3. Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) Link to this
to the Minister for Tertiary Education
Can he confirm that an April 2002 briefing to the Associate Minister of Education and the Minister of Education contained this statement regarding Te Wānanga o Aotearoa: “Ministry officials have stressed the need for increased governance involvement, oversight and financial management and planning.”; if so, which Ministers and officials were responsible for ensuring those concerns were acted on?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister for Tertiary Education) Link to this
Yes. The quote referred to is one used to describe the advice from officials to the council of the wānanga that the officials are working with. Those officials were those from the Ministry of Education. The responsible Minister at the time was, of course, the Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education).
Has the Minister seen a report dated 18 June 2003, to Steve Maharey and Trevor Mallard, outlining officials’ concerns about poor governance, conflicts of interest, and financial mismanagement, and their concern that there was a lack of progress on dealing with these issues; and why did the Government wait another 2 years before taking decisive action to sort out problems in the wānanga, when Ministers knew the facts in 2003?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I do not recall seeing that particular report. Action had been taken in May 2002 in respect of the appointment of a Crown development adviser.
Hon Marian HobbsWhat action was taken to assist the wānanga council to improve its “governance involvement, oversight and financial management and planning”?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
As I said, a Crown development adviser was appointed in May 2002. In addition, other advisers were brought in to assist with the development of rules. The problem is that often rules are adopted—including rules around conflict of interest—but those rules are subsequently breached.
Does the Minister stand by his statement, made on National Radio, in respect of the work done by officials and Ministers: “None of that worked. We can agree on that. It didn’t work.”; if so, who is accountable for the multimillion-dollar failure of officials and Ministers to safeguard taxpayers’ money spent on the wānanga over the last 5 years?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I would have thought that the person primarily accountable was, of course, the chief executive, Mr Rongo Wētere, who is now on leave.
Why did the Labour Government make Shane Jones the chair of Parliament’s Finance and Expenditure Committee, when he was a member of the wānanga audit and finance committee, where one of his responsibilities was policy on credit card use, which the Auditor-General described in his report, released yesterday, as unacceptable?
Madam SPEAKERI note that the Minister has no responsibility for that appointment. That appointment was made by the committee. Would the member please submit another question.
Has the Minister seen reports that Labour MP Shane Jones, now chairman of Parliament’s Finance and Expenditure Committee, was a member of the wānanga audit and finance committee during the period covered by the Auditor-General’s report, and that one of his responsibilities was policy on credit card use, which the Auditor-General describes in a whole chapter of analysis as “unacceptable”?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Yes. I am advised that he also resigned in frustration at the lack of progress being made, whereas—[ Interruption]—peace to that member, too—as recently as June of this year, Mr English appeared to have learnt nothing about the failures at the wānanga.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Yes. I have received reports with comments: “The answer here for the wānanga is that the Government stops trying to take it over.”, “The wānanga is not in a financial crisis and has not been.”, and “They are good. They are courses that do have value. They do reach a lot of people.” Those comments came from the Hon Bill English in June this year.
Why does the Minister keep saying in the media that the council of the wānanga has changed from the time when the Government threatened to sack it, when only one of the existing five members of the council is a new appointment, and the rest of them, including the chairman, are long-term members of the council who were there right through the period investigated by the Auditor-General, or are close associates of Rongo Wētere; why does he keep misleading the public about that?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Far more than five members have ceased to be members of the council, and, as that member should know very well, one can be a member of a body and still be a minority within it.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
Can I ask the Minister whether the quotes he quoted in the last supplementary answer bar one were made on a Māori radio station, and whether that is the explanation for the inconsistent comments that he has heard from Bill English—it is one of those things one says to brown people as opposed to when one speaks on National Radio?
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister is not responsible for any of those issues and cannot answer the question.
Gerry BrownleeI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. How can Dr Cullen be responsible for where quotes are made? That would be one question. The second question is what else was there in the part that you have picked out that made it comply, when there is clearly no ministerial responsibility for what a member of the Opposition has said.
The Minister, in making the quotes, therefore made himself responsible for those quotes, and therefore a question directed at them was, in fact, in order—but not the second part; the first part was in order.
