Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers

I have been advised by Te Māngai Pāho that it is currently reviewing this matter. I have also been advised by my officials that Te Māngai Pāho’s funding agreements specifically for the production of radio and television programmes contain terms and conditions for monitoring and evaluating expenditure on agreed contractual outputs.

💬 Katherine Rich: Is the Minister aware that a number of people involved in the production of the TV programme Te Wero, produced by Dreamtime Entertainment for the Māori Television Service, are still waiting for payment for services 4 months after they finished work on production; and given that this is another example of a company receiving Te Māngai Pāho funding that has not paid all its bills, will the Minister be investigating just what is going on with accountability?

Yes, most certainly.

💬 Dr Muriel Newman: What weight can we give to the Minister’s assurances that Te Māngai Pāho is effectively monitoring the expenditure of taxpayers’ money, in the light of a string of disasters like the John Davy affair, the “stop the Māori party” Derek Fox appointment, the convicted fraudster sportscaster scandal, and now the spending of hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars on converting Canadian cartoons into Māori?

I think this very exciting, innovative progress is something that member should learn about. Certainly I can assure the member that accountabilities are being pushed.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Given the thousands of Māori who suffer from ill health and bad housing, does he think it is a sensible use of taxpayers’ money to have $400,000 and sums like that spent on converting cartoons, when there is so much real need out in the Māori world; and why does he not do something about that?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The first two questions can be answered.

I assure the member that I want to do something about it. I also remind him that 40 percent of our people are under the age of 15, and 70 percent are under the age of 25 years. He never cared about those people when he was in Government for 9 years. I can assure the House that this Government is doing a good job about caring about Māori people.

💬 Katherine Rich: After a week when we have heard about the employment and resignation of a convicted fraudster, staff kickbacks, training money that was spent on flash dinners where the only capacity building seemed to be to Minister’s waistlines—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No, that question will not be allowed. The member has gone too far. I am ruling out that question. It is a personal reflection on members.

💬 Hon Dover Samuels: I seek leave to re-table a statement made by the director of Māori Sportscasting International in which he states that no donations whatsoever were received from MPs—myself or the Hon John Tamihere—in relation to that function.

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

💬 Katherine Rich: I seek leave to put my question again.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member is perfectly entitled to seek leave. Is there any objection? There is.

💬 Rodney Hide: I seek leave to table a series of pictures of the drinks and other things enjoyed by Mr Dover Samuels and Mr John Tamihere on 6 July 2002.

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

💬 Katherine Rich: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance. It is not usual that questions I have delivered in this House are ruled out of order. May I seek another call? I will certainly rephrase the question in a way that is parliamentary.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member will have an opportunity on another day. I agree that the member is very rarely out of order in this regard, but on this occasion I had given a warning, the member was out of order, and I ruled accordingly.

💬 Dr Wayne Mapp: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I draw to your attention that the National Party did not seek a call on question No. 1. Therefore, we have not used the allocation. According to your own approach to allocating questions, Katherine Rich could take a call.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member has raised an interesting point. I have consulted my chart and he is correct. Therefore, the question can proceed as another supplementary question, but it is the third one on this question, and that, of course, means that there will be only one supplementary question on the other questions.

💬 Katherine Rich: After a week when we have heard about the employment and resignation of a convicted fraudster, staff kickbacks, training money being spent on flash dinners, and Te Māngai Pāho – funded companies not paying their bills, does the Minister still have confidence in the chief executive of Te Māngai Pāho; if so, why?

At this stage, yes, and everything is under review.

Imports—Irradiated Fruit

8. SUE KEDGLEY (Green) to the Minister for Food Safety: Why did New Zealand accept a variation to the Australian New Zealand Food Standard code that will allow irradiated mango, papaya, mangosteen, litchi, breadfruit, carambola, custard apple and rambutan to be imported into New Zealand? [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I warn members that my patience has ended and there will be no interjections during question time when a member is asking a question. In our society, members are perfectly entitled to ask a question and to be heard.

The decision was made for phytosanitary purposes. Food safety was the prime factor in the assessment process. The process was very thorough and included a Food Standards Australia New Zealand project team, a reference group of stakeholders, and access to experts in the area of food irradiation. It was a lengthy process over a number of years.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Did the lengthy and considered process take into account the recent French-German research that found that chemicals formed during irradiation of certain foods, including tropical fruit like mango, may cause colon cancer and DNA damage; if not, why not?

