General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. This weekend the Labour Party will trot off to its conference and congratulate itself on its long-standing tradition of being the defender of those who are vulnerable. In fact, the Labour Party has, over the last few months, used every privilege of power to avoid the consequences of ripping off the taxpayer—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Members leaving the Chamber will please show some courtesy to the member trying to address the House. It is good conduct to do so, and it shows consideration for others.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I have not heard a word that my colleague has said since he started his speech. I ask that you set the time back to the start. A cacophony of noise was coming from the back of the Chamber. I agree with your remarks, but I think that respect should be shown, and that Mr English should start his speech again so that we can all hear it.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you, Mr Henare. That request will certainly be given some consideration.

This weekend the Labour Party will congratulate itself at its conference on its historical record of being the defender of those who are vulnerable. But, in fact, the reality is the opposite. This party regards itself as being entitled to every taxpayer dollar, and being entitled to use it purely in its own political interest, not in the public interest. Labour has used every privilege of power to justify what it has done and to avoid the consequences of what it has done. What the party has done will give Ms Clark some satisfaction. She overspent on the election campaign cap by half a million dollars, and she got away with it.

The whole Government machine is focused on justifying Labour’s actions. In the meantime members could see how the vulnerable are doing just by listening to question time today. Youths are being locked up with adults when they are not meant to be, and just a few months ago one youth got killed because of it. Officials are claiming there is no evidence of bad side effects resulting from a vaccination that has been given to 60 percent of New Zealand’s children, when the Accident Compensation Corporation has accepted 33 serious cases of bad side effects resulting from that vaccine—and the Minister did not know about it. Today in the Education and Science Committee the Education Review Office told us that 30 percent of schools have no idea about children’s achievement or progress. That is a case of a Labour Government stealing from our children the hope and the opportunity of a State education.

Today we heard even more about the honourable Taito Phillip Field exploiting overstayers for personal gain. Those people needed his help, but instead they were exploited—

💬 Paula Bennett: And he’s still on full pay!

And he will be on full pay until the next election, as far as we know. Today a piece of paper landed on my desk from the Council of Christian Social Services—hardly a bunch of right-wing extremists. That organisation said it was tired of “pilot-mania”, endless new strategies, and new ideas that do not work. It said that after 7 years and the expenditure of millions and millions of dollars, no child in New Zealand was any safer. That is what is happening to this tired, tired Government. It has become so focused on protecting itself and achieving its own political ends that the nation and its needs are going begging. The nation and its needs are suffering, and those who are most vulnerable—those whom Labour has always prided itself on protecting—are suffering the most, because there are no new ideas.

The Minister of Health, instead of protecting those sick people of New Zealand, spends all his time churning out press releases about the Exclusive Brethren and other matters. That is what the man with the most complex and demanding portfolio in the country is doing. Steve Maharey, the Minister of Education, is doing nothing in education. All is rosy, no problem exists, he has only solutions, and meanwhile 30 percent of our schools have no idea about children’s achievement or progress. Helen Clark has wisely decided to get out of the country, because she has to answer why an employee of hers, who is fully on the public payroll and whose costs are met by the taxpayer, is completely unaccountable to Parliament or the public for her actions in making Labour overspend on its campaign budget.

This Government is showing all the signs not just of being tired and in Government too long but also of incurable arrogance. It has a fierce and ugly sense of entitlement to power, a fierce and ugly sense of entitlement to taxpayers’ dollars, and a fierce and ugly sense that it must have support, that everything it does is right, and that it can do no wrong. Well, the reassuring thing is that the public do not see it that way. I say to Mr Mallard that over Labour weekend I experienced more political anger towards the Labour Party than I have experienced since a National Government abandoned the surcharge.

We are off to the Labour Party conference on Friday to celebrate our 90th year since formation. We do so united, we do so proud of our achievements to date, and we do so in no doubt of who our leader is and what our policy programme is. We are proud of our progress towards economic transformation, of the thickening and broadening of our economy, of the release of entrepreneurial spirit, of the greater attention paid to research, science, and technology, and of the blossoming of both traditional and new industries. We are proud of our focus on families—young and old—through Working for Families, and of year-on-year progress in health and education services. We have the second-lowest unemployment rate in the world—

💬 Hon Member: Not bad!

Hon PETE HODGSON:—not bad—and the highest level of participation in our workforce in our history. I can say about people who are vulnerable in this country that every day 50 people come off the benefit list in New Zealand and go to work. They have been doing that—at a rate of 50 a day—every day of the week, every week of the year, for 7 years. National put them on the list; we are getting them off it.

We are proud of our focus on national identity, of our arts and cultural renaissance, of our sporting prowess, of our new film industry, and of our status in foreign affairs. We are proud that we did not go into Iraq, and we are proud that we have no nuclear weapons or nuclear-powered ships. So we are heading off to the conference knowing who we are, having a very clear idea of what we stand for, and knowing that we have both high-quality and stable leadership.

