7. Labour - New Zealand First Coalition—Coalition DocumentsHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) to the Prime MinisterLabour - New Zealand First Coalition—Coalition Documents7. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her statements?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes in the context in which they were eloquently made.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Given her statements yesterday that of course some of my staff have been privy" to the 33-page unpublished coalition document do those staff still hold copies of the document and are they employed by Ministerial Services?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The Prime Minister was referring to material gleaned by members of her staff in preparation for the coalition agreement. All of that material is not subject to the Official Information Act because it was—Hon Steven Joyce: Didn't answer the question.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I'm getting to it.Hon Simon Bridges: Hurry it up. You haven't got all day.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well I have actually when you're around. Can I make it very clear what the Prime Minister has said about the matters which have been the subject of some artificial and constructed controversy. None of that material is official. None of that material is currently part of the eight-page document on the coalition agreement. But there are obviously side papers that we are working on in the future and when that material is known and completed and evaluated and budgeted it'll be announced.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a small pedantic point but I know how you are on these things. Should the Minister answering for the Prime Minister say "on behalf of the Prime Minister" or then speak in the third person? It makes a difference in the Hansard.Mr SPEAKER: I understand that it does and it has been a matter that another pedant has raised in the past. He's currently sitting in the Chair and I think he had a number of rulings that allowed for some flexibility on behalf of the Ministers answering for other Ministers.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well perhaps he could use his better judgment now in his own favour. That would be a good thing. In reference to her statement yesterday that her Minister of Finance holds a copy of the 33-page unpublished coalition document does she have confidence in him to ensure that he does not circulate that document to other Ministers or Ministerial Services employees or contractors or secondees in his office?Clayton Mitchell: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just on another pedantic matter the Minister asked a question referring to the Prime Minister as a "he" with "his". I think if we're going to be pedantic we should actually stick to the rules of asking questions.Mr SPEAKER: Right no. Let's—Hon Gerry Brownlee: I'm sorry Mr Speaker. My apologies. I am just so enamoured of the testosterone power of the current Government so I do apologise. I should have said "her". I'll say it again. In reference to her statement yesterday that her Minister of Finance holds a copy of the 33-page unpublished coalition document is she confident that he has not circulated the document to any other Minister or to any Ministerial Services employee contractor or secondee who might be in his office or other Ministers' offices?Mr SPEAKER: Before I ask the Prime Minister to reply I just want to indicate that I think the first part of the reply should indicate whether in fact the Minister of Finance does hold the document as Minister of Finance because it will make a difference as to further supplementaries.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: My answers whilst the questions are sustained are on behalf of the Prime Minister. I made that very clear on my first answer and I didn't think I had to repeat it every time. My answer for the Prime Minister though is this: not in his position as the Minister of Finance. That was not what the Prime Minister said yesterday and no amount of trying to reconstruct the Prime Minister's words will take away from the fact that she said Mr Robertson was privy to it because he was central to the negotiations for the whole time.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Is the 33-page unpublished coalition document located in any ministerial device or hard drive?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Could the member help me out by giving us a description of what a "ministerial device" is.Mr SPEAKER: Before the member goes on we will treat that as a point of order rather than having questions going the other way. Responding to the point of order the Hon Gerry Brownlee.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well thank you very much Mr Speaker. I appreciate that in his very very long decades-old career here the Deputy Prime Minister acting on behalf of the Prime Minister today has not been in office that often or often enough to appreciate what it might be. But it is essentially—perhaps maybe I should reword the question to make it easier for the gentleman.Mr SPEAKER: I think if one sort of winds back the sarcasm in it and just asks the question again—Hon Gerry Brownlee: There's no sarcasm in a question that asks: is the 33-page unpublished coalition document located in any ministerial communications device smart phone or hard drive of any type or a safe?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: First of all I'm not answering on behalf of the Prime Minister posing as a male for the umpteenth time which was the expression that the member repeated again. The second thing is that if we're going to take a long attack I want to tell that member I'll be around long after he's gone. And the third thing I want to say is that this was all done before the Government was formed and that is the only matter you're entitled to ask about.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Is the 33-page unpublished coalition document currently located in any of the ministerial communication devices be they handheld or on a hard drive or in any safe in any ministerial office?Mr SPEAKER: I'm going to interrupt now because my view is that the location of a non-ministerial document is not something that makes it a ministerial document. For example I used to keep my personal cheque book in the ministerial safe; that did not make it a ministerial document. I know members kept their lunch in the ministerial fridges and that did not make them ministerial matters. I'm saying to the member that I'm going to rule his question out—[Interruption] I beg your pardon? Nick Smith will withdraw and apologise.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Mr Speaker I withdraw and apologise. Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: If the member's going to—I haven't finished my ruling yet but what I was ruling is that I'm going to give the member one last chance without penalty to phrase the question in a way that involves ministerial responsibility. As has been shown in a number of jurisdictions the fact that something personal has passed through a ministerial computer does not make it a ministerial document. Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It might be an appropriate ruling for the Ombudsman as to whether a document that's held on a ministerial phone or document is not necessarily an official document for the purposes of that Act but I think you are going beyond your role as Speaker in saying that a Minister cannot be asked about any matter that relates to things that are funded for the public purpose in terms of being in a ministerial office—Mr SPEAKER: OK. I'm quite satisfied on that and I think that just about every member of this House—or those who've been Ministers—will have received material from family members from constituents on their devices which have been owned by Ministerial Services. That does not make that correspondence ministerial responsibility.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr Speaker thank you for those interesting clarifications. I'll change tack. Does the Prime Minister stand by her statement "Our office will be investigating how to apply a royalty specifically to water bottlers following advice from trade officials today that such a royalty would be in breach of our current and proposed free-trade agreements." and does this mean the unpublished coalition document will now be even shorter even without further font changes?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The Government's position is that there are many alternatives to arrive at the kind of result that a royalty would impose upon any taker of water. One could assume that like every other sovereign nation and every country that sets its own royalties we're working precisely on that as we speak.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does the Prime Minister therefore disagree with the legal team in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade who have made it very clear today that applying such a royalty would be a breach of current and future—including this comprehensive Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement—illegal?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The problem with that non-legal interpretation of a witness at a select committee is that the witness said "could". The witness did not say "would" and there if you've got any legal training is a substantial difference."