English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:641;Page:11202] 
2.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: What communications if any were received by her or her office or her department regarding Air New Zealand’s charter flights carrying Australian Defence Force personnel to Middle East locations? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
on behalf of the 
 Prime Minister 
: Neither the Prime Minister nor her office received any advice regarding this issue prior to its becoming public yesterday. I am advised that officials in various departments including the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet had seen security advice that referred to such flights but none of these officials informed his or her Minister. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Prime Minister just confirm what she has told the House that not only officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade were advised and did not tell their Minister but officials in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet were aware of these flights and did not inform any politician? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That is exactly the case and indeed that of course is what Mr Murdoch indicated today. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can she confirm and does she agree with the range of statements made by Air New Zealand that it took all reasonable steps to inform the Government about what it was doing; if so why has the Government continued to blame Air New Zealand when it now appears that at least two sets of the Government’s most senior officials did not give it the advice it thought it should have? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: As Mr Palmer and I discussed this morning it would at least have been helpful if Mr Palmer had notified me as the shareholding Minister about these flights given the potential political context that surrounded those flights. But the fact is that none of those officials informed their Minister; Ministers became aware of this issue yesterday. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is it a fact that we are talking about two of 42 different flights in respect of transportation of troops such as between Honiara and Dili; and is it right that those circumstances be understood when one is discussing this issue of what should have been advised to Ministers or not? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The member is quite correct. Air New Zealand undertakes a range of charter flights that involve the ferrying of troops. The fact that that is happening is nothing unusual in itself; that includes the ferrying of New Zealand troops in some particular circumstances—and American troops and Australian troops. What is different about this case of course is that any reasonable presumption was that those troops were likely to be proceeding to some form of active service within Iraq. The New Zealand Government unlike the National Party has a clear position on the war in Iraq. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade might reasonably have concluded that it should have given different advice to Air New Zealand. I understand that Mr Murdoch now accepts that and has apologised for the advice he gave. 
Hon Bill English 
: Given that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade knew all about this and apparently did not tell its Minister and that the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet knew all about this and did not tell its Minister what other departments are likely to have known all about it and not told their Ministers; and why does the story bear such a startling resemblance to the way in which the Labour Government’s departments handled all the knowledge about David Benson-Pope’s interventions and never told their Ministers? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The officials were those officials who come from departments that sit on the appropriate officials committee around security matters and I am therefore not prepared to go further into that for security reasons. What is absolutely clear is that indeed Ministers were not informed. I am afraid that the member will have to accept something he may not like. This is a cock-up by officials not a conspiracy by Ministers. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is it the Government’s position that it would have been against such flights in 2003 2004 2005 2006 and 2007; or for them in 2003 and against them in 2007; which position does the Government have on this issue? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Government’s position is very clear. We have opposed throughout the war in Iraq. We do not support active involvement in that war. We do not believe that participation by Air New Zealand the New Zealand flag carrier in ferrying troops to that war is appropriate. But we assume that Mr Key would have supported it in 2003 and changed his mind in 2007 and that the National Party caucus would not know what its position was at any point in time. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why is it that this morning the Government has allowed Simon Murdoch the chief executive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to take all of the blame for this by himself in his own public statements when the Prime Minister has now revealed to the House that the officials committee on security knew about it—a committee made up of senior officials from a range of Government departments; why did the Government not tell the public that this morning instead of blaming one person and when are the rest of them going to apologise if that is now the standard? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Because the responsible officials in this case were those in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. It was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade that was approached for advice by Air New Zealand; no other organisation was. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade informed the appropriate officials committee about this matter but the responsibility remained with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade alone in that regard. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Can the Minister confirm whether he has seen this report a transcript from 95bFM of an interview with Mr Key today on this very topic that we are talking about today; and can he confirm that it is impossible to tell from the answers to questions put to Mr Key whether he is for Air New Zealand doing it against Air New Zealand doing it or neither for nor against? