7. JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) Link to this
to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs
Does he stand by his statement that: “This Government encouraged submissions to the Health Committee, and agreed to the joint working-group comprising representatives of the Ex-Vietnam Services Association, the Royal New Zealand Returned and Services Association, and officials from the office of the Ministry of Defence and Veterans Affairs New Zealand to address the concerns.”; if so, why?
Hon RICK BARKER (Minister of Veterans’ Affairs) Link to this
In reply to question No. 12 on 23 March 2006, my answer as recorded in Hansard reads: “office of the Ministry of Defence and Veterans Affairs New Zealand”. It should have read: “offices of the Ministers of Defence and Veterans’ Affairs”. It was a minor correction. The answer to the question is yes, because this Labour-led Government has accepted for the first time that our service personnel were exposed to a toxic environment in Viet Nam, and have set up a joint working-group so that about 700 veterans can make submissions to it.
Has he read all five pages of the briefing to the incoming Minister, written by Veterans Affairs, which states in respect of the joint working-group: “Veterans Affairs New Zealand is not involved in this group.”, and why is he now claiming it is?
With that minor correction—either a slip of the tongue, or of recording, I would say the answer is accurate. What I would say is lamentable is that this is a very serious situation. We are attempting to undergo here a healing process, and it is very lamentable that Opposition politicians are trying to nitpick in a petty way over an issue when we should be treating it with a great deal of seriousness.
Hon Phil GoffHas the Minister received comment from Viet Nam veterans contrasting this Government’s acknowledgment of their exposure to Agent Orange with the literally decades of denial of that fact by a National Government that sent the veterans to Viet Nam, failed to acknowledge their service there, and refused to acknowledge the fact that they had been exposed to Agent Orange over years, over decades?
I would like to put on the record of the House that the response to the joint working-group has been overwhelmingly positive. People have appreciated the opportunity to have their concerns aired directly. I would also echo the point made by the Hon Phil Goff that it will be to the everlasting shame of National that it entered into a misconceived war, and, worse still, sent our soldiers there, in harm’s way, inadequately equipped and inadequately clothed, and entered into decades of denial.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Seeing that Judith Collins has put the issue of political integrity into the arena here, does the Minister recall who cancelled the class action funding for Operation Grapple veterans, arranged in 1997 by New Zealand First and then changed in 1999? Which party in power went back on its word on that arrangement?
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The member who has just resumed his seat is a longstanding member. He understands, surely, that he is supposed to ask a question with a question word. Surely you should call him to account for this matter.
Madam SPEAKERYes, it would be preferable if all members did ask questions with a question word and refrained from prefacing their questions with other comments. But I will ask the Minister to address the substance of the question.
In response to the Rt Hon Winston Peters, I can confirm that another layer of National’s shame is the back-down and refusal to fund what should have been done. It was, again, a U-turn. Those people are trying to politicise something on which we should be trying to engage in a process of healing.
What assurances can he give the veterans, members of the joint working-group, that their report does not have to reflect Government concerns?
The best surety I can give on that is the make-up of the joint working-group, which has representatives of the ex - Viet Nam veterans and the membership of the RSA. They are people of integrity and I will trust them to bring back a report. I would hope that the Opposition would stop trying to politicise a process that should be about healing.
Does the Minister accept that the joint working-group was set up in response to the open letter to the Prime Minister signed by 724 veterans or their families, who are deeply disappointed with the Government’s pathetic response to the Health Committee’s report?
What I can say is that this Government is the first Government to recognise that our Viet Nam veterans were in a toxic environment—an acceptance that the National Government denied over and over again. I can confirm that this is the first Government in decades that has seriously addressed the concerns of Viet Nam veterans. National should be deeply ashamed of its record of decades of denial, and apologise to this Parliament and to every Viet Nam veteran.
Dr Don BrashI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My colleague Judith Collins asked a very straightforward question. The Minister in no sense addressed that question. I think you should direct him to do so.
Yes, the member is right. Would the Minister please try to address the specific question that related to the veterans’ concerns, as I remember it.
I can confirm that, as a process of resolving this issue, the Government accepted the report of the Health Committee and followed it up with setting up a joint working-group in response to the concerns of Viet Nam veterans over decades, which is decades of denial by National.
Can the Minister confirm that in joint meetings we had with the veterans, they were very pleased that the Government had responded positively in the way it did, and what the veterans really despised was the party political point-scoring by those who were originally responsible for sending them to Viet Nam, but who never acknowledged their service?
I can, indeed, confirm that. The Viet Nam veterans are indeed very appreciative of the opportunity for their stories to be told. It is, I can confirm, lamentable that the National Party is trying to politicise a process that should be one of healing. Judith Collins should be deeply ashamed of her petty politics.
Will he now guarantee to Viet Nam veterans and their families that the joint working-group’s report will be released to the public unedited by the Government?
Hone HarawiraKa tautoko ia i ngā mōrehu o ngā pakanga i te pātai ki te Minita Whakapāoho, he aha ai i whakakāhoretia e ia te tono pūtea a Whakaata Māori ki te whakapāoho i te Hokowhitu-a-Tū, ā, ki te whakapāoho anō hoki i te rā whakamaumaharatanga mō rātou o Ahitereiria me Aotearoa, arā, te Rā o Anzac i te mea, he kaupapa nui, he kaupapa whakaharahara mō te katoa o Aotearoa ēnei kaupapa e rua?
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.]
[Will he on behalf of the veterans ask the Minister of Broadcasting for an explanation as to why a funding application from Māori Television to New Zealand On Air was declined to broadcast the Māori Battalion, and then another to broadcast Anzac Day commemorations, both of which programmes have huge significance for a nationwide audience?]
This Minister, unfortunately, has no responsibility for broadcasting, so it is not possible for him to answer that question.
The question was to ask this Minister whether he would be prepared to ask the Minister of Broadcasting.
I am trying to be helpful. However, the question does relate to Viet Nam veterans. That is the primary purpose of the question, and around that should be the supplementary questions. This is on a totally different tangent. Perhaps the member would like to change the question. I will allow one more go.
Could the Minister, having told us that all the Viet Nam veterans were so happy and overjoyed with the response of the Government and the joint working-group, tell the House why many, many Māori ex - Viet Nam veterans are disappointed that the joint working-group and the Government are not prepared to take this matter to any of the marae throughout the country?
I tell the member that the veterans have expressed support for the process, but I would also have to say that for many the jury is still out until they hear what is in the report and the Government’s response to it. In terms of where the joint working-group met, that was over to the joint working-group. It is not my responsibility. The working-group is independent; it makes its own decisions on how it operates, and that is as it should be.