Little Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Little Andrew: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 14 June 2012. Volume:680;Page:2996. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
12. 
ANDREW LITTLE (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for ACC 
: What meetings or discussions did she have with the Chair or Chief Executive of ACC between receiving the 16 March report relating to the Pullar affair and ACC laying a complaint with the Police and did she in any of these meetings or discussions either suggest encourage or agree to ACC laying the complaint? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 The question is misconceived as the matter was referred to the police on 13 March which was 3 days before the 16 March report. The 16 March report clearly states on page 3 that the matter was referred to police on 13 March the same date as the story appeared in the  
Dominion Post 
. I called a meeting of the chair and the chief executive on 14 March to be briefed on what was known about the privacy breach a day after the matter was referred to police.  
Andrew Little 
: What discussions—[ 
Interruption 
]  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member has a right—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! I apologise to the member. The member has a right to ask supplementary questions and I want to hear them. Ministers should not be interjecting so much. 
Andrew Little 
: What discussions did she have with the chair or chief executive officer of ACC between seeing the media reports which started on 12 March relating to the Pullar affair and ACC laying a complaint with the police and did she in any of these discussions either suggest encourage or agree to ACC laying the complaint? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The member is again wrong. The story was on Tuesday 13 March. The first time that I knew about the issue was when I opened up my emails and found that there was a story in the  
Dominion Post. 
 I had a text from Mr Ralph Stewart telling me there was a very bad story on the  
Dominion Post  
front page and asking could he ring me and he advised me that there was this situation. That day Mr Stewart referred the matter to the New Zealand Police. I had no discussions with him about referring it to the police. It was his decision. And in fact to say otherwise is quite wrong. 
Andrew Little 
: Did she in a conversation with the ACC chair or chief executive officer describe the conduct of Ms Pullar and Ms Boag as extortion or blackmail? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I do not believe I did. I can tell that member though that the actions were referred to the police before this matter was discussed with me as to what had actually happened. Mr Stewart on Tuesday morning 13 March knew only a little bit more about the matter than I did. He was the new chief executive officer. He had not been involved in all the many actions with Ms Pullar all the way through for years and years and years as previous ones had been. He had to find out the facts and he had reports from the senior managers.  
Andrew Little 
: What was the nature of the comments she made about referral of the matter to the police in any discussions she had with the chair or chief executive officer of ACC up to the time the complaint was laid with the police? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I have made it perfectly plain. The matter was referred to the police without reference to my input. And the fact is—I have said it so many times now—I think that member should stop coming down to the House with his pre-prepared questions.  
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was not whether it was referred without taking consideration of the Minister’s input. The question was what was the Minister’s input. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I think the Minister has made it pretty clear she had no input. That is what I understood she has told the House. That brings to a close questions—I beg your pardon. Supplementary question the Hon Winston Peters. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Hold the phone! 
Mr SPEAKER 
: My apologies. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Being that she is a trained lawyer is she aware of the crime of unlawful possession which is the exact position of Brownyn Pullar not in receiving the information but in remaining in unlawful possession of it and what is she going to do about that given that her friend Michelle Boag and she had obviously raised this with ACC? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Look as Minister for ACC I have no responsibility for the actions of either of those two persons referred to by the member. That is simply not something that I can comment on. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is she aware of the similar or analogous case of a man called Gao who received $9.9 million too much in his Westpac account and then remained in unlawful possession of it and dealt with it— 
Hon Steven Joyce 
: What’s this got to do with ACC? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well I used the word “analogous” which means I am giving you an identical case of unlawful possession— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! [ 
Interruption 
] Order! I am on my feet. I need to hear from the member the start of a question of some relevance to the Minister. The Minister has no responsibility whatsoever for the law surrounding unlawful possession and no responsibility whatsoever for a man whom Westpac may have inadvertently given money to. I accept the member may have a question there but I do want to hear the question.  
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well perhaps I could help if I ask why all number of heads in ACC are rolling when you have a case so analogous to Gao’s case of receiving legally but remaining in unlawful possession of $9.7 million and also Justice Young’s decision regarding the same thing—receiving a document from ACC and not dealing with it properly—when in fact it is clear from this letter that Michelle Boag wrote that they intended to use it against ACC to bring things to a satisfactory conclusion. Is the Minister prepared to see these heads roll— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I will invite the member to have one more go but I have heard clearly two questions there and only one supplementary question can be asked. The member started with a supplementary question and that was fine but then he proceeded to make another statement and then commenced another supplementary question. Members cannot do that. I will invite the member to please ask one supplementary question and give the Minister a chance to answer it. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well given the circumstances—now that you know what it is about—of someone receiving documents legally but thereafter retaining those documents in an unlawful way why is she prepared to see ACC officers’ heads roll and not go for the person who is acting illegally namely Bronwyn Pullar? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: In terms of ministerial responsibility I can advise the member that of course if he reads the report which is on the ACC website as to the actions that they took around the privacy issue they actually referred that matter to the New Zealand Police.