﻿Mr SPEAKER: Question No 8, Hon Phil Goff.
Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill) to the Minister of Defence:
What is the level of risk assessed by the NZ Defence Force
if its personnel are deployed to Iraq and what force protection
would be provided for them?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Defence):
Force protection has been determined on the advice from the Chief of Defence Force,
and I trust his professional judgment.
I am not going to undermine his responsibilities or the security
of our forces by providing the detail asked for by the member.
Hon Phil Goff: When the Australian Government is prepared to say
that it believes the risk of deploying trainers is high,
why is the Minister of Defence and the National Government
denying that important information to NZers?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I do not think it is in the interests
of the public or the personnel we are deploying for these matters
to be discussed. If the member wants to persist in saying
that this is something we should be discussing,
he needs to look back over the record of a previous Government
that did not even tell NZers they were deploying into combat zones.
Hon Phil Goff: Given the importance of a Government’s decision
to put its soldiers in harm’s way, should not a deployment
be put to the vote in this House in the same way as it was in 2001
when Labour deployed the SAS into Afghanistan and this House passed
by 105 votes to seven a resolution supporting the NZ deployment to Afghanistan,
contrary to the inaccurate and misleading assertions of John Key a moment ago?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The date that the member refers to, of course,
relates to a time when we had a responsible Opposition in this House,
not the riff-raff we have got there at the moment.
Hon Phil Goff: Why are we sending NZ troops
into a high-risk environment when the training outcomes
are expected to be low because NZ trainers cannot make a difference
to the deeply entrenched corruption, the incompetent leadership,
the sectarianism, and the low morale of the Iraqi army?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I notice that the member, as he is asking that question,
is referring to his own notes.
I suggest that he stops talking to himself in the mirror,
because he is getting just far too much misinformation from himself.
Hon Phil Goff: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. [Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can sense what the point of order is.
I am going to invite the member to re-ask that question.
Hon Phil Goff: Why are we putting Kiwis into a high-risk conflict environment
when the training outcomes are expected to be low
because of the incompetent leadership, the deeply entrenched corruption,
the sectarianism, and the very poor morale of the Iraqi army,
which our trainers cannot have any influence over at all?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I reject totally the points that are made
by the member and suggest that they are made simply to try
to give some credence to the very, very sad commentary
that he is delivering the nation on this matter.
Hon Phil Goff: Why have we agreed to send NZ soldiers into Iraq
without a status of forces agreement, which is the normal part
of the protection that Kiwis serving in another country would have?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It would be good if the member kept up
with what is actually happening. What was announced today
is that the Government is giving the NZ Defence Force the go-ahead
to prepare for deployment with the expectation that, all going well,
it would be deployed at some time in May. One of the conditions around that
is ensuring that we do have appropriate legal protections for our defence forces.
I do not think that the fixation the member has on a particular type
of protection is reasonable, given that there is only one country out of 22
currently in Iraq that uses that particular protection. I just think
that it is wrong for the left to come in here and insist
that unless there is this specific type of protection available,
then everything is wrong. It works for 22 other countries.
We will negotiate something that will give our men and women
in the mission the protection they need.
Hon Phil Goff: Is Lieutenant-General Tim Keating, Chief of Defence Force,
correct in asserting that of the 143 NZ Defence Force personnel
we are putting in harm’s way, only 16 of those are specialist trainers—
only 16 of 143 being put in harm’s way?
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Let me just reject the concept
that we are deliberately putting troops in harm’s way.
Every precaution is being taken to ensure that they are as safe as possible
in difficult circumstances. The Chief of Defence Force has advised us
that if we were to send a group of as many as 16 who are specialist trainers,
then they would need other support, and we have not been stinting
in allowing him to put together a mission that has all those supports in it.
It is ridiculous for the member to start making a big deal
of force protection at the start of his question,
and then start getting outraged because we have got force protection
that he thinks is too much. What is it, Mr Goff?
Are we protecting them or not?
Hon Phil Goff: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
>From that very long answer, was the answer actually yes?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member can go back and look at his question—
[Interruption] Order! The member can go back and look at his question
and he will see that the question was certainly addressed.
It may not have been to the member’s satisfaction, but it was addressed.
Question No 9.
Subtitles by the Amara.org community