2. Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he believe that all persons who have served as Ministers in his Government have met the requirement of the Cabinet Manual to behave in a way that upholds, and is seen to uphold, the highest ethical standards in their ministerial capacity, their political capacity, and their personal capacity; if so, why?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes, with the exception of Dr Richard Worth; because they are talented people who are working hard for New Zealand.
What ethical standards did his Minister Pansy Wong and her husband breach in their publicly funded travel to China in December 2008, which required her resignation?
The former Minister has accepted that she made an unplanned and inadvertent mistake, and I have accepted that. As we all know, from time to time we all make mistakes.
Is he fully satisfied that the misuse of public funds to travel to China to carry out private commercial business, the signing as a Minister of a business agreement in which her husband had financial interests, and promoting that business in China on a website were the only breaches of the highest ethical standards by his Minister?
I do not accept the second part of the question. The advice I have had is that the signing of a document is not in breach of the Cabinet Manual.
Will he, in the interests of transparency and the highest ethical standards, ask the Auditor-General to investigate any misuse of ministerial travel or authority relating to Pansy Wong, given her proven misuse of parliamentary travel funding, and given the precedent of his referring Phil Heatley’s case to the Auditor-General; if not, why not?
I think it is worthy to note a few things. Firstly, in the case of Mr Heatley, I was the responsible Minister as Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. In the case of Pansy Wong, it was a matter for Parliamentary Service, and therefore the report was sanctioned by the Speaker. But I say to the member that if he has any information that he feels is relevant, he is welcome to refer it to the Auditor-General himself.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was an elongated way of refusing to answer a question. The Minister was saying he was not responsible for your expenditure. The question was directly about Ministerial Services expenditure and Pansy Wong’s air travel.
Mr SPEAKERI hear the point the member is making, but he would note that the Prime Minister, in the last part of his answer, answered it by saying if the member asking the question had any relevant information in respect of that matter, then he was welcome to take up the matter with the Auditor-General. I believe that was an answer to the question.
If the issue is about ministerial travel and misuse of ministerial authority, why is it not his responsibility?
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I ask you to reflect on the Prime Minister’s answer. He said it was not his responsibility. What advice does he need that he cannot answer that question in a straightforward way?
The Prime Minister has answered the question. Members may not like the answer, and the public can judge the answer, but I believe it was an answer.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That could be an answer to any question. Any ignorant Minister could stand up and say “I have not had advice on that matter.” He is—
I have heard the member’s point, but the public will judge the quality of an answer. It was an answer, and members do not have to like it, but I cannot insist on a more precise answer to a question exactly like that. I will listen very carefully to the member’s next supplementary question—I am sure he will have one.
Why will this Prime Minister not accept his responsibility for any misuse of ministerial travel and ministerial authority?
Is the Prime Minister telling this House that he is not aware of the fact that his Minister misused her authority to expend public funds for a business trip, and misused her position to promote a private business interest on a website in China?
The member is now debating the issue; that is not a matter of order. The member will resume his seat.