What a contrast! The National Party has no policy, after 7 years. It has no direction, no idea of what it wants—except naked power for the sake of having power—and no more unity than a herd of cats. National members are approaching the season when the National Party has coups. In November 1997 Mrs Shipley rolled Mr Bolger. In October 2001 Mr English rolled Mrs Shipley. In October 2003 Dr Brash rolled Mr English. The October, November season of 2006 is now upon us. They really are uncertain what to do.

💬 Hon Member: Don’t do it!

That is probably good advice. In fact, the discomfort is palpable: senior members of the party wander around strange parts of the building late at night; Mr Key cancelled his 3-week trip to the US; and there is bad blood everywhere.

National last week spent a strong, vitriolic week saying that the Labour Party was corrupt, saying that other parties in this House were corrupt, and opposing validating legislation. National members said they knew very clearly the difference between ordinary parliamentary business and electioneering, so how does Eric Roy explain these pictures? Eric Roy—the buddy of Bill English, who has just resumed his seat—finds himself on one of these buses. These are actually two pictures of the same bus; the same number plate is on it. These are photographs taken at two different times. One of them, on the left, is a photograph of Wayne Harpur, the Labour candidate for Invercargill in the last election, and that advertisement was paid for by the New Zealand Labour Party. Over here, this advertisement of the bus with Eric Roy on it, with the National Party logo on it, and with advice that states: “Eric Roy is working for you” on it was photographed last week—the same week that Eric Roy and his mates were voting against legislation that would have validated precisely this sort of expenditure. This advertisement was paid for by the New Zealand taxpayer; this was not paid for by the New Zealand National Party.

National members spent all of last week saying that stuff of this ilk was wrong and that they opposed legislation validating it retrospectively. Now, this week, I get to out Bill English’s Southland mate. I want to know how much more of that is going on. How much more “Miss February” are we going to get from Dr Lockwood Smith? How much more “Miss June” are we going to get from Gerry Brownlee? How much more of this are we going to get from the National Party, now that legislation has passed saying that this stuff is OK, even though the National Party spent all of last week opposing it?

Can people believe that we have a health system in crisis and the Minister of Health spent 5 minutes speaking to the nation and did not once mention the word “health” or mention patients in New Zealand? Not once did he share with us the email that he must have received from the Minister for ACC to tell us about the 33 claims that the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has accepted in relation to the meningococcal B vaccine. We are asking the Minister of Health what they relate to. Do they relate to something as innocent as an injection injury, or, more important, do they relate to the serious case of an 8-year-old girl where the ACC has accepted—

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: No, not most of them.

Oh, “not most of them”, says the Minister for ACC. I ask whether she will table the email that has that information in it, because we need to know why the Ministry of Health is telling the people of New Zealand that there have been no significant events associated with the meningococcal B vaccine, yet ACC is accepting claims of which we know at least one is the result of a significant impact that specialists say is the result of the meningococcal B vaccine.

The reason why we want to know is this: parents in New Zealand have put their faith in the advice from the Ministry of Health to have their children immunised. I am one of them. I believed what the ministry was saying. Frankly, I have to say that my kids did not like it, but I have not seen any lasting side effects. But why would the Ministry of Health be hiding this information? Why is it not out there? There is a huge level of suspicion and misinformation out there about meningococcal B vaccination. We are relying on the ministry to tell the truth and to put it all out there. We will make the decisions. So why is ACC accepting claims when the Ministry of Health is saying that there is nothing to worry about and that nothing has been reported? We want to hear from the Minister of Health because the matter goes to the heart of our confidence in the advice the ministry is providing.

But, of course, we did not hear a word about health from Mr Hodgson; we heard all about strategy. Do people know that he is the Labour Party strategist? I will tell people how long he has been the Labour Party strategist. The first time he was Labour Party strategist was in 1990—the biggest election loss the Labour Party has ever had. Then he was the election strategist in 1993. Labour lost that election. Then he was the election strategist in 1996, which gave the lowest poll result Labour had ever received. And do people know what happened in 1999? Labour people said: “Three strikes and you are out. We are having Mike Williams as the election strategist.”—and Labour won. And, in 2002, was Peter Hodgson Labour’s election strategist? No, it was Mike Williams. Labour won handsomely then. Then in 2005 Mr Hodgson was back as Labour’s election strategist. Labour almost lost, and if it was not for Winston Peters, Labour would be losing again. So much for the great election strategist!

I ask the Labour Party back bench, who appointed Pete Hodgson as Labour election strategist? Who gave him the right to be Labour strategist? I suspect that it was Heather Simpson. So, at a time when we have scandal after scandal coming from this lumbering, arrogant Government, all we hear from the Minister of Health is nothing but politics—nothing but politics and nothing about health. Well, I say to the Prime Minister that she should put the country out of its misery, put this Government out of its misery, and go to the people, because she does not deserve to be the Prime Minister of this country. It is time to put this Government out of its misery.

In the latest opinion polls, who is gone? Russell Fairbrother—gone. Dave Hereora—gone. Moana Mackey—gone. Sue Moroney—gone. Darien Fenton—gone. Charles Chauvel—gone.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: Brash is gone.

