Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question Time 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question Time 
[Volume:610;Page:7436] 
8.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Will she hold a full independent public inquiry into her and her department’s handling of suspected terrorist Ahmed Zaoui’s arrival and stay in New Zealand; if not why not? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 No. Given that the matter is not finally resolved and because security matters and other issues cannot be commented on publicly it is not possible at this stage to hold such an inquiry. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why should anyone have any confidence in an in-house whitewash inquiry when the Minister previously described those people involved in this inquiry in the following terms: “It has let this House and this country down. I am not prepared to stand up to justify it when my own officials have not even told me the truth.” and moreover when she did not know today whether any heads had rolled as a consequence of that; why would anybody have any confidence or trust at all in the inquiry which she will have handled by her own officials? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have not asked the border and investigations officers of the Immigration Service to conduct the inquiry. I have been advised today that it has been referred to the Secretary of Labour. The terms of reference are being drawn up as we speak. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: Do any parts of the Immigration Act applying to Mr Zaoui prevent disclosure of any details of the case; if so when did they come into effect? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Yes. They came into effect on 1 October 1999. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: When the Minister first had this matter raised with her by the  
New Zealand Herald 
 on Monday why did she not seek a full and comprehensive briefing on the background so that she could make a decision about the need for an inquiry at that point or is it the case that she did ask for such a briefing and the department withheld important information from her? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: There was nothing on the Monday night that required a request from me to the department for an inquiry. The issues that were raised last night with me with the journalist concerned raised questions about how an Ombudsman had been responded to. That was an entirely different matter. 
Heather Roy 
: Is the real reason she will not hold a full independent public inquiry because she is concerned that she will be found to be one of the people whom top immigration spokesman Mr Ian Smith is complaining about who did not stick to the original song? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have said to this House on more than one occasion and will continue to say it that I was not involved in any agreement to lie and my department was not involved in any agreement to lie and I will continue to say that until members accept that that is the case. The real reason I cannot have an inquiry into the matter is that it is not finally resolved and because of security matters and other issues that cannot be commented on publicly as a result of legislation that came into effect on 1 October 1999 this is not an appropriate time for an inquiry. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is the Minister aware of the following facts: first of all the Immigration Service is part of the Department of Labour; second on matters of national security a full public inquiry can hear such matters in camera on application where they are relevant to that inquiry; and third why would she go on weakly defending glaringly obvious liars and conspirators while denying New Zealanders the right of a full public inquiry into this whole dodgy disgraceful affair? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Only two of those questions are to be commented on. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Yes I am aware that the New Zealand Immigration Service is an arm of the Department of Labour; of course I know that. The second question which I have been advised is the only other question I can answer is very plain. With regard to the matter that the member raised which has now completely escaped me— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I will again bring the matter to the Minister’s attention. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Oh yes the member raised the question of whether— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I will bring the question again to her attention. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: No no— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: She said the question completely escaped her and I want to help her out. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have recalled the question now. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: But I am getting sick and tired of this. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister said that she has remembered. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The second question related to the fact that we could hold a full public inquiry in camera. It would not be a public inquiry. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is not a frivolous matter for the Minister to be trying to laugh away. The reality is that I asked whether she was aware that in a full public inquiry or a commission of inquiry if matters of national security are claimed to be part of the evidence then that part of the evidence can be heard in camera. To then say that I was suggesting that a full public inquiry be held in camera in total is an absolute nonsense and I wish you would take it seriously. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the Minister could rephrase the answer that she gave and I invite her to do so. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Given that the matter is not finally resolved issues of security and other issues that cannot be commented on publicly are at the heart of the question that the member put to me which was about my department’s handling of suspected terrorist Ahmed Zaoui’s arrival and stay in New Zealand. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How can matters of national security if they are to be raised in this case possibly be properly dealt with by the Department of Labour or the Immigration Service; how can she possibly give that as a reason she is not going to hold a full public inquiry? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I need to refer the member to I think Part 4 of the Immigration Act which deals with matters of security. That part of the Act came into effect on 1 October 1999. It addresses issues of security.