"\u003C!DOCTYPE html\u003E\u003Chtml xmlns:xlink=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\u0022 xmlns:xsi=\u0022http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance\u0022 xmlns:mml=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0022\u003E\n  \u003Chead\u003E\n    \u003CMETA http-equiv=\u0022Content-Type\u0022 content=\u0022text/html; charset=utf-16\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cmeta name=\u0022viewport\u0022 content=\u0022width=device-width, initial-scale=1\u0022\u003E\n  \u003C/head\u003E\n  \u003Cbody style=\u0022font-family:sans-serif; font-size:100%;\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222ba31ad05d234068a65761f3bcb53608\u0022\u003ETuesday, 17 October 2006\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022964d25d889404bf2b9e4db23cf677eb2\u0022\u003ETuesday, 17 October 2006\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000002\u0022\u003EMadam Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000004\u0022\u003EPrayers.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c36b557af79a4ed8a5a77214aead1893\u0022\u003EPoints of Order\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d00771bb4a1d4e669bcd57611f0c94a2\u0022\u003EAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill\u2014Parliamentary Service Advice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac2b7a30b19a4b7daf59eaa90a1f1578\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac2b7a30b19a4b7daf59eaa90a1f1578\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. It is no secret that later this afternoon the Government will seek to introduce under urgency a bill called the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. It is our understanding that the Parliamentary Service gave considerable advice to the people who were responsible for the preparation of this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe Parliamentary Service is there for the service of all members of Parliament, and, therefore, it would be reasonable to say that the Parliamentary Service has a somewhat more representative role than any other Government agency when it comes to offering advice\u2014in fact, uniquely so. So I take this opportunity to express our deep disappointment that the General Manager of the Parliamentary Service notified us yesterday that he was unable to give us copies of the advice that had been supplied to those producing this bill, because, as he put it, the Parliamentary Service had to protect the interests of the Government, which was preparing this particular bill. At no time has the Parliamentary Service been a vehicle of the Government; nor has it been there to protect the interests of the Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMadam Speaker, I ask you to consider very, very carefully the decision that was made by the General Manager of the Parliamentary Service. The reality is that we have now been denied the opportunity to consider that advice, because, at this point, we still have not seen it. Madam Speaker, we would appreciate your coming back to the House, even perhaps during the time that the House is in urgency, and telling us whether it is your view that the General Manager of the Parliamentary Service was in the right to refuse to release information that, in reality, belongs to all members of Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u002268c00008f5124fc793d08a4a399eba4b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002268c00008f5124fc793d08a4a399eba4b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. I would note that that is a matter that is properly to be put before the Parliamentary Service Commission, and that will be done so tomorrow in accordance with what the member has indicated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ea2f78ea67ca4f68b73eb84a4ff49589\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ff277875795946eb83bfb424c662cd19\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022185362d5b5c84e9caeb3c41ea37c6d7b\u0022\u003EIngram Report\u2014Prime Minister\u0027s Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a54dd4f72424027a9f0247eee286b76\u0022\u003E1. Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement in relation to Noel Ingram\u2019s report into allegations concerning Taito Phillip Field that \u201CDr Ingram found that no conflict existed, or appeared to exist, between Mr Field\u2019s private interests and the use of his influence as a Minister.\u201D; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u00226bb8fa9ec14842fcab35b32a94601a26\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bb8fa9ec14842fcab35b32a94601a26\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022990b53ee7d99482b9f503d43e0da36e4\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Prime Minister\u2019s response to the assertion of Mr Sunan Siriwan, made on Television One\u2019s Sunday programme, that Taito Phillip Field, then a Minister in her Government, promised Mr Siriwan a work permit for New Zealand in return for slave labour in Samoa? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022962ce2008f86446381c17ab2d314d47f\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My response is that all such allegations should go to the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbb1ebb5c9cb48d4b613064830543c42\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister see any irony in the fact that her Government, which pretends to have such strong views about employment law, has amongst its number a man who employed Mr Siriwan and his partner in exchange for food and board?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d466d80c524c4020a4c1070431291731\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I do not have any evidence of an employment relationship. I suggest the member take his matters up with the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b99e99c5bbd4aa7bcc830e313ce9187\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: What is the Prime Minister\u2019s response to the revelation on Television One\u2019s Sunday programme that Mr Siriwan has sworn an affidavit alleging that he was told what to say to the Ingram inquiry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa80ce0f2d0b4fefb4a23031cc32694c\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My response is that that allegation has gone to the police.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ead1755768a4a30b9dea3ae45833adb\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: What faith can New Zealanders have in the Prime Minister\u2019s half-million-dollar Ingram inquiry in light of the clear allegation that one of her Labour members of Parliament pressured a key witness to lie to the inquiry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab2587fbc69d4102977e13c1cb18c7d0\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: If the member has that concern he should put it to the police. I note that he generally has no confidence in the police\u2014this Government does. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265d61782f0ac40bba561829846b68e68\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister now regret setting up a toothless inquiry with weak terms of reference, which was designed to cover up activities of one of her MPs and former Ministers; and does she wish to express regret to the New Zealand public for the way in which she has handled this matter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f81e96766cc1407a82818d5b54881874\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: There was obviously no such inquiry, and I repeat Dr Ingram\u2019s words: \u201CEven if I had possessed the power to administer oaths, and to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents, the process of inquiry may not have been significantly more satisfactory.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ad1d364c2b784cdb8aa15b2df63779d6\u0022\u003EHealth and Fitness\u2014Schools\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e641baa13ca4e3c864799c038a7a067\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour\u2014Wellington Central)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Education: What is the Government doing to support schools to promote healthy eating and encourage students to become more active?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022 data-id=\u00221859cf1c0b444d779df2f9b4630bc7e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221859cf1c0b444d779df2f9b4630bc7e4\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E I have a healthy answer. The Government is investing $67 million over 4 years in a campaign to improve nutrition and physical activity amongst young New Zealanders. Initiatives that support schools and early childhood services to play their part include nutrition guidelines, a food and drink classification system, school-based health promotions, professional development for teachers, a $3 million regional nutrition fund, and high-profile events to encourage students to get involved in learning about good nutrition. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f35b0619515f4ba9b2b14eb58d8753f5\u0022\u003EHon Marian Hobbs\u003C/span\u003E: Other than walking the talk, what has the response been to the Labour-led Government\u2019s commitment to improving nutrition in school and early childhood environments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ad7ec59c212418fab1b2bbea75a6185\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: I certainly would urge members of Parliament to walk the talk on this particular issue in order to give young people a good example. The response from both the education and the health sectors has been along those lines\u2014overwhelmingly positive. The campaign has been endorsed by the Heart Foundation, the Medical Association, food industry groups, the Post Primary Teachers Association, the New Zealand Educational Institute, and teachers and principals. Many schools around the country, of course, have already taken up this challenge. One example is the success of the Government\u2019s Fruit in Schools programme, which, my colleague Pete Hodgson announced today, will double in size. Reports from 80 schools that run the programme include reduced absenteeism, increased attention in class, healthier children, and students encouraging the whole family to improve their nutrition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a59d3ae-788b-4b19-b7dd-7d0e29a626fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec177db54d6c4adeac76ec63ec027177\u0022\u003EHon Brian Donnelly\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister consider compensating schools through increased operational funding, for the reduction of revenue they will confront from no longer selling goods, either in canteens or through fund-raising activities, that could be considered to be unhealthy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7afdd56a3ab49d89850475d46414076\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: The campaign contains some money that may be helpful to schools that are in that situation. But most schools that have already gone down this track have found from their experience that they do not lose money; they just sell different goods from their tuck shops, and, as a result, gain the same kind of revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e5648c441b24495a7c817ebaf61fd23\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Is he concerned that, despite the very innovative Fruit in Schools programme, every week New Zealand\u2019s primary and immediate schools sell around 56,000 pies but just 4,000 pieces of fruit; and what work is being done to help to turn these numbers round?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238bf80000e9b4fb192ae0c8f3cc3c1ba\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, of course, we are concerned, because we want to ensure that what is sold on school-grounds is healthy. So as part as the Mission-On campaign the Government, and the Green Party, of course, recently announced a $3 million-a-year nutrition fund to help schools and early childhood services become healthier eating environments for children. That funding was secured by the Green Party as part of its post-election agreement with the Government. It will be available from term 1 next year, and supports school and student-led initiatives such as healthier choices in the school canteen, shared fruit breaks for students, and water-only schools. That is a good, practical Green-led initiative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaaad191-62cf-43e8-a772-63a71dbf4d4a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266f7c40e6a904ed595c99c33e657bccb\u0022\u003ESue Kedgley\u003C/span\u003E: Is he concerned that these excellent healthy eating messages and initiatives in schools are being undermined by some of the sponsorship activities in schools carried out by companies\u2014for example, fast-food companies giving away vouchers for hamburgers, chips, and pizzas as rewards for good behaviour\u2014and would he therefore consider moves to make our schools commercial-free zones?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275a951433c854a1da9f242edeb875fd5\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, there are concerns about the promotion of particular foods to young people\u2014food that may be high in salt, fat, or sugar. We will be working with the schools on guidelines for what should be consumed on school-grounds, as well as guidelines on what can be sold on school-grounds. We hope, as I mentioned before, that a much healthier eating environment will come out of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002264cf1493bd714689952e074e87a68b77\u0022\u003EElection Advertising\u2014Validating Legislation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbbce5aabf3a4568a3b35835b02eaf95\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: What steps, if any, will the Government take to address issues raised by the Controller and Auditor-General in his report on election advertising?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002299cdc5b7a1424c84bf3d8ec93bd4bfe0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002299cdc5b7a1424c84bf3d8ec93bd4bfe0\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I will be introducing a bill this afternoon on this matter, to be taken through all stages under urgency. The Government will then seek to participate with all others in the House in the broader review of the appropriations and related issues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1ae5f878eb649638b846b78ab275a1d\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that the validating legislation he is introducing today will not impose any legal obligation on parties to pay back taxpayers\u2019 money, spent unlawfully; and is that because some of the parties involved have no intention of paying the money back?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226169b7da82b54e51b81c2050ca7bd068\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I am not aware of the position of all parties on this matter. I know what the position of my party is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022631994c0db4a45939f27f716a15c9235\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: In light of the Government\u2019s intention to pass legislation retrospectively validating unlawful spending by party leaders and members of Parliament, has the Government given any thought to validating legislation for art fraud, motorcade speeding, defamation, and the destruction of evidence; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b3fec5b17ca4d71ba526086896dc39f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: No more than the outside contributions to MPs\u2019 salaries.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226198b20b809a47b58e80fa1d23cc3e02\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Why does the Minister\u2019s bill seek to validate the unlawful spending of Mr Peters and the New Zealand First Party, when Mr Peters is making it very clear that he has no intention of paying back the $160,000 he owes the taxpayers of New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb51105ec7c44563a1a49d4bdde59d83\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I am unaware of the truth, or otherwise, of that assertion. I do note that the bill validates all spending by the National Party, including that for which it has not refunded the Government, including, for example, its 2002 spending, which under the Auditor-General\u2019s rules is clearly outside the scope. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273dab9706a9c466da303de8fe84442bd\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Is that a parliamentary word, and would its translation be a parliamentary word, as well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229a97d19d05241cfa5bfe0bd3ffde272\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It is a term. If the member wishes a translation I am sure we have an interpreter here to give it to him, if he is not aware of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4bbb716bdf04b9b9ffff80c841e85c7\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: If the Labour Party is taking such a highbrow attitude to this, in saying that it will pay it back, why has it not included that in the legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fd599bf593142e1aee2110f86513c4b\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I have no parliamentary responsibility for that matter, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eba34e2bc00f4de7ad29b145fe83136c\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister has made the mistake of thinking I was asking him a question as the deputy leader of the Labour Party. I was not; I was asking him a question as Minister of Finance. He does have a responsibility for expenditure of taxpayers\u2019 money, and the question asked why he has not included the repayment, or requirement for repayment, in his bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d3888862a284958a4df42eb6151b87f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: On a related matter, whether particular people refund the expenditure is irrelevant to whether the expenditure remains unlawful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022382824bae88c4775a781fe6a221fddc8\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Why is the Minister then placing so much importance on the validating legislation to remedy a technical breach, and such little importance on the actual requirement to pay the money back when it was spent from taxpayers, quite unlawfully?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ad6dc5524154eb9b1300e9b8c8bb5f9\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: There is clearly no requirement at this point. The member misses the second part. At the moment it is quite clear that unless changes occur through statute, a trip like Dr Brash\u2019s on parliamentary funding and at public expense to go and sign up a member of the National Party is outside the rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f38b11d8c2934830b6f60f0a430f7e91\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Are you going to accept that answer from Dr Cullen? It would seem to contradict your own determinations in these matters quite flagrantly, relating to parliamentary travel. I do not expect an answer right now, but I think any consideration of the determinations that you have made about parliamentary travel, as is appropriately your domain, would mean that Dr Cullen\u2019s assertion is quite wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232769b45b5214d87907d495d1239232d\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I say that of course the member does have a fair point if what we do is accept the legal opinion from Mr Jack Hodder, so thoroughly condemned by Mr Brownlee last Thursday. If, however, we accept a legal opinion from the former Solicitor-General, and the Auditor-General\u2019s opinion based on that, then clearly flying on taxpayers\u2019 expense to sign up a National Party member and for apparently no other reason is clearly outside the rules. It is called electioneering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240088973f7ac4b99b611279d07f83a71\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Ruling on the point of order, I say that this is a matter for the Minister responsible for Vote Parliamentary Service. It is a matter that should appropriately be raised tomorrow at the Parliamentary Service Commission.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221227b1e46f0e466ab9c26a8276dc5313\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that the tests set out in sections 72A to 72D of the validation legislation as presented would make the pledge card legal, and effectively overturns the Auditor-General\u2019s concerns?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc967ceb0f0e472aaed455baf2f9d67c\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: That would be the case, but the member should also note that section 7 lapses at the end of 2007. That was deliberately chosen to allow full review of the rules before election year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002207d20b41539d4635866b27186d4acac0\u0022\u003ERates\u2014Independent Inquiry\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204c0478880af4810b8a39d507e9c6fb2\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Local Government: What progress has been made on establishing the \u201Cindependent inquiry into issues around local government rates funding\u201D that he announced on 23 August 2006?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u00228b1888db44cd474bbce0c0cdcb669718\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b1888db44cd474bbce0c0cdcb669718\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E Good progress has been made. Consultation has been undertaken with a range of interested parties, and I have taken time to give careful consideration to the suggestions of other stakeholders and interested individuals such as the member who asks this question. I anticipate announcing the terms of reference shortly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f6bcfa85f30c4848be305e677a5f4bf3\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Is the expectation of ratepayers of rates relief from the Government a bit like the expectation that taxpayers have of the Labour Party ever paying back the money it owes\u2014that it really is on the never-never and it is not going to happen?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271f952cd32e8478dbc071567c96acbad\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: I can only say to the member that I anticipate the suit size I have shed in pursuit of a robust inquiry will ultimately bear more tangible benefit to the public of New Zealand than his extended forays on to the dance floor, which caused 12 weeks of parliamentary delay of his supposedly important parliamentary rates capping bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db7342f192074623bff694f0add57b16\u0022\u003EMark Blumsky\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree with the Local Government Forum when it says: \u201CIt is particularly unfair that the Crown makes no contribution for its land, especially as local authority infrastructure can be put under severe pressure by the visitors who are attracted to national parks and other reserves.\u201D; and will the inquiry address this burden on those who pay rates?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3b39a4d8e144622a3d8173bea4388f0\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: When the inquiry looks at the burden of rates I am sure it will also be taking into account the fact that central government contributes 13 percent of the finances of local government\u2014the highest it has ever been.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a59d3ae-788b-4b19-b7dd-7d0e29a626fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4db5e630fb541e99d114f02f6ec3eed\u0022\u003EHon Brian Donnelly\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister met with every party that has requested a meeting over the proposed terms of reference for the inquiry; if so, has he met with ACT?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a24dbd837dd444d0a4de91875273a001\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: I can confirm that I have had meetings with any party that has sought a meeting; I can equally confirm that I have had no such meeting with ACT members\u2014they did not ask for one. I received a letter from Mr Hide, and I replied to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022abe15db346fc4ef9876309dc90e280a8\u0022\u003EIngram Report\u2014Prime Minister\u0027s Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdd72a2c794e44518155a012beab7f20\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement to the House on 16 May 2006, with respect to the Ingram inquiry, that: \u201CInquiries must always take the time required to get to the root of the matter.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u00224c5879c2e1534bd5be5ccf6727661d2f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224c5879c2e1534bd5be5ccf6727661d2f\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffd1a7e4accd42a8b05e563b3e2b5262\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: How well did the Ingram inquiry get to the root of the matter, when Noel Ingram \u201Cfound no evidence to support an allegation that Mr Siriwan or Ms Phanngarm were promised work in New Zealand.\u201D, yet Mr Siriwan has sworn an affidavit claiming that Taito Phillip Field promised him that if he went to work for Mr Field in Samoa, he would be issued with a work permit for New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022991b855e2f31486eb16dcc1d8520c4ee\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Evidence, of course, is more than allegation, and I understand that the inquiry did speak to Mr Siriwan. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acd94399f85d4185a2b7587680c109d9\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: How effectively did the Ingram report get to the root of the matter, when Noel Ingram reported that: \u201CMr Field was unable to recall precisely when he did discover that Mr Siriwan was working on the house.\u201D, and when Mr Siriwan has sworn an affidavit saying that he did a deal with Taito Phillip Field to go to Samoa in March to work on Mr Field\u2019s house, in return for Mr Field obtaining a work permit for Siriwan here in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264c116bf0ed94d9185098ba862b171a4\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: There are, clearly, conflicting statements that the police will need to address in their investigation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220922a0be36b449ea86709976201b3392\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: How effectively did the Ingram report get to the root of the matter, when Noel Ingram concluded: \u201CThe evidence does not support a finding that Mr Field knew that Mr Siriwan was working on Mr Field\u2019s house \u2026\u201D when he met with the Associate Minister, Damien O\u2019Connor, on 17 May 2005, yet Sunan Siriwan has sworn an affidavit confirming that he did a deal with Taito Phillip Field to go to Samoa in March to work on Mr Field\u2019s house in return for Mr Field obtaining a work permit for Siriwan here in New Zealand? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284c5b71c9ca542f6b3f22cae4a784f8c\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: There are, clearly, conflicting statements that the police will need to address in their investigation \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a14700597b8a44618cabaa6502b6f0d7\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: How effectively did the Ingram report get to the root of the matter, when Noel Ingram concluded: \u201CI found no evidence that Mr Siriwan was influenced in his behaviour by the fact that Mr Field was a Minister.\u201D, and when Mr Siriwan has now stated publicly that he went to Samoa \u201Cbecause Taito Phillip Fields\u2014he\u2019s a Minister. He promised me to come to work on his house and then he will give me the visa to return to New Zealand.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022229282f72f4f42f6a734fb2e83e7702e\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I repeat that Mr Siriwan had the opportunity to speak to the inquiry and did not make those allegations then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022685591c543974c3a978ab76d6a62ff0c\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: How well did the Ingram inquiry get to the root of the matter where the conflict existed, or appeared to exist, between Mr Field\u2019s private interests and the use of his influence as a Minister, when Sunan Siriwan has now sworn an affidavit alleging he was told what to say to the Ingram inquiry and was under duress to say what he was coached to say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5a414c673284d1f947c1e823fdafdbf\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: That affidavit, of course, has been referred to the police, who are making investigations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224e509be17fc242978e95a321dc64a534\u0022\u003EGangs\u2014Numbers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c959d2ec09b244208ef4f6f692f5d0d1\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Police: How many gangs are known by police to exist in New Zealand, and what is the estimated number of affiliated members for each of these gangs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022 data-id=\u00226c565b7b6753473b961ef4ddb000862a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226c565b7b6753473b961ef4ddb000862a\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Defence)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Police: The Minister of Police is advised that a survey of organised crime in 2004 identified 69 gangs, with 32 of them being motorcycle gangs. The police have also advised that it is not possible, with the ever-changing face of gangs, to estimate the number of affiliates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce3978dc75d74b20a7be6c77fab3e781\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: How many gang affiliates were apprehended in the last financial year, and how does that figure compare with the number apprehended in previous years?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de9d62354eb84f1abb8117f2c40f9776\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: To the best of my knowledge, gang affiliation is not recorded against the names of convicted offenders. However, the member will know that there is a high correlation between gang membership and criminal offending. He will also know that our jails are full of offenders who are affiliated to gangs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223a0e52c8-5bb1-4325-9870-21f4e3eb3702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd770964c1fe48479e86e9812820d99d\u0022\u003EMartin Gallagher\u003C/span\u003E: How is the Government addressing the youth gang situation in South Auckland?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e36e2b22156848ecb8948a2116be09e7\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: There are a number of different types of gangs, obviously, and the youth gang problem is different in nature from the problem of gangs that are involved in organised crime. But it is a serious problem in South Auckland, and in \u014Ct\u0101huhu. An action plan was launched last month in Counties-Manukau and \u014Ct\u0101huhu. That plan has the police working with non-governmental agencies, local bodies, and communities. It involves the setting up of youth action teams. It involves proactivity on the part of the police in dispersing large gatherings where violence is threatening. It involves the employment of youth workers responsible for juveniles who have been picked up by the police. It involves the vigorous policing of liquor bans, and a series of other intervention and prevention measures, run across a number of different Government agencies. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022114114e3df82446c8b0f4560d257f90d\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: How many of the gang affiliates apprehended in the last financial year were charged under section 98A of the Crimes Act, under which participation in a criminal gang is punishable by up to 5 years in prison; and how does that number compare with the number charged each year since the passage of the Transnational Organised Crime Bill, passed by a Labour Government in 2002?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a2215f1868a486fa689c504d1a78f8f\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Section 98A does make participation in an organised criminal gang a criminal offence, with the police being required to prove that the individual knows that his or her participation contributes to the occurrence of criminal activity. My understanding is that that section was used on a dozen occasions in 2004-05 and 18 times last year. The reason the police do not use that provision more often\u2014among other reasons\u2014is that if it is possible to charge the gang member with a violent, sexual, or drug offence, they will use that provision, because it carries a higher maximum sentence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222233a5f9daa549cb83b376db8080d507\u0022\u003ETaxation\u2014Thresholds\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022033cfebc6b804307878820d89a181b28\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (National\u2014Helensville)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Will the indexation of income tax thresholds go ahead in 2008, as promised in the 2005 Budget; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002254cdeaf71e8e469e9a8729d616de1f6b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002254cdeaf71e8e469e9a8729d616de1f6b\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Any changes to tax thresholds will be considered in light of the final decisions around the business tax review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbe337eb09c6406f97891d27e4076a5c\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the comments made by Peter Dunne, the Minister of Revenue, yesterday when he said: \u201CThe business tax reduction proposals I announced with Michael Cullen in the Business Tax Review in July will go ahead from April 2008, and they will be accompanied by personal tax adjustments as well \u2026\u201D\u2014not just \u201Cmight\u201D but \u201Cwill\u201D\u2014if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af51fb86c4774480bfa6d8a142589ee9\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I am sure there will be some business tax changes. As to whether all the ones in the business tax review will proceed, I would be rather doubtful. As I said, implications for income tax thresholds and other matters will be considered in the light of the outcome of that, and, of course, the fiscal situation at the time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296c4e08ca7de4e9ba5aed6e5a7b3f218\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Has he seen any reports from the export sector on the importance of getting decisions around tax policy right?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b8c3efc27ee4eabb18bda994daaabb2\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Ohh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b2a4f9e41fe44efba03c28d3f9c011e\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: They have woken up at last; it has taken a long time today. I have seen a number of reports, including one from the chairman of Fonterra, highlighting the need to ensure that undue pressure is not placed on the export sector. Certainly, excessive fiscal loosening, which pushes up the pressure on interest rates and the exchange rate, will not help the export sector in current circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022862346481c044656b8659505b2cb9178\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with Peter Dunne that not only will tax cuts proceed on the back of very large surpluses but they will be the largest tax cuts since 1996; in which case, would he be so kind as to tell the House just how large those tax cuts in 2008 will be?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022043bf69b79064006bf76bbe66ae40620\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: It is not the purpose of my life to be kind to that member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262ff5adb681c4eac9cea20926f10686e\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Is the reason the Minister protested so loudly and stomped his feet up and down last week about tax cuts not because the tax cuts are not affordable\u2014because the leader of New Zealand First, Winston Peters, knows they are affordable; the Minister of Revenue, Peter Dunne, knows they are affordable; and his own Prime Minister has been out telling people they will be taking place in 2008\u2014but because when one is at the end of one\u2019s political career one likes to defend what one has done, or, in his case, not done, rather than what a Minister of Revenue and future Minister of Finance may do in 2008?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f678ed763fd04177a5839fc0722c8899\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: One of the important differences between that member and me is that I am happy in my job and want to continue in it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3a97027feb849ed9dce64a8933070e9\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister of Finance therefore confirm that he is the only person who is happy he is in his job\u2014because no one else in New Zealand is?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022011395ebb4dd4548b7265c9310b2d50c\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Unfortunately I cannot confirm that. Indeed, more recent opinion polls seem to show growing approval of the Government\u2019s economic performance. But I do note that just at the point where it looks a little more likely there may be some taxation changes, a number of commentators are starting to warn against them. That is precisely what one would expect would happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb79599ef38c42c68b3b3cce1e11fa49\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Did the Minister meet with Moody\u2019s rating agency yesterday, and did he ask it about the impacts of a modest tax cut on New Zealand\u2019s rating?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2d6c41776d04018838ccfd064799e29\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Not particularly, in terms of the meeting. Moody\u2019s\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e1af2b7a4c0458da6adfcac6e6ef644\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Other members in the House would like to hear the Minister\u2019s answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022786d20c51caf48dabf05bcadcec891d4\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: The member might know that when rating agencies call they largely ask the questions and I supply the answers. What the agency wanted assurance about was that there would be no sudden lurching around in the Government\u2019s fiscal policy, and I was able to give it that assurance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0f78dbdcd13401e826d45f8479ef236\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: When the Government rolls out tax cuts in its 2008 manifesto, in the miraculous way that it found the cash to extend Working for Families and to offer zero percent student loans, who does he think should actually take credit for that: the New Zealand First leader, Winston Peters; the United Future leader, Peter Dunne; or the Prime Minister, who is out there telling people that tax cuts will take place in 2008?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c02626237c10472397d07a1abcbe1712\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: There is one thing I am very sure about: if there are very large tax cuts, everybody will try to take credit for them; if there are not, I will take the sole credit, I am sure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2954cce74954fe28a40b885f610d1ea\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Who does he think will actually announce the tax cuts to be announced in 2008, as part of the Government\u2019s election manifesto: Phil Goff, Trevor Mallard, or any of the other pretenders to his job?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201e4c5492cce43f9b0e8c8ed23a91906\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: The only young pretender I know in the House is opposite me, and he looks really silly in a kilt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c4484ccf10ad46af83e5b127547c2538\u0022\u003EDefence Force\u2014Progress\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a599e46e19b4cc99308fe4f3a344107\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Defence: What further progress is he anticipating in strengthening and rebuilding the New Zealand Defence Force?