Well, Mr Mallard says that so and so is gone, but I have to say to him that he has lost it. Mr Mallard was almost the Minister of Finance of this country—almost—but he never got over the line. And did people hear Dr Cullen say yesterday that he was expecting to be the Minister of Finance for years to come? He was not saying that 10 months ago, was he? He will not let go because he knows that Mr Trevor Mallard has lost that golden opportunity he might have had to be the Minister of Finance for a year or so.

But, honestly, what is desperately needed in this country today is a fresh vision and fresh leadership that New Zealand can get from the National Party, because this Government has been 7 years in office and is showing all the signs of a tired, arrogant, third-term Government. The latest sign was revealed today—the huge blowout in the number of ministerial press secretaries and communications advisers.

Three years ago the National Union of Public Employees asked the Ministry of Fisheries to allow its fisheries officers to use pepper spray and batons, because it was concerned about the safety of the 85 front-line fisheries officers. What the union was met with was a stony silence—a stony silence from a Minister who is out of touch with what fisheries officers do and the issues they have to deal with.

Upholding the laws of our country is an important and honourable, if sometimes dangerous, occupation. Law enforcement comes in many forms, including that carried out by the police, customs officials, and those who—like fisheries officers—protect our environment. Fisheries officers are our first, our last, and often our only line of defence against those who would plunder our coastline. In 2004 a report was released by the Ministry of Fisheries on the risk of assault to fisheries officers. It gave many statistics, noting amongst them that fisheries officers are at the same risk of serious assault as our sworn police officers, and it noted that the information does not support the idea that it is becoming a less dangerous occupation. In fact, the report noted that, if anything, assaults were under-reported.

More than a third of reported incidents from 1999 to 2003 involved the use or the presentation of weapons. The Minister of Fisheries knows that this is a dangerous job, because he has given his permission for fisheries officers to have flak jackets, which they use. But he seems to think it is unreasonable that they should be able to protect themselves by using any other means, including pepper spray and batons. The ministry’s 2004 report noted that fisheries officers have a similar likelihood to sworn police officers of being assaulted with a weapon. We get very upset when our police officers are assaulted, but it seems that the Government is not the least bit worried about our fisheries officers being assaulted.

Fisheries officers had to wait 3 long years before the Minister of Fisheries deigned to give them an answer, in the form of a letter from Jim Anderton letting them know that they would not be allowed the means to defend themselves. It was a firm no, and that continues. Today in the New Zealand Herald a letter was published from the Minister stating that he would not allow fisheries officers to use guns. In fact, he seems to have misread the communication from the National Union of Public Employees, which was asking not for guns but for pepper spray and batons. It seems that the level of defence has escaped the Minister; he probably does not know the difference—indeed, he is completely out of touch.

From 2001 to 2003, 13 percent of officers each year reported incidents where they were assaulted or seriously threatened. The Minister has many objections; in fact, he is full of them, and he voices them loudly and often. He says there are not enough assaults to justify defensive weapons, but he cannot read his own statistics, because one in 20 fisheries officers in the last year received a serious assault. He says fisheries officers should withdraw from perilous situations and call the police. Well, it would do the Minister of Fisheries good to get out and see what these people do. He should take himself up to a remote coastline with a fisheries officer who deals with situations on his own and is hours away from the nearest police assistance.

Yet he will not allow fisheries officers to protect themselves. He worries about a domino effect. He says that pepper spray and batons will lead to Tasers and guns. Nobody is asking for Tasers and guns. He is completely out of touch, and he does not understand how fisheries officers are trained. On an international spectrum there is an acknowledged scale of force. Currently, fisheries officers are trained in open-hand encounters and carotid holds, which are very dangerous indeed if used under particular circumstances. But our fisheries officers receive significant and very good training, and it is merely a matter of good luck and good training that assaults are at the level they are, not higher. Pepper spray and batons are a lower level of defensive forms of self-protection. The Minister of Fisheries not only does not understand the danger that he is putting these people in, he does not want to understand—all in the name of upholding the law and guarding our coastline.

It is my view that we have quite a large responsibility as members of Parliament because we are able to access information that many other members of the public are not able to access. In my view it is part of being a responsible member of Parliament to use that information properly. I am outraged at the absolutely blatant deceit demonstrated by Tony Ryall in the House during question time this afternoon. In my view Tony Ryall, egged on by his favourite leader-to-be Bill English, portrayed a situation in such a way that will have parents up and down the country feeling concerned about the meningococcal B vaccine programme. He insinuated over and over again in supplementary questions that many people have had very serious repercussions as a result of having that vaccine. I think that that is a wrong thing for any member of Parliament to do. It is irresponsible, it is lazy, and it is dangerous.

At the end of my contribution in the general debate I will seek leave to table the list of injuries accepted by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) from 33 claimants who received their injuries as a result of taking the meningococcal B vaccine. I do not want at all to undermine the seriousness of the one claimant who, according to ACC records, has thrombocytopenia as a result of taking the meningococcal B vaccine. But I have had it confirmed that the incidence of that immune disease is no greater at all in New Zealand following the meningococcal B vaccination programme than it was prior. For Tony Ryall to insinuate anything else is just a disgrace. Some of the other injuries that occurred included fractured upper teeth—frankly, I think people need to know that—a frozen shoulder, and rotator cuff impingement. Those injuries could be the result of an injection of anything at all. They are totally unrelated to the content of what was being injected—they are all about the process.

