Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to speak in response to the Prime Minister's statement and I want to talk to many topics that I will hold her and her Government accountable for in this response. She talked to health. She talked to having confidence in the Government. She talked to having trust. I will challenge all these points across three domains. The first will be health: infectious disease and vaccines; the second will be the reform of vocational education; and the third will be the Tuia 250 data breach. New Zealanders cannot have confidence or trust in this Government or the management of infectious diseases or of vaccines. This time last year in Northland there was a meningitis outbreak. On behalf of Northland parents and children I am holding Pharmac to account for playing God and not telling anyone there were enough vaccines. I need to indicate to David Clark and the Director-General of Health that I held them to account at the time. I said Why did you not tell anyone that there were enough vaccines?" We now know the truth—we now know the truth. I wonder why at the time they didn't say "We didn't know." I wonder why they backed Pharmac. I wonder why it's taken so long to get to the truth. But at that point in time I held them accountable. We now know that is not correct. It is now an unequivocal fact that Pharmac knew about 30000 extra meningococcal vaccines—enough vaccines for everyone—and they told no one. We know that from the written parliamentary question this is what it looks like when Pharmac coughs up that "Yes we knew about the vaccines and we told no one." Why did Pharmac not convey the useful information around the 30000 extra meningitis vaccines to the Ministry of Health before the Northland vaccination campaign was signed off on 22 November 2018? Pharmac's reply is "Pharmac is a Crown agency and makes independent funding decisions." That is their reply. They told no one. They didn't tell the Ministry of Health about the extra vaccines. They didn't tell the Minister about the extra vaccines. Pharmac actually met three times before the Northland campaign was signed off with the Ministry of Health people who were organising the meningococcal campaign in Northland. Three times Pharmac officials sat in the room with the hard-working ministry people who were trying to figure out the best response for Northland and they said nothing. They had the knowledge within them that there were enough vaccines for everyone. They said nothing. The first meeting the second meeting and the third meeting Pharmac said nothing. It's not my view; it's all in writing. Look through the parliamentary questions on three dates: Pharmac people who had knowledge of the extra vaccines sat in the same room with the Ministry of Health and said nothing. They let them try and figure their way through a campaign where they understood there were not enough vaccines but Pharmac knew there were. Pharmac's reply to this when they say in the written question "We're a Crown agency and we make independent funding decisions." is code for Pharmac is omnipotent. Pharmac is above everyone. Pharmac doesn't have to tell Ministers or director-generals. Pharmac played God and that is not their role. The Minister herself put in writing that knowledge of those extra 30000 vaccines was important and it was useful. Pharmac must be held accountable for this. We cannot let them keep important information secret from the ministry secret from the Minister from people who are forming a response to a really urgent infectious disease outbreak. An apology to Northland parents and some evidence of change would be a start.There is another sadness. There was no money for meningococcal vaccines for Northland children but Winston Peters gave Papua New Guinea millions of dollars for vaccinations and even worse a meningitis vaccination campaign to Fiji. While Northland children were missing out on meningitis vaccines Winston Peters gave millions of dollars to the Pacific. Northland parents will not forget that. Northland parents will not forget that—in their moment of need with an infectious disease outbreak—Winston Peters gave money to the Pacific. And I do not decry their need don't think that for a moment.Hon Scott Simpson: It's about priorities.Dr SHANE RETI: But it wasn't much—it's a priority—for Northland children to have the vaccines that they needed. When he looked out his window and he looked into his immediate neighbourhood why did he not see the five- to 12-year-olds who needed the vaccines? That is a sadness.I want to talk to the measles outbreak at the end of the year. Thousands of cases of measles and we ran out of vaccines. Minister Genter was wrong when she says it was a matter of distribution; it was a matter of supply. Every DHB who is replying to an annual review are giving the dates when they ran out of measles vaccine. There was a shortage of measles vaccines. Now early in the piece we came up with solutions. We recommended that pharmacists be authorised to vaccinate for measles. They already vaccinate for H flu; they are well capable they are enthusiastic. A third of all pharmacists are already giving the flu vaccine. So very early in the outbreak as a party we put forward this suggestion. In our hands I would submit we could make this change in about five days. It is simple. It is a small administrative change that's all it is. The ministry no they delayed—and delayed and delayed. It was months later before they found themselves coming to the House proudly saying "Yes we are now authorising pharmacists to give the measles vaccine." What has been the consequence of that delay? How many vaccines have pharmacists given for measles during the recently finished—or soon to be finished—measles outbreak? What was the consequence of that delay? What number would you guess that pharmacists have given of measles vaccine when they were authorised? I'll tell you that number because I got it about two hours ago: 20. Twenty people had the benefit of pharmacists vaccinating for measles when we had thousands of people lining up for the measles vaccine when we were needing thousands of vaccines. We needed these people to be vaccinating authorised vaccinating months before the ministry finally got around to it and the sum total of people vaccinated for measles by pharmacists as of two hours ago is 20. It's appalling. That's a shocking delay. Way too late way too little. I want to talk now to the Tuia 250 data breach: a data breach where the independent review was conveniently released late and close to the House rising last year so we could not scrutinise it. And in this part I want to speak directly to the Prime Minister who in her role as the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage has responsibility for the Tuia 250 data breach. It is a matter of fact that as a consequence of that data breach she has data breached more young people than any other Minister in this Government has. Parliamentary Library have confirmed she has data breached more young people than any other Minister in this Government. She says she cares for young people but she doesn't care for their data. This is not the first data breach Jacinda Ardern has had. In fact there were two before Tuia 250. One of them was an email attachment that was sent to the wrong place. It was a sensitive email. It actually contained the list of titles of upcoming papers for the Ministry for Culture and Heritage sport and recreation—it might have even been yours Minister Faafoi—and the broadcasting portfolios. So you make a mistake. You send an email to the wrong place. It's got sensitive data. What would you do? You fix up what you've done at your end but shouldn't we reach out and say "Look I'm really sorry Minister Faafoi. I actually data breached some of your data. I think I've fixed it at my end. Can you tidy up at your end?" Wouldn't you reach out to sport and recreation which I believe is Grant Robertson and say "Hey Grant just letting you know—made a small mistake at our end. We'll fix our end but can you make sure that your end is tight?"? That's what a responsible person would do. Did Jacinda Ardern do that? No she did not. In written parliamentary question 39995 I asked her: did she communicate with the Ministers for broadcasting and sports and recreation that she had data breached their data? I'm advised the Minister of Broadcasting Communications and Digital Media was not notified by the ministry. I'm sorry to be telling you this for the first time so maybe there is some stuff at your end that you do need to tidy up. I would have thought a responsible person would have done that. The Prime Minister was not responsible. Jacinda Ardern breached data from other ministries. The independent review of Tuia 250 when it was released had a key finding: a significant conflict of interest. So there was a member in her ministry who had a personal relationship with the website developer of Tuia 250 the website that eventually failed and the legal team—this is what the Official Information Act tells us—eventually identified it with him or her and said "You can't do that. You've got a conflict of interest." What did that person do? Did they stop? No they did not. They continued to provide information just to the successful tenderer. Wow what an outrageous conflict of interest. Despite being warned by legal "You have a conflict; you need to stop." of the three tenders for this project he or she continued to provide information just to that successful tenderer. That's a conflict of interest. We can have no trust that this Government or Jacinda Ardern can look after our data."