Estimates Debate — External Sector

Members, we come now to the votes in the external sector, B.5, Volume 4. The question is that Vote Customs, Vote Defence, Vote Defence Force, Vote Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Vote Official Development Assistance stand part of the Schedules.

I understand the chairperson of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, Simon O’Connor, is not with us but that Paulo Garcia is going to speak for that committee.

on behalf of the Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee: I stand to speak in respect of the appropriations for external affairs. In the committee, we met, discussed, and held hearings on all the votes—foreign affairs, official development assistance, customs, defence, and defence force. In respect of the Vote Foreign Affairs, it was discussed by the committee that New Zealand is hosting APEC in 2021. The Government has allocated a fund of $200 million for the event. Concern was raised by some members of the committee that the funds could be insufficient in the light of Australian APEC having cost $331 million and Papua New Guinea’s APEC cost $330 million, making the point that in both Australia and Papua New Guinea APECs, the figures were in Australian dollars.

Then the discussion went on to the upgrade for Scott Base in Antarctica, which is set to cost $250 million to $290 million. The Minister mentioned that around $50 million will come from private donors. At this, some of the members of the committee expressed that there could not be any assurance on this.

Then the matter of the Venezuelan crisis was discussed, where members of the committee expressed their concern that New Zealand had not condemned President Nicolás Maduro as strongly and as quickly as it should have.

Then there was a discussion on Israel where Immigration New Zealand seems to have removed all references to Israel, with the Minister noting that as an error.

Discussions in relation to trade agreements included whether New Zealand would be prepared to deal with Brexit. The Minister confirmed that New Zealand was indeed prepared to deal with Brexit, with Opposition members of the committee expressing concern and saying that they will be watching these matters relating to Brexit as they unfold. The committee asked for updates around negotiations with both the USA and the EU. The Minister indicated there were challenges, and the committee expressed its keenness to progress information about this.

For Vote Customs, the honourable Minister Kris Faafoi, who was then Minister, spoke to the committee and confirmed that customs had sought a budget of $241 million. But the committee noted that the current budget of $241 million was 3 percent lower than what the department has spent last year. The concern was raised that with plans and new initiatives to combat child sex exploitation and to manage ever-growing risks at the borders, particularly due to GST being sought to be payable on any imported products purchased by New Zealanders from overseas and coming into our borders, initially purchased for prices over $400 and which has now been set at $1,000. Questions arose in relation to how customs could work out what the products actually were valued at.

In respect of Vote Defence and Vote Defence Force, which are comprised of two separate appropriations—one for the Ministry of Defence and the other for the defence force itself—the Ministry of Defence had budgeted substantially more funds in support of the defence capability plan. A large portion of the funds are to progress procurement for high-value assets to increase airlift and sealift capabilities of the defence force. Some committee members asked why the procurement process was not used to find a replacement for the Hercules fleet instead of the ministry going straight to Lockheed Martin. The committee also expressed concern on the decision to withdraw from Iraq.

Tēnā koe, Madam Chair. Tēnā koutou katoa. It’s a pleasure to be a member of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. Our responsibilities are to oversee Vote Customs, Vote Defence, Vote Defence Force, Vote Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Vote Official Development Assistance. It is in fact the last two that I mentioned that I’d like to focus on tonight: so Vote Foreign Affairs and Trade and Vote Official Development Assistance.

Essentially, I’ve chosen to focus on those, and I’ll start with the Pacific reset, because the Pacific reset actually provides the context for much discussion within the committee at the moment about our official development assistance, within a context of us valuing our Pacific brothers and sisters. I’ll start there because, actually, that is why we have had an emphasis on our aid money going into the region, and also trying to reframe the historical relationship we have had with the Pacific in terms of assisting and developing their dreams and aspirations.

One of those dreams and aspirations, obviously, which was emphasized by the Minister of Foreign Affairs when he spoke to the committee, was our commitment to climate change. So it’s been very significant recently. We have had the Pacific Islands Forum. Obviously, within that context, we as a country have pledged $150 million, of $300 million that we’ve highlighted for official overseas development, to ensure that the Pacific is fit to meet the demands of climate change. It’s specifically and exclusively for projects such as climate hazard mapping. We currently have initiatives in Tokelau and the Marshall Islands. It is to provide for risk planning in terms of energy production and energy efficiency sources so that these Pacific nations can be self-sufficient. So, essentially, our commitment is how can we help Pacific people to defend their homes and their livelihoods? I think, as we move into the future, that’s going to be an area that we will have to emphasize more and more, unfortunately, because climate change does exist.

