1. Question No. 1—Prime MinisterHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Prime Minister1. Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government's statements and actions in relation to the alleged unauthorised access of Budget 2019 material?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes particularly the comments made by the Deputy Prime Minister in relation to the ethics and legality of the Opposition's 2000 times repeated unauthorised accessing of the Treasury site.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In that answer to that question there was an allegation made by the acting Prime Minister that there were 2000 hits on the website by the Opposition. It was a pre-Budget week where one could easily expect many people preparing comparisons to have looked at that site. I think such an exaggeration is unacceptable in an answer from a Minister.SPEAKER: Well so is the member debating the number or is he—I can't quite see—Hon Gerry Brownlee: No no. SPEAKER: OK I understand the—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well the Standing Orders—SPEAKER: I understand the—just wait a second. I understand that the member doesn't like the reply but I'd like the member to address himself to a point of order. Hon Gerry Brownlee: Yeah that's right which would be going to the Standing Orders which require that Ministers give answers that are in the public interest. Inciting a position by saying something that is completely untrue does not do that. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Mr Speaker—SPEAKER: Speaking to the point of order the Rt Hon Winston Peters. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —in my answer I was quoting from information that was given to us and hitherto has not been contested. Hon Gerry Brownlee: This is—SPEAKER: Speaking further to the point of order.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Yes. This is the hitherto moment. SPEAKER: Well as the member is aware it has on occasions happened in the past and under both Governments that Ministers have been incorrect in the answers that they have given but I'm—and if it was absolutely incorrect or deliberately incorrect then there might be an argument for asking for a correction or if it was deliberate it is a matter of privilege. But in this particular case I thought—you know I'd need to go back and look at TV programmes that I have seen but I thought I saw the fact that there'd been 2000 unauthorised accesses to information being a matter of pride for some members. Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: A further point of order.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well it would be very unfortunate if you as the Speaker have now compounded things by suggesting that any use of a search bar on a publicly available website was somehow unauthorised. The reason for having a search bar on the Treasury website on TradeMe or on any other website that you'd like to name is so that people can use it. It is by virtue of its being there an authorisation—a welcome in. SPEAKER: OK. I'm certainly not going to get into that debate with the member but I think the House has had it quoted often enough to it in the last week or so what should be done in those circumstances and I'm not at the point where I am going to require the Prime Minister to correct that answer. Hon Amy Adams: Does she stand by her response to oral questions yesterday that in relation to Five Eyes members raising concerns with the Government I find that very hard to believe"? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister 100 percent. Hon Amy Adams: Is she not aware then that Andrew Hampton the Director of the GCSB has confirmed that that is indeed exactly what happened? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister no he is not aware of any such confirmation from Mr Hampton. Quite—Hon Amy Adams: Read your papers. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I'm going to read the papers now. Just give me a second here. This is what Mr Hampton said: "The GCSB has a longstanding practice of not commenting on its engagement with its intelligence partners for reasons of national security. However due to the need for clarity regarding the Treasury incident I can confirm that Five Eyes partners have not raised concerns with me directly or with my agency." Hon Grant Robertson: So can the Prime Minister confirm that the assertion made in the member's previous question is actually completely incorrect? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister and with delight yes—100 percent I can confirm that. Hon Amy Adams: Is the Prime Minister deliberately ignoring the part of Mr Hampton's statement when he made it very clear that Five Eyes members had been in contact with the GCSB over the allegations of a systematic and deliberate hacking of the Treasury website? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister who seeks to support the integrity of Mr Hampton I want to quote what Mr Hampton said again: "However due to the need for clarity regarding the Treasury incident I can confirm that Five Eyes partners have not raised concerns with me directly or with my agency."—end of quotes. That is the total answer to the question. SPEAKER: No. I am going to ask Amy Adams to ask her question again because I think the word "concerns" was not in her question.Hon Amy Adams: I will try. Sorry I don't have it written in front of me so I'll do my best to repeat it as I had it. Is the Prime Minister deliberately ignoring the part of Mr Hampton's statement when he made it very clear that Five Eyes partners had been in contact with the Government about the allegations of a systematic and deliberate hacking of the Treasury website?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister this was just a collegial contact that went something like this: "What's going on over there and can we help?"Hon Amy Adams: What specific assurances did the Government provide Five Eyes members in relation to the reports of systematic and deliberate hacking of the Treasury website?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister no assurances at all. None were sought. That was of course the kind of loaded inference and innuendo in yesterday's questions from the Leader of the Opposition but it won't work. It didn't work yesterday and it won't work today.Hon Grant Robertson: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the Director-General of the GCSB said "Five Eyes partners have not raised concerns with me directly or with my agency." that there were three routine information requests and/or offers for assistance and that Ministers were not briefed on these routine information requests?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister—and she wants me to apologise for being repetitive—yes I can.Hon Amy Adams: Isn't it correct that the GCSB in fact assured Five Eyes members that they believe that what had occurred was only an "information management issue"?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister no and this House should stop having people barking up the wrong tree day after day. If the Budget is of relevance please debate that.Hon Amy Adams: Is this going to be like the Five Eyes contact point where the Prime Minister one day says she finds it very hard to believe it happened and then is very quickly proven to be wrong?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister who wants to be helpful she's got no idea what you're talking about.Hon Amy Adams: Why did the Government leave the public of New Zealand labouring under the view for more than 30 hours that there'd been a serious hack of Treasury systems when Five Eyes partners had it corrected almost immediately?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister that questioner is better able to answer that than anyone else in this Parliament because that was the beginning of the controversy. It was the failure to follow the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) which I might add was launched by Mr Bridges which asked and it said this—can I just quote what was said back in April 2017: "From yesterday New Zealand officially has its own Computer Emergency Response Team or CERT just like the big countries do to keep a watchful eye on bad things in cyberspace." That's what happened and that member wants to find who's responsible. Go and look at a big mirror.Hon Grant Robertson: In light of the previous question about the word "hack" is the Prime Minister aware of a situation where the Ministry of Justice's search platform was used to get into the administration panel of the Ministry of Justice and it was described at the time as a "deliberate and malicious attempt to hack into the Ministry of Justice's IT systems" by the then Minister Judith Collins?Hon Gerry Brownlee: Now we're going to show this guy knows nothing about how computers work.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: On behalf of the Prime Minister—and ignoring the number one ignoramus in this House—can I say—SPEAKER: Order!Hon Gerry Brownlee: No answer his question. Don't call him that.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No no—look: if the glove fits wear it. SPEAKER: I think the Prime Minister had better sit down."