Intelligence and Security Committee — Membership

I move, That under section 11 of the Intelligence and Security Committee Act 1996 this House endorse Rt Hon Winston Peters as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee, nominated by the Leader of the Opposition, with the agreement of the Prime Minister, under section 7(1)(d) of the Act. The Intelligence and Security Committee is a very important piece of the security architecture of New Zealand. It is a body where information that pertains to the best interests of all New Zealanders is able to be considered by, generally, senior politicians from this House.

It is important that in all of our security arrangements there is an exercise of civilian control, and in the matters that relate to this committee it is important that we have people sit on that committee who have a long experience or a significant responsibility for the delivery of the work of this Parliament on behalf of the voters of New Zealand.

The Rt Hon Winston Peters has a long history in this Parliament, huge experience of how to operate inside a democracy, and has, of course, at one point been a Deputy Prime Minister, as well as a Treasurer and a foreign Minister. His breadth of experience, from both that appreciation of democracy and understanding of the security needs of New Zealand, and his experience in this House, make him ideally suited to sit on this particular committee. I therefore commend the motion to the House.

On behalf of the Labour Party, I absolutely endorse the nomination of the Rt Hon Winston Peters for this position. As the Hon Gerry Brownlee has already indicated, there is no one in this House with longer experience or, indeed, broader experience than the Rt Hon Winston Peters. I do not think that anyone in this House doubts his capability. We may disagree on minor matters at times, but I think all of us know him to be a man of integrity who will get the balance right between the security interests of the State and the rights of people not to be intruded upon unduly, and who will be discreet as is required. I have no hesitation in recording that—well, as nominated by the Leader of the Opposition.

One final point on that: the closer we get to proportionality on that committee—representing the face of this Parliament—the better. I think this is the right nomination, and we will be voting in favour of the motion.

The Green Party also supports the nomination of the Rt Hon Winston Peters as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee. We believe that the nomination of Mr Peters by the Leader of the Opposition, Andrew Little, is the appropriate one to make in the circumstances. The Green Party has always had respect for the political experience of Mr Peters and the breadth of his knowledge acquired throughout his time in the House but also, particularly, as Minister of Foreign Affairs, which is directly relevant to this appointment.

The Green Party, in the course of the passage—if I may just recall the adoption of the Intelligence and Security Act, which I believe came into force on 28 March and had its passage through the House in recent months. It was quite recently that the Committee of the whole House was immersed in the whole issue of the structure of the intelligence and security apparatus of this country. The Green Party was very pleased that changes were made in the Committee to the legislation—as I think the Hon David Parker has alluded to—that resulted in the requirement that from now on, when nominating a person for membership of the committee, the Leader of the Opposition and the Prime Minister must have “regard to security requirements and the proportional representation of political parties in the House of Representatives.”, at section 194(5). We were pleased that that was able to be adopted by the House.

I think this goes a long way to getting the right balance between the national security requirements of this country and the regard for different angles that the people of New Zealand, represented by the political parties in this House, bring to bear on the issue of national security and the relationship of that to human rights, not least the right to privacy in this country. So in that respect we regard the appointment of the Rt Hon Winston Peters as an appropriate step along the way to the proportional representation that is already enshrined in section 194(5), and we look forward to the fulfilment of that legislative requirement from now on in the future.

I want to, firstly, thank the leader of the Labour Party Andrew Little, the Leader of the House, the National Party, and the Prime Minister for the nomination of the Rt Hon Winston Peters and for their acceptance of that. I also thank the Green Party for its support, which it has just indicated here today.

There is an old saying in Māoridom that the kūmara does not tell you how sweet it is, so it is a good thing that I get the opportunity to tell you how sweet the kūmara is. The Rt Hon Winston Peters is, we believe, absolutely the correct appointment, for some of the reasons that have just been highlighted by the Hon David Parker. We are talking of his integrity, his discretion, his long service, and the fact that he is trusted. As the Hon Gerry Brownlee has just said, he has also served this Parliament and the New Zealand people well in the most senior of offices—be that as Treasurer, Deputy Prime Minister, or, on occasion during the coalition Government time in the 1990s, Acting Prime Minister—and has done so with aplomb and distinction. I guess the other thing we note in New Zealand First is that the Rt Hon Winston Peters is the only member of the Privy Council in the House, and we take great pride in that. He has also been recognised by being invited to speak in the House of Lords on at least two occasions that we know of.