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister can comment on reports but not on matters of another party’s policies or positions. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Nothing would surprise me. If Mr Key had been on the flight I assume he would have had an open return ticket—undecided whether to come back. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm what I think he is telling us in answers to these questions that the information that Air New Zealand had approached the Government and asked for advice about these flights was known to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade that it was communicated to the officials committee related to security matters—a group of the most senior and experienced officials on these matters across the whole of Government—that that information will be in the papers related to that committee and that none of them communicated any of it to any Minister; and how is it that the Government’s most senior set of officials on security seem to be unaware of the Government’s principal foreign policy? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I cannot understand how the ministry did not believe that the appropriate advice to Air New Zealand was that this was not consistent with New Zealand’s national interests. But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade is the body responsible for primary advice around the issues of New Zealand’s national interests and diplomatic standing. I heard a member previously mention the Civil Aviation Authority. That authority is not an expert on New Zealand’s international standing or diplomatic interests. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister confirm that Simon Murdoch is a very experienced civil servant with a significant degree of integrity and proficiency who has given his apology without conditions and that because of that it should be accepted given that part of his track record of public service was to be one of the few people in the Bolger administration who made it look halfway competent or proficient? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am not sure whether the second part of the question is in order but the first part is. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Mr Murdoch has been a good and faithful servant to successive Governments within this country in a wide variety of roles. [ 
Interruption 
] The problem with the member is that he has to accuse Mr Murdoch of being a liar if he says that Mr Murdoch does not accept responsibility for making an error. 
Hon Bill English 
: Given that the Minister has told us that the committee of senior officials related to security all knew about this did the Minister of Defence Phil Goff know how extensively Government officials had discussed this matter when he went on TV3 last night on  
Campbell Live 
 and three times said that Air New Zealand had not approached the Government—in an attempt to blame that company—when the Government’s own officials knew all about it and should not he apologise to Air New Zealand now? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No I do not think Mr Goff was aware of those facts at that particular point in time. But of course I do note that National Party members whacked into Air New Zealand yesterday as well before the facts were out and they seem to have forgotten that fact very conveniently today. 
Heather Roy 
: Is Air New Zealand an independently operating commercial airline operating on standard commercial air routes and under internationally accepted practices to which New Zealand is signatory; if this is the case can she make it plain to this House on what matters her Government will be interfering in commercial decisions and when the airline will be left to operate independently? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The airline is indeed a commercial operator. Of course the route from Australia to Kuwait is not one of Air New Zealand’s more normal routes for operations particularly given the assumption about where the passengers were going subsequently. Air New Zealand remains independent and I have emphasised today in my statements as the shareholding Minister that I will not be directing the airline in matters such as this. Mr Palmer has made it clear that if he had had different advice from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in January or indeed in April of this year Air New Zealand might well have come to a different conclusion in its interest—and its interest as New Zealand’s flag carrier. 
Hon Bill English 
: What confidence can the public have in a Government that cannot execute its own foreign policy where the two most senior civil servants in the public sector have had collective amnesia and have had to own up to defend Ministers where the Government-owned airline is by the Government’s own description politically out of control and where its own attempt to make capital out of the Iraqi war has blown up in its face? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Almost every one of those statements is inaccurate. Air New Zealand is not politically out of control. It sought advice received that advice and acted—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member who asked the question was given the courtesy of having that question heard in silence with just one or two interventions. The barracking is starting again. I can see members at the back cupping their ears trying to hear the answer. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Air New Zealand sought advice from the appropriate authorities received that advice and acted upon it. So it was not politically out of control. Secondly the two senior officials have not had amnesia at all. Unfortunately for them they have remembered very clearly what they did and said and one of them has had to apologise as a consequence of that. Thirdly this country’s position on Iraq is clear. We have no troops fighting there. Under National they would be there fighting and Air New Zealand would no doubt be ferrying our troops backwards and forwards to the battlefields. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table a series of articles from the city in which John Palmer resides that is from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 showing the opinions of the New Zealand people towards the Iraq war and that he did not need to— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those documents is there any objection? Yes there is objection.