2. JOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does she have confidence in the Minister for the Environment; if so, why?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes; because he is a hard-working and conscientious Minister.
Is the Prime Minister aware that last Wednesday, when David Benson-Pope was asked about the sacking of Madeleine Setchell, he replied: “No, I don’t know anything about the detail of that issue,”; if so, how does she reconcile that answer with the fact that the State Services Commission report clearly shows that he was informed by the Ministry for the Environment of the issue prior to getting asked the question by a journalist last Wednesday?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Yes, I am aware of that statement. I am also aware of the fact that the chief executive of the Ministry for the Environment told Mr Benson-Pope that he was consulting with the State Services Commission on the issue. He did not give the Minister any detail.
Who is correct—the State Services Commission, which states: “the Ministry informed the Minister’s office about the exact nature of the relationship and noted that the Chief Executive was managing the situation.”; or David Benson-Pope, who claimed he did not know anything about the details of the issue?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
My understanding is that the Minister was referring to knowledge of detail of any way in which the matter might be handled, and any settlement that might be entered into.
Why would the Prime Minister accept the word of David Benson-Pope, when he is a Minister with a track record of telling anything other than the exact facts when he gets asked a question?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
It is a longstanding convention of this House to accept an honourable member’s word.
What lengths has the Prime Minister or her office gone to, to corroborate the story that David Benson-Pope has given her? Has she contacted Hugh Logan, and what answers did he give her?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I most certainly am not making any such contact. I have looked the Minster in the eye, I have had responses, and it is a convention in this House to accept an honourable member’s word.
Did the Prime Minister look David Benson-Pope in the eye when she asked him questions about relevant other issues on which he has been seen to be misleading the public, and was he twitching when he answered that time, as well?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Of course, but not as much as that tragic member just twitched when he asked the question.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Seeing as we do not want to support some incestuous cesspit building in this country’s bureaucracy, if Minister Benson-Pope did not know, why is it that he was not entitled to know; or should he not have known, given the proximity of this person to his operation, and would that not be normal in any sound office—in defence of Mr Benson-Pope?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
The Minister made a fair point, and a document has recently been issued by the State Services Commission on the issue of political neutrality. It states that the Minister is entitled to expect to be informed in advance of any issues or difficulties relating to the agency, and it refers to a no-surprises principle. The problem in this case—and in my view it was not a problem attributable in any way to Miss Setchell—was that knowledge of this did not make its way to the chief executive.
Madam SPEAKERWould everyone please be seated. It is impossible for me to be able to hear. If members do not keep their comments down, then we will be having this question time in silence.
Is the Prime Minister telling not only the House but the Public Service that she does not think it was appropriate that Madeleine Setchell would have been hired, because of her partner’s relationship with the National Party; and if that is the conclusion the public sector has to draw from the Prime Minister’s answer, will the Prime Minister also tell the Public Service that she now intends to root out others who work currently in their jobs, whose partners or siblings have a relationship with the National Party; and if that is the case, whatever happened to political neutrality?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, I do not intend to threaten the State Services Commission—that is what he did with his comments yesterday. That is how much he cares about their political neutrality.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Well, if you sit there a while, Nick, young boy, you will find out. All you have to do is keep quiet.
No—please be seated. Everyone knows that the Standing Orders say that questions should start with a question. If that was rigidly enforced, of course, I would be stopping every second person who asked a question. So I remind members again of the Standing Orders—you begin a question with a question.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. With respect, it is long established, in centuries of English, old and new, that one can frequently ask a question where the question word is the last word in a sentence. Where did this rule creep in whereby one has start with “what”, “where”, “how”, “why”, or “when”? That is not what this Parliament should be descending to.
Well, I am following the Standing Orders, and whether they follow Old English I do not know. But the Standing Orders do require questions to start with a question word. So would the member please ask his question.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
When did the Prime Minister first learn about the objectives of the State Services Commission and its rules in respect of employing people as public servants; and, second, why does she think that that objective nevertheless overrules the need for a Minister to have confidence that he is not being required to work with the enemy?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I learnt about the independence of the State Services Commission in respect of employment matters a very long time ago. That is why I was rather interested to have drawn to my attention today a report from 1996 that stated that the new conservation Minister at that time, Mr Nick Smith, had asked his director-general to resign over the Cave Creek tragedy, and it was reported that the confrontation between the two men had raised a major problem for the State Services Commission, the only body that can sack a departmental head. Nick Smith tried to do it himself.
If David Benson-Pope had nothing to hide and was not concerned about his actions and the implications on the longstanding convention about neutrality of the Public Service, why did he not simply answer the question factually with the information he had; or has the Prime Minister—the same Prime Minister who has campaigned on accountability—now decided that that applies to everyone in her Government except David Benson-Pope?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
There are obviously non sequiturs in that particular question. What I would say is that the matter could have been better handled in my absence last week. It is being handled now.
Is the Prime Minister aware that in answering questions on the radio this morning in relation to this issue, David Benson-Pope said: “We’d been informed …”, in which case, why does she accept David Benson-Pope’s word when he said he was not informed?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I am aware of the concept of the royal “we”. It should not have been used in that context.
Hon Trevor MallardIs it the situation, then, that when David Benson-Pope uses the word “we”—plural; in other words, meaning himself and his political adviser, Steve Hurring, the royal “we”—it does not apply to, in his case, a “me”; and is it not just a clear example that David Benson-Pope knew all along what was going on: he issued the instructions; Steve Hurring was simply the person who went and carried out the Minister’s message, and the Prime Minister knows that that is exactly the case?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Of course I do not know any such thing; nor is that my understanding of the issue. I repeat again for the benefit of the relatively new member of Parliament who is the Leader of the Opposition, that it is the practice in this House to accept the word of an honourable member—even him.
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. As you were saying those words, the Leader of the Opposition mouthed across the Chamber to me, at least three times, the word “liar”. I take exception to that. I take great care in this House to be an honest person in responding to questions, as I have today, and I would ask that that matter be dealt with.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
I seek leave to table the documents and reports at the time of Bill Mansfield’s departure, to make plain that at no time did I know, even today, the political affiliations of Mr Mansfield, and that I properly raised those issues—