Urgent Debates Declined — Silver Fern Farms and Shanghai Maling—Performance of Regulators

My office has received a letter from the Rt Hon Winston Peters seeking to debate, under Standing Order 389, the performance of regulators in relation to the proposed joint venture between Silver Fern Farms and Shanghai Maling. As I am a shareholder in Silver Fern Farms, I have asked the Deputy Speaker to consider the application. I will now vacate the Chair and invite the Deputy Speaker to rule on the matter.

Kia ora mai tātou, tēnā tātou katoa. Members, I have received a letter from the Rt Hon Winston Peters seeking to debate, under Standing Order 389, the performance of regulators like the Financial Markets Authority in relation to the proposed joint venture between Silver Fern Farms and Shanghai Maling. The letter seeking an urgent debate was received on Friday, 3 June. It was not accompanied by any authenticating material. Previous Speakers have ruled that every statement in a letter seeking an urgent debate must be authenticated and that applications for an urgent debate that are not accompanied by authenticating material will be declined on that ground. The application is, therefore, declined.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You have my letter to the Financial Markets Authority, which is all the authentication you need. If you are referring to some other reference, like the 574 pages that they have got in China but not here, then that is another matter. But if you want authentication as to the complaint, I sent you my letter and you have it.

The letter was received over the member’s signature. There was no accompanying authentication—[Interruption] Do not call out while I am on my feet. The member has been here probably longer than most other people, and he knows the rules. I will not be trifled with in that regard. The application calling for the urgent debate is declined on the basis that it did not have authentication.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member should give me some assurance that he is not seeking to argue the point.

No, I am seeking a point of clarification. Are you saying that a member of Parliament’s complaint to a statutory authority is not authentication of his complaint?

There may have been material that was tabled in the House. It was not sent to the Speaker when seeking the urgent debate. The letter was not accompanied by authentication. That is the finding of many previous Speakers over a long period of time, as the right honourable member should be able to recall.