2. Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
What specific circumstances led the Cabinet Office to issue circular CO(02)14 Guidance for Dealing with Information Relating to Publicly Listed Companies?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) Link to this
A Cabinet minute authorising Treasury and the Cabinet Office to prepare such a circular.
Can the Prime Minister confirm that it was her comments regarding Air New Zealand shares while the Government was trying to purchase Air New Zealand that gave rise to the Cabinet Office circular, and is her Minister of Communications, the Hon David Cunliffe, obliged to follow the guidance in that circular?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I can confirm that in the earlier Securities Commission report referred to by the member the Securities Commission expressed great surprise that there had been no guidelines available for Ministers, and that was why the guidelines were prepared. Of course, they are guidelines for Ministers; as I have said on different questions about Cabinet guidelines over many years, they are not laws—they are guidelines.
Why does the Prime Minister continue to defend the public statements made by David Cunliffe, when he has clearly breached the Cabinet guidelines; and why would anyone take them seriously if she does not censure her Minister?
Do the Cabinet guidelines say: “… Ministers … should act cautiously when dealing with matters relating to a publicly listed company ….”, and: “Market participants may act on statements by Ministers, even if those statements are made without the benefit of confidential information.”; and if the guidelines do not apply to David Cunliffe’s statement on Telecom, whatever could they apply to?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
The guidelines are indeed along the lines suggested by the member, but the Minister believes he was cautious.
If she believes that the Minister was cautious, does she approve of the climate he has created whereby the chief executive of Vodafone New Zealand Ltd yesterday felt compelled to write a grovelling letter to the Minister expressing regret that a court proceeding had resulted in unexpected criticism of him, and apologising for this very unfortunate situation?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I understand that Vodafone first suggested writing that letter shortly after the court judgment referred to.
Is the Prime Minister aware that the letter was written yesterday, not after the court proceeding, and does she consider that investors can trust and give credibility to the Minister of Communications, when he has made public statements that wiped hundreds of millions of dollars off the value of one telephone company, and encouraged another telecommunications company, which he is also responsible for regulating, to write a shamefully grovelling letter to make sure it is on the right side of the Minister in case he says something that affects it?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
When I checked the share price before giving answers on this question yesterday, it was clear that at that time the shares were trading higher than they had been before the Minister’s comments, which would not suggest that great value had been wiped off. [ Interruption] The second point I make—and I know the Opposition does not like the facts, but I will spell them out—is that shortly after the court case referred to earlier, Vodafone itself had prepared the letter to send. The fact is it was finalised yesterday but had been in draft form for many, many months.
I seek leave to table a letter dated 23 May 2006 from Russell Stanners, Chief Executive of Vodafone, to the Minister of Communications, David Cunliffe, apologising for causing unexpected criticism of him by a High Court judge.
Is the Prime Minister now telling companies that are in industries regulated by her Ministers, and investors in those companies, that any Minister can say anything he or she likes—with any consequence—that breaks her own Cabinet rules, and that is just fine with her because she did it herself?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Obviously not, and certainly I would not tolerate reckless statements of the kind made by Mr English on one matter after another, including his claiming only yesterday that no option of a boys school had been given in the Flat Bush area, when the facts are there was no community support whatsoever for that. Mr English has constantly made reckless comments and made things up.