Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19532] 
12. DAIL JONES (NZ First)  
on behalf of  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Would he be prepared to introduce legislation to ensure that judges presiding over criminal and civil cases could not hear cases that involve them in a possible conflict of interest; if not why not? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Attorney-General) 
: 
 No because I am advised that it is not necessary given that there is a well-developed body of case law on exactly this question. 
Dail Jones 
: What will the Attorney-General do and is he aware of the case in which Judge Nicola Mathers was apparently acquainted with the owner of malfunctioning medical equipment that caused 84-year-old Edna Brown to suffer extensive fourth-degree burns leaving her seriously disfigured when the surgical freezing machine malfunctioned but did not disqualify herself from presiding over this case where there was obvious conflict of interest between her and the owner of that machine—that case having been completed in the courts and no matter remaining before the courts on that issue? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member has made a reflection on a judge which is contrary to the Standing Orders so I ask the member to stand and withdraw that comment. 
Dail Jones 
: I am just quoting from the case with respect Madam Speaker. The judge in the case in a number of paragraphs stated that she was acquainted with the person. I am merely repeating what the judge said in the case. I am just asking the Minister whether he regards that as a conflict of interest and whether he thinks something should be done about it. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: As I heard the member he was alleging that there was a conflict of interest as a statement of fact which was in fact bringing that judge into disrepute. 
Dail Jones 
: Perhaps if I rephrase the question— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That would be helpful. The member should withdraw the first comment however. 
Dail Jones 
: I withdraw and apologise to this person. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you. Now proceed. 
Dail Jones 
: Is the Minister aware of the case which was referred to in the  
New Zealand Herald  
on 18 March this year affecting 84-year-old Edna Brown who suffered extensive fourth-degree burns that left her seriously disfigured with regard to a surgical freezing machine that malfunctioned—a machine that was owned by a person with whom Judge Nicola Mathers said she was acquainted apparently in paragraphs 31 32 35 36 37 75 and 81 of her decision; and does he believe that something should be done about situations where judges indicate they are associated with people who own equipment to ensure that they do not deal in such cases? 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: No I am not aware of the case but I would have thought that near-acquaintance for somebody in New Zealand would not of itself necessarily create a conflict of interest. 
Dail Jones 
: In that case what can the Attorney-General say to this 84-year-old woman who believes that she was denied justice? She was left permanently and severely disfigured and no one accepts responsibility particularly the surgeon responsible who apparently offered Edna Brown $5000 in compensation providing she kept silent. Is the Attorney-General prepared to conduct an investigation into this case? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No. Despite the obvious sympathy one has for the elderly woman involved I do not think it is appropriate for the Attorney-General to step in and carry out investigations into judgments of this sort. 
Dail Jones 
: I seek leave to table the report in the  
New Zealand Herald  
dated 18 March 2005 about this matter. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.