Lee MelissaGENERAL DEBATEMELISSA LEE (National): I move That the House take note of miscellaneous business.It's a great honour to rise after my sisters have risen to celebrate Suffrage Day and I don't want to do any disservice to any of them but I recognise that this is a general debate and I need to get to the point I want to make in the general debate. But before I do so I'd like also to acknowledge the gratitude that I have to Kate Sheppard and also to someone who has actually paved the way. Pansy Wong was the first ever Asian—Chinese—member of Parliament elected back in 1996. Apparently I made history by becoming in 2008 the first ever Korean woman to hold office outside of Korea. So I take great privilege and for the record I'm No.105—105.Earlier in the debate my colleague Jo Hayes actually quoted something that Rt Hon Dame Jenny Shipley said talking about fighting for something instead of each other. When I talk about the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) and the former Minister Hon Clare Curran I want people to know that I'm not fighting her; I'm actually fighting for the transparency and the openness that she promised and I actually want to get to that.Today I'm a little bit disturbed that there was actually a letter from the Chief Archivist that the right honourable Speaker tabled. I had a look at that and it actually quotes Papers and records deposited remain in the care of the Chief Archivist and unless the Minister depositing agrees in writing they remain in the ownership and control of the former Minister." Technically what that actually means is that every Gmail that this side of the House has questioned the particular Minister and also the Minister of State Services on in terms of transparency and openness in relation to the appointment of the Chief Technology Officer which they have now had to cancel in relation to Derek Handley—how it all transpired—all of that communication that is actually apparently transferred to the Chief Archivist is not available.The Minister Hon Clare Curran has to give permission in written form to say that she gives permission; otherwise the Chief Archivist cannot actually release it. So I urge the former Minister Hon Clare Curran to come down to this House and actually perhaps give a personal statement and perhaps table all of those Gmails that are being questioned in this House. That would be the only honourable thing that she could do. Otherwise as the Chief Archivist says Ms Curran may establish by agreement with the Chief Archivist conditions for access under section 42(3)(c) of the PRA the Public Records Act. That pretty much trumps any Official Information Act (OIA) request that we could use to try and get the information and that seems really really wrong. I think as the Minister actually promised openness and transparency—even the Prime Minister has actually supported that view—I urge the former Minister to table all of those Gmails so that we will get to the bottom of it finally.And what a shambles the actual appointment process has been. I mean there's been advertising that went out looking for the CTO they closed the application decided that the whole 60 people who applied for the job didn't actually meet the criteria for Clare Curran and then opened it up again a second time round and actually apparently she's found one—delayed the announcement delayed the announcement. There have been lots of OIAs and questions and we find out that she did in fact appoint the Chief Technology Officer even when the Prime Minister said that Derek Handley was still under consideration.So there are a lot of questions that need to be answered and it has been very very murky. Considering the fact that that Minister has actually promised that this Labour-led Government will be the most open most transparent Government ever it seems those words don't really mean anything. If that Minister was the Minister for open Government and she has done these shady activities using her personal Gmail—and as members have said using personal Gmail's OK as long as you actually abide by the rules and be transparent but she hasn't been. If she's doing that what else is that side doing?"