Questions for Oral Answer
5 August 2009

Questions to Ministers

1. Health—Front-line Services

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

1. Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his commitment to move health resources to the front line?

Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) : Yes. This is an important objective that is desperately needed, given that over the last 9 years the health bureaucracy grew by around 25 percent, and the outgoing Labour Government cut $150 million from the health budget a few weeks before the general election.

Dr Paul Hutchison: Why is the Government so intent on moving resources out of administration and into improving front-line services?

Hon TONY RYALL: Our focus is on improving services for patients and consumers. In the middle of the worst recession since the 1930s, the Government has continued to make large investments in the public health service, and it is unacceptable that the health bureaucracy has ballooned over the past 9 years. We are endeavouring to peg it back. For example, the Government has cut the number of measures of district health board performance by around a quarter, and we have cut the number of reports that hospital staff must send to the Ministry of Health by a startling 52 percent.

Iain Lees-Galloway: Will the Minister refuse to sign off on any cuts to front-line services or front-line staff at MidCentral District Health Board, given that he has personally demanded that it finds $10 million worth of spending cuts?

Hon TONY RYALL: The MidCentral District Health Board is reviewing its staffing. For example, three directors have replaced five group managers on the senior management team. At the MidCentral District Health Board we have inherited a major deficit of around $10 million, which is not helped by that member’s party cutting $150 million from Vote Health before the last election. But I assure the member that on the issue of staffing and services at the MidCentral District Health Board, this Government is putting an extra $25 million into that district health board for the next 12 months, and it will make the decisions with regard to those resources.

Clare Curran: Will he agree to the cuts to community services to the rural elderly in Otago and Southland proposed by the Otago District Health Board; if so, how does he think those cuts will improve the health of these older people?

Hon TONY RYALL: District health boards are expected to make decisions within the funding that they receive, and in Otago and Southland—[Interruption] Members should wait for this: we have increased the funding of those district health boards by $29 million over the next year. On the matter of Ms Curran’s question, I say I have received assurances from the district health board that with the changes to residential care, no one will be unsafe, no one will be at risk, and no one will be unable to stay in his or her home because of these changes.

Grant Robertson: How will the closing of wards at Wanganui Hospital, as reported in the Wanganui Chronicle, help to deliver better front-line services for the people of the Wanganui region?

Hon TONY RYALL: We have inherited very significant problems in the Whanganui District Health Board. After 9 long years of the previous Government, services at the Whanganui District Health Board are in desperate need of improvement. That is why this Government is putting an extra $8.6 million into that board in order for it to deliver its services to the people of the district.

Hon Darren Hughes: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Robertson’s question was very specific: about the closing of wards at a particular hospital. The Minister gave us a political response; that is fair enough. But we wanted to be given specific information about how the closing of certain wards could lead to better health outcomes for the people of Wanganui. The answer went no way towards addressing that.

Mr SPEAKER: I heard the Minister, in answering that question, talk about the additional funding that he claimed was going into that health board, and that seemed to me to be a reasonable answer to the allegation that wards were being closed. The Minister replied by saying the Government was actually putting in more funding. It would seem to me that that is a reasonable response to that question.

Hon Darren Hughes: The Minister may well have made reference to general funding, but he did not link it to the closing of wards. This was a very short supplementary question specifically about the closing of wards in a certain hospital. The Minister did not say that his funding changes somehow were linked to those ward closures, so I do not think he has addressed that question.

Mr SPEAKER: With respect, if that is the kind of detail that the member asking the question wants to know, maybe that needs to be put down in a primary question. It is fairly unreasonable to expect the Minister to know every detail of every hospital around the country, when the primary question does not indicate that kind of detail is being sought. I think that is unreasonable.

Carmel Sepuloni: How do the cuts in funding for mental health services in Taranaki deliver on his election promises?

Hon TONY RYALL: The Taranaki District Health Board receives a significant amount of money from the Government from which to improve its services for the public. I have to say that the Taranaki District Health Board has done a very good job with its plans on how to spend the additional $11.1 million that this Government will be funding it this year—an increase of over 4 percent.

Stuart Nash: Can he guarantee that the reported cut-backs in Tairāwhiti District Health Board will not be to front-line services?

Hon TONY RYALL: First of all, I say that is a rather broad claim of reported cut-backs to services at Tairāwhiti District Health Board. It is much akin to the claims of the Opposition health spokesperson, who keeps talking about cuts to different services that do not actually exist, because she looked at the wrong table in the Estimates. I can tell the member that Tairāwhiti District Health Board is getting the biggest single increase in funding that it has ever had in years—a total increase of over $8 million.

