1. Ministers—Integrity and OversightHon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSMinisters—Integrity and Oversight1. Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement We have a high standard of expectation for our ministers"; and does she believe her Government is adhering to these high standards?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime Minister): Yes.Hon Simon Bridges: What specific steps has she taken to prevent the Provincial Growth Fund becoming New Zealand First's $3 billion political slush fund?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have seen the reports from Mark Mitchell regarding a conversation he's alleged to have happened between himself and a New Zealand First member of Parliament. Given the statements that were made around the implications that Ministers may have been involved I sought assurances from each New Zealand First Minister that Ms Marcroft had not acted under their instruction. They gave me those clear assurances and I take them at their word. Hon Simon Bridges: Well in distinction of that does she stand by her statement to Radio New Zealand this morning that "I find it challenging enough to make sure I keep control and oversight of my party and my own ministers. That's where my jurisdiction sits."?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I'll give the context of that comment. The question was whether or not—as I recall the question was whether or not I would be getting involved with a disciplining of another party's backbench MP. That would not be appropriate. My jurisdiction does lie over the conduct of Ministers and that is why I undertook to seek those assurances. Hon Simon Bridges: So she accepts then does she that she is the—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! Hon Simon Bridges: Is she—SPEAKER: Well start right again all right? Hon Simon Bridges: Is she the Prime Minister of the entire Cabinet not just the Labour Ministers? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes. That is why I sought assurances from those Cabinet Ministers who were referenced in some of the statements that were made by an Opposition MP. I am not for a moment stating that I don't have responsibility for Ministers. I do which is why I spoke to them directly. Hon Simon Bridges: What will happen if those Ministers have not given her the whole truth? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As this House does I have sought those assurances I have been given those assurances and I take my Ministers at their word as that last member did when he was in Government. Hon Simon Bridges: Is she aware of the commitment the Minister for Regional Economic Development has reportedly made to co-fund the extension of the Clutha Gold cycle trail; and if so is she satisfied that the appropriate process has been followed before allocating the funding? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I don't have the details of that particular project or where it is in the process. We do have a process and I would point out that there have been a number of grants that have been made already where it's clear that the process hasn't been politicised. Anne Tolley supported the investment in Ōpōtiki Harbour. Former National MPs John Carter and Murray McCully supported the investments in the Far North. There are a number of examples where it's very clear that this has been a process that has been about the economic benefit to the regions rather than who might be supporting the project and that is as it should be. Hon Simon Bridges: Is she also aware that until June 2017 the co-chair of the Clutha Gold cycle trail was none other than Shane Jones' colleague Mark Patterson; and if so does she believe that that has had any influence on a decision to award funding to this project? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I say—obviously he was involved in the National Party. But the point I'm making here—the point I'm making is that there is a process that these projects go through. There are a number of examples where support has come from the other side of the House. That has not led to a decision against the project because ultimately it depends very much on whether it has the support of the region the community and will produce jobs. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does the Prime Minister mean that when Mark Patterson first supported the Clutha cycle way he was a National Party functionary and member of that party or have we heard something here by mistake? SPEAKER: Order! That's—it's way way beyond the Prime Minister's responsibility. [Interruption] Mr Brownlee would you like to let your leader speak. Hon Simon Bridges: Has she sought an explanation from Clare Curran on what she and Carol Hirschfeld were discussing at their secret meeting; and if so what was it? Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: First I would clarify the meeting was held in a public place—for those who are familiar with Wellington it was the Astoria—and so I don't believe it's fair to characterise it as a secret meeting. I did speak to Ms Curran on a number of occasions about this particular issue. She's assured me that the nature of the conversation was high-level and very much about issues that she has canvassed in the public domain as well. Hon Simon Bridges: Well does she accept that the meeting was clearly more than informal and coincidental?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Minister Curran has never claimed it was coincidental. She's acknowledged that it was in her diary. She did correct an original written question to make sure that it was correctly documented and so from her perspective that has always been the case: it was always scheduled and therefore not coincidental. Hon Simon Bridges: Well isn't it more than informal given that it was clearly pre-arranged was in their diaries and RNZ and its future was discussed?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: She acknowledged when asked about the meeting that it occurred. It was in her diary and she also acknowledged that not including RNZ in the original written question asked by Ms Lee was a mistake and that's why she corrected it.Hon Simon Bridges: As Prime Minister does she believe it is right for her Ministers to "split hairs" when answering questions to Parliament?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No. That is why it is entirely appropriate that she corrected the record and included that meeting in her list of written questions. And I acknowledge that at that time my understanding is she had roughly 6000 she was answering and that was one of them."