MR SPEAKER: Question No 5, Hon Phil Goff.
Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill) to the Prime Minister:
Does he take responsibility for his office staff
passing on information obtained from the NZSIS
to Cameron Slater in 2011 for political purposes?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes, I take responsibility for my staff,
although I would note that the inspector-general
specifically says in paragraph 17 of her report
that the disclosure of any information did not breach
any obligations or confidentiality. I go back to the point I made earlier.
Cameron Slater may well have asked for an OIA request;
so did a whole lot of media at exactly the same time.
The problem was they did not ask for it in the form of an OIA.
Hon Phil Goff: Is the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security therefore
accurate in stating in her report on page 8, paragraph 17:
“The NZ Intelligence Security Service information was disclosed
by a member of the staff of the PM’s office to Cameron Slater for political purposes.”?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY: That is her assessment that there was a discussion,
but she goes on to say that it did not breach any obligations of confidentiality
owed to the NZSIS on the part of the PM’s office staff.
Would that be any different from coming down to this House
and releasing documents and file notes from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade
in relation to one of the members of this side of the House—gone by lunchtime?
Does that mean anything to you, Phil—Mr Goff, I mean—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Order! The PM has answered the question.
[Interruption] Order! I will just wait for a little bit of silence.
There is a discussion across the floor. [Interruption] Order!
Hon Phil Goff: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I cannot hear a word
you are saying because the PM is interjecting, constantly.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Order! I was equally having trouble hearing.
That was why I was trying to get some silence.
But I can assure the member that the interjections were not coming
from just my right; they were coming equally from my left.
Hon Phil Goff: Does the PM’s answer to the last question imply
that he feels that the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security
was not accurate in stating explicitly that material from the SIS
was transferred by his office staff to Cameron Slater, and is she wrong
in saying that the very moment that Cameron Slater pushed the button
to send the Official Information Act request on the SIS, your staff member
and senior adviser Jason Ede was on the phone to Cameron Slater?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! It certainly was not my staff.
The PM can answer either of those supplementary questions.
Rt Hon JOHN KEY: As I said, I am not questioning that there was
a discussion and I am not questioning that there is a contested view on information.
I am sure that is right. But what is also absolutely clear
is that the inspector-general has made it clear that any discussions
and any information, if it was exchanged, did not breach any obligations of confidentiality.
They are quite free to do that. What is a breach of confidentiality
is when someone goes to the media a day before a report is due to be released,
because it is embargoed—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The PM will resume his seat.
[Interruption] Order! I would be very reluctant to ask the PM
not to be here to answer the rest of question time.
[Interruption] Order! If the House will not settle down,
it leaves me with no choice but to ask members,
regardless of their seniority, to leave the Chamber.
The member Phil Goff will ask a supplementary question
without interjection, and there is certainly to be no interjection
from my right-hand side.
Hon Phil Goff: Why was it appropriate for Jason Ede to pass on information
to Cameron Slater so that he could put in an Official Information Act request
for party political purposes, when the PM constantly tells this House
that he wants security intelligence matters to be dealt with on a non-partisan basis,
when his very office made the SIS a highly politicised organisation?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Well, it is quite the contrary. In fact, actually, what the report absolutely
indicates is that there was no indication of collusion or direction by the NZSIS.
It made all of the decisions itself. In fact, all the claims made by Mr Goff
prior to the election do not stack up. So now we have only one question:
Mr Goff, will you deny that you leaked it yesterday?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! It is not the PM’s job
to be asking supplementary questions.
Hon Phil Goff: When the PM has spent 3 years denying that his office had anything to do
with passing information from the SIS to Cameron Slater,
did his staff members Phil de Joux and Jason Ede lie to him about that;
if not, why did he mislead the country?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have not. Mr Slater put in an Official Information Act request—
he is quite free to do that— and so did other members of the media.
Unless all of them were on the same conversation,
then one has to assume that the reason the Official Information Act request
came in from the media and from, actually, Mr Slater was as a result
of the statements made by Mr Goff and myself— and I am prepared to accept that both of us
relied on misleading information. That is actually why both of us
have got an apology today.
Mr SPEAKER: Question No 6, Melissa Lee.
Subtitles by the Amara.org community