5. Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) Link to this
to the Minister of Police
Will she assure the House that in relation to the police decision not to prosecute the Hon David Benson-Pope, Mr Benson-Pope was treated in the same way as any other New Zealander would have been treated; if not, why not?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) Link to this
I am advised that the decision not to prosecute the Hon David Benson-Pope was made by the Southern Police District commander, Superintendent George Fraser, in line with normal police procedure. To quote Superintendent Fraser: “Mr Benson-Pope is being treated no differently from any other person who might have similar matters raised about them.”
In making their decision not to prosecute, despite a prima facie case, did the police consult the Solicitor-General, a man who recommended against prosecution of the Prime Minister but for the prosecution of a National MP?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
My understanding was that certainly consultation took place with the Crown solicitor in Dunedin. I am not aware whether there was consultation further up the line in Crown Law.
Is it now police policy that they will no longer prosecute child abuse cases where they happened a long time ago and the child was too scared to complain about it at the time?
Was it not clear to the Minister of Police, from reading reports, that her police staff thought there was enough evidence that Mr Benson-Pope did abuse those children?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
In this Government the Minister of Police plays no role in questions around police prosecutions. I hope that that will be a tradition continued by all future New Zealand Governments.
Hone HarawiraKo te take kāhore koe e hāmenehia i a David Benson-Pope he tohu mō taua kōrero, arā, kotahi anake te ture mō te katoa, ā, mēnā e kore koe e whakaae ki tērā, ko tēnei pea te tohu hōnore mō rātou e mā ana wā rātou kiri?
[Is the decision not to prosecute the Hon. David Benson-Pope an example of “one law for all”; or is this what we understand to be white privilege?]
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
No, my understanding is that police have made decisions not to prosecute some similar events in the far north in the past.
When we consider the list of Labour Ministers investigated by the police—Helen Clark, John Tamihere, Dover Samuels, and now David Benson-Pope—why is it that there is always enough evidence to prosecute everyone else but them?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I repeat, the prosecutions are decisions taken by the police—[ Interruption] Well, if members opposite want to call Superintendent Fraser a liar, they can do so, but I suggest they do it outside.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
If the police receive an Official Information Act request they will consider that request under the statutory provisions. They will make that decision.
Rodney HideCan the Minister confirm that the conflicting evidence that the police had before them was 19 students who were there on the day, independently all confirming that David Benson-Pope tied a student’s hands to the desk and jammed a tennis ball in his mouth, as against David Benson-Pope denying that it happened, and can he also confirm that the police were considering charging David Benson-Pope, not just with assault, but also with making a false statement to the police and attempting to pervert the course of justice?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
No, I cannot confirm that, but I can confirm that other students have recalled that the principal accuser repeatedly hit out at students, pulled students’ ears until the webbing bled, regularly kicked students in the spine, hung a student out of an upper storey window, repeatedly broke a boy’s glasses, and physically assaulted teachers. If that is what Mr Hide is relying on, good luck to him!
Judith CollinsI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I thought that the Minister just before, in answer to one of the questions from the Hon Tony Ryall, said that the report would not be released. Was that right?
Madam SPEAKERThe report on “paintergate” was released by the police at the time they made the announcement of their decision. The report on the Benson-Pope case has not been released at that time, and it should be released.
That is not a point of order, but if the member wants to ask a supplementary question, please do so.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The difficulty we have is that Ruth Dyson, during the course of her answer to my colleague, said that the member would know if she had read the police report. How can my colleague know what was in the police report if the Minister will not release it? That is why I would challenge the Minister. To be consistent with what Ruth Dyson said, why does the Government not release the police report so that the public can see the truth?
Hon Dr Michael Cullen Link to this
It would be terribly helpful if the point of order actually related to what I said. What I said was that if people apply for the report from the police, the police will deal with that request under the Official Information Act. It is a matter for the police, not the Minister.
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. A moment ago the Minister appeared to be quoting from the police report. If that was the case, I ask that he table the police report.
Hon Dr Michael Cullen Link to this
No, I was not; I was quoting from a summary of a range of evidence sent to Mr Benson-Pope about the accusers. I am happy to table that document, with leave.
Hon Dr Michael Cullen Link to this
I do not have it. The police have the report. The National Party seems to be under the impression that Ministers of Police read the actual, original police reports. Those are matters for the police. This is not a police State.
No, I have heard enough. The point of order has been ruled on. I understand that the current matter before the House is to seek leave to table that document. Is there any objection to that? [ Interruption] I will take one point of order at a time. [] I am sorry, but obviously—as members have raised this issue two or three times—there is some difficulty in hearing in the Chamber. On occasion I also have had difficulty in hearing. I ask members to please not talk when others are asking questions, and I also ask that they keep the level of noise down when Ministers are answering them; otherwise, we will not make progress. I ask the Minister once again, finally, to describe the document.
Hon Dr Michael Cullen Link to this
The document I have in my hand is a summary, in particular, of a range of submissions sent to Mr Benson-Pope by ex-students, relating particularly to the people who have made the accusations. I am happy to table the entire document.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. While Dr Cullen was attempting to table the document the first time, a barrage of interjections was coming from Nick Smith, and that is the reason members could not hear what was being described. He was doing that while Dr Cullen was on his feet making a point of order. You have ruled very clearly on what happens in these matters.
Yes, I have. I know that it is a Thursday, but all members are now on their last warnings. We like to have a bit of give and take in the House, but unfortunately that has been abused.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. In answering that question, the Minister named three individuals and made very serious allegations against them. Unfortunately, the Minister has mixed up the three individuals with another student. I suggest to him that he be very careful with his evidence, and I invite him to stand on the steps of Parliament and say that he stands by what he just said in the House today.