12. Question No. 12—State ServicesHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of State ServicesQuestion No. 12—State Services12. Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of State Services: How many incorrect statements have now been made by Ministers over the process appointment disclosures and non-disclosures over the Government's Chief Technology Officer and who is responsible for these?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Acting Minister of State Services): In response to the second part of the question in my role as the Acting Minister of State Services I am responsible for statements made by myself and all other Ministers in respect of the appointment of the Chief Technology Officer (CTO). In response to the first part of the question this is a Government that acknowledges its mistakes and focuses on putting them right as I did yesterday by apologising to Mr Handley. I do note for example that both Minister Robertson and myself did correct statements made yesterday and of course Ms Curran was incorrect in omitting her meeting with Mr Handley from a written question response. Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why is it that Derek Handley can publish all his texts and emails in two days but Government Ministers with dozens of staff and hundreds of officials have still not been able to release all their texts and emails despite first being asked for these in question time more than three weeks ago?SPEAKER: All right. Now I am going to ask the member to rephrase the question so there's a supplementary to the primary or the answer. Hon Dr Nick Smith: Can you clarify in that the issue is around the provision of information. The issue is that we have had multiple mistakes over the provision of information and I think it is a reasonable question particularly—SPEAKER: It might be a reasonable question but the member has to link it either to the primary question—Hon Dr Nick Smith: OK I'll try again.SPEAKER: —or to the answer.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Well Mr Speaker I thought you'd be a champion for disclosure in this area.SPEAKER: Order! The National Party just lost the additional supplementary questions.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why is it that Derek Handley can accurately publish all his texts and emails in two days but Government Ministers with dozens of staff and hundreds of officials can now after more than three weeks from first requested not provide this Parliament with all Ministers' texts and emails?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: Well I—yeah.Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I'm happy to answer it.SPEAKER: I'm not sure there was much of an improvement but I will let it go.Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I'm more than happy to answer it Mr Speaker. Of course Mr Handley is a private individual and not under the same obligations as a Government around the release of information. We had begun work preparing that raw material for a full release—[Interruption]SPEAKER: Order!Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: —later this week. [Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume her seat. This is an area of particular constitutional importance and a new area for consideration by this House. What I want is I want to be able to hear the answer and I think other members should too. This reply will be heard in silence.Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Thank you Mr Speaker. Mr Handley is of course a private individual and not under the same obligations as a Government around the release of information. We had begun preparing materials for a full release later this week. On Monday as the Acting Minister of State Services I discussed the release with Department of Internal Affairs officials and it was decided that State Services would liaise with Mr Handley regarding the release of his part of the correspondence. Of course events overtook this. Furthermore we are dealing with considerably more material than Mr Handley as we also have internal communications to gather and prepare for release. We expect to release this information in the next day or so.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Who was responsible for the Minister of State Services last week after dozens of questions in this House that were evaded and a very clear directive from the Speaker to bring all emails to this House for three significant emails being omitted?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As I just indicated in the answer that I just gave the Government has prepared the collating and redaction of the material for release to be consistent with its obligations as a Government. This is expected to be released in the next day or so.SPEAKER: That's not—no I don't need a point of order. That's not the question that was asked.Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The person that would be responsible would have been the Acting Minister of State Services last week the Hon Grant Robertson.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does she stand by her answer yesterday and I quote The Prime Minister did not communicate with Mr Handley by either text message or her private email address about the CTO role" when Mr Handley has stated and I quote him "There were eight communications by text and email with the PM that I considered related to the CTO role."? Who is not telling the truth?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Yes I do stand by my statement because as Mr Handley makes quite clear in what is released both the text and email regarding the CTO position that were sent to the Prime Minister were not responded to.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Supplementary—SPEAKER: No. No the Opposition's supplementaries have all been used.Hon Stuart Nash: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker the member Chris Bishop stated that the police supported his Arms (Firearms Prohibition Orders) Amendment Bill. They in fact do not—SPEAKER: Order!Hon Stuart Nash: —and I think he should stand up and apologise.SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member knows that if a member has misled the House there is an appropriate approach to take and taking a point of order on it is not that approach.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker in advising the House on that last question you made the comment that this was new territory new ground—very important etc. The Minister of Energy and Resources in her answer spoke about the Government having to take obviously a lot longer time than any private individual would because of the obligations that are incumbent on a Government. Now we know up to this point what those obligations are and they would not seem to be supporting a view that it should take a very long time at all to do these things. So I wonder: would it be reasonable to ask the Minister to table any new obligations that the Government now feels—SPEAKER: No.Hon Gerry Brownlee: —in the release of these materials?SPEAKER: No no. The point that I was referring to was that I am not aware of a similar circumstance of ministerial communications from a former Minister not being immediately available to their successors. I think there's an important point around the collective responsibility and the continuity of the ministry and it's an area which I haven't seen any discussion on previously. I have made it clear including in a way which was probably beyond my powers that I think there is a responsibility for Ministers to obtain as quickly as possible the correspondence of former Ministers in order to ascertain what communications and especially what obligations have been entered into on the part of the Government by former Ministers. That is quite separate to the Government's responsibilities under the Public Records Act or under the Official Information Act.Hon Dr Nick Smith: A new point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: Well can we finish this one first?Hon Gerry Brownlee: That really is my point. The information given to the House over the last few weeks has been—the starting point was well all of Clare Curran's papers are off to the archives and there'll have to be some sort of a negotiation with the archivist—SPEAKER: Can the member resume his seat. I have made it clear in the House that the Chief Archivist does not override the powers of this House and Ministers are responsible to this House and not to the Chief Archivist. In fact if the member read my letter which I tabled in the House last week I indicated that fairly plainly to the Chief Archivist.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My new point of order is that it is a custom that you have carried on that sometimes a Minister is not able to provide the information that's sought in the question and a Minister sometimes says "I'll provide that information for the House" or "the member". You'll be aware over this four-week sitting that there have been a number of occasions on this issue where reference has been made to that. What I'm seeking your guidance on is the timetable for that being met because there are four specific elements where Ministers said they would provide information last week that has not yet been provided and I was seeking your help to ensure that would be met by the end of this sitting tomorrow.SPEAKER: I cannot and will not give that guarantee. We've had an undertaking from the Minister currently in charge of the area that release of the material is imminent. But the point that I will make to the member—and where I said we're tip-toeing in new constitutional grounds—is the right of Ministers to obtain the records of previous Ministers. That is something which is not absolutely clear. In my opinion it should be the case and it should be automatic and we might be developing a new constitutional convention as we talk about it. For that reason I'm not in a position to make such a requirement."