Turei Metiria: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 11 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:7881. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “Well you back the rapists …”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As the victim of a sexual assault I take offence at the Prime Minister’s refusal to deny his statement of yesterday.Mr SPEAKER: Order! It is put down as a question on notice. The Prime Minister then has to answer it.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Is this a fresh point of order?Chris Hipkins: It is a fresh point of order. It just relates to the general principle of the issue which is where something is ruled unparliamentary and a member then reaffirms whatever it was that they said that was unparliamentary—does that not then bring it back into the current debate?Mr SPEAKER: Unfortunately to some extent yes. The question has been accepted. It has been ruled in order. The Prime Minister now has a responsibility to answer it. He answered it with “Yes”. That in itself is certainly not unparliamentary. We have now got to move forward with a series of I hope helpful supplementary questions. If the Prime Minister was then to repeat such remarks as I said earlier I will deal with that issue.Metiria Turei: Would he agree that when he made jokes about the convicted murderer and molester Phillip John Smith he was backing the rapist and not the victims of his sexual abuse?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.Metiria Turei: Would the Prime Minister agree that when he said of the Roast Busters case that “These young guys should just grow up.” he was in fact backing those alleged rapists and not the alleged victims of those young men?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No but I think the member is trying to raise a defence to absolve herself from the fact that she has now learnt that 50 of the people whom they have been interested in are—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I remind the Prime Minister of my earlier ruling and Speaker’s ruling 196/7. The question was asked directly. The next part of the answer is not necessary.Metiria Turei: Does the Prime Minister now consider it appropriate to apologise to Tania Billingsley given his Government’s interference in a case that involved an alleged rape against her?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No. What I find disappointing is that in all of this debate the victims of these crimes in Australia and in other parts have never been represented by Opposition parliamentarians—only the actual people who have perpetuated these rapes these murders these abhorrent acts. Unfortunately that is the reality of what has happened in this Parliament in the past few weeks.Metiria Turei: Does the Prime Minister think that in light of his own comments where he has joked about rapists and child molesters where he has backed alleged rapists of young women—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just have the question please—the question.Metiria Turei: —it is now time for the Prime Minister to show some leadership on the serious issue of sexual violence in New Zealand and apologise for his comments from yesterday?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do like to show leadership on that issue but I am not responsible for other people who may advocate for people who commit crimes not for the victims of crimes.Hon Member: He’s reaffirming the same thing.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Again the member is interjecting. She may not realise it but she is.Metiria Turei: Will the Prime Minister apologise for his comment directed at the Opposition yesterday in light of his own comments where he has clearly backed rapists and alleged rapists?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I utterly refute the last part of the question and no in terms of the first part of the question.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has consistently supported his statement of yesterday. He has—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just—[Interruption] Order! [Interruption] I remind the member that when I stand it is time for the member to cease speaking. That is not a point of order. The Prime Minister in his answer has said nothing that is unparliamentary in that answer.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Having perused the—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I have the point of order.Metiria Turei: There is nothing in the Standing Orders or Speakers’ rulings that puts a time limit on seeking a withdrawal and apology. The Prime Minister has affirmed his commitment to this—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member will resume her seat. We spent quite some time at the start of question time today with my pointing out to the member quite clearly that if it is a matter of an unparliamentary comment made at the time and objected to at the time I can deal with it. If it is raised subsequently—and in this case 24 hours later—the time has passed.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Jacinda Ardern: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Chris Hipkins first.Chris Hipkins: It is simply to ask you to reflect perhaps with a considered ruling on the matter of effective repetition. I am not going to re-traverse it here but I would like to ask you to reflect in light of your earlier ruling today on whether in fact the issue of effective repetition should be reconsidered and whether a member—maybe not using the exact words. In the case of the Privileges Committee where there was an issue of a member repeating a comment outside the House all they said was “I stand by my comment.” and the courts deemed that to be an effective repetition.Mr SPEAKER: I will certainly as I always do go back and review today but I have been listening very carefully to the answers that were given and as I said to Metiria Turei I do not think there are any words in the answers that were given that would concern me as being unparliamentary. The question was put down and the question was accepted; the question therefore had to be answered and none of the supplementary questions that were answered were ruled out of order either. So I will review it but I will not promise to the member that I will come back with a considered ruling. Is there a further point of order from Jacinda Ardern?Hon Simon Bridges: Speaking to the point of order.Mr SPEAKER: No I have dealt with that matter.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would seek your clarification on this matter. You have ruled that the Prime Minister’s statement cannot be relitigated today because Opposition members did not raise it at the first opportunity yesterday. You have seen the Hansard as have I. I raised that issue with you at the very first opportunity and as a result of your denying that you are now justifying not requiring the Minister—Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. I invite the member herself to take the time that I have taken to go back and watch the video clip. The comment was made. It is 4½ minutes later that it is raised on the first occasion. My point strongly to this House—and I am surprised that we are still having to explain it—is that it must be dealt with immediately. That makes my job a lot easier. When it is then dealt with subsequently—and in fact there are a lot of other comments that are made in the meantime—it is difficult for me to then demand an apology subsequent to the event.