Stuart Nash: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked the Minister whether he would guarantee there would be no cut-backs to front-line services; he did not mention the words “front-line services” once. It was a reasonably general question.

Mr SPEAKER: I think, again—

Hon Ruth Dyson: Oh, a rescue brigade.

Hon David Cunliffe: Here’s the rescue.

Hon Gerry Brownlee: I am pleased that the Opposition think I am so capable. I just suggest that we are getting a lot of questioning again of answers where in fact, rather than a point of order being raised, you, Mr Speaker, are being asked to judge the quality of the answer. We have been over and over, for probably some hours in this House in the last few months, the position that puts you in. Perhaps some reinforcement, particularly to new members, of exactly what the Standing Orders say and require, and of what Speakers’ rulings have determined over a large number of years, would be useful.

Mr SPEAKER: I thank the honourable member for his intervention. The line I am taking with Ministers when they are answering questions is that where the primary question is clear and the Minister should have the information, I believe that the House and the public of New Zealand deserve to have such straight questions answered. However, where a general question is the primary question and then it is followed up by a number of detailed questions, it is much more difficult to expect the Minister to have specific information on those detailed further questions. Basically, in response to the member’s question, the Minister really refuted any allegation that there will be a cut-back in services, and in his answer stated there would be an increase in funding. I cannot judge the quality of that answer, but it would seem to me that it is a reasonable answer to the question he was asked. He is refuting the allegation and saying that rather than funding cuts in respect of that particular health board, there is a funding increase. I think that that is a reasonable answer to the question, given the primary question.

Hon Ruth Dyson: Why did the Minister agree to the proposal to cut 5,000 visits to the emergency department, for a 10 percent cut in X-rays, and for the cutting of 200 operations, all at Timaru Hospital; and how will he explain those health cuts to the good people of Timaru?

Hon TONY RYALL: I think one would explain that by actually looking for the truth behind those reports rather than misinterpreting information and tables, as the member does. For example, the truth behind the so-called cut to radiology is that the South Canterbury District Health Board is going to pay its private providers less. But it is apparently a cut to service that the board is going to reduce the amount it pays its private providers! I can tell that member that the district health board is making decisions within the resources it has, including an extra $6 million this year—a 4.4 percent increase.

Hon Ruth Dyson: Can the Minister now confirm that doctors and nurses are not front-line staff, and that home support, community services for the elderly, hospital wards on weekends, mental health services, emergency departments, X-rays, and operations are not front-line services?

Hon TONY RYALL: What an odd question from that member!

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Do I need to go into any detail? I think the—

Mr SPEAKER: Yes; if the member has raised the point of order he will run through it quickly with me.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Well, very quickly, that answer was prefaced by an offensive comment—one that was absolutely spurious and unnecessary.

Mr SPEAKER: Well, if I heard the Minister correctly, he referred to the question as being unusual.

Hon Members: No—odd.

Mr SPEAKER: Did I hear wrongly—odd? I beg your pardon—odd?

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: He’s odd.

Mr SPEAKER: I am dealing with a point of order. If “odd” is offensive, I apologise for that. But it was an unusual way to phrase a question, I have to admit. It sought an opinion. The kind of answer that members will get when they seek opinions or state questions in an unusual way—I cannot ask Ministers to be totally non-political in the way they answer questions like that. I mean, if members put down straight questions on the Order Paper, I will make sure Ministers answer them, but I cannot insist on a particular answer to that kind of question.

Hon TONY RYALL: District health boards are making decisions with regard to increased funding. These district health boards are led by many of the same people whom Labour—those members’ party—appointed while previously in Government, and they are endeavouring to do the best they can within the generous and improved financial resources we have provided in this year’s Budget. I can tell that member opposite that this Government is determined there will be improved front-line services for New Zealanders. We simply cannot continue to have the situation where, over the last 9 years, the budget has doubled but fewer people have had operations.

Hon Ruth Dyson: I seek leave to table an article from the Manawatu Standard headlined “Hospital jobs to go in $10 million cost cut”.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that press article. Is there any objection to that? There is.

Hon Ruth Dyson: I seek leave to table an article from the Otago Daily Times outlining cuts to community services for elderly people.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table an article from Otago Daily Times. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Hon Ruth Dyson: I seek leave to table an article from the Wanganui Chronicle headlined “Hospital looks to close wards at weekends”.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that press article. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Hon Ruth Dyson: I seek leave to table an article from the Taranaki Daily News, outlining proposed cuts in mental health services and Māori health support services.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that article from the Taranaki Daily News. Is there any objection? There is objection?

