Collins Judith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Collins Judith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:607;Page:4906] 
12.  
JUDITH COLLINS (NZ National—Clevedon) 
 to the  
Minister of Internal Affairs 
: Will the Government take responsibility for the distribution of pokie funds; if so what form will this responsibility take? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Internal Affairs 
: Yes in the form set out in the papers that the member already has. 
Judith Collins 
: Is the Minister aware of any discussions between the Greens and members of the Minister’s office pertaining to an increase in gaming tax and/or further controls over the distribution of pokie funds in return for the Greens’ support for the Responsible Gambling Bill? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: As the member is aware the Government has already taken responsibility for the distribution of pokie funds. The Responsible Gambling Bill introduces measures to enhance the integrity and accountability of gaming-machine societies that make grants to the community. 
John Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We raise this issue again that although it is true that the Minister in his answer mentioned the Responsible Gambling Bill and therefore one could say he addressed the issue he did not actually answer the question at all—which was whether there had been any communication between his office and the Green Party. That was the specific question and we would like an answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes I think the Minister should just comment on that part of the question. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: If the member cares to put the question down I am sure the Minister responsible will be happy to answer it. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: The Minister must know the answer to that question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister is not the responsible Minister. He is answering on behalf of another Minister and that is the answer he has given. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have an incredulity problem. We read in the media and we hear statements from the Green Party that the Greens are talking to the Government yet the Minister who has been given the job of replying to the question appears to be telling us that he has no knowledge of whether the Government is talking to the Greens. The Leader of the House is sitting just two seats away from him. I am sure that the Leader of the House knows and I am sure he could answer the question by saying: “Yes we are talking to the Greens.” or “No we are not.” 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I would like to reiterate the answer I gave. I do not know whether such a discussion has taken place. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Perhaps I should advise the House that Mr Dunne has interjected telling me that the answer is that he had better not be. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made his point no matter how much out of order it is. 
Dianne Yates 
: Does the Responsible Gambling Bill propose a change to the present system which allows societies to distribute gaming-machine profits? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No and it never has. The bill as introduced and as reported back preserves the right of societies to distribute gaming-machine profits to the community. 
Sue Bradford 
: Will the Minister support a publicly accountable distribution system rather than the current private system given comments by Judith Collins when she was chairwoman of the Casino Control Authority that “massive fraud flourished through a network of sham sports and social clubs many controlled by publicans and their mates”? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I had not seen the comment made by Ms Collins. I am sure that it will be widely distributed to sports clubs from now. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I call Stephen Franks for a supplementary question—no I am sorry; ACT has used its allocation. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This does raise the point that I raised with you earlier. If you are going to refuse to allow extra questions then in effect the Chair is protecting Ministers. The Chair is saying to a Minister—like the Prime Minister when asked a straightforward question which under Speakers’ rulings there is an obligation to reply to if one can—that all he or she has to do is refuse to answer and an Opposition party when seeking clarification which is what you have told us to do then uses up its allocation of questions. This is a supplementary question we had intended to ask. Mr Stephen Franks is a back-bencher whom you said you were going to protect. He wants to ask a supplementary question. I believe that you should allow him to do so. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have allocated the number of questions to be asked. The member can always seek leave to ask a supplementary question if he wishes. He can put the leave to the House. Does the member want to seek leave? I have already made a ruling. 
Stephen Franks 
: I will seek leave but— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is seeking leave to ask a supplementary question. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Stephen Franks 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am not sure whether I heard you answer the direct question. Having regard to Standing Order 373 is Speaker’s ruling 128/4 now completely obviated. It states: “If the Speaker feels that a Minister is trifling with the House the Chair can permit a further question or questions to be asked.” Will it work with the system that now operates? That was intended to be a discipline to ensure that there was a mechanism for the House to sanction a Minister who trifled with the Chair. If further questions to be asked come off a quota that ruling no longer has any effect. That ruling must have meant that they would have been additional questions; otherwise the ruling would have no power as a sanction against a Minister trifling with the Chair. Therefore I ask you to consider that question before ruling finally on this matter. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need to. If a Minister does trifle with the Chair then of course I am going to uphold the Speaker’s ruling and the Standing Orders. I adjudged that the Prime Minister addressed the question and supplementary questions flowed as a result. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Leaving aside my earlier interjection which incidentally I am happy to confirm can the Minister assure the House that there are no plans afoot to increase the rate of gaming duty to cover the cost of any shortfall in either Lottery Grants Board proceeds or proceeds for distribution from poker machines? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No such decision has been taken by the Government.