6. GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Why has she not asked each of her Ministers for an assurance that neither they nor any members of their staff were responsible for last week’s leak of the confidential Budget-related Cabinet paper?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) Link to this
Because I trust my colleagues, unlike the member, and because the State Services Commission inquiry is under way. I do note that it is the deputy leader of the National Party who is asking questions about leaks today.
Can the Prime Minister explain why, given that only her Cabinet Ministers and their closest advisers would have had access to the Cabinet paper, which had a commercially sensitive header on every page, she or her staff did not take the most obvious step and ask each of her Ministers whether they or their advisers were responsible?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
The member is wrong. The material referred to, I understand, went wider than Ministers’ offices.
Is her failure to ask Ministers the obvious question because she knows that the answer she might get is an answer she does not want to hear?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Absolutely not, although I appreciate that is probably why Dr Brash has not asked Gerry Brownlee, a recipient of the email, whether he leaked it.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Has she contemplated the investigation being widened to other MPs and their leaks of sensitive information—such as this email, which talks about targeting tactics, the most effective ways to achieve political objectives, a boast of being involved in a US$2 million to US$50 million campaign, formulating a specific plan, and consultancy and strategic advice—and would she consider widening the ambit of investigations to include an email from two Americans to Dr Brash and Peter Keenan of the National Party?
Madam SPEAKERRt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. With respect, this question is to do with investigations of leaks of sensitive information. I am just asking the Prime Minister—in fairness—why she would stop with her own administration when others in this House are having similar problems in respect of such behaviour.
Because, obviously, there is no responsibility for that matter, which is why I have ruled accordingly.
Would the Prime Minister be interested in receiving the advice that the only American bagman involved in the 2005 election campaign was a gentleman by the name of John Edward Foote, who has admitted he has connections to American political systems and has admitted that he was in receipt of funds from the US—and who was, in fact, the campaign chairman for the New Zealand First Party?
No, the Prime Minister has no responsibility for that matter. [ Interruption] Could we please have supplementary questions that are within the context of the Standing Orders.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Is the Prime Minister interested in widening the ambit of investigations to include the Parliamentary Service, which provisions the offices of MPs, to do with leaks such as this one, in which a senior businessman has suggested: “We can best serve your campaign if Sam and his family consider living in New Zealand for a period of time.”, and further: “This would be a unique opportunity to see one of the most beautiful countries in the world and change it for the better.” Does she not think that that sounds perilously—[ Interruption] There are five people there that should be sent out of the House.
Yes, I know. But the Prime Minister has no responsibility for the Parliamentary Service, so if the member would like to recast the question to bring it into context.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Prime Minister may not have responsibility for the Parliamentary Service, but she sure has responsibility for investigations, and she can determine the terms of reference as wide as she might wish, including the Security Intelligence Service. That is what makes her responsible in the manner in which I have asked that question.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. It is also my understanding that under the State Sector Act, I think, the Prime Minister does have the ability either to invite or direct the State Services Commissioner to inquire into matters that involve Crown entities, as well as departmental spending. Therefore, for those reasons, I think the question does come within her very broad responsibilities.
I thank the members for their assistance. It is certainly true that it would be within the jurisdiction of the Prime Minister to widen the terms of reference, but unless she does so, it is not the subject of a question. So when she does that, if she does it, it would come within the context of questions in the House.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Would the Prime Minister consider asking the person in this House in charge of the Parliamentary Service to conduct an investigation into leaks from MPs’ offices of the nature I have just outlined today, which suggest interference from abroad to change the country and positioning people in this country to run strategic advice for a certain political party—in this case, the one led by Don Brash?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Yes, that could be considered, but I doubt the Opposition would want the inquiry widened because the leak seems to come from rather too close in.
Speaking of leaks coming from close in, have any members of the Cabinet or their staff had their access to Cabinet papers revoked or restricted since last week’s leak; if so, in which ministerial office are they located?
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Was the Prime Minister aware, when Gerry Brownlee asked that question regarding one John Foote, that Mr Foote is a New Zealand citizen—
The member was asking a question. There was a deliberate interjection from a member of the party that is always asking for impartiality. You are all on your last warning. Would Mr Peters please start his question again.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Was the Prime Minister aware, when Gerry Brownlee asked that question, that John Foote, like many members of this Parliament, was born overseas but is a New Zealand citizen and has been for years, that there is no truth whatsoever about any funding coming from anywhere internationally to New Zealand First, and that, in fact, Mr Brownlee was just making it up as he went along?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I am intrigued that yesterday Mr Peters was accused of being anti-American, yet today National has attacked him because someone born in the United States helped with his campaign. Those National members should make up their minds.
Has the Prime Minister asked the Hon David Cunliffe for an assurance that neither he nor any of his staff were responsible for the leak last week; if not, why not?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
As I have said, unlike members opposite, I trust my colleagues. I know that Mr Cunliffe would no sooner have leaked that paper than flown to the moon.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. That answer was an interesting one. It perhaps addressed the question, but the answer certainly was not in the public interest. Although we know that David Cunliffe is an ambitious man, certainly we accept that he himself would not have wanted to leak such a document. But we do want to know whether he has been asked about his understanding of his staff’s involvement.
As the member indicated, the Prime Minister did address the question. As members know, answers are not required to be “Yes” or “No”.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Does the Prime Minister intend to ask the Speaker of the House, who is in charge of the Parliamentary Service and, therefore, for MPs offices, to tighten up security within those offices to avoid the kinds of leaks that concern two emails—the subject of which are a party leader’s denials—one dated 6 July 2004, which is about to be tabled today, and the other dated 20 July 2004, which irrefutably demonstrate his total knowledge of what was going on?
Hon Dr Nick SmithRt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I will leave the issue of investigation to the Speaker’s judgment, but I am indeed intrigued by the inconsistency between these emails and what Dr Brash said before the election. It does not add up.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Now that the National Party is flying a white flag, I seek leave to table the following document. It is an email from Sam Van Voorhis and Kurt Anderson to Dr Brash and Peter Keenan, dated 6 July 2004.