Points of Order — Privilege—Definition of Deliberately Misleading House Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility for Operational Matters 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Points of Order — Privilege—Definition of Deliberately Misleading House Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility for Operational Matters 
[Sitting date: 26 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8896. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Points of Order 
Privilege—Definition of Deliberately Misleading House 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is the first of two points of order. This one relates to a ruling that you have made with regard to a breach of privilege. On 14 March Phil Twyford raised a matter with you to which you replied on 20 March. I want to make it clear that I am not attempting in any way to have you reverse your decision and I think it was largely consistent with rulings that Speakers have given. However there is within your letter a ruling that I think would be unfortunate if it stood. That is where you say: “Only where a member can be assumed to have personal knowledge rather than knowledge by way of his or her official capacity and makes the statement in a situation of some formality can a presumption of intention to mislead arise.” 
The point that I would like to make to you quite forcefully is that if a Minister has an official report has read it and says that he has read it and if he then deliberately misuses figures from that report in a primary answer it is my view that that would be a breach of privilege. Clearly it is a high test but to suggest that someone can breach privilege only when the information they have is personal—and if they have official information they cannot breach privilege—appears to me to be wrong. I would ask you to consider that and to rule on it at some stage if you so wish. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. The advice I have received is that this is a longstanding practice and it is based on House of Commons practice. But the member raises a point that is serious. I accept that. I am happy to have another look at the tone of that letter and I will come back directly to the member. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Speaker. I want to emphasise that it is the word “only” which is the one that I do not think has appeared— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made his point. The member will now sit. 
Questions for Written Answer—Ministerial Responsibility for Operational Matters 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The second point of order relates to a written parliamentary answer from the Hon Peter Dunne received last Friday where the question goes to whether he or his predecessor indicated a lack of confidence or a relationship breakdown with staff and the reports that he has received. The text of the answer is that that is an operational matter and the responsibility of the Commissioner of Inland Revenue. 
I repeat—and it is actually quite parallel to question No. 11—that the question goes to the indication of a Minister to a chief executive of a problem and the awareness of the Minister of a response. Speaker’s ruling 155/4 I think goes to the question and  
McGee 
 also makes it very clear that Ministers are responsible to the House for their official actions and for the general conduct of their department and officials. For a Minister to reply to a question and say that this is just an operational matter I am sure you would rule it out and you have ruled it out in the House. But I would like you to look at that and to indicate whether or not your standard for Ministers addressing questions is going to apply to written questions as well as those in the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the member again. I want to have a look at the question and I want to have a look at the answer before commenting further. I will come back directly to the member.