4. Question No. 4—Prime MinisterHon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime MinisterQuestion No. 4—Prime Minister4. Hon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions?Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes in the context they were given.Hon James Shaw: Does he stand by his joint statement with the Prime Ministers of Australia and Canada in relation to Gaza made on 13 December 2023 that he supports urgent international efforts towards a sustainable ceasefire." and if so what specific actions has his Government taken since that date to secure a sustainable ceasefire?Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We have joined with many companies calling for a sustainable ceasefire and we'll continue to do so.Hon James Shaw: Is he aware that under article 1 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide New Zealand has an obligation to take action to prevent genocide before it occurs?Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm not sure the point of the question that the member is trying to ask or get to.Hon James Shaw: Point of order Mr Speaker. To assist the Prime Minister the point of the question was to ask if he was aware of article 1 of the convention.Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Personally not aware but if he'd like to direct a specific question to the relevant Minister I'm sure we could help.Hon James Shaw: What actions is the Government taking to meet its obligations under article 1 of the genocide convention in light of the recent ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that found a plausible risk of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza?Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It was a provisional finding and it wasn't a plausible risk.Hon James Shaw: Is the Prime Minister aware that the ICJ did find that there was a plausible risk of genocide which would—[Interruption]SPEAKER: Excuse me; when a question is being asked the House is silent. Start again.Hon James Shaw: Is he aware that the ICJ did find that there is a plausible risk of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza—Hon Chris Bishop: And not a genocide.Hon James Shaw: —and that—SPEAKER: Mr Bishop.Hon James Shaw: —and that that would trigger New Zealand's obligations under article 1 of the convention to take action to prevent genocide before it occurs?Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: The court did not make any findings that Israel has actually engaged in genocidal conduct.Hon James Shaw: Is the Prime Minister aware that there is a difference between having found whether genocide has taken place or whether there is a plausible risk of genocide taking place and that article 1 of the convention requires New Zealand to take action to prevent genocide before it occurs—i.e. when there is a plausible risk?Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I said earlier the court did not make any findings that Israel has actually engaged in genocidal conduct. That is part of a full and substantive hearing that will take place in subsequent months and years.Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister believe that the casual lazy misuse of a word as important as "genocide"—Hon Member: 30000 people.Hon David Seymour: —is not only incorrect but offensive to those victims of actual genocide?SPEAKER: Just a minute. The next person who speaks while someone is asking a question will be in a little bit of trouble.Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister believe that the casual lazy misuse of the word "genocide" is not only incorrect but highly offensive to those many people who tragically throughout history were victims of actual genocide?Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order. Mr Speaker I know you've adopted the flow approach for questions and answers but that was a good example I think of the Standing Order that purports to prevent members from using epithets and words in their questions that are likely to lead to disorder. I think you know there must be a line somewhere around where those words are going to fuel disorder because if any words can be used in a question then there will be regular bouts of disorder in the House.Hon Chris Bishop: Speaking to the point of order. Questions are required to be factual and that was.SPEAKER: That's true except that the lead-in to that question I'm sure is what the Hon Grant Robertson was talking about. So what we might do is have the question again without all the epithets on the front of it.Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister believe it is important to use a word as heavy as "genocide" accurately and only when fully justified by the facts in order to respect those many victims throughout history who tragically have suffered from actual genocide?Steve Abel: Including the Palestinians right now who are suffering from genocide.SPEAKER: That is not helpful. Who was calling out there? I didn't see who it was. [Interruption] Well can I ask you Mr Abel to please just contain yourself while people are asking a question. Sometimes we don't like the questions—quite often we don't like the questions. Just about every day so far I haven't liked a lot of questions but you've got to just let people have their say.Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm not sure which question I'm actually answering.SPEAKER: It's the David Seymour question which we've had twice and we really don't want a third time.Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No no; OK. Look the issue here is there have been provisional measures that have been announced in the provisional ruling of the ICJ and there is a further case that is continuing on and I'm only going to respond to the provisional measures.Hon Marama Davidson: Point of order Mr Speaker. Just checking with that question the claim from South Africa is specifically related to preventing the crime of genocide so putting it clear that that is not a casual misuse of language. The claim is to prevent the crime of genocide; that can be taken before the threshold is met. It's about saying "Don't do genocide."SPEAKER: Yeah look a point of order shouldn't be a place for a debate on issues like that."