Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8876] 
6.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Is she concerned about the number of New Zealanders on waiting lists for elective surgery and State housing and how many New Zealanders are on each list? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I am satisfied that good progress is being made in both areas. Eighty-two percent of newly referred patients are now seen by a specialist within 6 months compared with 66 percent in the 1998-99 year. In respect of State housing the 12379 applicants on the waiting list represent a smaller number than the number of State houses sold off under the previous National Government of which Mr Peters was for a time part. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the Prime Minister how many people were on the elective surgery list. She made no attempt to answer that. It is all there in the question. The last few words are: “and how many New Zealanders are on each list?”. That member who is meant to be the Prime Minister comes down to this House after a long rest and cannot answer even a simple question as to what the numbers are in the two categories. She gave the number for the second category—in a very diverse answer to do with the Government I was associated with—but on the question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will please be seated. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I have not finished Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will sit down now. The member will come to his point tersely. He has not yet raised a point of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I have raised a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked you why you have allowed the Prime Minister to get away with not answering the first part of the question to do with how many New Zealanders are on each list. In this case it had to be firstly elective surgery which is implicit in the question and secondly State housing. When she got to State housing having ignored the first part of the question she then started to blame me for the past which is not any matter for which she is responsible. So she has erred on three grounds and why have you not got up and stopped her? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Because she actually addressed the question. She gave the figures that were required. She added comments in as well. I heard her mention the number of people on waiting lists for State housing and the member acknowledged that. When she came to the question of waiting lists for elective surgery I heard a figure given there. The Prime Minister certainly addressed the question. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Well then I ask you to tell the country what the number is that I am seeking in respect of elective surgery. Tell us all now. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Mr Speaker I most certainly am prepared to support you in that you cannot make the Prime Minister give an answer but I really think you should rethink the reply you gave to the Rt Hon Winston Peters because you suggested that the Prime Minister actually had given the number of people waiting for elective surgery. If you were involved in active politics you would know that the number of people who are waiting for elective surgery is the country’s best-kept secret. Nobody knows that number. The Government makes sure it does not keep the numbers. Hospitals are told they are not allowed to keep the numbers. That is a complete secret. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That might well be but that was not the issue raised. Two figures were given. I am not here to judge whether the figures are accurate; that is for the Prime Minister giving the figures and for members asking supplementary questions. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With respect we have come back from a break from the House. We have all been led to believe by the media that we are going to get some sort of new transparency from the House in this term. I want to ask you as to how it is avoidable on this question to say how many New Zealanders are on each list. The first number required of course is the number of those on waiting lists for elective surgery. How could she possibly have answered that by putting up some sort of 6-month waiting list percentage? As the Hon Mr Prebble rightly points out it is the number of people on those waiting lists that we want to know; so does the whole country. For the Prime Minister of all people—not some junior Minister but the Prime Minister—to come down here and get away with her answer and be allowed by you to get away with it is a democratic disgrace. I want a bit of accountability in this House from her and from you. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will not make comments about me at all. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well I have. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member makes any further comments he will be leaving the Chamber. I am warning him of that right now. As far as I am concerned I heard an answer given. Perhaps the Prime Minister might like to restate the answer. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If you heard an answer then the Prime Minister has answered the question; but you did not hear any answer to do with the subject matter and now you are asking her to expand on it. My point is this: why do we always have to waste the time of this House by having to ask for questions to be answered in the way they are in every First World democracy particularly the ones we share the English language with. This is a disgrace. I am making my protest on behalf of myself and my colleagues and I believe it is generally shared by every informed observer of this process. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member might believe that but that is not my point of view and that is not the point of view I want to adhere to here. Ministers are asked questions and Ministers reply. I invited the Prime Minister to restate the answer she gave. If she wishes to do that I would like her to do so. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am happy to advise—supplementary to what I advised in a rather full answer earlier—that the number on elective surgery waiting lists amounts to 31785 of which a very small number are the refugees and new migrants Mr Peters despises. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Now there you go! She had the figure. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will hear the member in a minute. I am going to be sending somebody out—somebody who makes a comment. I am very close to doing that. Only one person speaks in a point of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Mr Speaker there you go—she had the figure. If you wish to send anybody out you should send her out and make her an example for this Government—and her Ministers. It is not a laughing matter to threaten to throw out members on this side of the House when she is clearly in breach of the spirit of question time in this House. In my view that is a disgrace. You should send her out and make it a lesson for the first time for a long long time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: All I want to say is this— 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need any further assistance on this matter. I will make that decision and I will make it alone. As far as I was concerned I invited the Minister to make any further comments if she wanted to. She did. She made an extra comment. That does not come off anyone’s question time at all. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to make two points. The reason it does not come off anyone’s question time is that members of Parliament and in this case Mr Peters had to take extreme action—which included a huge amount of provocation I have to say of yourself—to get the Prime Minister to give an answer to a question she had on notice. She can sit there and shake her head but she did not give the 31000 figure. She hid that figure until under extreme provocation she eventually stood up and gave it. At the end of the day unless there are some guidelines for times when Ministers have answers and choose not to give them but then give them under duress a bit later on during points of order you can expect nothing else other than lots of points of order because if anyone takes up extra questions that is just a way of those questions being used up. Mr Speaker I do not know whether the next time you attend the Labour caucus you will lay out the rules to the Minister or whether you will send a memo to Ministers on the way they answer questions—spell it out more—but at the end of the day for the sake of this House’s transparency we need to ensure when Ministers have the answer that they give it rather than us having to wheedle it out of them through points of order. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Mr Speaker perhaps the next time a National Party caucus is held you might attend it to tell its members that the requirement is for Ministers to address questions and the member needs to understand what that actually means. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: There is a Speaker’s ruling that states that if an answer to a question can be given then it should be given. While I do not want to associate myself with the tone in which some of the points of order have been raised with you I have to associate myself with the point that is being made and I think you should make it to the Prime Minister. In this particular case a question was given under notice. It asked for a particular number and it now turns out that the Prime Minister always had that number. No one in this House could misinterpret this question as not asking for the number of people on waiting lists for elective surgery. The Prime Minister in having that figure and then choosing not to give it to the House when asked is holding Parliament in contempt. It would be very helpful—I have invited you to do this before and perhaps you could have a think about it rather than doing it today—to have a formal ruling by you stating that if a Minister has the answer to a question then it is unparliamentary for the Minister to fail to provide that information to the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Speaker does not write answers for Ministers or judge the quality of answers. The guidelines are that questions must be addressed and in that regard Dr Cullen was right. On reflection perhaps the point the Hon Richard Prebble made is also one that is worth considering. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When the Prime Minister was asked as to what the number was in respect of the elective surgery list why did she not get up and just tell the House the straight direct and honest answer that was provided to her by her staff when she came down to the House; or is she just into full-scale evasion mode most of the time? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Answers should not be over lengthy and a lot of information was in the first one. 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: Is the Prime Minister concerned about the 25000 patients who were dumped from the waiting list because under this Government people have to be sicker to get service and how many New Zealanders does she think thought her credit card pledge to reduce waiting lists would be achieved by having patients simply dumped from the list? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The residual waiting list process has been around for quite a while. The numbers removed at this time are considerably fewer than the 58000 dumped when that member’s party was in Government. I am satisfied that more surgery than ever is being performed that a lot more money has been put in and that we are getting very good results in terms of the numbers being seen by specialists within the first 6 months and then being referred for treatment. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why is the Prime Minister so little concerned about the effect if we add the people who were tipped off the list to the 31000 then add the number of people who are on State housing lists which all up comes to 68000; why is she so contemptuously unconcerned about those people who are living in anguish and agony awaiting breast heart eye joint orthopaedic and hip operations to name but a few or who are living in squalor and in overcrowded conditions while she spends tens and tens of millions of dollars on a whole lot of illegal immigrants and reconciling some Afghans who when the situation has been stabilised in their country are not to be reconciled there but of all things here? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I am sure the member is not really interested in knowing that out of over 63000 State tenancies last year 154 went to refugees. It has been the practice of Governments for many years to make sure that refugees are appropriately housed in the community. I for one would want to see that practice continue. 
Jill Pettis 
: Have policies in respect of the health and housing needs of refugees changed in recent years? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: No. I understand that essentially the same approach has been taken to the housing of refugees in the community including in respect of State housing and in meeting their health needs which are often quite considerable. It is a good thing about New Zealand that the practice has been the same under a range of Governments including when Mr Peters was Deputy Prime Minister. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I would like to table the comments made by the Prime Minister when I was Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister when she blatantly complained about New Zealand First being far too influential in driving down the number of immigrants and refugees. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those statements. Is there any objection? There is.