Smith Nick: General Debates 
Smith Nick: General Debates 
[Volume:617;Page:13325] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 This afternoon I want to expose the deliberate dishonesty of this Government on the single most contentious issue of this parliamentary term. Everybody acknowledges that the issue of the foreshore and seabed is the issue this Parliament has been focused on. The Minister for Land Information does not have a huge portfolio. This is not a job that appears in the newspaper every single day. But on the single issue of relevance to the public of New Zealand he got it so awfully wrong. 
Let us go through the paper trail. On 18 July last year the Minister specifically sought a report from his officials on how much of the foreshore and seabed was privately owned. The officials came back with only a one-page report explicitly stating that the quantum was very small. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: When did they say that? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: They said that on 18 July. However they said that it was a preliminary view. One week later they came back with a further report confirming that view and went further by stating that the amount of privately owned seabed and foreshore was very small. That was on 25 July. We then had from the Minister a systematic spin job—orchestrated no doubt by the ninth floor of the Beehive—to deliberately confuse the public. We had a headline in the newspaper stating that one-third of the foreshore was off limits. Mr Tamihere the “Minister of Misinformation” said that one-third of the foreshore was privately owned. He said that in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 on the  
Holmes 
 show and up and down New Zealand. 
I talked to surveyors. They said that that could not possibly be true. I went to the Parliamentary Library and asked for information. The paper trail showed that the Parliamentary Library went to Land Information New Zealand sought advice from the Minister and decided not to provide it. The Minister then came to the House—not once not twice but three times—and asserted that he was correct. 
He went even further. I produced a 1993 report from the Department of Conservation stating that less than 1 percent of the foreshore and seabed was privately owned. The Minister said that was garbage yet we know now he had information in his hands at that very time and knew all those things were incorrect. 
He went even further. Today in the House he said that it was not a question on notice. It was! We can check the record. He had 3 hours to check and read the one-page report which he had specifically received from Land Information New Zealand to find out that he had been misleading this Parliament. 
There is a longstanding principle that if one misleads the House one comes to the House to apologise and correct the record. It is extremely serious that even today—9 months later—the only person who will admit that the Minister was wrong is the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister said that he made a mistake. Why does the Minister for Land Information not have the courage to come— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I withdraw and apologise. Why does he not come to the House to correct the record? The Prime Minister said that it was an innocent mistake. Well well well! The record shows something very different. 
I want to know why the Government has two different standards for Lianne Dalziel and John Tamihere. We know! This is a weak Prime Minister who is so much at risk with her Maori constituency that she will allow any low standard of ministerial accountability. There is no standard any more; otherwise if John Tamihere were a man of honour he would resign his portfolio. It is absolutely clear— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was standing outside listening to that speech. It is absolutely out of order to suggest that a member lacks honour. That member just did that and you did not stop him. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I have already pulled up the member for using the words “lack of courage”. I think that the Minister has a good point. Honour can actually refer to courage and often it does in different instances. I ask the member to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I withdraw. Is it not interesting that Lianne Dalziel— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You required the member to withdraw and apologise. He did not. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I was under the impression that the member had withdrawn and apologised. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I am happy to withdraw and apologise. Trevor Mallard is so sensitive about covering up for mates like John Tamihere who gave three lots of conflicting answers. Lianne Dalziel did the honourable thing. Why is John Tamihere not following? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: He’s a Maori. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: My colleague Gerry Brownlee has put his finger on the button. There are two different standards in this Government. John Tamihere should go. [ 
Interruption 
]