2. Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Did the Controller and Auditor-General seek a meeting with her to discuss his report into Government and parliamentary publicity and advertising; if so, what was the outcome of that meeting?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) Link to this
The Auditor-General wrote to me, as I am sure he wrote to Dr Brash, offering the parliamentary Labour Party, as I am sure he offered the parliamentary National Party, a briefing prior to releasing his report to other parties. The Labour Party, unlike the National Party, did not think that was an appropriate course of action. Indeed, the Auditor-General had previously indicated in writing on 17 December that he would circulate a draft to all parties—which, in the event, is what he did.
Does the Prime Minister accept that as the highest-elected official in the land she had an obligation to offer support to the Auditor-General as he sought to eliminate unethical or unlawful spending; and how can she therefore explain her refusal even to meet with him?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
To use the member’s words, as the highest-elected official in the land I also have a responsibility to ensure that small parties’ interests are properly looked after.
When did she or any of her Ministers know that the Chief Electoral Officer had ruled that the pledge card constituted election material and should therefore be included in Labour’s return of electoral expenses; and what specific actions did they take to ensure that their overall spending did not exceed the maximum allowed?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Those are matters for which the Labour Party determines the level of expenditure. They are not matters I deal in, just as I am sure the Leader of the Opposition would not want to be held personally responsible for his party not being able to figure out GST.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I asked the Prime Minister when did she or her Ministers know that the Chief Electoral Officer had ruled that the pledge card was an electoral expense item. She has totally failed to address that question.
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
The member will have to put that down in writing, because I am not the person who organises the budget for the campaign. It is quite clear that the Leader of the Opposition knew a great deal more about the Exclusive Brethren advertising.
Rodney HideI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am asking you to rule, because the Prime Minister’s first response to the question was that she actually had no responsibility for the question. Well, actually she does, because she is the Prime Minister 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and she was specifically asked about when she knew. Subsequently, she said that she did not know and that a question would need to be put to her in writing for an answer to be given. Madam Speaker, I would like you to rule whether the question was in order, so that a written question can in fact be put in.
Madam SPEAKERI thank the member for his point of order. The Prime Minister did address the question when it was re-put to her, and she has obviously asked for that to be put to her in writing so she can answer it fully. So the question has been addressed. It was in order, as was the answer.
Which other Ministers, or other senior Labour Party officials, were implicated with the Prime Minister in deciding to distribute the taxpayer-funded pledge card, knowing that it would put them in breach of the Electoral Act cap; and will they now at least show some remorse and repay the money to taxpayers?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Such material has never been considered attributable in the past, and the Labour Party’s position is that it is still not attributable. But while we are on the subject of what is attributable expenditure, I wonder who paid for the simultaneous delivery, in the city of Gisborne, of leaflets put out by the National Party and the Exclusive Brethren respectively. Both leaflets went out at the same time. Was that attributable?
Is the Prime Minister seriously asking this House to believe that she is smart enough to be Prime Minister of this country yet not smart enough to recognise that a pledge card she used at the launch of Labour’s campaign, and which was used throughout the campaign, was not somehow a campaign item that should have been included in Labour’s electoral expense return?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Such material has never been considered attributable—just as I assume the National Party thought its material was not attributable when the party circulated it, and just as I am sure Dr Brash thinks it is not attributable expenditure to have the Exclusive Brethren take lines straight out of National Party policy and put them in leaflets. Where is that in his party’s election return?
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. You have had, again, a further demonstration of the National Party’s inability to have an answer given to them and to keep quiet so that the rest of us can hear it. That braying has reached a new tempo, and so early in the year. Those members may not like the news they are receiving, but they are bound, surely, to let the rest of us share in hearing it.
Madam SPEAKER: I agree with the member. We have had equal braying from all sides of the House, so perhaps we could keep the noise to a level where the rest of us can actually hear the answer to a question.
Can the Prime Minister recall a few years back signing a painting that had been prepared for her, and is she now prepared to sign this cheque, which I have had my office prepare for her to sign, so that she can repay New Zealand taxpayers the $446,000 used by her office to fund an electoral expense?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I will be very happy to bring down to the House a similar document asking the National Party to refund to the Exclusive Brethren half a million to a million dollars, which National told the Chief Electoral Officer was not attributable because it did not know about it. But the Leader of the Opposition has confessed that he knew all about, agreed with it, and thought it was tremendous.
Ron MarkI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I seek your advice, as you clearly understand the rules of the House better than I do. Is there any protection for parties who bring innovative ideas to this House from parties who copy New Zealand First in bringing cheques to the House, as Mr Brash did? Is there any protection for us against such plagiarism?
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I note the objections and scorn that came from the National benches, but can I tell those members, through you, that if they have anything original that is not a direct copy of New Zealand First’s strategies, then maybe I would not object.