Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:630;Page:2047] 
3.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Economic Development 
: What part has he played in general policy development as an Associate Minister for Economic Development since taking up the role? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS (Associate Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 I have been involved in the development of industry and regional development policy over several years. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Does the Associate Minister stand by his quoted statements in the lead article of the  
Independent 
 newspaper today? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: A number of statements were made in the article today. I say to this House that those statements were made from my experience as a member of the Far North District Council both as a councillor and a member of the hearings committee on the council over a number of years. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Is the Minister really telling the House that the extensive comments he made in the  
Independent  
article about the Whangamata marina which is about 200 kilometres south of the area of the Far North District Council and his comments about the ministerial veto in the Resource Management Act are to be believed given his role as a former Far North District councillor rather than as a member of this Government? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I say to that member: absolutely. That is the contribution I made and I made it quite clear to the journalist Tim Donoghue that I was commenting and observing through the process and the experience I had when I was a councillor and a member of the hearings committee—and sometimes on the other side as an applicant. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I wonder whether you could help the House and perhaps help the Minister in answering the question. It seems to me that the Minister is taking an odd position when on being questioned in the House about what he is quoted in the press as having said he says that he was speaking then not as a Minister but in some other capacity. It seems to me that as a member of this House the Minister has no opportunity to do that. He is a Minister of the Crown 24/7 365 days of the year. He cannot make a whole lot of comments he now wishes he had not made then turn up to the House and not be held to account for them because he says he was talking about being a district councillor. That is certainly not possible. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. 
Hon Annette King 
: What about when the member’s a private investigator? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No it is all right. I do not really need any assistance on this matter but I thank the member. I make two points in my ruling. First members are of course answerable only for comments they make in the course of their responsibilities as Ministers or Associate Ministers. Second I point out that many members have several capacities. For instance some are party leaders as well as being Ministers and as well as being members of the House. That is perfectly in order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: As the Associate Minister has brought his experience into the issue can he recall how many times while he was sitting on the Far North District Council the Hon Nick Smith told him and that council that he intended to repeal National’s Resource Management Act—was it 100 times 50 times 20 times or not at all? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry; that question is out of order. The Minister is responsible in this House only for his actions as a Minister. Does the member wish to rephrase the question? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Given that the Minister in his second answer today put his experience as a councillor at issue which is one of the experiences that was brought into an evaluation of matters in respect of the Resource Management Act today does he recall how many times while he was gaining that experience as a councillor that Nick Smith then in charge of the Resource Management Act promised to repeal the legislation—was it 100 times 50 times 20 times or never? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The member’s question is based on the premise that I was in charge of the Resource Management Act. At no time among the many ministerial portfolios I had was I the Minister for the Environment. I will be pleased to be put in that role in the next Don Brash Government. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I come back to the original ruling. The Minister is responsible only for his actions as a Minister not as a councillor. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Minister was allowed to give the second answer at which time he put at issue his experience which I think is very valuable experience. I wanted to know whether while he was gaining that experience he witnessed any intervention from the then Minister of Conservation who was in charge of significant portions of the Resource Management Act. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I ruled the question out of order. I will not go back on that. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: Can the Minister give examples of his involvement in economic development and policy making? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I have been involved in economic policy-making on behalf of the tangata whenua the Maori people of this country in advocating for the Hui Taumata in setting up economic development agencies right around this country and also in the promotion of Maori tourism throughout New Zealand—and right now 13 Maori tourism organisations make a valid contribution to the economy of this country. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: When he made his disparaging comments about the Hon Chris Carter to his colleagues in the Labour caucus room did he explain to them at the time that he was speaking as a previous Far North District Council councillor or had he forgotten to put on that hat at that moment? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: Let me say that I have never made disparaging comments about my colleague Chris Carter. I hold my colleague in the highest esteem and integrity and he and I have been friends for a long long time. It is a little different from that mob on the Opposition side of the House. I wonder what happens in their caucus when nobody is listening. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: In his role as Associate Minister for Economic Development how many reports has he managed to access from the Minister of Conservation’s office when it was in the charge of the Hon Nick Smith that set out to amend or repeal the Resource Management Act; is it 10 five or none? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: In my time as a district councillor and member of the hearings committee there certainly were a lot of comments relating to the Resource Management Act and also to the then Minister— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry but the Minister has heard me say that he is responsible only for matters in his capacity as Minister. The question was correctly put. Could the Minister please address the question. 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I have not heard any comments about Nick Smith. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: For the benefit of the member for Tauranga who is usually asleep at Cabinet I seek leave to table the—[ 
Interruption 
] I am sorry the previous member— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please be seated. I thought we were trying now not to make disparaging comments about other members when we raise points of order or ask questions. Would the member please put his point of order. If he wants to table a document he should please seek leave for that. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek leave to table the Owen McShane review done in 1998 of the Resource Management Act which included the recommendation that the ministerial veto of the Minister of Conservation be removed. It was supported by me at the time. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I think Nick Smith should be asked to withdraw and apologise first of all for making an allegation about Bob Clarkson and his ability to stay awake and second for misleading the House by saying he is a member of Cabinet which he will never be. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That was not a point of order. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Does the Hon Dover Samuels Associate Minister for Economic Development agree with Dover Samuels Far North District councillor in criticising Chris Carter’s “unfair” decision in respect of Whangamata and his statement that the ministerial veto of restricted coastal activities should be repealed? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. With respect if he is asked to compare two experiences one of which by the Standing Orders and your rulings is out of order there cannot be an answer to that question. 
