Points of Order — Allegations—Hon David Benson-Pope

I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Under Speaker’s ruling 127/2, “Denial by a member of a charge or insinuation, or of a statement imputed to the member, must be accepted.” This is a very old Speaker’s ruling going back to 1881. It seems to me that we have a quandary, because the Hon David Benson-Pope said on 12 May in this House that he did not commit the two assaults, and, as I understand Speakers’ rulings, we have to accept that in this House. You know that I have raised this matter with you. You ruled it out in the first instance on 7 June for a lack of evidence and said that if I got more material I could put it to you. I wrote to you again once the police came out with their press statement, and, on 24 November, you came back to me and said that I was out of time.

Now, the precise situation is that the police report released yesterday said that the evidence was essentially overwhelming that the two assaults took place. I am in the position that I believe—like a great many members in this House, including some of the Labour back-benchers I have spoken to—that the police version is to be accepted. So I believe the police. That leaves me in the quandary that if I stand up in this House and say that I believe the police report, I am essentially breaking the Standing Orders, because Mr Benson-Pope has denied that the two assaults took place. That seems to me to be a silly situation when the House as a whole believes it took place—the police certainly do, and so do the public of New Zealand. I am wondering, Madam Speaker, in relation to this very old ruling that goes back to 1881, whether you can shed some light on how we might proceed in the light of the police report.

The member cannot refer the matter of a privilege issue from the floor of the House. As the member indicated, he has written to me again on the matter. As the member is also aware, he has not been precluded from anything yet until a determination has been made on that matter. If the member has a question he wishes to ask to be ruled out of order, or a debating point he wishes to make in a debate that is ruled out of order, then he can ask the Speaker to reconsider those rulings at that time. The matter at this moment is at large and has not been determined. I think we should leave the matter there until it is, and move on.