2. Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) Link to this
to the Minister of Finance
Was the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs correct when she said the Minister of Finance had met with the Pacific Economic Development Agency “on several occasions”; if so, who did he meet?
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) Link to this
I have a slightly longer answer. The answer is yes. I had a series of discussions with Pacific community groups that shared the Government’s deep concern about the effects of the recession on Pacific people, including 14 percent general unemployment, and probably higher among young people. Those meetings included ministers of churches, local government people, business owners, and the Pacific Island Chamber of Commerce. Discussions focused on following up on the Auckland Pacific Economic and Social Transformation Agenda—APESTA—conference held in October 2008 under the previous Government, which was sponsored by Government agencies and opened by the Auckland Regional Council chairman, Mike Lee. In December 2009, I addressed a public Pacific business forum in Māngere jointly hosted by the Pacific Economic Development Agency and the Pacific Island Chamber of Commerce. In February 2010 I attended a meeting hosted by the Pacific Economic Development Agency. I am advised the agency was represented by J R Pereira and Mose Saitala. People who are active in the Pacific community wear many hats, and I may have met with members of the Pacific Economic Development Agency in other capacities at other meetings. We need to remember that this is all about providing job and training opportunities for Pacific communities, which are facing 14 percent unemployment, and probably higher for young people.
Was the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs correct when she stated on Radio New Zealand this morning that the Minister of Finance had been in discussions with Mr J R Pereira, the contact person for the Pacific Economic Development Agency, about the project over a “fairly extended period of time”, and when did he first discuss this project with Mr Pereira?
There was no project until about February this year. Prior to that, I had met with a range of people who were frustrated that there had been endless talk about economic development in the Pacific community but, actually, not much had occurred. Existing providers do their best, but, as that member will know, the resources available in the Pacific community are not extensive. When someone is proactive and takes an initiative, a Government should take that opportunity.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I quoted from the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs, who said that the Minister of Finance had been in discussions with Mr J R Pereira for an “extended period of time”, and I asked when he had first met with him. The Minister did not answer that question.
Mr SPEAKERAs I have pointed out, people wear a lot of different hats in the Pacific community. I can go back and check when I first met with Mr J R Pereira. I expect that it was when I first met with the Pacific Island Chamber of Commerce. In my capacity as Minister of Finance I meet with chambers of commerce all over the country, and I was requested to meet with that one. That may have been the first occasion, and it would have been in early 2009, although I cannot be sure.
This was a most unusual situation, and I took that further answer from the Minister as being helpful.
Chris TremainThe Minister having attended a number of meetings with Pacific Island leaders, what measures did Budget 2010 take to improve the prospects of Pacific people?
In a general sense, the tax switch involved in Budget 2010 will promote investment and employment, and the forecasts include 170,000 new jobs. That will make a big difference to a community that has been the hardest hit by unemployment.
When he said that it was critical that the Government continued to “responsibly manage public finances on behalf of taxpayers. We can’t take our eye off the ball.”, did he apply that standard to the funding proposal he received from the Pacific Economic Development Agency—a proposal that is 6 pages long, with two of the pages containing nothing more than statistics straight from Statistics New Zealand, and that seeks close to $4 million of taxpayers’ money?
I am not sure just which proposal the member has seen, but that is—[ Interruption] No, I am not, actually. That is not a description of the proposal that I received. Like every other proposal that is put to the Government, it will go through a thorough process of a purchase agreement, accountabilities, and good care of taxpayers’ money. I must say that is not unusual. The Budget includes tens of millions of dollars of contingency, where the accountabilities and the contracts are going to be negotiated over the next few months.
What other agency has had a project approved by him by simply writing a proposal that is 57 words long that has not been through any open and transparent process, does not have one word of detail, was emailed from Honiara, and seeks $1 million a year, as in the proposal to him for the Pacific Skilled Employment scheme?
The member is simply wrong. I do not know what document she is referring to. It is certainly not the one that is being worked through now by Treasury and the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs in order to come to a conclusion about appropriate contracts. We do not intend to let petty party politicking get in the way of making vital progress for a community whose young people are in desperate need of action after years of talk from the previous Labour Government.
Pretty words. Does he have any more written material from the Pacific Economic Development Agency, other than the 6 pages provided that were addressed to him and that the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs talked about on the radio this morning, to back up a proposal that he is prepared to hand out millions of dollars to; if he does have more material, would he please give it to the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs, because she has made it clear that she seen only the particular proposal that I am holding?
Of course there is more written material than that member’s misrepresentation of it. As I said before, that is what is being discussed. Not one dollar will be paid out unless all the accountability is met. This initiative has arisen because the Pacific Island community is tired of the endless talk and no action that they got from the previous Labour Government. It is time to do something for young Pacific Island people, and not just sit around talking about them.
Was the Minister of Pacific Island Affairs correct when she affirmed on Radio New Zealand this morning that the Pereira family had been involved in brokering appearances or endorsements by members of the Pacific Island community during the election campaign; if so, did he know that before agreeing to $4.8 million for Mr J R Pereira’s project?
I resent that implication. [ Interruption] If the member really wants to know, the only Pereira I knew before was Tino Pereira, whom I understand was very close to the previous Labour Government. That does not mean he did not have something to contribute to the welfare of Pacific Island people. That member will know that I have my own connections with that community by blood relationship. The motivation of the Government has been to deal with a problem that I know that party understands well, which is young Pacific Islanders who have low skill levels and no attachment to the workface, and who have been the group in New Zealand hardest hit by the recession. When that community produces a proactive initiative with sound business principles, it is an opportunity to take, not a problem to dismiss.
As Minister of Finance, why has he not insisted on an open, transparent process that allows other Pacific Island providers to have a go at $4.8 million, if he is serious about wanting to improve the lot of Pacific Islanders, because they are outraged at the process that he has allowed to take place?
I actually do not think the Pacific Island community is outraged at a Government putting more money in a tight Budget into helping young Pacific Island people get jobs. If the member wants an explanation, I am a bit familiar with the matter, having been through these processes in Government before. There is not a depth of providers of business-related services in the Pacific Island community. There is one other one, the Pacific Business Trust; it was mismanaged by the previous Labour Government for the last decade, so it has had to be restructured several times. This proposition will enable more to be done by helping existing providers, and no dollar will be paid out until, or unless, all the purchase agreements have tight accountabilities and have annual signposts along the way.
I seek leave to table the funding proposal to the Minister of Finance of the Government of New Zealand, which is 6 pages long.