Urgent Debates Declined — Tax System—Overseas Trusts

I have received letters from the Rt Hon Winston Peters and Andrew Little seeking to debate, under Standing Order 389, the release of documents that are alleged to show that New Zealand is used as a tax haven. The members have authenticated their applications with news media reports suggesting New Zealand is a tax haven. However, the making of allegations can never constitute a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility, and I refer members to Speakers’ rulings 212/3 and 212/4.

The Government is accountable for concerns raised about the alleged use of New Zealand as a tax haven, but this is an ongoing matter. To date, it has not announced any particular action it intends to take about the matter, or made any policy announcement. To warrant an urgent debate being held, there must be a new situation or decision of importance in itself. The absence of action on the part of the Government is not a particular case of recent occurrence under which an urgent debate can be sought, and I refer to Speakers’ ruling 212/2. The application is, therefore, declined.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not apply on the basis of allegations; I applied on the basis of international evidence, which has not been refuted, as to the personalities involved. No one in the Government, starting with the Prime Minister and the Minister of Revenue, has got up and said that those people are not transacting business in this country. They are not allegations; they are proven facts, and I want to have a debate on what that means for a country with our reputation.

I have given a ruling that three things must be met. Firstly, it must meet the case of recent occurrence; I am saying quite clearly that it does not. Then I had to consider ministerial responsibility. Finally, the third one is whether it requires the attention of the House. I have made a ruling; there is no debate.