McCully Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
McCully Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:610;Page:7344] 
2.  
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (NZ National—East Coast Bays) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Why did a New Zealand Immigration Service spokesman write in a memo relating to newspaper coverage of the detention of suspected Algerian terrorist Ahmed Zaoui that “I was let down badly. Everyone had agreed to lie in unison but all the others caved in and I was the only one left singing the original song.”; and who was party to this agreement? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 The comment was added to a media log prepared by the Immigration Service media adviser in response to the  
New Zealand Herald 
 editorial which is referred to in the log. There was no agreement to lie in unison or otherwise. There can be no party to an agreement that does not exist. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: How does the Minister reconcile her statement to the Press Association this morning that Mr Smith had answered the question truthfully but the journalist had got the week of Zaoui’s detention wrong with Mr Smith’s very clear statement to the  
New Zealand Herald 
 on 12 December 2002 that: “Normally if there is anything untoward they would let me know and I haven’t heard anything.”? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: As I understand it the question that was put to him by the journalist was about a person who had supposedly arrived the night before. Mr Zaoui had not arrived the night before; he had arrived the week before. Today I have discovered that Mr Smith did not have as much information as I did because he did not have a sufficiently high security clearance to receive it at the time. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Who are we to believe: a person who said “I was let down badly. Everyone had agreed to lie in unison but all the others caved in and I was the only one left singing the original song.” and who 6 days later after his briefing advised a leading New Zealand paper that he had no knowledge of this person who has arrived in this country or the Minister given that there is no reason for Mr Smith to lie? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The Immigration Service has issued a statement today clarifying that very matter. There was no agreement to lie. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: If this matter was not the subject of some prearranged management plan why did Mr Smith advise her as reported immediately after receiving a call from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 and why did she personally ring the  
New Zealand Herald 
 back later? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: As has been reported in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 this morning I was conducting the office Christmas function for all of my departments. I had people in my office from the Immigration Service the Ministry of Education the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Economic Development. All of those people were enjoying a celebration of the forthcoming Christmas. At that point the phone call was received while he was actually in my office. He completed the conversation. He and I had a conversation. I seem to recall that the reporter from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 asked to speak to me about the particular matter. I have it in my diary that I was to contact her on my way to the airport. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When Mr Smith said: “I was let down badly. Everyone had agreed to lie in unison but all the others caved in and I was the only one left singing the original song.” what about those comments; and anyway the circumstances in which they are written suggest that he was making a flippant comment which is her now present explanation for this alarming state of affairs? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: If there had been an agreement to lie then that would be a most serious matter. I reassure the House that there was no agreement to lie. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Is the Minister asking the House to believe that it was pure coincidence that Mr Smith provided an incorrect answer—which would be regarded by any dispassionate observer as a lie—on 12 December only 5 days before writing in a memo: “Everyone had agreed to lie in unison”? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I think I have explained to the member more than once that the question he was asked was about somebody who had allegedly arrived the night before. What I said is that the answer was technically correct. It was a truthful answer. There was no one who had arrived the night before. It is splitting hairs. I accept that there is no requirement on anyone to not provide truthful information to the media. I do make truthful statements to the media and I spoke to the  
New Zealand Herald  
reporter that night and indeed the next day as well. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does the Minister remember in similar circumstances where the Immigration Service was involved blaming her officials and saying that she was seriously let down; how does she explain that Mr Smith wrote these comments after he had spoken to the Minister of Immigration—namely herself—and why should we believe therefore her statement in this House today? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The statement that has come out from the Immigration Service today makes it absolutely clear that the individual concerned was not referring to any agreement to lie. There was no agreement to lie. As I have already advised the House the day following that particular function I received advice from the director of security that there were security concerns and nothing more than that could be said publicly and that it had been agreed by all the agencies concerned that the only public comment would come from me as Minister of Immigration. That was the only agreement. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister tell this House now—having got that out—why did Mr Smith write the memo were he not deadly serious about its content; and why does she expect anyone in this House or in the country to believe her explanation now? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have already explained to the House that I cannot say why Mr Smith wrote that particular comment. I cannot say what was in his mind at the time other than to reflect on the fact that the  
New Zealand Herald  
editorial had been very very hard on him and that he has no ability as a public servant to respond. 
Rodney Hide 
: In the light of her answers is the House to understand that Mr Smith was not telling the truth when he wrote: “Everyone had agreed to lie in unison” in which case what does the Minister make of his writing that? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The Immigration Service has put out a statement saying that Mr Smith acknowledges the words were ill-chosen but emphasises they were not meant to be taken seriously. The service refutes any suggestion the remark was intended to imply that the service or other agencies were lying about Mr Zaoui. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We sat patiently through that. That was not answering my question. I asked a direct question: “Was that statement truthful?”. It is all very well to hear what the Immigration Service had to say about it. The Minister was asked a direct question: are we to take it that when he wrote: “Everyone had agreed to lie in unison” that that was a “not true” statement? The Minister not once addressed my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister did. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I thought I would say this to be helpful to the Minister. In reply to Mr Hide’s answer the Minister read out a statement from the Immigration Service which if she looks at it clears everybody except herself. Are we to take note of that fact? It is basically saying that Mr Smith was not lying and the agencies were not lying. It does not say anything about whether the Minister was lying who I understand was the only person saying anything. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the member is making a political point of order. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Will the Minister give the House an assurance that if she discovers that any official or person in her office has been engaged in an arrangement either individually or with others to lie over this matter she would expect heads to roll? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have made it very clear that I would expect heads to roll if there was an agreement to lie. There was no agreement to lie. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Will the Minister take disciplinary action against Mr Smith if his comments: “I was let down badly. Everyone had agreed to lie in unison but all the others caved in and I was the only one left singing the original song.” were not true but if they are true will she take action against him and all those other officials who were involved and perhaps offer her resignation seeing that he suggested that the Minister was involved as well? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I was waiting for the request for me to resign; I have been expecting it for ages from that member. The issue that the member raises is a question as to whether the comments that have been made were anything other than ill chosen which is the expression that has been used by the Immigration Service. The bottom line is that there was no agreement to lie. I have no power to take disciplinary action in respect of staff members of the Immigration Service. That is a matter for the general manager and the chief executive of the Department of Labour.