Hon Ruth Dyson: I seek leave to table two articles from the Timaru Herald: one outlining the 200 operations to be axed, and the other outlining the proposal to cut 5,000 visits to the Timaru Hospital emergency department.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table those two articles from the Timaru Herald. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Hon Ruth Dyson: I seek leave to table a letter from Tony Ryall to the South Canterbury District Health Board, saying the board has his full support in implementing the plan of cuts outlined in my supplementary question.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.

* Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

2. Job Ops and Community Max Schemes—Access

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

2. TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How can employers, organisations and groups access the recently announced Jobs Ops and Community Max schemes?

Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) : The calls have been flooding in. Groups of employers with entry-level employment or volunteering opportunities can call Work and Income and get young people into those roles really quickly. If they meet the simple criteria for Job Ops, we can pay up to 50 percent of their wages for those 6-month opportunities. For Community Max we will pay the minimum wage for 30 hours a week to get projects done in people’s towns and communities. I encourage employers and community groups to give Work and Income a call on 0800 778008.

Tim Macindoe: What kinds of employment opportunities are now available?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: We have had calls from all over New Zealand, and here are just a few: a dairy farm in Fielding, a concrete company in Tauranga, and a transport company in the South Island. We have even had employers who have called about Job Ops and who have gone on to list several other vacancies in their business with Work and Income. I am really pleased that employers are listing more vacancies with us, realising the high calibre of people and broad skill set that Work and Income can provide. Recently we had a guy in his fifties at one of our Canterbury Work and Income branches who was looking for work, and—I kid you not—within 10 minutes he had a job with a company down the road.

Tim Macindoe: Can the Minister give the House an update on the level of interest in the programme?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: On day three of the youth opportunities package we have had a total of 130 phone calls to the employer line for Job Ops and Community Max, and 10 registrations of interest from community groups about the Community Max programme. And we have 47 Job Ops positions ready to go on our books on just the third day. Young people are stepping up in their droves asking for those opportunities.

Hon Annette King: Can the Minister give a guarantee that the two young people she said had already been placed into jobs—one as a factory worker and one as a cafe assistant—have been filled from totally new positions and not existing vacancies, because, according to the rules she put out at the weekend, pre-existing vacancies are not eligible for Job Ops?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: It is my understanding that those employers called in on Monday with those jobs, that they were matched on the Monday and people were placed in them, and that on Tuesday they started the job. That is my understanding of how it happened.

3. Physical Therapy—Funding for Severely Disabled Students

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

3. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) to the Minister of Education: Mr Speaker [Interruption]—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have called the members’ colleague. I say to the front-bench members on my left that I have called the Hon Clayton Cosgrove [Interruption] And I will have order on the right-hand side of the House too [Interruption] Either way, I am not happy with the member continuing to interject when I have called another member to ask his question. I accept that there had been a breach on both sides of the House and I will ignore the latter one.

Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE: Has she considered the impact of the Government’s decision to discontinue physical therapy funding for students with severe disabilities?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) : Yes.

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: What would the Minister say to Kaiapoi mother Julie Baker, whose 12-year-old daughter Brittany has cerebral palsy and faces the very real prospect of having to remove her from school as a result of those cuts, which the mother says will have “devastating consequences for children like Brittany”?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I am advised that a student with high or very high needs would still continue to receive about $20,000 from both the Ongoing and Reviewable Resourcing Scheme and from theoperations grant, and a quarter of that Ongoing and Reviewable Resourcing Scheme funding should be used for therapy. I am also advised that there are a number of children throughout the country with similar or even higher needs who are not receiving any of that extra support because this additional funding for therapy was schools based, not needs-based.

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Why did the Minister tell the 23 schools throughout New Zealand affected by these cuts that to make up the shortfall in funding, “those schools might contribute from their operational grants or their staffing entitlement”, and does she agree with the principal of Addington School that runs, as she should be aware, a conductive education programme, that such a suggestion is “insulting”?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I say to that member that up and down this country there are a large number of schools that under the previous Government were supporting special-needs students from their operational grant and from their staffing entitlement. This Government has put an extra $51 million into Ongoing and Reviewable Resourcing Scheme funding and that will create another 1,100 places for children whom the previous Government left unfunded and unsupported.