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022 data-id=\u00226db11e49675b4bb7bc68f31fc47e331a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226db11e49675b4bb7bc68f31fc47e331a\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Defence):\u003C/span\u003E The 2006 long-term development plan update was released today and records major progress in rebuilding the New Zealand Defence Force after National halved expenditure on defence as a percentage of GDP in the 1990s. The plan lists 13 major projects that have been approved by Government and are now in the acquisition phase, five projects that have been approved in principle by Government, and 12 in the capability development phase. Seven new projects have been added to the plan, including infrastructure projects at Devonport and \u014Ch\u0101kea, major upgrades for the Anzac frigates, replacement of pilot training aircraft, and the possible acquisition of a new satellite communications system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237087bf4ede646c8bd9e273416168de1\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Have final decisions been taken on the purchase of light utility training helicopters to go into service alongside the NH90s?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c699e7c6-53b9-470c-a14a-378cb6fc8a04\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022278b907a75ce4aba8bd9950c69d1448b\u0022\u003EHon PHIL GOFF\u003C/span\u003E: Final decisions have been made by Cabinet to purchase six light utility training helicopters to replace the Sioux helicopters. They will have capabilities far in excess of the existing aircraft. They are expected to cost up to $110 million and will be a major asset, complementing the decision and the contract signed to buy eight NH90 medium utility helicopters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ed7afe26984742e6bb20cc43a0664157\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 6 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022038ed8c24a724dba9f44c1af2c463062\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022038ed8c24a724dba9f44c1af2c463062\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister of Police has given an answer to one of my questions, which I think he needs to reflect on and to possibly make an adjustment to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022598b0c08afdf451cb3d5160bef8dc7ce\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please be seated. Points of order are heard in silence. That is the last warning. Would Mr Mark please be succinct in his point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022391e18a2b3fc42f2bf60ca7282fb3fb3\u0022\u003ERON MARK\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave of the House to table answer to written question No. 286 from the Minister of Police, which states: \u201CStatistics on gang affiliations are recorded by the police.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b4d4dcf7e1014cfdaa2c37e7dcc77900\u0022\u003EWorkforce Taskforce (Health)\u2014Terms of Reference\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1e8ddb86a4c4ca99d4e1ebae41f23f6\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: What are the terms of reference for the new health Workforce Taskforce, and when were these advised to the task force?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u00220acf5f21e21c48cd9be94c909889c61e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220acf5f21e21c48cd9be94c909889c61e\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E The terms of reference are concerned with ways to streamline medical education and training. They were first advised to task force members before they accepted appointment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022497f8682e2b84930899e2344eb0b4da0\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen reports that the junior doctor shortage has reached crisis levels, with one in four junior doctor positions vacant at Middlemore Hospital, one in eight vacant in Waitemat\u0101, and at least 30 junior doctor vacancies in Christchurch; and how bad are the junior doctor vacancies at other district health boards and nationally?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e74c7b1827c4422a9529233ce3aac82\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I have seen quite a range of reports refuting those assertions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b9f24ab9e5b432c83a7db439dbf30ef\u0022\u003EMaryan Street\u003C/span\u003E: What reports has the Minister received on support for the workforce task force?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274a5be1f20644641b97236d76bec6f6e\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: The task force will be, or has already been, in discussions with the New Zealand Medical Association, the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, the Medical Council of New Zealand, the aforementioned Resident Doctors Association, the Clinical Training Agency, and so on. The support for the task force from the medical community, unfortunately, has not been echoed by Tony Ryall and the National Party. Mr Ryall called the task force members, who include some of New Zealand\u2019s most respected clinical leaders, a bunch of do-nothing bureaucrats. That is unfortunate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b25322cfa24c48e2a25b8fae19db0124\u0022\u003EBarbara Stewart\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister assure us that the transformation of the Health Workforce Advisory Committee into an action committee with a new name will result in the promised major changes in the way we train our doctors; and when will these changes be implemented?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a932e61fc2c41e293ccdf69acb8a0bc\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I can. Indeed, the task force is charged with taking a range of options already presented to the Government by earlier studies and turning them into a concrete way forward for the Government. I am confident that it will deliver just that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b3fe53f0fa44268bfa099124cddb9a6\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister really deny that there is a crisis in the junior doctor workforce, that district health boards are being forced to employ locum junior doctors, sometimes at twice the rate they would pay for a full-time junior doctor, and that the latest data show that the cost of locums in public hospitals has rocketed up by 62 percent in Waitemat\u0101, by 67 percent in the Hutt Valley, by over 40 percent in the Bay of Plenty, and has more than doubled in the capital in the last 12 months alone; or will we see in the next few weeks another U-turn from this Minister, as we did on the general practitioner shortage, the elective services crisis, and the promise that Labour would not pay back the pledge card money?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b4230431cde408f9a65f76f024e866b\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: There have not been any U-turns on general practitioner training or, indeed, on elective surgery. There have been no U-turns. The member just needs to pay a bit more attention to his job, a little more attention to his portfolio, and to try to get some health policy out some time. In respect of the number of New Zealand graduates who apply for jobs in our hospitals, all I can quote is the district health boards\u2019 lead negotiator in the junior doctors\u2019 negotiations, who said there had been no change in the number of New Zealand graduates applying for jobs in our hospitals. The figures have not been finalised yet, although reports suggest that only six doctors out of a graduating class of nearly 300 are looking for work other than in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e054a55736714afc97ecb2954c67cd33\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Is he sure that it is the Government\u2019s tactic to deny any crisis in the junior doctor workforce, despite the number of applications for junior doctor positions being at a new low and the fact that we are rapidly losing many of our junior doctors to Australia\u2014or is this like the Labour pledge card tactic, where it was reported in the country\u2019s largest newspaper that party strategist Pete Hodgson had been made to look an idiot by going on television at his leader\u2019s behest to steadfastly maintain Labour would not pay back the overspending, and, when he did front up, the hapless Hodgson had to admit that he had not been briefed on all the tactics by the Beehive\u2019s ninth floor? A great strategist!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022901d982db5ba403091bc8d284b06604f\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Just a couple of points in respect of that roundabout question on the workforce of New Zealand\u2019s health system. Firstly, I myself do not know how many junior doctors are leaving New Zealand and going to Australia. I am advised that the number is six out of 300. Secondly, in respect of the pledge card, one thing that I think is worth pointing out is that this Government has put out a pledge card before every election, has been elected on each occasion, and on each occasion has kept every one of its pledges\u2014and it will continue to do so proudly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bc2e17ba8c44e17902f2b847ed2e0a4\u0022\u003ETariana Turia\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Madam Speaker, t\u0113n\u0101 koutou katoa. What work is being undertaken to implement the broad, overarching goal in He Korowai Oranga to increase the number and improve the skills of the M\u0101ori health and disability workforce at all levels?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec1a9cf0967a45e1af7bc6a939cb1cac\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: I suspect the member is already aware of a M\u0101ori health workforce action plan that, of course, has been taken around the country by my colleague Mita Ririnui and others over recent months and has received wide acclaim. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d663bc7449ae4c0fa75356082deb3dde\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: When New Zealand most needs to recruit and retain junior doctors in order to stem the outflow to Australia and the increasing number of vacancies in our public hospitals, why is there an increasingly acrimonious negotiating relationship in the health sector; and, whatever his answer may be, why should we accept it, when the last time he took a firm position the Prime Minister hung him out to dry, saying his promise not to pay back the money was wrong and he was operating outside instructions\u2014basically, that he made it up?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfbf63c1a0614eab878c4ad56cc9bcdb\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: In respect of the last part of the question, I suspect it was because she thought I was not dry enough already. In respect of the first part of the question, this Government does not say that New Zealand has enough doctors. We have never said that New Zealand has enough doctors. This Government has increased training for New Zealand doctors. My colleague Annette King increased the number in 2004\u2014the first time any Government had increased the number of doctors in training for about 20 years, including the 9 years when that member was a lacklustre, unimportant part of a National Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b7b4458930046ac878ca0b38e7a2a91\u0022\u003ETariana Turia\u003C/span\u003E: Given the Minister\u2019s response to my earlier question, when he said that Mita Ririnui has been going around the country on the issue that I had asked him about, can he tell me whether Mita Ririnui has advised him that 50 percent of M\u0101ori midwives have left the health workforce in the last 2 years; and what actions will the Government be taking to respond to that calamity?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ad3e787396b4af19e8bb92ccd7cf2b9\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: No, he has not. Indeed, if the member\u2019s assertion is accurate, it is certainly a cause for concern. She may wish to approach me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022603ae58e-47c4-46f9-bfc8-8355a48988ad\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240211350bd554de7ac77e5c49edf79f5\u0022\u003EDr Jonathan Coleman\u003C/span\u003E: How can the House have confidence in any answer this Minister gives, when he appeared on television saying that Labour would not be paying any money back, and the Prime Minister then said that Mr Hodgson was not under any instruction or encouragement to make that statement and that statement was wrong; and is being publicly hung out to dry by the Prime Minister not a sign that confidence in this hapless Minister continues to erode, right from the back benches all the way to the front?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b44ff00e53844dda327b9d26655b781\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Struggling though I am to find any link between this issue and the health workforce issues facing New Zealand, I say it is my\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccbcd9f60d14488d835b165ad9e9cd76\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I must say that question was wide of the original question, but I had asked the Minister to respond\u2014and I would also ask members to refrain from barracking again, so that the rest of us can hear the answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222359a4b22fda40779f9ec001e66bcd3b\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: The answer to the question is that the statement was made on radio, not television\u2014and that was only the first thing that the member got wrong in framing his question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226b3cfd88c5f44b6fae685b31dd98ebd7\u0022\u003EQuestion Time\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022 data-id=\u0022c115324c37834534a5cb576324d6e6c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c115324c37834534a5cb576324d6e6c6\u0022\u003ERON MARK (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. On 10 October, in question time, a point of order was raised by Nandor Tanczos, one of the politest MPs in this House, and that point of order was preceded with a comment from yourself to him\u2014a pre-emptive warning\u2014that said: \u201CThis had better be a point of order.\u201D Straight after that point of order, a point of order was raised by Gerry Brownlee that was anything but a point of order, for which you gave no admonishment. Now, just prior to this question, I sought to raise a point of order. I had barely started when I had an interruption, which you dealt with\u2014and I thank you for that. You then cautioned me that I should be succinct. Madam Speaker, if you were to go back and play through the television footage of question time on those three particular instances\u2014and a dozen since then from Gerry Brownlee, in particular, and the National Party in general\u2014I put it to you that it might be seen that the minor parties have been treated by you in some way differently from the major parties. I ask you to contemplate that and to give that some thought in the actions you take from hereon in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022380b8ab84dd64f9995168a79360572bc\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. That is not a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002253e52a650f5348b2bad008513ffdd28e\u0022\u003EHouse Prices\u2014Treasury Investigation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022050de4cdca5c438a87ff96896ef56be0\u0022\u003EGORDON COPELAND (United Future)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Is work being carried out by the Treasury on a possible link between continuing high house prices, artificial constraints in the supply of land and the price of housing; if so, what is the current status of that work?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002291e27456836744838baf79463f9b4307\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291e27456836744838baf79463f9b4307\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Treasury, obviously, is involved in a wide range of work on housing, but it is not currently working on the specific matter raised by the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225052a7366bc646a3865e8ca5567fda7c\u0022\u003EGordon Copeland\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister agree that raising the official cash rate has done little, if anything, to dampen the property market, and is it possible that the variable most responsible for continuing high house prices may be the restraints placed on the supply of land for new housing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219da9dc6abbb494a9f7cf60a7790a988\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: No, I do not agree with the latter point. I think one of the problems is that with the high proportion of fixed-rate mortgages, it sometimes takes quite a long time for monetary policy tightening to flow through into household incomes and disposable incomes. There are signs that it has been occurring in recent months. I think the problem with the member\u2019s assertion is that, presumably, it would lead to the logic that one should have a variable land supply as a means of moderating demand and supply within the economy, which I think could be pretty difficult to work in practice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a298e0fd8c5046098d222bdb5dafa77f\u0022\u003ER Doug Woolerton\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister concerned about the potential loss of valuable, highly productive land if constraints were to be removed from city housing expansion?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241a9ba5501ed4a4ab6b438c3bb52d0a3\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: The member raises actually a very important and interesting point\u2014that it is all very well to look at the housing issue from one specific side, but there are a whole range of other issues around land use that also have to be considered. One of those is the maintenance of land in a productive capacity in the rural sector, and at a reasonable enough price for the productive sector to be able to make a profit out of that land.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f8b92f47-d078-4e6a-b4c6-136913bda55d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228aef17b7e3d34e49a3f1b8ecb7e3ba7f\u0022\u003ESue Bradford\u003C/span\u003E: Is work being carried out by Treasury on a possible link between the way property investors can claim tax losses against their investment and against their income tax, and rising housing unaffordability; if not, is the Government considering making any changes in this area?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec99ffe0d8464e7cbf8c050da5afee05\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: On many occasions these issues have been looked at by Treasury, and, obviously, suggestions come forward from the general public. I think the conclusion that tends to emerge at the end of the day is that it does not seem to make a lot of difference. Countries like Australia, which have heavy stamp duties on housing and which have a quite different kind of capital gains tax regime, have at least as marked housing cycles as New Zealand does, so it does not seem to be a particular answer to the actual problem in that respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236dc3033c0514017a525dbf4a340772b\u0022\u003EGordon Copeland\u003C/span\u003E: In the light of that response, is the Minister aware that in Australia the Federal Government is now giving a lot of attention to the freeing up of land for housing, does he see a role for Treasury in making housing more affordable for first-time homeowners, and would that include a rigorous economic analysis of any link between rising house prices and the availability of land for new subdivisions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d80721810f349fa8bb8a451f9134666\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: The Government is already taking a number of actions that, over time, will assist in the affordability of housing for first home owners, which, obviously, is where the key concern should be. After all, once one is into the first home, then rising house prices is an entry on both sides of the ledger from the point of view of most families, depending on which part of the country they are living in. But again\u2014going back to the previous answer\u2014it is important to be careful in this respect. The Australians do have, of course, a lot more land to free up, but they are also running into enormous problems around water supplies, not least because of urban demands.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f8b92f47-d078-4e6a-b4c6-136913bda55d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba5bcf016d914f01ab9116298c98d9e3\u0022\u003ESue Bradford\u003C/span\u003E: Is any work being carried out by Treasury on a possible link between the lack of a capital gains tax and continuing high house prices here; and does the Minister accept that a capital gains tax on property sales apart from the family home could help to make housing more affordable again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c39446425c404b8c8bf7e782eefb9c25\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is extremely hard to make that connection between a capital gains tax and the affordability of housing, in so far as there has never been a theoretical argument put forward about a capital gains tax on housing. It is more in the direction of a level playing field around investment; it is not around the notion that it will make houses cheaper. Indeed, it is very hard to see how it would necessarily make houses cheaper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022927ea6dd58944f32959024a8ff9a2c28\u0022\u003EKeith Locke\u003C/span\u003E: What concerns does the Minister have about extending the urban limit, in addition to the matter raised by Doug Woolerton\u2014such as, the cost to New Zealand in extra Kyoto Protocol carbon credits from allowing urban sprawl to continue largely unchanged in places like Auckland, and the fact that it makes it more difficult to establish a viable public transport system to replace some of the longer car journeys from the suburbs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a0800268c7e445bbbbb58867e3b30fd\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Again I think that is a very good point. Obviously, unlimited urban sprawl simply raises the difficulties around providing adequate public transport, which is already a major issue in terms of public transport in Auckland because of the very large amount of urban sprawl and the distances to be covered in relation to the size of the population. We are very different from, say, compact-style European cities. So there are a lot of factors that need to be taken into account. It would be very undesirable to seek short-term solutions for a particular point in the housing cycle, which would have long-term damaging consequences from the point of view of New Zealand\u2019s social, economic, and environmental development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9e7fc01a9aa408d9fe25162872ccb0a\u0022\u003ETe Ururoa Flavell\u003C/span\u003E: What advice has Treasury provided to respond to the damning finding in the Social Report 2006 that the proportion of low-income households who are spending more than 30 percent of their incomes on housing is over twice as high as it was in 1988, and that of those, M\u0101ori are highly overrepresented?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022827c962892614e4aaefaeefacfa14dd5\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: It underlines the importance of policies such as the Working for Families package, other means to assist with housing acquisition, the rates rebate scheme, and a whole range of measures targeted to try to ensure that people on low to modest incomes are able to be in a better position to afford housing. Of course, as we move to the next stage of the economic cycle and monetary policy eases back again at some point in the future, that housing affordability index will show, again, quite a significant change. It is a very cyclical measure of what is happening in society. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00222e3c2dd5c6bb4a39b3c3180c4ca323be\u0022\u003ECorrections, Department\u2014Confidence\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E11. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022879a80ab7bde4ca6a08286675f4d730b\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Corrections: Does he have confidence in his department; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u00222c1e8d685ed5407a82d32214842ed356\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222c1e8d685ed5407a82d32214842ed356\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Minister of Corrections):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, but there is always room for improvement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7a52c25374644afadfb1a6a76f71c40\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: How can the Minister be confident in his department when the indicative cost for Spring Hill prison was not known until June this year, 20 months after earthworks began, and the indicative cost for Otago prison, also known as the \u201CMilton Hilton\u201D, was known only in May, 17 months after physical work began; and did Cabinet know that the estimates it was being given every time the Minister asked it for more money were not even based on agreed costs?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c089228c3be4a17a8c3c5c48e4e762d\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: All of these issues have been thoroughly canvassed by the State Services Commission. Treasury is also inquiring into the processes that effectively managed one of the largest building projects in this country. Those four new prisons have been, and will be, completed on time. I think that is a major achievement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0cd8080c43344ebb7c38df748456538\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that the State Services Commission report states that the indicative target out-turn costs should have been calculated before construction began, because the delay meant that contractors were paid based on costs they claimed, without any assurance that those costs were reasonable and with no incentives to save money; and how can the public be certain that contractors were not creaming it at taxpayers\u2019 expense during that hiatus?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261d3bce3caf14ccca53ec75cbf3d9458\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: The inquiry by the State Services Commission uncovered no extortion by any contractors. The report did state that without the collaborative working arrangement management system, it was unlikely that these projects would have been completed on time. They have been and will be completed on time, and that is a major achievement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230703ec1bfe24771a903f4d452903399\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: How can he be confident in his department when a report by Opus International Consultants, done for Treasury, stated that it could not find any clear rationale for the decision to adopt collaborative working arrangement contracts for the construction of new prisons, that it was \u201Cuntested in New Zealand\u201D, and \u201Ca significant departure from the previously agreed, and well-tested, methodology\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d06fefccae24b41ac38d26c28a9f736\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: This was, effectively, one of the largest construction projects undertaken by the Government in this country. The collaborative working arrangement was a new management regime. Internationally, there are many other variations of that regime to manage such large projects. The State Services Commission, and Treasury, I am sure, as identified, have said this was an appropriate method of management.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccaa5c931db34f148e640a0eba86de03\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that even before the collaborative working arrangement for the earthworks at Spring Hill could be signed off, the cost estimates were already $9 million over budget, which led a Treasury official to state, in an email: \u201CI can\u2019t see how Corrections can enter into a contract that knowingly exceeds the amount Cabinet has specifically allocated for Spring Hill.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022672bb3631a8549c8a112c052b6761e94\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: I am sure that email from a Treasury official will be part of the investigations. I await the report from Treasury. The report from the State Services Commission stated the collaborative working arrangement was appropriate for a project of that size. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022372c82949f784ea485ffa3feb7045b7f\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm the finding of the State Services Commission that there is no recorded decision by the project steering group to adopt the collaborative working arrangement methodology, which was \u201Cheavily dependent\u201D on the advice of the project director, John Hamilton, and the New Zealand expert on collaborative working arrangements, Stewart Rix\u2014who, according to answers to my written questions, has benefited by $1.3 million plus expenses, to date\u2014because the Department of Corrections had \u201Cvery little knowledge and understanding of collective working arrangements\u201D; and how can he maintain that this methodology has not lost the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars in budget blowouts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022110b5019d88142b7885c3b16ea585067\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member to read, and quote, the full report in this House. That report did not expose any major problems. It did, however, identify that at early stages of the project there were shortcomings, and changes were made. I am confident that the completion of these projects, on time, will be acknowledged as a major achievement for the Government and the corrections system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e03fb567fa854b01a4842dece8275477\u0022\u003ERates Rebate Scheme\u2014Response\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229e22424ce114bee92784fea0ec9475a\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK (Labour\u2014Rotorua)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Local Government: Has he received any reports on the response to the Government\u2019s newly expanded rates rebate scheme?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022 data-id=\u0022de3972df2f78443cb79d4db529469434\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022de3972df2f78443cb79d4db529469434\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON (Minister of Local Government):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, despite the opposition of National and ACT to the rates rebate amendments to extend coverage earlier this year, rates rebates totalling over $26.9 million have been approved for some 59,560 New Zealand households, in just the first few weeks of the 2006-07 year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228700ab87cc8b4073b0f968bcba6ab14d\u0022\u003ESteve Chadwick\u003C/span\u003E: How does this compare with the level of rebates for 2005-06?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002272e48ab0-e7ae-427f-bedc-793b7a91adba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3d01b36d3bc4964a8aeab28e39b520e\u0022\u003EHon MARK BURTON\u003C/span\u003E: This compares with the 4,200 households that received a rebate for the whole of the 2005-06 year. In other words, there has been a fourteenfold increase in households receiving rebates and an almost fortyfold increase in the total value of rebates provided, in just the first few weeks of the 2006-07 rating year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f7eef67442664583833a1dd7b65a2b84\u0022\u003EUrgent Debates Declined\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00224905da47d0dd4bcab472698a1d56e29c\u0022\u003EElection Advertising\u2014Auditor-General\u2019s Report and Speaker\u2019s Response\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022ced2dbf75968432385508388606d86c6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ced2dbf75968432385508388606d86c6\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have received a letter from Rodney Hide seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the Auditor-General\u2019s report on advertising expenditure, and the Speaker\u2019s response to the report. I have also received a similar application from Dr Don Brash. Standing Order 380 requires that the matter for debate be a particular case of recent occurrence, and involve the administrative and ministerial responsibilities of the Government. This is a particular case of recent occurrence; this is the first day upon which it could be considered. However, as I pointed out to members in my ruling on Thursday, it does not involve the administrative or ministerial responsibility of the Government. It is clear that ministerial responsibility lies with the Minister responsible for Vote Parliamentary Service, and administrative responsibility lies with the Parliamentary Service. The Government\u2019s intention to introduce validating legislation does not alter this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003EI understand that the Government intends to introduce a bill today, under urgency, which seeks to validate the parliamentary expenditure in question. This will provide the House with ample opportunity to canvass the issues raised in the reports. Both applications are therefore declined. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00228a43f73ab08f4660b32854375b366857\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a43f73ab08f4660b32854375b366857\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. On what basis are you declining the applications? Firstly, if you are making the case that Parliament is about to enter into a debate, you cannot possibly know that that is the case. That most certainly should not have affected your decision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ESecondly, although you are saying this is a matter that is to do with the Minister responsible for these matters, it is also a matter very much at the heart of concern for all parliamentarians. Although the way you have ruled is interesting, Parliament itself has not had an opportunity to express a view on the Auditor-General\u2019s report. What we have instead, apparently, is the Parliamentary Service telling us that it is now working for the Government and that it has been party to the drafting of this legislation. Effectively it is making itself a servant of the Government, and is showing you\u2014and, therefore, this House\u2014a high degree of disrespect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThirdly, this debate today is on a very narrow issue relating to a whole spectrum of things. It deals only with the validation of appropriations, and barely touches on anything else. In any event, how can you rule that Parliament itself cannot express a view on this, and how fair is it that the whole organisation of this place, including your offices, have been in cahoots with the Government to effect exactly this result?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002214c254f8e52c4f2088d462fe22623327\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214c254f8e52c4f2088d462fe22623327\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I will take up a number of points. First of all, Madam Speaker, obviously your decision on such a matter is final and in itself is not open to debate. Secondly, on the point of view of foreknowledge by yourself of the Government\u2019s intentions, I say that my answer in the House to a question asked by the member was that the Government was going to introduce legislation under urgency as soon as possible. But I have no difficulty in stating that in response to your report to the House, which recommended validation, I wrote to you yesterday, consequent upon Cabinet decisions, that it was the Government\u2019s intention to introduce a bill under urgency today to be passed through all stages. There is nothing improper at all in the Leader of the House communicating that information to the Speaker when the Speaker has recommended to the House that action be taken. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe third point, of course, is that the primary reason why you have turned down the application is that the responsibility lies with the Parliamentary Service Commission, not with a Government Minister. Therefore, it fails to meet the actual test of responsibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022c10f963686c24fa084777f3ac2e50918\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c10f963686c24fa084777f3ac2e50918\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I will rule on the point of order. I have heard extensive comment on it. I ruled in accordance with Standing Order 380 that there is no ministerial responsibility. I also note that Dr Brash, in fact, included in his application an indication by way of a ministerial press release that the Government intends to introduce legislation. I would therefore ask the member to withdraw and apologise for his implication that something improper was done by the Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00223400a16e121349fd91b5f5b0858245f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223400a16e121349fd91b5f5b0858245f0\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. This House took time to discuss, as we have said before, the issue of September 11\u2014the planes flying into the World Trade Center. There was no ministerial responsibility for that. We could go through any number of other debates where the House has set aside time for a discussion about matters for which there is no ministerial responsibility. