Turia Tariana: Urgent Debates — Hawke’s Bay District Health Board—Conflicts of Interest Report 
Turia Tariana: Urgent Debates — Hawke’s Bay District Health Board—Conflicts of Interest Report 
[Volume:646;Page:14988] 
Hon TARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. It is a matter of considerable concern to all of us in this House that a report into the capacity of the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board has revealed a culture of mistrust and dysfunction between the board and management. We have learnt from the Director-General of Health Stephen McKernan that if the chair had applied common sense and good practice the matters at the heart of this whole issue might well have been avoided. Well frankly that remains to be seen. 
Major questions that must be asked arise from this whole report. One of them has to be why Peter Hausmann was appointed by this Government to the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board. People in the community have asked that question given that there was knowledge of his business interests and of the likelihood of a conflict of interests and in particular it was known that he was a potential contractor for services from the board. To say that he was appointed because of the skills and expertise that he would bring to it simply does not make sense. Other business people who are not as implicated in the business of health as he is might also have been excellent in that role. So what was the role of the management in the contractual agreements in light of the allegations that are being made? 
Five years ago all sorts of crisis and scandal were directed at another body in the Hawke’s Bay a Maori health provider. The Hawke’s Bay District Health Board ordered an urgent investigation into the trust after claims of mismanagement. The headlines screamed accusations of nepotism and the wolves were quick to call for immediate statutory management for the future of the Maori health provider—a provider that had been running successfully for more than a decade. The audit looked into allegations of the employment of family members—this was a hapu provider—the use of trust vehicles and a range of other practices considered outside the organisation’s contract. Yet a couple of years later when these conflicts of interest arise between two commercial initiatives—between the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board and a board member—suddenly it appears that conflict of interest is not such a biggie at all. A double standard is operating here. The simplest test of governance that we would have expected to operate at the level of the district health board has failed yet the same board had been quick to judge a Maori health provider caught under the same slur of judgment. 
We know that for far too many of these appointments cronyism has been seen as part and parcel of their practice. Cronyism is in fact the norm. We know that Ministers also alter reports. Ministers cannot deny that. They can deny all they want that they do not interfere in these so-called independent reports but it is simply part of the convention of this place. So the comments made by the board chair Kevin Atkinson that the final report reeks of political interference or that irrelevant matters are being submerged under a smokescreen are actually not too far— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I ask you to consider that an implication has been made to which I take personal exception and it is contrary to what I have said publicly and in this House. I confirm again that I had no input into the report. I did not see either the draft or the final report before the day it was released and I was not briefed on its contents. I ask the member to accept that assurance. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the Minister. That is not actually a point of order but the point is made. 
Hon TARIANA TURIA 
: The comments made by board chair Kevin Atkinson that the final report reeks of political interference or that irrelevant matters have been submerged under a smokescreen are probably not too far from the truth. 
I want to make some comments about that person. It is far too common a practice for people to come to this House to denigrate and insult individuals: to name and blame them for various issues that need to be attended to. Mr Atkinson has been the latest victim of this approach yet he is in fact the very same man who was appointed not very long ago by this same Government to be the chair of this board after being elected by his community. So is the Government admitting its error in appointing him—its misjudgment? The House exists in the dubious privilege of being able to slam individuals who are unable to defend their honour in the debating chamber. 
The fundamental issue for this House and the Minister of Health to deal with is that if the relationship was as dysfunctional as the report lays out why were the issues not identified earlier? Why were the checks and balances not in place to ensure that the competing business priorities of two of the members of the board came to attention earlier? The competition between Mr Hausmann and the pharmacy interests should have come to the attention of the board long before it came to the attention of the Ministry of Health. What this matter really highlights is the issue of the appropriateness of people involved in health sector business also being involved at the governance and management levels. 
We know that Maori are pilloried over and over again with spurious claims being made of nepotism and conflict of interest. We in the Maori Party actually know that the strengths of whanaungatanga can work really well to provide a solid foundation for business success. We have only to cast our memories back to the crisis hyped up around Te Wananga o Aotearoa to know that Maori organisations often come under a great deal of scrutiny when family members are involved—and particularly scrutiny by this House. In actual fact whanaungatanga or kinship—the extended family linkages in Maori society—is not a point of conflict; it is a point of difference. If we look at family relationships more broadly in many ways we see that keeping business within the family has been so successful that it places families on the  
National Business Review 
 rich list. Of the 187 entries in the 2004 list 47 were in fact family affairs. There is the Goodman family the Fletchers and of course many others. 
The point is all about being transparent coming up clean and ensuring that mandated checks and balances can be adequately enforced. We are the last party to claim that relationships and connections cannot be used to the benefit of a business. The key issue must be the way that they are managed and the way that the technical and ethical issues and the public perception are organised. The general feeling is that in this case it was not good practice. The Maori Party agrees with the Greens that anyone with business interests should not be allowed to be on any district health board. This is a sector in which the nation needs to be able to trust for the good health of the people that we have standards and practices that are transparent and prevent people from getting a competitive advantage. The Maori Party also supports an inquiry being made into the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board by the Auditor-General. Kia ora.