English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:629;Page:1875] 
2.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
 to the  
Minister for Tertiary Education 
: Has he as Minister for Tertiary Education at any time raised concerns with any agency about the validity of audit reports produced about Te Wananga o Aotearoa; if not why not? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister for Tertiary Education) 
: 
 I raised concerns with the Minister of Education and the Office of the Auditor-General about the timing of these reports soon after I became the Minister. I am advised that previous Ministers raised concerns about their validity. By the time I become the Minister of course one was moving on to issues of resolution of the wananga. 
Hon Bill English 
: Is the Minister aware that the Auditor-General has now raised doubts about the audit opinions signed off by himself on the annual financial statements of the wananga for 2003? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I have seen media reports to that end and that Mr Brady said he had no excuse for signing off of flawed audits. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: What would the Minister say about the efficacy of the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit if he were told that it had informed the Education and Science Committee on 20 October 2004 that it had no particular concerns about the financial affairs of Te Wananga o Aotearoa yet within 6 months that organisation was in serious financial difficulty? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: To some extent the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit was relying upon the audited reports. In hindsight it is clear that that advice was not good advice. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister understand the problems it creates for Parliament when the Auditor-General has now admitted he probably should not have signed off the 2003 financial statements given that his own report later on and tabled in this Parliament found that there were unspecified contracts disputes over the ownership of assets and potentially illegal transactions in the wananga but Parliament’s own watchdog signed off the accounts as true and fair? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Yes; of course I am not responsible for the Auditor-General. He is an officer of Parliament not a Government employee. What I am responsible for is the actions that I took against considerable criticism from members opposite that led to the resignation of the chief executive of the wananga. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Could it be that one of the reasons for the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit’s assessment of the financial affairs of the wananga at that time was that the wananga had established in 2003 an audit and risk committee that included two external members one of whom was a certain Shane Jones? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: It did indeed set up such a committee. It is my recollection it was chaired by Mr John Storey who I think is probably widely respected on all sides of this House. The committee made a number of recommendations. I am advised by Mr Jones that the wananga consistently ignored the recommendations from the audit and risk committee and that was one of the reasons why Mr Jones resigned from that committee. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: How has the Crown addressed the breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi identified by the Waitangi Tribunal including the failure to ensure that a partnership agreement between the Crown and wananga was concluded and that the Crown undermined its rangatiratanga—authority—and effectively took control of the institution? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I do not accept that last part. If we had effectively taken control the problems would not have arisen. With respect to partnership it takes two to tango. In this case we rather more engaged in dirty dancing I think. 
Hon Bill English 
: How did the Minister and his officials for 2 years overlook a serious conflict of interest for Deloitte’s as the auditor of the wananga and the Crown adviser; a conflict so bad that the Auditor-General said yesterday he has effectively sacked Deloitte’s from the audit contract for the wananga? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I would emphasise that the Auditor-General stated in his view that the appearance at least of a conflict of interest had not contributed to the failure to spot problems. I am not responsible for the issues around the audit given of course that there was a separation between the Hamilton office doing the audit and Mr McNally from the Christchurch office of Deloitte’s. 
Hon Bill English 
: Does the Minister accept he is responsible for the appointment of a Deloitte’s senior partner as the Crown adviser in the wananga right through this period; that that adviser was in a conflict of interest with his own company which was the auditor and that has left Parliament in the position where the Auditor-General has had to own up to breaking his own rules and signing an audit opinion he should not have signed? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That last statement is incorrect. It is clear: the Auditor-General stated to the select committee on the basis of reports I have that even if there were a conflict of interest that was not the cause of the problems surrounding the audits. In the case of the first question the answer is clearly no. I suggest the member remind himself when I became the Minister for Tertiary Education. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why now that the Government is running the wananga have the financial accounts for the year ended December 2004 not yet been finalised or signed off by the Auditor-General? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Government is not running the wananga. The council of the wananga is running the wananga and it is moving to get a full council in place. When that full council is in place some of the issues raised by my colleague Mr Flavell will be able to be discussed between the Government and the wananga. The Auditor-General is responsible for that audit and the Auditor-General is an Officer of Parliament not an officer of mine. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why did the Government appoint a Crown manager called a Crown manager who has control of the cheque book if it was not the Crown’s intention to have significant control of the wananga and can he answer the question about why the accounts for the 2004 year have still not been signed off 15 months after the end of the financial year? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The purpose of a Crown manager is to address the problems that led to the various things that the member is talking about. I am satisfied that the wananga’s financial management is now considerably better than it was in 2003 2004 and 2005. The Auditor-General yesterday declined to give the member the reasons for this—I do not know what they are.