Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cosgrove Clayton: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:656;Page:5310] 
3.  
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: What reports if any has she received about submissions to the Law and Order Committee on the Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 On 11 May 2009 the chief executive advised me that staff from the Department of Corrections would be making submissions to the Law and Order Committee in a private capacity or as Corrections Association of New Zealand representatives. Obviously I had no concerns about this. Staff have the same rights as anyone else in terms of making submissions to a parliamentary select committee. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Has the Minister seen reports about ACT MP and select committee member David Garrett threatening prison officers who submitted against the bill yesterday saying: “You’d be aware that given your submission here you wouldn’t get offered a job anyway would you?” Will she be seeking assurances from the ACT leader and Government coalition partner Rodney Hide that Mr Garrett will be required to withdraw his threats and to discontinue threatening the future job prospects of Department of Corrections staff; if not why not? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call the Minister to answer that question I point out to the House that there is no responsibility on the Minister’s part for the actions of another member of Parliament. She has no ministerial responsibility for that. I am happy to let the member not waste a supplementary question but it needs to be in order. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The initial question asked was a straight question to the Minister about whether she had seen reports about Mr Garrett’s comments and I think that is in order. The second question simply asked whether she would be seeking any assurances. It is up to the Minister to answer of course but the first part of the question has to be in order. It asked simply whether she had seen reports regarding his comments. If she chooses to go on to say she will seek assurances or whatever— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear the honourable member. Certainly the first part of the question is in order but I am afraid the second part is not. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I have heard some reports about what happened in the select committee yesterday. I am clearly not responsible for comments that Mr Garrett made but I note that the member who is asking the question was the chair of the committee and the order of the committee should have been controlled by him. 
Chester Borrows 
: What other reports has the Minister received on the Corrections (Contract Management of Prisons) Amendment Bill? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I have received a report that new section 199 inserted by the bill describes details that must be covered in every prison management contract including the fact that objectives and performance standards for the management and care of prisoners cannot be lower than the standards applicable to prisons operated by the Department of Corrections. In addition the contracts will provide for programmes designed to ascertain and address the causes of prisoners’ offending and to assist their reintegration into society. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Will the Minister give the House an assurance that contrary to Mr Garrett’s threats no prison staff members will jeopardise their future job prospects by expressing their personal views to a select committee on proposed Government policies; if not why not? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I can certainly give an assurance to the member that I believe and this Government believes absolutely in the right of individuals including our staff members to make submissions to a select committee. In fact I will read from a letter from the assistant regional manager at Auckland prison to staff that said quite clearly that officials have the same political rights as other members of society including the right to make submissions to and appear as witnesses before select committees. It also said that officials should be careful however that their attendance in a personal capacity is consistent with their professional obligations to the Government of the day; it goes on to talk about that. I absolutely support that view. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Given that answer and the gravity of the threats will the Minister go further and ask her chief executive to assure all Department of Corrections staff that they are entitled to comment on proposed Government policy in the manner that these prison officers did and that despite some worrying trends in this Government they should not feel threatened or intimidated by Mr Garrett’s behaviour? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Yes; I can even go further than that. In fact I can read from a statement that the chief executive of the Department of Corrections has asked to be attributed to him today. It says: “I refute absolutely any suggestion that I threaten staff with disciplinary action should they appear before the select committee in their private capacity. My understanding is that those appearing made it clear at the beginning of their submission that they were there in a private capacity.” That was from the chief executive Barry Matthews. I understand that numerous reports have described comments otherwise from the department and I am happy to front up with the information and the evidence. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Will the Minister give the House a further assurance that she will not be releasing private information held on Department of Corrections databases about these prison officers—or any other staff who choose to exercise their democratic rights and oppose her Government’s policies—in an attempt to intimidate them in the same way that her ministerial colleague Paula Bennett did in respect of two solo parents? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I do not think that question even deserves the dignity of an answer. It is so bad. Quite clearly I do not have access to such information; I do not want access to such information. Frankly if I wanted to intimidate someone they would know it. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I must have silence to hear the point of order being raised by the Hon—[ 
Interruption 
] I want to hear a point of order from the Hon Clayton Cosgrove. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Disregarding the smokescreen at the end— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have asked the House to be quiet so I could hear a serious point of order and what the member has just said is not within order. He must come to his point of order. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: It was a straight question and has to be seen as such given the fact that the Minister’s colleague has already released information using databases and given that this Minister as Minister of Corrections— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have heard enough— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: —does have access— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will sit down now. The member admittedly started with a fair point of order questioning whether the Minister had answered his question but went on to try to bring in information. That is out of order. Look the member’s question was highly political and he got a highly political answer. He can expect that when he asks highly political questions. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question asked whether she would be accessing databases. That was the question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will sit down now. If that was all he had asked it would be fine but he went on to make significant political imputation in the rest of his question. If he wants a simple straight answer to a question he should ask a simple straight question and not load it with the political loading that he built into that question. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Given that Standing Order 401(l)—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: This is a point of order. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: —prohibits a member from “assaulting threatening or intimidating a member or an officer of the House” would it be in order to seek clarification from the Minister as to whether her previous statement extended as far as members of this House? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call the Hon Rodney Hide I must say I did not hear the first part of the member’s point of order because there was noise in the House. I apologise for that but I will hear the Hon Rodney Hide. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: The member has been here a while and should appreciate that what he is raising is a matter of privilege. There is an appropriate way of doing that and it is not by way of point of order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member for his intervention. He is quite right.