5. Question No. 5—ImmigrationHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of ImmigrationQuestion No. 5—Immigration5. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of Immigration: Other than Karel Sroubek's lawyer and family members who made representations on his behalf in respect of his deportation liability?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Minister of Immigration): Along with Mr Sroubek's legal representatives and family a number of other people did make representations on his behalf in relation to the decision to deport him that I considered as part of my decision. As the member is aware there is an investigation under way into this matter. It is important that I do not prejudice the investigation or possible further action as a result. Because of this ongoing work it is not in the public interest for me to specify who made representations. I will provide more information at the appropriate time.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Did Alex Swney an inmate with Mr Sroubek at Wiri Prison make representations in support of his application not to be deported?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I refer the member to my primary answer.Hon Dr Nick Smith: What are you hiding?SPEAKER: Order! The Hon Nick Smith will stand withdraw and apologise.Hon Dr Nick Smith: For saying What are you hiding?"SPEAKER: And there will a deduction of supplementaries as a result of the further interjection.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I withdraw and apologise.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Did John Sinclair Mr Sroubek's yoga instructor make representations in support of his application not to be deported?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I refer the member to my primary answer.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Did Richie Hardcore former martial arts champion make representations in support of his application not to be deported?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I refer the member to my primary answer.Kieran McAnulty: Does he or his office have any record of Mr Woodhouse offering to provide information in relation to Karel Sroubek?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: No.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. One of the rules of question time is that you should not use inference in the way a question's asked—it's quite clear; the Clerk will point it out to you—or you shouldn't make those inferences and you should avoid that type of approach. That question—SPEAKER: You can't "make" an inference. You can take an inference; you make an implication.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Oh well thank you. Every day you learn and in this place the rules change every day so there's a lot to learn. The point I'm making is that in asking that question the member is trying to suggest that somehow Mr Woodhouse or my colleague Mark Mitchell should have known about the Minister's consideration of this. Now given that the Minister can't tell us anything about what he was doing how on earth could they possibly know to have asked for those briefings earlier?SPEAKER: Well I'm not across all of the media but I got a very clear indication earlier in the day today that in fact one of the members the Hon Gerry Brownlee has just referred to had in fact asked for a briefing because he said so.Hon Member: We haven't had the answer to that question Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: No we did get an answer. It was a very short one.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is the Minister denying that the request for a briefing and to offer information was made to him through an intermediary around lunchtime last Wednesday?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I would say to the member that asking a member of the media to backchannel something without making a direct request is hardly an appropriate way to make an offering to a Minister.Hon Michael Woodhouse: What weight did the Minister place on the representations of supporters of Mr Sroubek who were not family members?Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Not much.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I'd ask you to reflect on the answers that we've had to the last two questions in that the purpose of question time is for Opposition members to ask questions of the Government. The only answers that were given any information were actually about members of the Opposition and what they might or might not have done in this case.SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat thank you. It has long been the ruling of Speakers in this House that decisions for deciding not to fully answer questions in this House are decisions for Ministers. They make the decision as to whether something is in the public interest or not and when they make those pronouncements the House takes them at their word."