Source: New Zealand Parliament – Hansard
Question No. 4—Prime Minister
4. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Prime Minister: Is he confident that officials and Ministers are making decisions transparently and impartially?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Broadly, yes. Ministers and officials make a broad range of decisions, each governed by different processes and considerations. The high-quality nature of those decisions, and the accountability and review mechanisms for decision makers in those decisions, is a core feature of New Zealand’s Government, and one of the main reasons for New Zealand’s renowned for transparency, good governance, and ease of business.
Brooke van Velden: How can a developer applying for a subdivision consent be confident the independent hearings commissioner does not have an investment in a competing subdivision, when the Prime Minister couldn’t trust his own transport Minister to declare shares of Auckland Airport when declining “airport authority” status to the North Shore Aerodrome?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Those two things are completely unrelated. But if the member has any evidence of the first, I’d encourage her to share it.
Chris Baillie: How can a humble pub owner applying for a liquor licence under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act be sure that the district licencing committee members haven’t invested in a competing pub, when the Prime Minister couldn’t trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining “airport authority” status to the North Shore Aerodrome?
Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Two parts of a question need to have something to do with each other. I think we can see what’s being attempted here by the ACT Party, but I can’t see how the first part of that question is in order as a question to a Minister—the Prime Minister, in this case.
SPEAKER: The primary question has quite a wide scope to it. The Prime Minister is basically responsible for everything that the Government does, so I’m going to allow the question. But like I’ve warned members before, especially when they get more than one lead to a question or it’s not particularly—if you’re wanting a specific answer like that, you may not get that.
David Seymour: Is he going to answer the question, Mr Speaker?
SPEAKER: Yes. The question’s been asked and the Prime Minister will address it.
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The two issues that the member raised in the question are completely unrelated. Again, the allegation in the first part of the question is a serious one. If the member has any evidence that that has happened, then he should produce it. But in answer to the second part of the question, the Minister concerned had declared the shares.
Simon Court: How can miners applying for mining permits under the Crown Minerals Act be confident that the responsible Minister hasn’t invested in a competing mine, when the Prime Minister couldn’t trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining “airport authority” status to the North Shore Aerodrome?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Again, that’s a very serious allegation that the member has made in the first part of the question. If he has any evidence at all to back up the allegation that he’s just made, then he should produce it.
Dr James McDowall: How can he be confident that nobody approving or declining Callaghan Innovation grants has an undisclosed share in the applicant or their competitors, when the Prime Minister couldn’t trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining airport authority status to the North Shore Aerodrome?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: If the member has any evidence to back up the claim he’s made in the first part of the question, he should produce it.
Karen Chhour: How can people dealing with Oranga Tamariki (OT) be confident with OT staff making decisions to put children in foster families’ care don’t have undisclosed interests in the adopting families, when the Prime Minister couldn’t trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining airport authority status to the North Shore Aerodrome?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I think that’s an absolutely disgraceful way of abusing a system that’s designed to protect children, and the member should know better.
Damien Smith: How can overseas investors be confident that nobody in the Overseas Investment Office making decisions about—
Hon Dr David Clark: He’s using a dead baby’s passport.
Damien Smith: —the application has shares—
David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I just heard David Clark make a pretty outrageous heckle which, first of all, he shouldn’t be speaking; questions should be heard in silence; and, second of all, he might like to consider withdrawing the remark that he made, if he feels that’s appropriate.
Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, it has occurred a few times, in your reign as Speaker, where the nature of questions has led people to interject during them. We’ve just had a succession of questions from the ACT Party that have impugned a range of public servants, public service agencies, and Ministers, and I don’t think it’s surprising, in light of those questions, that there will be interjections during them.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, it’s not for individual members in this House to determine the appropriateness or otherwise of a question—that’s you’re your job. That’s why we have collectively supported you in the chair. And the questions that were asked from the ACT Party may not be comfortable for people who are hearing those questions, but they are, none the less, legitimately asked and should, wherever possible, in the public interest, be given an answer.
Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to that point of order.
SPEAKER: Do you have to? Quite clearly, the questions being asked have upset some members of the House. That doesn’t automatically mean that they’re out of order. I have allowed the questions to be asked, and members of the public will make their own judgment around them. But I thank the father of the House for his intervention.
Hon Members: Grandfather.
SPEAKER: Yeah, well—I think I’m acknowledging the experience of the member and his contribution. So whilst members might not like what they’re hearing, in terms of the question, the member does have the right to ask it. Would you like to ask it again?
Damien Smith: How can overseas investors be confident that nobody in the Overseas Investment Office making decisions about their application has shares in land or companies affected by the investment, when the Prime Minister couldn’t trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining airport authority status to the North Shore Aerodrome?
Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I’m absolutely satisfied that if any of the very serious allegations that the ACT members have raised in any of their questions have any basis of fact, that there are systems in place to deal with them.
