Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:634;Page:5944] 
6.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: When he told the House on 24 August 2006 that “The Ingram report makes clear that Mr Field may have committed some errors of judgment” was he referring to Mr Field’s failure to advise the Associate Minister of Immigration of all relevant information or were there other matters he was referring to? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 Yes; and no. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Was it merely an error of judgment that Taito Phillip Field kept from the then Associate Minister of Immigration the fact that Mr Field did a deal with Mr Sunan Siriwan for him to work for Mr Field without pay in Samoa in return for a work permit for New Zealand as alleged in a sworn affidavit by Mr Sunan Siriwan; if so why is that merely an error of judgment? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The matter discussed is the subject of a conflict of evidence and has been referred to the New Zealand Police. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Was it merely an error of judgment that Taito Phillip Field kept from the Associate Minister the fact that Mr Field employed Mr Sunan Siriwan’s partner Ms Phanngarm as his wife’s personal housekeeper in Samoa where she “clean everything even her shoe clean her house clean her clothes by hands and wash her underwear by hands everything” without pay in exchange for his assistance in securing a New Zealand work permit for her; if so why is that merely an error of judgment? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I repeat that the matters referred to are the subject of a conflict of evidence and have been referred in the proper way to the New Zealand Police. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When Taito Phillip Field kept from the Associate Minister of Immigration the information that Ms Phanngarm was working for Mr Field’s wife without pay in Samoa “like slave I still have to work even I’m sick” in exchange for immigration assistance does he consider that merely an error of judgment; if so why? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I repeat that the matters have been referred to the New Zealand Police who are the competent people to investigate and where appropriate decide whether they are for the courts to determine. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When considering the latest immigration applications of Mr Sunan Siriwan and his partner Ms Phanngarm was it merely an error of judgment for Mr Field to take $2000 in cash from Mr Sunan Siriwan neither issuing a receipt nor returning the $69 overpaid for Ms Phanngarm’s deportation costs; if so why is that merely an error of judgment? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The allegations referred to to my knowledge have not been established as fact but have been referred to the New Zealand Police for further investigation. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When considering the latest immigration application by Mr Siriwan was it merely an error of judgment for Taito Phillip Field to pay Mr Siriwan $1000 in cash—cash he just happened to have in his pocket—when he met Mr Siriwan in Samoa last week given that Mr Siriwan has signed an affidavit alleging Mr Field offered him the money to stop him from talking to the media; if so why is that merely an error of judgment? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I am sure that the matter to which the member refers will be further investigated by the New Zealand Police. The member is indeed brave to refer to things in people’s pockets.