It looked at a variety of research, particularly by the World Health Organization, which said that irradiation was an acceptable means to improve food safety.

💬 Dave Hereora: How are decisions such as the decision to support the irradiation standard reached?

When the Government accepts a standard, it takes account of robust, science-based advice when making those decisions.

💬 Shane Ardern: Does the Minister think that banning all exports and imports into New Zealand, banning any contact with the World Trade Organization, and stopping all other major transactions either domestically or internationally, as is promoted by the Green Party, would improve food safety in New Zealand?

💬 Sue Kedgley: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member has made an incorrect statement suggesting that I am calling for the banning of all exports and imports into New Zealand and suchlike, which I have never done.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member’s word will be accepted. The rest of the question can be answered.

I do not think there is a question if that is taken away.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Why is the Government trying to change the international standard on food irradiation at a Codex meeting in Tanzania today, to try to remove any limits on the dose of irradiation that may be applied to food so that food producers will be able to irradiate food, such as tropical fruit, as much as they like, with no questions asked?

The New Zealand position on the Codex Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants is to support a proposal to replace a maximum dose, currently at 10 kilogreys, with permission to use a minimum dose, to be able to achieve microbial decontamination. For example, for tropical fruit it will be 1 kilogrey—not endless, but 1 kilogrey—but for herbs and spices the use is 30 kilogreys, and that dose would be sufficient for the treatment, but it would be less than anything that could affect wholesomeness and quality. Along with Codex we are asking to enable the right level to be used. Of course, if we do not use irradiation, I presume the member continues to support the use of ethylene oxide and methyl bromide, both of which have very bad effects, not only on the environment but also on the health of the people who eat the food that have been treated by such chemicals.

💬 Shane Ardern: Does the Minister think that if we were to consume nothing but New Zealand grown organic food we would improve food safety in New Zealand?

I would suspect that if we had to rely on New Zealand organic-grown food we would probably starve. There would not be enough of it.

State Sector—Employees

9. PITA PARAONE (NZ First) to the Minister of State Services: Is he satisfied that all State sector employees are treated in an equal manner with respect to employment issues?

State servants’ employment conditions are a matter for their individual employer. I would expect employers to treat their employees according to the conditions set out in individual or collective agreements.

💬 Pita Paraone: Is the Minister concerned that we could feasibly have 180 repeats of the situation currently facing the Taranaki District Health Board, where the chief executive officer, John O’Neill, is taking unlimited sick leave at a cost of over $5,000 per week to the district health board, which is receiving no extra funding as a result; or does he deny any responsibility over the matter, as his colleague the Minister of Health has done on several occasions?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The Hon Trevor Mallard can deal with the matters for which he, as Minister, is responsible.

The provision in question has been standard in chief executive contracts in the wider State sector and has operated in, I understand, over 300 employment contract agreements without difficulty. Of course, the commission continually evaluates developments in employment law and practice, and will review the chief executive model employment agreements when necessary.

💬 Tim Barnett: Does the State Services Commissioner employ any State sector employees?

Yes, but very few.

💬 Shane Ardern: In the light of the Minister’s answer, how is it that a request made to the Taranaki District Health Board by its chief executive—who is on sick leave after being suspended while overseas on honeymoon—for information around the accusation in regard to his employment issue has still not been furnished, or he has had no information on that matter? How is that?

I think the member knows that it would be absolutely inappropriate for me to comment on an individual case. I submit to the House that it is also unwise of him.

💬 Sue Bradford: What commitment does the Minister have to reducing the pay gap in the public sector, whereby in 2001 male managers earned on average $65,000 a year, and female managers $54,000, according to a human resources capability survey of public service departments?

That is not a problem that I have noticed in our Cabinet.

💬 Judy Turner: Can the Minister explain, in the light of the State Services Commissioner’s statement to the Government Administration Committee that he did not endorse unlimited sick leave and it was being phased out, why it is still included in the standard contract offered to new district health board chief executives, which can be found on the commission’s website?