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMy point here is that you appear to be saying to the House that you have heard that the Government is going to fix it, so members do not need to have a view on it. That is unfair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022174ddbafbde04806bc9c5617bc90e80f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022174ddbafbde04806bc9c5617bc90e80f\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, Mr Brownlee. Of course any member can seek leave for the matter to be debated. That is the way in which matters are raised. Of course I am not indicating that that course of action could not be taken. It is the job of the Speaker to rule in terms of the Standing Orders and in this instance the Standing Order is clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u0022005fd2453a57483fa89e8723109870c4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022005fd2453a57483fa89e8723109870c4\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I seek some elaboration of your ruling, and you may wish to do this by way of a subsequent statement to the House. I thought you helpfully gave an indication to the House on Thursday as to your thinking on the question of ministerial responsibility. The Leader of the Opposition subsequently responded with a further letter to bolster his application for a snap debate, in which he pointed out that the Minister of Finance had taken over some responsibility for the matter raised by the Auditor-General, that he had made an announcement about his intention to legislate, and that, indeed, the matters pertaining to the Public Finance Act then came into play, which clearly of course do fall within the administrative responsibility of the Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003ESo while I can understand your reasoning, so far as it went, prior to the Minister of Finance taking the initiative and responding to the Auditor-General\u2019s report, I have some difficulty understanding how the actions of the Minister of Finance could still leave this matter outside the criteria for a snap debate. Without in any way challenging your ruling on this particular occasion, I think it would help the House in the future, in dealing with these matters, if we could understand the reasoning by which we came to this process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022537edd835a6341e696b0e0bcc0c26c27\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022537edd835a6341e696b0e0bcc0c26c27\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. As I pointed out in my ruling, the administrative responsibility is with the Parliamentary Service Commission. If a member wishes to debate this matter, all a member has to do is to seek leave to do so. [Interruption] I have given my ruling, Mr McCully. I have done you the courtesy of explaining the basis of the ruling again. I will enter into no further discussion on it. And the member should be seated while I am standing. I have given my ruling. I have explained the basis of the ruling. As far as I am concerned, it is the end of the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u0022a391f4c849d743128d569846defa6c63\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a391f4c849d743128d569846defa6c63\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I seek the leave of the House to debate the Auditor-General\u2019s report and the Speaker\u2019s response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222852259b6fd942a990f0ecab57c6d931\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ec3bce5d7ae748dc80238e344294978a\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002295fd366b207c45da8f775b9051d9c2de\u0022\u003EUrgency\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00223ed8ed9575ee4ad39b0b4f28fd545cc4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223ed8ed9575ee4ad39b0b4f28fd545cc4\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That urgency be accorded the introduction and passing of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. This motion is moved in order that the House may address as quickly as possible the uncertainty around the legal status of past and current appropriations, and it will also give the chance for the House to debate the Auditor-General\u2019s report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002221621d610df24136babca278259e28f0\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That urgency be accorded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002290b1d778c3294c47bb7fe96dac1e1b26\u0022\u003Epresentation of report\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aadb3387f39640c3a219eebfa49896d4\u0022\u003Epresentation of report\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022840602b69c354f28a1f2bccf3db1be9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022840602b69c354f28a1f2bccf3db1be9f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I hereby present a report on unappropriated expenditure on Vote Parliamentary Service for the period from 1 July 1989 until the day on which the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill comes into force. I move, That that paper be published.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226094eba509ab40188f25e8caa2aa195e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the motion be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022203acf370f5f464d86fb16f3b9c3e07e\u0022\u003EAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222aed65caccb44a3e8cd71019cf5e705f\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00220dccce17ab234bd1a24b7a1af0a8cf05\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220dccce17ab234bd1a24b7a1af0a8cf05\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022962aa5d84f124d23ac2cb2b0fc8a8610\u0022\u003EDr Richard Worth\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Would it not be appropriate for us to see this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2f399dd958c4d388677eaddc891addc\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That is not a point of order. [Interruption] The bill is on the Table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa555271ced7478e944122fff9de1a39\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I say that a copy of this bill was made available to National Party members this morning before their caucus.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022631e36690b0b4c45819e3c69fdc93b92\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: The bill was delivered to us halfway through our caucus this morning. One copy was given to me, and another copy was given to Dr Brash. There are only two copies on this side of the Table, and they were brought into the House just as Dr Cullen was about to speak. This debate should not progress until there are sufficient copies on the Table for every member to have an opportunity to read it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220934a0e4b42746fe806d7b884f7a6206\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that copies of the bill are available for members on the Table.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237efd8de37c94efc89b40a3504757fd4\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave for the House to adjourn for 20 minutes while the bill is distributed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c0926ddc482c4e1494e31cca8b9dde7a\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? Yes, there is. [Interruption] Members, please, we will preserve a little bit of respect and decorum.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022568f005398644e3e9904c926a2d1bcba\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, when bills are moved for introduction and passing under urgency, they are tabled subsequent to the motion being approved.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThis bill does two things. Firstly, it validates expenditure from 1989 to the present day, and, secondly, it provides interim funding definitions to enable the Parliamentary Service to function until the end of 2007, when clause 7 of this bill lapses. The first part of the bill, the validation, is unspecific\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a59d3ae-788b-4b19-b7dd-7d0e29a626fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249c4c2d38f0041a6ad1a4d16d10e060a\u0022\u003EHon Brian Donnelly\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Given that some sensitivity has been expressed by National Party members about being able to see the bill, some of us in this part of the House would like to actually hear what Dr Cullen has to say. It has become quite clear that the official Opposition is not going to allow that opportunity, at all. I ask that you ensure we do not have a continuation of the barracking that has just started. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff14d7e995c94cd6ac723d7219ca9421\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I am ruling on the point of order, Dr Smith. About five members on the National Party side of the House spoke during the member\u2019s point of order. This is a final warning to those members. Mr Donnelly makes a perfectly valid point. We cannot hear. It is very hard for the parties on the cross benches to hear. I ask the member to show all members some respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e541e88992b24ddc801dd87a31e60bf9\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014[Interruption] I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I have never done this in my career before, but I have the right: I ask to be heard in silence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d0f24530f024fe4a03d0b68cd4936cf\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has asked to be heard in silence, and he will be heard in silence. I warn members that the member will be heard in silence. Members have had their warning. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022684a5e7e4f5b4bd79fb76713650f3273\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: The validation is for expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service that may have been outside the scope or purpose of an appropriation or other enactment. It is framed as generally and vaguely as that because the import of the Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion, followed by that of the Auditor-General and the Auditor-General\u2019s subsequent report, is that it is impossible to tell what may or may not have been outside the scope of Parliamentary Service expenditure up until the present day. It certainly casts a pall upon a whole range of expenditure around travel and other matters that may have been outside the scope. The Auditor-General did not look at those; he looked only at a 3-month period, and only at the communications vote. Therefore, of course, there is nothing in his report that assists us in terms of determining what else may have been outside the scope, including communications expenditure, before 1 June 2005\u2014expenditure that is exactly the same as expenditure that he has ruled unlawful in the period under review.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003ESecondly, the bill provides an interim funding definition, because that uncertainty continues to the present day and into the future. It is not clear what the Parliamentary Service can spend money on at the present time. Were, for example, Dr Brash again to seek to travel to another place in the country to sign up a second National Party member for the year, that would probably be outside the scope of the parliamentary appropriation, according to the rulings of the Auditor-General. We should not forget that the Auditor-General did not look at the issue of travel funding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThis issue began, it would now appear, with the Auditor-General\u2019s 2005 report. That report was primarily about ministerial budgets\u2014more precisely, about Government publicity campaigns such as that surrounding the Working for Families package. The report incidentally made some observations and comments around Parliamentary Service funding, but in no part did the Auditor-General state in any shape or form that the then currently understood interpretations of what was legitimate were in fact outside the bounds of what he considered to be legitimate. So no clear warning was given at that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe Auditor-General\u2019s report last week, and the previous Solicitor-General\u2019s legal opinion, took that matter somewhat further. As for the Auditor-General\u2019s 2005 report, as I said, the content was limited in some respects; the non-content, in our view, remains very significant. The Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion in April this year took a very narrow view of what was in, in terms of parliamentary purposes, and I think it is worth reminding ourselves of the Jack Hodder opinion, which states: \u201CA fundamental feature of the context is that the potential scope of the work of the House of Representatives relating to legislation on public expenditure, and of the parties represented in the House, is almost unlimited. However, that scope is the field of contestable policy proposals and decisions, and of legitimate political dialogue between MPs and the electorate. The competition between parliamentary parties includes a continual contest for future electoral support.\u201D I can only say \u201CHear, hear!\u201D to that; that is what we call democracy. But taking a narrow view of what is in, as the Solicitor-General and the Auditor-General did, then having a brightline test, leaves a huge amount of uncertainty about what is, in fact, legitimate. That was comprehensively challenged, as I said, in the Hodder opinion, and in the Speaker\u2019s report to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EFurthermore, the Auditor-General\u2019s report last week provides no clear guidance at all to the House as to what, in the current parliamentary appropriations, is legitimate spending. Wittingly or unwittingly, the report ended up being partial in that respect, both because it covers only a very limited time period, from 1 June 2005 to the election, and because it covers only certain appropriations\u2014that is, communications expenditure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EIt is clear that legislation is the only way to remedy the issue of unlawfulness, and that is unaffected by the refunding of money. The passage of this bill does not, at this point, change at all whether a party should or should not refund money to the Parliamentary Service. The refunding of the money does not affect in any way the unlawfulness of the original expenditure. The National Party argument seems to be that it prefers to remain with its expenditure being unlawful. Indeed, it is in the peculiar position of arguing\u2014it is the only party in the House arguing this\u2014that it knew that the rules had changed but it broke them nevertheless, and has now chosen to refund the money. And Katherine Rich seems to be the sort of fall person, in that respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe real problem is that nothing is solved, in terms of the current conundrum, by the Auditor-General\u2019s position. There is no clear guidance in the report, as I have said, and the bill therefore provides a narrow definition of what is out, and a brightline test from there. What is out, in terms of communications, is seeking support for the election of a particular person or persons, seeking support for a party vote for particular parties, encouraging any person to become a member of a particular party or parties, and soliciting subscriptions or other forms of financial support. That probably reflects a pretty fair summary of where the vast majority of parliamentarians believed the rules were, up until the Auditor-General\u2019s report. It is a narrow definition, and then there is a brightline test; what is beyond that is, therefore, legitimate expenditure. Therefore, Dr Brash will not have to refund the expenses of his travel to Nelson to sign up Ian Ewen-Street as a member of the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002238229c1af80b4d3f90b84e4a5d856b86\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Those references that Dr Cullen is wishing to pepper his speech with are, in fact, of themselves out of order. Dr Cullen has asked that the House give him the respect of being heard in silence. You have said that that is his right. We are not able, actually, to find anywhere in Speakers\u2019 rulings or the Standing Orders that that is something speakers can ask for; nonetheless, we respect his desire to get his message across. But we are not prepared to sit here and hear him make personal reflections on members on this side of the House without your intervention\u2014without your calling him to account. There have been three occasions now. I am loath to take a point of order during the Minister\u2019s speech\u2014it is the opening speech on a bill\u2014but, Madam Assistant Speaker, you do have a duty, if you are preserving Dr Cullen\u2019s right to be heard, to ensure that our right not to be impugned in any way is also treated with some respect from the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f50d0eb0fdb64b3287ef8b30354ddd7d\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I was not impugning Dr Brash, at all. The point I was making was that, in my view, what Dr Brash did was a perfectly legitimate action. But that legitimate action is cast into doubt by the Auditor-General\u2019s ruling. What this bill does is make clear that what Dr Brash did was legitimate. So if the member thinks there was a personal reflection, I am happy to withdraw and apologise for that. But let me assure him that there was no personal reflection in that comment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea3b275fa5ce4ec09a2e10ceac44de3d\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Perhaps, from the point of view of clarifying the issue, if the member would like to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299a817f1128245a3b31237f56458c4fd\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise, to the extent that it appeared to be a personal reflection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8ad1be3815d41469937548ad316af8a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022429df7db2cb947ae839efdd3bc801f41\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ca6dc3f224a46588e497cb64d57eb9e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, please, I want to make two points. First of all, to the member\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002277de1d3eb5674f679627340c9ed6d455\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: That member will leave the Chamber now. I was in the middle of giving a ruling. That was extremely bad manners. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ea3db772bf84312bce2266502860a71\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The point I was making to Mr Brownlee was that under Speaker\u2019s ruling 57/2, any member is entitled to be heard without interruption.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7c29a4cdf9e4279b05b6fc8d3a18dfc\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think it is important. A member\u2014I am sorry I do not know the member\u2019s name, but the one next to Mr Bennett\u2014called out twice during Dr Cullen\u2019s speaking to the point of order. I think she should be disciplined, because you did say that people were on a final warning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282a5a4d88f7c4e828478bc095732910f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member whether she called out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244444848d54b4802a5fb52b312bdea02\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Madam Assistant Speaker, but I am desperately trying to find, in the Standing Orders\u2014that is what I was actually doing; I have not been calling out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229acf364300244888a2b1518e742bdc5c\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. I ask the member to stand and just answer my question: did the member call out during that point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234013d8c661b44f29c7a49591a5fa2dd\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Madam Assistant Speaker. I am not trying to be smart; I am just trying to work out which point of\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228ea4aae6e58494ab487a32b9c987808\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Did the member call out during\u2014[Interruption]\u2014just a minute; just answer the question. We have been hearing points of order, and they will be heard in silence. Did the member call out during the point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022618d715e57574e2ca9e5a10c9cb15f01\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Yes. I am not sure, to be honest with you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231c33a2c9138410bab4b5c55ff0c9fbb\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will leave the Chamber. [Interruption] Just wait, please. I will wait until the member leaves the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f2b547d5d9e47efb300747b2bbc4c12\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. None of the Speakers\u2019 rulings or the Standing Orders work if members of Parliament are not prepared to respect them. The Chair has no authority other than the authority that comes from the respect members of Parliament are prepared to give the Chair. You have taken a pre-emptive strike\u2014and I use those words very deliberately\u2014on our side of the House this afternoon, when two members were provoked, quite unreasonably, by the very member who stood up to complain about them just a few minutes ago and who is well known for his loud and smart mouth in this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMadam Assistant Speaker, I want to explain to you that the decorum in the House from this point is extremely tenuous. We are not prepared to be treated in a manner that is any different from the Government. Our observation at the moment is that that is exactly what has just happened in the last couple of minutes, particularly in respect of the last incident where one of the loudest people through points of order\u2014during my own point of order, for example\u2014was the very person who appealed to you and whose appeal you accepted by throwing one of our members out of the House. That is not a good way to progress. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI want to point out to you also, Madam Assistant Speaker, that when you call on Speaker\u2019s ruling 57/2\u2014which states: \u201CStrictly speaking, a member is entitled to be heard without interruption, but with the tacit consent of the House the rule has been relaxed in favour of members asking reasonable questions.\u201D\u2014you should remember that we are part of the House; it does not belong exclusively to the Government. Anybody who is witnessing the sort of legislation we are getting pushed through today, who has witnessed the activities of the last couple of days, and who is witnessing the very partial position taken by Parliamentary Service could well believe that the Government thinks that this is just some sort of a rubber-stamping exercise for dictatorial powers. But it is not, and it is your job, Madam Assistant Speaker, to ensure it is not seen to be that. We expect fair treatment and we expect you now to turn to Mr Mallard and deal with him as you have two of our members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002251af277eb3bc4b2b930411dc31f18bd1\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to draw it to your attention that Dr Nick Smith has yet to leave the Chamber, having been ordered to do so\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ad3260d26fe43108efe5a5d8b7f012e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, it was not him; it was another member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cd985b7570d407f9f9b732139fb4902\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Was he not ordered to go?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ccdd8d444bd4bf8aff57639702e72a9\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b02e296f30f48358f38e653322f77e5\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: In that case\u2014and I think he thought he was ordered to, for a moment\u2014I make a point about being heard in silence. I know that that is done relatively rarely recently. In fact, it is a very longstanding principle of this House that members have the right to ask that, and it applies to any member of the House. If Dr Brash, in responding, wishes to be heard in silence, then he also can make that request.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cab1e808225a4eb7bc843b1cc7708703\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c668760b8504c248486e6e162da776a\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229627cda445974525a5be0641a1fecc8f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: It is the issue, Mr Brownlee, and it is what I ruled on. I also tell the member that a warning was given. Several interruptions occurred prior to Ms Bennett\u2019s interruption. There was not an interruption from the Hon Trevor Mallard. He was entitled to raise the point of order he raised. I ask Dr Michael Cullen to continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273456a0f9abd480181e73bd645f4a827\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Can I make the point\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3bc406fe02d4131ac973994586eadc1\u0022\u003EHon Murray McCully\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c40dda6b1dfa4e02b855d1fd76e07885\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I just warn the member that I have dealt with the point of order to date, so I presume he is raising a new point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220686e371f56348d89346dcb06e0936ef\u0022\u003EHon Murray McCully\u003C/span\u003E: I am, Madam Assistant Speaker. I heard you direct the Minister of Finance to withdraw and apologise after offence was taken on this side. That should have taken place without any qualification. Dr Cullen sought to make that withdrawal and apology with qualification. I now ask that you require him to withdraw and apologise in the terms required by the Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269ff6381c56c467a82bd7657bd73497a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: He did withdraw and apologise the second time without any qualification. He did that the second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022341f5238c6de4761a5fb88e1aa2700c7\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Are we to take from your ruling in respect of the request by the Minister of Finance for silence on this very contentious bill that any interjection will result in a member being ejected from the House? The reason that that is important is that Dr Cullen has repeatedly claimed that the Leader of the Opposition, Dr Brash, specially travelled to Nelson to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3b09183a4fb418e8c85c08daab25464\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will be seated. I have dealt with that point of order. The member has withdrawn and apologised for that. The point of order has been dealt with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbff22b8634a4a15b46df2e31f8ef746\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272eb850a06c84f5faf5f35610482709f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I presume it is a new point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd2f5d229ac14bad88aab2d402974cf1\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: It is a very new one, as of this minute. I have been in this Parliament a long time, and one of the traditions I have been very keen to follow and observe is that whenever Speakers were making a ruling or discussing a point of order, they would always be on their feet. In fact, it was important that any member of this House had to resume his or her seat whilst the Speaker did that. I want to make a plea on behalf of my colleague Phil Heatley, because, Madam Assistant Speaker, you did not rise to your feet on a number of occasions. Rather, you sat while you made a ruling. I did not realise you were even involved in making a ruling when I looked up. On a couple of occasions since then you have stood up to so do, but you were not on your feet when you were dealing with Phil Heatley\u2019s interjection. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EGoing back a number of Speakers, I see Sir Robin Gray here in the House. He will know that he used to get to his feet all the time and deal to people like me when we were being badly behaved. I suggest, on behalf of Phil Heatley, that because the sign was not there that you at least allow him to come back into the House and make sure that he then behaves himself according to the principle that when you are on your feet we remain silent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297e6cc7ae32f4213b32ce6dce149bc17\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I take the member\u2019s point and also note that although Speakers often stand when they are giving a ruling, they often remain seated too. I also make the point on the ruling I gave in respect of Mr Heatley. I had very clearly said I will address the ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7d63444211647418560f3dd0b4dd073\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I make the point now more theoretically and assisted by the intervention from Dr Smith. Let us suppose a member of Parliament travels somewhere and has a range of business at that place. Amongst that business he or she may sign up a member for his or her political party. The import of the Auditor-General\u2019s opinion, and the brightline test that is imposed there, is that the entire expenditure is out of being legal. [Interruption] I am afraid that that is not rubbish. The member should read the Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion again. Mr McCully is nodding his head. He actually agrees with me. He understands the point being made. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion quite clearly is that if something is outside then that renders the entire vote activity\u2014the expenditure that that involves\u2014outside the appropriation. The member really has to read those reports very carefully, because if he does not he will not understand how important it is to actually carry forward the second part of this bill, which is to clarify the current spending rules. And might I say to the House that the Government, if it were self-interested, would not bother to do that part, because half the Government is covered by Vote Ministerial Services in that respect, not Vote Parliamentary Service, and that would give us an undue weighting and advantage in that respect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EHowever, in carrying forward that interpretation\u2014in setting out that narrow interpretation\u2014there is a sunset clause: it will expire at the end of next year. That is done because we have to respond to the need for a broader review of the rules. Another independent report is being done by John Goulter and Adrienne von Tunzlemann, which may have implications for the structure of Parliamentary Service votes. There are issues that will almost certainly lead us into the legislation around the Parliamentary Service in terms of the apparent responsibility of the Speaker for expenditure incurred by a political party with which the Speaker is not in the least connected. I think that in itself places the Speaker in an impossible position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThis House, and the parties in this House, must move on from these issues to actually address those issues over the coming few months so they can be clarified before we enter upon another election cycle in 2008. That is why the sunset clause is both long enough to enable the review to be done but short enough to make it clear that it does not go into the 2008 election year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThis is not a difficult bill; it is a bill that requires some degree of detailed application in order for it to be understood clearly and to make sure that people understand the actual surrounding issues. I am sure that most of the debate will have absolutely nothing to do with the actual contents of the bill, but then that is not unusual, unfortunately, for debates in this House these days.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u002274e04d051ce64f05ae5aaa99eeceb926\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002274e04d051ce64f05ae5aaa99eeceb926\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sorry to carry on with the point of order I raised before, but I ask you to look at Standing Order 80(2). Under the heading \u201CMaintenance of Order\u201D, that Standing Order states: \u201CWhenever the Speaker rises during a sitting, members must sit down and be silent so that the Speaker can be heard without interruption.\u201D Now I think that is a very clear Standing Order in our book\u2014that is, when the Speaker rises to his or her feet, members must sit and remain silent. When my colleague Phil Heatley interjected you were not on your feet, Madam Speaker, and therefore I make the plea again\u2014because Mr Heatley could easily not have realised you were in the process of standing\u2014that he be allowed back in the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249297f0133554ecf85d10b53f4d0a69e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The point that I made stands exactly as I said. The ruling certainly does not state that the Speaker has to stand at every point. But I take the points that Mr Brownlee made, and I say both those members can come back at 4 o\u2019clock.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022 data-id=\u0022a0c24fe7950e49f0b2684c7e1886254d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a0c24fe7950e49f0b2684c7e1886254d\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition):\u003C/span\u003E This House has rarely seen more cynical and self-serving legislation. If this bill passes in its present form, there will be no legal obligation on any political party to pay back the money that was stolen from taxpayers\u2014none at all. Let me say that again: if this bill passes in its present form\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223300ab452a5b408d9a59e56a60f264bd\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. On behalf of Katherine Rich and other National Party members, as well as other members of the House who have stayed within the old rulings of the commission and accidentally stepped outside authorised expenditure, I object to being called a thief.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac735e6f30424f50937ad69a3563e762\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Again, members were calling out during that point of order. Members know there should be silence during a point of order. I thought that comment was part of the debate. The member has taken a personal reflection at being called a thief\u2014is that correct?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f902623704542cdb860f4f8cf1d5aba\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I have taken a personal reflection at the member saying that the money was stolen. I am one of the members who made an error by taking the rules as they had always been and as they were confirmed to me by the Auditor-General. He subsequently changed his mind. The money was not stolen, and I say that on my behalf and on behalf of Katherine Rich, who did exactly the same thing as I did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d9c2ac4237542f5b5353c3632f451ff\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is not making a direct accusation to the member or to a party, which the member cannot do\u2014he cannot use those words. But that is not really what he did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227d1183f9b754124b786ea9e9986a6b7\u0022\u003EKatherine Rich\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Mr Mallard\u2019s interest in my well-being is rather touching, but I am a bit unaware as to why he keeps including me in the debate. That member knows he is not able to seek leave on behalf of other members. He is a member who has been in this House for a long time, so I would have thought that he would be aware of that. I take offence at being continually included in the debate when there is no reason for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022613c8945bbb74575b94137cfc74efdf2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Again, that is not a point of order, because of the non-direct reference. I have ruled that no direct reference was made to a member. Is Katherine Rich taking direct offence?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a06d825f0fda4c028bb7d234e23c3f19\u0022\u003EKatherine Rich\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I am taking direct offence at inclusion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b818627ddc78460ea3c30ff9864e76ba\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has taken direct offence. Would the member please withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dfa8b47c5de24155b60017ced7f23bae\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbeae0b21de646fa84d64206ef7f79cc\u0022\u003EHon Murray McCully\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I apologise to my colleague Dr Brash for interrupting his speech. You have just given a couple of rulings, Madam Assistant Speaker, and I just draw your attention to the fact that again you have given those rulings while being seated. If you do that it will make things quite difficult for us this afternoon, during what is going to be quite a robust debate. If you want to retain order in the House, I urge you to obey the Standing Order and stand when you want to make a ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8fc4cb3e63049219472282d4671ede5\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: If one reads the Standing Order carefully, one sees there is no requirement on the Speaker to stand. What it does make clear is that when the Speaker stands, everyone else is to be quiet. There is no requirement for you to stand. Over the years some Speakers have stood all the time, some have stood some of the time, and, frankly, in the case of some people one cannot tell the difference.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b669589e0a2417fa470dba820544151\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is quite right. I tell the Hon Maurice Williamson that I gave exactly that ruling quite a while ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fd64c58cc0c4b928e340effca104a1a\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: If this bill passes in its present form, there will be no legal obligation at all on any political party to pay back the money that it has, in deference to the sensitivities of Mr Mallard, misappropriated. For that reason, primarily, the National Party will be voting against this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5bb24b43e774463b0b8352e68b39d7e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot make a direct allegation against a member about misappropriation. I said before that the member had not made such an allegation, but this time he clearly has.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022128a8262263b435da1a7fff1f8eced2a\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. What Dr Brash said was, effectively, \u201Cin deference to the sensitivities of Mr Mallard\u201D, and he referred to the money having been misappropriated. If it helps you, Madam Assistant Speaker, I will table the Auditor-General\u2019s report, which talks about the money having been misappropriated. That is not an aspersion against the Minister; it is a fact. It is the only reason that we are here to discuss this bill today. To say that we cannot mention that has to be absurd.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fca54862f278461197c391cd030112b1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: That is not what I said at all. I said: \u201Cwhen it is made against an individual member.\u201D The member cannot say that about an individual member. He can certainly say that in the context of the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235268f4121854cf1a7d9f2e09e57da4f\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. He did not say it about an individual member. He said, \u201Cin deference to the sensitivities of Mr Mallard\u201D; he did not accuse Mr Mallard of misappropriating funds. The fact is that the Auditor-General\u2019s report talks about the Labour Party having misappropriated funds. If Mr Mallard wants to say that by virtue of his membership of the Labour Party he is affected, well, that is only a matter of fact, surely. If he is also offended by the fact that the Auditor-General did put that in the report then, I guess, that is the reason why the Government has brought in the legislation\u2014to tell the Auditor-General he is just a plonker, and to go away because the Government does not want to know about him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cce6dff16d654d13a59db68d5e0cdece\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I take the point, Mr Brownlee. I would just remind members that they cannot make accusations against individual members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a41e1d220694c03b0b1e355527acecc\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: I repeat: we will be opposing this legislation because in its present form it imposes no legal obligation on any political party to pay back the money that has been misappropriated. We will be moving amendments to make the passage of the bill conditional upon every political party repaying the money that has been misappropriated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party has been trying to avoid this issue for over a year. I came across a press statement issued by my colleague Simon Power on 5 September 2005\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260d4d5240ee646e495c67ca6d3c9b6cb\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Before the election?