Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is subject to correctionCunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 23 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14177. Text is subject to correction.]1.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Leader of the Opposition) to thePrime Minister: Does he have confidence that his Ministers are ethical and competent?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Hon David Cunliffe: Can he assure the public that the Hon Nick Smith the Hon Peter Dunne and the Hon John Banks all upheld to his satisfaction the requirements of theCabinet Manual that “… Ministers are expected to act lawfully and to behave in a way that upholds and is seen to uphold the highest ethical standards.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: This is going to come as a great revelation to the member but John Banks is no longer a Minister.Hon David Cunliffe: In light of that answer and given that John Banks has conveniently forgotten helicopter rides 7-foot-tall German billionaires and the concurrent arrival of two cheques for $25000 how is it credible for the Prime Minister to even consider reappointing him to a ministerial role as he said he would do yesterday?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It strikes me that the member keeps forgetting what he tells private audiences he is in. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have a point of order.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I appreciate that the question had an introductory part to it but the Prime Minister should make some attempt to address it.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I think that question would fall into the category that you often mention and that your predecessors in that seat often mentioned: very heavily loaded political questions. What the Prime Minister did was refer to the first part of that question and I think adequately addressed it.Mr SPEAKER: On this occasion I am going to accept the advice given by the Hon Gerry Brownlee. The question was very politically loaded. When members ask a supplementary question like that they give a fair amount of licence to a Minister or Prime Minister to answer.Hon David Cunliffe: Given that the Prime Minister said yesterday that he would reinstate John Banks but would only possibly reinstate the Hon Peter Dunne can he tell the House why his confidence in the Hon Peter Dunne is lower than in the Hon John Banks?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have no ministerial responsibility for that.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister does have responsibility for statements that he made and he was being asked to reconcile two of those statements. That is a perfectly acceptable question.Mr SPEAKER: On this occasion I accept the advice of the member Grant Robertson. I am going to ask the Hon David Cunliffe to re-ask that question.Hon David Cunliffe: Given that he said yesterday that he would reinstate John Banks but would only possibly reinstate the Hon Peter Dunne can he tell the House why his confidence in the Hon Peter Dunne is lower?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It is not.Hon David Cunliffe: Does he believe that Nick Smith simply forgot about being briefed on theRuataniwha dam before 29 July the first eight times he was asked about it in the House even though the dam submission had been mentioned three times previously in the Minister’s weekly reports?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Mr Speaker I understand that you are yet to make a ruling on the privileges complaint in relation to this matter and I do not believe that it is appropriate to discuss the matter until you have done so.Hon David Cunliffe: Does he think it is appropriate for the Minister of Conservation to interfere in a departmental decision and to stop the department from raising legitimate concerns about water quality to the Ruataniwha dam board of inquiry?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I think that Doris Johnston made it quite clear that the Minister did not.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I delayed raising this point of order because I thought it would be obvious to you that when Mr Key said that a matter was brought before you for a privileges decision he acted as though you were some fine judicial court and the matter was sub judice. It will be very apparent to you that you are not and the issue is not so he should not have been able to get away with that.Mr SPEAKER: I am not sure exactly what the point of order is. Maybe the Hon Gerry Brownlee could help. [Interruption] Order! This is a point of order. It will be heard in silence.Hon Gerry Brownlee: It was perfectly reasonable in the answer for the Prime Minister to acknowledge the letter to you from the Hon David Cunliffe relating to the matter of privilege and suggesting that it would be inappropriate to make any prejudicial comments when it is in your hands. I think that is perfectly acceptable.Mr SPEAKER: I accept that. I agree entirely.Hon David Cunliffe: Given this sorry litany of ministerial failures and the fact that his ragtag Government is hanging by a thread is his plan C to inflate crazy conservative Colin Craig or is he just a “Mad Hatter” looking for a new tea party?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am sorry that the member cannot count but we actually have 64 votes so we are not hanging by a thread. If he wants to get into crazy he could look at his own coalition partners. But actually he does not have to look too far. He should just follow the advice of Trevor Mallard who nicely summed up last night exactly what he thought of Metiria Turei.Rt Hon Winston Peters: How can the Prime Minister be contemplating restoring to a ministerial post someone who leaked from the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) four separate times and a fifth time which was in respect of the Inland Revenue Department and Novopay; how can that person possibly be—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Tell us about the gnome.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon Winston Peters: The difference is that I did not lie to the House like you did.Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is a very good example of the unhelpful information of an interjection but then the response from the Rt Hon Winston Peters was out of order. Would the member now rise to his feet and simply ask his supplementary question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I would be very grateful to. How can the Prime Minister be possibly contemplating restoring to a Cabinet post someone who leaked information in respect of the GCSB four separate times and a fifth time in respect of the Inland Revenue Department and Novopay; how can that person possibly fit the high standards that he has hitherto claimed to uphold?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Firstly the premise of the question is wrong. It is unproven in terms of the first point and the second point is that if he wants to talk reinstatement maybe he should talk to Brendan Horan. I understand he might have been—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not helpful to the order of the House.