Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 10 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11848. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour)to theMinister of Finance: Given his statement yesterday that “Solid Energy was another example of where the incoming National Government had to clean up a mess left by the previous Government” what was the level of debt held by Solid Energy on 30 June 2008 compared with the level of debt on 30 June 2012 and what is the total amount of dividends received by the Crown from Solid Energy since he became Minister of Finance?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):The amounts are $15 million $295 million and $163.9 million respectively.Hon David Parker: Is the Minister of Finance aware that the Labour Government never approved of Solid Energy’s lignite developments because of dubious economics and greenhouse gas emissions and that he the Minister turned the first sod on Solid Energy’s lignite plant; and how is that the previous Labour Government’s fault?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I think the member is mixing up a couple of projects there. One is the briquette plant for which I did turn the first sod because it created jobs in a community where 400 jobs had been lost. I know of course that the Opposition was against the new jobs in Mataura even though a whole lot of the people in Mataura vote for the Labour Party. Now I am asking them why.Hon David Parker: I seek leave to table a photograph of Mr English and a sod.Mr SPEAKER: Order! No I am not prepared to put that leave.Hon David Parker: Is the Minister aware that his National Government encouraged Solid Energy to expand its coal operations take on more debt and pay out higher dividends all in the face of a falling coal price; and how is that the fault of the previous Labour Government?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have to say that Solid Energy did not need any encouragement. It had very large-scale plans for expansion which the current Government disagreed with. Of course we could have moved faster to slow down Solid Energy’s investment but when we did move the Labour Party organised a protest on the steps of Parliament which means that we do not take its complaints about this very seriously.Hon David Parker: I seek leave to table a document of Mr Brownlee’s—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am not prepared to entertain this any further. Would the member continue with his supplementary questions if he has any.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Is it now out of order to table photographs that are inconvenient to the Government?Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is questioning a previous ruling.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Is it out of order for members to seek leave to table photographs in this Parliament?Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have given a substantial ruling on the tabling of documents. If a document is of assistance to members and gives them further good information I will allow the leave to be put. In this case the member is attempting to play politics with a couple of photographs. I told him I would not put that leave. He continued his point of order which is an abuse of the privilege of a point of order and will lead to disorder.Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption ]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has a right to raise a point of order and it will be heard in silence.Hon Trevor Mallard: My point of order is that we have had a Minister denying the promotion of coal and a member trying to table a document that was promoted by a current Minister of the House and described as “Sexy Coal”. It seems inappropriate not to allow a document entitled “Sexy Coal” to be tabled.Mr SPEAKER: Again that member is now disputing a ruling I have already given and I will take that very seriously if it happens again. Question No. 7.Hon David Parker: Supplementary question.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I had called Catherine Delahunty for Question No. 7.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. What happened before was that David Parker was raising a point of order with you when you indicated that you did not want to hear it so you moved on to the next question.Mr SPEAKER: That is exactly right.Chris Hipkins: He had further supplementary questions. He had not at any point indicated to you that he had finished. Are you now saying that if you do not like something that is going to happen you are just going to discontinue the question and move on? That is wrong.Mr SPEAKER: No the member is quite right—that is exactly what I am saying. If we are going to get into a situation—[Interruption ] Order! If we are going to get into a situation where I detect that a member is creating disorder then I will move on. On this occasion I will allow David Parker to finish his supplementary questions.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You said in your ruling that you had relied upon a previous Speaker’s ruling. Can you tell us what that ruling is please.Mr SPEAKER: No I did not say I had relied on a previous Speaker’s ruling. I said I had given a very substantive ruling some 2 or 3 months ago. I will send a copy to the member so he is fully aware of it.Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry. If I can just make it clear it was a previous ruling of the current Speaker not a ruling of the previous Speaker that the Speaker was referring to.Mr SPEAKER: And that is not a point of order. I have allowed David Parker to continue with his line of questioning.Hon David Parker: Given the Minister of Finance’s statement on Monday about Labour’s criticism of his Government around Solid Energy and the Future Investment Fund when he said “They need to show us who they’re going to borrow the money off which foreign bankers are going to lend us the money.” if his Government provides a loan to Solid Energy that is not from the Future Investment Fund will the Government borrow for the loan or is he just going to print the money?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Just as with student loans we will be borrowing for it.Hon David Parker: Which is correct: that Treasury officials made a mistake reading the Cabinet minutes and appropriated $100 million from assets sale proceeds to “Solid Energy recovery facilities” seemingly without Cabinet authority and that this $100 million mistake was replicated in multiple Cabinet and Budget documents that he and other Ministers checked over and signed off in the lead-up to the Budget somehow all missing the $100 million error; or that he is once again covering up for the misrepresentations by the Prime Minister who feigned ignorance because he did not want to associate the Future Investment Fund with his Government’s mismanagement of Solid Energy?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The second assertion is nonsense and the answer to the first one is that Treasury did not describe correctly what Cabinet had decided.Mr SPEAKER: Just before I call the member the ruling I gave for the benefit of the Rt Hon Winston Peters was given on 19 February 2013. The Clerk has found a copy and we will pass that to the member for his information.