Rodney Hide 
: You have ruled already that a member can ask for an opinion and can certainly ask for a Minister’s opinion of some other comment. That question is perfectly in order and the Minister is required to answer it. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: I draw your attention Madam Speaker to Speaker’s ruling 139/3 from Mr Speaker Kidd. He states: “The primary condition of asking a question of a Minister is that the Minister has ministerial responsibility for the subject matter of the question.” He then goes on to state: “If there is no ministerial responsibility there can be no question.” I would submit that not only this question but many of the other questions asked this afternoon on this subject are out of order in that there is no ministerial responsibility and further that much of the strife we have got into in recent weeks has been because of the practice of allowing members to ask questions that have only a tangential relationship to the responsibility of the person they seek an answer from. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Mr Dunne raises an interesting ruling that was put in place by Speaker Kidd but let us be very clear. Dover Samuels is Associate Minister for Economic Development. Economic development is very much threatened by the Whangamata decision. We would assume that that is why Dover Samuels was so publicly critical of the Minister of Conservation. For two Ministers who are taking different positions to try to hide that difference by climbing in behind the Standing Orders or Speakers’ rulings is quite wrong. 
As for the comments that have been allowed from Mr Samuels that on that particular day he was not speaking as a Minister but rather as someone who had some recollection of being a district councillor some years before that of course opens up the whole question as well as to whether he should be asked other questions. I think that Mr Peters’ question should have been allowed to stand because the answers given by Mr Samuels would be about as ridiculous as the decision that was made by Chris Carter in the first place. So although Mr Dunne suggests that over a period of time there have been some supposedly tangential questions we suggest that many of those questions would not arise if Ministers gave straight answers in the first place. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Points of order should be brief and not long speeches. I get the grasp of the member’s issue. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Reiterating a false interpretation of the original answer does not make it true. Mr Samuels did not say he was answering as a Far North District councillor; he said he was drawing on his experience as a Far North District councillor. That he is perfectly entitled to do. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I am ruling on the point of order. When looking at the Associate Minister’s responsibility I say there has to be an official connection between the two positions. So I rule that the point made by the Rt Hon Winston Peters is correct. The question needs to be resubmitted so that there is a connection. There is not at the moment. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Does Dover Samuels Associate Minister for Economic Development with responsibility for assistance in the development of policy agree with the Dover Samuels a former Far North District councillor who was quoted extensively in the  
Independent 
 today criticising— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I think that the member is right. He could put his question without the latter bit and it would be within the rules. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: For goodness’ sake! 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: There is no official connection between the two. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. It was not the Opposition that went down the line of Ministers being able to wear different hats on different occasions. It was not the Opposition that allowed the Minister to suggest today that every comment he made as the Minister about Chris Carter was in praise of him. Yet we are able to read that somehow as district councillor Dover Samuels was not very happy with Chris Carter. All Dr Smith is asking is whether the Minister agrees with the chap who is apparently a former district councillor. It is Mr Samuels who has put on two hats and it is the Chair who has allowed that to happen. Our opportunity to question the Associate Minister should not in any way be diminished because of the utterly ridiculous way in which the Government wishes to present itself. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I want to make two serious points. The first one is that if the questioner seeks a comparison between a ministerial position and a prior one then no comparison can be made. That is the point I am making. But the second one is far more serious. It is the propensity of that member to get on his feet take the House’s time for minutes and not articulate one principle of law at all or any principle from the Standing Orders and get away with it. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. My point of order is not on the substance of that issue but on the fact that you have repeatedly ruled that points of order are to be heard in silence. I saw four front-bench National Party members who were not silent during that point of order. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes I did too so I remind members to please respect that ruling. I have endeavoured throughout question time to make sure questions and answers are within the Standing Orders. It seems to me it is important that we all do that and that questions should be within the Minister’s official capacity. I have ruled on that. I will take no further discussion on that point. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry Mr Brownlee this point of order has to be a totally different one. I have ruled on the matter and we have had a considerable discussion on it. If it is on another point that is fine. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: As you know all our questions have to be verified at various times so if we now receive a news report of a member of the Labour Government making a statement somewhere that is of interest to us are we constrained by the description that is put upon that person? It seems to me today that the Minister has decided that he will not be scrutinised on this matter because he is saying he made his statements in a capacity other than as a Minister. Perhaps there should be some directive to all members of the Government that when they make statements to indicate as you would put it Madam Speaker which hat they have on. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The original question was perfectly in order; the supplementary questions have strayed off the point. But I would refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 140/6. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Does Dover Samuels the Associate Minister for Economic Development with responsibility in the delegations for policy development agree with Dover Samuels a former Far North District councillor who has extensively criticised— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry but the member is repeating the question. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I made it absolutely plain that I am asking the Minister in his role as an Associate Minister for Economic Development. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: If the member stopped there he would be all right. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The delegations make plain— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The member is now being deliberately obtuse. He has been warned twice as to the impropriety of his question. He cannot make that comparison. The question is out of order. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I have ruled on this matter. It is the comparison that is out of order. It is not the substance of the question. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: That is a farce. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please leave the Chamber. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: This is just a farce. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: You may well say so but you will be out of the Chamber. Please leave now. 
The Hon Dr Nick Smith withdrew from the Chamber. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Why have you accepted an answer from Mr Dover Samuels that he did not speak to either the Labour Party caucus or the  
Independent 
 as a Minister but rather as a free-wheeling individual who had some experience as a Far North District councillor of those matters and that those matters had annoyed him? You allowed that answer to stand. When we come to the House we look at the delegation and say the Associate Minister for Economic Development presumably recognising that the veto exercised by the Minister of Conservation will terrify anybody who is looking at that sort of development in the future makes those statements by drawing on his experience. But apparently he is not able to be questioned on them simply because he chooses to designate himself as being in a different role at the time he made them. That does make this process utterly farcical. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I point out to Mr Brownlee for the last time that there is nothing new about Ministers acting in different capacities in which they are liable to be required to give answers to questions in the House. I have checked what the Minister said and have told him to confine himself to the responsibilities and I have said the questions had to be related to his ministerial responsibilities. That is what is in the Standing Orders. The question could have been asked within the Standing Orders. We will now move on. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. From my long experience in this Chamber I know that when a member is asked to exit the Chamber in the way that you asked the Hon Dr Smith and that member then hurls abuse at the Chair there are further consequences. I want to know what you intend to do in respect of his behaviour which is simply unacceptable. In the past any member who has done that has been punished. What does the Chair propose to do now? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am considering the matter. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: What consequences for development in coastal marine areas does he believe the decision of the Minister of Conservation over the Whangamata proposal will have? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I believe that the Minister of Conservation should have overall jurisdiction in terms of the final decision under the Act. That Act was put into place by a National Government. But I also understand the complexity of any application for coastal permits when there has to be consideration of other stakeholders in terms of the particular activity being applied for. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Will the Hon Dover Samuels wearing whichever hat happens to suit accept the sincere and wholehearted congratulations of every member of the Opposition on his very perceptive comments about Mr Chris Carter’s decision on the Whangamata marina? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I inform the Leader of the Opposition that I wear only one hat. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: What discussions has the Associate Minister had with the Far North District Council or any other district council or environmental council about the consequences of the Whangamata decision? 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: I was on a local authority for over 20 years. I have not communicated with any local authorities or any regional councils in terms of the observations I have made to the  
Independent 
.