Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:14518] 
3.  
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she stand by her statement regarding Maori Language Commission Chief Executive HaamiPiripi’s submission on the Foreshore and Seabed Bill that “It just isn’t on”; if so what discussions has she or her Ministers had with the board of the Maori Language Commission about the actions which should be taken as a consequence? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes I understand that the Minister of Maori Affairs has expressed his concerns about the matter to the chair of the Maori Language Commission. The Minister expects the commission board to discuss the matter and to advise him of the outcome of those discussions. 
Dr Don Brash 
: How does she reconcile her position in regard to Mr Kit Richards whom she demanded be sacked over a personal email sent from his home computer which she described at the time as “guerrilla warfare” with her position in regard to Mr Haami Piripi who made a public submission to a select committee of Parliament threatening civil war or is this another example of different rules for different categories of New Zealanders? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am surprised that anyone has accused me of being soft on Mr Piripi. Mr Richards attacked Government policy covering his own State organisation. Further he made threatening comments about me the Minister in charge of Timberlands and Marian Hobbs. There is all the difference in the world between a State employee who directly undermines the policy of the Government for the organisation for which he works and Mr Piripi who made comments about another part of Government policy. However I want to tell the member that I would take exactly the same view as I have of Mr Piripi’s action if it were say the chief executive of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority pronouncing on education policy or the chief executive of Transit pronouncing on transport policy. It is not appropriate and that is why new legislation will see that the State Services Commissioner has a role in setting down guidelines in that area. 
Rodney Hide 
: Would it increase the Prime Minister’s concern and strengthen her hand to learn that Mr Piripi’s submission was prepared in December-January long before he was denied the opportunity to take part in the hikoi and that he did join the hikoi in Kaitaia defying a Government ban and indeed did sign a petition in support of Maori claims that was published in May 2004 in the Tu Mai magazine and how come he is still employed? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The member has set out a pattern of activity that is not acceptable for a chief executive of a Crown entity. He might well have added the comment that was made about the Leader of the Opposition. I do not consider that comment by Mr Piripi acceptable either. That is why the Minister has raised the matter with the commission. That is why we have legislation in front of Parliament to set down the possibility for the State Services Commissioner to have proper codes of ethics and standards in that area. This sort of activity is not acceptable. I make one more point. The chief executive of a Crown entity must be able to work with people across the political spectrum. That is why it is not appropriate for him or her to be making political comments. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I thank the Prime Minister for that full reply. However she did not address one part of it which was: how come he is still employed? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister addressed the question. She can address the question in any way she wishes provided she does and she did. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Do I take it from the Prime Minister’s earlier answer that there are no specific guidelines at present which is why legislation is being prepared; if that is the case what advice do Ministers convey to senior public servants about their role in such circumstances how is that advice conveyed and is there any consistency? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: My understanding is that there have not been clear guidelines in that area in the past and that the State Services Commissioner has not had a role. That is why there is now legislation before this House which I hope will be supported that will enable the commissioner to give guidance to the wider State sector on ethics values and standards. In the interim and because of this incident the Minister of Maori Affairs has written to the chief Maori Language Commissioner and asked him to report back to him on what set of guidelines on ethical standards the commission has laid down for its employees. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Did she have any serious expectation that the Maori Language Commission might take some action in relation to Mr Piripi when the chairman of the commission Mr Patu Hohepa has himself been shown on television participating in the seabed and foreshore hikoi and does she still have confidence in Mr Hohepa as chairman of the commission in light of the fact that he himself participated in the hikoi against the express instructions of the State Services Commissioner? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Any instructions from the State Services Commissioner could not apply to members of a board or a commission but whether the Government has confidence in the commission obviously depends on how it handles matters. We will be watching this matter with great interest. I might also refer to the advice of Wira Gardiner who of course has experience as a chief executive and as a chair of a Crown entity. He has made it quite clear that a person in Mr Piripi’s position should not be making such public statements because they can bring the commission into disrepute as they have. 
