Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 01 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12237. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour)to thePrime Minister: On whose authority did his Chief of Staff request that the Parliamentary Service provide access to information relating to Ministers and their offices and “any other relevant material requested” and did this take place after the Henry inquiry was told that Parliamentary Service would not release the information requested?Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the Minister my office has been advised that this answer may be longer than normal.Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development)on behalf of thePrime Minister: First can I congratulate Mr Robertson on his dancing last evening—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the Minister please just address the question.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Prime Minister’s chief of staff was acting with the Prime Minister’s authority when he asked Parliamentary Service to supply information relating to Ministers and their staff to the Henry inquiry. The member will be aware that the publicly released terms of reference for the inquiry clearly stated that stage one would include reviewing communications and copying equipment and records log books and any other material considered relevant to the persons and/or their officers who had or were likely to have had access to the compliance review report. At no point was it expected or desired that a journalist’s records would also be included in the inquiry. It is wrong that they were and the Prime Minister is extremely disappointed that the journalist’s records were sent to the inquiry. Let us be clear about what happened here: Parliamentary Service sent records that were not asked for to the inquiry and that is a serious mistake. The Prime Minister’s chief of staff asked Parliamentary Service to release information relating to Ministers and staff only not a journalist. He did so because he was giving consent to release the information for Government Ministers as flagged in the terms of reference. The Prime Minister also made it clear himself that he expected Ministers to comply. He notes that these issues are now before the Privileges Committee.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was a very long answer from Minister Joyce acting for the Prime Minister but it did not respond to the second leg of the primary question.Mr SPEAKER: I think that on this occasion that is a reasonable point that is being made. Can the Minister on behalf of the Prime Minister respond to the second part of the question: did this take place after the Henry inquiry was told by Parliamentary Service not to release the information requested.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: My advice is that Mr Eagleson emailed Mr Thorn on 9 May—and of course that email was tabled in the House yesterday—to confirm that the Prime Minister wished him to make available the inquiry records in relation to Ministers and their staff. That is the instruction he is referring to in the primary answer.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry; that still does not answer the second leg of the question. The second leg of the question asked whether that took place after the Henry inquiry was told that Parliamentary Service would not release the information. All that Mr Joyce did then in his further answer was tell us something we already knew about an email from 9 May.Mr SPEAKER: It would be helpful if the Minister on behalf of the Prime Minister could address that particular fact. It is a primary question that was on notice.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I understand Mr Speaker. My understanding is that this email occurred at the point where it was felt that Mr Eagleson would need to clarify that the Prime Minister and Mr Eagleson as his chief of staff had given permission for Ministers to be accessed and that was first. So I think we can assume that might have occurred after originally being told that they needed that clarification so it would be available.Grant Robertson: So to completely clarify the Henry inquiry was told by Parliamentary Service that it would not release the electronic information and it did release that information only after Wayne Eagleson sent an email on behalf of the Prime Minister?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I am not sure I can be as emphatic as the member would like me to be. [Interruption ]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon STEVEN JOYCE: But I think that certainly we can take from the email that the chief of staff felt that he needed to clarify for Parliamentary Service that there was indeed a request to make available on behalf of Ministers.Grant Robertson: Did the Henry inquiry request and receive swipe card data for Andrea Vance on her movements in and out of this building after Wayne Eagleson’s email on the Prime Minister’s behalf requesting any other material be provided by Parliamentary Service to the Henry inquiry?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I do not have that chronology to hand but what is clear—Grant Robertson: Oh yes very convenient.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: No what is very convenient is your question Mr Robertson. What is clear is that Mr Eagleson in no way asked for that information so whether it was supplied before or after is entirely incidental to Mr Eagleson’s email.Grant Robertson: When the Prime Minister said in answers to my written questions that his office became aware of the existence of emails between Andrea Vance and Peter Dunne discussing the Kitteridge report “as a result of a conversation with the Parliamentary Service” why was his office communicating directly with Parliamentary Service about records retrieved for the Henry inquiry?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I think it is fairly straightforward. Mr Eagleson had told Parliamentary Service that it was entitled to provide the information with regard to Ministers. As we all know there was some concern expressed I think from Mr Dunne or from his office about that information being supplied and so therefore there was further conversation again I suspect wanting to know whether that information could be supplied and subsequently there was obviously a conversation with Mr Dunne. But this is all in relation to the Minister’s information and it was at the point where the Minister’s information was not able to be supplied that the clarification was sought.Grant Robertson: Is he aware of section 6(2) of the Parliamentary Service Act 2000 which states: “The Parliamentary Service is not an instrument of the executivegovernment.”; if so why did his chief of staff on his direction instruct Parliamentary Service to provide “any other relevant material requested by the Henry inquiry” to the inquiry?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Because it was in relation to Ministers who had had a ministerial warrant that the Prime Minister had provided to them. The Prime Minister had made it clear to all his Ministers that he expected them to comply with the inquiry and supply and authorise to supply the relevant information. Mr Eagleson was following up that instruction with Parliamentary Service.Hon David Parker: It doesn’t wash.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It does wash and you should pay attention.Grant Robertson: Why does he think it is appropriate for his chief of staff to put pressure on Parliamentary Service to release electronic records that it had originally declined to release to the Henry inquiry?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Two points in response to that. Firstly it was actually in regard to Ministers who held a ministerial warrant and they hold that because they enjoy the confidence of the Prime Minister and he had made it clear that information needed to be provided to the inquiry. The second point is the contradiction—just a short time ago in this House the Opposition was baying for those emails between Mr Dunne and Ms Vance to be released. Suddenly it is holier than thou about the privacy of that information. You cannot have it both ways Mr Robertson.Grant Robertson: Is it correct that Peter Dunne received the Kitteridge report as the leader of a support party—as an MP in this House—not as a Minister as the Minister has just stated?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I am not aware exactly on what basis he received that report but what I can tell you in relation to the emails and the information is that it was in relation to this matter as there was a ministerial warrant.Grant Robertson: Given that this is his inquiry and it was on his instruction that his chief of staff ask Parliamentary Service to access the electronic and phone records—and that when his chief of staff speaks to someone they are speaking to him—why will he not just take some responsibility for a fundamental breach of the rights of MPs and journalists in this building?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Prime Minister was making inquiries about his Ministers in the ministerial inquiry. It was not about their capacity as MPs it was not about journalists and with the greatest respect the irony of the situation is that the Opposition has been baying for this information and is not happy for it to now be released.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On several occasions now the Minister has gone well beyond what had been pretty serious questions to him and has started to attack the Opposition. This is—Hon Annette King: Every answer.Chris Hipkins: In every answer that he has delivered he has attacked the Opposition. Previously in this House we actually had a standard that suggested that Ministers did not do that.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: In relation to that last question it contained any number of suppositions and made a political accusation and I think I was entitled to make a political response. [Interruption ]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not need any further assistance. On this occasion I think that the answer to the question was adequate and certainly not out of order in any way.Grant Robertson: I seek leave of the House to table an email from Wayne Eagleson on 9 May this year at 4.39 p.m. to Geoff Thorn in which he confirms that the PrimeMinister would like the Parliamentary Service to make available inquiry team records and other relevant material requested.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that email. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is none. [Interruption ] I apologise. There was objection. It will not be tabled.Grant Robertson: John Banks objected.Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is every member’s right in this House.