Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 30 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4994. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he regret his statement about the Hungarian Provincial Reconstruction Team in Afghanistan; if not why not? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Prime Minister) 
: 
 No; because it was based on information provided to him by the Chief of Defence Force. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What exactly did he as Prime Minister achieve by making disparaging remarks about Hungarian soldiers that the Government of Hungary has variously described as false malicious ill-advised and unfair; what did he achieve other than the ill will of Hungarian people towards New Zealand? Those remarks were widely reported and will be long remembered. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am sure that there will be many people in Hungary who still remember New Zealand’s contribution to their own liberation not too long ago. Might I say that the work that the two services the New Zealand Defence Force and the Hungarian defence force do in their two respective areas is obviously very valuable to the reconstruction of those two areas and we respect that. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does he think that gratuitous insults from the Prime Minister towards Hungary and from Gerry Brownlee towards Finland will have enhanced the regard that those countries have for New Zealand and the likelihood that they will support our upcoming bid for election to the United Nations Security Council? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I cannot speculate on what some other country might do with regard to a UN vote. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Since he has criticised the Hungarians for not patrolling in the southern part of Baghlan and since his announcement that the Kiwis will patrol in those areas has he reconsidered his announced intention to have them patrol given that the Kiwi soldiers lack mine-resistant armour-protected vehicles without which they would be under extreme risk and would likely suffer further casualties? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The member was offered a briefing on all these matters last week. He has not taken it up. It is not appropriate nor— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There are two points that I would like to make to you. Firstly that is not an answer to my question. Secondly I have asked the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee for such a briefing and it has not been offered. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member’s point of order is perfectly fair that that is not an answer to the question. It may be that the Acting Prime Minister considers that it is not in the public interest to answer the question but he should indicate that rather than going into the answer in the way he did because the question was a fair question. So I call on the Hon Gerry Brownlee to now answer it. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I do not think discussing these matters in the House given the desire to protect the security of our soldiers in any theatre of war is desirable; nor is it in the public interest. I would point out that the member has been offered a briefing on this and has not taken it up. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The chairman of the select committee knows that I have asked for that briefing— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member knows that he cannot dispute the answer by way of a point of order but he can make a personal explanation if he feels that what the Minister has said is impacting on him and affecting him adversely. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: My point of order is this. The Prime Minister has publicly announced that we will be patrolling so it is not a case of security. That is not the reason why— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! No no. That is not a point of order because none of us can second-guess a Minister if they invoke the public interest in not answering a question. We cannot do that and it is not appropriate to try to challenge that by way of point of order. 
Denis O’Rourke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! A point of order has been called. 
Denis O’Rourke 
: Could you clarify that when answers are given to a member’s question they need to be answers for the benefit of the House and that questions cannot be answered by reference to offering a briefing to a particular member? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think in fairness on this occasion the relationship between the two issues is that the Minister has declined to answer what seemed a fair question from the Hon Phil Goff. The Minister has declined to answer it invoking the public interest as the reason for not answering it—the safety of New Zealand’s Defence Force. That is the Minister’s judgment alone and I cannot question that. In terms of the Minister then referring to offering a briefing the questioner is the shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Opposition spokesperson on foreign affairs and it is not uncommon for senior Opposition members to be offered confidential briefings by Ministers in these kinds of circumstances. I think that is not unreasonable for that situation if that is the Minister’s judgment. Certainly as Speaker I cannot question that judgment. But it is not uncommon to offer a senior Opposition spokesperson a confidential briefing in those circumstances. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: When the Prime Minister promised that he would send New Zealand soldiers to patrol in Baghlan was he in possession of all of the relevant facts around the risk posed to the New Zealand soldiers particularly since the Minister of Defence has said that he was not that the Government was not and that of course New Zealand does not have mine-resistant armour-protected vehicles? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well the first point is that the New Zealand Government has provided to the New Zealand Defence Force in Afghanistan all equipment that it has asked for. Secondly I would say that I am the Acting Prime Minister and I am not briefed well enough to be able to answer that question. 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: What reports has the Prime Minister had from the Labour Party in response to his offer to— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think we all know that the Minister has no responsibility for any Labour Party reports. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think that is a fair point. I realise the member tried to dress it up in the guise of “what reports” but at the end of the day the substance of the question must have some relationship to ministerial responsibility and as pointed out by the Hon Trevor Mallard the Minister has no responsibility whatsoever for any Labour Party reports. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Just by way of assistance if the Minister of Defence really wants help he should ask: “Has the Prime Minister”— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! No the member should not do that. [ 
Interruption 
] No the member should not do that. [ 
Interruption 
] Order! 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I seek leave to table a letter that I addressed to the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee more than 2 weeks ago to which I have had no reply asking for a briefing. 
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 Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: What response has the Prime Minister had from the Labour Party to his offer of a confidential briefing on all matters relating to the situation in Afghanistan an offer the Prime Minister made to the Labour Party over a week ago? What response has the Prime Minister had? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well disappointingly—it would seem from the tabling of the letter in the House just before that the Labour Party wishes to conduct this discussion in public—the answer is that no response has been received. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Question No. 12 the Hon Tau Henare. [ 
Interruption 
] Order! Members know that that is not good enough. We are better than that.