Mr SPEAKER: The House comes to Questions for Oral Answer. Question No 1, the Hon Annette King.
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) to the Minister of Health: In light of his admission
yesterday that health funding has not kept up with all inflationary pressures under this Government,
how will the health budget absorb the increased cost of purchasing medicines that the Prime Minister
has said is likely to result from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Kia ora, Mr Speaker. The member is being selective
in her portrayal of health funding, which under this Government has risen by $4.1 billion—
actually an increase above inflation.
The member is also getting ahead of herself on the TPP.
As the Prime Minister said yesterday, if there is any increase, it is likely to be small
and the Government will fund that. Over 7 years National has increased and managed the health budget,
whereas Labour blew the budget and left a deepening $150 million deficit.
Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Mine was a straight question on notice, and the last part of that answer—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! No, that particular answer was perfectly in line with the Standing—[Interruption]
Order! I do not expect the Hon Annette King to interject when I am on my feet, if she wishes
to stay for the balance of question time.
I am giving a ruling as to the satisfactory nature of that answer. In my mind it had a little bit
of politics in it. This is a debating chamber.
Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
You have given previous rulings in this House about—[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member please sit down. I just want to deal with something else.
I will give the very last warning to the Hon Annette King. If she continues to interject
through a point of order, whether her colleague is on his feet or I am on my feet, I will be asking her
to leave the Chamber. I apologise to the member for interrupting.
Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You have given rulings on
previous occasions about primary questions on notice when Government Ministers use their
answers to them to take political flicks at the Opposition. You have previously said
that was unacceptable. I can see why my colleague Annette King rose to take the point of order
that she did, because that answer did contain that at the end of the answer.
In fact, earlier in the answer it strayed close to it, but the last part most definitely was out of order.
Mr SPEAKER: I am sorry—I apologise to the member but I do not recall giving such a reason.
I judge every question on its time, and frequently a primary question will have a bit of political
connotation in it. I then judge whether it is likely to create disorder. In this case I do not
think that answer was unacceptable, as I have already indicated. So in actual fact
what we have here is a case of the member relitigating a point I have already ruled on.
Hon Annette King: If funding for the increased costs of pharmaceuticals arising from the TPP deal
will not be “by raiding the … budget” as he claimed yesterday, how much has Pharmac,
which has been providing technical advice to him, said would be needed to cover the savings
Pharmac normally achieves in Vote Health?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The whole point is that the TPP agreement has not been signed yet.
We do not know what is in it. That is a budgetary matter that would be dealt with
in the next Budget, should the agreement be signed.
Hon Annette King: In light of that answer, is he saying that he has had no advice or assumptions
given on the impact of the TPP on Vote Health, even though we know that Pharmac has been
providing technical advice to the Ministry of Health, or is he being kept in the dark?
Mr SPEAKER: The Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman— either of those two questions.
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Refer to answer number two.
Barbara Stewart: In light of what the Minister is saying now, how does he reconcile that with what
his Prime Minister said 1 month ago: “We won’t sign anything that undercuts Pharmac
"in a way that would have a dramatic impact.”?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: There is no contradiction there at all, I am afraid.
Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table a letter received today from Pharmac, received under an
Official Information Act—is that all you need, Mr Speaker? Thank you.
Mr SPEAKER: That is all I need. I am putting the leave. Leave is sought to table a letter from Pharmac, dated today.
Is there any objection to that being tabled? There is none. It can be tabled.
Hon Annette King: Is he aware that Pharmac saved $1.4 billion this year alone on the purchase
of pharmaceuticals for NZers, and how will these sorts of savings be affected if patents are increased
for longer, as indicated by him in the House yesterday?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I am very glad that Mrs King has brought up Pharmac’s performance,
because it has been excellent. In the last year it funded 20 new pharmaceuticals,
and 21 existing pharmaceuticals have been funded for new users over the same period.
That is going to benefit 70,000 extra NZers over this coming year.
So, yes, I am aware of its performance.
Hon Annette King: What advice has he received on the impact on cancer and heart patients
if they are required to wait longer before they can access generic medicines because of extensions
made under the TPP deal on high-cost patent medicines?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Mrs King is making a massive assumption. The TPP has yet to be signed.
Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked what advice—
Mr SPEAKER: Yes, I am going to invite the member to ask that question again.
Hon Annette King: What advice has he received on the impact on cancer and heart patients if they
are required to wait years longer before they can access generic medicines because of extensions made
under the TPP deal on high-cost patent medicines?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: There is absolutely nothing to indicate that that will happen.
Hon Annette King: If the TPP deal will not raid the health budget but Pharmac is unable to make
the savings necessary for district health boards, where will the Ministry of Health find $40 million
over the next 4 years to fund home care for the disabled, given the ministry also has to find
$32 million of cuts in the same period?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The first point is that there are no cuts to the health budget.
We have actually increased it by $4 billion over the past 4 years.
The second point is that Mrs King has made it clear that she is opposed to the TPP, but she might want
to think that, actually, if we do end up with the TPP, we will have a far stronger economy and be able
to afford much more in terms of health care. So that is really what she wants to consider:
what is in NZ’s interest here.
Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table an Official Information Act document from Treasury—
a report dated 22 April this year—that shows funding for disability support coming out of the Pharmac drug savings.
Mr SPEAKER: I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table that particular Official Information Act document.
Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.
[Interruption] Order! Supplementary question, Dr Russel Norman.
Dr Russel Norman: Has he received advice as to the impact on the health budget of any potential TPP deal?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Officials cannot provide advice when they do not know what is in the deal.
Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Mr SPEAKER: I hope it is not that the question has not been addressed, but I will listen—
Dr Russel Norman: It has not been addressed.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question had—[Interruption] Order! The question was definitely addressed.
Question No 2, Fletcher Tabuteau.
Subtitles by the Amara.org community