Horomia Parekura: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Horomia Parekura: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 31 July 2012. Volume:682;Page:4066. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
5. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour—Ikaroa-Rawhiti) 
 to the  
Minister of Maori Affairs 
: Does he stand by all his statements? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: When the Minister said that if privatisation of State assets occurs it must be managed in a manner that is consistent with Te Tiriti o Waitangi was that position consistent with the interim recommendation of the Waitangi Tribunal? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Yes. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: What advice did he give to the Minister of Finance in so far as the transfer of 49 percent shareholding interests in State assets is not a contravention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: As Minister I did not give any advice to the Minister of Finance on that particular point. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: What assurance did he seek from the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations that the transfer of 49 percent shareholding interests in State assets is not a contravention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Simply that we had been working with iwi leaders and iwi groups on this whole issue. At the end of the day it is their viewpoint that we put forward. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was very specific and asked what assurance did he seek from the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member may repeat her question in full. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: What assurance did he seek from the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations that the transfer of 49 percent shareholding interests in State assets is not a contravention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: As I implied in my earlier answer I arranged the meetings and the iwi leaders made that submission themselves to the Prime Minister. 
Grant Robertson 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to say that that still does not answer the very direct question about what assurances the Minister had sought from two other Ministers. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The difficulty we face is that the Minister in his answer is talking about arranging meetings whereas the questioners have asked what assurances he sought from the relevant Ministers the Minister of Finance and the Minister responsible for Treaty settlements as to whether or not the partial sale of State assets—these particular ones involved—would be a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. The Minister has not really made any attempt to answer that at all. I mean he either sought some assurances in this area or he did not. I am not saying how the Minister should answer but to say something about the question would be helpful. 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I attended one of those meetings—there have been several. My understanding is that assurances were given to the iwi leaders after I had arranged for them to meet with the Prime Minister rather than my seeking the particular assurance. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the Minister. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: Can the Minister clarify what assurances were given to iwi leaders with regard to the transfer of 49 percent shareholding interests in State assets to assure him that it was not a contravention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: My understanding is that discussions are ongoing and have been going on for some time. I guess that is probably a question you should direct to the Minister responsible for those issues. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of point of order Mr Speaker. If you need one. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Does one of those members wish to raise a point of order or not because I am about to go on to the next—[ 
Interruption 
] Well actually I will hear from the Hon Trevor Mallard. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Mr Speaker I think the fact that it took me a second to jump up was an indication that I thought you were going to intervene to indicate to the Minister that he should answer the question as opposed to making passing reference to meetings and not being specific as to the assurances that he had taken on board as he was asked by Nanaia Mahuta to do. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The reason why I paused myself was I was actually thinking about the Minister’s answer because what the Minister said if I recollect correctly was that certain assurances had been given to iwi leaders. He implied that he was not actually responsible for any assurances given by those other Ministers to those iwi leaders. As I thought about his answer I believed that actually he had answered the question in so far as he was indicating that he was simply not responsible for what the Ministers had actually said to those iwi leaders. The wording of the question I think enabled the Minister to answer in the way he did. 
Grant Robertson 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The supplementary question from Nanaia Mahuta related to the previous answer that the Minister had given where he said that he had been in a meeting where assurances had been given. So I think it was a legitimate supplementary question to follow on from that and ask about what assurances— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is quite right. It was a legitimate supplementary question. What I am saying is that I think the Minister’s answer was also legitimate in that he sidestepped the assurances given because he is not responsible for them. I think I cannot ask the Minister to answer for something he is not responsible for. But the question was certainly legitimate. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister in his reply said that he had referred it to the Minister responsible. The Minister of MaoriAffairs has a responsibility of duty of care to Maori people in this nation. He is responsible for that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister of Maori Affairs cannot be responsible for everything to do with Maori people. I mean when other Ministers are involved—obviously the Minister has answered in terms of what he did in respect of certain meetings and certain assurances being sought but the Minister has not answered in terms of what actual assurances were given on the basis I am assuming that he believes he is not responsible for those. I think I am correct in that assumption. That is why I cannot take the matter any further. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The full extent of the question however relates to his assurance: what assurances did those Ministers give to give him assurance that the transfer of 49 percent of State-owned assets would not contravene Te Tiriti o Waitangi which is his responsibility? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Was that a further supplementary question? 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: That was the supplementary question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That was not as I heard it the previous supplementary question and that is why I have ruled on the matter in the way I have. If assurances were given by another Minister to any iwi leaders the Minister of Maori Affairs is not responsible for those assurances and that is why I believe he has answered in the way he has. I am not in a position to require him to answer in any way differently from that. I mean the member could reword the question perhaps because the member still has further supplementary questions. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Your memory is normally really good. This might be the exception that proves the rule. I think you received an assurance from Nanaia Mahuta as to what was in her question and you said you had a different recollection. Mr Speaker I think her recollection as she was reading from the same piece of paper could well be accurate. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think I will hear from Michael Woodhouse. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: In defence of your memory I have a very clear recollection that the Minister of Maori Affairs answered in respect of the initial question about what assurances had been sought that he had facilitated a number of meetings and in fact mentioned the Prime Minister. He did not say he was at all of them and therefore he could not speak to the specific assurances given by the Treaty Minister and the Minister of Finance to a third party to iwi which was the subsequent question. Therefore his answer was perfectly in order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have ruled on the matter now. The member does have further supplementary questions to pursue the matter if she should wish to. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: Can the Minister assure the House that based on the assurances given by the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Treaty settlements the transfer of 49 percent of shareholding in State-owned assets is not a contravention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Yes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister confirm that he was at a meeting where he heard iwi being given certain assurances to the extent that his having heard those assurances he advised the Prime Minister that the process should be put on hold until the Waitangi Tribunal reports at the end of September? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Other iwi did not ask that and the meetings I talked about were well before the tribunal came into the picture.