It is that sort of deceit that has been demonstrated so strongly by the National Party under the leadership of Don Brash. Frankly, I think he is a leader who deserves to go, because his style of politics is all about division and deceit, and in my view there is no room for that in our country. We should not have that sort of behaviour being demonstrated by anybody, let alone by people who are elected to leadership positions in this Parliament.

Don Brash’s track record in terms of deceit, is, quite frankly, gobsmacking. For weeks and weeks he has been coming into this House with his pious, sanctimonious bleating about taxpayer money being used on campaigning. On 20 October in the Otago Daily Times he said on the record, then confirmed it subsequently to a number of journalists, that he did not use any taxpayer money to fund Bryan Sinclair, the campaign strategist. He said that not one dime of taxpayer money was used to pay Bryan Sinclair. But by the end of last week he confirmed on the record that he had lied in those previous interviews, because Bryan Sinclair’s salary, hotel costs, travel costs, office phone bill, and cellphone bill were all paid by Parliamentary Service money—the same money that National members said we used inappropriately. Not only did the National leader use the money inappropriately he then lied to the public of the country, for a whole week.

Should we be surprised? This is the same man who simply forgot to pay GST on the broadcasting. So will that party refund the GST that is owed to the New Zealand taxpayer? No, it will not, because if it did pay the money back—

💬 Lindsay Tisch: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member said that Dr Brash lied to the country. She cannot say that he lied, at all.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I have been thinking about that. The member is right. Under Speaker’s ruling 40/4 the word “lie” is out of order, and many other expressions can be used. I ask the member to withdraw.

I withdraw. Dr Brash consistently told the country one story on the public record, and by the end of last week he had changed his mind.

There are not many occasions—

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: I am sorry to interrupt the member. I indicated during my address that I would seek leave to table the list of actual injuries in order to correct the total misapprehension Tony Ryall created.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Leave is sought. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.

There are not many occasions in the general debate when I can actually agree with the comments made by the great Labour Party strategist Pete Hodgson. He said in his contribution that the Labour Party was united. I agree with that statement: the Labour Party is united in corruption. That is what most New Zealanders agree with. Over the Labour weekend I had people coming up to me at every function I attended—

💬 Jill Pettis: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In points of order in the House over the last couple of weeks it has been ruled that members are not allowed to say that other members are corrupt. That member has just said that, and I ask that he withdraw and apologise.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I understand that the member was speaking about the Labour Party, not the parliamentary party. There is a difference.

The people who came up to me during Labour weekend were telling me that the Labour Party was without principle and was totally corrupt. Its members in Parliament rushed through retrospective legislation in this House over most of last week in a blatant attempt to hide the fact that they stole taxpayers’ money. They used their numbers in the House—their majority—supported by Winston Peters and New Zealand First, and by Peter Dunne and United Future. The people of New Zealand know that that legislation was rushed through under urgency, and that Labour was not prepared to go to a select committee. It was a desperate attempt to right the wrongs that were correctly pointed out by Kevin Brady, the Auditor-General.

The worrying thing for the New Zealand public is that while the Government is so intent on covering up its mistakes and what occurred at the last election, it is forgetting its basic function, which is to govern. I was absolutely shocked this morning to observe a photograph on the front page of the Christchurch Press that shows, very graphically, a young New Zealander lying beaten in the street in downtown Christchurch. I say to Parliament that it is a basic function of the New Zealand Police to protect that guy and to make sure that that sort of incident does not happen in Tuam Street in Christchurch.

I sympathise with the police, because I know they are busy. They are flat out investigating Taito Phillip Field, who, at this stage, is home on gardening leave, on full pay, so that Helen Clark can keep his vote. But we are seeing story after story in the media. We have only to think of the Television One programme last Sunday night that suggested very grave corruption. Yet it does not suit Helen Clark to bring that matter to a finality. That person is showing himself to be unfit to be a member of the House of Representatives, yet Helen Clark leaves him at home, on full pay, simply because she needs that vote.

So I say to this House that the incident of the poor kid lying beaten, and probably unconscious, is totally unacceptable. That is the sort of function a Government should be looking after. Darren Hughes might be interested to know what Annette King, Minister of Police, said when approached about the problem. She said the growing problem had nothing to do with the Government or with police strategies. That is outrageous. People in New Zealand expect a Government to provide safety in our streets. They expect a Minister of Police to be responsible. When that poor kid lies beaten and unconscious in Tuam Street, that is a responsibility of the police and their strategies. It is certainly a responsibility of the Hon Annette King, Minister of Police; the buck stops with her.

But we are seeing a Government that is forgetting about the basics of governing. Information given to the Education and Science Committee today shows that 30 percent of schools in New Zealand, according to the Education Review Office, are unable to tell their students how they are progressing. What schools are in that 30 percent? We are told that the public and the parents of New Zealand are not eligible to know that information. In other words, parents in New Zealand with kids in the State sector genuinely do not know whether their kids are being provided with a satisfactory education by the State. That is another basic function of this Government that is not being done properly.