Stephen Franks 
: Why does the Prime Minister think that it is relevant he has expressed regret or apologised as reported in today’s  
New Zealand Herald 
 and if regret or apology is sufficient what attitude would she take if a senior defence official turned up to a select committee or on television expressing his or her real views about what this Government’s attitude is doing to New Zealand’s defence against security risks? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Having read the transcript of a substantial interview that Mr Piripi did yesterday I thought that he did strike a note of regret and there was some insight that he felt he might have gone too far which is certainly my view and I think the view of many others on all sides of the House. I really cannot see the relevance of reference to officials appearing before a select committee. Officials have a duty to serve the Government of the day and that is why we have codes of public service behaviour and why it is appropriate to now extend those guidelines in ethics and standards to the Crown entities which after all are set up to give effect to Government policy regardless of who the Government is. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Does the Prime Minister agree with the statement made by Mr Piripi in his submission on the Foreshore and Seabed Bill that: “New Zealand history is riddled with factual examples of lies theft murder and racism all characterised by settlers . . .”; if not has she taken any steps to back up yesterday’s tough talk in front of the news media with real concrete action? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I could not accept that the paragraph that the Leader of the Opposition has just read is any fair account of New Zealand history. I might say that Mr Piripi wrote to the  
Dominion 
 in the mid-1990s when he was a public servant serving another Government expressing pretty strong views about our history. I am not aware whether that Government ever raised the matter at the time but I repeat that these sorts of comments are not appropriate for someone in his position who must deal without fear or favour with people across the political spectrum. He has an important job to do—that is promoting te reo Maori—and I believe that comments such as he has made actually imperil the commission in its work. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Does the Prime Minister recall on 27 January describing as “guerrilla warfare” a private email never intended for publication from the general manager not of a Government department and not of a Government commission but the independent State-owned enterprise Timberlands; and also her saying: “We are asking Timberlands chair Young to explain why this employee should continue in his employment.” and that was despite the fact that Mr Kit Richards had said that if he had caused embarrassment to the Government it was inadvertent and he felt bound to apologise; why did she continue to make press statements until he was forced out of his employment; and will she give an undertaking that she will continue to make press statements until the chief executive of the Maori Language Commission is forced out of his employment; or are there two laws in New Zealand? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I repeat that Mr Richards made a direct attack on Government policy over the organisation for which he was directly employed. He further urged others in that organisation and elsewhere to campaign against the Government on its policy over the organisation for which he was employed. Frankly he was in quite a different position from the Maori Language Commission chief executive who did not make a submission about anything to do with his own organisation—he made a statement about another area of Government policy. As it stands that was wrong. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I seek the leave of the House to table an extract from the  
Dominion Post  
of 28 January: “Timberlands manager job on the line over email”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does the Prime Minister not understand that she does little for Maori if she accepts lesser standards no matter where they might occupy themselves in the professions than she would accept from someone else thereby advocating two standards one for Maori and one for Europeans; and does she not understand how invertedly racist that is? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The course being followed is for the Minister to speak to the commission ask it to look at the matter and take whatever action it sees fit and come back to him. I assure the member that if the action is seen to fall short that will only speed the passage of Crown entity legislation through this House so that there can be very clear expectations laid down of what appropriate conduct by people at high levels of Crown entities actually is. 
Dr Don Brash 
: What is the difference—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is no point in interjecting when the person next to the member is asking the question. The fact that the microphone is on is not a reason. 
Dr Don Brash 
: What is the difference between the situation with Mr Kit Richards whom she demanded be sacked following his sending of a personal email from a home computer which she described at the time as guerrilla warfare and the situation with Mr Piripi who made a submission to a select committee in which he stated of a piece of her own Government’s legislation: “It destroys any confidence we might have in Parliament and in Government to govern fairly.”? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: For the third time—one person directly attacked Government policy for his organisation. Mr Piripi did not. 
Rodney Hide 
: I seek leave of the House to table Mr Piripi’s name on the petition. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.