Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6339] 
6.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she have confidence in her Associate Minister of Maori Affairs Hon John Tamihere? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How does she arrive at that conclusion after his attack in the last 24 hours on the elderly leadership of Maoridom questioning their skill sets and their competence to take us into the next generation when we have a Minister who was guilty of forgery of uttering of numerous drink-driving offences and of having the books changed at the Waipareira Trust to disguise an $800000-plus deficit by declaring an unrealised profit—all of which is grossly illegal—and worse than that how can she have confidence in such a person’s criticism of people like Api Mahuika of Ngati Porou? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I understand that the matters referred to have been covered by a personal statement made in this House before. Nothing the Minister said was as offensive as Mr Peters’ reference to Sir Graham Latimer in this House 18 months ago as New Zealand’s leading teat-sucker. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is the Prime Minister aware that Sir Graham is about to be the subject of a report from the Maori Affairs Committee—a draft of which she has no doubt seen—and is she not also aware of the fact that Mr Tamihere’s record in business is not what he claims it to be and that the other circumstances as with Fortex would have seen him behind bars? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: If the member is making allegations of wrongdoing I suggest he make them to the appropriate authorities and show his good faith by repeating them outside the House. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: Will the Prime Minister be apologising to kaumatua and kuia for her Associate Minister of Maori Affairs’ accusations that those leaders are “strangling their young successors” or will she just give her usual apology for any offence that may have been taken? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I expect that most of the leaders referred to will agree with Sir Graham who said today that throughout history young people want to take over from their elders. Mr Peters may experience that at some time. 
Stephen Franks 
: Does the Prime Minister share her Associate Minister’s view that it is time for detribalised young urban Maori to take control of the sums now expected by iwi in treaty claims settlements; if so how will she make sure that wronged iwi are not wronged again as claim damages are taken by descendants of kaupapa Maori many of whom have never lost so much as a fish or a tree through a breach of the treaty? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: It is hard to know where to begin with such a question. The Crown settles with iwi on historic claims. Iwi have decision-making structures for how they deal with the proceeds of those claims. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Noting that I stand by my comments about Sir Graham Latimer being a crook and have stood by them for decades and noting that the Inland Revenue Department convicted him of nine offences of straight out non-payment of tax how can the Prime Minister say she is not aware of Mr Tamihere’s offence in respect of the Waipareira Trust business when it was part of an auditor’s report—a public report I might add—which in any other circumstance would have seen that person convicted and put behind bars as happened in the Fortex case; how can she plead ignorance on this matter? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: My understanding is that those matters have been dealt with by way of personal explanation in another debate in this House. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Will the Prime Minister please tell us on what day Mr Tamihere got up and made the issue of the falsifying of the Waipareira Trust books a matter of personal explanation in this House? If not stop misleading this House! 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I do not have knowledge of Mr Tamihere falsifying books. The member should step outside the House and make that allegation. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has given that answer twice. The second time I gave her a clear steer in saying that the audited accounts are a matter of public record. I do not have to step outside this House to say what is in those records; it is a matter of public documentation referred to by newspapers. I am entitled to an honest answer on this question. We have a Minister challenging the senior figures of Maoridom—like Api Mahuika whose family 
involvement with Ngati Porou leadership goes back centuries—and I am asking the Prime Minister about the information she has in respect of this simple matter. She first told us that it was a matter of personal explanation. That is not true—and Mr Tamihere is not denying that. Secondly on a matter of public information she said that I should disclose that information outside this House. This is a serious matter. The Prime Minister has covered up for someone who has committed numerous crimes and been convicted. She slides past those crimes as though we should all accept that. When he insults Maori— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the member has gone too far. I want him to come to his point of order— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When he insults the leadership of Maoridom some of whom have worked decades for their people and in many cases are unblemished then he has to be questioned in this House. All I am asking is for the Prime Minister to give an answer. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member can ask that and he can debate that in the House; we have freedom of speech in the House. That is not necessarily a point of order in relation to the question that is being asked at question time. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It would be expected that a Prime Minister more than any other Minister would have the talent and the ability to give honest open direct answers not slide behind “You say it outside the House.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister did give an answer that perfectly addressed the question in her terms. That does not mean to say the member cannot debate the answer but that is not the point of order procedure. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am getting tired of these points of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I am aware of what the requirements are in this House but it is not a debatable matter when the Prime Minister says that this matter has been disclosed by way of personal explanation. True or false it is not. The second issue is whether I should disclose this matter outside the House in public. It has already been disclosed in the audit report. Mr Tamihere knows that. So what is your defence of the Prime Minister’s failure to 
answer these questions? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is absolutely nothing for me to rule on. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: It is a cover-up. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There are two matters I wish to raise. Firstly we just had a series of non – points of order from the member. I was required to withdraw for one very short one. We just had one that took about 4 minutes in its various angry phases. Secondly the member said that it was a cover-up. If that is referring to your rulings on those matters that is grossly disorderly in this House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I did not take that to be the case. I take it the member was not referring to anything that I said. Is that correct? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I am referring to what you said. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Then the member will stand withdraw and apologise. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I withdraw and apologise.