Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19627] 
3.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she stand by her reported statement that she considered many of the comments about her Government by John Tamihere in his  
Investigate 
 magazine interview untrue; if so why? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes because I do. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Has she then reconsidered her previously stated position that she wants politicians to “say what they mean and mean what they say” or does that premise only hold true for persons other than John Tamihere? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: In a democracy people are free to say what they mean and mean what they say. They also have to recognise that that may have implications for the way their team regards them. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Will she require Mr Tamihere to say that what he stated about her Government in his interview with Ian Wishart was incorrect as part of her requirement for an acceptable apology from him? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I have no ministerial responsibility for Mr Tamihere. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. That has to be just the biggest hiding from a question that we could possibly hear and an obfuscation of the worst kind. This is a situation where a member has stated publicly that he may resign over this issue. The Prime Minister has laid down for the information of the nation the conditions under which Mr Tamihere may come back. If he cannot accept those conditions quite clearly the Government’s thin majority means it is in trouble. For the Prime Minister to say that she has no responsibility in a ministerial sense is a complete nonsense. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister should have raised the matter as a point of order—as opposed to an answer to a question—that she had no ministerial authority. I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 131/6 which makes it quite clear that a “Prime Minister is not answerable for actions taken in a non-ministerial capacity whether as Leader of the Opposition or as leader of a political party.” 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Might you explain to the House the inconsistency in your determination about ministerial responsibility whereby previously the Minister of State Services was able to make all sorts of comments about Tories and about what MPs on the Opposition side of the House said or might have said and that was OK but when it comes to the Prime Minister you take a very narrow definition of what ministerial responsibility requires. I simply ask for some consistency from the Chair as to the responsibilities of a Minister. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: That big issue is actually a relatively simple one. Of course the question in this latter case was whether a question was in order. The member is now raising somewhat late the issue of whether an answer was in order. A question has to be about a matter relating to ministerial responsibility. If a Minister adds certain matters in an answer members may object if they wish to but they have to be quick to catch it. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: When it comes to a Government holding a majority in the House surely that is the ultimate responsibility of the Prime Minister. Therefore as a Minister she should have responsibility for circumstances she can control—which this question goes to the heart of—when it comes to the ability to maintain that majority. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Madam Speaker the ruling you have given is of course correct but I draw your attention to the peculiar facts of this case. In this case we have someone who is an ex-Minister and who is out on—I do not know what they call it—a sort of study leave. 
Hon Member 
: Psychiatric leave. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Psychiatric leave! That is my fault Madam Speaker; I should not have asked for assistance. The question of whether the member can come back in relation to that question put forward by Mr Brownlee obviously includes his returning to Cabinet. The idea that the Prime Minister does not have any role in her Cabinet—well it is a novel one but it is not one that has ever been argued by the Prime Minister before. I suggest to you therefore that the comments made by Mr Tamihere and the conditions that the Prime Minister will set before she will have him back—even though the Labour caucus may vote members up the Prime Minister has a say in those matters—are perfectly reasonable matters to put to her. She may not like answering the question but I think it is reasonable certainly that that question should be allowed and that that answer should not be allowed to stand. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: That is a very interesting point but of course the question did not raise the issue of Mr Tamihere re-entering Cabinet. Had that issue been raised of course it would have raised a further interesting question because in the Labour caucus the Prime Minister does not appoint Ministers to Cabinet but merely allocates their portfolios. So perhaps to help the member if he tries to ask such a question I tell him that he will need to phrase it in terms of extending the size of Cabinet thereby creating a vacancy on which the Labour caucus will then vote. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have had enough comment and I thank members for their contributions. The fact still remains however that the Prime Minister was not responsible for the matter that was asked about in the question. In respect of the subsidiary point that a member—I think it was Dr Smith—raised relating to the Minister of State Services I say that in his answer to the question the Minister did address it. In the course of doing so he made a comment but no formal objection was taken to that comment. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Can you tell us then when the Prime Minister is not responsible as the Prime Minister for the statements she makes? The statement that this question was based on—remembering that we cannot ask questions without having a fair basis for asking them—was from the Prime Minister’s own comments at a press conference. If the Prime Minister is speaking at a press conference about a matter that goes to the heart of her ability to command a majority in this House then where is the point where she is no longer responsible as a Minister for her answers? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister would have been responsible if the matter had related to a member of Cabinet. But it did not so the question has to go back to ministerial responsibility. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is this a new point of order? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: It is a point of order in response to the ruling you have given with respect to the— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is the member challenging the ruling? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: No I am not; I wish to identify the Standing Order that you are required to enforce as Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry—would the member say that again? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I want to draw your attention to the Standing Order you are required to enforce. Until you have heard my point of order I think you should hear me out. Madam Speaker you have often raised complaints about the Opposition repeatedly raising points of order during question time. Yet you are now saying to us that if we do not raise a point of order you will let Ministers stray well outside the Standing Orders. It is your responsibility as Speaker to enforce the Standing Orders. We have had several answers from Ministers that directly contradict Standing Order 370. So I require your clarification of whether you see it as your responsibility to enforce Standing Order 370 which states that members in answering questions must be concise must be confined to the subject matter and must not include any discriminatory references to any member or any offensive or unparliamentary expression. Clearly Trevor Mallard’s response earlier did breach that Standing Order. Am I to take it that unless we jump to our feet every single time to take a point of order you will simply let Ministers get away with breaching Standing Order 370? 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: The member raises an interesting and a fair question in terms of Standing Order 370. In that context I will also refer you Madam Speaker to Standing Order 364 in relation to the content of questions which must not contain “… arguments inferences imputations epithets ironical expressions or expressions of opinion”. If Speakers off their own bat enforced both those Standing Orders very strictly we might well find ourselves reverting to the situation we once famously had under Speaker Wall when only one supplementary question was allowed in the entire question time. Some reasonable degree of free flow is required on that. But if the member wishes to take a very strict approach I will be happy to police the questions and he can police the answers. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank members for their contributions. It is true that I have not chosen to strictly enforce every Standing Order on the grounds that I thought it was important that members exercise considerable freedom in the House in relation to the questions that they ask and the answers that are given. However if it is the wish of the House that I do strictly enforce them I am happy to do so. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is this a new point of order? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Yes it is. Yesterday when Mr Dunne asked what you determined was a hypothetical question to the Prime Minister and challenged that decision you allowed him the opportunity to reword his hypothetical question in such a way that the Prime Minister could answer it. I ask for the same courtesy today. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have no difficulty with that at all. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: How would the Prime Minister react should the Labour caucus choose to re-elect Mr Tamihere to a Cabinet position if Mr Tamihere in his apology has not stated that all the comments he made in the Ian Wishart article were incorrect? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: As Prime Minister I accept the decisions my caucus makes on electing members to Cabinet. I am happy to hear the member confidently predict the return of a Labour-led Government. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: In what way is John Tamihere’s statement in the  
Investigate 
 article that unions have increased their power after the announcement of the Labour list untrue? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Labour has selected a very talented and diverse team of candidates. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Can the Prime Minister confirm that for that last question to have any truth at all Labour would have to increase its percentage of the vote above what it received at the last election and is she grateful of that indication from the National Party about its confidence in that matter? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I heartily agree with that. I can say— 
Simon Power 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The point of order will be that that question was addressed in her capacity as the party leader. Is that right? 
Simon Power 
: It’s not bad. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you very much. I am pleased I have the confidence of the member. That was not a legitimate question. 
Brian Connell 
: Why does the Prime Minister think that the letters to the editor in today’s  
New Zealand Herald  
and  
Dominion Post 
 which are representative of mainstream opinion are so resoundingly positive about Mr Tamihere’s comments in the  
Investigate 
 magazine article? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am sure that the National Party research unit has been in overdrive on the letters page. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The question will be heard in silence. 
Peter Brown 
: Will the Prime Minister clarify the situation? If it is true that John Tamihere was not telling the truth as the Prime Minister said a few moments ago then he must have been telling lies. If he has been telling lies and the Labour caucus wants him back in Cabinet will the Prime Minister tell us whether that is an acceptable standard for a Government of New Zealand? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: As I have told the House many times before the Labour Party elects Ministers to its Cabinet. It elects people who are team players and who have ability. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does the Prime Minister remember her statement that her Government would bring in new standards of behaviour—[ 
Interruption 
] Should I start again? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: If the member’s own side will permit him to do so and will hear his question in silence yes. The member will please start again. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does the Prime Minister remember her statement that her Government would bring in new standards of behaviour and does that preclude people who she says are telling lies from being in her Cabinet? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: That is not a phrase I would use but I would cheerfully compare the record of this Government with that of the Government the member served any day.