Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13914. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Leader of the Opposition) to thePrime Minister: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf on 25 September “The Minister was aware that the Department of Conservation was working on a submission. He was not aware of the content of the leaked draft submission until Tuesday 17 September”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Hon David Cunliffe: How can the Prime Minister stand by that statement given that Nick Smith’s 20 May weekly report discussed submission content and said that the Department of Conservation had concerns with the approach to nitrogen and phosphate monitoring 3 months before the Minister claimed to know?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not have that particular report in front of me but what I do know is that the weekly report of 29 July did indicate within two sentences that there was a lodging of a submission to be made in the name of the director-general and on 31 July the Minister received the report.Hon David Cunliffe: I seek leave to table a summary of the Minister’s weekly reports which the Prime Minister clearly has not been briefed on by his Minister—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. [Interruption] Order!Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There may be some confusion—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Is the member seeking now to table another document?Hon David Cunliffe: I am seeking to table the cover sheet to the question for written answer that attached the weekly reports from the honourable Minister—Mr SPEAKER: Leave is now sought to table—[Interruption] Order! Leave is now sought to table the cover sheet. Is there any objection? No there is not. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon David Cunliffe: How can he continue to support Nick Smith given Dr Smith’s claim that he first asked the Department of Conservation to give him a copy of the submission on 29 July and when his 24 June weekly report states that he required it to be approved by him on 17 June—17 June?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Because I am advised that that is correct.Hon David Cunliffe: I seek leave to table the particular extract from the weekly report which shows that the advice the Prime Minister received—Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought now to table—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: The member is seeking to table a document. Is the member seeking clarification?Hon Dr Nick Smith: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: Is the member seeking clarification?Hon Dr Nick Smith: Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: No no. Order! The point is that I am dealing with a point of order to table a document. I will put that leave and then if the member wants to raise a point of order that is perfectly in order. Leave is ought to table the particular document outlined by the Hon David Cunliffe. Is there any objection? There is not. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Is it proper to seek leave to table documents that have been provided by way of written answer to a question? Because both documents that the Leader of the Opposition has sought leave for have been provided to the House by way of answer to a written question.Mr SPEAKER: I am happy to clarify that. If I am clear that the document has already been clearly made available—and I expect members when they seek leave to table a document to make that known to the House—in that case there seems to be little point in tabling the document. On this occasion Mr Cunliffe sought to table two documents. I was unaware whether they were freely available and on that basis I then put the leave to the House. It is for the House to determine.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just to clarify the point for the member the Prime Minister in answering both the supplementary questions that David Cunliffe asked said that he was unaware of the material. That is the practice in which you have previously said it is OK to table documents—to help clarify matters in the House.Mr SPEAKER: I will just tidy that up for the benefit of the member because it is not strictly a point of order. What we have said in the past is that documents can be tabled if they further inform the members of the House. As to whether a Minister stands up and says they have no knowledge of that etc. that is not the purpose of tabling a document; it is about giving further information to members.Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. For the information of the House I can confirm that the information that has just been tabled by leave was in fact received by the Opposition only this morning and is still subject to the standard 3-day stand-down before its publication as a question for written answer.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member for that. Leave was put for the documents to be tabled. That is the end of the matter.Hon David Cunliffe: How can he have confidence in Nick Smith when the Department of Conservation raised water quality concerns in May—May—and told Smith that it was preparing a submission Smith asked to approve it in June and yet the same Minister claimed to know nothing about it until September?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I think that the member is attempting to conflate and draw inferences from a whole lot of material which he cannot. The simple facts of life are that on 29 July at his weekly meeting he received a report that had two sentences in relation to the submission. On 31 July he received the report. And I refer the member to Doris Johnston the Deputy Director-General of Conservation who said amongst otherthings that “He never saw the draft submission that everyone’s been talking about” and “the Minister did not play any role in my decision-making.” So the member can conflate things as much as he likes he might bamboozle his Labour caucus but he will not—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Order! That answer is quite sufficient.Hon David Cunliffe: How can the Prime Minister have confidence in Nick Smith given Smith’s claim in response to a question on notice that he first knew that the Department of Conservation was preparing any submission was 29 July given that the Minister’s weekly reports show he had already been briefed on it on 20 May 17 June and 24 June?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It really does not matter how many times the Leader of the Opposition looks at the press gallery; it will not be any more convincing because it is not correct. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Question No. 3.