 offensive my questions to has he seen any reports dated in 2008 of a political party wanting to have the mixtonship of the modelsequently supplies to Kiwbками and which if so, which political party was it? the order of point of order is being called the right row Winston Peters the very order, the very obvious response to that inappropriate question is that that minister Order! Remember it was you Miss Seat! Right now! Order! Order! Order! Just because a member in the House doesn't like a question being asked, the question is in order, it relates to strategic assets and the sale of strategic assets. The Prime Minister asked about whether the Minister had received certain reports. The Honourable Bill English to answer it. If I wasn't sure which political party it was when the Prime Minister asked that question, I am now, and I think it was New Zealand first who advocated mixed ownership model for Kiwi Bank in the 2008 election. Question. Point of order to the right Hon Winston Peters. It's padly obvious that he has received a report. Order! Order! Order! Order! Order! Order! Order! Order! Order! Question. In 2008, you proposed floating shares in Kiwi Bank. Is that still your policy? No, I didn't say that. I said, if you want to expand Kiwi Bank and didn't have the money, and so you were taking, say, from $1 billion to $1.5 billion, floating the second $500 amount. You wanted to sell shares in Kiwi Bank, didn't you? Can I answer the question? You're asking for an economic equation. The public are entitled to it even if you can't understand it. What I was saying is, if you want a broadness capital base, doing that would not be a privatisation. It's rudimentary, and you're trying to say it's the same thing. So selling shares in Kiwi Bank, you wanted to do that? We're not selling shares in Kiwi Bank, we're expanding the shareholding base to get you the extra capital. It's a different matter from selling the first billion-dollar shares. Don't you see the point? You did sell shares in Auckland Airport, including 40% of them were sold to foreigners. Oh, yes, you got the handset here. July 28, 1998. You are saying that, here to Michael Cullen, that excluding foreign investors from the offering would have lowered the price that the Crown received from its shares. So why was it okay for you to sell shares to foreigners? It wasn't. It wasn't. It was a public asset, and now you're writing an answer. I knew you'd ask that question. Well, give me the answer. Well, the answer is simply this. We, at the time, were caught with a company unable to develop and with high debt.