Emotive politics, that is what National is all about. But what is its policy, what is its solution, what is its answer? Nothing! Silence! Every time National Opposition members get up to say anything in the House it is negative, it is dreary, it is tired, it is old, and it is frustrated. National has not one solution. It is a tired Opposition. In fact, the National Party is in disarray. It has leadership bids going on all over the place. National is not united. It has not been able to demonstrate, at any one point, that it has a vision for this country and that it has leadership that will take this country forward.

Members opposite cloud the issues. In everything they said around election spending, there is no transparency whatsoever about who bankrolled National’s campaign bid.

💬 Darren Hughes: 92 percent hidden in trusts.

Yes, 92 percent was hidden in trusts that the New Zealand public do not know about. Members opposite stand up in this House and say they want transparency on the issue. Well, the New Zealand public deserve it, because this country is not about “cash for policy”. This country does not stand for secret funds being used to fund campaigns to enable others to run the agenda of this country. It is a transparency that all New Zealanders deserve. The National Party is in disarray. It has no leadership, no direction, and no vision. Secret funding is running its campaign. National is going nowhere. Every time we ask National members what their policy is, there is nothing. When we ask what they are going to do about it, there is nothing. They just moan and complain. There is a cover-up going on in, and only in, the National Opposition; what this Government is focusing on is clear and simple.

We need a country that is going forward. We need a country that will lift opportunities for every New Zealander. We need a country that performs to its highest potential. We also need a country that builds bridges and creates a sense of unity. Those are three key themes that this Government is running on. We want to make sure that families young and old have a greater sense of well-being and quality of life. We want to see economic transformation. We have to lift opportunities for everybody in this country, but, more important, we have to lift what underpins us as a nation. We may be small but we are smart. We are diverse, and yes, that is a strength. We have opportunities here in New Zealand that should not be limited by our size, our geographical position, or the ethnicity of our population. In fact, it is about building a sense of national identity. So Labour does have a vision. We are not tired. We are energetic, we are keen, and we are enthusiastic, and we know that the way to go is forward and to continue doing that.

We need only look back at the track record of the previous National Government. In 1996, when I first came into Parliament, unemployment was around 18 percent for Māori under a National-led Government. That is not acceptable. Now, unemployment is below 9 percent—half what it was under a National-led Government. We have to say that we have taken this country somewhat forward. The National Government let the trade sector languish. There was no focus whatsoever on Modern Apprenticeships or anything. Labour knows that it has to fix that gap. There are skills shortages throughout the whole country. This Government is doing something about it. More Modern Apprentices, that is what we say. More than 2,000 people are currently in apprenticeship training, and we will increase that.

More important, bridging the skills gap for the benefit of the whole country is good for all of us. That is leadership under this Government. That is going forward. In fact, I was quite excited to see in Te Kūiti’s local paper that no young person is on the unemployment register in Te Kūiti. Shane Ardern will agree with me that that is a fact. Fantastic! That did not ever happen under a National Government, but it has now under a Labour-led Government. [Interruption] That is right. That is in provincial New Zealand and in the rural areas. Shane Ardern will agree with me that never before has Te Kūiti ever trumpeted that kind of benefit.

Under a Labour-led Government we have better access to health care and general practitioner services. People will remember that when National was in Government people were paying up to $45 to visit their doctor. Under a Labour Government, if people are part of a primary health organisation they can be paying around $10. That is fantastic. That means that people will go to the doctor when they need to, not to the hospital because they have to. Under a Labour Government those are the types of gains that we are starting to see. We can make real gains in the area of housing, which is where I think a lot of New Zealanders who are really in need can really benefit from the direction and vision of a Labour-led Government.

Last Tuesday when I arrived at Parliament I was told by our senior whip, Lindsay Tisch, that a really important bill would be introduced, the most important bill that he had ever experienced, certainly, in the 7 years that he had been in Parliament. He was right! It was not because it was a wonderful bill, or altruistic, or selfless, or an example of a great Government working for its people. It was none of the above. It was the worst bill ever, and probably the worst I will experience in my time in Parliament. It was the absolute opposite of a wonderful bill. I sat through 2 days of appalling, self-serving arguments justifying why this cowardly Government overspent its election budget, then tried to validate its overspending. Well, it did validate it. It passed the bill. I was ashamed that this Parliament, which I have come to to serve, was so sullied by such a bill.

But I say to colleagues that I was not alone. New Zealanders are angry. The whole of New Zealand is angry about this bill. It is discussed on radio talkback. If we talk to people in the street or meet them at local meetings, they talk about it. They are very angry and they will not forget how this shameful legislation was rammed through at breakneck speed, without even the by-your-leave of a select committee to which the public could make their submissions. Shame on this Government—shame, shame, shame!

All the while, while this Government has been distracted from its core business, while this Government has been fiddling and stealing taxpayers’ money, the whole of the health sector has been slowly disintegrating in front of us.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member made an inappropriate reference to members of the parliamentary Labour Party, and I ask that you ask her to withdraw and apologise.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): If the member said anything inappropriate, I ask her to desist in future and to come to the point of the debate.

