2. Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes. They are talented people who are working hard for New Zealand.
Why would he have confidence in the Minister for ACC, who told this House yesterday that under Labour’s 2001 Act sexual abuse claimants had to show a mental illness to be eligible for support from the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) when in fact the Act states “mental injury”; and is it not disturbing to have a Minister who either is prepared to mislead the public or does not know the difference between mental illness and mental injury?
Yes, the Prime Minister does have confidence in the Minister for ACC. He is dealing with probably the biggest mess that the previous Government left, and he is showing admirable progress in the face of very complex and challenging issues.
What confidence can he have in the Minister for ACC, who continues to refuse to listen to experienced health professionals who are telling him that the approach ACC is taking to sexual abuse victims is unethical and, according to the Association of Psychotherapists, requires people who have been raped or sexually abused to be diagnosed as “mad” before they can receive help?
I think the association is probably just getting carried away there. [ Interruption] Well, that is a fairly old-fashioned kind of diagnosis, actually. But Opposition members cannot have it both ways. One day they are accusing the Minister of meddling in the affairs of ACC and in clinical decision-making, and the next day they are accusing the Minister of not stepping in to override clinical advice that he has been given.
Has the Minister for ACC informed him that up to 75 percent of the professional health workforce undertaking sexual abuse diagnosis for ACC may no longer be permitted to diagnose victims; and has he explained what impact that will have on victims who are waiting to receive help?
It is not automatically the case that everything that has been said about this issue has been accurate. The ACC board has moved to make sure that the practices of the accident compensation scheme are consistent with the law passed by the previous Labour Government. Plenty of vigorous discussion is going on between ACC and the providers over whether the scheme does comply with the law. But the board has no choice but to make sure that the scheme complies with the law that Annette King’s Government passed.
Is he aware that many counsellors who are currently undertaking accident compensation counselling work are refusing to implement the Minister for ACC’s unethical guidelines; and will he step in to require the Minister to reach agreement with clinicians before he implements the new system, rather than treating the victims of sexual abuse as guinea pigs in his experiment?
The member’s sincerity would be a bit more obvious if she did not try to make political capital out of this.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I take exception to that comment. These questions were put down in good faith and in honesty. He implied that I do not care about this issue, and I take exception to that.
Mr SPEAKERI hear the honourable member. I make the point that the primary question that was put down did not indicate where the questioning may go. It asked whether he has confidence in all his Ministers. However, that being said, I accept the point of order the honourable member made. The Minister, in answering the question, should not in any way question the integrity of the questioner.
As the member well knows, the guidelines are not the Minister’s guidelines. They are ACC’s guidelines, and they were formed on the basis of expert, clinical advice. The fact that the member calls them “the Minister’s guidelines” tells us she is politically motivated over this issue when she should be trying to solve what is a serious and complex issue.
Lynne PillayAs victims of crime are a priority for this Government, has the Minister for ACC informed him of what will happen to victims of sexual abuse and rape who do not want to be re-victimised by having to retell their horrific stories over and over, to qualify for counselling?
The Minister for ACC does keep the Prime Minister informed about the consequences of policy decisions. Some of those decisions are made by the Government and some of them are made by the ACC board, but any clinical decisions are made on the basis of expert clinical advice.
Is he aware that the new guidelines, which the Minister for ACC is supporting, will mean that despite the police, health professionals, and local sexual abuse experts supporting a victim, that a victim’s right to accident compensation counselling can be denied by an official in Wellington who has not even met the person; if so, will he require the Minister to reconsider his policy?
I am a bit surprised that the member raises that issue. It has always been the case with the accident compensation scheme—including during the 9 years under the previous Labour Government—that officials somewhere deny coverage for something that is not actually covered by accident compensation.
Hone HarawiraDoes he have confidence in the Attorney-General and in the Minister of Māori Affairs to lead the repeal of the previous Labour Government’s oppressive and discriminatory Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004?
The Prime Minister does have confidence in the Attorney-General and the Minister of Māori Affairs on this particular issue. The National Government has listened very carefully to the case the Māori Party has put, and it has also listened to the many iwi around the country who were not listened to by Labour.
Rahui KateneDoes the Prime Minister agree that in working together the Attorney-General and Minister of Māori Affairs are demonstrating the willingness of the Crown to enter into respectful and mana-enhancing Treaty relationships with iwi and hapū, and does this give substance to the articles in the nation’s founding document—te Tiriti o Waitangi?
The answer to that is yes. But, of course, discussions about mana-enhancing policy do not always mean agreement. I have to say that the constructive tension that sometimes exists around that is much better than the bad blood that Labour obviously feels from seeing the Government work with the Māori Party successfully.
John BoscawenWhat confidence can the Prime Minister possibly have in his own Minister of Finance, under whose status-quo projections New Zealand will owe over 200 percent of GDP by 2050; and why will he not agree to cutting wasteful Government expenditure and increasing competition in health and welfare to avoid this economic catastrophe?
In the first place, the projections are based on no policy change. But, of course, the Government is making policy in those areas and is working with the member’s party, which, of course, has more robust views than National does about competition in health and education. But we can learn something from his party, and I am sure that he can learn something from us.