12. Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Why did he lose confidence in Dr Richard Worth as a Minister?
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
As I said on 3 June, Dr Worth’s conduct did not befit a Minister, and I would not have him in my executive.
Was his loss of confidence linked to his coming to a view that Dr Richard Worth may have offered ministerial appointments inappropriately?
I have no intention of going into the specifics, but I can say that I am satisfied that Dr Worth did not meet the standards that I set for my Ministers, and, therefore, when I lost confidence in him I sought his resignation.
If his loss of confidence was “nothing of a legal nature”, as he said yesterday, nothing to do with Dr Worth’s trip to India, because that was all aired some months ago, and nothing to do with Mr Goff’s phone call to the Prime Minister about 6 weeks ago, because he has discounted that, then what was it about?
As I said, I will not go into specifics, but it is fair to say that I lost confidence in Dr Worth, and, on that basis, he could not remain a Minister.
When he said yesterday that “I saw information I felt I needed to act on. I acted.”, what was that information?
I will not go into specifics. For a start, Dr Worth is now a member of the public; he is not a member of the executive, he is not a member of Parliament, and he is not a member of the National caucus. All I can say is that if I see information of that nature, then I will act, and I would act again if I saw that kind of information again.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was inevitable that at some point I would need to raise a point of order under Standing Order 377(1), which states: “An answer that seeks to address the question asked must be given if it can be given consistently with the public interest.” My submission to you, Mr Speaker, is that the last answer—we will stick with just the last answer—did not seek to address the question asked.
Mr SPEAKERIt is an interesting point that the member has raised. However, as Speaker, I cannot be the judge of the public interest in a matter like this. I have to rely on a Minister’s view of whether providing more information is in the public interest. I cannot be the judge of that. From what I heard the Prime Minister give in his answer, his assessment of the public interest is that it is not his intention to say any more about the matter, and he gave the reasons why. I will hear the member further, though.
I am happy to accept that ruling.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It is a new point of order. Given that this is a matter that certainly took the attention of the media yesterday, that has certainly taken the attention of the media over recent days, and that certainly is in the interest of members of the House, I wonder whether the Prime Minister is entitled to come to a view as to what is in the public interest and what is not, when it is blatantly obvious to many people that this matter is in the public interest.
I accept the genuineness of the member’s point of order. These are, obviously, difficult issues. I have to repeat that, as Speaker, I cannot make that judgment; only a Minister can make the judgment as to whether providing certain information is or is not in the public interest. I therefore have to accept the Prime Minister’s assessment that, now that Dr Worth has retired as a Minister, which is the principal issue—and he has retired as a member of Parliament, too—there are matters of privacy at stake. I cannot second-guess the Prime Minister’s judgment on this matter, and I therefore have to let the Prime Minister’s answer stand.
Has the Prime Minister told his Cabinet colleagues why he lost confidence in Dr Richard Worth as a Minister?
I am not going to go into the specifics of the matter, but it is fair to say that if somebody does not enjoy my confidence, then he or she will not remain as a Minister.