I withdraw and apologise. Just a few days ago, regarding the health sector, this stunning Annual Report 2005/06 including The Health Independence Report, was released. An amazing press release came out with it. It was so full of spin I was dizzy; I felt sick, actually. I read through the press release and through some of the statements. One of them was: “Overall patient satisfaction ratings show that New Zealanders believe that the health services they receive are very good.” One has to wonder who the hell they asked to do that questionnaire. Did they ask the tens of thousands of New Zealanders who have been culled off waiting lists, for data-cleansing purposes?

💬 Hon David Carter: They’re probably too sick to be asked.

That is right. Did they ask the New Zealanders who are missing out on the crucial drugs that will keep them well and out of hospital? Did they ask the demoralised and striking health workforce? Did they ask the women who are desperately trying to fund-raise to pay for Herceptin to keep themselves alive for their children and their families? Did they ask the New Zealanders who do not have access to a general practitioner, particularly in rural New Zealand? Did they ask the rural general practitioners who are so overworked and burnt out that they are packing their bags and leaving in protest?

Here is another doozy. Here is another quote from this wonderful spin: “People are being treated earlier and are less likely to require hospitalisation.” Time and time again it is just the opposite, and we have proved it on the National side. The exact opposite is happening. The culling of tens of thousands of people off hospital waiting lists, for data-cleansing purposes, means that people will get more sick and need more complex operations. It is false economy.

It is also about what the report does not state. This wonderful book mentions that the hospital mortality rates are reduced, but it does not talk about the adverse effects suffered by patients. Just in July this year a New Zealand Medical Journal article stated that 13 percent of patients admitted to acute care hospitals are associated with an adverse event. Dr Seddon, who wrote the article, said that 750 deaths are due to preventable medical errors.

Very shortly after that I received an email from a concerned doctor who stated that, yes, it was all very well to have a workforce that is demoralised, but what would turn it round would be excellent morale, healthy incomes, excellent ongoing education, and adequate numbers of staff being rostered. This is not happening in our current hospitals. New Zealand has a health workforce that is so low in morale that health workers are leaving. They have no job satisfaction, and they are not staying in New Zealand. They are going across the Tasman. Every time Australia has a deficit in its workforce, it advertises in New Zealand for general practitioners, for locums, for specialists, and off they go.

October, early November, springtime, is my favourite time of the year. Why is that? There are a couple of reasons. First of all is spring racing. The spring racing carnival is about to descend on us in the shape of the Melbourne Cup. It is one of my favourite times of the year. But the other key reason why spring is one of my favourite times of the year is that it denotes the Labour Party conference, which comes along every spring. The Labour Party conference is a wonderful occasion. I have been going to it for many, many years and it never fails to amaze me how it gets bigger and better every single year, as the Labour Party builds and builds in this country. Not only does the Labour Party conference get bigger and better but there is always greater and greater diversity. In fact, the diversity of the Labour Party conference will rival that of any political party’s conference in this country. No other political party in New Zealand can deliver a conference of the diversity that the New Zealand Labour Party can. That is the reason why a Labour-led Government is the best Government to lead this country.

The Labour Party has the policies that fit the real New Zealand—not the whitewashed or the mainstreamed type of New Zealand that the National Party would like to see. The real New Zealanders on the ground come to the Labour Party conference and help form the policies that lead to the development of this Government. That is why this is the Government that leads this country, and does it in such fine style. It is not just by accident that it has policies that work in this country. It is by great design, great party membership, and great involvement in our conference. We need only to look at the venue for the Labour Party conference this year. We are going to provincial New Zealand, Rotorua. We are not sticking to the main centres. Rotorua—provincial heartland New Zealand—is where we are heading for the Labour Party conference so that people in provincial New Zealand can come along and have their views heard, and can participate in an inclusive process of policy decision-making.

But inclusiveness and leadership are nothing new for this Government. I want to talk about the leadership that has been demonstrated by the Labour Government, particularly at the Pacific Islands Forum. There were issues that threatened the success of the Pacific Islands Forum. Who was it who came to the rescue? Who was it who showed real leadership in that area? It was Helen Clark, Prime Minister of New Zealand. Trouble in the Pacific Islands is of fundamental importance to New Zealand. These are the issues in which we need very good, strong leadership. I listened to Helen Clark, Prime Minister, this morning when she talked about her role in finding the common ground. We moved through this period of potential problems for the Pacific Islands Forum, because we had a leader who could find the common ground. That is a real strength of Helen Clark. How fortunate it is that New Zealand voters were savvy enough to elect a Labour-led Government, so that Helen Clark could bring about peace to the threatened Pacific Islands Forum.

Imagine if Dr Don Brash had turned up to the Pacific Islands Forum to represent New Zealand. Dr Brash cannot even get peace within his own caucus, let alone in the Pacific Islands! He cannot even find common ground in his own caucus, nor amongst his allies. I watched yesterday in this House as Rodney Hide from the ACT party used one of the very few supplementary questions that the ACT party has to slam National, to have a go at National. This is Dr Brash and his colleagues in the National Party finding common ground! They cannot even do it with their own allies in this House, let alone go to the Pacific Islands Forum and find the common ground there.

