3. Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he stand by his advice to the House last Tuesday that he accepts former Minister Pansy Wong “made an unplanned and inadvertent mistake”?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes, because that was the finding of the independent McPhail report.
Would he be surprised to learn that having approved his Minister’s private travel to China in December 2008, Mrs Wong was greeted in Lianyungang by a large, pre-printed banner, which, when translated, read: “Warm welcome to New Zealand Cabinet Minister to visit and inspect our company”, and does he therefore still believe that the trip was private, and the mistake unplanned and inadvertent?
To the latter part of the question, yes. To the former part of the question, no, because when one goes to China and one is an important person, often there are banners. I accept that that member would never have had one other than “Goodbye and see you later”, but members on our side of the House get lots.
Would he be surprised to learn that Mrs Wong then inspected that company and encouraged “the staff members of Hovercraft to be innovative and brave”, and that she wished “the company achieve a great success in the nearest future”; and, noting that her husband is a part-owner of that company, does it now occur to the Prime Minister that the trip to Lianyungang was motivated by matters other than attending the flower show, as Mrs Wong claimed?
Mr SPEAKERNo. It was acknowledged that Pansy Wong visited that company. Good wishes to people who work in companies are not unusual things to express.
Would he be further surprised to learn that while in Lianyungang city Mrs Wong met with the chief secretary of the city and “attended the signing ceremony of co-operation framework agreement between New Zealand Pure Natural Ltd and the people’s government of Niushan town, Donghai, and Lianyungang city”, all of this on a private trip he approved; and did he know that the majority shareholder of New Zealand Pure Natural Ltd is Sammy Wong, who was also there on a taxpayer-funded trip?
No, I have no knowledge of that. But what I can say to the member, as I have said the whole way through, is that if the member wants to take anything to the Auditor-General or the police, he is more than welcome to do so, and the resignation of Pansy Wong from Parliament does not alter that one little bit.
Acknowledging that Mrs Wong’s resignation does not alter that fact one bit in respect of the possibility that public moneys may have been misused, will he now agree to refer these issues to the Auditor-General, showing leadership that he managed to discover with earlier Ministers but somehow not with this Minister?
The Prime Minister has no responsibility for members travelling on a private trip. I do not see why the Prime Minister is responsible for that issue.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has the ability as Prime Minister to refer anything he wishes to the Auditor-General, and he is being asked whether he intends to do what he did previously—for example, not all of Mr Heatley’s travel was ministerial travel and—
I have heard the member sufficiently. The Prime Minister may answer the question in so far as it is simply seeking his view of something, but it does not automatically mean the Prime Minister has the responsibility. I call the right honourable Prime Minister to answer the question in so far as he can.
No. For me to do that would be to rely on the information that Pete Hodgson has, or thinks he has, and, actually, in my experience of Pete Hodgson, he is more often wrong than he is right.
Hon Phil GoffAs the Prime Minister has acknowledged he knew nothing about a second visit to a company largely owned by Mr Wong, does he still stand by his statement of 9 December that “there is no basis for further investigation”?
Yes, and if any member wants to take any allegations to the police or the Auditor-General, then they should feel free to do so.
Does he stand by his statement on 9 December that Mrs Wong’s misuse of a taxpayer-funded trip was simply “an innocent mistake” and that she was certainly fit to remain as a member of Parliament; if so, how does he explain the Wongs’ failure to come clean with Mr McPhail about the full extent of their business dealings while in China on a taxpayer-funded trip?
Why was the Prime Minister in this morning’s media so keen to see referred to the Auditor-General unproven allegations against Len Brown, Mayor of Auckland, when he is not prepared to send proven allegations against the Wongs to the Auditor-General?
I have a number of documents, which I seek leave to table. The first is called a supreme newspaper. It is a newsletter of Lianyungang Supreme Hovercraft Ltd dated January 2009. It is off a website that has subsequently been taken down, and, as well as the original Mandarin and photographs, it has an English translation.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. When people object, they must say so. The Prime Minister cannot object by nodding.
I thought I heard the Prime Minister say yes. [ Interruption] Well, I am sorry but the Speaker determines that matter.
I seek leave to table an extract from the New Zealand Companies Office database regarding New Zealand Pure and Natural Ltd, showing major shareholding by Sammy Wong and other shareholders, including Jenny Shipley.
I seek leave to table a document from the Lianyungang City Overseas Exchange Association website congratulating Pansy Wong on becoming a new Cabinet Minister in New Zealand, dated 2 December 2008, and acknowledging that she will travel to Lianyungang towards the end of the year, which she did 3 weeks later on an unplanned trip.