Paraone Pita: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Paraone Pita: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:606;Page:3988] 
10.  
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Is she satisfied that district health boards are using their funding to meet the maximum benefits of community health needs? 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Health) 
: 
 No there is still some way to go. Until the establishment of district health boards the old hospital and health services were predominately responsible for hospital services. The change to district health boards requires them to take a broader responsibility for health needs. Over time I would expect a better alignment of district health board funding to meet local community needs based on the health needs analysis they are now required to undertake. 
Pita Paraone 
: Does her dissatisfaction include the Taranaki District Health Board paying twice for chief executive officer services at a total cost of over $500000; and for how long is she prepared to allow taxpayer funding to be wasted particularly when the board is turning away patients in need of surgery in order to make its elective surgery waiting lists appear shorter? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: While I have no responsibility for employment matters I have been advised by the board that a serious complaint was laid against the chief executive officer. The board decided to investigate but the chief executive officer went on sick leave and that has been slowing down the resolution process. A temporary chief executive officer has been employed because the position could not be filled internally. She accepted the position at short notice and at a lower rate than the State Services Commission recommends. The board is very keen to resolve the complaint but has been frustrated and hamstrung by the fact that the chief executive officer is entitled to unlimited sick leave as part of the employment contract that he signed and has been in place for quite some time. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: When was the requirement instigated for district health boards to undertake a comprehensive assessment of community health needs and why? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: This Government made it a requirement of district health boards through the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act. While boards must implement the New Zealand health strategy and other agreed national strategies they need to take account of particular local health needs. Those needs change over time and boards require regular reviews. 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: Have any district health board public hospitals decided to ration surgery plus deny patients access to first-specialist assessment as a way of coping with their financial deficits and what does she believe will be the outcome of those rationing decisions for patients? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: All boards are required to live within a budget. I am pleased to tell this House that in the 2003-04 financial year at least 15 of those boards will be out of deficit. They are working hard to ensure that they provide the range of services they need to provide and I think they are doing that in an extremely good way. 
Heather Roy 
: What responsibility does she accept for the double-up in chief executive officer services at the Taranaki District Health Board and if none who really is in charge? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I do not accept responsibility for employment matters. The board is taking every step it should take in an employment matter including natural justice for the chief executive officer. I believe the board is handling the matter correctly. Under the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act I am not able to be part of the employment contracts of chief executive officers. That has been the case for at least 20 years. I would be interested to know whether ACT intends to change that should it ever become the Government. 
Sue Kedgley 
: To ensure that district health boards are able to be fully responsible to local community health needs will she ensure that all democratically elected district health board members are able to speak freely to their communities and to the local media about local health needs and are not muzzled or gagged; if not why not? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Practically every district health board meeting in New Zealand is now open to the public and the media. The member should compare that with the board meetings of the old hospital and health services and Crown health enterprises which were closed. The media and the public were locked out for 10 years. Board members are entitled to speak on what they want and I am pleased to say that they are. 
Judy Turner 
: Can the Minister confirm that the new chief executive of the Taranaki District Health Board was also the recipient of a $25000 pay rise when making the transition from chief executive officer of Southern Health to the head of the Southland District Health Board when the health sector was restructured? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: No I cannot. What I can confirm is that the acting chief executive officer Mary Bonner is receiving less than she is entitled to under the State Services Commission guidelines. 
Judy Turner 
: Is she satisfied that funding from district health boards is being optimally utilised when combined deficits of $272 million mean that money that should be used to save people’s lives is instead devoted to debt servicing? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The deficit for the 2001-02 financial year was $217 million. It was paid off by deficit support in the financial year in which it was incurred. The predicted deficit for this financial year is $188 million. According to the latest statistics they are right on track and funding is provided to pay for that deficit throughout the year. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I waited until the end of the question so as not to interrupt anyone. The Minister is required under the Standing Orders to address the question. The Speaker is not responsible of course for the answer but a Minister must address the question. MPs are allowed to ask two parts to a question and my colleague Heather Roy asked the Minister whether she accepted any responsibility and if none who was in charge. There were two questions. The Minister gave a great long answer. She said that she accepted no responsibility but she never once addressed the question of who was in charge. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I want again to raise this issue which is very important. It is all right to apologise or state that one is not going to interrupt the member but this is classically a case of a point of order that must be raised at the time the issue occurs. It should have been raised when the answer was given not somewhat later on. There is a good reason for that part of which is to ensure that people’s memories are absolutely fresh about what was said at the time so as not to encourage them to come back and raise new points of order about matters that have already happened. Secondly Mr Speaker it is not for you to judge the nature of the answer. We are getting on to a slippery slope if we continue to question the nature of an answer given because it then becomes a contest as to who is deciding what the answer was and whether the answer was accurate. Thirdly if the member had actually listened to the answer he would know that the Minister made it clear that it was the board that was responsible. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: I would like to address the first point raised by Dr Cullen. My colleague Rodney Hide raised the matter while we were still on this question. That is his point; he did not interrupt the supplementary questions but raised the matter when the House was still considering that substantive question on the Order Paper. So I put it to you that it is not an unreasonable delay to raise it in that manner. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: All I want to say is that it is best to raise the issue when it occurs when we can easily recall the details. But if members ask more than one question it is still over to the Minister to decide how to answer. The answer must address the question and it did.