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dff3dd0f571d4b618478696584fde0bc\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014before the election last year, in which he drew attention to the fact that the pledge card issued by the Labour Party bore the parliamentary crest. And he asked whether that could mean it was funded from taxpayers\u2019 money. Of course, we now know that it was. When Simon Power raised that question at that time, he was quietly ignored by the Labour Party. But we know that 3 or 4 days before that, the Chief Electoral Officer had warned Mike Smith of the Labour Party by phone that the pledge card was an election expense. On 2 September last year\u20143 days before my colleague discovered it\u2014the Labour Party received that advice in writing. Initially, Labour Party members accepted that the pledge card was an election expense and then, of course, they changed their minds\u2014just after the election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EAt the beginning of this parliamentary year, I drew attention to the fact that $446,000 spent by the Labour Party on its pledge card was almost certainly an improper use of taxpayers\u2019 money. Then, a few months back, we had the draft of the Auditor-General\u2019s report. At that point, neither I nor anyone on the Opposition side of the House knew precisely what the Labour Party\u2019s obligation was in that draft report\u2014we did not have it. But we knew, from the criteria listed in the document that we had, that the pledge card, at least, would have been caught by the Auditor-General\u2019s ruling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003ESo what happened? Well, the Labour Party started to make excuses. It said the rules had changed. The Auditor-General said no, they had not changed. The Labour Party said the rules were unclear. The Auditor-General said no, they were not unclear. The Labour Party said everybody had been doing it since 1989, and $350 million was at stake here. Helen Clark told people to move on, because it was a beltway issue and nobody cared about it outside Wellington. Then Mike Williams, the president of the Labour Party, said the party had made such expenditure in 2002 and 1999, so it was OK. The situation is worse than that. Not only was that an admission that because Labour had sinned before, it thought it could sin again without penalty, but we now know that in 1999 the pledge card did not carry the parliamentary crest and was published with material saying it was proudly supported by members of the Labour Party. That raises some very serious questions about whether the public and Parliament were misled about where the money came from. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003ENow we have a bill that validates what has been done, so there is no legal obligation at all on political parties to pay back the money that has been misappropriated. Helen Clark says that Labour will pay it back, but we know that sometimes Helen Clark makes \u201Ccommitments\u201D that she has no intention of actually honouring. I think back to when she first became the Prime Minister. She said her objective was to get New Zealand into the top half of the OECD within 10 years. Well, 6 or 7 years on, she is hoping we have all forgotten about that, because, of course, she has not a dog\u2019s chance of actually achieving that objective. When she talks about getting this money paid as a target for this financial year, is that a target or a commitment? Why will she pay anything back after the law has been changed in order to make what is currently illegal, legal? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003ENot only is that the case but this bill, at clause 7, proposes a new definition of \u201Cfunding entitlements for parliamentary purposes\u201D that would clearly allow the Labour Party pledge cards to be OK. In order to be counted as electioneering, material has to explicitly ask for a vote, explicitly ask for membership of a party, or explicitly ask for money. Under that definition of electioneering, the pledge card would be legal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EWe should also, however, note that even if this cynical and self-serving bill passes in its present form, it does not get Labour off the hook for having breached section 214B of the Electoral Act. That section makes it a corrupt practice to knowingly spend above the legal limit. We know that is exactly what the Labour Party did. It had a limit of $2.38 million; we know it spent at least $2.8 million. It was warned by the Chief Electoral Officer that it was at risk of doing that. Even the Labour Party\u2019s own auditors said that if the pledge card was electioneering expenditure, then the Labour Party had breached the cap. I think of what happened to my poor friend Bob Clarkson. He was taken to court by a Minister in this Government who thought he might have overspent slightly the $20,000 electoral limit. Bob would have forfeited his election to the seat of Tauranga had he been found to be guilty. He was not guilty\u2014the court found he was not guilty. The Chief Electoral Officer, the Electoral Commission, the Auditor-General, and the Solicitor-General all accept that Labour spent more than its legal entitlement in the 2005 election, and nothing in this bill will change that fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EPassing this bill into law will remove any legal obligation that political parties may have to pay back the money that they owe. The National Party has paid back the small amount of money that was inadvertently used by a small number of my colleagues. ACT has paid back the money that it inadvertently used too, and I congratulate the party on that. The M\u0101ori Party has paid back the money that it inadvertently spent. The Progressive party did not spend outside the terms of the rules at all. Why? Because Matt Robson said the rules were entirely clear. Let me congratulate the Progressive party, the ACT party, and the M\u0101ori Party. We had very careful people running our money, and I call on the Labour Party and the other parties that have not yet paid back the money they owe to pay it back, and to pay it back now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party stole the last election by the slimmest of margins, by breaking not one law but two laws. The very least it can do is to pay back the money that was misappropriated, and to pay it back now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022 data-id=\u00224a92858db44843c8acd89c69efd97b5f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224a92858db44843c8acd89c69efd97b5f\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E The Leader of the Opposition made, I think, four points. Before I move on to rehearse a bit of the history of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill that is before us today, in the spirit of sound debate I thought I would answer each of those four points, if I am able to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EIn the first point the member argued that there was no obligation to pay back this money. Of course, he is right. There is no legal obligation for reimbursement of this money. But the Labour Party has made it absolutely and unequivocally clear that now we are in the position of having in front of us the reports of both the Auditor-General and the Minister responsible for this, we will be refunding the money. So I say to the member that that is the first point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EIn the second point the member asked why Labour has been not responding in this way for some months. The reason was we have not had the Auditor-General\u2019s report until now. We have not had the response from the Minister responsible for this funding until now. The member himself is debating this point now because we have those reports now. Even the member himself, and the other parties that he has quoted as paying that money, paid that money prior to receiving those reports. They now, in a post hoc way, have to be sure that they are paying back what they now regard as the appropriate amount of money on the basis of those reports. In other words, most of this debate has taken place because of a leaked report. The real debate takes place now because we have the actual reports\u2014the final report and the response from the Minister responsible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E The third point he made was that perhaps we need to look at commitments being carried out. I do not want to get into a silly argy-bargy back and forth across the House, I simply say to the member that the reason he is sitting in an MMP Parliament of this construction is that politics had become so bankrupt, following Governments that preceded both himself and myself, it led to people saying that people do not carry out commitments\u2014compared with the last 7 years, when this Government has restored the notion of politics being about carrying out commitments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EFourthly, the member said that the Labour Party\u2019s knowingly spending money had led to a situation where it has now been required to pay it back. I do not think anybody in the House, including the few members on his side who spent money during this time\u2014I will vouch for them as well as everybody else\u2014spent the money knowingly. The only people who appear to have done that, I am sorry to say, are those who did so in relation to the GST issue that applies to broadcasting. It beggars belief to think that someone who sat on the GST committee, and who understood exactly what GST was, did not understand that GST applied to broadcasting spending. That is knowingly spending the money, and that is why the member\u2019s party should pay the $115,000 back. That is the one bit of knowingly spending money that really does need to be put to bed. The $115,000 that was knowingly overspent on broadcasting is obviously something the member should have, would have, and could have known should be paid back. So the $115,000 that we are constantly told is sitting in a bank vault somewhere should be paid back. The money should be paid back so that the member can move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279e0d92511e34235a724f0d8b891539e\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: The member who is speaking has raised the issue of the GST refund. My colleague and National leader, Dr Don Brash, has often sought leave to introduce the bill in his name. To see whether Mr Maharey\u2019s just-stated comments are in fact true to his word, I again seek the leave of the House for Dr Brash\u2019s bill in the ballot to be introduced, to lie upon the table, and to receive its first reading forthwith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223add0d202ce94db2bc6f6050539fbe30\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has sought leave for that bill. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022429d4e1e0687486180dc1e1b2be1d05a\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Dr Smith that there is absolutely no impediment in the way of the National Party paying that money back today. National members should put the cheque on the table today. There is no impediment at all to their paying it back. If they are so eager, if the money is there, they should write the cheque and pay it today. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003ELet me go back to the bill itself and rehearse the story so far. This is how it goes. The Auditor-General reviewed advertising expenditure for the 3 months before the last election. What he did during that time was to broaden what we understood to be money being spent for parliamentary purposes. The Auditor-General I think, from all of our points of view, has applied a definition of parliamentary purposes that is different from what has been used by people for a large number of years. What that means is that although he focused only on the 3 months prior to the last election, the implications of the ruling by the Auditor-General go back to 1 July 1989 when the rules were changed. Also, just because the Auditor-General focused on advertising, it should not lead us away from the fact that the way in which he has interpreted advertising\u2019s purpose has raised implications for all of the spending by members of this House under that parliamentary rubric. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003ESo two points have been raised by the Auditor-General that we need to look at. One is the broadening of the \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D definition\u2014the range of spending that people in the House are involved in. As a result, it is important for us to have a look at how we operate in the House. From the point of view of the Auditor-General, we have not been operating properly. Therefore, the rules need to be changed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EAn important point is what we do with all of this. How do we deal with the fact that he is effectively saying there are unappropriated expenses here? Effectively, what he is saying means that expenses incurred outside the appropriation are in breach of section 4 of the Public Finance Act. According to the Auditor-General, such a breach, when it occurs, is illegal, notwithstanding any repayment of the money\u2014that does not sweep away that fact. So we are put in the position that no matter what members might do to put it right\u2014a National Party member, a M\u0101ori Party member, or whoever, who is putting it right by deciding to refund the money\u2014we will still be outside the Act. So the only legal remedy for such a breach of section 4 of the Public Finance Act is for those expenses to be validated by an Act of Parliament. Without that validating legislation, no matter what people do, it will remain an unlawful situation. Is this unusual? No, it is not. Unappropriated expenditure is something that has been validated before. For instance, last year the financial review bill included validation of $310 million relating to forecast liability under the Kyoto Protocol. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003ENow what happens after that in respect of the situation with the Auditor-General and the situation in terms of the law; what happens next? This is what happens next. The report goes to the Minister responsible for that expenditure. That Minister makes a response because, in this case, the Auditor-General asked for a response. The response from the Minister responsible stated, among other things, that \u201Cin accordance with section 26C of the Public Finance Act 1989, the unlawful breaches of the seven party appropriations should be validated by legislation, and that legislation should be introduced as soon as is practicable.\u201D The Minister said that the validations should not await the normal annual validation process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThe report of the Controller and Auditor-General and the report of the Minister responsible for the vote said, of course, that what we might want to do\u2014and the Minister has confirmed that she will\u2014is go for an external review of our institutions to have a look at what we do in the future. So we have validating legislation and we will have an external review to see where we go from here. One of the things we need to do, of course, is to look in particular at what \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D will actually mean in the future. All of us are in a situation right now where we may well be spending money in a way that is outside this new understanding from the Auditor-General. So in the interim we need to make sure we are OK, and that is why this legislation finishes in 2007\u2014it is an interim measure. I reiterate the point I made before that there was no requirement to reimburse, from what the Auditor-General and the Minister said, but we have made it very clear that we will do it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThis bill does three things. First, it validates past expenses that may have been outside the scope of appropriations in Vote Parliamentary Service from 1 July 1989 until the bill comes into force. Secondly, it validates any associated breach of a range of validated Acts, such as the Civil List Act 1979. Thirdly, it provides an interim solution for the period through to 31 December 2007, following which the work that we will do between now and then will set the scene for the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThat is the nature of the game here today. We are in a situation where nobody here has intentionally spent money, except in relation to the GST. We have had the Auditor-General\u2019s report, which has changed the rules of the game. We have had the Minister\u2019s response for Parliament to consider, and the result of that has been for us to have validating legislation and a working party to look at what we will do post - December 2007. That is the situation we are in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022932ce56e8ad74f7381d77cde8ff8fbfb\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: You are corrupt cheats.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fdedb3130d34e958ba5a7306c26c9fa\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Dr Smith that we are in the same situation as members in his party. This legislation is absolutely necessary, but if the member is extremely excited about what he is doing today, I ask whether we can have a cheque for the GST before the end of the day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002291eaf3cd19f846a6a1a1b3d00df6da7a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291eaf3cd19f846a6a1a1b3d00df6da7a\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E The explanation from Mr Maharey was an utter disgrace. I ask simply these questions: what definition do we give to the word \u201Cthief\u201D; what definition do we give to the word \u201Ccheat\u201D; and what do we call a group of people who deliberately take something that is not theirs, use it for their own ends, then try to hide the fact that they took it in the first place? They are thieves and they are cheats. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E We are here today only because they were caught. Let me make it very clear to anyone who wants to know, with regard to all this talk from Mr Maharey about the need to validate this spending, if the Labour Party had not been caught we would not be here today. It is as simple as that. What we have is a bill to cover up the theft by Labour from the taxpayer\u2014a theft that it has now been caught for\u2014and Labour members are all holding up their hands and saying that they are holier than thou and will pay it back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269ecf55dd39444868475daf074697cba\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: When?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f07ba120ed840ed8de3ced95a19ed78\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the question is when. I notice that when Labour was caught by the Auditor-General for appropriating some $21 million to advertise its Government programmes and it was later pinged back to only $15 million, those members said that it was not much. But I tell you what, this morning the Labour caucus found out that $750,000 split 50 ways is a huge amount of money. So we do want to know when it will be paid back, and we want to know why this legislation does not include that information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWhat I was most fascinated by was the Prime Minister\u2019s reaction on last Monday\u2019s Breakfast television programme, when she was asked about the intention to pass validating legislation. She said: \u201COh well, that is just a technical thing. We are paying it back. There it ends. Let us move on.\u201D It was classic Helen Clark\u201413 months of saying that Labour will not pay, and of saying that everyone else is wrong except Labour, and then it is: \u201COh well, we will pay. We are moving on. That is the end of that.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe rules are extremely clear around this particular issue, and they have been for a very long time. For Labour to suggest that they are not is completely disingenuous. I refer Mr Maharey to the Hunn-Lang report of 1990, which was the basis for the establishment of the Parliamentary Service and the rules that go with the expenditure of taxpayer money around parliamentary support in the first place. Apparently, we are being told today that these rules have been wrong for the last 16 years and that we have to go right back to that time to sort it all out. Well, I say to Mr Maharey that that was a Labour Government report, which was put on the Table by no less a person than Sir Geoffrey Palmer, and that there is nothing in it that would suggest that any of the behaviour that has gone on before this time was particularly illegal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EFor Dr Cullen to suggest that somehow, if this legislation is not passed, simple things like MPs\u2019 travel, their communication with their constituents, and their use of a research facility to find out whether some idea is worthwhile would be completely wrong is, of itself, wrong. That is what democracy is built on: the idea that we elect some people to think a little bit about the future\u2014some people who can move freely and speak freely. But when it comes to the election period, there is no provision, and there never has been, for some party to confuse its campaign expenditure with its parliamentary expenditure. What we saw from Labour members was a cynical decision to very deliberately pay for the pledge card\u2014and, it would appear, for a great deal of other advertising\u2014from its Parliamentary Service funding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWhat they knew also, because, let us remember, they had letters from the Auditor-General, the Chief Electoral Officer, and their own auditors stating that if this pledge card is considered election spending\u2014and they have admitted right from the word go that it was\u2014they would breach their electoral spending cap. It was a breach of section 214B of the Electoral Act, as Dr Brash pointed out, and, in that sense of knowing, it makes those members party to a corrupt practice. What we are doing here today is, apparently, alleviating that situation. Well, this Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill will not do that. The question still remains out there for New Zealanders to ask themselves: \u201CIs this a Government that respects the conventions of governance in our country?\u201D. The answer overwhelmingly is \u201CNo\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWe have asked over and over, when the Government will pay this money back. What we have had in return is a deafening silence. The reality is that when this bill passes today, there will be no legal requirement for the money to be paid back. In fact, we might ask ourselves this question. If the pledge card was not illegal because 14 months or so after it was posted out the law changed to make it legal, why would one pay the money back? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe other point that Mr Maharey made was that even if one paid the money back, one still has to validate it. Well, I want to know why we do not do that every time someone commits benefit fraud or every time the Government pays a prison construction bill that it should not be paying. We could go on and on about where Government appropriations are going in the wrong direction, but there is no need to refer back to Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMr Maharey said that it is not unusual to come back for appropriations to be realigned. Those appropriations are usually within the policy confines of a Government. They are not about some Government choosing to stick its hand deep into the pocket of the taxpayer and reach money out for its own political purposes, and that is the strong and serious difference we have here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI am in possession of some information that tells me the land grab undertaken by Robert Mugabe\u2019s Government in Zimbabwe is perfectly legal, because after that Government got in the bulldozers and all those thugs who whipped those people off those farms, it passed a law to make that action legal. Although I do not want to exaggerate, become carried away, and suggest that this Government is operating as if it were a Mugabe-style Government, the reality is that the comparison is chillingly close. Mr Hughes shakes his head and says \u201CNo, no, no\u201D. I would ask Mr Hughes why we are here today and why we have this legislation in front of us. If Mr Hughes and his colleagues had not robbed the taxpayer of nearly $1 million, we would not be here today. The reality is that this legislation makes perfectly legal the terrible and disgraceful act that the Labour Party committed. Members opposite are saying that it happens all the time. It does not happen all the time. There are appropriation realignments, but there are none like the sort of situation we have today where illegal activities are being made legal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI reserve my final comments for New Zealand First members, who, I think, have been a very big disappointment on this particular issue. They have a $160,000 overspend and a statement from their leader that they will not pay it back, but will go to court. Well, everyone knows that when this legislation passes\u2014assuming that the House will be compliant enough to pass it\u2014then there is no basis on which to go to court, because Mr Peters will be stumping up to court, saying: \u201CI am not paying this money back, because I did not break the law.\u201D, and the judge will say to him: \u201CYou are dead right, sonny. Fourteen months after you spent the money, your mates in the Labour Government made it perfectly legal for you to do so.\u201D So I hope that the New Zealand First members get up today and tell us whether they will accept their moral obligation to repay the money, and whether they will accept the fact that New Zealanders expect politicians to repay the money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI would also ask the Labour Government members whether we can expect during their speeches today to have put in front of us a time line for when they will repay the money. Finally, I want to know why Labour members keep swinging arrows across to this side of the House asking whether National will pay the GST. The answer is \u201CYes\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b734874748b45149662449afd333146\u0022\u003EHon Judith Tizard\u003C/span\u003E: When?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221db1d008d20e4cf6ba6439cc785bfbf3\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, unlike the Labour Party, we want the law changed so that we can pay. Labour members are changing the law so that they do not have to pay. This is utterly disgraceful legislation and we will be fighting it very hard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u00220ead831d661e457f9eb904015178f430\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220ead831d661e457f9eb904015178f430\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E New Zealand First will be supporting the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenses Validation) Bill. [Interruption] Yes, we will. We will do that for three reasons. The first reason is that the Controller and Auditor-General has recommended that we do so. [Interruption] Members should take the time to read the Auditor-General\u2019s report. On page 53 of the report he makes the recommendation that this legislation should be passed. As the Auditor-General notes, the relevant sections of the Public Finance Act 1989 require this type of legislation to validate the appropriation. The Controller and Auditor-General is the man who is telling virtually every party in Parliament that it owes some money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThe second reason New Zealand First is supporting this bill is that the Speaker herself has recommended that this step be taken. Finally, we are supporting this legislation because Treasury suggests that it should be supported. Treasury, in its report, explained why this sort of legislation is required in terms of the Public Finance Act 1989.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EIn fact, New Zealand First is somewhat disturbed about the politicking that surrounds this type of legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022543d5dead2cc4282a6d1d7eaf9564795\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Nobody can hear, at all. Will members please show some respect to the speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e32194e53a24ae89946b4d1135d8135\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: To put it simply, if the Controller and Auditor-General, the Speaker of the House, and Treasury all independently say we must pass this legislation, then New Zealand First agrees that it should be passed. I invite members of the National Party to read the documents\u2014maybe I should table them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI want to make this point perfectly clear: New Zealand First will pay any moneys that it rightfully and lawfully owes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022087c748b96944e51a0971cefb34da607\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: What does that mean?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac7ac0e2a18148b2a113bcc9743f7bcf\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The members do not understand what that means.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b4bffcfd1254d2cb2724cb58d541a7a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I say to the members at the back of the Chamber that one or two interjections are acceptable, but that constant barracking is not acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c644f45994fa41d096f83bc68e3f0ae3\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I have been sitting here quietly, actually.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244256fb0ccd44e79b48e6278179f8235\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, you have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241129b22bafa41d88e90f6bff7249100\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: But it is very, very hard to keep quiet when the deputy leader of New Zealand First speaks in favour of a law to validate his party\u2019s unlawful spending, and has the temerity and audacity to say that New Zealand First, as a matter of policy, will pay back any money it lawfully owes, when it is busy here, under urgency, changing the law so\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228f68e131d1b4bf3940045df7fe6ff18\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The members knows that that is not a point of order. [Interruption] No, the member will please be seated. The member cannot go on with a point of order that is not a point of order. It is a debating point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3adac8bc3304ed0bd1e5eb6814d0653\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Mr Hide\u2019s offering to the House leads us to an interesting point. I refer you to Standing Order 165 and Speakers\u2019 rulings 70/5-6 and 71/1-5, which deal with financial interests, pecuniary interests, and declarations thereof. Given that Labour MPs have today received the bad news that they each have to write a personal cheque, given that many other parties have found themselves in a similar position, and given that New Zealand First is the only party out there saying that it will not pay it back, then\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d96d58b9ded4a49aa9a9d0f61ccb641\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, but this is not a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaff04553fce4abf8b1ce1f7c16a2c1c\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: With all due respect, it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a08450b93d4489fad090edb56d322a6\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: It is not a point of order. The member will be seated. That is a debating point, and the member knows it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e6e7a69957614ac198d1ea01bca6ab12\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249b8cf73e4a145ffa8dbcdee417252d9\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, but I have ruled on the point of order. Please be seated. What the member has been raising for the last 2 or 3 minutes are matters within this bill that are for debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d6cf1a19d8a4e0b8d8e7cd2ba52b308\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Assistant Speaker, you cannot debate the Standing Orders. The Standing Orders are clear. This member has a financial interest in this bill, and he has an absolute obligation to declare it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7cecf39bb2942ea8116b27715d9c4b6\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is just completely misinterpreting the Standing Orders, and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c543bc61ec6846c286f432e47e2c781a\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Would you interpret them for us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d06dc71a1e11459f9a25abcfaa0d87fd\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Brownlee\u2014[Interruption] Please be seated, Mr Brown. Before we go any further, Mr Brownlee will withdraw and apologise for his interruption of the Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d76a4cb8b5c94fbc8389705101066d7e\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249a6d727180c46bf918b7b096c1f24ce\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, please be seated\u2014I was ruling on that. It was not a point of order. The member was bringing into the debate Standing Orders that do not apply to this matter. Please continue, Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3529a87db9c43a4b9f31394cbe0b5a5\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022487480fbfefc43c08416a01e1d5820c0\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I say to the member that if he is contesting my ruling, that in itself is disorderly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002267023111e56441a981628d3471779c2a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Assistant Speaker, I want to read to you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221190b7dbbe00446786aaef92849cd21c\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, just a minute. Can I be assured that the member is not contesting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a9c2117e32340a6b10b514c47f56850\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I am not contesting your ruling, Madam Assistant Speaker; I am raising a new point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022adce2f039b714ae3a4e4d2d29787dc77\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I call Dr Nick Smith, who is raising a new point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe9e43aeef804814b65486361d121aa2\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Madam, Speaker, I draw to your attention Standing Order 166, which states: \u201CA member must, before participating in the consideration of any item of business, declare any financial interest that the member has in that business.\u201D We are all aware in this House that there is a court action involving members of this House. A court case in the High Court of New Zealand names every Labour member\u2014in fact, I think the interest applies also to yourself, Madam Assistant Speaker\u2014as having a financial interest in this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThis is a very serious point of order. It goes to the heart of the integrity of this Parliament. I ask you, Madam Assistant Speaker, to give a considered ruling on the following point. Given the fact that there is a legal action involving the financial accountability of all 50 Labour MPs, then a clear interpretation of that Standing Order, particularly when one adds to it the Speakers\u2019 rulings, would say that members opposite who are affected by the legal action must declare a financial interest in this bill. I ask you, Madam Assistant Speaker, to give a considered ruling so that the Standing Orders of this House are upheld.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EIt is a perfectly proper Standing Order, because when we debate issues in this House, it is the public interest, not our own personal interests, that must take precedence in the business of this Parliament. I believe that the 50 Labour Party MPs have a very distinct private interest in this bill. Madam Assistant Speaker, we need your ruling on Standing Order 166 for those members to be required to declare that financial interest. If you do not do so, these Standing Orders are not worth the paper they are written on. We are talking about a sizable amount of money\u2014over $10,000 per member. Those members have a financial interest, it must be declared, and they should not be able to participate in a debate in which they have that financial interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278e1f5d78eb0438aa9addc0142297dab\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The financial interest is not different from that of any other members generally. That is the point. Court proceedings, or anything else, do not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291480deaaba7408d96c2a4c2a3c14cd0\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Can you explain why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022018f023cbd664c468fdc1b405114cb10\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will now leave the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002297f815c7faae496598301c149650a48f\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I simply asked you to explain why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1893b0559854bc080fc62dfc31dd0ef\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will now leave the Chamber, with no backchat. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002269a6d2446e074076b8d8a4ce9f1b915a\u0022\u003ENaming of Member\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00220707f760921f4402b4784dac76adcee3\u0022\u003ENaming of Member\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u002214ca42e2ebcd40edba9d6d0998e92486\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002214ca42e2ebcd40edba9d6d0998e92486\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s behaviour is disgraceful, and I ask the House to name the member. The question now is, That the House name Hon Dr Nick Smith, whose conduct is grossly disorderly, and judge the conduct of this member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question that the House name Hon Dr Nick Smith, whose conduct is grossly disorderly, and judge the conduct of this member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u0022d435c9365b014451bee3b99413d65cda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d435c9365b014451bee3b99413d65cda\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. You put the motion. It was very clearly won on the voices, and no member called for a ballot. I put it to you that the proper course for you, and there is only one course open to you, was to declare that the Noes have it. I invite you to make that calling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279b9def231184a37b20c3b5ca8ef2448\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is not correct. It is up to the Speaker to call, and I have said that the Ayes have it and that the vote be called. There will be silence during the voting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002281394874f6af4dc0a64a8f40b898cb04\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the House name Hon Dr Nick Smith, whose conduct is grossly disorderly, and judge the conduct of this member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022dd9a10a62c444c45aeff9ba504202010\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dd9a10a62c444c45aeff9ba504202010\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ed28e8603154a91b96b3a7f1a2d0999\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: This matter has been dealt with. You cannot relitigate, or further debate, a matter that has been dealt with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229023bb847dce4abc88ceebdb7cf988bd\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that we can always ask the Speaker for clarification of rulings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b241680a1c0944c9a7051551ec05bb9e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: There is no debate on this matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022917dfa75973947fd9aa9e1aca0bef9de\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: It is not a debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229118957568e04462a714054ecc3aa671\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: There is no debate on this matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236e46419264a4caf9686db1869b208c0\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I am simply asking that you clarify the matter. You just commented that the Labour Party, and other members, who clearly, in our view, have a financial interest in this bill, do not have any greater interest than any other member of the House. I do not think you can let that hang out there, without some explanation. It does not have to be now; it might come later in the proceedings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e764d504d3a48e89032c5d0114c87b2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I have ruled on the matter. I call Peter Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002206e73956c27741129595bdcba4ce983f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002206e73956c27741129595bdcba4ce983f\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table this piece of paper on which I have a number of scribblings. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214d7ebee87964728a0da09cb43bf4b0d\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not think that is enough explanation of what the member wants to table. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204248661372b42d6941c450d978855e2\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: These are my speech notes from before. Do you wish me to read them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e031affd66694f01bee4447d14504b41\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No. The member wants to table his speech notes. I just warn the member that he cannot trifle with the House. We have dealt with this matter before, but the member wishes to table these speech notes. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00229633ddf7d19347f480d25d772944bba8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229633ddf7d19347f480d25d772944bba8\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002237dd67d476514638b163f73e22a42b86\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I just warn the member that I will not tolerate trifling points of order. The member cannot proceed to table matters that are not within the House\u2019s business. We have dealt with this point on another occasion, as the member well knows.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ed842d50bb4d4bb7b2e06bd47b8c2bc4\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: In my speech, I referred to the Review of the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, DK Hunn and Henry Lang, January 1990. I seek leave to table that report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222edbd2a2b4c3461f9585301ce84c744e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member wishes to table that report. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u0022d571a015849a493db11ec31412de6a6f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d571a015849a493db11ec31412de6a6f\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I want to draw to your attention that I was halfway through my speech, and although I have no problem with Mr Brownlee taking as many points of order as he cares, it is a custom of this House to allow a member to finish his or her speech, then take the points of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224f98e2e48aa4c63b55e8dd788298542\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Members are always entitled to take points of order, as we have seen. But the House needs to get on with its business.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00224740fde8ee46481bbe97cdc99322083b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224740fde8ee46481bbe97cdc99322083b\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E During the course of my speech, I referred to a number of matters that are covered in the legal opinion given to the Speaker by Mr J Hodder and Ms BA Davies, 11 October 2006. I seek leave to table that document. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201f13dabfa104b09b4fafe31a425e015\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u0022b1a8a6594d3f4d01876dadc37d3b5cf1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b1a8a6594d3f4d01876dadc37d3b5cf1\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I seek the leave of the House to table a copy of the opinion of Mr Jack Hodder of the law firm Chapman Tripp, which has been referred to by previous speakers, and which I intend to refer to, at length, in the speeches that I will be giving to the House in respect of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221fcf0637685c4a04a946da793faf7025\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I thought that was one that Mr Brownlee just did, but if it was not, is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d61b26fee4794358a4a9d7fd035d6cd3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d61b26fee4794358a4a9d7fd035d6cd3\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I raise an issue under Speakers\u2019 rulings 16/7 and 16/8, which relate to appropriate business attire for members of the House. I was wondering whether the electioneering badge being worn, at the moment, by some members of this House, including yourself, would be considered as part of business attire. I think it has electioneering on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ca53fa9717e4885b1af3684067be814\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will be seated; she is just trifling with the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4718d728e1a405eac2603983775f554\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019m not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1c38fc18a0f4d8d8883e8cbc54fd17f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Just a minute, I will explain. Many members wear, as the member is wearing right now, a support emblem, or whatever one likes to call it. This badge is actually in support of board of trustees\u2019 elections. It is exactly the same as the member is wearing, herself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dca0bbf45f5b4327b128b9f46c3af17a\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e2a615a5a364e6b85b00c77502770ac\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I have ruled there is nothing against the dress code. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229820746e66043d8a082ad68359c66b9\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a4756f65ba64cba975ced77ac9b9dbf\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Could you please be seated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220df354b2f45943d98747d0a9ecb5e1cc\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Could you please give me the courtesy of making my point of order, without interrupting me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022433b88ac4993432c97bf31fd362a56b9\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. I have ruled on the matter of the dress code. I have explained what it is, if the member could not read it from there. It is exactly the same as many members wear in this House, to support a cause or otherwise. If the member has a new point of order, please raise it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00228a1ecef6860645b7b4507d5b5e2f2ab1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a1ecef6860645b7b4507d5b5e2f2ab1\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. That point of order from Judith Collins was not a great point of order, but she was allowed to be heard in silence. You have ejected members of the National Party when they admitted to interjecting on a point of order, and there is no doubt, I know, that if you asked the Hon Harry Duynhoven whether he interjected on Judith Collins\u2019 point of order, he would say he did, and therefore I think you should ask him to leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b167b7bfb5ae459eae0fc7534e5e17de\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Harry Duynhoven, did you interject?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7f2ce3ce0af4f3691c5c3f976d1fb28\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: I did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022effa44f7edef44c1a01c9ffe4d730ec5\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u002244f998f5c6484ec89d9d9ad00eeb4b79\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002244f998f5c6484ec89d9d9ad00eeb4b79\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022138ee86958064180b8ec108d76b613bb\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I will hear the point when there is silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe2d92d7791c476980f0effd589aaee8\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. You will have noticed a number of members here seeking leave to table certain things. The point that my honourable colleague Judith Collins made was about her points of order being able to be heard. I have to make this point, although it does not give me any pleasure to make it: consistently, when we on this side of the House make points of order on various things when you, Madam Assistant Speaker, are in the Chair, before we have said two or three words you cut us off. If you want to know one of the reasons why there is often difficulty when you are Chair, it is that on this side of the House we do not feel that we get fair treatment. It does pain me to say that, Madam Assistant Speaker, but I want you to reflect on what I am saying. I do not take trifling points of order, but this is a serious matter, and it will cause trouble for you in the future, and trouble for the order of this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f298ff3a1ea74d6ca1866d65fcbd86b9\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I just say to the member that that was a very threatening statement to the Speaker. The member knows that there is a correct procedure, if the member wants to complain about the Speaker, and the member will follow that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022cb28424286ec4faba77d806d3f33e73f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cb28424286ec4faba77d806d3f33e73f\u0022\u003EERIC ROY (National\u2014Invercargill):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am in some difficulty, because I believe that procedure has not been followed correctly. You will know that when procedural motions take place, such as a closure, the wording of the motion has to be used precisely. The point of order that I make is that if you look at Standing Order 87, you will see that the correct wording of the naming was not adhered to. You said: \u201CI move that the member be named.\u201D Standing Order 87 says: \u201C \u2018That [such member] be suspended from the service of the House\u2019. \u201D That is the naming process. I put it to you that in your attempt to deal with the disorder that you perceived, you did not use the appropriate wording for the procedural motion that should have ensued at that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002231f35affbf954c45a1c88023538034c1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I called on the House to judge the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u0022956bc7c0841d4dad9a72160e9c8ed886\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022956bc7c0841d4dad9a72160e9c8ed886\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Naming a member of Parliament, as you know, Madam Assistant Speaker, is the most serious thing that can happen outside of a breach of privilege. So what has gone on here today is very serious indeed. It is not often that the Standing Orders specify the precise wording that has to be used. I cannot see how Dr Nick Smith can have any sense that there was a proper vote of Parliament, when an incorrect procedure was followed. I think the easiest thing to do is essentially to validate the vote of the House by your naming him correctly and our having the vote again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df74815095d64dd7bd11fe317e53e1fc\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I hardly think that is necessary. The intent was perfectly clear\u2014as under Standing Order 87. Can I just say to members that we have had a lot of trifling points of order. I am not going to tolerate it much longer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022 data-id=\u0022faf51568f1a044f09099e1da14ed2cc8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022faf51568f1a044f09099e1da14ed2cc8\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Dr Nick Smith raised a question about Standing Order 166. Unfortunately, he did interject when you were giving your ruling. I wonder whether it would be helpful to the House if you were willing to explain more fully why the Labour Party speakers in this debate have no pecuniary interest, given that, as Dr Smith pointed out, there is a case in the High Court at the moment that, if it were to proceed, would involve every member of the Labour Party caucus being up for an amount in excess of $10,000. That is not a common interest for the rest of Parliament; it is peculiar to the Labour Party. I think those members do clearly have a direct pecuniary interest that is not general to the rest of Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222c969a91eeb949e79dea1e9ec43c6acb\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I do not know whether you were here before, Dr Brash, but I clearly made a point that court proceedings do not prevent legislation from proceeding.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e6a4dfaa8a394ca397e639c063440d4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e6a4dfaa8a394ca397e639c063440d4f\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I refer you to Speakers\u2019 ruling 63/1, which is in relation to a party vote. I do this because when it came to the vote in relation to the naming of Dr Nick Smith, after the vote was lost on the voices you directed that there be a party vote. I quote the Speakers\u2019 ruling: \u201CA party vote is not an opportunity for a member who does not agree with the result on the voices to test the position of another party. The Chair will have the Clerk conduct a party vote only if asked to by a member who gave his or her voice contrary to the Chair\u2019s declaration of the result on the voices.\u201D I believe that your decision to require the Clerk to go ahead with a party vote was a wrong decision in terms of Speakers\u2019 rulings and the Standing Orders. I seek that you revisit that decision, because I believe that it invalidated your attempt to have Dr Smith named.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224341cbd73e434fe8b2cc21afc570d4ee\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member is quite wrong. That is completely the Speaker\u2019s call. [Interruption] I have dealt with this issue, and I will not have any further discussion on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022 data-id=\u0022afa923f2740541469f9ae855739b06dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022afa923f2740541469f9ae855739b06dd\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. This is a different point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe02a8422cbf458b9f49f99a8e1290ba\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: A different point of order, Dr Brash.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fb6f25f1bac4e2e93064fcc4ea74980\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: You said that High Court cases did not invalidate legislation going through, and I accept that completely. But Standing Order 166(1) states: \u201CA member must, before participating in the consideration of any item of business, declare any financial interest that the member has in that business.\u201D I think that all we are asking for is that members of the Labour Party who speak on this bill do declare they have a financial interest in its outcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5d001821e8b4ea586ea7e46e4a1930e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is not correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a69a6d6f5b2d47f4b3b88fa6cd49013d\u0022\u003EEric Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022733365ddb6bc49cd8e1c2c8d129a01b2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Is this a different point of order, Mr Roy? [Interruption] Yes, I have concluded. The information I have been given is that this financial interest is not different from that of other members generally.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00226bd3ec4e491046b191ec7a39ea949532\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bd3ec4e491046b191ec7a39ea949532\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I understand your ruling about the court case, but I will give a situation where it is quite different from that of every other member in this House, and that is the situation of Peter Brown and the New Zealand First MPs, who, by their own words and actions, have declared clearly a financial interest in this bill. They have said that if it is found that their spending has been unlawful, then they will cough up $150,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1aa047b045044cb91f9508c5a54b4a2\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: No, we haven\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a098a8c5a19c48568095886e734015bc\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Peter Brown now says he will not. I notice that he can interrupt on my point of order. [Interruption] I do want to hear Peter Brown\u2019s speech, eventually; I would rather that he was thrown out when he had finished his speech. But by his words he said: \u201CIf this legislation doesn\u2019t pass, we\u2019ll have to pay the money. If the legislation does pass, we won\u2019t have to.\u201D I cannot understand a more clear financial interest in a matter before this House than the one that Peter Brown and New Zealand First confront here today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2452799cabe43708c0fb2b3a7079549\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: This affects all members generally. It is not\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d66ae7887c6d4ed1ae4203eafecfaabf\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: It does not affect me because I have paid the money. It does not affect the National Party because they have paid the money. It does not affect the M\u0101ori Party because they have paid the money. It does not affect the Green Party because they have paid, anyway. It does not affect the Labour Party because they are not going to pay it, ever!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022953671716ebf4a0bbd9d26a75976ac1f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Hide, you have made your point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c10b73e63f9348b69eeb2a629fdf2831\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d40c0990dedc4b2798ecda39fce5503a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Is it a new point of order? Because I have ruled on this point of order. [Interruption] Please be seated. I want all members to be very clear that I have ruled on this point of order relating to this appropriations bill for the Parliamentary Service. The points that members have been making affect all members generally. I have ruled on this matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248b711bedb8840c39fe1b581a71e26d6\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b6995427a3049189b22c9f8b187677a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just check with the member, because I have ruled on this matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022998fad1d3aea4260993e1a6557dd9c1a\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Assistant Speaker, I think you will find out that it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ee3d0e5337645a2a7573e5130475fe2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. I will just make it clear again. The bill is to validate expenditure and provide an interim funding arrangement. It is not to do with members individually\u2014their pecuniary interest. Please continue, Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022326d3ef03db44a1da5de2420eb0ad199\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022326d3ef03db44a1da5de2420eb0ad199\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b1d94dcdc0a43e7ba905d2bdb1e5c05\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am not taking any more. Please be seated. I have warned the member that I have ruled on this point of order several times. If the member wants to raise a new point of order, that is different, but I must warn the member that I have ruled on this point of order. For the member continually to raise it is in itself out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7144c8e4b2a4f548d8face491d843ed\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: During Rodney Hide\u2019s point of order\u2014and you have now dismissed two members of this House\u2014Peter Brown interrupted. I ask you to treat equally everybody in this House and ask him to leave the Chamber, for the exact reason that my colleague Paula Bennett and my colleague Harry Duynhoven were removed from the Chamber\u2014for interjecting on a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022707bb7d0a8fa4200bd380265af5d6e1c\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: And while the member was making a point of order\u2014Mr Hide\u2014several members here were raising points of order. I was trying to clarify this matter, which had become complicated. Please continue, Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b91b3cf8d0bd4bcdb50f959f11881073\u0022\u003EEric Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249d17de12ff245c5836faf359b6af963\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, Mr Roy\u2014is this a new point of order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d37e154d2c34b97b64599accca711f1\u0022\u003EEric Roy\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is not because\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220432076c1bca449f8cf5668812afeca3\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, I have ruled\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236976f49bd984eaca8d205ec5337e547\u0022\u003EEric Roy\u003C/span\u003E: Could I please explain.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6c2a2fc288f4c048598eb646f5e2143\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. I have ruled on this point of order. That is the end of the story.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u00225eb796d9dc8b426082e8f6a2491e6b4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225eb796d9dc8b426082e8f6a2491e6b4f\u0022\u003EERIC ROY (National\u2014Invercargill):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Can you repeat your ruling on the point that I made, because I have completely missed the point you made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226826944c0f624a71b5a8d497a4d3f306\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I have ruled on the points of order that numerous members have made about members not being able to participate in this debate because of their perceived pecuniary interest. What I have said very clearly is that this expenditure relating to the validation of appropriations in Vote Parliamentary Service affects all members generally.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u0022fa9e5862842e4dc9b9d723f748435405\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fa9e5862842e4dc9b9d723f748435405\u0022\u003EERIC ROY (National\u2014Invercargill):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Mine is quite separate. I did raise a point of order, and then it was kind of overtaken by other matters. The point I make is, quite simply, that procedural motions are quite prescribed and have to be adhered to accurately, particularly because, in the case of naming a member, it is a very serious matter. There is a very prescribed and stated motion in Standing Order 87. You did not adhere precisely to that wording, so I questioned the validity of your move. You mentioned that we had understood the intent. My point of order is that that is not the point. This is a procedural motion in which very exact wording must be used.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e1d00eb900e4ec4b6c5bb0063b794f1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I have already ruled on the matter. As I said, the intent was clear in the naming. All members who voted on it are clear about the intent of the naming of a person in this House, as the member\u2014[Interruption] Mr Simon Power, would you like to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223236f0c8243a41dbaaa7b6159993d847\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df33bcbd71bb449db35e5cf0b5450f25\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: As I said, Mr Roy, the intent was clear. All members are clear about the naming of a member. I asked the House to name this member. [Interruption] I am sorry, but I will not enter into this any longer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00222cae52cdd70d42c580e920c003af85fc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222cae52cdd70d42c580e920c003af85fc\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Can we expect, then, to see a written ruling changing the Standing Orders to comply with your determination that as long as the Speaker loosely indicates what is intended, then procedure is deemed to have been followed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022537cca4b39e54c138459dbba935b8a32\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am sure you cannot, because it is unnecessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022e43abddda2774d10a547ac6a1e6ff369\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e43abddda2774d10a547ac6a1e6ff369\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a45d16b70764d408bfa6d2058175837\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I have dealt with the matter that you have just raised, Mr Brownlee. I have ruled on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc34028d293c4ae89e5d0beee803edde\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Assistant Speaker, have you ruled that the Standing Orders, in the case of naming members, no longer apply?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a653acb534b4793bc42ed48a94a16fe\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Of course I have not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d424d15abfde48b585ac4e94cf6f5792\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is exactly what you have done. You either follow the Standing Orders or do not. Naming someone is a serious matter. You cannot expect us to be totally compliant while the Speaker gets it wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221b7fffedb60e46dfbe50ab7413e932f7\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is absolutely right; the naming of a member is a serious matter. That is why I referred to the Standing Order that the House be asked to name the member. All members of the House are very clear about that, when a member is named. [Interruption] I have dealt with this matter and there will be no further points of order on it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u00221043f71fcd8840eb8202d3345b60c13c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221043f71fcd8840eb8202d3345b60c13c\u0022\u003EDr RICHARD WORTH (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am glad that the Leader of the House is here because I seek leave for the naming of Dr Smith to be revoked. The reason for doing that is twofold. Firstly, with great respect to you, Madam Assistant Speaker, I do not believe that when there was no call for a party vote, you were entitled to require a party vote to be taken; and, second\u2014and I respect your ruling on this, but I nevertheless suggest it is not correct\u2014there has been a formal breach of those two Standing Orders that relate to naming, Standing Order 87 and Standing Order 88. So that we can move on, I seek leave for the revocation of the naming of Dr Smith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b671e03603f34e3db354d85c987bf546\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022394440ad9e5645f9859830a82585e0ff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022394440ad9e5645f9859830a82585e0ff\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table a document entitled Principles to underpin management by public entities of funding to non-government organisations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EDocument not tabled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00224993f610cdd7461bbc8d98399429acf4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224993f610cdd7461bbc8d98399429acf4\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think we have got ourselves into a bit of an impasse here that it is useful to revisit. This is an important matter. It is one that the House has the right to consider properly. We are being held up here on an issue that is not of some insignificance. I do not wish to undermine your authority at all, but I suggest that it would be appropriate for Dr Worth to seek the leave again, to enable the House to move forward. Clearly, Dr Smith will then be on some pretty clear notice about his behaviour moving forward, and I am sure other members will be, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u00222b1500db13c7423bb2a3333b6fd84924\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b1500db13c7423bb2a3333b6fd84924\u0022\u003EDr RICHARD WORTH (National):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for the naming of Dr Nick Smith to be revoked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b8036ef2b0c4b5abe604c3d6439d18a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226ffd825e961c4b5eac94ee908a1c0828\u0022\u003EQuestion, by leave, revoked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226ffd825e961c4b5eac94ee908a1c0828\u0022\u003EAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002235fd39c3061645e7a9c51ba0ada9d862\u0022\u003EFirst Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000490\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u0022e3549084919a4b56880c3f84028c8ac8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e3549084919a4b56880c3f84028c8ac8\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I think that in the spirit of cooperation we should just move on, but I want to draw your attention to something; I am not worried about it now, but I want to make this point, and then I am happy for Mr Brown to resume his speech. Your ruling has been a bit tough. I noticed that when Paula Bennett interjected on Trevor Mallard\u2019s point of order, you threw her out. When Mr Harry Duynhoven interjected on Judy Collins\u2019 point of order, you threw him out. But when Peter Brown interjected on mine, as was acknowledged by everyone, somehow that was perfectly OK, and you did not offer any sanction whatsoever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e4af30d2e5b450da01a977fb2fee22f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Hide, I have already dealt with that. As I said, when you raised several points of order several other people were interjecting at that time and there was a lot of discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u002286b02bad01b04651a2be30301c7ec03f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286b02bad01b04651a2be30301c7ec03f\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I take you back to the events surrounding your request for Mr Duynhoven to leave the Chamber. When members are told by the Speaker to leave the Chamber, they are required to go immediately, with no further action taking place in the Chamber, and, normally, the Speaker holds up proceedings to make sure that the member who has been instructed to leave does leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E After Mr Duynhoven\u2019s offence was drawn to your attention, you decided you had to require him to leave. You instructed him to leave, but, rather than leaving, he wandered over to the whip and engaged in a lengthy conversation. My colleague who had raised a further matter was already well into the development of his theme before Mr Duynhoven left the Chamber. I draw to your attention the fact that you had already ruled his actions to be disorderly by requiring him to leave the Chamber. The only thing that can happen after that is for his behaviour to be ruled to be grossly disorderly and for him to be named. That is the approach that you took with regard to one member today, and I now require that you consider taking precisely that action in respect of Mr Duynhoven. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002241b7334135bd4546a18e8478ede4f90a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241b7334135bd4546a18e8478ede4f90a\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E This is quite important. The matter is now out of time. That matter should have been raised when it happened; the member cannot raise it later. It is now out of time. One could have made exactly the same point about Ms Bennett when she delayed her departure from this House. It is beyond the point of time that the matter should have been raised; the member should not try our patience further. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d5cef52905547c3bbd72d3353c5120e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I noted that Mr Duynhoven did do that. I thought about interrupting the speaker, and refrained from doing that. Mr Duynhoven went. I take your point, Mr McCully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u0022763bf9f668bb4c8584486b3a19611ed6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022763bf9f668bb4c8584486b3a19611ed6\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221121dbebb4449248d1928041473d800\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: We have dealt with this matter now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9d2579e94a84f60bc90a118198425c5\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY\u003C/span\u003E: I am raising a new matter. Dr Cullen has just made a suggestion that my actions were out of time, and I want to clarify that matter. This has been something of a brawl. I am not allowed to refer to the fact that the Leader of the House was not here at the time, but I simply say that Dr Cullen may not be in full possession of the facts in relation to the proceedings of the House in the last hour or two. I respond to his assertion by simply saying that I have been trying to raise this point for some time now. The fact that the Speaker has chosen not to give me the call because other matters have been given precedence is not my responsibility, and I reject absolutely the suggestion that I did not raise the matter in time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c66dc0be61ef4851b6a1f6e692216443\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is probably correct in that a lot of other points of order have been raised. I did not realise that that was the particular point that you were going to raise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u00226cf61eaa69924a12858663dd7fb92849\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226cf61eaa69924a12858663dd7fb92849\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I will commence where I left off before that interlude. I want to make this point absolutely clear: New Zealand First will pay any moneys that it rightfully and lawfully owes. However, we have reservations\u2014and we are entitled to have reservations\u2014about the Auditor-General\u2019s summation. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dadea97b9b1a400c95ce41cecbdcae09\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Brown, please continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224da7ce53a61648d1a0d27c2f08107a5b\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: And because we have reservations about the Auditor-General\u2019s report\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ab1b42016da4e26a6365e58bf261676\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It might be that not many other people are interested in what this member is saying, but I am, and I cannot hear him, even leaning back hard against the speaker behind me. Could you, maybe, ask for a little more decorum, so that we can hear the member?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280630907fe0041b7a7ea6f65edaac634\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Mallard. Can the member please continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228af0c02eb144ffd9450fd3cb694088b\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We have reservations about the Auditor-General\u2019s findings, we are entitled to have those looked into, and we are seeking legal advice. On this issue, I tell members that some top Queen\u2019s Counsel in the country cannot agree on the whole thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI want to make this clear also. The Auditor-General alleges he went and spoke with the political parties, and outlined his concern. We know that he spoke to Dr Don Brash, because Don Brash was on the radio saying so, but he did not speak with anybody in New Zealand First, and I do not believe\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be481a85472346be8b753f1ca6622379\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your judgment on Standing Order 111. Given that Mr Brown and his leader have intimated they are seeking a judicial review of their circumstances, it seems to me that it is important that you give a ruling on the issue of whether we can hear his speech, or whether there is a real and substantial danger of prejudice to the trial of the case. On that matter, Mr Assistant Speaker, I seek your view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ffa42e0555b4a489306967560ddff77\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: It is a very simple matter. This is not a matter awaiting, or under, adjudication in any court of record at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a77ae2ed0b0646848bb2f74ba2a87d38\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb2ba5813d274296b9d5500f225d990a\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. If Mr Mallard\u2019s proposition were correct, then, clearly, Mr Brown is misleading the House, and you must, most definitely, have a view on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022823702fd6480492ab2032b943eac68db\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I have only just stepped into this debate. I am listening very carefully to what Mr Brown is saying, and I will continue to do that. In the meantime, I say that Mr Brown should not get into the details of the case if papers have been filed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228eaedf7da9144d458543eb841d8d7275\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Assistant Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bcaebdcab1040a1837d3c9a8d782e96\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I have already ruled, Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d42e815ab6f64d9db326596d41e3e875\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, let me make clear what I have said. I have not said\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a09924cb041b4716972b2c0ad333a545\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Hang on, Mr Brown. I am on my feet; please be seated. I am saying to the member that he should not get into the details of the case if papers have been filed. If they have been filed, the member should not get into the details of the case; if they have not been filed, it is a different matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210571cb958c84f10a34d4c17f8052dd5\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, and let me put your mind at rest. I have not spoken about any judicial review or any papers, or any speaking about any judicial review or papers\u2014or any legal court, or anything else along those lines. I have suggested that New Zealand First will be consulting lawyers, and getting their advice. We understand that the Auditor-General spoke with, at least, the National Party, and advised its members some time before that he was going to take a tougher or a different line on this issue. At no point did he speak with anybody in New Zealand First. I will say that again: at no time did he speak with anybody in New Zealand First. I do not believe that he spoke with the M\u0101ori Party, the Green Party, or United Future, but they can clarify that for themselves. At no time, so it appears, did he advise even the Parliamentary Service, because some of the so-called offending material that we have been found guilty of using was checked by the Parliamentary Service. We had clearance from the Parliamentary Service. Then, for the Auditor-General to claim, by vague references\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a83a920b6a604cf89d62938895b1451a\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Like a Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5c3c56694b5490da3ef83168f89eaaa\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014that this July 2000 report constitutes a warning for the third parties is, we believe, patently unfair. It is all very well for Simon Power to say: \u201CLike a Solicitor-General\u2019s report.