Goff Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 01 April 2015. Volume:704;Page:2799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]12.Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill) to the Minister of Defence: Does he stand by his response yesterday “well why would you?” when asked if he would publicly release details regarding the level of protection afforded to New Zealand personnel in the upcoming deployment to Iraq?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Defence): In the context that the question was asked yes.Hon Phil Goff: When details about legal protection have not been suppressed in the past is the lack of transparency in this case because in fact he has achieved less protection for our New Zealand soldiers in Iraq; if not what is the reason?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It is an unreasonable suggestion from the person asking the question that there has been less legal protection achieved for our people who will be deployed to Iraq but I would go on to suggest to him that he look back at recent history—2001 2003 2006 and 2009—and note that such agreements were not released on those occasions. On at least one of those occasions I believe he was the Minister of Defence.Hon Phil Goff: I seek leave from the House to table the status of forces agreement in regard to the Solomon Islands in 2003 and in fact the—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The document has been described; it does not need further description. I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table that particular document. Is there any objection? There is none.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Phil Goff: With regard to transparency why did his office yesterday mislead journalists by telling them that New Zealand soldiers were not in Australia training for deployment only to correct that later in the day after it was exposed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The member is using his own interpretation of circumstances to create a picture that is simply untrue. I was asked about the issue at about a quarter to 10 yesterday morning and I confirmed to them that there were troops training in Australia. The really ironic thing here is that the Labour Party thinks it is odd that our troops should train for a mission before they go. I seek leave to table a document showing that it was the Solomon Islands Government that passed special legislation in 2003 that enabled the arrangement to be put in place that Mr Goff speaks of. It was not—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The document has been described. I will put the leave. Leave is—[Interruption] Order! Would both Mr Mark and Mr Brownlee continue their conversation after question time? [Interruption] Order! Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is none.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Phil Goff: Why has Mr Brownlee refused to be transparent when asked and tell this House what the level of risk is in the area that we are deploying New Zealand troops to when the Australian Government by comparison has been open about the fact that it is high risk and when the New Zealand Chief of Defence Force Lieutenant General Keating told the select committee that the place we are going to is an “extremely dangerous place”?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Once again the member asking the question puts together an assertion and suggests that it is fact. It is not. I have always maintained that we need to exercise a high degree of caution in the way in which we engage around this particular deployment because it is risky. And anyone who watches their television on an evening will know that.Hon Phil Goff: Why has the Minister repeatedly failed to be open honest and transparent around the questions of legal protection for our deployed troops around risk levels for the Iraq deployment and even about our soldiers training for deployment in Australia when answering honestly any of those questions does not involve any security risk for our people?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well Mr Speaker I am actually quite surprised that you allowed that question given the fact that—Mr SPEAKER: I am giving plenty of licence to the answer.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —it was full of all sorts of accusations manufactured in the mind of Phil Goff. I have always been open about the nature of this particular involvement but I have said that there are particular concerns around this deployment that will mean that we do not say some things publicly. If the member cannot work it out I would suggest he spends a little bit of time with some of the families who have got members who will be part of this deployment. Of course for his own political reasons he does not care about that. He has got no interest in protecting those people. He has got an interest only in trying to get a little bit of public position that might put him back into contention against his old mate Andrew Little—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The general debate will start shortly.Ron Mark: I seek leave of the House to table the United States status of forces agreement with Iraq which is available on the internet.Mr SPEAKER: If it is available on the internet I will not be putting the leave.