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: 12 September 2012. Volume:683;Page:5138. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What did he mean when he said that there is a “level of discomfort about the high level of the New Zealand dollar” in answer to Oral Question No 2 yesterday? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I meant what I said. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I go to the Rt Hon Winston Peters for a primary question I think it is not an acceptable answer to say: “I meant what I said.” The question asked what he meant when he said that and I think some explanation is not unreasonable. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: What I said yesterday was there is a level of discomfort about the high level of the New Zealand dollar. That put it about as accurately as I could have at the time and I have no further explanation despite your wish for one. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What would be a little bit helpful would be to hear who has the level of discomfort. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: No he didn’t ask that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No order! The question asked what did he mean by—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! You know it is a primary question. The question asked about his saying there is level of discomfort. Is the member saying that he has a level of discomfort? The primary question asked for an expansion on that answer and I think the House does deserve an expansion on that answer from the Minister of Finance in answering a primary question. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am in a difficult position because I have no expansion on it. I made that comment. We could get into theories about exchange rates and adjustments. We could get into what “discomfort” might or might not mean. But I do not have any extra thing to say on it that will assist the member. I am happy to assist him if he has some other question but in response to that question that actually sums up the Government’s position about the New Zealand dollar. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: So the Minister has explained that the Government has a level of discomfort. [ 
Interruption 
] I am being serious here. This is a primary question on the Order Paper to the Minister of Finance. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If you are going to go down this track then you would need to put in front of you the question that was asked yesterday that elicited that answer because I think then it would be seen that the answer given by the Hon Bill English was perfectly reasonable and should have been abundantly clear. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That might be the member’s view but the primary question was asked and it is not acceptable simply to answer a primary question with “I meant what I said.” when the answer that was referred to was simply a level of discomfort about the high level of the New Zealand dollar. There is a genuine interest in this issue. I believe that this House deserves better from the Minister of Finance. I expect the Minister of Finance to be able to answer that primary question and expand a little on those words. I am not asking for more than a little further explanation of what he meant by that. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I object to being forced by the Speaker to give an answer more than what I am willing able and can justify giving. I have never seen this happen in the House before. The member asked a question which I thought was not that sensible a question because I said— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member cannot do that. I accept that if the Minister is invoking the public interest if he does not believe that it is in the public interest to expand further on that answer I fully accept that—I fully accept that. But the question was accepted as being in order and therefore being a primary question there were several hours to prepare an answer to it—and it is on an issue of significant public interest. I believe that the House does deserve an answer. If it is not in the public interest to expand on that answer I am absolutely prepared to accept that. If that is the Minister’s position I fully accept that. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry but I do not believe that the Minister made any claims that it was not in the public interest to answer the question. I accept you may be trying to interpolate that but I think actually we need to hear from the Minister. If he is arguing it is not in the public interest to answer I believe he needs to say that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I interpreted what he said as alleging it was not in the public interest to expand further on that answer. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have been unusually restrained on this matter as you will have been well aware. But does this mean that henceforth any Minister can get up and take the Minister of Finance’s view that all he has to do is use the word “discomfort” and refuse to explain what it means to anybody— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! This is not really a point of order. This is now getting into the Minister’s answer. The member has seen me attempt to elicit an answer to a primary question. I have interpreted what the Minister has said as that in his view it is not in the public interest to expand further on that particular answer. The member can dig into that further with the supplementary questions he has. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not believe that is actually what is happening here. The Minister is simply refusing to answer the question under your direction. He is not claiming a public interest defence. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member is not particularly helping the order of the House. He has seen me push a Minister harder than he has seen any other Speaker ever push a Minister. If he wants the Speaker to continue to actually try to elicit answers from Ministers then it is not very helpful to take this line. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does his answer to my primary question mean that he and his ministry after 3½ hours cannot tell us whether or not the level of discomfort includes his concern that the dollar might be overvalued? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: No it does not mean that. What the answer to the question means is that as the Government has said quite often we would prefer the level of the dollar to be lower. That would make it easier to rebalance the economy. However on the other hand it would if it was lower reduce the standard of living of New Zealand households. Either way we cannot influence the level of the dollar directly and we are getting on with helping our exporters be more competitive because unlike the Opposition we do not think we can choose the level of the exchange rate. 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I accept that you provided quite a lot of assistance in trying to get the answer to the primary question and the Minister did not answer. But the answer that he has just given effectively could have been the answer to the first question— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! No this is unhelpful to the progress of the House. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think my colleague in a way that he should not have has interjected that you did not hear the point of order and I think it would have been appropriate to hear it. Mr Speaker you interpreted that the Minister had said it was not in the public interest. Our view is that your interpretation was wrong. That has just been confirmed by the Minister answering in a way that he should have originally. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will hear the honourable Bill English. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I am just trying to assist the progress of the House. There is not much point in our having a long debate about the answer to the first question. I gave you a point of view about that the member asked another question and I could easily have got up and just said “No” and sat back down but I do not think that would have assisted the progress of the House. I do not think there is a lot of point in our going back and litigating that. I am happy to answer the question the member asked. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: And indeed the question was a slightly different question. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If as he says—and I quote him—he “would prefer the dollar to be lower” how lower does he prefer it to be? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I do not have in mind and I do not think anyone has in mind a particular level. All the measures of relative values of the New Zealand dollar show that by historical standards it is at high levels. If it was 75c in the US dollar that would be easier. If it was 70c it would be even easier for exporters but bear in mind that would also mean a reduction in living standards for New Zealanders. As I said before either way we cannot pick the exchange rate. We do not try to pick the exchange rate. We get on with making our exporters as competitive as they possibly can be. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister has once again given an answer that could have been given to the primary question. I would argue that he has defied you in not answering the primary question because you interpreted that he was acting—you said that it was not in the public interest. It— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! This is not helpful to the order of the House. The Speaker makes his judgments and that matter is now dealt with. We are getting answers to the supplementary questions and I think that is good progress for the House. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Given that he had 3½ hours to answer the primary question and about 3 seconds to answer the supplementary questions today does he consider his assessment of the situation to be better than that of the IMF which has said the dollar needs to be about— 
Hon Steven Joyce 
: Better than John Walley’s. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: There is only one wally around here and I am looking at him. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Members should know the mood the House is in today. It is unhelpful to make any kind of interjection like that. The Rt Hon Winston Peters please to ask his supplementary question. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Given that he had 3½ hours to prepare the primary question’s answer and 3 seconds to answer the supplementary questions does he consider his assessment of the situation to be better than that of the IMF which has said the dollar needs to be about 15 percent weaker than its current level or the Prime Minister’s statement on 17 April that “We’ve been overvalued for a few days.” when the New Zealand dollar was trading at US82c the same level it is at now? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I do not believe that my assessment is better than others’ but I think it is about as good. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When he told Radio Live on Monday that the Reserve Bank “would be looking to intervene” did he mean to say he supports the dollar reflecting New Zealand’s economic fundamentals or what did he mean? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Could I ask the right honourable member please to repeat his question. It just was not heard clearly. If the member could repeat his supplementary question. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Perhaps you could turn it on again so I can print it off. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When he told Radio Live on Monday that the Reserve Bank—and I quote him—“would be looking to intervene” did he mean to say he as the Minister of Finance supports our dollar reflecting New Zealand’s economic fundamentals; if not what did he mean? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I was asked a question about the speculation by some trader that the kiwi could go to US90c and I pointed out that if it looked like that was happening based on historical experience the Reserve Bank might look to intervene. But then that is ultimately a matter for it. In respect of the fundamentals of the New Zealand economy we are fundamentally a bit more sound at the moment than a lot of other developed economies. That is one reason the dollar is a bit higher. If we continue to perform in the way we are with growth of 2 percent to 3 percent that will put us in a pretty special group of developed economies. That level of performance is likely to keep the dollar somewhere around where it is. 
Hon David Parker 
: And still we get poorer. And still we get poorer. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: What we need to do is make our exporters as competitive as possible so that regardless of the level of the dollar they can be profitable. And by the way the way to get poorer is actually to devalue by 20 percent as the Labour Party is advocating. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! [ 
Interruption 
] No. Order! The Minister cannot allege policies to another party.