\u201D; the Auditor-General knocked on Don Brash\u2019s door and spoke with him for quite some considerable time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220471265217040a29a935b24bd7998fb\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Can members be seated. I say to the members on my left\u2014many of whom have been in this Chamber for many years\u2014that I would like them to look at Speakers\u2019 ruling 57/3: \u201CInterjections \u2026 are out of order unless they are rare and reasonable;\u201D\u2014and, as a former colleague in this place used to say, they sometimes, at least, might be witty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220632194eab241c2805e014ebdd6deb2\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022367aeae7422f459cb550ac4e7dfaed0b\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Speakers\u2019 ruling 57/3; I have made a ruling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f518eb5ae0dc44e7a3508fe344eafc2e\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: I have a point of order\u2014a new one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221d47c4fcda1475daef97a8bbbf4b8a7\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1d816de1e8643a2af89d6f596d96e05\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to clarify, because of all that has gone on this afternoon, whether the member speaking\u2014and I raise this point now before he continues, so that I am not interrupting him again\u2014has declared his financial interests in this matter, and whether his case is different from those of the rest of us. We think it is different, because we do not owe the money. Is this a financial interest that should be declared by the member?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227761099f9ae84a9eb58b9220b1a4b882\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I think you know, Mr Assistant Speaker, and I think that that member knows, that there is not a financial interest in this. If one looks at this appropriation legislation, one sees that the case is exactly the opposite. If there were to be any interest, it would be in the approach that some members opposite have been suggesting. There is none in this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207e8bf296e254f77ae20b067ea00b4d2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister has made a good point, but I am prepared to listen to what the member has to say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a549349832f40028ff69fa02b77c558\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Assistant Speaker, I refer you to Standing Order 165(1), which states: \u201CA financial interest is a direct financial benefit that might accrue to a member personally, or to any trust, company or other business entity in which the member holds an appreciable interest, as a result of the outcome of the House\u2019s consideration of a particular item of business.\u201D I put it to you that the member who has just resumed his seat\u2014Mr Brown\u2014would, on an ordinary reading of that particular Standing Order, have a financial interest. He needs simply to declare that interest, as I see it, under Standing Order 166, and I request that you ask him to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcf8b813223849fcacb40fac3232417a\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I do not want to prolong this any more than is necessary, but I explain for the House that when one is dealing with financial matters, there are really two sorts. The first is when there is spending\u2014the sort we are currently dealing with\u2014and the second is one when there is income revenue to the Government, or taxation, which would deal with matters of refunds. At the moment we are dealing with an appropriation, and therefore it makes no difference to whether refunds are made. Therefore members cannot possibly have a financial interest in it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a6b00ad3304455c8f4b186d122724ec\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Mallard. It is up to members individually to declare whether they have a financial interest. It does not relate to individual members. I understand that the matter has been dealt with, in a previous sitting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223af298b267f3467c955dc62cd5b1be60\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You pointed us to Speakers\u2019 ruling 57/3, on interjections, and I notice here that the rule was originally made by Speaker Statham, in\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9abbd32053e429e88673373bb84f24d\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: 1923.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfa5030bd36b405ba781d0b65af635bf\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E:\u20141923, yes. It was upheld by Speaker Barnard in 1936. It was further upheld by Speaker Barnard in 1936, and there have been no updates since. So this is a 70-year-old Standing Order. Things have moved on a bit, Mr Assistant Speaker, and I think there is an opportunity here for you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222a9fa73bbe24eefbebc6a228d8322c2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: You have everybody laughing, Mr Brownlee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e56f4b14b374078a1e313b69324ffee\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: No, I think Assistant Speaker Robertson could well find himself making the 2006 ruling. It would be quite a contrast\u20141936 with 2006. I was fascinated that you obviously are very aware of it, because you called our attention to it without reference to the book. You are well aware of the importance, I suspect, of the interjection process. Goodness, the whole House would be asleep most of the time if it were not for interjections. I just say one more time that you really do need to think about updating that particular Speaker\u2019s ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f353694d30d4cf09a4e7b603b214f4d\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Brownlee. I have taken note of what you said. I call the honourable member Peter Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d3ddfb3ecb74ffaaf46653b328e4563\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. How long do I have left?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dfe61243823451fbe5d602439db3256\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Just under 3 minutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022237df2e6963c411db73717c017c1786f\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to start at the beginning and go through it all again, because clearly members opposite do not understand the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022096379eb83d54fee947c092616faaf31\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The House is the master of its own destiny. The member is perfectly entitled to seek leave if he so wishes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226899d797e10f4a66ac65c51a4df3c5c5\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to start again right at the beginning and go through the whole thing in one hit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3b4f57c635c446294f3e21280c7dc8a\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is. The member will continue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228243de53519a49cfb712f5bc1dc20e5d\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d218a2a31894650a74a2e47774eb180\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Let us give Mr Brown the courtesy of being heard, colleagues.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a531cd3a4634a569ac029106473551a\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. There has been a misunderstanding. The \u201CYes\u201D was in fact an affirmation that we would like the member to start again. Put the leave again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022722be4a82e5a4869a14172c1fc2dc5be\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b56718eb88604bcbb91888ee0a3b775c\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think that what Mr Brownlee is saying is that there was no objection from the National caucus to leave being granted, and that there was a misunderstanding. Everyone was so enthusiastic to hear Mr Brown\u2019s speech uninterrupted from the start that an involuntary exclamation was emitted. I think the House actually\u2014and I am relying on the previous Speaker\u2019s ruling that it is the intent that is important\u2014intended that leave be granted, and I think it was granted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268f182a9e49649ce8707e08433688d25\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: You cannot seek leave for somebody else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226196ef27a5884cfd846b6e81fff5baec\u0022\u003EEric Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The House sets precedents for itself. The very last time that my colleague Dr Worth sought leave, the very same thing had happened; there had been an error of judgment from within the Labour caucus, and Dr Worth sought that the leave be put again. I think it is totally appropriate that it be put again. The same mistake has occurred on this side. There is a precedent. We would certainly encourage Mr Brown to put his leave again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ac99f58708c6471d89b73c2c72d314db\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The thing is that the issue is in the hands of Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cb95ad3f622948dc8562f60a30902a14\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. If I have one serious thing to say about this afternoon\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ebb017a04a24e74a02595391f4572ef\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I have two points. The first is that, again, I am having trouble hearing the member. The second point is that in the racket he might have missed the point that everyone wants to hear his speech again. But only he can seek leave for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a7ebd9efec14cc49eb5e75b15586205\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Mallard. I just say that the practice of members engaging in barracking is intolerable in this Chamber. I call Mr Brown to continue his speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fc8751c052c4a508fb290d77c515dcc\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022925338905596440fa8411ffca68aaffc\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I have dealt with this issue, Mr Hide. The member is to continue his speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255b7f718fecd4dd48a392340e30815cc\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do not think you understood what I said. Maybe I did not communicate it very well to you. My point was that leave had actually been granted. It does not need to be put again. The House granted Mr Brown leave\u2014that was the intent of the House\u2014to start his speech again. Leave has been granted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223aa4a564c9a42b59e5662da9d6e2119\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Hide. That is not the intent I got from Opposition benches. We have all been in this House for a long time, and know that when somebody says \u201CYes\u201D when leave is put, he or she is objecting. That is the normal practice and has been ever since I have been a member of Parliament, which is nearly 20 years. I will put the case back in the hands of Mr Brown. It is his call. He is the man making the speech, and he is the only one who has the right to ask for leave. If he chooses not to do so, that is his decision. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bddb3575880b478aaa80e3a806d2c4bc\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I put my hand up and say that I said \u201CYes\u201D, but it was a \u201CYes, Mr Brown! We\u2019re going to hear it again!\u201D. It was an affirmation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c97d67be13440c48a61cc843c713c5e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member, but it is up to Mr Brown. I have already ruled. Please continue your speech, Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2708f90e0774f9fa53b449cbeca36a3\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I would have thought it appropriate for the Auditor-General at least to have advised the Parliamentary Service in clear, concise terms what he was going to do. When New Zealand First had our pamphlets, our brochures, checked off, they were OK\u2019d by the Parliamentary Service. On page 54 of the report\u2014if anyone in the National Party wants to read it\u2014the Auditor-General makes it quite clear that he sees that one of the remedies is that the Parliamentary Service should sign off any proposed spending. That is exactly what we asked for. We think this bill is essential in order to clarify the circumstances in which we operate in Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, I have to say that I have never seen such childish behaviour in my life. If this is what the National Party has become, then God help it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022 data-id=\u0022991d8173f9d44894b8a1bf24c62ea21f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022991d8173f9d44894b8a1bf24c62ea21f\u0022\u003EJEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader\u2014Green):\u003C/span\u003E The Greens will abstain from voting on this bill, in accordance with our cooperation agreement with the Government on all matters of confidence and supply. A month ago I announced that the Greens would pay the full amount found to have been spent outside the scope of our parliamentary appropriation but that we would not support validation legislation, on the principle that MPs should not use their power to legislate in order to remove themselves from accountability. Since then, it has been clarified that the form taken by the legislation makes it a matter of confidence and supply, so there would need to be an extremely good reason not to observe our commitment under the cooperation agreement, which is to abstain. It is also clear that this legislation is actually required by the Public Finance Act, and the House cannot really get around that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EWe would be entirely happy not to oppose the bill at all if all parties had committed themselves to their moral obligation to repay any spending that has been found to be outside the scope of the appropriation. However, two parties have yet to make that commitment. We would be very concerned if this legislation was used by them as an excuse not to pay the money back. The obligation is simply a moral one. We can find no legal obligation on any party to make restitution for what is found to have been spent in error. But the passing of validation legislation does not absolve anyone from that moral obligation, onerous though it must be for parties that, like our party, have reduced representation this term compared with that in the previous term. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EIn the Committee stage, we will support those clauses that set out the rules from here on. If the bill could be split into two, we would support those clauses at the third reading too, but it appears that it will not be. It is essential that the law gives us some guidance as to the meaning of \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D and \u201Celectioneering\u201D; otherwise, none of us know what we can and cannot do with our leaders\u2019 budgets right now. It is true that we were all warned that we could not use parliamentary appropriations for electioneering, and I think we all agree with that. It is also true that electioneering has never been defined, so we all followed a rule of thumb that we could not ask for votes for a candidate or a party, and that we could not solicit money or membership in any way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E The Auditor-General\u2019s 2005 report did not clarify electioneering any further than that. To the extent that it did try to clarify the rules, those criteria are not applied in the Auditor-General\u2019s 2006 report. Our 2006 spending has been audited using a different set of rules from those set out in the Auditor-General\u2019s 2005 report. For example, the 2005 report identifies a principle of democratic interaction, saying that dialogue between representatives and the public is a valid and fundamental part of a democracy. Yet newspaper advertisements that invited the public to discussions with me on climate change and oil depletion were ruled out of order, though they made no reference whatever to the election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EWe also have a new rule that the legality of an action changes dramatically 3 months before an election. That is despite the opinion of the Solicitor-General, which the Auditor-General says he relies on, that explicitly says that things lawful for the rest of a parliamentary term do not suddenly become unlawful 3 months before an election. The Auditor-General relies on the Electoral Act for that ruling, which is never applied to the spending of the Parliamentary Service appropriation. It is a particularly difficult ruling to apply, given that one never knows that the 3-month period had started until the election has been called, which usually occurs at least a month later. So we are meant to try to second-guess when the election will be held, in order to determine when spending suddenly becomes unlawful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe Auditor-General has applied a ruling that any mention of the future, or of a vision, by a party constitutes electioneering. That would seem to favour parties that wish only to preserve the status quo. I also fail to understand the application of a criterion of wide dispersal, where the more widely a communication has been dispersed, the more it is held to be electioneering. Under MMP, list members and parties have nationwide constituencies. Surely, if a communication is lawful in one place, it is lawful in several places. I raised my concerns regarding all those newly imposed criteria with Mr Brady when I asked to see him, and I have still not had any satisfactory explanation of the criteria that he has used. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003ESince the election, the Auditor-General has defined as electioneering any discussion on matters not actually before the House. No such ruling was given to us before the election, and it advantages members of the Government, who are likely to want to talk about legislation they are promoting, rather than Opposition parties, who prefer to discuss with the public legislation they would like to introduce but have not had the opportunity to introduce. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EClause 7 defines \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D in the way they have been understood for some time: excluding the seeking of votes, money, or members. At least with that through, we can continue to do our jobs as MPs in the interim, while new rules are developed before the next election. The Greens look forward to participating in that process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003ESome very serious issues of democratic principle are raised by this investigation and this ruling. Members and parties are elected to pursue certain policies on behalf of the public. Elections are, or should be, a contest of policies. The business of Parliament is partly about ensuring stable government, and much of its lawmaking is not particularly contentious. But it is also about a contest of ideas for the future of our country. A central question is whether MPs are allowed to use parliamentary funding to discuss their policies with the public. That goes to the heart of the issue. If they are not permitted to do that, then parties without rich backers will have difficulty in informing the public about what they propose, and a poorly informed public cannot support a democracy. The ruling from the Auditor-General says that we may not use our leaders\u2019 budgets to tell the public about the policies we are advocating. It is hard to see what we can, then, use them for. Can Dr Brash, for example, give the House his word that no letters were sent from his office in the 3 months before the election outlining the National Party\u2019s policies, or is it just that there is no audit trail for that sort of activity as distinct from advertisements taken out in newspapers? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EIt will always be difficult to draw a line between where work as a parliamentarian stops and electioneering starts. That is why we need clear guidelines if the line is to be drawn in a different place from where we always thought it was drawn. In particular, this report is a very partial audit of parliamentary funding for parties. It has looked only at advertising expenditure. If the advertising budget cannot be used to discuss our policies with the public, then surely neither can our staffing budget, our travel budget, our accommodation budget, or our phone budget. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EIf staff are not allowed to prepare responses to questions from the public and the media about our policy positions, it is difficult to see what they can do in the period after the House rises for the election. There is no parliamentary business for them to assist with. Parliament is in recess then in order to allow the democratic process of electing representatives to occur, at which time the overwhelming public interest is in learning factually about the policies the parties are proposing. No one has ever told us that all staff must be sacked on the day after the House rises for the election, which would be the consequence of applying the criterion the Auditor-General has proposed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThe report also raises questions about the use of money allocated for MPs\u2019 travel and other expenses during that period. It is surely absurd that we cannot use parliamentary money to invite people to a meeting to discuss our policy, but we can use it for the leaders to travel to the TV debates, which are totally about electioneering. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003EThose are all matters that the Parliamentary Service committee must consider in order to have new rules in place before the next election. It may be that the definition of \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D should be somewhat narrower than that set out in clause 7. Advertisements that do not solicit votes or money, but that nevertheless make disparaging comments about other parties or simply carry slogans with no information or content, might equally be held not to be for parliamentary purposes and to be solely for electioneering purposes. That is for the Parliamentary Service committee to determine in its deliberations. For the moment, we have the guidance we need in order to continue to do our work as MPs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022 data-id=\u0022f5885b234c294911a25e07e7a96639ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f5885b234c294911a25e07e7a96639ef\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Waiariki):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe; kia ora t\u0101tou. For months this Parliament has been swooning over three little words, and they have not been \u201CI love you.\u201D \u201CPay it back\u201D has been the constant call, and today we see how this Government is addressing the political inferno that has erupted around paybacks. We thought that last Thursday the Government had the guts to fess up, to come clean\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002241c7a2cc69c345ae8731b3ec5cd64800\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member will be seated. You cannot challenge the Government\u2019s courage or that of a member. That is a personal reflection. The member cannot use that word. He cannot challenge someone\u2019s courage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255d313c1ea234ebaae842f4038a3b36b\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I hate to disagree with you. I think the member actually praised the Government for having courage, and a member is allowed to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222d1e81583b34fa7bfc9c02231e7cca6\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry; that is my mistake. My apologies, Mr Flavell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233b97056d62c4aa4a019e034e27610c6\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and to plead guilty that spending of $447,000 on a pledge card is unlawful expenditure, and we welcomed the Prime Minister\u2019s statement to that effect. Compliance with party and member support appropriations under Vote Parliamentary Service is a critical part of doing our job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party accepts the report of the Controller and Auditor-General, Kevin Brady, and understands only too well the importance of certain concepts that are very freely thrown around in this Chamber\u2014concepts such as honesty, integrity, and accountability. We endorse unreservedly the Auditor-General\u2019s comments on the need for the prudent management of public money. We also share his concern around the significant breaches of the appropriations. We look forward to robust debate about what are legitimate parliamentary purposes, as opposed to electioneering purposes, at the table of the Parliamentary Service Commission and the appropriation review committee. But no, Labour had to shuffle the cards before they were even dealt, and it has introduced appropriation legislation as a confidence and supply matter. We are all under the scope of public scrutiny, and the M\u0101ori Party has stood up to that scrutiny and paid the money back. We paid the dues\u2014all $53.70 worth. That was the right thing to do, and it was the honourable thing to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EI want to talk a little more on the concept of honour, for just one moment. Is it honourable to accuse an official of besmirching the reputation of politicians? Is it honourable to send strongly worded dispatches to the Parliamentary Service in order to apply more pressure to make it pay a bill for the distribution of the infamous pledge card? Is it honourable to take money from the public to pay for political electioneering, not just in 2005 but in 2002 and 1999 as well? Is it honourable to introduce legislation to validate unlawful spending? The honour comes in admitting a wrong has been done and offering to pay the money back. The honour comes in meeting our responsibilities as members of Parliament to the taxpayers of this nation. The honour comes in being accountable to the citizens of Aotearoa. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EThe response from the Speaker to the Auditor-General\u2019s report was a stunning display of verbal gymnastics. In particular, it states that if there is no validation, reimbursement does not purge the unlawfulness. I quote: \u201CWithout validating legislation, the unlawfulness remains.\u201D So what is the issue at hand? Is it the unlawfulness, or is it the lack of validating legislation to purge the unlawfulness? Clearly the latter has prevailed with today\u2019s introduction of legislation whipped up under the frenzy of urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EWe absolutely agree that in the court of public opinion, this Parliament has been found guilty of crimes against the taxpayer, in terms of some $1.2 million of parliamentary funds having been spent unlawfully on electioneering by MPs. We need to have a speedy resolution to the issue if we are ever to build confidence in the public, so that we will not be summed up in one of those Tui ads that might read: \u201CMPs can be trusted not to fritter away taxpayer funds for their own election campaigns. Yeah, right!\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party considers the question of transparency to be central to the debate at hand. When our whanaunga break the law, they are charged and prosecuted. They plead guilty or not guilty, enter a plea bargain, get immunity because they are prepared to give evidence against another person, or, if convicted, get fined, home detention, community service, or even incarceration. I have never heard of any of them seeking retrospective legislation to validate their unlawful behaviour. The M\u0101ori Party has to ask where the old maxim \u201Cdo the crime, do the time\u201D went. All of a sudden, the high-minded parliamentary moral police are silent. Although paying up will not purge the unlawfulness of the expenditure, is it not transparently obvious that in wanting to pass retrospective legislation, all this Parliament will do is to validate or legalise the illegal? The logical upshot of this is that the most guilty parties will then claim that what they did was not unlawful, and we can therefore expect that they will say they do not have to pay their dues. That is cheeky and arrogant, and it knows no bounds. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EWe cannot resile from the fact that this whole inquiry into parliamentary spending came into being because of the lack of transparency\u2014the fuzzy boundaries between departmental, ministerial, and political advertising\u2014that was evident through the Working for Families promotion. The M\u0101ori Party has asked on a number of occasions where the honour was in introducing a policy that actively discriminates against 250,000 New Zealand children who have at least one parent on a benefit. How can this Government sit silent, knowing that it has forced the Child Poverty Action Group to take legal action in the High Court over the in-work payment\u2014the $60 a week that beneficiary families are prevented from accessing. How ironic it is that on this day, International Anti-Poverty Day, on the one hand we are discussing an Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill to justify unlawful spending by MPs\u2014MPs who will soon benefit from another pay rise\u2014while on the other hand this Government is denying money to our most vulnerable families. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EWe absolutely agree with the Speaker\u2019s advice that this matter must be considered seriously if public confidence in Parliament is to be maintained. In honour of this moment in history, we want to shift the rhetoric from a focus on \u201Cpayback\u201D to a drive to \u201Cpay forward\u201D. The concept of payback brings with it notions of revenge, punishment, and retribution. We want, instead, to promote the notion of paying forward. Paying forward is an investment in the future. It says: \u201CI will care for you, I will look after you.\u201D Paying forward is a way of contributing to the well-being of people. It is a promise of compassion, and a commitment to integrity. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EHow much more honourable it would be for the record Government surplus of $11.5 billion to be spent on the future of Aotearoa. We could invest in justice\u2014Treaty justice. We have been told repeatedly that $1.3 billion until 2010 is all that the country can afford to pay for the land alienation and confiscation that occurred over 150 years. I remind this House of the advice from Professor Margaret Mutu that the settlement claims equate to approximately 0.6 percent of what the claims are really worth. Hirini Moko Mead of Ng\u0101ti Awa, in describing the direct negotiations process, explained: \u201CVery often, there is no negotiation, but rather there is a statement that this is the Crown\u2019s policy and this is what you have to live with.\u201D Our people have gone into settlements, accepting that the deals that are done are, at best, a compromise that by no means compensates for the magnitude of their loss. And even then, in the case of the Te Arawa lakes settlement, the settlement contained confiscations anew, through the intervention of a new concept: the Crown stratum. Paying forward would acknowledge a grievance had occurred, and the claimants could be supported to achieve fair and durable settlements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EThe opportunity provided by the Auditor-General\u2019s report was, indeed, a turning point in the history of this nation. But the hard work will come with paying forward and setting a pathway for the nation. Now is the time to invest in the future\u2014a future based on honesty, accountability, and justice. We could invest in the ongoing health of the nation, by ensuring we retain quality medical specialists rather than losing them to international salaries. We could invest in M\u0101ori, Pasifika, sole parents and benefit-dependent families, for whom poverty has become entrenched. We as a nation could pay forward, clawing back our reputation internationally from that of a nation that breaches the human rights of indigenous peoples to that of a nation that upholds the rights of every citizen to achieve his or her optimal well-being\u2014mauri ora. This is an opportunity to truly pay forward, and to invest in a new direction in setting a pathway for the nation. Now that would be extraordinary legislation, which we would sign up to. Kia ora t\u0101tou.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223eb6e6104e7347c0a585afe52e0815e6\u0022\u003EHon PETER DUNNE (Leader\u2014United Future):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, I want to make my remarks in two parts. The first part deals with the Auditor-General\u2019s report and the response to that, and the second deals with the legislation itself. I think that at least one party in the House may not have quite caught up with the news that United Future has agreed to repay the amount deemed owing in the report, and we will do so as soon as we are in a position to meet that commitment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThat commitment will not change with the passage of this legislation. Our view is that although we think there are considerable flaws in the Auditor-General\u2019s report and the logic that he applied to his decisions, those considerations actually count for nothing in the public mind. The public is clearly of a view that parties misappropriated their funding and that parties have consequently to make good that misappropriation. Whatever our thinking about the nature of the report and the way it was carried out, we will honour that commitment. That stands, regardless of the fate of this bill. So I say unequivocally to those who fear that the passage of the legislation may be used as a vehicle to say that what was deemed to be unlawful is therefore now lawful, so our obligations do not apply, that in our case we do not accept that logic. We accept the commitment and we will meet it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe second point I make relates to the bill itself. It has been said\u2014and I think with some truth\u2014that validation measures are not unusual in this Parliament, and some very large validation measures have been passed through this Parliament over the years. In fact, I recall one for something in the order of $350 million in one instance. In this case, Treasury has advised that, given its role as the steward of the public finances and looking at the provisions of the Public Finance Act, there is now a question\u2014a very real question\u2014about the validity of all parliamentary expenditure under these headings, going back to 1989-90. The consequence of a question being asked about the lawfulness of expenditure over a 17-year period raises serious questions for the integrity of the books of successive Governments over that period. Therefore, there is a strong case to pass legislation to clarify immediately that that expenditure was, in fact, lawful; that removes not just a question of doubt over the 2004-05 and 2005-06 years, but the question of doubt that Treasury has identified right back to 1989-90. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI observe in passing that at that level this is just not an argument about parliamentary spending. If the integrity of the books of New Zealand is in question, then so too is our integrity in the international financial marketplace, and our ability to do business in that sense has been adversely affected. So this legislation becomes more serious and more necessary in that regard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe next aspect of the legislation that is important is to clarify the definition of \u201Celectioneering\u201D. We may not be in election mode at the moment, but it is unclear, arising out of the Auditor-General\u2019s report\u2014and particularly if one relies on the advice of the Solicitor-General, then looks at the conflicting advice from Mr Hodder\u2014what actually constitutes electioneering at the present time. One thing we can say is that a majority of parties in this House, if not all, have historically had a view about what one can and cannot say, and that view is challenged in the Auditor-General\u2019s report. So at the very least, an argument emerges that we need to codify what it is that constitutes election spending, and that is what this bill does by taking a very conservative approach in that it effectively replicates what most of us have understood to be the status quo. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EBut because there is uncertainty moving forward, the bill introduces a sunset clause at the end of next year\u201431 December 2007\u2014on the strong understanding that in that time the Parliamentary Service Commission, members of Parliament, and the parties in this Parliament will work to develop new rules that are more specific, more transparent, less uncertain, and less open to the misinterpretation that clearly applied across the board, at least in the mind of the Auditor-General, before the 2005 general election. So this bill sends a signal in that regard\u2014that it expects further work to be done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EMembers may well ask: \u201CWhy the urgency\u2014why the need to do this right now?\u201D. I say two things in response to that. Firstly, the Speaker, in her response to the Auditor-General\u2019s report last week\u2014and I hope I am not involving her in the debate by quoting her report\u2014highlighted some circumstances that could be occurring right now where expenditure by members on areas they thought were legitimate is brought into question. For the safe and good running of this Parliament and the whole process that we are about, that cannot continue unanswered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThe second point is that my party has already had accounts for payment returned to it by the Parliamentary Service since last week\u2014accounts that in the normal course of events would be paid because they satisfy the conditions\u2014on the grounds that in the wake of the Auditor-General\u2019s report, new uncertainties now apply. So we are now getting to the situation where the day-to-day business of this place\u2014and I am not talking about electioneering accounts\u2014is being put in some doubt, not by officious bureaucrats, but by cautious people saying: \u201CGiven that ruling, we are uncertain as to how we proceed.\u201D So that is what introduces an element of urgency into this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThere will be many who will say that this is Parliament rushing to get itself out of a hole. I do not think that is true, because even by making lawful what the Auditor-General has deemed to be unlawful, in my view we do not remove the moral obligation on those who have accepted it to repay the debts that have been attributed to them. But what we do is remove the uncertainty that now affects the Crown accounts, that now affects the way in which this Parliament operates, and the big question that hangs not so much over us but over the staff who support us, about what they can actually do as part of their normal duties helping us do the work we are elected to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EThis has not been one of Parliament\u2019s most glorious moments. This has not been a happy affair, whatever position one takes in relation to it. But the reality is that we need to act decisively to resolve it. Given the commitments that most parties have made to meet the obligations imposed upon them by the Auditor-General, we need now to tidy up this situation so there can be no uncertainties in the future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f555a23a-d230-4f03-80ba-a44e6ec8bd29\u0022\u003EI hope that parties do not take the view that this lets them off the hook. United Future takes the view that we have some obligations imposed upon us by the Auditor-General\u2019s report. In the case of a very small party, they are very big obligations. I was tempted at the beginning to declare a massive financial interest in this, because it certainly is for my bank balance. That is actually not the point. We accept that responsibility, we move on, and now we make sure that the rules that emerge as a result of this exercise are ones that are robust, clearly understood, able to be supported by all, and not subject to the sort of misinterpretation, misunderstanding, and unruly and sometimes very bitter debate that the experience of the last election has occasioned. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u00227ade42c5567a439a8c3eae172f686990\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ade42c5567a439a8c3eae172f686990\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E There is no need for validating legislation. Sure there has been some unlawful spending, as identified by the Auditor-General. Well, that can stand. It can be left as unlawful spending. I do not believe that our Parliament and our Government have done themselves at all proud in the way this matter has been handled. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThe Auditor-General is an officer of Parliament. We make him an officer of Parliament so he is independent of the political day-to-day business of Government. We spend taxpayers\u2019 money. I believe that we did try to stay within the rules. I believe every party when it says that. However, we know that it is possible to get it wrong, and we did. The person who said that we got it wrong was the Auditor-General. He gave us an opportunity to have an input on his draft report and I believe that every party, bar New Zealand First, did so. New Zealand First, for its own reasons, chose to dispute the report after it had become finalised. I myself sent a strong letter to the Auditor-General, and I met with him and spoke on the phone on, I think, three occasions. I made a very strong representation to him and he listened to me most carefully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EIn the end, he reached his conclusions and I regard him as a referee. If this Parliament, we as politicians, and, indeed, the Government, are to have any sort of integrity and legitimacy, then we have to say: \u201COK, I gave it my best shot. The Auditor-General gave me an opportunity, and this is what he has found.\u201D And it does hurt that he found against us. It hurts not just financially, it actually hurts that we have been accused of spending money unlawfully. I know that our party\u2014and I am sure the other parties, including the Labour Party\u2014believed that it was following the rules. But, having been found by the Auditor-General to be outside the rules, then I think that as parliamentarians we have to accept it and lump it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWhat I found particularly distasteful was Ministers of the Crown, including the Prime Minister, attempting to bully the Auditor-General and to attack the Auditor-General, because I think that brings his office into question. I certainly believe that it undermines the authority of our Parliament, because every other New Zealander apart from the 121 MPs in this House, when found to be operating unlawfully, cannot rush off and change the law. They cannot turn round and abuse the referee. There are consequences for doing that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EHere are we, making the laws for the rest of New Zealand to follow, attempting to uphold our justice system, and, indeed, offering some integrity to the way in which taxpayers\u2019 hard-earned money is spent, yet we saw the Prime Minister and Ministers of the Crown attack the Auditor-General in a way that we would not accept from any other New Zealander. We have seen Ministers of the Crown, including the Prime Minister, attempt to say that there are no rules for how they spend hard-working taxpayers\u2019 money. Well, that cannot be right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ENow we find ourselves in Parliament changing the law to make lawful what the Auditor-General found to be unlawful. I will make it plain what we are saying here: MPs have unlawfully spent money that was hard-earned by taxpayers, so what will we do? We will use the special privilege and special power we have to change that law in order to make what was unlawful lawful. That is wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EIt is wrong that we are doing it, and it is wrong that we are doing it in such haste. We can think of all the issues that confront New Zealanders, and our Government and our Parliament say that they are too busy to deal with them, but when it comes to our politicians\u2019 own self-interest\u2014wow! Suddenly Parliament has time. And we are rushing it through under urgency so that the public, whose money it is that is being spent\u2014by us\u2014does not have a say, and so that when we are found in breach of the rules that we expect all New Zealanders to follow and all civil servants to follow and uphold at their peril, we do not worry. No, under Helen Clark\u2019s Government, we rush in with the legislator\u2019s pen, we stop Parliament in its tracks, we bring legislation into the House, and we pass it under urgency. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThat cannot be a right process, and the easiest thing to do is for us to pay the money back. I value United Future\u2019s position that those members will pay it back; I value the Labour Party\u2019s position that it will pay it back. I think that that is the right thing for us to do, as much as it pains us. But it cannot be right that we are here under urgency, changing the law, and I will make it plain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWe had a situation where the Prime Minister signed a painting that she did not paint. There were legal implications arising from that. We cannot rush off and change the law on that basis. The law of art fraud has to stay as it is. We know from the police report that, yes, the Prime Minister broke the law. What she did was unlawful. She was not prosecuted or convicted, and that is fine, but what she did was unlawful\u2014just like the spending that Helen Clark did was unlawful and just as the spending that the National MPs did was unlawful\u2014and it should just stand. It does not need validating legislation. Helen Clark\u2019s motorcade sped through the South Island at breakneck speed. That, too, was unlawful. We did not rush off to change the law to say that we will make lawful what was unlawful. Ruth Dyson was caught having had too much to drink then driving. We did not rush to change the law\u2014no! Members of Parliament have to accept the consequences of the rules. They cannot use their special position of power and privilege to change the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EI listened most carefully to Dr Michael Cullen\u2019s reasons for the other expenditure that MPs make and I think there is confusion over what the rules now are. I certainly think that when we head into the next election there will be huge confusion, so the rules have to be tidied up. But the way to tidy up the rules is not to rush legislation through Parliament. It is not actually Parliament\u2019s legislation that defines how we can spend the money. There is a reason for that: we do not want the courts looking into Parliament and at how it spends the money. That is why we have never put it on the statute book; it is for Parliament itself to decide. So what we should be doing, rather than rushing in here in Parliament to change the rules, is to take a considered approach, as is envisioned, in order to get some proper rules about how we spend the money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ELet me put in my two pennies\u2019 worth. I think we should have budgets, like we have with the leaders\u2019 budgets and for MPs. I do not think we can control the spending with a whole lot of rules. I think that is too tough. So I suggest instead that we have fewer rules and more transparency. I think the public has a right to know how political parties spend its money, what they spend it on, and how it is broken down, and I think the Parliamentary Service should be subject to the Official Information Act. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the Labour Party should be able to take its leader\u2019s budget and spend it on the pledge card. That is its budget. But I say that the public has a right to know, because we have found that that is where the rubber hits the road. The public has a right to know how we spend its money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u0022948541a513b54436b3a9939d049bb12e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022948541a513b54436b3a9939d049bb12e\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E In the few minutes between now and the dinner break I will see whether I can convince my colleague Mr Rodney Hide to change his vote on the basis of this logic. I understand that the member said he felt that passing this legislation did not matter. He did point out that it had no bearing on whether one paid the money or refunded any outstanding moneys. He did understand that the passage of this legislation lets no one off the hook in terms of one\u2019s decision of whether to refund any outstanding moneys, and he does understand that the non-passage of this legislation puts no one on the hook in respect of refunding any moneys owed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EHe also pointed out the fact that money has been unlawfully spent and, even though Madam Speaker and Treasury think that the legislation should be passed, he has an argument that asks: \u201CIf it were not passed, what harm would be done?\u201D. I will not respond to that; that is his point of view. But I do invite the member to reflect on this: we do not know now what we can spend money on. We do not know that now. There is a reason prospectively\u2014not retrospectively, I say to Mr Hide, but prospectively\u2014to say that this legislation should be supported because it provides parliamentarians with a brightline as to what they may and may not do prospectively until new rules are in place. The Auditor-General\u2019s findings, whether or not one agrees with them, are broad, wide reaching, and significant. The changes have been enunciated by speaker after speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EWell, that ruling stands unless this legislation passes. Therefore, all this stuff about Dr Brash going to Nelson to sign up a person from the Green Party into the National Party, and all of the examples given by Dr Cullen in the first speech in this debate are true\u2014and any legal opinion would back that. In fact, the Solicitor-General\u2019s own legal opinion backs that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ccc938ae2014259806bf8f1d0af0bcb\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s all rubbish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aced800a803f4d5c976bcc03ef8df0ef\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Bill English says that it is all rubbish, because that is as far as his intense intellectual ability takes him. The problem is that we do need to think prospectively. I would say to Mr Hide that there is a case for him to consider changing his vote to one of support\u2014if not now, then at the third reading, because I do not think that this group of 121 people can operate unless there is validating legislation that tells us with some certainty what we can and cannot do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc90dfa5ca654a1a836074dc87a615b1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Before we start, I say to Mr English that I heard the comment he made as I sat down. Would the member like to withdraw and apologise?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b45346f5fa784e97966d0410143f3c3e\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274d6ee815e6c47aab3f0bcc609268934\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u002204189b0030c54ed883726e0b1483cf71\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204189b0030c54ed883726e0b1483cf71\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (National\u2014Clutha-Southland):\u003C/span\u003E In order to remind the House of why we are debating the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill today, let us go back to 22 August last year. On that day, Labour Party volunteers all around the country went to their electorate offices and campaign headquarters, and picked up boxes of the pledge card. Those volunteers set off to every corner of every suburb in every town, to deliver that pledge card. They put it in mailboxes, street by street. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EThe families, young people, and pensioners of New Zealand went out to the mailbox, picked up their mail, and took the pledge card back inside. Some of them just threw it in the rubbish because they were sick of the election already, and some of them had a quick look and saw Helen Clark\u2019s face on the card\u2014nothing new\u2014and did not take any more notice of it. Others picked up that pledge card and looked at it. They saw promises of a rates rebate; of 250 new community police, which made them think about the burglary down the street last week; and of a $10,000 grant to young couples who were trying to buy their first home. Then they looked at the TV and saw pictures of the political leaders going about the business of election campaigning. Those good citizens of New Zealand thought they were in an election campaign. And so did the Labour Party volunteers, who were delivering that pledge card. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EBut if members read the evidence that the Labour Party gave to the police when they investigated complaints under the Electoral Act, they will find that two people at least thought Labour was not in an election campaign. They were the people who were running it: Helen Clark and Heather Simpson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022201df0c745044a6cbb1a115fd659f34c\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: Pete Hodgson thought they weren\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f158b686110845bfa3fb543cf1787bda\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Everyone else thought they were in an election campaign. Some of those mums and dads might have made up their minds on that night, but it was still 3 weeks until election day. Over those 3 weeks those mums and dads faced a barrage of advertisements in the newspaper and on TV that tried to change their minds about how to vote. Do members remember the newspaper ads in the last week of the campaign\u2014\u201CDon\u2019t take the risk.\u201D? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003ELabour told the police that its spending was legal, and that the pledge card was not electioneering but normal parliamentary business. Who ever believed that Labour believed what it was saying? The truth was that all that advertising in the last week or so before the election was unlawful, because it was paid for by taxpayers\u2019 money in the first place, and, more important, because it broke the cap on electoral spending in a campaign. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWe are told that the law is unclear. Well, the law on electioneering and the election spending cap are very clear. That has been laid down by the courts, and the consequences of a failure to comply are very clear. Members should ask Reg Boorman, who was ejected from Parliament, and Bob Clarkson, who could have been ejected, about that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWe have order in a community when people obey unenforceable law. If a sign says \u201CNo dogs allowed\u201D, people do not take their dogs there; if there is a red traffic light at 2 o\u2019clock in the morning, people do not run that red light. That is order in a community. It has turned out that the electoral law that caps campaign expenditure is unenforceable. The Labour Party dared the police to prosecute a Government that had just won an election, and the police decided not to do so. So it has turned out that that law is unenforceable. That is why the Labour Party has breached the bond of trust with the New Zealand public. It did those things knowing full well what it was doing. How do we know that? Well, the Auditor-General warned us\u2014all of us\u2014that the conduct of politicians had been too loose. The Chief Electoral Officer put that in writing to the Labour Party, and said that it must count that spending as electoral expenses. But Labour ignored that letter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EYou see, respect for the rule of law is a positive quality; it is not just obedience under the fear of discovery and punishment. It is clear now that although there has been a discovery of Labour\u2019s breach of the electoral law, there has been no punishment for that. The positive quality of respect for the rule of law must be exhibited particularly by those who make the law, because a Government has more power than anyone else. It has more opportunity and more temptation to breach the law, and more capacity to fight its corner if it breaks the rules. Of course, a Government has the deepest pockets. It can take anyone to court at any time, and it can put up with any attack from anybody. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWe are here because the Labour Party breached the bond of trust and lost its moral authority. It showed no respect for the law, for its officers, or for the consequences of breaking the law. At some stage we all have broken the law, and we have respected those consequences. But this Government does not respect them. It has exploited the privilege of power. It has bullied, browbeaten, and used every tool at its command\u2014including this parliamentary process\u2014to avoid the consequences of breaching a law it knew it was breaching. What does it say about a party that was founded on the principles of defending the poor and vulnerable, that Labour has shown, in the last 12 months in New Zealand, an ugly and a fierce willingness to use the privileges of power totally in the service of its own political ends\u2014not the public interest? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWho could possibly argue that the behaviour of the Prime Minister, Helen Clark, has been in the public interest in the last 6 months? It has not been; it has been in the interest of the Labour Party. It is just one more round of a record that has gone round and round: \u201Cpaintergate\u201D, \u201Cspeedgate\u201D, and \u201CDoone-gate\u201D. I ask members to remember the attitude of the Prime Minister then. She said: \u201Cby definition the Prime Minister cannot leak.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EToday we have found out that by definition Labour cannot misuse public money, because it thinks the money belongs to it, and because it thinks it is so morally superior in its use of public money that any use of it, by definition, must be right. Of course, it is not. When one strips back the technicalities, the legislation, the convenient legal opinions, and the procedural manipulation, one finds that Labour believes, deep in its heart, that it is entitled to make any use of the tax derived from the hard-earned incomes of New Zealanders\u2014and in Labour\u2019s interest, not in the public interest. We have unmasked an ugly and a fierce sense of entitlement. The Labour Party is willing to do anything, say anything, and bully anyone in order to defend that sense of entitlement. In fact, if one had listened to the debate on this issue over recent months, one would think the wronged party was the Labour Party. One would think Labour was being unjustly attacked. One would think that Labour was the one whose money had been put up in good faith and misused. One would think Labour was the injured party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWe have seen that deep and ugly sense of entitlement in the attacks on the Auditor-General.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u00224e3cbc2da1f048cda40fac9e25c36ac5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224e3cbc2da1f048cda40fac9e25c36ac5\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E The bill, and the circumstances in which the House finds itself tonight, should invite members opposite to reflect. Indeed, it should make all members in this House reflect, because we in this Parliament have a unique role. We have unique powers, and with those unique powers go some unique responsibilities. Yet, today, we find ourselves not just legislating under urgency; we find ourselves legislating about ourselves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EI invite members opposite, and those who want to prop them up in this Chamber, to apply a very simple test. It is this: if the Auditor-General\u2019s report concerned the actions of private citizens or a private organisation, or even of a Government department or local authority, and that organisation or local authority had breached the terms of the Public Finance Act, would we be here tonight rushing a bill through all stages, on the first available parliamentary day, to address that matter? Would we be here tonight, under urgency, using the extraordinary powers of this House to rectify the matter, on the first available day? Would we be trying to avoid the select committee process, by which every other measure that goes before this House is subject to scrutiny? No, we would not. Would we be trying to avoid any form of public scrutiny over the normal parliamentary timetable of a bill? No, we would not. Would we see the lack of consultation with the parties that are affected by the law that is sitting on the Table of the House, because parties on this side have not been subjected to any form of consultation, in the way that any ordinary New Zealand citizen or organisation would enjoy that consultation about a measure that touched their affairs? No, we would not see it happen, were it not for the fact that this legislation suits the affairs of the New Zealand Labour Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EToday, as a consequence of that fact, we see that this Government has no hesitation in hijacking the legislative process, hijacking the parliamentary process and the parliamentary timetable, through urgency; in reducing the normally non-partisan role of the Minister responsible for the Parliamentary Service, and of the officers who serve in that service, to the role of pawns of the Labour Party and their mates\u2014all to serve the narrow, partisan interests of the Labour Party and its friends. That is an abuse of this Parliament. It is an abuse of the legislative process. It is an abuse of the confidence of the New Zealand public, who elected the representatives who sit in this Parliament. It is an abuse of that confidence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EWorst of all, these are actions that are driven by a motive that should never be allowed to rear its ugly head in this Chamber. It is naked, shameless, unprincipled self-interest. It is the very thing that we commit ourselves, at the commencement of each day of sitting, that we will put aside, in the interests of the public we are here to serve. That is what is driving this Labour Government in taking this bill through the House under urgency tonight. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThis measure has some important implications. First of all, as a result, we will see State funding of political parties, in a significant way, introduced into the New Zealand law. That is something most New Zealanders are opposed to; something that New Zealanders will have no say about, because we are doing this without consultation with them, and, in many ways, without their knowledge. We certainly do so without their consent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThis is also bad legislation because it places politicians above the law. We are simply passing this measure because, unlike any other class of New Zealanders, we can. We know that it is wrong, and members opposite know that it is wrong. That is why, of course, we are doing it under urgency. The way in which this measure is being handled politicises the Parliamentary Service Commission, which has now some decades of history running this institution. It politicises that institution, in a way that members opposite, along with others, will learn to regret over time. And that is not a threat; that is a promise. There is no going back from that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003ELet us be clear about one thing, as this measure goes through the House in the space of these 2 days. Some parties in this Parliament, despite what they might say, have absolutely no intention of paying back the money they have unlawfully taken from the public of New Zealand. That is the reason for this bill. This bill is being passed so that those parties will not have any legal obligation to pay back the money they have taken unlawfully. The New Zealand First Party knows full well that it votes for this measure tonight so that it will not have to pay the money back. It is galling to sit in this Chamber and hear Mr Brown tell the House that the New Zealand First Party will meet all of its lawful obligations, as it participates in passing, under urgency, a bill that will ensure that New Zealand First has no lawful obligations, at all. Even Mr Brown can work that out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThere is only one reason for the rush, for the urgency, for the avoidance of public scrutiny, for the avoidance of a select committee process\u2014that is, because some people in this Parliament have no intention of meeting the obligation they have to the New Zealand taxpayer to pay the money back. By the end of this week they will have no legal obligation to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EWe do not have State funding of political parties in New Zealand, and there is a reason for that. The public is opposed to it. The public has always been opposed to it. That is why, for three successive elections, the Labour Party has hidden the fact that taxpayers have picked up the tab for the centrepiece of its election campaign\u2014the Labour Party\u2019s pledge card. Members on this side are pretty suspicious; those of us who have been in the Parliament for a while are deeply suspicious about the Labour Party, and we think all sorts of terrible things about Labour from time to time. But it did not cross our minds\u2014it never ever crossed our minds\u2014that the Labour Party would have the sheer gall to use taxpayers\u2019 funds to purchase the pledge card, which has been the centrepiece of not just the last election campaign but the last three election campaigns. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EMembers of the press gallery have asked us, almost incredulously: \u201CHow can it be that you people haven\u2019t got on to this before?\u201D. We have had to give them the honest answer that we simply did not think that even the Labour Party could stoop so low as to use taxpayers\u2019 money to fund the Labour Party pledge card. We did not ever think it was possible. Nor did many of the institutions that guide our society think that it was appropriate. It is deeply revealing, as a result of the revelations we have seen in recent days, that the Parliamentary Service officers did not think it was the right thing to do, either. Those officers paid over the money they were obliged to only because they had a gun to their head from Heather Simpson. They were told absolutely: \u201CPay up, or you know what consequences will be coming your way.\u201D By the end of this week, the Labour Party pledge card will be able to lawfully be paid for with taxpayers\u2019 money. That is the fundamental change in the law that clause 7 of this bill will make. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E I conclude by regretting most sincerely the shabby politicisation of the Parliamentary Service Commission that has seen this bill come to the House. Normally when we pass a bill we have procedures that ensure the bill sits on the Table for a while so that all of the parties that will be affected by it will know what will happen to them, that they will have their ability to have a say, that we have a select committee process, that we have transparency, and that we pass bills over weeks and months, not over hours and days. That is because transparency and accountability to the public are fundamental principles of the way in which this place operates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EBut because of the naked self-interest of the Labour Party, all of that is being put to one side to pass a bill that suits certain members of this House. That is an outrage. It is an outrage that the Minister responsible for the Parliamentary Service Commission has been prepared to engage with the Minister of Finance in that process and make her officers do the same. She has sold down the river members of Parliament on this side of the House, and she will never ever regain our confidence as a consequence. She will never regain the confidence of members on this side of the House in relation to the administration of the Parliament. Her use of Jack Hodder and Chapman Tripp, who foolishly lent their names to this enterprise, is very much a matter for regret. That was a shoddy piece of work on their part. Even the Attorney-General will know that that is the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand public are not silly. They know what is going on here. They have worked it out. This is one giant nail in the coffin of this Government. These people will be down the road, and the sooner the better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022864aa506132f43b786f6d1b069bd3ab8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a first time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb9f23ca66824c76b6cf7f49558bdd5b\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022e446ec77342d4be59cf3f9cf02299dda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e446ec77342d4be59cf3f9cf02299dda\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a second time. There has been an enormous amount of huff, bluster, and nonsense this afternoon. I want to start with the most obvious\u2014Mr Hide. Only a few weeks ago Mr Hide was complaining to me privately about the stupidity of the National Party and the line it was taking on the Auditor-General\u2019s draft report, and threatening to expose the Auditor-General to serious examination in front of a select committee. Today, of course, it is a totally different story in public from Mr Hide. There is a word for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EBut let us come to National Party spending. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ca3118b7adb454597e4332725186ced\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: It is not as bad as the dishonesty of Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221810d1823925495cb0b839fc52788304\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, here goes the so-called lawyer from the north, who has become the prosecutor on immigration cases. Let us ask some questions of the National Party. What did the National Party spend its leader\u2019s vote on before the last election? There was no accounting and no scrutiny. Was it spent on staff, on Brian Sinclair, on campaigning? But because it was not communications it was not studied by the Auditor-General, who declined to look beyond, at what might have implicated the National Party. The Auditor-General also declined to look at 2002 and the National Party\u2019s pledge advertising at that point. I invite a National Party MP to get up and tell us what those members spent their leader\u2019s budget on, because it was all spent. No, of course they will not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022998702fbcf404c80ad24909a0b3b5841\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: We didn\u2019t break the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbbf68df2bfb45f5afb041486fa28b16\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: If they spent any of it on anything to do with electioneering, as defined by the Auditor-General, then they broke the law and it was unlawful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EBut in terms of breaking the law, we know the one party that did break the law by overspending on its broadcasting expenditure. What happened when the police investigated? Steven Joyce, general manager, New Zealand National Party, told the advertising agency named Rainmakers\u2014what a wonderful name\u2014that it was GST inclusive but the Rainmakers person said it was GST exclusive. The police cannot attribute responsibility for the GST overexpenditure to either the New Zealand National Party or Rainmakers and are not therefore in a position to charge either person. How convenient for the National Party! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat did that party want this House to do? It wanted this House to retrospectively validate its overexpenditure on the GST, not so it could pay it back\u2014the party could pay the broadcasters any day\u2014but to avoid a conviction and a fine for overspending on its broadcasting. That is why National wanted leave of this House for retrospective validation. No wonder Mr McCully, the Peter Mandelson of the National Party, does not want to listen to these particular facts. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat about the money spent on travel by the National Party? Was none of that to do with electioneering in the 3-month period? Are we to assume that what we thought about Dr Brash was true\u2014that he wandered around the country in a daze for those 3 months and did not spend a single period of time electioneering on the public expense? But the Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion means that if any of his time was spent electioneering, then, I am afraid, all that expenditure was unlawful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EPoor Katherine Rich, who sent out a letter that was absolutely legitimate within any previous understanding of Vote Parliamentary Service, took the pratfall for the rest of her colleagues. I respect loyalty, and therefore I respect Katherine Rich in that regard. Murray McCully, of course, has always been the first in any coup developing in the National Party. He is telling everybody that Don Brash is gone. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat about the National Party\u2019s involvement with the Exclusive Brethren?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256fd60155c92449a97fee658cb0853c2\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: So what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022093f6ef9a0e14f0bb2b88ad816dab990\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: So what? This is the man who accused the Exclusive Brethren of breaking up families for religious purposes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d2a7f221642042f5b27a9a6389f32dc3\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224662bba539574558a185ce826e6f72e1\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CThat\u2019s right.\u201D he says. Well, what was Dr Don Brash doing in bed with the Exclusive Brethren, to the tune of $1.2 million payment to Don Brash for his services in trying to get rid of a Labour-led Government? What was happening in Napier and Hastings when schoolchildren were being used for push-polling in conjunction with the National Party? How come Craig Foss was paying for pamphlets that the Exclusive Brethren could not deliver, to be delivered? Did he declare it in his election expenses? What was going on, in terms of that relationship with a small, extreme group? This is a group that does not believe in defending New Zealand but it condemned the Labour Government for not spending enough on defence, that does not believe in voting but says it should have the right to choose who the Government is, and that is so strange that it does not believe in joining up sewerage pipes until they reach the city council sewer if it is running across a neighbour\u2019s property. What was the National Party doing in bed with a bunch of fruitcakes like that, when in fact it was receiving vast sums of money to do whatever it was the Exclusive Brethren expected of them? That is the reality. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWe heard from Mr English. I have to say that Mr English gave the only decent speech on behalf of the National Party this afternoon. I disagreed with it but, by God, it was a powerful speech, compared with \u201CDr Magoo\u201D at the start, and then the bully rant and rave\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebc4ff731d4b4488b8d6080558dfdc0b\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I draw the member\u2019s attention to the fact that he must refer to members by their correct name.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aed7fac247cc4fc2a0fd2dd64f8889c2\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Brash, at the start, was not quite clear why he was in the House, and of course Mr Brownlee has tried just to bluff and bluster his way through, without any understanding of the legal issues involved. But we heard from Mr English about respect for the law. The Labour Party disagrees fundamentally with the Auditor-General\u2019s conclusions but, because he has provided that ruling, we are refunding that money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat happens when the National Party does not like the referee\u2019s decision? Mr McCully got up only 10 minutes ago and said: \u201CNo cooperation with the referee. We don\u2019t like the decision. That\u2019s it. We won\u2019t obey the referee any longer.\u201D That is National Party members on the rule of law. They are all for the rule of law when they are the rulers and they are the law, but, when the law disagrees with them, they do not have any respect for the rule of law, at all. We, however, disagree fundamentally. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThen we had the big king-hit from Mr McCully, who said that the bill is not going to a select committee. I invite Mr McCully to look at the bill; it is an appropriation bill. I invite him to read the Standing Orders. An appropriation bill does not have to go to a select committee, whether or not there is urgency. If we had simply had the first reading today, the bill would have been set down for second reading tomorrow without going to a select committee. [Interruption] That is right, Mr Power\u2014an appropriation bill does not have to go to a select committee. But this is a party whose members complained in the House this afternoon that they had not yet seen the bill, when I had sent one over to them this morning. The problem was that Mr Brownlee does not know where a photocopier is, so he could not run off any copies for any of his colleagues. Yet, strangely, by the time the National members got to the House they said they had already drafted amendments to the bill even though they had not seen it. That is National Party logic for us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EFinally, I ask why the National members hate the pledge card. I do not believe Mr McCully at all when he says that National members did not know it came out of Parliamentary Service funding in 2002; they have complained about that for a long period of time. What they hate about the pledge card is really very, very simple\u2014it breaks the rules as they understand them. In the pledge card we say what we are going to do, and we have done it, three times in a row. The National Party will never forgive Labour\u2014not for being the Government, but for much, much worse. We have ratted on the National Party principles. In Government, we have done what we said we would do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EI draw a conclusion that the National Party will never have a pledge card. We can guarantee that whatever promises its members make they will not keep them\u2014like that of Dr Smith, who was going to remove the toll gate on the road to knowledge by removing student fees, and instead made them much bigger; or like that of getting rid of the surcharge \u201Cno ifs, no buts, no maybes\u201D, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWell, bad luck, the Labour Party will carry on keeping its promises, standing for the rule of law, and, despite my own somewhat low instincts, making sure that the Parliamentary Service\u2019s appropriation is able to support the National Party for the coming year or so\u2014which, without this bill, it would not be able to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u00224d710b07140e48279b22bea3faa708ca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d710b07140e48279b22bea3faa708ca\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (National\u2014Helensville):\u003C/span\u003E That speech was typical of Michael Cullen and the Labour Party members, who just cannot seem to get the order of things right. If we go and ask average Kiwis what they expect, we find they have a pretty simple order of things. The first thing they want from the Labour Party is the money back. They do not want validating legislation that somehow makes them feel good. Michael Cullen was on Agenda on Saturday morning telling New Zealanders that he had to make the accounts be all tickety-boo so he was going to ram through validating legislation. Well, here is a novel idea for Dr Cullen. If he wants the accounts to be all tickety-boo, he should not break the law in the first place. That would be a good start. The second way is to pay the money back. I tell the House that no New Zealander should be under any illusion: we were always going to be here passing validating legislation under haste. We always knew that from the moment Labour members got caught with their fingers in the till, there would be validating legislation. The only thing that changed was that when the public found out the facts\u2014when they really knew what went on\u2014then Labour had to pay the money back as opposed to just passing the validating legislation in the first place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EHow ironic, in a party that absolutely polls itself to death, for this bunch of poll-driven fruitcakes to have woken up on 6 September to read a poll that stated that 81 percent of New Zealanders wanted them to pay the money back, and that 75 percent of their own supporters knew that Labour\u2019s actions had been criminal and wrong, and wanted the money returned. I say to the Labour Party: here is a novel idea. To get the order right, the No. 1 thing is to pay the money back. No. 2, how about an apology? How about a bit of regret? How about saying sorry to the people of New Zealand who trusted the Labour Party\u2014trusted it with their taxpayers\u2019 dollars? Labour caucus members went into their caucus room today and moaned and complained about having to put their own money back. Instead of feeling sorry for themselves, they should have felt sorry for the people of New Zealand, the people whom they misled for 13 months. How about Labour saying sorry, instead of rushing with validating legislation? