Mallard TrevorRt Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Speaker): Thank you Madam Chair. I want to start off this debate before we get on to some of the issues which are clearly more focused by thanking David Wilson the Clerk of the House and Rafael Gonzalez-Montero for the work that they have done in building organisations that I think serve this place very well. They don't get credit in the way they should; their teams don't get credit in the way they should. And I think the way that change has occurred after the election contrasted with the way things happened after the previous election we were not perfect but a lot closer to it and the way that this place was able to operate during the COVID emergency was something which was pretty special and actually world-leading as far as democratic institutions are concerned. I do want to say thank you to them for that.I want to say it's good to be here in this Chamber and have the ability to debate. It takes I think someone pretty special to make a totally out-of-order debate during a general debate someone with a different set of values and a different moral compass to make a set of allegations in an out-of-order way in a general debate when the person who is being attacked has no ability to reply. I say it is good to be here and have the ability to discuss these issues.Chris Bishop: You could have come to the committee.Rt Hon TREVOR MALLARD: The member says I could have come to the committee. I asked for that committee to come forward—I asked for the committee to come forward. I changed the time of the committee because Mr Bishop wasn't prepared to come in the morning because he had something more important to do. We changed the time to suit him. We extended the committee—we extended the committee before Christmas. Why did we extend it? Because the National Party asked. We had Pacific speakers around the Pacific waiting on a Zoom call because Mr Bishop wanted the committee to extend. For him to say that I didn't attend the committee is just untrue—just untrue—and that member I think needs to settle down; settle down a little bit and we'll get on with it.I have apologised for a mistake which I made. I shook the man's hand in September. The paperwork was completed in December. But my mistake doesn't erase the fact that there were serious allegations from staff members that had to be taken seriously. I have a duty of care to make sure that staff are safe. I believe in taking a victim-centred approach and I want to be really careful about causing further distress for the three or more women who have suffered serious sexual assaults as a result of working here. I just say that not listening to the general manager when he pleaded for those women when he told the committee the pressure that they were under—every time this was raised by the Opposition is something which I very much regret.The Francis Review is something which was very important. It highlighted some culture issues here and since that time what we've done is have within this Parliament a group of people who have worked really hard to make it better. Now I want to acknowledge the chair of the committee both chairs actually—the chair of this committee and the other committee—for the work that they've done. I do want to acknowledge the Hon Anne Tolley for the work that she has done because the work that she has done will make a difference long term.I want to thank Paula Bennett for the work that she did in championing women who had been sexually assaulted. I didn't always agree with her and I don't think she always got it right but she was there for those women and that's something which I think is very very important. But some people are working on making this place feel safe and then there are others. Chris Bishop: Ha ha!Rt Hon TREVOR MALLARD: The member might think that's funny. The member might think that serious sexual assault and not supporting the victims of it is funny but I don't. Mr Bishop this is not a school debating society; this is something where at least three—Chris Bishop: Answer the questions.Rt Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I will answer the questions. I've got all night to answer the questions and I will but what I'm going to do is lay out some context and say that his ongoing behaviour has caused distress to a number of women and he's been asked to stop and he hasn't. I believe the victims—I believe the victims. I believe in the most important case the one around which the court has been focused the second internal investigation done by individuals who were not involved in the first investigation who are not involved in the culture of cover-up that appears to be supported by members opposite and I believe the police. Now people have to make a choice. Do they believe the victim the results of the independent internal investigation and the police or do they believe the person on which Mr Bishop relies? That's a call to be made. It's a value judgment—it's a value judgment—and people have got to make a decision on who they support. But I start by standing with the victims of this. I want to as part of this just make it absolutely clear that the investigation that was done first under the old Parliamentary Service administration was a disgrace—it was an absolute disgrace. The woman involved was put back to work with the man who sexually assaulted her. That was the decision of the previous administration. That is the sort of human resources approach that in my opinion belongs in the previous century and quite a long way back there.I want to go to some of the questions that members have asked. The member is right. I have indicated to him that I worked out within about 24 hours that there had been an association with an individual for whom it was inappropriate. Now I do not agree with the characterisation that Mr Bishop has given that particular individual and my comments that it ruined a person's life that I caused the heartbreak and agony for the complainant. I don't believe the stuff that he posted on Facebook about destroying a man's life. That man's life was destroyed when he sexually assaulted a woman. That's what did it. And I want to reiterate I will support the woman and what she said I will support the investigation that found that he seriously assaulted her and I will support the police—and I will support the police and their investigation and the results of that.Going to the questions from Mr Woodhouse the matter is relatively simple. There are actually as far as that individual is concerned two complainants and there are at least three separate incidents involving three separate women and at least two perpetrators of serious sexual assault.