It is a clarification on your ruling. You have just ruled that, by using the quote, the Minister himself is responsible for the quote. How can that be?
He is responsible for it to the extent that the veracity of that quote can always be challenged by another member. So I would ask the Minister to address it to that extent. It is the veracity of those matters that he is responsible for.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. A technique that is repeatedly used by Ministers to avoid the Standing Order and make quotes of the sort Dr Cullen made is to give a big, long quote then, right at the end, put the name of the Opposition member who is associated with it. If they put the name at the front end, the matter would clearly be out of order, and you would intervene to say it was outside the ministerial responsibilities. I would just ask you, as Speaker, to wake up to that technique, and to ensure that both the intent and the meaning of the Standing Orders are complied with, and that that technique is not used just as a mechanism for Government Ministers to be able to misquote Opposition members.
I thank the member for his comments, but, as I have ruled, a Minister can be challenged or questioned on any quote he makes. That is what happened in this instance, and that part of the question should be addressed now.
Ron MarkI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. We down here on the cross benches have been unable hear everything, and in the points of orders we have actually lost track of what the question was. I ask whether we could have the question asked again, please.
I think the member makes a very valuable point. The level of noise in the Chamber through chatting or commentary on questions or answers does make it very difficult for other members to hear. I tend to allow members to respond robustly, but when it impedes the hearing of other members I will intervene more often. For the purpose of the members who did not hear the question, I ask that the question be repeated—but only that part of it that was in order.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
Were the quotes the Minister supplied made on a Māori radio station, and does he have any explanation for that?
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Can you explain to us where ministerial responsibility applies in this case. If members of the House are able to ask silly questions such as: “Where did you get the quote from?”—and no one is disputing the quote; the issue here, as Dr Smith pointed out, is the misuse of the quote, and that misuse is well outside the Standing Order—[ Interruption]
The point is that no one is disputing the quote; the issue is that the quote is being used in a way that is outside the Standing Orders. If you allow this question, it simply runs away from the intent of question time. Question time is to scrutinise Ministers, not comments made by members of the Opposition.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Apart from anything else, if members wish to have this point of order applied, then, of course, that would have ruled out Mr English’s question to me about whether I had seen reports that Mr Shane Jones had been involved in doing something. I am afraid that Opposition members, if they get a ruling on this in the way they are seeking at the moment, will find asking some questions in the future very difficult indeed.
I will rule on the point of order. The Minister has used quotes; therefore, the Minister can be asked about those quotes. There is nothing unusual in members quoting someone else and being challenged when they do in fact make that quote.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Yes. I am advised that the comments occurred on the Willie Jackson programme. It does seem to me to be important that one has one press statement for all.
Can the Minister explain the conflict of interest inherent in the Crown’s appoint of Mr Graeme McNally as the development adviser to the wānanga, when the wānanga is audited by the Auditor-General by statute, the Auditor-General has delegated Deloitte’s to carry out the audit of the wānanga, and Mr Graeme McNally, on whom the Crown has relied for advice over several years, is a partner in Deloittes—the firm that does the audit and should have uncovered all the financial mismanagement that the Auditor-General uncovered?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I am advised that the conflict was not known to the Minister at the time that Mr McNally’s appointment was made. Mr McNally, of course, had been appointed—
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
The Mr Angry act will not do in this respect. Mr McNally had been used frequently in terms of tertiary institution monitoring, and very successfully. When the conflict became clear, Mr McNally’s appointed ceased.
How long did it take two Ministers of Education, one Minister of Finance, and 350 officials, all being paid tens of thousands of dollars, to work out that Mr Graeme McNally, a partner in Deloitte’s and auditor of the wānanga, was the same Mr Graeme McNally who was paid $127,000 by the Government to give the Government advice on the wānanga, and is not that a direct and fatal conflict of interest?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Rather too long, in my view, but significantly less than the time that member has taken to discover there is a financial problem at the wānanga—because he still does not think there is one.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I asked the Minister how long it took three Ministers and 350 officials to work out that Graeme McNally, a partner in Deloitte’s, was the same Graeme McNally that the Government had appointed to give independent advice on the wānanga, and the Minister did not answer that question.