Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:618;Page:14381] 
5. RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: Is he satisfied with the Department of Corrections report on Iwi Consultation and Other Matters Related to the Spring Hill Corrections Facility dated 14 April 2004; if so why? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 Generally yes. The Department of Corrections provided a frank report covering the issues well given the time frame I set. I note the Environment Court in its judgment on Spring Hill praised the department for its consultation with Maori. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does it concern the Minister that the Department of Corrections in its frank report never advised him that it had deducted but then reimbursed a double payment to the same consultants of $18928 from a contract with the Waikato Raupatu Lands Trust which the Tainui people themselves discovered in their own forensic report and will the department seek reimbursement for these duplicate payments made; if not why not? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There are three questions there and two can be answered. 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The department was extremely aware of the fact that double-dipping might occur and it advised me that it went out of its way to ensure that this did not happen and deducted amounts billed separately before making payment to Tainui. The internal audit of Tainui’s finances is a matter for Tainui to deal with. If the auditors have concerns I am certain they will raise them. 
Rodney Hide 
: Here it is. 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: Is this a leadership bid? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I am sorry Mr Speaker. If the auditors have concerns I expect they would raise them with the department. 
Martin Gallagher 
: With reference to the Environment Court hearing about Spring Hill what did the court have to say about the consultation process regarding the Spring Hill Corrections Facility? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The Environment Court decided in favour of the proposed Spring Hill Corrections Facility proceeding. In its judgment the court said that the Government “went beyond the call of duty to make sure that such problems of mandate within the various groups consulted did not emerge” and went further by saying that the Government had “met its obligations of consultation with Maori in a very full and complete way.” 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Which Department of Corrections staff contractors or ministerial staff were hosted by Tainui at a corporate box at Wellington stadium while they were conducting consultation on the new prison and is he satisfied that these arrangements are appropriate? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I am not aware nor have I been advised of any such arrangements. 
Tariana Turia 
: Who else did the department pay consultant fees to in regard to Spring Hill Corrections Facility for what purposes were they paid and how much were their fees? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The amounts and the consultation process were detailed in a report mentioned in the primary question from Mr Hide. I am happy to make a copy of that report available to the member. I have tabled it before but I am happy to give her a copy after question time. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Why did the Department of Corrections pay Mr Ngakete $11735 for work in October November and December of 2002 when he was at the same time employed as a corrections employee with the Waikato Raupatu Lands Trust and received $16875 for corrections work during that same period? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The whole issue of iwi consultation and who got paid for what when is detailed in the report. I am keen for the member to have a look at that report and to read it carefully. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The whole point is that it is not detailed in the report. If Mr Swain cannot answer the question then he should say so. To point to a report where that is not detailed and it has been pointed out in a forensic report by the Tainui people it seems to be a hopeless situation for a Minister to say: “Oh it’s in this report.” when it demonstrably is not. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is nothing wrong with the Minister answering by referring to a report. One hopes that the Minister is accurate. If he is not there will be appropriate action for him to take. 
Ron Mark 
: Has the Minister noted the disproportionate amount of attention being paid to the inappropriateness of the use of certain Maori consultants and contractors to that of the appropriateness of the decision to give preferential contractual consideration to Jagcon and Mr John Hamilton; if so could the Minister venture an opinion as to why that would be the situation given that Jagcon’s involvement was first questioned in this House by Brian Neeson MP in June 2001? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: That is a fair point and it was detailed in the report. The member may be interested to know that when Jagcon’s contract was due for renewal it was put out to tender. 
Heather Roy 
: Why did the Department of Corrections pay for Haydn Solomon and Tahi Ngakete to travel to Perth and Melbourne on 21 to 27 May 2002 while employed by the Waikato Raupatu Lands Trust under contract to the Department of Corrections and what did that travel achieve? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I cannot answer that. Presumably that is a matter for Tainui to resolve. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Is the Minister saying to the House he is unaware that Department of Corrections staff or contractors were hosted by Tainui at the Wellington stadium and if he is saying that how then can he stand by his comments in light of reports that such comments were referred to him and he declined to comment? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: No comments were referred to me about that matter. They were to do with the issue of the internal audit of Tainui. I rightly said that that internal audit of Tainui’s financial matters was not only funded by Tainui but was an internal matter for Tainui and that is where the matter should lie. 
Rodney Hide 
: Now that Tainui’s own forensic accountants have shown his Department of Corrections report to be a whitewash and a cover-up is the Minister prepared to call in the Auditor-General to determine just where each of the $1.5 million given in what that report shows to be soft contracts fake time sheets and double payments to those consultants; if not is it a fact that he is just covering up for a department that has wasted money? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I have not read the report but I am certain that it states no such thing. The answer to the second question is no. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know that the Minister is not the brightest one on the front bench. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That sort of comment is out of order and the member knows it. Please come to the point of order. 
Rodney Hide 
: It is just a logical inconsistency in the Minister’s answer when he said that he has not read the report but that the report states no such thing. I have the report. I can assure the Minister that it says exactly that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a debatable point.