Little Andrew: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLittle Andrew: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 29 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5417. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]2.ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “it is highly unlikely actually that the Government will have to pay any more through Pharmac. But on the basis that it had to pay a tiny bit more the Government would fund that increase”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I stand by my full statement which was as the member outlines ending with: “the Government would fund that increase because actually what would end up happening is that the Government would earn a lot more revenue through tax revenue.”Andrew Little: Why does he say that patent extensions under the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement will cost only a tiny bit more given that Pharmac says that buying generics saves an additional $40 million to $50 million every year? Is that what he means by a tiny bit?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am confident with Pharmac that the structure will remain in place if New Zealand becomes a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement and also that for the most part it will be able to continue to buy generics. But on the basis that it ends up having to buy patented drugs for a little bit longer—you will accept that Pharmac has quite an aggressive stance in the way it negotiates. It is quite capable of negotiating even better deals potentially across a wide number of drugs and I am not convinced it would actually pay a lot more. If it did pay a little bit more then the Government would fund that and New Zealanders would pay the same amount.Andrew Little: Has he heard of the cancer drug Glivic which Pharmac used to spend $40 million a year on before it came off patent reducing the cost to $2 million a year; and does he understand that if the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement extends patents by 7 years it would cost Pharmac an extra $84 million a year just for that one medicine?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes and I have also heard of Herceptin which this progressive Government in the end got Pharmac to fund. Actually the way to get Pharmac to fund even more drugs is to have a wealthier economy and therefore if you are doing more economic activity and you are earning more you have more to put into your health system. Show me a country around the world that has a First World health system but that does not have a First World economy.Andrew Little: Can he guarantee that Pharmac will still be able to purchase lifesaving medicines that Kiwis need like Glivic when the cost of buying them increases by hundreds of millions of dollars; if so what else is going to be cut from the health budget which he has already underfunded by $1.7 billion to meet these new expenses?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Let us get a few facts right. The dodgy Labour numbers on health are about as accurate as the dodgy Labour names of Chinese buyers in Auckland. Secondly it will not be hundreds of millions of dollars. There may be a very small cost increase and if there is the Government will fund that. Let us just test this for one second: is the Labour Party now telling us it would like to pull out of the New Zealand - China free-trade agreement which has had massive impacts on the New Zealand economy? No but somehow when they could do one with the United States they think it is a bad idea.Andrew Little: I seek leave to table a copy of the report from Infometrics from June this year confirming that the real cut in health spending to date has been—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before I put the leave I just want to check with the member whether that document is freely available to members if they want it.Andrew Little: No it is not. It is not on the website.Mr SPEAKER: I will accept the member’s word and put the leave. Leave is sought to table this Infometrics document. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Andrew Little: Why would he sign a deal that restricts free trade and lifesaving medicines and according to our negotiators is not going to achieve free trade for our dairy exports?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: What a load of nonsense! The Trans-Pacific Partnership started its negotiations under Helen Clark who basically said that it would be a good thing for New Zealand if we could get a free-trade agreement. Phil Goff when he was not wandering his way to Riyadh telling them porkies about our sheep deals—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I think I can anticipate the point of order. The member will stand and withdraw that comment.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: OK I withdraw but—Hon Members: And apologise.Mr SPEAKER: Order! On this occasion I will decide that. The member will stand withdraw and apologise.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have done it.Mr SPEAKER: And apologised?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I apologise.Mr SPEAKER: Thank you. [Interruption] Order! The House will now settle.Andrew Little: Given that it is clear that the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement will make medicine more expensive for New Zealand taxpayers why can he not just be straight with New Zealanders and tell us who will miss out who will pay more and what will be cut from the already ailing health sector?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It is not at all clear that it will make medicines more expensive but in the event that it makes it slightly more expensive for Pharmac the Government will fund that because what is absolutely clear is it will create enormous benefits for New Zealand businesses. This is the chance to have a free-trade agreement with the United States and Japan. I will tell you what this feels like—the Labour position on The Hobbit. They opposed it and turned up at the premiere. It is just like the Skycity convention centre. They opposed it but they turned up in the corporate box.