Jo Goodhew: What reports has the Minister received on funding for special education?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I have received an email from the mother of a 5-year-old girl with autism. She wrote of her long campaign to secure special-needs funding for her daughter. She thanked the National Government for boosting special-education funding by $51 million, which will provide help for another 1,100 children so that other mums and dads would be spared what she had suffered [Interruption]—

Mr SPEAKER: I just ask members to be a little reasonable. I have called the Hon Clayton Cosgrove to ask a supplementary question, and he has not had a chance because his colleagues are interjecting so much.

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Does the Minister consider it fair that although private schools are set to receive an additional $35 million in funding, the future development of an education for some of the country’s most vulnerable children is now under threat as a result of her directive to discontinue funding, and how on earth does she reconcile that little anomaly?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: What is not fair is under the previous Government some schools got extra funding and some schools did not. Some children got that extra funding, and some children did not. That is what was not fair under the previous Government.

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. With respect, that was a straight question that asked the Minister about the fairness of funding private schools to the detriment of the most vulnerable children. She started the answer off by saying she would tell me what was fair and then she prattled on about something else. She did not even address that question. It was a straight one.

Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr Speaker—

Mr SPEAKER: I do not need any further help on the matter. All I invite the honourable member to do is to read his Hansard. If that was asked, it might have been possible to get an answer, but he went on to ask the Minister how she reconciled something to do with fairness. The Minister gave an answer reconciling how she sees that, and that is the dilemma the member will get when he adds that type of thing to his question. The Minister is entitled to respond to that part of the question.

4. Early Childhood Education and Care—Participation

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

4. ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tāmaki) to the Minister of Education: What is the Government doing to increase participation in early childhood education and care?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) : Yesterday the Hon Dr Pita Sharples and I announced $8.9 million in funding from the discretionary grants scheme to create more than 400 new places in early childhood education centres. The grants include more than $5 million for new capital works in the Counties Manukau District Health Board area, where participation rates are generally low. Other projects will create 70 places in Samoan immersion centres, a new centre in Arrowtown, and services for Māori, Pasifika, and refugee communities.

Allan Peachey: What other activity is under way to increase participation in early childhood education in Counties Manukau?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: A wide range of initiatives is going on, as part of the Counties Manukau participation project. Three early childhood centres have been confirmed for school sites, and more centres will be established in South Auckland. Among other projects, the first street-side playgroup has been established in Papakura, three education play days have been held, a community champions initiative is being developed with community groups, and three new certified playgroups have been set up. Increasing early childhood education participation is a top priority for this Government.

Sue Moroney: How will the Minister ensure increased participation in early childhood education, when her own Ministry of Health predicts that New Zealand will need 19,000 extra early childhood education places by 2011 just to maintain 2008 rates of participation and to increase the participation of Māori and Pasifika children; does she realise she will have to do better than just maintain a grant scheme established by the Labour Government, in order to make the headway that is required?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Despite the previous Government’s establishment of the discretionary grants scheme, it left the incoming Government the legacy that that member refers to. I can assure her that this Government is addressing those issues in every way possible, and the first step is to increase participation rates, in a sensible and community-driven way, in areas like South Auckland, where there is not good participation of Māori and Pasifika students.

Rahui Katene: How will the discretionary grants scheme impact on Māori in early childhood education?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I am pleased to advise the member that the recent funding round allocated funding to create 30 new places at a kōhanga reo in South Taranaki, and five other kōhanga reo have grants to plan new buildings or refurbishments for over 120 children. Planning grants have also been given to projects that include supporting the development of Māori immersion centres.

Allan Peachey: How will this money be allocated in future?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Groups that have been involved in applying to the discretionary grants scheme have told me, not surprisingly, that the process under Labour was overly bureaucratic and consumed far too many resources. I have asked the ministry to look at ways in which that same amount of money could be used more effectively to increase the number of children participating in early childhood education by creating more places.

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I seek leave to table a letter dated 28 May 2009 from a Ministry of Education deputy secretary, Nicholas Pole, which shows that the last Labour Government funded every year the physical therapy package for children like Brittany Graham, and the 2009 Budget of the National Government cut it.

Mr SPEAKER: That last statement is out of order when seeking leave to table a document. Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.

* Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

5. Adult and Community Education—Cuts

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

5. Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) to the Minister for Tertiary Education: Does she consider the cutting of the adult and community education budget to high schools to have been a retrieval of low-value educational expenditure?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Tertiary Education) : No. The previous Government, of which the member was an Associate Minister for Tertiary Education, left the incoming Government with $500 million of unfunded tertiary commitments. We had to fund some of them, such as the CPI adjustment in 2010 and student support increases. That required reprioritisation in other areas. We also had to have a close look at every area of tertiary spending. We decided that we need to focus our dollars and attention on young New Zealanders and on ensuring that the number of higher qualifications completed increases. We are still committed to adult and community education, which is why we are investing $124 million into it.

