Peters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 12 April 2016. Volume:713;Page:10369. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When he said that Mr Shewan was independent was he aware of his Westpac Banking Corporation Australian-owned bank settlement of $2.2 billion to the Inland Revenue Department which it had attempted to evade in terms of taxation?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I would not want to agree with the member’s characterisation but yes I am aware he worked on the issue.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When he made the appointment about his expertise was he aware of the case Penny v Hooper where the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court dismissed Mr Shewan’s evidence as being inappropriate from an expert witness?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I was not aware of that particular point but I would say this: John Shewan has been highly respected across the tax industry in New Zealand. He has been chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers. He is someone who was given an award either in the Queen’s Birthday or in the New Year’s Honours. Frankly actually when it comes to financial expertise and knowing what he is talking about he runs rings around that member.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was about a case in 2010. Either he was aware or he was not aware and after that he should have been stopped.Mr SPEAKER: The Prime Minister immediately said he was not aware of that particular case.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. When he said he was not aware—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! It is a point of order. I wish to hear it in silence.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When the Prime Minister said he was not aware why then was he not stopped from rambling on about something he was not asked about?Mr SPEAKER: The member makes a reasonable point. As I have mentioned many times in this House I will determine when I think an answer has gone on for too long.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When the Prime Minister made the statement about the expertise of Mr Shewan was he aware of how his so-called expertise on form over substance on the wine-box allegations conflicted with the Privy Council the Court of Appeal and the full High Court of New Zealand?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am aware of John Shewan’s complete integrity. That is not something I am sure of when it comes to every member.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There are reasonably clear rules—and that have in the past been enforced—about questioning the integrity of other members in the House which stops members from doing so for very good reasons.Mr SPEAKER: And on that occasion it was not addressed to any particular member as I took it.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In which case it was directed at all members in which case I take offence.Mr SPEAKER: On the basis that Chris Hipkins is offended I am going to ask the Prime Minister to stand and withdraw the last part of that answer.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Sorry Chris. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The right honourable Prime Minister will now stand and withdraw it correctly without any addition.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I withdraw.Mr SPEAKER: Supplementary question—Order! [Interruption] When I am on my feet the Hon Amy Adams equally should be quiet.David Seymour: In what century did the wine-box inquiry take place?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: One so far back I can hardly remember it.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why did he tell The Paul Henry Show yesterday that he was taking a paper to Cabinet that morning proposing the appointment of an international tax expert?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Because I did.Rt Hon Winston Peters: So what happened to the international tax expert? Did he turn you down?Mr SPEAKER: Well he did not turn me down.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member can come into the House and abuse and bag Mr Shewan if he wants but Mr Shewan has a glittering career. I will get him to reflect on his own.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order. Why—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] I have not called.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Why is the Prime Minister allowed to lace up the end of every inferior answer with an epithet or insult?Mr SPEAKER: I invite the member to go back and equally look at his question where he finished his question by saying “Did he turn you down?”.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is this highly independent John Shewan the same John Shewan at National’s caucus party held at Premier House hosted by the Prime Minister?Mr SPEAKER: If there is any ministerial responsibility the Prime Minister.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Probably and so were the parliamentary press gallery and many other people. People love coming to a National Party function. It is a lot of fun. You used to be the cheerleader amongst them Winston.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I am just waiting for silence from my left.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Once again why is the Prime Minister allowed to get away with an end to an answer like that over and over again?Mr SPEAKER: I suspect if I had been applying the rules very strictly the question was out of order. It asked about an issue for which there is no prime ministerial responsibility. It is a party matter.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Why is it that you allow a question presumably because it is in order and yet when challenged as to allowing out-of-order replies always flick the complaint away by saying “I shouldn’t have allowed the question.”?Mr SPEAKER: No I didn’t—[Interruption] Order! I am happy to try to help the member. I did not say I should not have allowed the question. I said the question was not strictly in line with the Standing Orders. I can start if the members want me to to apply them very very rigorously. I suspect it would not be to the advantage of the Opposition and I suspect after a relatively short period of time members would wish that I did not do that. But in that particular case given the question the way it was asked and the answer the way it was given I was satisfied that it was within the bounds of the rules.Hon David Parker: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: Before I take any further points of order if it is in any way relitigating the decision I have made and the answer that I have given—Hon David Parker: No it is not.Mr SPEAKER: If it is a fresh point of order I am happy—Hon David Parker: It is a fresh point of order.Mr SPEAKER: A fresh point of order—the Hon David Parker.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. How was the question out of order?Mr SPEAKER: I thought again—[Interruption] Order! I will try to explain it. The issue was about the attendance at a National Party function.Rt Hon Winston Peters: No.Mr SPEAKER: Well as I heard it it was and that is the—[Interruption] Order! My patience is running extremely thin with Dr Megan Woods. If she continues to interject particularly when I am standing on my feet she leaves me no choice but to ask her to leave.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can he confirm that Mr Shewan was a longstanding partner and chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers New Zealand the same accounting firm that was directly implicated in the 2014 Luxembourg Leaks scandal?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question yes; in answer to the second part of the question no I do not know what the member is talking about.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware of the connection between PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Cayman Islands organisations and companies and trusts and one Codan Trust Company (Cayman) Ltd? Is he aware of that?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I seek leave to table relevant documents that relate to that last question of the Prime Minister where he appears blissfully unaware of what is going on.Mr SPEAKER: Order! No. Just explain the documents.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well you will not find them around.Mr SPEAKER: Just explain—[Interruption] Order!Rt Hon Winston Peters: This is a corporate record and register not available for public inspection that I seek to table.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular corporate record. Is there any objection? [Interruption] Is there any objection? There appears to be no objection; the member can table it.Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.