Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:633;Page:5115] 
6.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Has he seen the file note dated 30 August 2005 of a phone conversation at 9 a.m. between David Henry then Chief Electoral Officer and Mike Smith General Secretary of the New Zealand Labour Party; if so what was the advice Mr Henry passed on to Mr Smith about the Labour Party’s pledge card? 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 No. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Is he able to confirm that in the weeks leading up to the election Mr David Henry made approaches to both the Labour Party and the Tauranga National Party candidate Bob Clarkson to warn them about the need to stay under the Electoral Act’s spending caps and that while Mr Clarkson cancelled his planned advertising in order to stay within the law the Labour Party just kept on spending and ignored the warnings Mr Henry had given? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: As I have explained to the House before the Chief Electoral Officer is responsible for the preparation and conduct of parliamentary elections and the supervision of candidates’ expenses and donations. It is not appropriate for me to interfere in that process. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Nick Smith has just made an unparliamentary comment and I have taken offence. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Did the member make an unparliamentary comment? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I said they were corrupt cheats. That is nothing compared with what Mr Mallard— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Objection is taken. Would you please withdraw and apologise. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I do find it ironic that the Prime Minister specifically made exactly that allegation against Dr Don Brash earlier in the day. You chose to take no action and Mr Mallard chose to take no action. I would like to know why there is a differing standard between what you expect from one side of the House and what you expect from the other. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No there is no differing standard. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Well I ask that the Prime Minister be asked to withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I am sorry. You should have asked at the time and if you had I would have asked the Prime Minister to withdraw and apologise. Members have the solutions in their own hands. 
Tariana Turia 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. We did not hear Minister Burton in the response that he gave. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the Minister please repeat it. 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: The Chief Electoral Officer is responsible for the preparation and conduct of parliamentary elections and for the supervision of candidate selection expenses and donations. It would not be appropriate for me to interfere in his statutory responsibilities. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Has the Minister seen evidence of correspondence from the Exclusive Brethren Church to David Henry the then Chief Electoral Officer in which the Exclusive Brethren ask: “if it would compromise National’s position if we communicate to MPs and candidates our strategy and show them draft publications before they are published.” ? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: As I have said to a number of members who previously asked me about records and correspondence from the Chief Electoral Officer I do not routinely see them. It would not be appropriate to do so. But frankly it would not be a surprise to me if that were the case. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Is it a fact that nearly 3 weeks before the 2005 election Mr Henry told Mike Smith the Labour Party general secretary that the pledge card was an election expense regardless of who paid the bill; and does he find it disturbing that the Labour Party then went on to spend over $1 million in advertising after that conversation and breached the spending cap? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: Again I repeat for the member’s benefit that I am not in receipt of the correspondence or the file notes from the Chief Electoral Officer to any political party nor should I be. The statutory relationship between that officer and the Minister of Justice has to be kept at arm’s length. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does the Minister find it concerning that after the phone call of 30 August warning the Labour Party that it was breaching the law and a follow-up letter on 2 September confirming what the Chief Electoral Officer had previously said in a telephone discussion Labour went ahead and spent $585000 on newspaper advertising in the last 2 weeks of the campaign in flagrant disregard of his advice which led to a breach of the spending cap? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: It is another variation on the same question. The answer remains the same. It is not appropriate for me to be in receipt of the correspondence between that statutory officer and various members of Parliament. If I were I may well have received the document the member Lynne Pillay referred to regarding National Party expenditure. I did not receive that either. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Would he find it concerning that after again receiving a letter from the Chief Electoral Officer on 12 September instructing Labour that its arguments against his decision were spurious Labour spent $416000 on advertising in the final week of the campaign knowingly putting itself over the electoral spending cap; and would he not expect a party in that position to have tried to avoid overspending or to at least have shown some respect for the Chief Electoral Officer and his opinions on those matters? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: As the member understands I am sure by now I am not in receipt of that sort of information from the Chief Electoral Officer. Frankly if I were nothing I have heard today would concern me as much as the $1.2 million spent to buy an election on behalf of a political party. 
Lynne Pillay 
: I seek leave to table an email of 8 June 2005 from a group of Christian businessmen who had put together extensive publications throughout New Zealand about building trust in a Brash-led National Government. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Can the Minister of Justice confirm that if National were able to pay the $110000 GST receipt currently owed we would even then not breach the spending cap unlike his own party which because of its having dipped deeply into the taxpayer’s purse has well and truly breached the spending cap; and if he cannot answer that why does he claim to be the Minister of Justice who is responsible for electoral Acts? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: I cannot answer that for two reasons: firstly I do not have ministerial responsibility for electoral spending; and secondly I do not have access to a critical piece of the information—even if I wanted to—that the member referred to and that is the 80 percent of the National Party’s expenditure hidden inside trusts. I apologise; I would not want to mislead the House—it is 92 percent of the National Party expenditure that is buried and hidden in trusts. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does it concern the Minister of Justice that a Labour back-bencher can claim to have emails that transferred between the Exclusive Brethren and the Electoral Office which are available apparently for tabling in this House but that he himself claims he has no such knowledge of those various communications; and if in fact there is a breach of security around the Electoral Office will he offer his resignation to the House? 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: No but I can perhaps help the member and introduce him to a facility that is available to parliamentarians and is called the Official Information Act which is why some of the information his colleagues have is available for him to ask the very questions that he is asking.