Hon Maryan Street: Is the Minister aware that the PricewaterhouseCoopers report of June 2008 estimated that, for every dollar of Government investment in adult and community education, there is a return of between $16 and $22, not including private or volunteer contributions to the sector; if so, can she advise the House which sector of the education system gives a higher return on the Government’s investment?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Yes, I am aware of that report. The member should look closely at where PricewaterhouseCoopers got that information from. I understand that it did five case studies of different community organisations providing adult and community education. It also did a survey that was put out amongst those who participate, which, from memory, had a response number of about 500. I consider that to be a very small sample to try to extrapolate answers to those sorts of questions from.

Hon Maryan Street: What value would the Minister place on the two most popular courses offered through Counties-Manukau adult and community education programmes: English in the workplace, and the learner driver’s licence theory course—both of those are likely to be cancelled because of the cuts to adult and community education funding—and how does she expect people in the Ōtara area to pay for those courses, when the Tangaroa College investment plan clearly states that user pays in Ōtara is not a viable option?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I say to the member that by refocusing adult and community education on language, literacy, and numeracy, I would have thought that English in the workplace would certainly have been one of the top courses that would be funded under that focus. My advice to the people who are taking part in those courses would be to be in touch with the Tertiary Education Commission to ensure that those courses are provided.

Catherine Delahunty: Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou katoa. Can the Minister confirm that the funding for the training of Youthline volunteers who counsel distressed young people has been cut?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: No, I cannot.

Hon Maryan Street: Was the Minister advised in her meeting with the representatives of the Community Learning Association through Schools recently that she risked going down in history as the Minister who killed night classes; if so, does she intend to do anything about it?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I had a very good meeting today with the representatives of Community Learning Association through Schools. We had a free and frank discussion. They put their views to me, and I explained the situation to them.

Catherine Delahunty: Does training for Youthline volunteers who counsel distressed young people fit her definition of a hobby course?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I have no definition of a hobby course. I would suggest—[Interruption]

Hon Tony Ryall: Gardening in the wind.

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I would suggest that Youthline or the providers of that course get in touch with the Tertiary Education Commission, which has asked schools to provide it with expressions of interest for courses that they propose to make available next year. I believe they have until 21 August to make those expressions.

Hon Maryan Street: I seek leave to table the Tangaroa College adult community education investment plan, which states that user-pays is not a viable option in Ōtara.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.

* Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Hon Maryan Street: I seek leave to table a photo of yesterday’s meeting in Parliament that the Minister was unable to get to.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table a photograph. Is there any objection? There is objection.

6. SAS—Deployment in Afghanistan

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

6. KEITH LOCKE (Green) to the Prime Minister: Will he be withdrawing New Zealand’s successful provincial reconstruction team from Afghanistan, and instead sending a deployment of the New Zealand Special Air Service; if so, why?

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister): The review of New Zealand’s commitment to Afghanistan will be considered by Cabinet in the next 2 weeks, and any announcements will be made following that consideration.

Keith Locke: Does the Prime Minister agree with New Zealand Brigadier Tim Brewer who said that our provincial reconstruction team is “making a difference”; if so, what will happen to New Zealand’s civil aid programmes in Bamian if our team pulls out?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: I can assure the member that views such as the brigadier’s will be taken into account.

Keith Locke: Does the Prime Minister agree that by contrast with our provincial reconstruction team, an SAS unit is likely to be deployed with US combat forces, which seem to be losing support among the Afghan people, partly because their operations are causing so many civilian casualties?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again, I reiterate that the Government is taking into account a range of opinions and considerations as it reviews our involvement in Afghanistan.

Keith Locke: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Up until now I have not raised a point of order about whether or not the Prime Minister has answered the question properly, because I thought I would let him answer one or two questions. But I have asked him three questions and I have heard no specific answers, or reference to the provincial reconstruction team or the SAS. He has just talked about a review. At least at some point he should answer the questions.

Mr SPEAKER: In fairness, the member asked his primary question in relation to whether New Zealand will withdraw the provincial reconstruction team, and send a deployment of the SAS. The Acting Prime Minister gave a perfectly good answer to that. He said that Cabinet will consider the matter in due course and will make a public announcement. That was a very informative answer. I believe that kind of answer is absolutely a perfectly proper answer. I think it is unreasonable what the member is saying. I think the member finally sought an opinion from the Minister about the value of certain activities, and about how people perceived the performance of American forces in Afghanistan. The member cannot expect a precise answer. The member cannot expect an answer that he might wish to hear from the Minister. He has a couple of further supplementaries, and I invite him to pursue the matter.