So it is just as well we have a Prime Minister of the calibre of Helen Clark. Dr Brash clearly is contending with a lot of problems at the moment. Just 6 percent behind him, in recent polls on the preferred leadership of the country, is John Key.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. A couple of weekends ago my whānau and I, and the people of Ngāti Hine along with a number of people from other tribes, gathered on the Ōtīria Marae to celebrate my father’s 90th birthday. Some people may think that that is not such a great occasion. But given that the statistics suggest that as a Māori man he has been living on borrowed time for the past 18 years, I think it is worth a mention in this House. Notwithstanding the pleasure he received in having so many people share this occasion with him, I thought just how fortunate we are as a whānau in still having him with us. It gave me an opportunity to reflect on the effect he has had on my life and, in particular, on the few words of advice he offered me when I was starting to make my own way in this world.

One such piece of advice that I particularly recall, and still adhere to to this day, is: kia whakapono katoa ō mahinga ki waenga o iwi. This essentially means: “Always deal ethically with your people.”, which I took to mean never to be economical with the facts. Others might take this also to mean never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

In a few weeks’ time this House will debate a member’s bill that was given great fanfare when lodged, as it was touted as fulfilling the reason why the member’s party was in Parliament. Just to ensure that people understand which bill I am talking about, I am, of course, referring to the Foreshore and Seabed Act (Repeal) Bill. One would think that the title of this bill is clear and signals the bill’s intent. Alas, a closer reading of the bill proves quite the reverse; it actually states that the foreshore and seabed be re-vested in the Crown. One needs to ask why this Parliament should go to the bother of dealing with a bill that is already covered by existing legislation that ensures that the present seabed and foreshore is already vested in the Crown.

I have heard that the member’s party had not anticipated the bill being drawn from the ballot so soon in this parliamentary term. I can now see why. The bill falls well short of the expectations of the many supporters of the member’s party. The member is quoted as saying, in her defence: “We only ever said that we would repeal (the act), and that is our intention.” Can I say that this bill is certainly not going down that line. I wonder, also, what my whanaunga from Te Aupōuri thinks of this bill, given his understanding of the intent of his party policy being to have the foreshore vested in Māori title. The Māori Party members will certainly have some difficulty in explaining all of this to their constituency to gain its support.

Added to all of this, of course, is the question of what position the National Party will take, given its stated opposition to the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004. Will it support the bill? Will it support the Māori Party? Will the Māori Party rely on National’s support? Will we see a new alliance being formed between the two parties? I say to both of those parties, notwithstanding the invitation to dine together and the subsequent declining of that invitation, to remember the old saying: “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.” The scorn that will be heaped on their houses by their respective constituencies will certainly far exceed that of a scorned woman.

The Māori people today are in a much better position socially and economically than they have been in a long time. Having said that, I would be the first to say that there is still a lot of work to do. As my father continues to espouse, the solution lies not in grievance mode, but in the pursuit of education, education, and education. I say to any party that intends to support the Foreshore and Seabed Act (Repeal) Bill that Māori would be better serviced, socially and economically, if the focus were on increasing and improving access to education.

During this debate we have heard criticism about corruption, and that the people of New Zealand have been misled. This has been said by members of a party who really believe that they exist, and have been born, to rule. As long as they forget that this country operates under a system known as MMP, they will be doomed to sit where they are sitting now in this House, irrespective of what amounts may be owed by various parties.

It was interesting to hear the New Zealand First member have a wee chat and not even mention the $160,000 that his party owes. We are all interested in finding out from Mr Paraone when he is going to pay the $160,000. [Interruption] Another legal opinion! We will wait to see when and whether New Zealand First pays back the $160,000.

It is interesting that members have talked about the Labour Party conference this weekend being all-inclusive. We have heard from Mrs Mahoney about that, but I read with interest today in the newspaper that Taito Phillip Field has not been invited. I cannot see how it will actually be all-inclusive when right now Labour Party members are selecting who will be allowed through the door.

Here we have a party, the Labour Party, that does not listen to advice. Its members were warned by the Chief Electoral Officer and by the Auditor-General about their election spending. They were rorting the system in 1999, 2002, and 2005, and they stole those elections. On the bottom of the pledge card brochure in 1999 there is a quote from Helen Clark: “This card was paid for and delivered by Labour supporters.” Yet on Close Up, on Thursday, 12 October, the Prime Minister fronted up and said Labour had made no attempt to hide that the card had parliamentary funding. So here we have an example of the double standards that will bring the Labour Party and this Government down. The Auditor-General needs to be commended; Mr Brady hung tough. He was worked over by “H1”, Helen Clark, and “H2”, Heather Simpson. He was worked over by both them, but he hung tough. Well done to the Auditor-General.

It was interesting to read the article on the weekend by Anthony Hubbard in which he termed Helen Clark “H1” and Heather Simpson “H2”. He wrote that Ms Simpson was the bulldozer and the Prime Minister was pulling the levers. Being experienced with bulldozer driving on our property, I was thinking that that would not be a pretty sight, would it—Helen Clark pulling the levers while sitting on top of Heather Simpson, the bulldozer.

