4. Todd Barclay—Southland Electorate Office Allegations Prime Ministerial ConductGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Prime MinisterTodd Barclay—Southland Electorate Office Allegations Prime Ministerial Conduct 4. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in the House yesterday the statements made to me regarding this were reported to the relevant party official—that is on the record—and then to the police. It is a weird world when the Labour Party says that reporting a matter to the police is a cover-up"?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Foreign Affairs) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes although the Prime Minister should have been more precise in his response to the supplementary question and said "making a statement to the police" rather than "reporting a matter".Grant Robertson: Is it not in fact correct that he did not report the matter to the police about Todd Barclay recording his staff but rather that they asked to interview him because they had found out about his text confirming this during their investigation?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I hear the calls from across the House that this is a cover-up. Let me be very clear: the only cover-up in this country today is the immigration scam by the Labour Party for its campaign purposes.Mr SPEAKER: Order! That answer is not necessary to this particular question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It should be very apparent that he was asked a specific question to which he provided no answer at all but rather sought to attack the questioner on another matter. That is out of order.Mr SPEAKER: And if the member had watched me as soon as the Minister transgressed into an area that had nothing to do with him I rose to my feet and stopped the answer immediately. [Interruption] Order! I would be grateful if the interjections from both the Rt Hon Winston Peters and Ron Mark would cease. They have not stopped since question time started at 2 o'clock.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister was asked a question. Your stopping him does not answer the request from us to know what the answer to the question was.Mr SPEAKER: If the member spent less time interjecting and listened to the answer he would have realised that in fact the question was well addressed by the Minister before he diverted to another issue.Grant Robertson: Is it not in fact correct that the only reason he spoke to police about Todd Barclay recording his staff was because the police requested that?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Of course because the complaint was not made by Mr English and all of his dealings in this matter were made in his private capacity.Grant Robertson: In light of that answer why did the Prime Minister try to present yesterday that he had reported the matter to the police?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: If the member had heard the response to the primary question then it would have been made clear to him and he would be clear that there was imprecise language used.Grant Robertson: Why did his office not authorise the release of his statement to the police when they released the file of their work on the Todd Barclay investigation?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: There is no ministerial responsibility for that course of action.Grant Robertson: Who made the decision in his office—his prime ministerial office—not to authorise the release of his statement to the police?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It was not a matter for his prime ministerial office; it was a matter for him as an individual. He did not have that—[Interruption] Well all I can say at this point is that there was no ministerial responsibility in this case and there is no ministerial responsibility in this case.Grant Robertson: Can he not see that a person who knows for more than a year that there has been taping of a staff member in an MP's office who discloses that to police only when questioned who lies to the media about what he knew and who prevents the release of his statement to the police is involved in a cover-up?Mr SPEAKER: Order! No that question is completely out of order. To suggest that a member lies deliberately is out of order and again I refer members to a number of Speakers' rulings on page 48.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can you clarify for me—there have been previous rulings. You are correct—you are not allowed to say that a member has lied in this House—but there have been previous rulings about whether or not a member has lied in another setting. I said in my question that he had lied to the media. I did not accuse him of lying in this House.Mr SPEAKER: I will look further into the matter but at this stage I have ruled that question out as a question that effectively accuses another member of lying."