O'Connor Damien: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Damien: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 23 October 2014. Volume:701;Page:211. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]9.Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman)to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his commitments to the Pike River families?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House)on behalf of thePrime Minister: Yes.Hon Damien O’Connor: Does the Prime Minister still believe recovery of the bodies of the 29 miners to be “an absolute priority” and will he accept the advice of the two mining experts Bob Stevenson a former UK chief mines inspector and Dave Creedy that recovery of the drift can be done safely?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The Government made available funding to Solid Energy which has primary responsibility in this matter for that very purpose. As to the opinion that the Prime Minister might have about the expertise offered by the two gentlemen mentioned there is no basis for him to make any comment on that.Hon Damien O’Connor: Will the Prime Minister and the Minister for State Owned Enterprises ensure that Solid Energy makes the decision on whether to re-enter Pike River based on all the available evidence and information and will he show the families dignity and provide them with the opportunity to seek clarity on any issues raised in that evidence?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The question really asks the Prime Minister to get in the road of a decision that needs to be made by the Solid Energy board. It would be inappropriate to do that.Hon Damien O’Connor: During the more than 12 months of reporting on progress to re-enter the Pike River mine was the Prime Minister briefed at any stage that any re-entry into the Pike River mine would be illegal because there was no second egress?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Those reports would have gone to Solid Energy.Hon Damien O’Connor: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the question: “Was the Prime Minister”—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I did not exactly catch the question. I am going to invite the member to ask the question once more.Hon Damien O’Connor: Thank you Mr Speaker. During the more than 12 months of reporting on progress to re-enter the Pike River mine was the Prime Minister briefed at any stage that any re-entry into the Pike River mine would be illegal because there is no second egress?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I am unable to answer that question because I do not have that information available given that I am answering on the Prime Minister’s behalf. But in any event it would be my understanding that matters that related to re-entry to the mine would have been conveyed to Solid Energy for Solid Energy to make a decision about a go or no-go. So matters about egress or second egress etc. are not matters that I am able to comment on. What I would say though is that at the time of the original explosion and then particularly after the second and third explosions in that mine there were a lot of suggestions that a second egress would be a good idea.Hon Damien O’Connor: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I appreciate the difficulty that the Minister has in answering on behalf of the Prime Minister but I am seeking from him a commitment to provide the information as to whether the Prime Minister—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order. You asked the question and the Minister answering on behalf of the Prime Minister said that he just cannot give you that information. So it is not a point of order then to raise a point of order and seek a commitment. If you have another supplementary question and want to try to do it that way it might be possible. But you cannot use a point of order for that.Hon Damien O’Connor: Does the withholding of information from the Pike River families show the same arrogant disrespect as the Prime Minister’s comments about the mother of the young West Coaster killed in a motor accident and other parents of the Pike River miners which he wrongly dodged responsibility for answering questions about yesterday?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You have ruled earlier today in a very interesting way because you sort of hinted that something might change but then said it is very difficult and that you would have to make decisions as you go along. But I do not think that you can actually go past in that consideration the requirements of Standing Order 378(a) which relates to a Minister and therefore clearly to the Prime Minister and which states that a Minister can have questions put to them relating to: “(a) public affairs with which the Minister is officially connected or (b) proceedings in the House or any matter of administration for which the Minister is responsible.” The question just alleged a whole lot of statements that came from various sources and the requirement to comment on those does not fit any of the requirements that are here in the Standing Order. So what I think we are getting to is that we are very quickly going to get to a position where Opposition members can ask as many catch-22 questions on made-up stuff as they like and Ministers would be expected to respond.Hon Damien O’Connor: Appreciating your ruling that clearly apportioned to the Prime Minister some responsibility I am aware and the Pike River families are aware of a person appointed by the Prime Minister which they were grateful for at least 2 years ago who was to report and liaise directly between the Prime Minister’s office and the families. Those are the questions that I am asking about in terms of briefings and responsibility. The Prime Minister has responsibility in this area.Mr SPEAKER: I certainly accept the point that the Hon Damien O’Connor has just raised. He raised a question where in my mind there is no doubt there is ministerial and prime ministerial responsibility. The way in which the question was raised was certainly not helpful. I have not got a good record of some of the language used but it was relatively emotive. The easiest way forward I would have thought is for Mr Brownlee—but it is for Mr Brownlee to decide—to simply answer the question and dispute the facts as they have been laid out. Mr Brownlee has now raised a point of order which if I understand it is trying to suggest there was no ministerial responsibility—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No no.Mr SPEAKER: Well then maybe I will ask—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I will explain.Mr SPEAKER: I will ask the Hon Gerry Brownlee to explain his point succinctly because it was difficult for me to comprehend.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Thank you for that opportunity. If the Hon Damien O’Connor had asked the question that he managed to get out in his point of order it would have been a simple thing. But it was everything else that went with it.Mr SPEAKER: Then I have got a very instant solution to this. I am going to ask the Hon Damien O’Conner—this is a very sensitive matter and I appreciate that—to ask the question as factually and without emotion as he can and let us see whether I can assist the honourable member to get an answer from the Minister answering on behalf of the Prime Minister.Hon Damien O’Connor: Does the withholding of information from the Pike River families including the legal advice provided to Solid Energy that it claims prevents it from re-entering the mine display a level of arrogance by the Prime Minister or reports about the Prime Minister towards members of the Pike River families?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well firstly I reject any suggestion that there has been disrespect shown for the families of the Pike River victims—far from it. The Prime Minister has never failed to turn up to speak directly to them on occasions when that is what they wanted to do. As for the suggestion that information is being withheld by the Prime Minister’s office from the families that is not something that I can make a comment on other than to say that for the last 12 months or more this is a matter that has been in the hands of Solid Energy and the board of Solid Energy. If there is any information that they are withholding from the public then we would expect that it is made available at the time that they make decisions.