Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:629;Page:1215] 
1. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Has she received any recent reports regarding the development of policy around the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. Three iwi are currently in negotiations with the Crown pursuant to the Act. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Prime Minister seen the leaked discussion document “National’s Relationship with Maori” where it reads in relation to the Foreshore and Seabed Act the following: “We need to consider public opinion and decide on our position.”; and does the Government intend to follow this flip-flop or this idea of putting one’s hand into the wind to see which way the public feeling might prevail? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Yes I have seen this quite extraordinary— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. That behaviour is simply intolerable. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes I agree with the member. It is known that in fact people do not make any comment when a member is asking a question. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can I repeat the question? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes you may. Would you mind please starting from the top. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Thank you. Has the Prime Minister seen the leaked discussion document entitled “National’s Relationship with Maori” where it reads in relation to the Foreshore and Seabed Act and I quote from it: “We need to consider public opinion and decide on our position.” and does the Government intend to follow this flip-flop or this policy prescription where one puts one’s finger into the air and sees what the public thinks? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I would like you to consider whether the Prime Minister or any Minister for that matter is able to give an opinion on a document that does not belong to them and is being grossly misrepresented by the Government’s new “poodle protector” the Hon Winston Peters. I am quite certain that the Prime Minister will have a lot to say. Prime Ministers under pressure normally look for any excuse to take the spotlight off them. The fact is that her Government has been engaged in corrupt practice and some comment about a leaked document which is of no concern to us adds nothing today and I think you need to consider whether the Prime Minister should be allowed to get on her feet and gratuitously attempt to protect herself. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: If you ruled that people could not ask questions about a document that they had not originated which they have got from somebody else that would lead to 12 patsies a day and no questions from anybody other than Labour or Progressive members. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: First of all I did not seek an opinion. I asked whether the Government intended to follow such a policy prescription. The second thing is that during the time the member spoke in his inimitable unqualified fashion he started using all sorts of epithets that had no relation whatsoever to the point of order. I know he is struggling to keep his job but this is not the way he should do it. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member is right. Mr Brownlee would have been right if an opinion only had been sought but a Government intention was sought; therefore the question is in order. I would also just like to remind members that points of order are not an opportunity to make speeches. It does help the Speaker if the essence of the point of order is in fact the subject of that point of order. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I have two things. First I withdraw my comments referring to Mr Peters as being the Government poodle and security watchdog. Secondly I seek leave of the House to table the so-called leaked document in order that there can be no misrepresentation of its content at all. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
John Carter 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. During the course of the member Winston Peters asking his question there were one or two interjections from the side on which you very firmly ruled and reminded the House that it does not tolerate interjections during questions. I must say that the same rule also applies during points of order and at the time that Gerry Brownlee was taking his points of order there were a good number of interjections from across that side of the House. I just ask that we be consistent in applying the rules. If it is pertinent for this side to sit and listen to questions that are jokes and not be able to object then similarly the same rule should apply during points of order for the other side. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member. I assume he is not suggesting that the Chair is partial on this matter or the Speaker is partial is on these matters. Of course the rule applies to everyone and everyone is on their last warning. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I have seen this extraordinary document and I have compared it with the National Party’s policy which says: “Return the seabed and foreshore to Crown ownership.” I am therefore absolutely staggered that the National Party is open to the possibility of repealing the law that puts the foreshore and seabed beyond doubt in Crown ownership and that would leave us open to private exclusive title being issued over those very areas. That is my definition of a flip-flop. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: If the coastline of New Zealand is so protected as she claims why is her Government in negotiation with Ngati Porou Te Whanau-a-Apanui Ngati Porou ki Hauraki and Ngati Porou themselves when we all know that the only reason for that negotiation is that those tribes claim a proprietary interest in that 600 kilometres of coastline? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The legislation which the National Party opposed always gave the ability for Maori to have their customary territorial rights recognised. The National Party said that that was a terrible thing and there should be only Crown ownership. But now for political reasons National members want to flip-flop and open up the possibility for private exclusive freehold title to be issued. That is a flip-flop again. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Prime Minister is misleading the House and taking a position that can be described only as dishonest in suggesting that we are looking for private ownership of the foreshore and seabed. It is her Government that is about to give away 600 kilometres of coastline because a bunch of its friends have stuck their hands up and demanded it. This is a matter that perhaps should have been dealt with in different ways. It is bad legislation and I do not think it should be compounded in the public’s view by the Prime Minister being able to tell lies to the House. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Speaking to the point of order Madam Speaker firstly I ask that those comments be withdrawn. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The comments relating to? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Accusations of lies and dishonesty. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I withdraw those comments. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Secondly I put it to you Madam Speaker that there is no misrepresentation when we have the National Party prepared to consider supporting outright repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act knowing that that would leave us with the situation we had before the Act was passed where it was possible for Maori to move through to fee simple title. Those are the facts. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: These are debating points they are not points of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Prime Minister seen a leaked discussion document titled “National’s Relationship with Maori” where it reads: “We have made it clear that we want to help New Zealanders on the basis of need not race but any look at some of those statistics will show that the need does lie substantially with Maori.”; and does the Government intend to follow National’s key election policy plank which it knew to be completely untrue and that its credibility was on the line? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: From January 2004 the National Party through its leader set out to convey an utterly false picture of New Zealand whereby Maori were somehow privileged. Mr Brownlee’s memo makes it clear that he recognises that actually the neediest people in New Zealand are to be found in Maoridom and that needs something done about it. 
Metiria Turei 
: When the Prime Minister’s Government used the Foreshore and Seabed Act to confiscate the seabed apparently for the benefit of New Zealanders were New Zealanders told that the seabed was going to be leased to international seabed mining companies with prospecting licences issued covering a third of New Zealand’s coastline threatening our endangered dolphins and marine ecosystems and with no consultation with affected coastal New Zealand communities? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am told that it involves no change to mining legislation whatsoever. What the Act does is make clear the understanding that had been around for rather more than a century that these areas were in Crown ownership. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Has she received a report from Te Runanga a Iwi o Ngati Tama-Te-Ra that strongly objects to what the chairman described as “the backdoor deals” being negotiated with Ngati Porou ki Hauraki through the former Labour Associate Minister of Maori Affairs John Tamihere and the whanau of the current Minister of Maori Affairs the Hon Parekura Horomia in relation to Ngati Tama-Te-Ra’s interests in Tokatea and Mataora and will she follow the advice of Ngati Tama-Te-Ra that the Minister of Maori Affairs and the Attorney-General step aside from the process; if not why not? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I have not seen such a report but I would have been very surprised at any serious allegation that people who were seeking to exercise their rights under a statute are in some way acting in an underhand way. In fact to simply describe the chair of the runanga Ngati Porou Apirana Mahuika as somehow compromised because he might be vaguely related to a member of Parliament I think is simply ridiculous. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: I seek leave to table a letter from Mr D Baker the chairman of Te Runanga a Iwi o Ngati Tama-Te-Ra to the Hon Parekura Horomia dated 26 January 2006. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.