Labour blocks questions on Taupo petition costs

Press, 4 October 1982, Page 21

Labour blocks questions on Taupo petition costs

PA Wellington The Labour. Party blocked questions asked in Parliament about whether it still owes $lO,OOO in costs arising from the. Taupo electoral petition result five months ago. But the party's general secretary. Mr John Wybrow, confirmed later that Labour had accepted that the amount its petitioner will have to pay is $10,784. Mr Wybrow also repeated the point argued in Parliament by .the Opposition, that the costs were awarded against the party's unsuccessful candidate, the former member of Parliament, Mr J. W. Ridley, and not the Labour Partv.

Mr Wybrow said the court registrar had apportioned witnesses’ expenses' and disbursements (including hotel accommodation), and Labour had only recently finally

agreed on the amount that was its share. Earlier, on July 5. the court had awarded twothirds of the costs. The petition result was announced on April 21. After Labour stopped-ques-tions from a Government member of Parliament in the House, the Prime Minister, Mr Muldoon, had the final word.

He rose to a point of order and said, “Everybody knows the costs have not been paid." Amid the uproar of Government members of Parliament and angry shouts from the Labour benches, the Chief Opposition Whip, Mr J. L. Hunt told Mr Muldoon he was a “silly fool." ■ Mr N. P. H. Jones (NatInvercargill) advised Labour members of Parliament to “take the hat round,, chaps." Mr P. R. Burdon (Nat.,

Fendalton) had attempted to read his substantive question on the Parliamentary Order Paper, which asked the Minister of Justice, Mr McLay. if enforcement proceedings had been taken against the Labour Party to obtain costs awarded against the party in the petition. Mr Wybrow said later that no proceedings had been taken against either the party or Mr Ridley. When the question was to be put in the House, Mr F. D. O'Flynn (Lab., Island Bay) objected, saying it was incorrect to say that the costs were awarded against the Labour Party. He pointed out that the litigation was between the successful candidate, National's Mr R. N. McClay, Mr Ridley, and other persons.

Mr O’Flynn also said the question did not comply with

Standing Orders, because questions put to Ministers had to relate to public affairs.

"There is a great distinction between matters of public interest — things in which the public take an interest — and public affairs. , "The public, regrettably, is very often interested in personal affairs when they become published, but they do not become public affairs."

The Speaker ruled that Mr Burdon would have to resubmit the question another day because it should refer to litigation between persons, and not involve the Labour Party.

He also said the Justice Department had a responsibility for collecting costs, and so the matter was one involving Ministerial responsibility.