Dr Kennedy Graham: In advance of any decision made within the next few weeks, would any potential deployment of SAS forces in Afghanistan operate under the same mandate as the provincial reconstruction team or a different mandate; if it were different, what mandate would it be, and what legal basis would it rest on?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: In the first place, those are hypothetical questions. The Government understands that this is a complex and serious issue, and there will be plenty of opportunities to debate whatever decision the Government makes. I think that the member has raised the issue before of the legal basis of having any New Zealand personnel operating in Afghanistan, and the Government has satisfied itself that there is an adequate legal basis.

Keith Locke: What is the Prime Minister doing to investigate recent detailed claims in the media that in 2002 our SAS could have contravened the Geneva Convention by handing over Afghan prisoners to US forces without sufficient regard to their possible mistreatment in US jurisdiction?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Prime Minister has been looking into that matter. He has been advised that in 2004 and 2005 the previous Government conveyed through diplomatic and defence channels to the US our expectations in writing that detainees are to be treated in accordance with international humanitarian law and human rights law. The Prime Minister also notes that the current US administration under President Obama has placed an emphasis on the non-use of torture and on the humane treatment of detainees, as is evidenced by the decision to close its detention facility in Guantanamo Bay. The SAS acted in good faith in 2002 in entrusting detainees to the US.

Keith Locke: I seek leave to table an article from the Taranaki Daily News, entitled “Six weeks in Afghanistan”, on Brigadier Tim Brewer’s tour—

Mr SPEAKER: The member is seriously seeking leave to table a press article?

Keith Locke: It is relevant to my question, because I did—

Mr SPEAKER: All right; I will put it to the House. Leave is sought to table that press article. Is there any objection? There is objection.

7. Health, Improvement—Māori Whānau

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

7. Hon MITA RIRINUI (Labour) to the Minister of Health: What steps, if any, is the Government taking to improve the health and well-being of Māori whānau?

Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) : The statement of intent for the Ministry of Health reflects the steps being taken to support whānau to achieve their maximum health and well-being, and I refer the member to that document. We are moving to a much stronger focus on outcomes, rather than on a lot of activities. We want to empower whānau and providers to identify what will bring wellness to those communities, rather than have a more top-down, prescribed approach.

Hon Mita Ririnui: In the light of that answer, does the Minister still intend to reallocate $1 billion to the whānau ora fund; if so, how does he reconcile that with the comments of the Minister for Social Development and Employment, Paula Bennett, on Q+A this weekend, when she stated that she does not “envisage us carving off a billion dollars from the welfare, from certainly social development to go into that sort of scheme”?

Hon TONY RYALL: I think the important point in respect of whānau ora is that we are currently in the midst of developing work on it. The Associate Minister of Health Tariana Turia is working very closely with her group, which is led by Professor Durie. Work is going on with Māori public health organisations and other providers about how whānau ora can make a big difference to whānau.

Hon Mita Ririnui: Does he agree with Taitimu Maipi, the chairman of Hauora Raukura o Tainui—one of the original architects of whānau ora—who stated that it was important to foster the provision of health services to Māori by Māori, because it increased their rate of participation; if so, why is he allowing the Waitemata District Health Board and the Auckland District Health Board to cut over half a million dollars from Māori provider development?

Hon TONY RYALL: It is true that the Counties Manukau District Health Board has carried out a major review of its contracts, using a systematic approach that aims to put funds closest to the front line and reduce duplication. I am advised that that approach has freed up enough money for it to increase service contracts by Māori for Māori overall by 42 percent this year.

Rahui Katene: How will he achieve improved outcomes for whānau?

Hon TONY RYALL: The Associate Minister of Health Tariana Turia is working very hard to achieve real gains and improved outcomes for Māori. She recognises that it requires the resources and application of all those involved—not only those in the public health service but also those in other parts of public service delivery, such as welfare and education. The Associate Minister has asked the Ministry of Health to monitor health and disability services for Māori, and, in particular, to focus on reducing the incidence and impact of cancer for Māori; ensuring high-quality interventions for diabetes and cardiovascular conditions; early detection and screening; and quality, integrated public health services.

Hon Mita Ririnui: Has he received any other reports from other Ministers who are not prepared to help fund the Associate Minister’s $1 billion whānau ora fund by making cuts in their own areas?

