Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:606;Page:3697] 
12.  
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Defence 
: Has the frigate Te Kaha which is tasked with “escorting US and coalition vessels through the Straits of Hormuz” escorted any United States vessels carrying war materials for use in any attack on Iraq? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade)  
on behalf of the  
Minister of Defence 
: The  
Te Kaha 
’s role under Operation Enduring Freedom is focused on counter-terrorist activities. A small part of that role involves escort duties designed to protect shipping from terrorist attack in the Gulf of Oman and the Straits of Hormuz. The Maritime Interdiction Force group does not differentiate between ships requiring that protection by the cargo they might carry. 
Keith Locke 
: Can the Minister confirm what was portrayed in a photograph in the February issue of  
Navy Today 
—that is  
Te Kaha 
 escorting the huge American navy transport ship  
Watkins 
 through the Straits of Hormuz—and does he think that this ship was not carrying war materials to be used against Iraq? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I repeat my answer that the Maritime Interdiction Force group made up of a range of different countries does not differentiate between legal vessels in terms of their need for protection against terrorist attack—or is the member actually suggesting that it should differentiate? 
Taito Phillip Field 
: What other countries does New Zealand operate alongside as part of the Maritime Interdiction Force? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The countries that New Zealand operates with in that group are Canada the Netherlands Greece France and the United States. The member may note that that group obviously contains a number of countries that have strongly resisted the use of force in Iraq at this time but are very active in their anti-terrorist activities. 
Simon Power 
: Why when the Government has contributed the frigate  
Te Kaha 
 to escort US and coalition vessels has the Prime Minister announced today that New Zealand is not backing the American-British draft resolution declaring that Iraq is in material breach of a UN resolution to disarm? 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt my colleague but the primary question was addressed to the Minister of Defence not the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Backing a resolution at the UN is not a matter for the Minister of Defence. 
Simon Power 
: The primary question makes direct reference to “carrying war materials for use in any attack on Iraq” which precisely relates to the proposed resolution put today. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I suggest that the member slightly rephrase the question. The Minister is not responsible for the United Nations Security Council resolution; another Minister is. The member can I am sure construct another question. I will allow him to do so. 
Simon Power 
: Can New Zealanders trust any assurances or information provided by the Government on New Zealand Defence Force deployment such as that of  
Te Kaha 
 when the Prime Minister has previously made statements about the Government’s intentions to recall the SAS and such statements have later proved to differ from reality? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: To the best of my knowledge all of the Prime Minister’s statements have been in direct line with reality and have not differed from it at all. That is why she is on 50 percent support while Bill English is languishing at 9 percent. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Can the Minister confirm that the overall command of the Maritime Interdiction Force operating in the Arabian Sea is based on a nuclear-powered US aircraft carrier; if so why is New Zealand not prepared formally to join the coalition of the willing or is it that he and his Government are prepared to sacrifice our national interest to appease the loony left of the Labour Party? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The premise that each of those other questions were based on is wrong. The then Acting Prime Minister Michael Cullen made it quite clear that the command is not based on an aircraft carrier. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Has there been any change in the terms of the deployment of New Zealand vessels operating in the Straits of Hormuz; if so what change; if not how long is the deployment expected to continue? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: No there have been no changes in the terms of the deployment.  
Te Kaha 
 has been in the region since late last year and its deployment finishes tomorrow. It will be replaced at that time by  
Te Mana 
 which will operate through to June. 
Keith Locke 
: How can we be seen as being anything other than complicit in the US build-up to war against Iraq when we are escorting a boat like the  
Watkins 
—called a floating brigade—that can carry “an entire US Army armoured taskforce including 58 tanks 48 other track vehicles plus more than 900 trucks and other wheeled vehicles” and that has been unloading materials in the Gulf for the US war effort? It is the second-biggest ship after the aircraft carriers. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The answer is that the role of the Maritime Interdiction Force group—which is multinational including New Zealand France and other countries—is to protect against terrorist attacks. It is quite separate from the situation in Iraq. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: I seek leave to table a briefing paper from the New Zealand armed forces that shows that the overall command of the Maritime Interdiction Force is based on a US nuclear-propelled aircraft carrier. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table an article in the February issue of  
Navy Today 
 with an illustration of  
Te Kaha 
 escorting a US vessel. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that article. Is there any objection? There is objection.