Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Jones Dail: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:626;Page:21042] 
3.  
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
 to the  
Coordinating Minister Race Relations 
: Is it Government policy for all Government-funded entities to provide education on the Treaty of Waitangi; if so what has been the total cost in the last financial year for all internal courses contracted courses and education material on the Treaty of Waitangi? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Coordinating Minister Race Relations) 
: 
 No. 
Dail Jones 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I take it that that was an answer to the first part of the question. I just ask the Minister to give some thought to the second part of the question which he has had for at least 4 hours and ought to know something about as a Minister. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Are you asking a supplementary question? 
Dail Jones 
: I just ask him to answer the question that has been set down on the Order Paper which he has had for 4 hours. I read it out for your benefit Madam Speaker. I said: “if so what has been the total cost in the last financial year for all internal courses”— 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: The member asked whether something is true; if it is then what? The member said no it is not true so the “if so” part becomes completely irrelevant at that stage. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes I am afraid it can be read like that so maybe the member would like to ask a supplementary question to that effect. 
Dail Jones 
: In view of the fact that statements have been made that the Government will be spending $6.4 million over 3 years on education and suchlike through this Budget for that purpose is the Minister denying that that money will no longer be made available because of various complaints that have been made to the Government by parties like New Zealand First? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I have noticed no complaint from New Zealand First on this matter. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Minister has just answered no to the first part of the primary question. Then when asked about specific expenditure that has been publicised widely in the newspapers he answered that he knew of no complaint from New Zealand First. He is being devious and obtuse and he should be now told to answer the primary question. His answer must be “Yes” because by way of his last answer he has just admitted that there is some expenditure. If it is outside of Government policy he can say so. But it surely must be part of Government policy otherwise the Government would not be doing it. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The primary question states: “all Government-funded entities”. It states “all”. It is a very badly drafted question. As soon as I saw it I said that there was no need for any additional information on it because clearly all Government entities do not provide education in this area. It is just rubbish. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: One of the difficulties is that when members ask multiple questions in supplementary questions they are at risk of getting an answer to only one of them which is all that is required under the Standing Orders. I suggest that the question was answered in this instance. If the member wants to have another supplementary question then he should do so. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The proper way the question would be answered in any other Western democracy would be for the Minister to say: “No not all Government departments but some and here is the amount.” 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Well— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If one of all Government departments was not engaged in this it does not mean that the question should not be answered. One department may not be engaged which is quite natural in that case but the fact of the matter is that some Government departments surely are. Why cannot the Minister just give us the answer instead of trying to be a clever Dick which does not come naturally to him? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for that contribution. 
Rodney Hide 
: Speaking— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I do not need any help with this. Thank you very much Mr Hide. The question has been answered. If you wish to have different questions and different answers then I invite the members again to have a reconsideration of the Standing Orders. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Has the Minister troubled himself to find out the total cost in the last financial year of all internal courses contracted courses and education material on the Treaty of Waitangi paid for by Government agencies? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No. 
Rod Donald 
: Does the Minister agree that well-informed dialogue and honest information on the Treaty of Waitangi foster racial harmony in this country and peace and understanding in our communities or does he support the view that New Zealanders should remain ignorant of our origins as a bicultural nation? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The former. 
Tariana Turia 
: Does the Minister recall the Prime Minister’s statement to this House on 11 February 2004: “I agree that the Treaty of Waitangi is the founding document for New Zealand and that it is a symbol of unity trust and partnership between Maori and the Crown …”; if so should not the Government continue to fund education on Te Tiriti o Waitangi in an effort to build unity through the founding document of this nation? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I do have a recollection of that and of course if the Prime Minister said it we will keep on doing it. I remind the member that there has been an announcement recently around information around the treaty campaign and when she works her way through her papers she will come to it. 
Dail Jones 
: Is it Government policy for some Government-funded entities to provide education on the Treaty of Waitangi; if so what has been the total cost in the last financial year of those internal courses those contracted courses and that education material on the Treaty of Waitangi? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Clearly a number of Government agencies and other Crown entities including universities are involved in education in that area. I have not seen fit to waste their time by asking the cost of all the individual courses. 
Stephen Franks 
: What do those education courses teach is the meaning of the treaty when I have not been able to get a single straight answer from a range of central and local government organisations when I have asked just what they expect job applicants to show when they are told they must show commitment to the treaty; would it not be a good idea at least for the Government to sort out its own message and ideas before the propaganda presses start rolling? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am in two minds as to whether I should be giving advice to the member at this point on those matters—that is job applications. I think it is clear that some Government agencies have been absolutely inappropriate in their suggested requirements for job applicants. A number of jobs that have nothing to do with the treaty have the treaty mentioned in the advertisement. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What about your office? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I want to say that I am very embarrassed that Ministerial Services when advertising a job available in my office suggested that knowledge of the principles of the treaty was necessary. For an electorate secretary in my office such knowledge is absolutely unnecessary and that should not have been in the job advertisement. 
Dail Jones 
: How and why has the Minister forgotten launching a treaty information website the first part of a campaign promised by the Labour Party before it came to power in 1999 and an information programme that will run for 3 years and has a budget of $6.47 million—how can he possibly have forgotten that; and in what way will that benefit any New Zealander whether Maori or non-Maori bearing in mind in particular that the Government’s 2005 Budget funding for Maori is directed to agencies instead of families? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: It has been quite interesting—there have been tens of thousands of hits on the Treaty of Waitangi information website at the State Services Commission. The information is presented in very neutral terms and has been checked by eminent historians including Jamie Belich and Dr Claudia Orange for its neutrality. On this matter I tend to agree with the Greens that knowledge is better than ignorance even if the member has the opposite point of view. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I seek leave to table a document in which officials question whether it is clear that any additional benefits are likely to be gained from the national touring exhibition which is at a rather large cost to the Government. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Dail Jones 
: In view of the Minister’s inability to come up with figures as asked by me of him I seek leave to table a  
New Zealand Herald  
article from 19 April 2004 indicating the budget of $6.4 million and the cost of the website which the Minister seems to have forgotten does cost money. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Stephen Franks 
: I seek leave to table a letter from the Minister of Justice that tells me the treaty commitment is to require that the ministry “take into account that New Zealand is a diverse society and that it should respect and seek to meet the needs of all New Zealanders.” 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Stephen Franks 
: I seek leave to table a letter from the Ministry of Defence that says the ministry has no formal statement of the principles of the treaty but is committed to an equal employment opportunities policy. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Stephen Franks 
: I seek leave to table a letter from a district health board with an equally empty response. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.