English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
[Volume:607;Page:4963] 
5.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
: Has New Zealand given a clear undertaking to the United States to assist in post-war reconstruction in Iraq as reported in the media; if so what support has been pledged by the Government? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 Yes. I made clear some time ago New Zealand’s humanitarian commitment to assist Iraq’s recovery and reconstruction following the war. I personally advised the Australian High Commissioner the British High Commissioner and the American Ambassador of our commitment to assist and of the initial form of that assistance. At the same time I outlined to the House New Zealand’s intention to provide both immediate and post-conflict assistance to Iraq. 
Hon Bill English 
: Has the Minister seen reports by the Prime Minister that she may commit New Zealand’s mine-sweeping capacity and has he also seen reports that that was part of the deal with the US to try to make up for the gaffe over the remarks about the Al Gore presidency? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I have seen the Prime Minister’s comments with regard to the potential assistance that New Zealand can give in clearing mines. As I recall those comments were made quite some time ago and had absolutely nothing to with the current controversy. 
Martin Gallagher 
: What if any steps has the Government taken to offer assistance—again can the Minister give us details about the mine-clearance operation and the precise form that that particular assistance would take? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: New Zealand has been in contact with the United Nations Mine Action Service which has a high regard for New Zealand’s professional capacities in that area and which has stressed to us the enormous need that exists for mine-clearance given the risks to human safety from the extensive minefields in Iraq. It is likely that New Zealand would be able to establish and manage a demining programme providing technical advisers and trainers if requested by the United Nations Mine Action Service. 
Peter Brown 
: When can we expect New Zealand to get actively involved; will it be soon or will we wait for the last bullet in the war to be fired? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: It is better than soon—we are already actively involved. New Zealand has already spent $3.3 million providing assistance through a range of UN agencies and humanitarian organisations like the International Committee of the Red Cross. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: When the National Security Council called for an apology from the Prime Minister of New Zealand did it also seek assurances of New Zealand’s assistance to the post-conflict reconstruction programme and was that offer of assistance included in the formal letter of apology; yes or no? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Let me first correct the member. The National Security Council in the United States has never called for an apology from the Prime Minister. The answer to the second part of the question is that it did not. The letter was as I outlined to the House—neither more nor less than that. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: What indication has the Minister had from the United States and any other Government that New Zealand’s offers of assistance will be accepted? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I know that the two high commissioners and the ambassador whom I have spoken to all very much welcomed the commitment that New Zealand has already made. The countries they represent are very keen that New Zealand makes further commitments in the post-conflict era as winning the peace might be somewhat harder than winning the war unless the countries of the world come together and provide that assistance to the people of Iraq who have suffered over a long period of time. 
Hon Bill English 
: Which of Helen Clark’s three policies on the US involvement in the Iraqi war does the Minister support: keeping quiet while opposing the war; putting the boot in as soon as there is some bad news about the war; or now crawling to meet every demand of the US in order to cover up the damage to our national interests? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The member is wrong on every front. The Prime Minister and this Government have taken a remarkably clear consistent and principled stand—that is first that we wanted any action that might be taken to have a multilateral UN mandate; secondly that force is an ultimate sanction that should be used only after every other option is exhausted; and thirdly that as a humanitarian nation we have a commitment to do what we can to assist the people who have suffered both before the war and as a consequence of the war.