Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:20359] 
3.  
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she stand by her statement to the House regarding claims that commissioner Doone had said: “that won’t be necessary” that “I can only imagine that the reporter put those words to me and I would not have been in a position to confirm them because they were not in the reports.”; if so how does she reconcile this with her signed brief of evidence that states: “I am informed that Mr Alley states he put those propositions to me and I said words to the effect of ‘you’re not wrong’. I accept that this is correct.”? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 By reference to the following sentence in that paragraph in the brief that Dr Brash has chosen not to quote which says: “I am certain that I drew attention to the issue that Mr Doone had disputed these details during the inquiries to which I have referred.” 
Dr Don Brash 
: Can she tell the House which version of events we are supposed to believe: the version she gave the House last week in which she denied confirming the words “that won’t be necessary” or the version she signed in her brief of evidence to the court last month in which she agreed that she had confirmed those words? Which version of the story are we supposed to believe is correct? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The member’s submission about what is in the brief is not correct. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Can the Prime Minister tell the House how the words “you’re not wrong” which she agrees she used to Mr Alley could possibly be construed to mean that she was in no position to confirm his statement as she told the House last week? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: When a two-part proposition is put to one and one laughs and says “you’re not wrong” but immediately points out that the second point is contested the facts are clear. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does the Prime Minister deny to the House that the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 in a phone call to her explained the gravity of her assurance by stating: “This is going to cost us a lot of money if we’re wrong.” and does she accept that in a subsequent phone call the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 editor read to her the opening paragraphs of the 16 June 2000 article so that the Prime Minister could confirm the accuracy of the detail before publication—which indeed the Prime Minister confirmed? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: No notes from any conversation with that editor have ever been made available to me. What is absolutely clear is that the substance of the story was always correct and that was that Mr Doone intervened in a way that was inappropriate. 
Dr Don Brash 
: If as media reports suggest there are tapes or transcripts of her conversations with the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 will the Prime Minister give her consent to the release of those tapes or transcripts so that we can judge for ourselves whether it is the version in her court evidence or the version she gave in the House last week that is correct; if not what does she have to hide? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I know of no tapes. I know of journalist’s notes from Mr Alley. I know of no notes from Ms Chetwin. It seems to me that the Opposition’s role is to try to help Mr Doone through questions in the House. The Opposition might also like to say whether its friends are bankrolling Mr Doone’s efforts. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Did the Prime Minister state in her signed brief of evidence that she had received a phone call from the editor of the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 in which “Ms Chetwin’s purpose in calling me appeared to be to reassure herself that the paper had adequately checked and investigated the matter.” and does she accept that it was only because she gave that reassurance that the paper ran the story? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: That probably was her purpose in calling. The point is that the substance of her story was always true. Mr Doone intervened. Dr Brash supports that inappropriate action. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Does the Prime Minister recall accusing in February 1999 the then Prime Minister Mrs Shipley of “prevarication and evasion” regarding a private dinner between Mrs Shipley and Kevin Roberts; further does she recall demanding that all documents be tabled and issuing an election statement on 23 November in which she said: “Labour will drive a culture of change starting at the top.”; if so as she has admitted that she leaked confidential documents—for which any member of her administration who leaked them would instantly be fired—and as she has admitted that she anonymously confirmed a false statement then allowed the newspaper to print a false statement on which she had “declined to comment” is this what she meant by “a culture of change starting at the top”; if not will she take the advice she gave Mrs Shipley and resign? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I lost count after about eight questions there— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sure the Prime Minister can address those questions. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I do indeed recall my comments at the time and I make the following observations. No one was threatening to sue Mrs Shipley—that is the first point. The second point is that Mr Doone went precisely because this Government would not tolerate two standards of justice one for the commissioner and one for other people. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Can the Prime Minister tell the House why it is that although her evidence to the court is littered with references to her inability to recall important details about her conversations with the  
Sunday Star-Times  
she is now so certain on the one aspect of those conversations that suits her case and can she advise the House whether this type of selective amnesia is going to be the characteristic of this administration in the future? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I can assure the member that conversations one has 5¼ years ago are not uppermost in one’s mind but I can also assure the member that I was assisted by journalist notes made available to my lawyer and I challenge the member to say that he can recall every aspect of what he said 5¼ years ago. 
Rodney Hide 
: Did she tell the  
Sunday Star-Times  
after it had published the article that Peter Doone would not get a cent out of the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 
because the Cabinet papers that she had seen would vindicate the  
Sunday Star-Times  
when they were released and did she also state to the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 that anyway Peter Doone was running out of money having spent $40000 fighting the Government to keep his job? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The substance of the story was always true and I challenge members opposite to say how Mr Doone is bankrolling his case—with support from their friends. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why as the Prime Minister was she having one communication let alone five communications with the media on this matter knowing that there were issues yet to be settled and is it not in line with the same performance with respect to Dover Samuels where on 18 December 2000 it was reported that she said: “He could not be an effective Minister with allegations swirling around him.” when she in fact was the person who was the chief swirler who passed on a vicious malicious totally false allegation that saw him lose his job and is that not a fact? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: There was a time when I used to pick up journalists’ phone calls; that time is largely now gone. One does learn from those experiences. 
Dr Don Brash 
: I seek leave to table for all members of the House and backbenchers of the Labour Party the brief of evidence of the Rt Hon Helen Elizabeth Clark dated 13th day of April 2005 for the High Court outlining the Prime Minister’s recollection of these events. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Is that in full? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: A clarification—is that in full? 
Dr Don Brash 
: Yes. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: There is no objection. The document will be tabled. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Rodney Hide 
: Is there anything in the statement of evidence by Mr Oskar Alley or Ms Suzanne Chetwin about their interaction with her that she contests and if there is why will she not share that with the House? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: As I said at my press conference yesterday there are matters in those briefs where no doubt content and context would be cross-examined if a matter ever went to court.