Foreign Affairs, Minister—Samoa Visit

Paraone Pita Paraone Link to this

Speaking humbly, I went to Samoa last weekend both to accompany Dr Rice there at the conclusion of her visit to New Zealand, and to participate in a meeting between Dr Rice and the Foreign Ministers of Pacific Island Forum States. Some time ago, during one of my visits to Washington, I suggested to Dr Rice that she would find it well worth her while to make a visit to the South Pacific to meet with her Pacific counterparts on their home turf, face to face. New Zealand and the United States share a strong commitment to promoting good governance and sustainable economic development in the wider Pacific region and beyond, and she seriously appreciated the suggestion and the total visit.

What were the key outcomes of the meeting?

First of all, the fact that the meeting took place at all was a key outcome. A new chapter in US relations with the Pacific Islands Forum nations is set to begin. The conversation ranged over a number of pressing issues that preoccupy the whole region, such as fuel and food prices, and climate change, and views were freely exchanged on possible ways of dealing with those challenges. In response, Dr Rice expressed strong support for the efforts of the forum to address key challenges through a regional approach—including, I might say, the situation in Fiji. She also thanked this country for, and asked me to pass on her compliments in respect of, the role we are playing as a responsible neighbour in the Pacific.

Did the Minister, in his meeting with Dr Rice, repeat the 2005 comment of the leader of New Zealand First that moderate and militant Muslim groups are “like the mythical Hydra, a serpent underbelly with multiple heads, capable of striking at any time and in any direction.”; and can he reassure the House, in line with the Prime Minister’s answer earlier, that he does not conduct the foreign affairs of this country in line with those embarrassing comments?

What I was mindful of and thought about, in talking to Dr Rice, was a young novice MP who had just turned up in this Parliament, and who had shown no understanding of the big issues. However, I am bound to say that, now that I know he reads my speeches, he is about to get himself a serious education.

I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The question was not about me, whatsoever; it was all about what Mr Peters said to Dr Rice, and whether he talked about his view that moderate and militant Islamic groups are exactly the same. That was what the question was about.

Would the Minister like to add to his answer, please.

Paraone Pita Paraone Link to this

Well, I am happy to add to it, in the sense that I did discuss with Dr Rice the characteristics of some politicians. I said that one of the characteristics that is most unwelcome in politics is the “dingo-istic” attitude that somebody is showing in this House!

Tēnā koe, Madam Speaker. What role is New Zealand playing in assisting the development of our neighbours in the Pacific?

Locke Keith Locke Link to this

That is a very, very sensible question. New Zealand takes extremely seriously its obligations as a good Pacific neighbour. Since becoming the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I have overseen an increase in New Zealand’s Official Development Assistance programme of almost 70 percent between 2007-08 and 2010-11. That is by far the largest commitment to increase Official Development Assistance spending for decades, and will see New Zealand’s assistance reach 0.35 percent of gross national income by 2010-11. I am bound to say that I appreciate the support of the Minister of Finance in this achievement.

Did the Minister express to the US Secretary of State New Zealanders’ opposition not only to the US’ illegal war in Iraq but also to the use of torture by the American military, and the long-term detention of people without access to fair trial, at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre?

Dr Rice is an extraordinarily talented, highly educated woman. I kinda thinks she knows New Zealand’s views on Iraq. So, no, I did not raise them. I do know, though, that she respects the parliamentary independence that was expressed by this Parliament, which supported the Government at that time. I also did not raise the fact that when the communists invaded Afghanistan in 1980, someone now in this Parliament decided to support them; he also supported Pol Pot.

I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. You have ruled on this matter many times, and a member’s word should be taken. The member Keith Locke has said very clearly many times that he did not make those comments or support the invasion of Cambodia by Pol Pot.

He can deny it as long as he likes, but I have tabled documentation in respect of the allegations about Pol Pot and about the member’s support for the Russian Communist Government’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1980. He cannot now resile from those words, even though he may be sensitive about his past stupidity.

Hide Rodney Hide Link to this

The matter has been raised in this Parliament before, and there is, obviously, agreement not to agree on it. Members have the right to express themselves freely in this House, and they do so constantly. If another member takes offence, however, then he or she should raise the matter at the time.

I think the issue is—just to help the House, and, I think, to help the Minister of Foreign Affairs—the difference between the fall of Cambodia and the actual rise to power of Pol Pot, because the two events are not concurrent.

Locke Keith Locke Link to this

I thank the member, but this is not a matter for debate.

I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister still has not addressed the question about the Guantanamo Bay detention centre and the use of torture by the American military.

I think he did. As I heard his answer, he said that, no, the issues were not raised.

I seek leave to table a speech called “The End of Tolerance” given by the Rt Hon Winston Peters.