleague the Minister of Trade on 29 September in the course of a visit to Saudi Arabia which is headed "New Zealand & Saudi seek early completion of GCC FTA" and accompanying this statement is a joint statement signed by Minister Todd McClay and by the Saudi Arabian Minister of Commerce jointly committing the two Governments to the early completion of the GCC FTA. That visit followed one that I myself had undertaken earlier and it follows interactions I have had with each of the other five Governments of the Gulf States to confirm that in this matter having been resolved to the satisfaction of the Saudi parties and particularly to the satisfaction of the Saudi Government the objection has been removed and the issue of the free-trade agreement is now back on the rails and will take its proper course.Those who do not take an interest in these matters may be surprised to hear that this is a very important market to New Zealand producers today. This is going to be a much more important market to New Zealand in the coming years not just because the Gulf States themselves are hugely important not just because they are natural partners—in that they have significant funds but a significant lack of arable land and water and that their No. 1 priority is food security—but also because this is the gateway to the African continent where there is going to be an explosion of trade and economic opportunity for New Zealand business in the years to come. For any New Zealand Government simply to walk away from a frozen free-trade agreement negotiation because it was difficult to resolve would not have been a responsible course of action. It was not one that I was prepared to contemplate.So to the extent that there are criticisms of the process that are levelled in the Auditor-General's report today I accept those criticisms as the Minister responsible. To the extent that there is credit now or in future that is to be distributed as New Zealand banks the gains that come from the completion of the free-trade agreement and the enhancement of economic and trade opportunities with the Middle East and with Africa I hope that some of that credit will come my way as well."