Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ryall Tony: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:640;Page:10547] 
5.  
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Does he still think of the Ministry of Health inquiry into conflicts of interest at Hawke’s Bay District Health Board “I must say I don’t expect to find anything”; if so why? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 The contract at the centre of the review has already been examined by the audit committee of the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board. Its legal advice was that Mr Hausmann’s company did not receive any particular advantage. All of that documentation is in the public arena. However disquiet and innuendo persisted to the point where Mr Hausmann wrote to me asking for a further review of the same issues that had already been examined and I agreed. I later asked the Director-General of Health to widen the terms of reference so that any stone that might need to be turned can be. I am not sure how many times I have given that answer to the House this week but it would be quite a few. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Why is the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board seeking legal advice over its chief executive signing a $1.1 million contract for caregiver training with a company controlled by one of its own district health board members Mr Hausmann without a public tender process or is that just nothing? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I am not sure why the board has sought legal advice on that. It seeks legal advice on many things as do all district health boards. These are large organisations that need to be run carefully. 
Ann Hartley 
: Are the conflict of interest provisions in the law sufficient or is the Minister considering an upgrade? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Continuing the theme of Groundhog Day I can tell the member that the ministry’s advice is that the law as it stands is robust. However it has one obvious weak link which is that it requires honesty on the behalf of board members. Mr Hausmann’s declaration of interest is to my knowledge complete. Dr Bierre’s was not and as a result a contract worth many many hundreds of millions of dollars came tumbling down. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Is the Minister or the Government concerned by reports that suggest that negotiations on this contract have been going on for months including Mr Hausmann’s meeting district health board staff on the matter yet Mr Hausmann did not declare his involvement in this additional company until February 2006 only days before the contract was awarded; and did the Minister not tell the House yesterday that full disclosure of conflicts was made when the Hon Annette King appointed Mr Hausmann? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Yes I did tell the House that yesterday and I stand absolutely behind those remarks. As to the documentation that the member draws his remarks from all of it has been put into the public arena and all of it will be reviewed by the review team. However there will be some differences. The review team will review the documentation in sequence it will review it in context it will review it without prejudgment and it will review it without hissy fits or toy tossing. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: If there was full transparency here why do the April 2006 board minutes of the district health board show that the Chief Executive Officer Chris Clarke and Mr Hausmann both told the board that there was a public tender process involved in the awarding of this $1.1 million contract to a company controlled by Mr Hausmann yet a month later Mr Clarke admitted to the same board that there was no public tender process at all? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: All of the documentation that the member continues to draw his questions from has been put into the public arena and will itself be reviewed by the review team. The review team I am sure will review the documentation in sequence and in context without prejudgment and without grandstanding in the House. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Does the Minister not realise that the reason why the public will not accept an inquiry into his appointees’ actions by another of his own appointees is the fact that Mr Hausmann has been inserted into this conflict of interest position because the Hon Annette King rushed his appointment through the process in order to avoid the cut-off period for new appointments before the election; that it was in fact her decision to rush the process that put Mr Hausmann in the position where today everybody including Mr Hausmann is calling for the Auditor-General to investigate yet the Minister is happy for his hand-picked appointees to do the job? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Let us go back over it again. The appointment process that was carried out by the Hon Annette King was unexceptional or to put it another way identical processes had been used before and will be used again—identical. The Ministry of Health is adamant that the advice provided to Cabinet was accurate and sufficient. And on the matter of the Auditor-General I say that the Auditor-General is not my person; the Auditor-General is his own person and he can involve himself should he choose to. He has so far indicated that he chooses not to. 
Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: How can the public be confident in the outcome of an inquiry into insider trading when that inquiry is to be headed by a district health board chair who as a Labour Government appointee himself has an inherent conflict of interest when called upon to investigate fellow Labour Government appointees at the next-door-neighbour district health board? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Let me rise in defence of the reputation of both Syd Bradley and Ian Wilson. Let me rise in defence of their reputations. Not only were both of them appointed by National to a variety of positions but they are held as far as I am aware in high regard by both sides of the House and probably by all sides of the House. I object to this House being used by that man to variously impugn the integrity of two gentlemen this week who have provided this country with long and loyal service and who do so without fear or favour.