Madam SPEAKERI have received two letters from Rodney Hide seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the stepping aside of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the announcement that the Serious Fraud Office is to undertake an investigation into donations made to the New Zealand First Party. These are both particular cases of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibilities. The applications are interrelated, and I shall deal with them together.
Not every ministerial resignation, much less a stepping aside, would justify an urgent debate—Speaker’s ruling 166/5. In this case a Minister has stood aside while an inquiry is held into allegations that do not relate to official actions taken by the Minister. The matter is obviously not concluded. When the investigation is reported members will have an opportunity to raise its conclusions if this is warranted.
Furthermore, the Privileges Committee is also carrying out an inquiry into a related question of privilege. When the committee reports there will be an opportunity for a debate. As the matter has a way to run, and as last week three questions for oral answer specifically addressed confidence in the Minister of Foreign Affairs—and there was a further one today—I do not consider it requires the immediate attention of the House by way of an urgent debate today. That does not preclude an urgent debate in the future depending on the outcome of events. The applications are, therefore, declined.
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I accept your ruling, of course, but I find it a difficult one to accept. We are in the last days of Parliament, we have a case that is certainly consuming the nation and is of great concern to New Zealanders, and this will be the last opportunity that we get to debate this issue before Parliament rises. You say in defence of your ruling that there were three questions for oral answer addressing confidence in the Minister. They were not questions from me; they were questions from another political party. The point of an urgent debate is that this is a matter that concerns the whole House. If having a Minister of Foreign Affairs under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office having to step aside is not a matter of urgent debate, of concern to the public, heaven knows what possibly could be.