Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:631;Page:3469] 
12.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: When does she expect to receive the Ingram report on alleged conflicts of interest involving Taito Phillip Field given that she originally set the deadline for 4 October last year just 9 working days after she first established the inquiry? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 When it is finished. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Has the Prime Minister’s maintenance of “regular contact” with Taito Phillip Field led her to stand by her statement of 14 September last year: “I think the only thing he is probably guilty of is trying to be helpful to someone.”; if not why not? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Indeed I think he was but I am awaiting a full report. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When Taito Phillip Field told the media: “Only God knows the truth of what is going to happen … you should ask him” did she take that as a commitment to his remaining a member of the Labour Party; if not what commitment has she received that he will remain in the Labour Party in Government? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That question relates to the Prime Minister as a party leader not as the Prime Minister. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. That question goes right to the heart of the Government’s ability to maintain a majority. I do not think the matter can be dismissed as being a Labour Party issue; it is very much an issue for the Government. Everyone knows that if Taito Phillip Field leaps to some other party as he is entitled to do then the Government would suddenly need to have a different set of arrangements to maintain a majority. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: This is a very important point because of course if that question is allowed it is equally in order for us to ask questions of Dr Brash in his role as leader of the parliamentary National Party about members of his caucus. The fact that there is a differentiation in role between being the leader of a party and being the Prime Minister is fundamental to the way in which question time can operate. If the member cares to consult the Standing Orders he will find that it is possible to address questions to a private member in relation to his or her parliamentary responsibilities and if that question is allowed in the form in which it has been asked then we can ask that member—and I am sure we would like to frequently—questions about his colleagues and his responsibility for them. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: The reason why I believe that that question falls within the Standing Orders is that the Prime Minister also has a responsibility to maintain the confidence and supply of this Parliament—in other words a majority. If one of her members has an intention to leave her party that brings into question her ability as Prime Minister to maintain a majority in this Parliament. She is responsible for that. [ 
Interruption 
]  
Madam SPEAKER 
: Order please! This is an important point. The Prime Minister can certainly be asked about whether the Government has the confidence of the House but the issue is about the individual member in terms of his party membership. So I ask the member to try to redirect his question towards the issue of ministerial responsibility. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: When the Prime Minister told the media that Taito Phillip Field’s position is that “he is working through the issues in the report but I have no reason to doubt his membership of the Labour Party.” was she saying that regardless of the seriousness of any of the findings in the Ingram report no actions of her former Minister while he was a Minister could be sufficiently serious for her to question his continued membership of the Labour Party in Government? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That relates to when the member was a Minister so if the Prime Minister can address any confidence she has at that level not after the time when he stood down from being a Minister then that would be acceptable. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The member is not a Minister so I do not have responsibility for his actions. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: During her “regular contact” with Taito Phillip Field did he discuss with her the reasons that the Asian crime unit may have been investigating his activities? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: My contact with Mr Field is as the leader of the party not as Prime Minister. I have responsibility here only as Prime Minister. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: In ensuring that she maintains a majority in this Parliament does she have any standards at all that she expects of members of her administration in meeting the normal legal requirements of this country or are there no standards at all and would she accept any behaviour in trying to maintain the confidence and supply of this Government? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Mr Field is not a Minister and in terms of standards Dr Smith would never make the cut in this Government either. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. You have just heard a most serious allegation made against a member of this House. I would have assumed that such a serious allegation would be backed up with some proof or documentary evidence or with something to verify the reason that that question was asked. The question was not asked accidentally; it was planned. I do not know whether there is such evidence but Dr Lockwood Smith owed it to this Parliament to provide some evidence before he asked a question in such a cavalier fashion implicating a member of Parliament in a possible crime. I ask him to give us that evidence. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. 
Taito Phillip Field 
: I seek leave to make a personal explanation under the appropriate Standing Order of this House. I want to make it clear to this House and to the member that has just asked those questions in relation to a possible investigation that the only thing I am guilty of is to go overboard or to go the extra mile in order to help people who came to me in a desperate situation. I want to make that quite clear to that member who has on various occasions in the last few months questioned the Prime Minister with regard to that issue. I want to make it quite clear that my statements to the media last week in relation to the question the reporter asked me about my future meant that I do not have a crystal ball. All I said in response to that question was that only God knows the future and that the reporter should ask Him. If the member wants to make something out of that statement in relation to my loyalty to the Labour Party then he is going down the wrong track.