Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Gallagher Martin: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:12704] 
2.  
MARTIN GALLAGHER (Labour—Hamilton West) 
 to the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: Has he received any recent reports into possible changes to New Zealand’s nuclear-free status? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I have received a number of reports including this one released by the National Party yesterday under the cover of the hikoi—though apparently it has been around for some months. This report states that National should repeal the nuclear-free legislation but tell the public that the policy ban will remain. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister is being reckless with the truth that is contained in that document. It does not make such a claim. I seek leave to table the document in order that all members may know that the Minister is misleading the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There were two issues there. The first matter that the member raised was a matter of debate but he sought leave to table to the document. 
Document not tabled. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The problem with that policy recommendation is that I have received other information that Don Brash has already told an American congressional delegation that a National Government would repeal the ban “before lunch” which absolutely contradicts what he has been saying elsewhere. 
Martin Gallagher 
: Further to the Minister’s interrupted primary answer has the Minister had any advice in terms of our foreign relations about whether the recommendations in the report to be tabled will have any credibility? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I have received advice that the National Party set up the Somers commission in the early 1990s to look at this same question of nuclear-powered ships and promised the US State Department that this was in fact a mechanism to lift the ban. However apparently the then Government got cold feet in the face of strong public opposition and reneged on that undertaking to the United States. So I suggest in answer to that question that this bill will have credibility with neither the Americans who have been taken down this track before nor the New Zealand public when they know that the Leader of the Opposition is being totally disingenuous about what he said on his position. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The last part of that answer was out of order. The Minister has no responsibility for that. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I say to Mr Brownlee that far too many points of order are being raised. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Points of order of course are raised when the House is conducting itself in an unseemly manner. In this case the Minister when giving an answer was being most unseemly in suggesting that there was a bill somewhere. I challenge him to table any bill that he thinks he has in his possession. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. As I said to the member I dealt with that by my ruling before he got up. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does the Minister’s reference to 1990 relate to reports from the National Party’s Picton caucus of that year at which time it decided to come out opposing both nuclear-armed and nuclear-powered ships visiting this country and at which time the then spokesman on defence Doug Kidd and the then leader of the National Party Jim Bolger made a claim that they had always believed in that policy? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the Minister cannot answer that question. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Does the Minister accept the fact that in fact New Zealand is not nuclear-free with widespread applications of nuclear technology including smoke alarms in our homes that are promoted by Government agencies; if he does accept that fact then what is the reason that his Government persists with the ban on nuclear propulsion? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: All New Zealanders accept the fact that some radioactive materials are used for example in hospitals and that there is good reason for that. Nobody opposes that. But the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders are absolutely opposed to having either nuclear-propelled or nuclear-armed vessels in this country and this Government for one will stand by its policy based on conviction—unlike that National Opposition which has flip-flopped all over the place over 14 years. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I hesitate to challenge your ruling but my question related to recent reports. I think in historical terms the last 20 years is recent. Mr Goff introduced the issue of 1990 into the debate. I asked whether the Government had received any such reports. That report from that conference in 1990 was pretty significant because it changed the position of both parties at the time—Labour and National—on the question of nuclear-capable ships. So in that context I ask you to think about it again. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I did and I have; I still think the question that the member asked was out of order. 
Keith Locke 
: Would the direction promoted by the National Party in Wyatt Creech’s report not eventually lead to nuclear-armed ships coming into New Zealand ports particularly given the fact that the soft Danish model promoted by Wyatt Creech in the report has actually led to nuclear-armed ships coming into Danish ports? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No this is asking for comment on a particular issue that is a party point. This is not a question that can be accepted. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have ruled on it I say to Mr Locke and I will not re-rule on that particular issue. The member did not ask the question in order. There is a way to ask the question but he did not do that. 
Keith Locke 
: I asked— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: All right I will give him one last chance but it must be within the Minister’s responsibility. 
Keith Locke 
: Does the Minister agree that according to reports he has received on the Wyatt Creech report the Danish model promoted by Mr Creech in that report would actually lead to nuclear-armed warships coming into New Zealand ports because that has happened in Denmark? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think there is very little difference between the way in which the question was asked the first time and the second. What it leaves the Minister doing is giving speculation to the House about something that has nothing to do with current Government policy. That is quite unacceptable. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. The Minister can answer only about reports he has received. But he can certainly do that. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: This Government believes absolutely that the legislation is a clear guarantee to the public of New Zealand that neither nuclear-armed nor nuclear-propelled ships will come into this country. The alternative policy of saying: “We will repeal the legislation but we will keep the policy ban.” has absolutely no credibility. It is the more so because Don Brash has already told the Americans that he will repeal the policy ban and he will have those ships here. He will just not admit it publicly. He has said it and refuses to deny the fact that he said it. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Has the Minister received any advice— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Now I do not want to have to warn any honourable member but there have been just a few too many interjections and of course there can be none while a question is being asked. The member will please start again. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Has the Minister received any advice from his ministry the New Zealand Defence Force or any branch of the United States Government that repealing that provision of the antinuclear legislation without changing the policy will in any way assuage American concerns about the operation of New Zealand’s antinuclear policy? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The advice I have received is that the Americans will simply give no credibility to a promise by a party that in Government has made those promises before and has not lived up to them. That is why I say the National Party has credibility neither with the Americans nor with the New Zealand public—and rightly so. If there were one argument to put forward the National Party would actually take the call and ask a supplementary question which they have failed to do each time this question has come up in the House. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Minister received any reports that the Americans have received the comments from Dr Brash with the same sense of alacrity and déjà vu with which they received the comments from Mr Lange back in 1984 that he would sort the matter out within 6 months of taking power? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I certainly cannot confirm that that was the undertaking that Mr Lange had given. What I can confirm however is that a message went very clearly from the then National Government that the Somers commission would sort that matter out and give it the grounds to repeal the ban. Everybody knows that the National Party wants to repeal the ban but is scared to do so because overwhelmingly New Zealanders are in favour of keeping that ban. That ban will stay under this Government.