Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 26 June 2012. Volume:681;Page:3278. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
7. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by all his statements? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does he stand by his statement at the Monday 18 June press conference on the impact of immigration on entitlement to New Zealand superannuation where he said: “Yes there are some people who come to New Zealand and either are in the workforce for a short period of time or not [in the workforce] at all but for the most part they’re a very small group.” 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes; and I advise that those who get New Zealand superannuation are 592470 and those who have qualified at over 55 years of age and therefore got New Zealand superannuation but would not have worked for very long are 14135. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Did he mislead the public by selectively using the number of 14135 immigrants aged 56 and over who are already receiving New Zealand superannuation rather than reveal the full real extent of entitlement to New Zealand superannuation when Immigration Service statistics show that 15499 people just in the 60 and over bracket—not 55 and over; the 60 and over bracket—have been granted residence from non - reciprocal pension agreement countries and will be entitled to New Zealand superannuation after only 10 years? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No and anybody who is here for 10 years or longer is entitled to New Zealand superannuation. The advice I have had is that the number for those aged over 55 is 14135 of which the estimated Chinese number is 3444—not 22000 as per the Dominion Road Chinese restaurant. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: So is he saying that this Department of Labour source document showing that the number for non-reciprocal arrangement countries for age 60 and over—just that small category; not 55-plus but 60 and over—is 15499 precisely; and does he not acknowledge that the changes introduced to immigration policy in May of this year in the parental category are a belated response to the huge influx of migrants who will after only 10 years residency be entitled to full New Zealand superannuation? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: What is true of what the member says is that the Government has tightened up the provision in the way that it allows people in. The Ministry of Social Development numbers we have are 14135 and of that 3444 are likely to be people who have come and not been in the workforce either at all or very little who are Chinese and getting New Zealand superannuation not 22000 as the member has made out. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Prime Minister not seem to understand that the figure of 15499 is the entitlement figure which was the subject of the debate he spoke to the press conference about; and does he not understand that this superannuation policy is highly accessible and generous to those admitted through parental reunion from non - reciprocal pension agreement countries who may make no contribution at all before qualifying after 10 years? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Unless I am missing something 15000 or whatever number he has got from the Department of Labour or 14135 which is the number I have got from the Ministry of Social Development—both those numbers are a hell of a lot less than 22000 Chinese people on which the best advice I have had is 3444. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Who said that the figure was 22000 Chinese people— 
Hon Members 
: You did. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Oh no no—no no. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member will resume his seat for the moment. [ 
Interruption 
]—Order! I am on my feet. The member is entitled to ask his question without an answer in unison like that. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The point that I thought you were going to get on your feet for was the suggestion that you had in fact made that figure up. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I was more keen to enable the right honourable gentleman to ask his question than be worried about myself but members should be aware of that. They should not interject in that way either because if they say “you” it does mean the Speaker. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Where in the speech or the press conference following that speech by the leader of New Zealand First is there any reference to the 22000 being Chinese only; second does he not understand that in the 50-plus category which is the third measurement the figure was beyond 26000? So in short he is just blatantly misleading the public with selective micro figures. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I am prepared to accept that when the member was talking in hushed tones about some Chinese dude he had once met who hung out somewhere and who could not back up his numbers but liked chicken chow mein from a Dominion Road Chinese restaurant then I may have got it slightly confused. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister can ramble on as much he likes. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! [ 
Interruption 
] Order! No wonder I am on my feet. I invite the right honourable member to go back and read the  
Hansard 
 of his question. Given the question asked the Prime Minister had a lot of licence in how he answered. I see very little grounds for any point of order over the Prime Minister’s answer but I am prepared to listen. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I do not think I need the  
Hansard 
; I have got the question right in front of me. None of that enables the Prime Minister surely within the Standing Orders— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member cannot raise points of order in that way. If in fact as he claims he asked exactly the question that he had written in front of him I would be very surprised. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The fact of the matter is the Prime Minister was asked to verify where he got his statement from— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member is not going to debate with the Speaker. The only reason why the member’s question was possibly within the bounds of supplementary questions was the Prime Minister had mentioned the member’s speech in his answer. The member could not possibly have predicted the Prime Minister was going to mention the member’s speech in his answer so he could not possibly have prepared a supplementary question that he wrote out on the basis of that answer. That is why I made the point that I just did as Speaker. As I say given the question the member asked the Prime Minister had wide licence in how he answered it. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Supplementary question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has already had five supplementary questions I am afraid. That has used the entitlement for New Zealand First. Fortunately I did not hear that final interjection. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: In accordance with Speaker’s ruling 148/4(1) I seek to table a document setting out the 15499 figure for the 60-plus group alone. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The source of the document? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: The Department of Labour collation. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table a Department of Labour collation. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 









Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.