As I indicated earlier, practices and law are looked at carefully by the State Services Commissioner, and draft contracts—which are the responsibility, of course, of the boards, when they are signed, not of the commissioner—are updated regularly.

Government Information and Services—Access

10. HELEN DUNCAN (NZ Labour) to the Minister of State Services: What steps are being taken to ensure that accessing Government information and services online will be secure for members of the public?

I have released a discussion document seeking public feedback on four models of authentication. We need to ensure that people registering to use an online service are genuinely who they say they are, and that they are secure in knowing that they are genuinely dealing with a Government agency online.

💬 Helen Duncan: Will authentication be required by members of the public in order to access every Government service?

No, the e-government portal launch late last year provides a one-stop shop for more than 3,500 Government services. The State Service Commission estimates that around one-third of services that become available will need some form of authentication—for example, registering a birth, making an accident compensation claim, getting a replacement driver’s licence. The idea of authentication is not new. People have had to do it for years in order to join libraries, apply for passports, or join up to a bank online.

Question No. 11 to Minister

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. When I submitted this question this morning I specifically wanted to know the opinion of the Minister of Health, Annette King. I note now that it has been changed to the Associate Minister.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: That is the right of the Government, and that must be the responsibility he has been delegated by the Minister. Please ask the question.

I seek leave to ask question No. 11 of the Minister of Health.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to ask question No. 11. Is there any objection? There is objection. Please ask the question as stated.

Smoking—Ban

11. Hon DAVID CARTER (NZ National) to the Associate Minister of Health: Does he support the banning of smoking in all pubs, clubs and RSAs as recommended in the Health Committee’s report on the Smokefree Environments (Enhanced Protection) Amendment Bill; if so, why?

Yes, because 4,700 New Zealanders die each year from smoking-related illnesses and a further 388 from second-hand smoke. My goal as Minister responsible for tobacco control is to reduce those tragic figures significantly.

💬 Hon David Carter: Is the Minister aware that his colleagues, including Ministers, are already telling the hospitality industry that the bill will be considerably softened, and does he support that approach?

No, I am not aware. While I have seen such claims made in the media, this is a member’s bill, not a Government bill. Any MP can move amendments to the bill and they will be assessed by the House on their merits. I expect that members will take up that opportunity when the bill is in the Committee stage.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why can the Minister and his colleagues not keep their big noses out of the ordinary lives of New Zealanders, particularly the downtrodden, working-class people who used to vote Labour, and why are those attitude cops so beset with stopping ordinary New Zealanders getting on with their lives?

This Government cares about the people of New Zealand. If we were to ignore the road toll in this country and not take any action, we would be deemed negligent. If we were to ignore the outrageous and tragic figures from smoking in this country, we would be deemed negligent also.

💬 Heather Roy: Why does the Minister not concede—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I am sorry. There is something wrong with the member’s microphone. Perhaps she could start again. Members should just be a little more sensible.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did hear her and she was out of order in her initial comments. Perhaps you could give her some guidance.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I will certainly be listening. If there is anything that is out of order, the member will not be proceeding with the question. Please ask the question inside the Standing Orders.

💬 Heather Roy: Why does the Minister not concede that that ban is just pandering to Labour voters, and that it will have a devastating effect on sporting clubs, workingmen’s clubs, and Returned Services Associations—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER:. I will now ask the member to start again.

💬 Heather Roy: Why does the Minister not concede that this ban is just pandering to the chardonnay socialists and will have a devastating effect on sporting clubs—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No. That was not the question asked by the member that I heard. The member talked about Labour voters, or something like that. She is now getting into the area of adding in material so as not to render the question effective. I will give her one more go. Please ask the question, and I will not have any interjection.

💬 Heather Roy: Why does the Minister not concede that this ban is just pandering to Labour voters and will have a devastating effect on sporting clubs, workingmen’s clubs, and Returned Services Associations, and is a blatant attack on the freedom and choice of law-abiding New Zealanders?

I do not agree with that member. I remind her that the bill was heard by the select committee, and there were 397 submissions. The changes made to the bill were made unanimously. Members on the select committee included two from National, one from New Zealand First, one from ACT, one from the Greens, alongside those from the Labour Government.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why does the Labour Party seem obsessed with attacking the hard-working men and woman of this country, many of whom have very few pleasures, including smoking, and if that is the case, why stop with smoking; why do we not have one on eating, for example, or lack of exercise?

