Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 18 October 2012. Volume:684;Page:5978. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
6. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he think it is important that his Ministers including himself come to the House prepared to give honest answers? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House) 
on behalf of the Prime Minister: [ 
Interruption 
] Yes. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! This is a serious issue. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How can he give that answer—that the answer is “Yes”—when he has set the standard so low by giving inaccurate information to the House on multiple occasions this year despite being fully briefed for example when he told the House that the first the Government Communications Security Bureau briefed him on Dotcom was on 17 September this year despite a February briefing or when he gave two conflicting dates for when he first learnt of the non-disclosure certificate having been signed by his Deputy Prime Minister? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Every effort is made to honestly answer questions and when there are mistakes noted they are brought to the House’s attention as has been the case in each of those ones the member speaks of. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How does he explain the discrepancy between his written answer to my question on 7 May asking about meetings with the Hon Simon Power in the period between 7 April and 23 July 2011 in which he stated: “There is no record of what was discussed … and I have no recollection …” and the answer he gave to a supplementary question in the House yesterday claiming that the honourable Minister did not raise the issue of Kim Dotcom with him at the meeting on 13 June? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Because that is the case. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well then what is it? That his answer to my question on 7 May in which he said that there was no record and no recollection of the 13 June meeting with Mr Power is true or the answer he gave yesterday to the effect that Kim Dotcom was not raised at the 13 June meeting by Simon Power because logically both answers cannot be true; or is it that both answers are false? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: No. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. No what? I am asking him: if the first answer is true and the second one is true that cannot be; well they are both false if he says no. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member will be aware that with supplementary questions a Minister is obliged to answer only one part of the question. The final part of the member’s question was “are both answers false” and the Minister answered “No.” which is a perfectly legitimate answer. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well I see. It appears anything goes. Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister has given false information to the House on multiple occasions this year— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! There is quite an important subtlety involved here. The member has now just accused the Prime Minister of giving false information to the House. [ 
Interruption 
] No order! The member can question about the accuracy of information. I have allowed some fairly robust words to be used as was the case even in the primary question. It talked about the requirement to give honest answers. But I think it is going one step too far to accuse another member of giving false information. I am sure the member can word his question just to avoid that direct accusation in a way that is acceptable. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Why on earth should I when the Prime Minister has apologised twice in this House and he is coming again with another apology for having given information to the House that was not true—the opposite being false. I am not going to be restrained by that sort of dialectic argument. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I think I will accept the member’s point on the basis that information that is not correct can be defined as false. I accept the member’s point. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Bearing in mind that the Prime Minister has given false information to the House on multiple occasions this year despite being fully briefed such as the first time the Government Communications Security Bureau briefed him on Dotcom or the certificate to do with the Deputy Prime Minister or yesterday that there was no record and no recollection yet he could tell me that Simon Power did not speak about it; bearing all that in mind why does he not apply the same standard that he applies to other Ministers to himself and step down to avoid what will be most certainly inevitably future deepening embarrassment to him and his colleagues? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I think the proposition put by the member is quite ridiculous. If you just take the situation with the so-called meeting with Mr Power quite clearly he had no recollection when he answered your question and upon checking he was able to confirm that—simple. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. But the Prime Minister told us there was no record. How can he check with no record? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! [ 
Interruption 
] Order! I say to the Leader of the House I am on my feet. The member cannot dispute the answer by way of point of order. The Minister has given his answer. The question contained a number of assertions and the Minister in answering them said they were ridiculous. He is at liberty to do that in answering a question. 
Grant Robertson 
: In light of the Prime Minister’s answers does he stand by his statement to TV3 last night that he voted for the purchase age of alcohol to be 20 years old; if so has he corrected the record of Parliament that says that Mr Key voted for the age to be 18 years of age? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That vote was for the split age. 
Grant Robertson 
: In light of that answer I seek leave of the House to table the personal vote record for the purchase age vote on the Alcohol Reform Bill that indicates a vote of 18 years from Mr Key. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I think the member has made his point but we do not table stuff that is actually in the  
Journals 
.