Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:13917. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to thePrime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Metiria Turei: Would it not be wiser for him to reserve his decision regarding confidence in John Banks until after the courts have decided whether he has committed criminal fraud?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not have the luxury of doing that. The member asked me the question now.Metiria Turei: Does the fact thatSkycity’s Chief Executive Officer Nigel Morrison was a witness in John Banks’ preliminary hearing and is likely to give evidence if there is a future criminal trial affect his confidence in John Banks’ ability to make an objective decision about the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill?Hon Judith Collins: It’s outrageous. This is before the courts.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I will kindly follow the member’s advice. The matter is before the courts and I will not be discussing it.Metiria Turei: Has the Prime Minister been advised in writing by John Banks that he has a potential conflict of interest in relation to the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I cannot recall getting a record of that but I would need to check my files.Metiria Turei: Will the Prime Minister require John Banks to formally advise him that a conflict exists as theCabinet Manualrequires given that the Skycity chief executive officer could be required to give evidence in court about John Banks and that the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill relies on John Banks’ single vote to pass?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Look the matter is before the courts and I do not intend to make any hypothetical assessment of it.Metiria Turei: How can he consider that John Banks does not face a conflict of interest when the chief executive officer of Skycity needs Mr Banks’ single vote to ensure that the casino secures a massive increase in business and that same Skycity chief executive officer is in court giving evidence that could sink John Banks’ political career?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not accept the proposition from the member.Metiria Turei: I seek leave to table a document produced for me by the Parliamentary Library identifying two members of Parliament who have abstained from voting because of conflicts of interest—Mr SPEAKER: Order! If it is the voting record of this Parliament then it is freely available to members.Hon David Cunliffe: Does the Prime Minister have confidence in the Minister of Conservation given his statement: “I expect high standards from my Ministers … if they don’t meet the standards I set then I will obviously take action if necessary”; and if it is proven that the Hon Nick Smith’s statements around the dates he was first briefed on theRuataniwha dam issue and the submission from the Department of Conservation are incompatible with the truth as evidenced by the Minister’s own weekly reports will he ask the Minister to resign?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question I have confidence in the Minister.Hon David Cunliffe: Given his refusal to express confidence in his Minister is it within the high standards he expects of Minister Nick Smith to ensure that the Minister has bent over backwards to get his department not to stand in the way of special interests making massive windfall gains from this partially publicly funded project?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: My assessment of the Leader of the Opposition’s portrayal of this event is very much like that of his regional statistics. He is making it up.Metiria Turei: Is the Prime Minister seriously telling this House that he is genuinely unconcerned about allowing one of his Ministers who is dependent on the Skycity chief executive officer who could make or break that Minister’s political career to have the deciding vote on a deal that is worth more than $400 million to the Skycity Casino? Is it really of no concern to you?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not accept the proposition from the member about the Skycity convention centre which I understand these days the Labour Party is now supporting quietly.Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 5 Brendan Horan. [Interruption] Order! The level of noise coming from this particular corner is getting to the stage when I will have no choice but to pick one of the noisiest and ask that person to leave.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I might be able to help explain some of the noisiness because the Prime Minister is just making things up in his answers—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order and the member will be very lucky to see the balance of question time.Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can you explain how the Prime Minister has responsibility for the Labour Party’s policies; if not why was that comment—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. If the members continue to raise invalid points of order if they continue to do that I will be asking them to leave.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise a point of order under Standing Order 383(2) about the Prime Minister’s last answer where he included a matter that he is not responsible for which was entirely incorrect and not relevant to the question.Mr SPEAKER: I invite the member to go back and look at the question that was asked. It was a question with opinion.Hon David Cunliffe: Speaking to the point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: No. If it is a fresh point of order I will hear it but if the member is now questioning my point of order then I will be asking the member to leave. So if it is a fresh point of order I will hear it but I want to be quite clear—Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a fresh point of order. I seek your guidance as to the difference between a ruling that says that a point of order is not a point of order and a ruling that says that a point of order on a matter like for example Standing Order 383 is a point of order but one that you do not find meets your threshold. What is the difference?Mr SPEAKER: The member is now questioning my ruling. I invited Grant Robertson and I invite the member to have a look atHansard. When a question is asked it should equally be short and concise. But when it is asked and it includes quite a lot of additional prose it will likely get a political answer back.Grant Robertson: Point of order Mr Speaker—Mr SPEAKER: Is this a fresh point of order?Grant Robertson: Yes it is Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Does it in any way question my earlier rulings with—Grant Robertson: Mr Speaker—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member resume his seat. If the member wants to raise a fresh point of order I will hear it but if it in any way questions a decision I have just made in the last 5 minutes then the member will be leaving the Chamber.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise a point of order under Standing Order 383(2) and make clear that the answer the Prime Minister was giving was to a question from Metiria Turei. It was not a question from this side of the House. The Prime Minister then introduced material that was irrelevant and under Standing Order 383(2) he was out of order and you should have ruled him out of order.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I accept the point that the supplementary question was from Metiria Turei. I equally now invite both the Hon David Cunliffe and Grant Robertson to study that question. It was a very loaded question when it was asked and it got a political answer back.Hon David Cunliffe: Point of order Mr Speaker—Mr SPEAKER: Can I just clarify again. I just—[Interruption] Order! This is a point of order but I just want to give Mr Cunliffe exactly the same warning that I gave Mr Robertson. If it is a fresh point of order I will hear it. If it is in any way attempting to question or to relitigate what I have just determined then the member will be leaving the Chamber for the balance of question time. Fresh point of order—Hon David Cunliffe: Clarifying the point Mr Speaker—Mr SPEAKER: No I am not accepting clarification of a point. I have ruled.Hon David Cunliffe: Then I decline to raise the point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: The member can certainly raise a point of order but it must be a fresh point of order.