Hon TONY RYALL: I can advise the member that I have been working closely with a number of our colleagues—the Minister of Education and the Minister for Social Development and Employment, together with the Associate Minister—to advance whānau ora, because it is a move away from the patronising, dictatorial, Wellington-knows-best approach that we saw from that member and his failed Government, towards an approach that is prepared to empower whānau to take responsibility for their health and welfare.

8. Tax Agreements, International—New Zealand as Signatory

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

8. AARON GILMORE (National) to the Minister of Revenue: What recent international tax agreements has New Zealand entered into and what are the reasons for becoming signatories to these agreements?

Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) : New Zealand has recently signed two new tax agreements. Last December we signed a protocol to substantially amend our double tax agreement with the United States of America, and in June we signed a completely new double tax agreement with Australia. Both of these agreements represent a definite improvement over our existing treaties with those countries. They reduce tax barriers to investment by reducing withholding rates on dividends, interest, and royalties. They also bring our treaty arrangements up to date with modern treaty practice, provide greater certainty for taxpayers, and improve cooperation between tax authorities in the respective countries.

Aaron Gilmore: What further tax agreements has New Zealand entered into that provide more transparency around financial transactions and help combat tax evasion?

Hon PETER DUNNE: In addition to the double tax agreements, we have concluded a number of what are called Tax Information Exchange Agreements with key tax havens and other low-tax international finance centres. These include Bermuda; the Cook Islands, whose agreement the Prime Minister signed recently; Guernsey, whose agreement I signed recently; the Isle of Man; Jersey; and Netherlands Antilles. Agreements with the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, and Gibraltar will be signed next week. These Tax Information Exchange Agreements extend the ability of the Inland Revenue Department to request offshore tax records, business books and accounts, bank information, ownership information, and other tax-related information for the purpose of detecting and preventing tax avoidance and evasion by New Zealand residents.

9. Youth Employment—Workers Employed Under Government Youth Opportunities Package

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

9. DARIEN FENTON (Labour) to the Minister of Labour: Does she agree with the Minister for Social Development and Employment that the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2008 will not apply to workers employed under her Government’s youth opportunities package; if so, why?

Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) : Yes, I understand that 90-day trial periods will not be available for employers making use of the Job Ops and Community Max packages. In order to receive the subsidy, employers will need to agree not to use a 90-day trial period, which I remind the House is not compulsory, nor is it automatic. It is entered into only by mutual agreement.

Darien Fenton: If, for any reason, a young person employed through the youth opportunities package is fired, using the 90-day trial period, will her Government take action to retrieve money or subsidies given to those employers, and what action will she be willing to take as Minister of Labour to protect the employment of those young people?

Hon KATE WILKINSON: That does not fall within my responsibility. The Department of Labour is not administering the subsidy. That question should be directed to the Minister for Social Development and Employment.

Darien Fenton: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. There were two parts to that question. The second part asked what action she would be willing to take as Minister of Labour to protect the employment of those young people. That does fall within her responsibilities.

Mr SPEAKER: Sadly, as the member knows, when the member asks two parts to a supplementary question, the Minister needs only answer one of them. The Minister has done that, so I cannot assist the member further.

Jacinda Ardern: Did the Minister or her department advise the Minister for Social Development and Employment prior to question time yesterday that the 90-day trial period would not apply to young people on the Job Ops scheme; if not, why not?

Hon KATE WILKINSON: I understand that our respective departments did have discussions about the implementation issues, including the trial period.

Darien Fenton: Is the Minister satisfied that all fixed-term contracts to be created under the Government’s youth opportunities package will be for genuine reasons as required under the Employment Relations Act; if so, why?

Hon KATE WILKINSON: This Government, unlike the Opposition, believes that it is bound by the law and it is covered by the law. It is not above the law. Fixed-term contracts are provided for in the employment relations legislation, as that member should know. They are not, per se, illegal. If there are illegal fixed-term contracts, then action will be taken accordingly.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. As a member of the previous Government, I take offence—

Mr SPEAKER: No. The member will sit down when I am on my feet. The member cannot litigate that issue under a point of order. If he believes there is inconsistency, he can ask supplementary questions to point that out; if he has taken personal offence he can make a personal explanation, but he cannot litigate the answer by way of a point of order.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Repeatedly in this House over the last 25 years, when members take personal offence at comments made about them or a group that they are part of, or responsible for, they have been able to raise points of order on that. I am very offended by the suggestion that I—

Mr SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. I cannot assist the member if the House has not complied with its own Standing Orders in the past. The member is welcome to bring forward a change to the Standing Orders, if necessary. When members disagree they can ask supplementary questions, or if they take offence they can make a personal explanation. But they cannot litigate answers by way of points of order.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: I alert him to the fact that I have ruled on the manner.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I seek leave to make a personal explanation with regard to allegations that I have broken the law.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to make a personal explanation along those lines. Is there any objection? There is none.