One of the other things I wanted to highlight in terms of the kōrero that we had before the committee—there’s a nice-headed contribution called “Bipartisanship in foreign affairs”. One of the things the Minister said when he presented to the committee was that he hoped that there will be further Opposition input into foreign policy in the future. But I do want to specifically highlight that the reason there isn’t as much as we would expect or we would like is because we who aren’t in the executive are constrained by a lack of information to members outside of the executive. I wanted to put that on the table, because I think there’s always been a willingness in foreign affairs for us to collaborate and for us to work together. But, obviously, if there are constraints or Cabinet conventions, then that’s not always possible.

One of the things that have happened in this last year was the opening of new embassies. I particularly wanted to emphasise the opening of our embassy in Ireland. We’ve never had an embassy in Ireland, and I think the fact that we have prioritised that embassy in this particular year, which started with an announcement in March 2017 by the previous Minister of Foreign Affairs, Murray McCully, highlights how important we see Ireland as, in terms of developing a relationship—particularly in the racing industry, I noted. That is going to enhance our ability, hopefully, to have trade agreements that are going to be beneficial not only to our country but to those in Ireland and also in Europe, where we have historic connections.

I just want to focus on one last issue, and it was an emphasis on West Papua. So there is an acknowledgment by the Minister of Foreign Affairs that we have an issue in West Papua. Recent days have highlighted some of the military operations in that particular part of Indonesia, and so I want to put on the table that the Minister has raised these issues. We as a country are incredibly interested in what’s happening within that region, and so there is a willingness for us to engage with the Indonesian Government to ensure that there isn’t any harm happening to the inhabitants. Kia ora.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It’s a pleasure to take a call on the Appropriation (2019/20 Estimates) Bill tonight. I want to, firstly, acknowledge Minister Ron Mark, because on coming into Government—I was very concerned, as the outgoing Minister, that the Labour finance Minister had signalled very clearly to the country that the first area that would be looked to make cuts in was defence, because we’d spent a lot of time in Government doing our defence white paper and putting our defence capability plan together. I was very concerned that they’d start to make cuts in that. I spoke to the Minister and said, “We’d support you as long as you can keep the investment flowing.” Up to date, they have adopted our defence capability plan and they continue to make the investment where we felt it was very important in personnel, equipment, and, of course, the regeneration of defence property.

However, when I get to the part of the speech where I’m going to talk about property, I am concerned about some of the things that were signalled during the Estimates debate. Firstly, though—procurement of aircraft. The Government has signalled, or the Minister has signalled, that the replacements of our C-130 Hercules are going to be the C130J-30 Super Hercules. The thing that I was concerned about with this process—and it relates to feedback that I’ve received directly from manufacturers that had showed an interest in this process, including the Japanese Government. They actually deserved to be treated with a bit of respect throughout the procurement process, because they actually had a very good platform that, I believe, should have actually—our Ministry of Defence, when we were in Government, we spent a lot of money and we made a big investment to make sure that we had a world-class procurement system, because historically in New Zealand, one of the issues has been—and the Minister raised this in the hearing—that we have made poor decisions on procurement. The latest example that he gave of that was the NH90s. Let’s be honest, it was a painful process bringing those NH90s into service; there’s no doubt about that. But now if you were to ask any of our Royal New Zealand Air Force personnel, they would tell you that it’s an outstanding platform that brings a lot more capability not only to our own service but also to our partners whom we often have to operate with.

The one interesting point that I made—because the Minister was highly critical and was pointing the finger at the National Government around poor procurement decisions. I thought, “That’s ironic.”, because every poor procurement decision that has been made in New Zealand for our New Zealand defence forces has been made by the Labour-led Government, often in partnership with New Zealand First. Actually, the NH90s are a clear example of that. They were a poor decision made by a Labour Government supported by New Zealand First. The good decisions have actually been made by National, the National Government. So I just wanted to take this opportunity to be able to correct the record on that.

The Embraer KC-390: very, very good aircraft. Yes, I accept the fact that it’s only been brought into service for the Brazilian Air Force. It’s a new platform, it’s new technology, and it’s state of the art. Embraer actually brought one of the KC-390s down to New Zealand, to Whenuapai. I went up there with the Chief of Defence Force and the Chief of Air Force. We went on the aircraft, we went for a test flight, I spoke to the pilot—so I spoke right from the loadmasters through to the pilots. They loved it. They said, “This is new technology; this is modern technology.” I feel that we should have used our procurement process to actually go through and make sure that we’ve been fair to every manufacturer in every country that had engaged with us—

CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): I am sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to report progress to the House.

House resumed.

Bill reported with progress.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.