Peters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 06 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3221. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First)to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in regards to Whānau Ora “They have to be ambitious themselves—it’s a higher trust model and it has the potential to deliver better results not only for families but also for taxpayers who are not currently getting the value for money they should be.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):Yes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he agree with the Auditor-General in regard to Whānau Ora that using her words “It was not easy to describe what it is or what it has achieved.” or that “We could not get a consistent explanation of the aims of the initiatives in Whānau Ora” or that “the situation has been unclear and confusing”; and what if anything has he done about it?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In terms of the latter part of the question quite a bit actually. There has been a tightening up of the system with the commissioning agents and various other reviews that have taken place. In terms of the former part of the question as I say improvements have been made but it is a new way of doing things in a highly complex area. The member happens to be the MP for Northland. He probably knows that in Northland there are some very complicated cases with families that need help across a range of agencies. I am sure that when he is in his electorate office on Mondays Tuesdays Wednesdays Thursdays and Fridays when he is not in Parliament seeing those constituents he will have many of them coming to him talking about those complicated needs. I look forward to seeing those constituents seeing him—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The answer is too long.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Talking about Northland how come a third of all payments made to Whānau Ora provider collectives went to just two of Te Puni Kōkiri’s 10 regions and those two regions also happened by sheer coincidence to be where two former Māori Party Ministers come from; and what did he do as Prime Minister to stop this blatantly preferential treatment?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I reject the member’s proposition. Section 5 of the report has where all the money was spent and the different agencies that got them.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked him a very serious question and I am waiting for an answer. It is no use saying to me that section 5 has got where the money was spent.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Prime Minister rose to his feet and disputed the figures that the member had given in his question. That is an answer.Rt Hon Winston Peters: If he wants to dispute that fact which is easy to analyse—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just ask the question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I am asking the question—all right?Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. Now he will stand and withdraw that remark immediately or leave the Chamber.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Which remark Mr Speaker?Mr SPEAKER: Stand and withdraw without embellishment.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well I withdraw the remark if it was offending you but I had two remarks there.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just withdraw the remark otherwise I will be—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I withdraw.Mr SPEAKER: Now the member when I ask him to take a supplementary question will stand and simply ask the supplementary question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware if he wants to put that graph of expenditure into contention that nearly a quarter of all individuals accessing Whānau Ora funding through the Whānau Integration Innovation and Engagement Fund between 2010—Hon Member: Is this English? Who wrote this?Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well I wrote it myself unlike that clown up there. I am able to do my own homework.Mr SPEAKER: Order! My patience will expire very quickly with this member. The question should be concise. I will allow the member to start the question again but would he refrain from commenting even if there is an interjection.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware that nearly a quarter of all individuals accessing Whānau Ora funding through the Whānau Integration Innovation and Engagement Fund between 2010 and 2012 went to just one of Te Puni Kōkiri’s 10 regions and that that region was where the former Minister for Whanāu Ora came from; if so what if anything did he do about that bias?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have two points. As I said in my earlier answer the Office of the Auditor-General report breaks down on a year-by-year basis the costs in regions and the distribution of the money in Part 5 of the report. I go on to say that the report says that there is no suggestion of misspending or other unscrupulous activity. In relation to the second point the member made about the Whānau Integration Innovation and Engagement Fund that was established the point is that Whānau Ora was established in about 2010. It had to start in one place. It did not roll out everywhere because there just was not that capability all around the country from day one.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Which is a better use of Government resources: $20000 spent on special needs education to support children with dyslexia and other conditions; or the $20000 his Government spent through Whānau Ora on Dunedin gang members who then used the money to buy cannabis; or $80000 to Whānau Ora for the Palmerston North women’s refuge without one client with the rest going of course to the European women’s refuge; or $60000 for Ōtaki’s Rahui rugby club for a 1-day hooley?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not have the details of every individual one of those but what I can say is this: if you go back and look at the history of New Zealand and the complications of these families and where that leads you can see that if we have somebody who goes to prison it costs $105000 a year to have that prisoner there. When we have children growing up in very dysfunctional families—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was very specific. I have been waiting and I am waiting for—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member will resume his seat. The question asked which one was the better use of taxpayers’ money and then the member gave quite a number of examples. The Prime Minister is attempting to explain the use of taxpayers’ money if you would allow the Prime Minister to finish his answer.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: My main point is really that these are families that have high needs. They have complicated needs and there are a lot of costs incurred by the Government and successive Governments as we try to support these families. Actually I think the way we have dealt with these issues in the past has not proven to be good value for money for taxpayers.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I set out one alternative and three options. When will I get my answer? I am not hearing it yet.Mr SPEAKER: The member if he had been listening has had his answer. The question has been addressed. If he wants to continue with a supplementary question I suggest he try.