Anyway, I just want to know from some of the back-benchers how they feel about having to pay back $6,000. How do you feel about that?

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): The member is bringing the Speaker into the debate.

How does Sue Mahoney feel about paying back $6,000?

💬 Sue Moroney: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member is not using my proper name. If he is going to refer to me, I would like that to occur. He can pay back the GST at the same time.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): The member’s name is Moroney. The member has said it twice incorrectly.

How does one of the new members on the Labour back bench feel about having to pay back $6,000? How does the member for New Plymouth, Mr Duynhoven, feel about paying? What is the figure he will have to pay back?

💬 Hon Harry Duynhoven: You mind your own business, sonny.

Right, certainly. I would say the figure is about $12,000 to $16,000. That will really, really hurt. It was a dark day last week, was it not, when retrospective legislation was passed. I was out on the hustings over Labour weekend and in contact with some of the key constituents in the Otaki electorate—

💬 Hon David Carter: Did you see Darren Hughes?

No, no, I did not see him anywhere. That is the most marginal electorate in the whole country. Those constituents were saying it was terrible that the retrospective legislation had been passed last week. I was speaking to strong Labour Party supporters and they have turned against Labour. So they will not be driving from Ōtaki up to Rotorua on the weekend to put money into a bucket during a whip-round; they will be staying put. They have had an entire gutsful of this Labour Party, and they all know that Labour is on the way out.

While the strategist Pete Hodgson has been out there fronting up to the media and talking about the election spending, he has not been concentrating on some of the core issues facing our country. Health is of vital importance to the Otaki electorate, and to the people of Kapiti and Horowhenua. While he has been out there trying to spin the way out for a corrupt Labour Party in a deep hole, he has not been focusing on the core role of a health Minister. Health is of great interest up in Levin; we have a health centre being built up there, right now. The roof is on, the sides are going on, and $16 million has been invested, but no general practitioners are signed up.

It is great to be taking a call in this debate, and to have been incredibly flattered by the Opposition today, whose members are busting to come to the Labour Party conference in Rotorua this weekend. Well, they are not welcome, because that conference is going to be focusing on building a better future for New Zealand and New Zealand families. National members can listen to the policies when they drop out as pearls of wisdom, but they do not have any idea, at all, about policy. We have not even seen a little wee pearl of wisdom there.

We will be talking about what we have done in Government to transform the economy. We have dropped unemployment to the lowest level in the Western World. That is what we will be talking about, and that did not happen by accident. We are investing in health, education, and policing. As my colleague said, we are maintaining our reputation overseas with our leader over in the Pacific Islands Forum. We are a proud, principled, independent, and nuclear-free nation—and if the Opposition ever got into Government it would be the first thing to go. We are still delivering to the people of New Zealand, and we are not destroying their morale or their sense of pride in who they are as New Zealanders.

But it is spring, and spring is an interesting time for Opposition members. Lots of things happen, and not just spring rolls—they start to roll. That is what happens. In November 1997 Jenny Shipley overthrew Jim Bolger. On 8 October 2001 Shipley stepped down. On 9 October Bill English was elected leader. On 28 October Don Brash replaced Bill English as leader. What else will happen this spring, while Labour is busy dealing to its policies and to its membership out there? There is a change in the wind; the change is there for the ghost who walks, Dr Brash. Matthew Hooton has already said he does not think that National can ever win with Don Brash.

We are all asking ourselves why John Key cut short his visit to America. He came back here saying that he had some things he had to focus on. Perhaps the issue he is worried about—if he is going to be the next leader—is what National’s relationship is with the Exclusive Brethren. He might get it right. He might also ask how men who profess to know about business do not understand their party’s spending on GST. That needs to be put right, and that money needs to be paid back. He may also have to deal with National’s refusal to pay money it overspent on broadcasting. There are lots of things for John Key to get right, and we will be watching with great interest. But one lesson I think he may need to know as a new wannabe leader is that tax cuts will not buy more surgery for New Zealanders. They will not buy more teachers, more social workers, or more police, and they will not buy Herceptin.

I want to focus on our leadership at the conference. It is secure, and it is actively working out in the regions to build confidence. We will show them confidence in Rotorua this weekend. Our party membership is up and our policies are still delivering, and they are still inspiring mum and dad Kiwis. We can look at KiwiSaver. It actually has New Zealanders terribly excited about starting to turn into a savings economy. What a great thing for this country! We will show the fruits of our Labour policies in Rotorua this weekend. We will be looking at things like economic transformation.

In my electorate, Rotorua, we are seeing tourism surviving against a lowering trend in the rest of the country. We are looking at issues like the lakes restoration in our area. Forestry and manufacturing are confident, with a new planer mill opened at Red Stag Timber by the Prime Minister just last month. We are looking at trans-Tasman passenger services. The board of the council’s bright economy strategy is looking at energy cogeneration, bio-fuels and thermal energy production. These things are happening under a Labour Government, with policies that help them happen. Unemployment in this region, as in all regions of New Zealand, is at an all-time low level. Today’s announcement at the Pacific Islands Forum about seasonal fruit pickers being able to come to New Zealand is fantastic for our kiwifruit and blueberry industries.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.