Mr Peters will, I think, serve the interests of the Green Party and all other parties in this House very well. For those who might have thought that he would be very, very conservative and very strictly war hawkish—well, you have never seen that demonstrated by Mr Peters. In fact, Mr Peters’ endorsements of my views on the Iraq invasion back in 1993 and later, in the years 2000, and his adhering to those sometimes very controversial views on deployments into the Middle East, is, I think, something that gives comfort and satisfaction to other parties in the House—that he will be a very balanced mind and a person who will exercise experience and wisdom in adjudging security matters.

Once again I want to thank the Government very much for supporting his appointment. I thank the House for the endorsement, and assure it that Mr Peters is looking forward to the responsibilities and will perform with distinction, as he always does.

I have never heard a more solemn or subdued debate in this House, and I could barely hear the words of Gerry Brownlee, David Parker, Kennedy Graham, or Ron Mark through the chewing on dead rat that was stopping those words from getting out. Well, I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to this motion. I cannot think of a worse person in this House who could be nominated to such an important committee as the Intelligence and Security Committee.

We know that security is important and perhaps now more important than at any other time, with the various geopolitical tensions that we face, whether they be off the coast of North Korea, in Syria, or wherever else. We know that terrorism is changing its shape and is becoming harder and harder to detect and prevent.

💬 Darroch Ball: What would you know, David?

💬 Ron Mark: Jumped-up little prick.

We know—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I will ask the member to sit down for a second. This is clearly controversial and painful for some members, but they must control their interjections to those that are appropriate. I am not looking at Mr Mark; I am looking at Mr Ball at the moment. You must not bring me into this debate.

Thank you for your intervention, but I am not bothered by the squealing from New Zealand First—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The member has now been here long enough to know that he does not comment on my rulings, and he will not if he wants to continue.

I apologise, Mr Assistant Speaker. What do we need in a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee? Well, I would say that such a member should be diligent, should be collegial, should be honest, and, ironically, should be prepared to put New Zealand first. And what do we see in the characteristics of Winston Peters? This is a guy who has been called diligent. Well, I prefer the words of somebody else whom we are about to debate, Simon Upton, who said of his time in Cabinet with Winston Peters: “There was something genuinely sad about watching him arrive at Cabinet meetings with his papers unread, still tightly secured by their green Cabinet Office ribbon.” That is the person going on the most important committee in New Zealand, according to this motion. I have watched the same thing in the Finance and Expenditure Committee in the last 2 years, when he shows up with his papers unread, asking questions that would be embarrassing if only anyone could understand what he was trying to say, far off topic, to the bemusement of the officials before the Finance and Expenditure Committee.

I said that a member of this committee should be collegial. The least collegial person in this House is someone who has been sacked from three different Cabinets by three different Prime Ministers. That is the opposite of collegiality. This committee requires someone who is honest, not somebody who has been censured by this House—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The member has just reflected on the honesty of another member. He will withdraw and apologise.

I withdraw and apologise, but putting the interests—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Mr Seymour, you cannot withdraw and apologise and say “but”, all right? Just make it absolutely unequivocal and move on to another topic.

I withdraw and apologise. Now, the next thing that you might want in a member of this committee is the ability to put New Zealand first. Well, the fact of the matter is that Winston Peters is like one of those old lags in prison—somebody who cannot retire, who cannot go nowhere else, because he has got nowhere else to go. The Rt Hon John Key—he could retire, because he has got other options. He has got other things to do. In fact, most members of this House have that, but Winston Peters is somebody who has absolutely nothing else to offer the world and is scared to leave this House.

Order! The member’s speech is concluded.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. As an elected member, I have a right to speak in this House and time on the clock. Could you please explain—

The member will resume his seat. [Interruption] The member will resume his seat. I will give the member an explanation. His speech has been terminated for repeated breaches of the Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings. He had been warned twice, and he breached on a third occasion. I think the member knows about the three-strikes law. He is probably lucky to still be here.