We are a Government that is prepared to facilitate hard calls to protect our people when necessary. This is a member’s bill, and that member’s party voted for this bill to go to a select committee, and all the changes were made unanimously.

💬 Heather Roy: I seek leave to table the report of the bill that shows that ACT New Zealand submitted a minority report on the bill. The Minister said it was unanimously supported; it was not.

I have a point of clarification. I did not refer to the report. I referred to the bill itself and the changes made that were supported unanimously.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: But leave was sought. Is there any objection? There is objection.

💬 Hon David Carter: What reports has the Minister commissioned to establish the adverse economic impacts that this legislation will have on our tourism and hospitality industries, as evidenced by the fall in Sky City shares yesterday?

The international evidence that we have for such moves made in a number of countries, including Ireland, Norway, and more particularly in the state of California, indicates that over time there is no adverse effect on businesses.

Child Pornography—Imports

12. DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) to the Minister of Customs: What is the Government doing about the importation of objectionable materials such as child pornography into New Zealand?

The Government is committed to wiping out any trade in material depicting the abuse and degradation of children, including its importation. I am heartened to report that the first sentence of imprisonment under section 209 of the Customs and Excise Act was recently handed down in the Tokoroa District Court to John William Noble. This man got 8 months for importing, via his laptop computer, 3,698 images and 43 movie files of children involved in sexual acts. This included the abuse of toddlers and children under 5. Additionally, the New Zealand Customs Service has a number of other prosecutions awaiting trial, with imprisonment again being a potential outcome.

💬 Darren Hughes: What power does the New Zealand Customs Service have to stop the trade of such material in and out of New Zealand, especially with the wide and relatively unrestrained use of the Internet?

In the case of John Noble, his successful prosecution under New Zealand legislation was a result of a contract with US Customs where he was identified as part of the US Customs sting to capture traders in such objectionable material via the Internet. This Government moved swiftly last year to amend the Customs and Excise Act to give such material imported by electronic transmission, such as over the Internet, the same status as objectionable material in hard copy form.

💬 Shane Ardern: In the light of the Minister’s answer, and the Minister of Justice stating on 5 March that most of the trade in this material is via the Internet, when will the Customs Service implement the measures that the Minister just spoke of?

I am glad to assure the member that the Customs Service has a high level of expertise in this area. We are developing and expanding our ability for encryption, forensic investigation, and our contacts with the US and other customs agencies, and I am very confident that we will see a huge improvement in our success rate in this area.

💬 Marc Alexander: Does the Minister consider legislation clarifying the rules in interpreting objectionable material, such as the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification (Meaning of Objectionable) Amendment Bill, would be useful in the prohibition of such material?

The Government will be supporting that bill to the select committee, but I need to advise the House and the member that the Government is planning a wider range of changes, particularly in the area of penalties.

Questions to Members

Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2)—Dog Control

1. DAIL JONES (NZ First) to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: What meetings have been held by the Local Government and Environment Committee to consider the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2) concerning dog control, since it was referred back to the committee?

The bill was referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee on 18 February 2003. At that time the committee was up against tight statutory deadlines to report the financial reviews. On 6 March the committee met to consider the bill and received a briefing from officials. We have today released a statement outlining our intentions regarding progressing the bill.

💬 Dail Jones: Does she have any indication, as chairperson of the committee, as to when the committee is likely to consider submissions on the Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 2)?

The committee has been advised that Government officials are seeking further information, particularly the views of all district councils on the bill and on possible methods of dog control. The officials are preparing recommendations on measures that go beyond what is currently in the bill. This may take the form of a Supplementary Order Paper. The committee has resolved to seek public submissions as soon as that information is available to us so that the public may comment on those further proposals.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Noting that the Minister of Local Government said that he would be introducing changes within weeks, and that it is now 3 weeks since the tragic incident involving the girl in Auckland, has the committee had any indication as to when it will receive amendments from the Government to the dog control laws?

The committee has been advised that the Minister is likely to be considering the recommendations of officials by the end of March, which is very soon. We expect a briefing very promptly after that, and we will then be able to proceed with the bill.