John Armstrong: Hawkins rescued by Peters’ retreat

Sometimes an Opposition MP poses a question to a minister which is so gobsmackingly good that even a practitioner as quick-footed and witty as Michael Cullen is left gasping for a suitable reply. And, more often than not, such gems get lost in the parliamentary ether.

Pity poor Tony Ryall. National's law and order spokesman had a beauty lined up for the Deputy Prime Minister yesterday as Dr Cullen undertook the almost weekly chore of expressing confidence in Police Minister George Hawkins.

Standing in for an absent Prime Minister, Dr Cullen affected a bored-sounding "yes" as to Helen Clark still having confidence in Mr Hawkins while opposition parties seized on reports that police had told a South Auckland dairy owner they would not investigate thefts from his shop because they were not high priority.

Why then - asked Mr Ryall - was the Labour leadership continuing to express confidence in Mr Hawkins when the wider Labour Party had just demoted him down its list?

For once, Dr Cullen's reply about the respective qualities of the Labour and National lists failed to cut it.

Unfortunately for Mr Ryall, however, it was not going to be another miserable afternoon for the besieged Minister of Police. Winston Peters had already seen to that.

A stunned silence had earlier greeted the New Zealand First leader as he repeated his allegation that Auckland bookshop owner Jim Peron is a paedophile.

 

So much for quietly dropping the matter after being accused of abusing parliamentary privilege when he first asked questions about immigration checks on Mr Peron.

On the Act benches, Rodney Hide, who has staked political credibility on defending Mr Peron, sat in open-mouthed amazement at what he was now hearing for the second time.

Even so, he and other Act MPs were clearly reluctant to be drawn into an argument - until Mr Peters asked Immigration Minister Paul Swain whether he had any reports "there is a political party that seems to be a defender of paedophilia behaviour and paedophiles".

Richard Prebble and Stephen Franks immediately accused Mr Peters of a slur on their characters and demanded an apology.

Extracting an apology from Mr Peters is the parliamentary equivalent of pulling wisdom teeth - it can take a long time and there is a lot of resistance.

When the Speaker, Margaret Wilson, suggested Mr Peters might have implied individual Act members supported paedophiles, Mr Peters claimed he had referred only to a party, not specific MPs.

Despite the Speaker's insistence, Mr Peters continued to refuse to apologise, leading Mr Prebble to urge the Speaker to "name" him.

Mr Peters has already been "'named" twice in this session and a third offence would have had him shut out of the chamber for 28 days.

He finally offered an apology of sorts - one confined to Mr Prebble and Mr Franks. This inevitably brought Mr Hide to his feet to say he too was offended, prompting Mr Peters to relent completely and offer an unconditional-sounding apology.

Across the chamber, Mr Hawkins was no doubt offering his thanks. Tomorrow's headlines were already written - and he would hopefully not be now starring in them.