Hon Trevor Mallard: As part of her answer, the Minister of Labour indicated that the previous Government—involving its Ministers, as she is aware—disregarded the law and broke it. I take offence at that, and it is not true.

10. Mothers—Effect of Section 59 of the Crimes Act

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

10. JOHN BOSCAWEN (ACT) to the Minister of Women’s Affairs: What advice, if any, has she received on the effect of the changes made to section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961 on mothers raising their children, and what has been the effect of this law on women?

Hon PANSY WONG (Minister of Women’s Affairs) : None. But I am touched by the member’s sensitivity towards women’s issues, which is in stark contrast to the constant calls from other members of his party for the abolition of the Ministry of Women’s Affairs.

John Boscawen: What, then, does the Minister say to the young mother who had two Child, Youth and Family workers take her 10-year-old daughter away after the daughter made a false complaint that she had been smacked, especially in light of the statement by National MP Pansy Wong in 2006, “I doubt that scratching the claws from law will act as a deterrent to those who use force against their child”?

Hon PANSY WONG: Of course, I agree with the wise National MP Pansy Wong. In fact, scratching at that law alone will not completely stop the use of force against children. That is why I am very pleased that my colleague the Hon Simon Power, in the first 100 days of the National-led Government, introduced the Sentencing (Offences against Children) Amendment Bill, which permitted violence against children to be taken into account as an aggravating factor in sentencing.

John Boscawen: What, if anything, has caused her to change her mind on the anti-smacking law?

Hon PANSY WONG: We will be listening, and listening very properly with full attention, to the results of the referendum. I agree with the Prime Minister that if indeed there is a big No vote, then Parliament would be better to have the backbone to change the legislation if it starts to fail people.

Hon Steve Chadwick: Has she received any representation from the Minister of Corrections, the Hon Judith Collins, to scrap the Ministry of Women’s Affairs?

Mr SPEAKER: Before the member responds to that, I say it is a fair stretch from the primary question. [Interruption] I do not need to hear the member. I will allow the Hon Pansy Wong to answer.

Hon PANSY WONG: What a question! Unlike that member, I am very appreciative of the 100 percent support that I enjoy from my National colleagues, particularly my National women colleagues.

Hon Steve Chadwick: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister did not answer a very specific question about a direct representation from the Minister of Corrections, Judith Collins, to scrap the Ministry of Women’s Affairs.

Mr SPEAKER: I believe I heard the Minister say in answer that she enjoyed the support of that Minister in respect of the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. I cannot judge the nature of that support, but I believe that is a reasonable answer to the question.

12. Prisons—Escapes

[Uncorrected transcript—subject to correction and further editing.]

12. Dr CAM CALDER (National) to the Minister of Corrections: Has she received any reports about the number of escapes from New Zealand prisons?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) : Yes. I am pleased to advise that the number of escapes has fallen to an all-time low—

Hon Members: Hear, hear!

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: —thank you—although any escape is one too many. The number of escapes in the 2008-09 financial year fell to 12, compared with 23 in the 2007-08 financial year. The 2008-09 result is especially pleasing when one notes the increase in prisoner numbers.

Dr Cam Calder: What work is under way to further reduce the escape rate?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: At my request, the Department of Corrections has completed a comprehensive review of the eligibility of every prisoner to be employed on work parties outside the prison perimeter, as those are the prisoners with the most opportunities to escape. Following the review, a small number of prisoners have been brought back inside the wire. In addition, the result of the re-evaluation of security classifications to ensure that escape risk is appropriately assessed and balanced is due next month.

Dr Cam Calder: Has the Minister seen any other reports about the number of prison escapes?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Yes. I have seen a press release in which the Hon Clayton Cosgrove claims that “this year prisoners have been taking off seemingly willy-nilly.” In fact, of the 12 escapes in 2008-09, most occurred when his party was in Government. The member needs to get his facts straight before he issues shrill and misleading press releases.

Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Is the Minister taking credit for this drop in prison escapes, or is it an operational matter?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Actually, I am very proud of the good work that the Department of Corrections has been doing, and I did ask—[Interruption]—if members would listen to the second part—for a comprehensive review of the security rating of prisoners working outside the prison. It has actually worked, and I am very pleased that the Department of Corrections took up my suggestion.

ENDS

© Scoop Media