Points of Order — Call Seeking—Speaker’s Acceptance Privilege—Procedure for Raising Alleged Breaches 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Points of Order — Call Seeking—Speaker’s Acceptance Privilege—Procedure for Raising Alleged Breaches 
[Sitting date: 16 October 2012. Volume:684;Page:5795. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Points of Order 
Call Seeking—Speaker’s Acceptance 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Senior Whip—Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. A few moments ago—I just let the din settle down before I raise this point of order with you. A few moments ago the Prime Minister sought the call. He called “Mr Speaker”. He did not indicate at the time that he was calling a point of order. Mr Peters Mr Parker Mr Mallard and various others then sought to raise a point of order with you. Of course under the Standing Orders a point of order comes before all other business so even if you had granted the Prime Minister the call you would have been required to take the point of order from Mr Peters. I accept that that led to a testy exchange between members and that was unfortunate. However I do note on the Order Paper that Mr Peters does have a question down. It is a legitimate question—it is presumably along these lines—and I wonder whether you would consider allowing those members now that things have settled down to return to the House particularly so that these matters can be canvassed by way of questions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member knows full well that I do not ask many members to leave this House—in fact up until today only one member this year. I do not do it lightly. The only grounds under which the Speaker could have recognised the right honourable Prime Minister was for a point of order because there was no other provision for the Prime Minister to speak. Even for a ministerial statement the Prime Minister has to seek the Speaker’s—[ 
Interruption 
] Well the Prime Minister does not have to seek leave to make a ministerial statement but he does have to under a point of order give an explanation that he is making a ministerial statement. So a point of order was the only grounds under which the Prime Minister could have sought the call then and that is why I recognised it as a point of order. I was perfectly happy to let the members raise their points of order after that—after the House had dealt with the Prime Minister’s point of order. But I am not going to have that nonsense. The Rt Hon Winston Peters is a very experienced member. He knows full well that members who have questions on the Order Paper if they are required to leave the House—the Hon Trevor Mallard is back in the House and actually I accept he left voluntarily. I accept he left voluntarily. I note that. But members know experienced members know that if they have questions on the Order Paper and they are required to leave the House no one else can ask those questions. I am not about to change the rules. Members know the rules and members should think about that before they take the Speaker on like that. I was very happy to hear the member’s point of order at the appropriate time. [ 
Interruption 
] Order! I am on my feet. But the matter is dealt with. I feel sorry that the member has been dealt with in that way but I must say he was kind of fortunate he was not named for that performance today. 
Privilege—Procedure for Raising Alleged Breaches 
DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My point of order is that the Rt Hon Winston Peters wrote to you on 3 October 2012 with a reminder yesterday on 15 October 2012 concerning an investigation into a breach of parliamentary privilege by the right honourable Prime Minister— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Order! [ 
Interruption 
] Order! The member will resume his seat or he will be—the member will resume his seat. That has nothing to do with the proceedings of the House. Those matters are dealt with by a letter to the Speaker and the matter is being dealt with. It is not a matter to be dealt with—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! I am on my feet. The member will learn to respect that or he will be joining his leader. It is his choice just like I warned other members. It is their choice. They comply with my rulings or they leave the House. 
DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On that same matter surely the House is entitled to an explanation— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I have ruled on that matter and that is the end of the matter. I am sorry but all members have to be treated the same. The matter is not a matter legitimately raised by point of order in the House and that is the end of that matter. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I seek leave to table the letters to you from the Rt Hon Winston Peters. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave to table two letters to you from the Rt Hon Winston Peters one dated 3 October 2012 and one dated 15 October 2012 concerning a request for an investigation to be undertaken into a breach of parliamentary privilege by the Rt Hon John Key. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 






Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Would it be possible—I am asking as a member of the Privileges Committee on this occasion—for you to give the House an indication of when you might have concluded an answer to the request set out in the letter please? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Speaker receives such letters on a frequent basis. There is nothing unusual about that. In fact the Prime Minister’s response on this occasion was received yesterday and the matter is being considered today.