Points of Order — Tabling of Documents—Leave Given for Incorrectly Described Document

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to start by apologising for interrupting the debate, but earlier, during question time, I sought leave of the House to table a letter that I described as being to the Greater Wellington Regional Council. I incorrectly stated that. The letter was actually to Local Government New Zealand. So I would like your guidance, and it may be that I need to seek leave again. The letter is dated 10 August 2015, from the office of Simon Bridges to Local Government New Zealand—

Order! I can handle this with ease. The letter, from memory, was accepted and tabled. Is that correct?

💬 Ron Mark: Yes, yes.

So the letter has been tabled. I think it just—

💬 Ron Mark: Sorry, I have not tabled it. To clarify, there was no objection to my tabling the letter that I requested, but I incorrectly described the letter. It is to Local Government New Zealand.

I think, on that basis, the member could proceed to table it because I think that the inaccuracy is relatively unimportant. The document may be of information to members. But I think it goes to show how careful members should be when I ask them to describe documents with accuracy. In this case, I do not think it is necessary to put the leave again. The member can proceed to table that document.