Peters Winston: Intelligence and Security Committee — MembershipText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11138. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First):Gerry Brownlee today corrected John Key’s misinformation earlier on in these series of questions. He said thatMr Key had been the beneficiary of multiple briefings. That was a sizable admission. On Monday the Prime Minister told the nation that this motion has “got nothing to do with what happened last week”. Mr Key of course had Mr Dunne leave the Intelligence and Security Committee on a technicality to use his words. He then told the media that Mr Dunne could not stay on the committee because he was no longer a Minister all of which we have demonstrated by reciting the Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996 as not being the case. So there you have got “Mr Spray and Walk Away” being caught out demonstrably palpably every day. John Key is spinning quicker than the blackjack wheels at Skycity Casino.The law is clear. That law of 1996 says that anyone who is a member of Parliament can be on the committee. John Key nominated Peter Dunne to sit on that committee not because he was a Minister but because he was propping up the Government and Mr Key trusted him. Be under no illusions here. Mr Dunne’s resignation from the Intelligence and Security Committee has everything to do with what happened last week. It is central to the whole story. Contained in the wording of this motion we are discussing today is a clear admission by the Prime Minister that he can no longer trust Mr Dunne on matters of national security. The question is whether we can trust the nominee Tony Ryall.The Prime Minister is leaving the House and the country in no doubt about who leaked the Kitteridge report and the question must now be asked: why did he go to such lengths as a Prime Minister to cover it up? Why did he choose David Henry? Did David Henry his inquirer not seek the powers to get to the truth or did Mr Key not give him the powers to get to the truth?Hon Member: Ha ha!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Those questions are fundamental and they are not laughing matters. I want to say this to those National members over there: how is it that one member of Parliament knows precisely how Peter Dunne leaked that Kitteridge report? How come one member of Parliament knows exactly how he did it and yet Mr Key claims he does not know and Mr Henry claims he does not know? In fact no one knows except for one member of Parliament who knows exactly how he did it.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Who’s that?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well that member is the one who has been giving this speech and that is why I am certain where I am going. Is it because what is in the report is so damaging—that is the report that should have been written about what Mr Dunne did—to Mr Key and his Government? For we know it is damaging to Mr Dunne. The material is comical and sad and it is also worthy of a psychological study. But we will get to that sometime in the future.But what Mr Key is doing is allowing and pervading a cover-up. Why has he appointed Tony Ryall to do Mr Dunne’s old job? It became apparent that the Prime Minister in his interviews is not just absolutely perplexed by this appointment but is set on spreading bulldust as wide as he can. This is not a case of the Prime Minister’s now famous brain fades. It is not a case of the Prime Minister getting lost in the detail. Rather it is indicative of John Key’s wilful irresponsible ignorance as the Minister in charge of the Government Communications Security Bureau to do his duty.The truth is he does not want to know so he does not have to share it. There is the corpse fingerprints blood on the floor DNA everywhere and no one but one member of Parliament knows how it was done. Mr Key does not want to spell out exactly who was leaking what and when. You see it was not just one leak. This person leaked the report on the morale of the Government Communications Security Bureau. There was a leak about the new head and appointment of the Government Communications Security Bureau. There were leaks about the review of the Government CommunicationsSecurity Bureau leaks about the briefing that was coming up on the Government Communications Security Bureau a leak about the Intelligence and Security Committee’s proceedings and other leaks as well. All those leaks and the Prime Minister and his colleagues over there who call themselves the National Party do not want to know.There is an acrid stench rising from those benches—an acrid stench of ignorance. They might be sitting there embarrassed but I am asking Mr Bennett over there from Hamilton why the people of Hamilton are not entitled to know that their millions of dollars in the security industry are being so blithely handled. Where would you get a Parliament where members of Parliament say: “We will put somebody on the committee who will do everything to serve our bidding and he will engage in the cover-up. He won’t ask who’s leaking. He won’t ask the import of these leaks. He won’t ask how embarrassing it is internationally. He’ll just sit there and make sure there is a cover-up.”?Mr Dunne is not qualified by his own actions already. This Parliament is asked to trust Mr Tony Ryall to go on the committee and represent it and to oversee the intelligence and security issues of this country. I have no confidence in Tony Ryall and the reason is that he is already involved in the cover-up. You have got two members of the committee who want to know more—Russel Norman and David Shearer—and now you have got a member of the committee who does not want to know and who wants to engage in the wilful ignorance.This has been a cover-up from the word go. Look at the terms of reference given to David Henry. There was no mention of Mr Henry having the power to access the information the electronic information and five sets of it—no reference about those powers whatsoever. Then you go to the Henry report page 2 and it is there—cheap obvious and not even clever. He says he could have got from the State Services Commissioner all the powers if it was a civil servant. He could have got—next paragraph—the support of the Prime Minister in respect of Cabinet Ministers. And then in the next paragraph he says that someone who came under suspicion was the leader of a political party. He did not say it was another Minister. Why did he distinguish that—Mr Dunne being the leader of a party and not a Minister? Because if you go down further you will see at bullet point 13 on page 2: “I remain of the view that I need to have full access to all 86 emails.” Why just those 86?There is much more here. The man has been leaking like a sieve. What the ramifications for our international reputation are we do not know. But over there we watch National members. They are telling the whole country—Mr Bennett Ms Adams over there and those from the South Island from the West Coast the member from Hawke’s Bay and the one from Dunedin; they are all there—by their inaction inertia and wanton behaviour that they do not want the taxpayer to know.Heavens it must be embarrassing to behave like that. It must be extraordinarily embarrassing to go on the hustings and say: “My No. 1 duty is to serve the country and look after the security of its people.” then come to the committee—Hon Tau Henare: Why don’t you like David Henry?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Oh yes oh yes Mr Henare is guilty as sin. He is another yes-man—another yes-man a “let’s pull the wool over my eyes” man. Boy I mean in the Māori world do you know what you would call that?Hon Annette King: What do you call it?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: It is a “c” word. It starts with “c” and ends with “e”. Mr Henare does that member want the powers to find out the truth? Mr Henare does that member there want the powers to have the truth? No. Does he want to know who leaked the report? No. Does he want to know why Winston Peters knows how he leakedthe report? Oh no he does not want to know that—he does not want to know that does he? No. Does he want to know why we spent all that money on—[Interruption ] Yes but does he want to know why we spent all that money on Mr David Henry and he never got to the truth? No. One last sentence: as Muhammad Ali would say if Mr Key even dreams that this is going away he should wake up and apologise.