3. Foreign Affairs Minister—United Nations Security Council Resolution Condemning Israeli Settlements in Palestinian TerritoryDr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) to the Minister of Foreign AffairsForeign Affairs Minister—United Nations Security Council Resolution Condemning Israeli Settlements in Palestinian Territory3. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does he support the New Zealand sponsored UN Security Council resolution of 23 December 2016 that condemned the expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory?Hon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Yes.Dr Kennedy Graham: Will the Minister then reaffirm to this House today the Security Council Resolution 2334 and the Government's longstanding policy that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967 including East Jerusalem has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law?Hon PAULA BENNETT: As I said in the primary answer yes we do support the New Zealand - sponsored UN Security Council resolution as the member has said but I think on behalf of the Minister the broader point is that a peaceful resolution will require engagement by both Israel and the Palestinians. That is what he is focused on.Dr Kennedy Graham: Does the Minister then disagree with the former Minister of Foreign Affairs that continuing settlement growth at anything like the current rate will render the two state solution a purely academic concept. There will be nothing left to negotiate."?Hon PAULA BENNETT: He is interested in looking forward rather than looking backward. He does support certainly the previous foreign affairs Minister.Grant Robertson: Backward to the things you did support!Hon PAULA BENNETT: No he is a forward-looking Minister is Gerry Brownlee; if there is anything we can say about that man—forward looking. He is very focused on actually supporting the resolution that we put forward. But as he says he is actually more focused on the engagement of both Israel and the Palestinians. His position is that settlements undermine that two-State solution.Dr Kennedy Graham: In light of the Minister's forward-looking comment—that New Zealand should not make pronouncements on issues in the Middle East—if a foreign Government were to illegally occupy New Zealand territory would the Minister expect our allies to condemn the action or follow his lead and not make pronouncements about how either party involved should behave?Hon PAULA BENNETT: That is simply hypothetical and I would not comment.Dr Kennedy Graham: Does the Minister disagree with the UN Secretary-General's comment—which was not hypothetical—who 4 days ago expressed "disappointment and alarm of the decision by Israel to build a new settlement" and "condemns all unilateral actions that … threaten peace and undermine the two-State solution."?Hon PAULA BENNETT: I am sorry I have not seen those comments and as such I could not comment on those comments that I have not seen.Dr Kennedy Graham: In light of the Minister's comment this morning on radio that the resolution was "premature" does the Minister agree with the New Zealand ambassador to the United Nations who said at the Security Council meeting on the day of 23 December: "Today's resolution confirmed principles that have long been accepted in the United Nations … While more could have been done the text was achievable 'right now'."?Hon PAULA BENNETT: I believe those comments around being premature were more in light of the fact that we would have liked to give Israel notice of the resolution and our part in that but did not.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is it not a fact foreign Minister that the resolution was not in line with longstanding New Zealand policy; second that it did not go to Cabinet as required by the manual because of the denunciation aspects; and third that that is why he is trying to backtrack on it now?Hon PAULA BENNETT: I disagree. It is in line with long-term policy. While the resolution did not therefore need to go to Cabinet the short-term notice of it though—being on 22 December and then happening on the 24th—meant that there was no Cabinet in that time anyway. But according to the Cabinet Manual it did not need to go."