Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:615;Page:11430] 
9.  
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Can the Prime Minister assure the people of New Zealand and the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan that New Zealand was not involved in nor had any knowledge of spying on United Nations officials following the Australian Broadcasting Commission report last Friday that New Zealand received transcripts of United Nations Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix’s intercepted phone calls? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 It is not my normal practice to comment on operational intelligence matters. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is quite an important point because the Prime Minister is not answering the question. It is true that there are confidential matters in relation to intelligence about operations about sources etc. but my question addressed an illegal operation not something legitimate. If she can give a blanket “no comment” when members ask about illegitimate illegal operations being conducted by intelligence services then how can this House and the country have an accountable security service? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I cannot uphold the member’s point of order. The Prime Minister is entitled to answer that question the way she wishes and it stands or falls as that answer. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. I have taken the point of order and I suggest that the member moves on to a supplementary question. 
Keith Locke 
: I think there is a broader question here because the same principle applies to the police to immigration and to a lot of portfolios where there is confidential material. Surely we cannot in this House allow the Ministers in those portfolios to give a blanket “no comment it is confidential” to any challenge particularly where it concerns illegal activity. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: All I can say is that the Prime Minister gave an answer. I ruled that it addressed the question and the member may now ask a supplementary question. 
Keith Locke 
: Does she stand by conventions prohibiting the interception of UN communications and agree that it would badly affect our international reputation if the reports that we may be in some way associated with such illegal behaviour are correct? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I can only repeat that it is not my normal practice to comment on operational intelligence matters and I do not intend to be drawn by the member into a debate that is raging in the United Kingdom. 
Keith Locke 
: Can she confirm that UN conversations passing through the communications satellites targeted by the Waihopai station can be monitored and their contents passed on to either the US National Security Agency or the British Government communications headquarters under existing partnership arrangements? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: No I do not intend to comment on that operational intelligence matter. What I will say about Waihopai is what I have said before which is that I believe it acts in the interests of New Zealand. 
Keith Locke 
: Can the Prime Minister then explain the purpose of the Government Communications Security Bureau’s Waihopai station; and does it provide information to the United States and Britain? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: We are starting to get well wide of the original question. I repeat: I do not comment on operational intelligence matters. I repeat as I have said before that Waihopai operates in the interests of New Zealand in signals intelligence. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think the Prime Minister is showing disrespect to the House in not providing some information on the nature of the Waihopai station because one can read the Marlborough phone book or the sign outside the gate at Waihopai to see that it is a defence satellite communications unit and there are other Government publications that explain its character. Can she not at least provide the information in a public arena because it is trifling— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If it is in the phone book it is in the public arena I would have thought. I want to say generally to the member that it is the member’s opinion that there is an illegality. I do not know whether there is and that is not part of my reason to rule on that particular matter. The Prime Minister was perfectly in order in giving the answer she gave.