10. Question No. 10—Prime MinisterCHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Prime MinisterQuestion No. 10—Prime Minister10. CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his appointment of Wally Haumaha as Deputy Commissioner of Police and does Mr Haumaha still enjoy his confidence?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Acting Prime Minister): An inquiry into the appointment process is now under way and I have confidence in Mary Scholtens QC's ability to run a fair process. It would not be appropriate for me to comment during that inquiry.Chris Bishop: Why was Wally Haumaha appointed as deputy commissioner when he was asked in the interview process by the State Services Commission words to the effect of Is there anything in your past that would embarrass the Government?" to which he answered "No."?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: With respect to those matters that may relate to the inquiry I can't comment other than to say there's one aspect that I can comment on and that is this: Mr Haumaha received two significant promotions under the National Party and an honours. I suppose at that point in time some of us thought well the due diligence had been done and we could have confidence in the National Party's judgment.Chris Bishop: Why was Wally Haumaha appointed when he was not the preferred candidate of the State Services Commission interview panel that interviewed him?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Again a very distinguished woman with qualifications of course Mary Scholtens QC will determine the process and give us a report on that and at that point—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Because he's a mate.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No Mary Scholtens is not a mate of mine. She's married to a former National Party Minister. Didn't know that did he—didn't know that did he? So we'll await her wise opinion when we get the report.Chris Bishop: In relation to the Scholtens inquiry why did the Government scale back the Government inquiry into his appointment from a short and sharp inquiry that would only take six weeks when officials originally recommended an inquiry of three months at a cost of $840000?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I think the answer to that is so obvious. We are a very frugal Government. We're famous for looking after the taxpayer's money the same way we look after our own—very Scottish in that fact. I just want to say $800000 was far too much and so we've reached a much more reasonable accommodation.Chris Bishop: Has he asked the Rt Hon Winston Peters why he told Parliament he was invited to the celebration of Mr Haumaha's promotion to assistant commissioner of police by the police and the Government of the day when the evidence shows he was invited by the marae which Mr Haumaha is the chairman of?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: At this point in time there's no such evidence on the last claim that Minister made just like there was none yesterday. Now let me just say this here: at the marae were all the police heads at the time and a number of political parties. I just happened to be one of them. I got there—because I was a very busy man—well after the event started and was seated at the direction of the police. That's why I had the assumption that they were involved in its organisation.Chris Bishop: In relation to that final answer was he invited to the marae to Wally Haumaha's celebration by the marae?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: In that context I think the answer's almost compellingly no but as some members will know here in Māoridom we're very much a wanted guest sometimes—not always because of the effect of what our message might be but nevertheless because it's important that they hear all sorts of views. That was the reason I assume I was invited.Chris Bishop: So if he wasn't invited by the Government of the day he wasn't invited by the police and as he just said he wasn't invited by the marae who invited him to the celebration of Wally Haumaha's promotion to assistant commissioner?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The first thing that member's going to have to do is get some cultural understanding. A marae can be a building a marae can be a complex or a marae can be all the people and the complex all put together. So in that context it's very difficult to know—I know the building didn't invite me but as to who on the marae had the foresight and wisdom to invite me I don't quite know. That said that member yesterday promised a revelation. When are we going to hear it?Chris Bishop: What is the difference between Meka Whaitiri who was stood down as a Minister once an investigation commenced into alleged inappropriate behaviour towards a staff member and Wally Haumaha whose alleged bullying behaviour towards civil servants is now the subject of two—and possibly soon three—inquiries and why will he not stand Mr Haumaha aside?SPEAKER: I'm going to make a minor amendment to the question and make it "public servant" so we have a New Zealand not a UK context and ask the Acting Prime Minister to answer it.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Can I just say the member actually gave the answer in his question—he said "alleged". In this country people are presumed innocent. We have an inquiry going on now into the process that appointed Mr Haumaha a twice-promoted police member under the National Party and an honours recipient under the National Party.Chris Bishop: Why did he stand Meka Whaitiri aside as a Minister when the allegations against her were only alleged and how does that differ from Mr Haumaha?SPEAKER: I'm going to get the member to try again at the beginning of the question: "Why did the Prime Minister" not "Why did he".Chris Bishop: Why did the Prime Minister stand Meka Whaitiri aside as a Minister when the allegations against her were only allegations and how does that differ from the allegations against Mr Haumaha?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The Prime Minister in the Meka Whaitiri case had the benefit of a report. In the case of Mr Haumaha the inquiry is still being done and so as the member said yesterday I can also reveal that we will wait till the report's out."