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ESomething very interesting has happened over the last 13 months. Labour members have come up with every excuse in the book. They have tried the lot; we have heard the lot. This has been a spin extravaganza from the party that has perfected spin. I ask the Labour Party to spare us the spin\u2014we have heard enough. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ELet us run through the different spins now. The first of them was that somehow the rules had changed and it was all a bit different. That is not what the Auditor-General actually said in the New Zealand Herald when he was interviewed on 22 August. He made it quite clear that he had warned the Labour Party, that he expected there to be no surprises in its spending, and that he drew a line in the sand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E There was no ignorance of the rules, there was no kind of mistake, and the referee did not change things afterwards. What happened was that Labour Party members who knew they would lose unless they spent one hell of a lot of money in the last 10 days, and who knew absolutely that they would get carted out, said: \u201CTo hell with the rules, let\u2019s get the money from wherever we need to get it from.\u201D Now that they have been caught, they have the audacity not to say sorry, and to feel sorry for themselves. Well, we do not feel sorry for them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225afcd11e97e24b1e82a85010975b23c8\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt the member who is on his feet, but in the barracking the Hon David Benson-Pope accused Mr John Key in a most unparliamentary way, and I ask him to withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002294dc2147b6544afbad6f19f97261441c\u0022\u003EHon David Benson-Pope\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff533b6d2d97446183a7614e71e90cbb\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The second part of this long and miserable tale that we should not forget is Michael Cullen\u2019s own actions. This is the man who threatened the New Zealand Herald\u2014who said to the New Zealand Herald, and its owners, APN, that Labour would have no hesitation, if it had to, in ripping up the legislation relating to APN. He made a veiled threat that APN knew and understood. That is the level Labour was at with its back to the wall. The message was pretty clear: stop talking about the fact that the Labour Party had been caught with its hand in the till, or Labour would have a closer look at the legislation relating to APN. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EAs is typical from Labour, as we saw yesterday regarding charities, when this Government does not like anybody, it changes the rules, and it does not matter who is collateral damage along the way. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe third person to get in the way of this Labour Party trying to avoid paying back its debts was the Auditor-General. Helen Clark, with more venom than we have ever seen, attacked the independent person in New Zealand politics, the Auditor-General. She should be ashamed of herself for the way she attacked that man. He is, quite rightly, a superstar in these events. He is not the guilty party\u2014the Labour Party is. That was yet more spin. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe fourth part of Labour\u2019s spin came from Pete Hodgson, who came right out and said that the Labour Party would not be paying the money back. Yet he had the audacity to go out and make a statement to the Sunday Star-Times: \u201Cthe public would say that it was clearly for political purposes\u2014and for Christ\u2019s sake, of course it is, you know? If it wasn\u2019t we would put out a pledge card the day after the election not before it.\u201D When one issues a pledge card that says \u201CVote for me and we\u2019ll do these things.\u201D, one is on pretty safe ground to assume it is an electioneering expense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ESteve Maharey knew that. He did not get up and complain in caucus today when he had to front up with his $15,000, because he knew that he was part of a cabal of individuals who were as guilty as sin. That was the fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EAnd then the last of the five spin-merchant campaigns came when Trevor Mallard decided he would play a dirty tricks campaign on the National Party and on our leader. So absolutely no one was going to get in the way of the locomotive Labour Party; it went right through, all the way. It was prepared to take out anybody and anything that got in its way. The only minor problem that occurred for the Labour Party was that 81 percent of New Zealanders have woken up to what it was on about; they want their money back, they want a bit of contrition, they want an apology. What they do not want is validating legislation, rushed in through urgency\u2014the kind that makes the Minister of Finance feel happy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ESo why are we here passing validating legislation, in urgency? We all know that is because the Labour Party is facing a lawsuit that it does not want to face, and the simple way to get rid of that lawsuit is to pass this validating legislation. The person taking that lawsuit, Mr Darnton, admitted on Newstalk ZB tonight that once this legislation is passed, under urgency\u2014the Government forced by its support partners to do so\u2014that lawsuit will go away, and we all know it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EHow sneaky this whole campaign has been. Let us go back and have a look at what really happened in 2002. The Labour Party produced a pledge card that very conveniently on the side of it had \u201Cauthorised by Mike Smith, c/o PO Box something\u201D. Labour did everything it possibly could to make that card look like an expense paid by the party as part of its campaign. Of course National did not know, because we were tricked as everyone else was tricked. It was only when the crest turned up on the 2005 card\u2014an action the Auditor-General made happen, because he knew that that would alert other political parties\u2014that my colleague Mr Simon Power brought it to the attention of the authorities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ESo the Labour Party can never get up and tell the people of New Zealand that it did not know what was going on\u2014that the rules changed, and that somehow it was a little bit different. This Labour Party has been sneaky, this Labour Party has broken every rule in the book, and this Labour Party has been caught with its fingers in the till. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI finish by saying that when a political party comes into office and forms a Government, it does so with the trust of the people of New Zealand. It is expected to use its money, to spend it wisely, and to do that with integrity, authority, and honesty. One thing above all that has been proven over this very sorry saga is that that party will never be trusted by the people of New Zealand again. The people of New Zealand know a bunch of crooks when they see them, and even crooks in the dock have a policy of saying sorry and showing some remorse. So before Labour members get up and force through this legislation, I offer them this bit of a starter: why do they not get their cheque books out, pay the money back, say sorry, and for once in their lives accept they have done wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022 data-id=\u0022a3787b6e2cde425d97e1758fe655a4b0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a3787b6e2cde425d97e1758fe655a4b0\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E That was the man who, at the present time, is travelling the world and telling people that he will be the next leader of the National Party. He has talked about the notion of restoring trust, but I say to that member that before he can take over the leadership of the National Party, he should say he is sorry about the 1990s. Was there one single promise that National kept in the 1990s? Was there one single thing National said it would do that it actually carried out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fe1212a80e934d078762adb9ad6de2c0\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Say sorry!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd3202ee1af94cbe83a864e7b29ba042\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Key may, first, like to say, on the way through to taking over the leadership, that he is sorry about the 1990s, and that if National ever gets a chance to be back in power, this time it may try to keep one single promise. On the way through to the leadership, Mr Key should also have a crack at telling us about the trust funds. What is in the trust funds? How much money is in the trust funds? Who put the money in the trust funds, and what do those people want in return for that money? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003ESecond, now that Don Brash has admitted he did not take the appointments with the Exclusive Brethren out of the diary, can he try to recover a little of his memory and tell us when the meetings were, what went on, what the deal was, what the $1.2 million was for, and why a major party was getting alongside a sect like the Exclusive Brethren, which has a fundamentalist agenda that is being pushed in country after country. Why did the National Party defend those people in advancing their agenda\u2014people who want to send New Zealand boys and girls off to war, yet who are pacifists themselves? That is called something beginning with \u201Ch\u201D, I think. I ask Mr Key to let us have Mr Brash clear up the issue of the Exclusive Brethren on the way through to the leadership. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThird, National should have a crack at paying the GST back\u2014at writing out a cheque for $115,000 for the GST. It is unbelievable, I tell Mr Key, that Mr Brash\u2014Dr Brash; whatever he wants to be called\u2014the man who helped to invent GST, did not understand the implications of not paying GST on the broadcasting money. He invented the thing, he sat on the committee, and he is now the leader of the party. He was the person in charge of the National Party campaign, but he did not know about the GST. Well, I say: \u201CPay it back\u2014pay the money!\u201D It is $115,000. Mr Brash should have his cheque book out here tonight, sign the cheque, hand it over, and not keep on saying there is a legal reason not to pay it. There is not a legal reason. Mr Power, who is one of the few people on the National side of the Chamber I have any time for at all, is a lawyer. He could spend a little time advising Mr Brash there is no legal impediment to paying the money back. So I say to Mr Key to let us have the GST payment, on the way through to his taking over as leader. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EIf Mr Key apologised for the 1990s, if he told us about the trust funds, if National unpacked the Brethren, and if it paid the GST back, then maybe the New Zealand public would say that Mr Key looked like a person who was a little on the honest side of things. But until that day arrives, the legacy the National Party has is of its members breaking every single word they have ever put on a piece of paper and, today, of sitting here but not paying the GST back. That is amazing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EWhen I first came into this House there was a man here called Richard Prebble. Richard Prebble used to take us aside when we came to the Chamber to make our speeches, and he would say we knew too much about the topic. He would tell all of us new entrants that that was a waste of time. He said we should want to know nothing, and then we could go in and make extraordinary speeches, because we would not have the impediment of the truth in front of us. And that is what I am hearing from National speakers today and tonight. They have been to the \u201CRichard Prebble School of Politics\u201D. If someone does not know anything about the argument, then he or she can come in here and rave on, as if somehow we live in Zimbabwe and we are about to pass legislation like Mr Mugabe\u2019s. In Zimbabwe there would not be an Opposition to sit in Parliament and talk about passing legislation, but this is not that situation. But if people are of the Richard Prebble style of politician they can get away with ignorance, because they have to have that sort of thing if they are to make an argument. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThe argument is extremely simple. People should forget all the stuff that has gone on over the last little while, and the fact that there was a leaked report and a huge debate. The fact of life is that we have just received the final report, and we have just found out what the Auditor-General was actually saying. We have just heard the Speaker\u2019s report from the Chair\u2014[Interruption] Members are becoming very excited here; they should calm down. We have just had those two reports, and now we can begin to react to them. That is what, in our calm, considered way, the Labour Government is doing. We are now responding calmly to the information we know. We know we have to respond to the fact that the Auditor-General has broadened the definition of what it is reasonable to do as a parliamentarian\u2014what we understood about spending money not being allowable unless one was doing just normal things, and not asking for any kind of vote. He has broadened that definition and we will have to legitimise that kind of expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EWe know that even if we pay back the money\u2014which Labour is committed to doing; we will refund that money\u2014the expenditure will remain unlawful. So we are passing legislation that will help not just ourselves but every member in the House, Katherine Rich included\u2014a member who, as Michael Cullen said, is one of the few members on the Opposition side we also respect. We say that we understand that in doing this we are helping everybody out, and we will go ahead and do it. We know that the Minister in charge of this legislation has suggested we validate the expenditure quickly. That is what we are doing. We are also going to have an external review. That is what we are doing. In other words, we are making sure that we leave this Parliament in shape so it is able to carry on doing its work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EBut what do we hear from the National Party? Its members have gone on and on this evening about an issue that has nothing at all to do with validation. For one person after another\u2014people with the integrity of Murray McCully\u2014it has just been an opportunity. It was amazing to watch Murray McCully rise in the House with indignation. It was such good method acting that it was as though Robert DeNiro had arrived in the House to tell us, with all the moral authority of someone like Moses, that we should all behave ourselves\u2014and that is in spite of the way that member has behaved in this House year after year. Does anybody remember tourism? Does anybody remember what Murray McCully did with regard to tourism? Let us get the situation right, here. This is simply National Party posturing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EI want to finish with this thought for the National Party. The National Party quite clearly started off this term with a plan to character-assassinate people and to run issues that have nothing to do with policy. Do you remember, Madam Assistant Speaker, that it ran a whole lot of that over the summer period? Do you remember what happened? National got nowhere; it went down in the polls. It has done that again. Why are National members so desperate tonight? I will tell members why. They have put all their eggs in the basket of this particular issue. This is the issue they have fought on for months. The whole country has had no policy at all from the National Party. National has a leadership change to come and it has no policy whatsoever. The National members need this issue to work for them. That is why they are so desperate. That is why there is so much venom. That is why there is so much bile. That is why so much hatred is coming through from the National Party. National members are desperate for this issue to work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EI say to the National Party that it will not work. Once this legislation is through, the public will put this issue behind them. They will move on, and they will start to ask questions, such as: \u201CWho can run the Government?\u201D, \u201CWho can run this country?\u201D, and \u201CWho has a vision for the future?\u201D. There is only one party with a vision for the future. It is called the Labour Party. The National Party is in the gutter. It is looking at the stars, but it will never get there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00221ec2c2bc98e6492fbbf01870f9bcd034\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ec2c2bc98e6492fbbf01870f9bcd034\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I start tonight by congratulating someone. I want to begin my contribution to this debate by congratulating the Auditor-General. This is a person who has stood against a barrage of personal abuse and bullying tactics to try to get him to change his view. Attempts were made to discredit him publicly, not only in the media but also in other fora as well, and he stood firm against all of those tactics. Frankly, the only court of opinion that matters on this issue is the court of public opinion, and members opposite would do well to read the editorials of all the major daily newspapers around New Zealand when the Auditor-General\u2019s report was finally tabled in this House. It said one thing. Underneath the detail the Auditor-General simply said he would not be pushed around. It was wrong, and he was going to say it was wrong. He said in his report: \u201CSome MPs and parliamentary parties have said that I acted unfairly by \u2018changing the rules\u2019 after the event. I have not changed any rules.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003ESo who does the Labour Party think the public are going to believe\u2014somebody who said right from the start that he would not be pushed around, or a Labour Party that is wildly spinning the line that the rules have changed? Well, the public have made up their minds. They believe the Auditor-General. The bullying did not work. If the Labour Party\u2014as Steve Maharey said in his contribution\u2014thinks that the public are going to put this issue behind them, I assure him that it will not be the case. If the Labour Party thinks today that this issue will not be raised on the hustings at the next election, it is wrong. If New Zealand First, Labour, and United Future think this issue will disappear into the ether after the legislation gets through the House, and they will not have to pay the money back, then let me assure them that that is wrong.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EI must admit that at 11.30 this morning I thought of those first-term MPs in the Labour Party who, 12 months into their job, arrived here to the news that a campaign they had very little to do with\u2014that they had no say in but simply participated in\u2014will now cost them between $8,000 and $10,000 of their personal money. If I were Maryan Street, I would be saying: \u201CWell, the collective is fine, but actually this isn\u2019t my fault, and I am not going to pay it. Maybe Heather Simpson should.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe question I found particularly interesting is where the senior Labour Party Minister is who has been nowhere near this stuff and has run a mile. Where is Phil Goff? Phil Goff has so much confidence in the Labour Party\u2019s ability to handle this issue that he negotiates separately with the Auditor-General. He wanders off on his own and has a separate negotiation with the Auditor-General, and he sits in his caravan waiting, waiting, waiting because he knows that the opportunity is not far away.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EI have to say that over the last 7 years I have on occasion sat on this side of the House and quietly admired some of the political management skills I have seen, but, having been a student of politics before becoming an MP, I was totally disbelieving when, as senior whip, this matter was brought to my attention in September 2005. In the first week of that month I wrote to the Auditor-General after looking at the pledge card, the fold-out sheets, the conference banners, and the like and not actually believing what I saw. I actually did not believe that the Labour Party would have the overwhelming gall to think it could get away with it. In fact, I read the letter seven times before I sent it, to make sure I was not overstating the case. But it was impossible to overstate; it was almost too obvious. My colleague Bill English has spoken about the deep level of cynicism required to actually take an affirmative step to sign that letter to Parliamentary Service and to say: \u201CPay this bill, or else.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThis was not an accident. This was not reckless, even. This was a wilful step that was taken by senior party officials. Frankly, that level of inherent arrogance was just gobsmacking, if one steps back and looks at it objectively. Even if it could be argued that the expenditure was legitimate, which it cannot be, and even if it could be argued that all parties will pay the money back\u2014and my colleague the Hon Murray McCully has done a very good job, I believe, of summarising the fact that there are parties in this House that have no intention of paying that money back\u2014if all of those factors were legitimate, why are we in urgency? If those factors were legitimate, why not allow the public to have a say? Why not allow the bill to withstand the select committee process? This bill does not have to be an appropriations bill\u2014particularly Part 2. Any normal form of legislation could contain these matters and be dealt with in an open and transparent way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EBut let us step back. Helen Clark has always campaigned on her integrity. That has been her No. 1 asset and something, I have observed over the last 7 years, she guards and protects viciously. Fair enough! Well, that has gone. That integrity has gone.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bb2db82dc4c4cf7bf9d7568871487de\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: No, never.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245e1f0ed2a9643b395cd59a3b77f5d5d\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: It does not matter for Darren Hughes. He is 12. He can spend some time on this side of the House and go back over to the Government benches in 20 years\u2019 time. It does not matter to him. It is Rick Barker I feel sorry for\u2014no, I do not feel sorry for him. Rick Barker has done his dash; it is time he moved on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe moral authority that allows the Government to do its business has gone. Its political capital, to use the phrase, is spent, and we will table in the Committee stage a series of amendments that will seek the votes of those in the Chamber who believe validation should occur only in the event that the money has been paid back. I say this to the Greens: do not abstain on that point. Do not become a party of Ashraf Choudharys. Take a stand and decide to vote for amendments that say \u201CValidating legislation is OK as long as the money is paid back.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThere are members opposite in the Labour Party who actually respect, in my opinion, the political process in the Parliament and they know this is wrong. They know this is wrong and it is a big rat for them to swallow before returning to Opposition. John Key made an excellent point when he spoke earlier tonight. If one has done something wrong, show some contrition. At the very least one should front up to the public and say \u201CHands are up, got caught, made a mistake.\u201D I have had to do it, and, believe me, it is not hard. Just put the hands up and say \u201CA mistake has been made.\u201D, and accept the punishment. Those Labour members should accept one thing: they will be in Opposition in 2008. They should save what little integrity some of them still have, because the winds of change are blowing through the electorate, and I tell the members of this House that Helen Clark\u2019s integrity in this country is nil. Which members opposite want to go down with that ship?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022 data-id=\u0022941052f00c7a49989f017c5fc8903c2f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022941052f00c7a49989f017c5fc8903c2f\u0022\u003EHONE HARAWIRA (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tokerau):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora Madam Speaker. Kia ora t\u0101tou te Whare. Everyone in the House well knows how seriously the members of the M\u0101ori Party take their roles as MPs. We attended the induction, we swotted up on the Standing Orders, we read Speakers\u2019 Rulings, and, in fact, we even came in for parliamentary training before the election because we were so sure we were coming into Parliament. We worked our butts off because of our commitment to our people. On the very rare occasions when we have slipped up we have copped the flak and done the punishment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ESo with this bill, as with other bills, when it comes to talking about appropriation legislation to validate parliamentary expenditure, we decided to have a really good look into what this was all about. We know that appropriations are supposed to be limited to a specific amount and scope. We know that in this situation there is a serious case to be answered, because expenses were incurred outside the scope of the appropriation, and the Government was warned against doing it before it actually incurred those expenses. That means that Parliament stands in breach of section 4 of the Public Finance Act of 1989\u2014a breach of law, an illegal act, and an unlawful offence that puts Parliament\u2019s already tarnished credibility further at risk. Now I may be only a new boy on the block, but even I know that political parties are supposed to operate according to the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori Party made a mistake\u2014no issue. One of our people sent in an account that we should have paid, but it was paid by the Parliamentary Service\u2014a paltry 53 bucks. But it had nothing to do with overspending. In fact, we came nowhere near our spending limit because we did not have enough money. It was a straight-out mistake. We were informed of the mistake and we repaid the bill\u2014end of story. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EThen I hear that persons of privilege\u2014MPs\u2014can simply introduce new laws to right any wrong. I guess that is what is meant in the latest edition of Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand, which states: \u201CThe office to which members are elected has a considerable amount of legal freedom guaranteed to it, so that members themselves have the capacity to carry out their duties of the office as they sit and, indeed, are able largely to define what the duties of that office are.\u201D I guess that means that in the house of privilege\u2014the House of Parliament\u2014legal freedom means that those who control the House can do exactly what they want to do. That is what really sucks about this bill, because it is about an abuse of the concept of legal freedom. In fact, it is about legal highway robbery. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ESo I turned to Hansard to see exactly what this legal freedom means, and surprise, surprise, we have already been here before with the 1894 Native Land (Validation of Titles) Act amendment. In case members\u2019 memories do not go back as far as that, that Act, widely known in M\u0101ori circles as the \u201CValidation of Invalid Land Sales Act\u201D, has actually come before the House on a number of occasions recently\u20146 May 2004, to be exact, a day that will remain etched forever in the minds of M\u0101oridom. That is the day the infamous foreshore and seabed legislation came before this House\u2014legislation that the M\u0101ori Party is seeking to repeal. Dr Cullen was asked that day to consider the similarities between the foreshore and seabed legislation and the \u201CValidation of Invalid Titles Act\u201D, which legislated away M\u0101ori rights to court redress for land taken without their knowledge or consent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ETwo years later, on 15 June 2006, my esteemed colleague Te Ururoa Flavell asked a question of the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs about whether the M\u0101ori Purposes Bill would legalise decisions that did not have a legal mandate, in much the same way as legalising the theft of M\u0101ori land that occurred with the \u201CValidation of Invalid Titles Act\u201D of 1893. Third time lucky, my even more esteemed leader, Dr Pita Sharples, raised the same \u201CValidation of Invalid Land Sales Act\u201D in the context of the Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park) Validation Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ESo there is no doubt in my mind at all about where the Labour Party turned to try to get itself out of this mess, because, as the Speaker has rightly pointed out, without validating legislation the unlawfulness remains. Although she urged parties to pay the money back, her key point was that repayment itself would not change the unlawfulness of the spending. So, hey presto, a new law would be required; a new law based on precedent, based on the validation of imperfect titles, of legal theft, and the justification of banditry from the 1800s. The precedent then for validating unlawfulness was in 1894, when the amendment to the 1893 Native Land (Validation of Titles) Act was passed, in which the illegal confiscation of M\u0101ori land was justified, legalised, and validated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EThat amendment also created a perception that every bit of M\u0101ori land taken from that point on would also be legitimate. George Elliott Barton, the first Validation Court judge said something in 1893 that could have been written for Dr Michael Cullen in 2006. I quote from 1893: \u201Cthe chief object of the legislature in passing validating statutes has been the validation of all honest and straightforward purchases, whether they are legal or illegal in their inception\u201D. He was saying that the illegal orders that he did not have the power to make as a Native Land Court judge would now be validated. This tells us that it does not matter whether acts are legal or illegal, or whether one has the authority to make orders, all that matters is that one has the power to make one\u2019s thievery legal. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EThis House has a history of dishonesty, concealment, and conspiracy to deceive stretching back to the very earliest days of parliamentary deception in Aotearoa\u2014a history I have no doubt the learned Dr Cullen, a professional student of social and economic history, has studied in depth. I refer the House to a book written by Dr Cullen himself, called Lawfully Occupied, for clues as to where this Government\u2019s notions of lawfulness and unlawfulness may have been sourced. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ELast week we quoted Santayana, who said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. But given the experience and the intellect of the Labour leadership, we would have to say that this is not the case here. Was Labour\u2019s overspend an accident? No way; this was a deliberate and calculated act. It was a conscious decision to ignore the advice of the Auditor-General and go ahead with an overspend of some $800,000. They have got snapped with their fingers in the cookie jar and this bill is nothing more than legal screaming. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ELast week Dr Cullen said that Parliament would need validating legislation to cover election overspending. But honestly folks, who here genuinely believes that in such a close election as we had last year, $800,000 over the top could be seen as anything but a deliberate act of election chicanery? There have been overspends before\u2014$309 million in respect of the Kyoto Protocol, $56 million in tourism, and $12 million in corrections\u2014but they were blunders. They were of a completely different nature to the lust for power we see manifest in this Labour Government\u2019s appropriation legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EWhat sort of example does this unlawful shenanigans give to the nation? Does it say that any M\u0101ori on the street can go to jail for pinching a bar of soap, but political parties can validate the theft of millions of dollars of M\u0101ori land? That any Pasifika can lose his or her home as a result of being caught in a shady finance deal, but politicians can validate the theft of a million dollars in election overspending? Or that any poor P\u0101keh\u0101 can watch their kids suffer because they cannot afford a doctor, while we watch a Government build a surplus of $11 billion? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EThis is the challenge we face here today. The 1997 Waitangi Tribunal report said that validating illegal transactions was \u201Ca very dubious proceeding\u201D, especially where it fails to protect M\u0101ori owners from hasty or excessive alienation. The M\u0101ori Party strongly opposes any thought that people of privilege should be able to validate their wrongdoings while those in genuine need in this country have to suffer the laws, the police, the courts, and the jails that are so often their lot. \u201CWalking your talk\u201D is the first principle of genuine leadership. Cowering behind a fa\u00E7ade of legislation is the domain of thieves and scoundrels. Kia ora t\u0101tou.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022 data-id=\u0022716f0e10d3a04dcab0032edc6dac273c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022716f0e10d3a04dcab0032edc6dac273c\u0022\u003EGORDON COPELAND (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E On behalf of United Future members, I say there is not much else we want to say about the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, because the ground was very adequately covered by our leader, the Hon Peter Dunne, during the first reading debate. But there are a couple of things I think we should respond to, in terms of some of the information that has been placed before Parliament during this debate. In particular, I want to comment on the\u2014in my view\u2014very simplistic analysis presented to the House by Rodney Hide in his speech. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003ERodney Hide suggested that his respect for the Auditor-General and his office, and for that of the Solicitor-General, would, ipso facto, lead to the conclusion that it was wrong for us to pass this legislation, because somehow or other that would be disrespectful to the Auditor-General. He suggested that since the Auditor-General has declared the expenditure to be unlawful, we should leave it for all time to sit in some kind of limbo in the Government accounts as unlawful expenditure. But I point out to Rodney Hide that the House faces a slightly deeper dilemma than that simplistic analysis. It is that in addition to having advice from the Auditor-General on this matter, Parliament has also had advice from Treasury. Treasury has advised the House in its written report, which has been tabled with the papers, that expenses incurred without or outside an appropriation are in breach of section 4 of the Public Finance Act 1989. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003ENow two wrongs never amount to a right. So I think it is quite illogical and it would really be quite crazy to argue that because a party\u2014and this is certainly the case for United Future, whatever may be the case for other parties\u2014inadvertently broke the rules regarding electioneering expenditure as per the Auditor-General\u2019s report, based upon the opinion of the Solicitor-General, we should then set about to deliberately break the rules and the law, as set out in the Public Finance Act, by failing to validate the resulting unlawful expenditure. Someone has really lost the plot in the analysis of the whole thing, because all that we are doing here tonight is to go with the law\u2014the Public Finance Act 1989, which obliges us to validate the expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EThe unlawful or lawful nature of the expenditure, as Peter Dunne so adequately described, has nothing to do at all with the moral imperative of whether the money should be repaid. United Future, as a party, has resolved that moral imperative very clearly, by saying that we intend to repay the money. We will do so irrespective of whether this bill goes through tonight or is defeated. We will repay the money because it is necessary to do so. Inadvertent though the unlawful nature of the expenditure may have been, we acknowledge that there is a case to be answered in terms of the New Zealand public, and that the only reasonable response to their concerns about what has happened through these unfortunate events is to make a repayment. That is exactly what we intend to do. I repeat those assurances tonight to this House and I say that that moral imperative, from our point of view, remains whether or not the expenditure is validated by this legislation. But because it would be wrong to deliberately breach the Public Finance Act 1989, we will continue to vote for this bill through the Committee stage and its third reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc619fe10a2a4dfdaf11644e8bc2a356\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc619fe10a2a4dfdaf11644e8bc2a356\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Associate Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E This debate centres on restoring public confidence in the institution that is Parliament. Members of the public who are listening tonight could be forgiven for thinking that everybody has inadvertently been caught by the Auditor-General broadening the definition of what was appropriate\u2014everybody except the National Party. Tonight we have heard a whole lot of invective, a series of auditions by the \u201Csuper - front bench\u201D of Simon Power and John Key. Interestingly, Katherine Rich has remained\u2014quite logically and smartly\u2014very silent. But people would be forgiven tonight for thinking that everybody had inadvertently sinned, apart from the National Party. I could remind National Party members that they got caught by the same broadening of the same definition to the tune of around $10,000. They got caught by the same definitional broadening as every other party in this House, yet they conveniently sit here tonight pretending they are lily-white, they did no wrong, and everybody else inadvertently sinned, apart from them. Well, there is a word for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EThis Government\u2014it is true\u2014did not act on a draft leaked report. This Government did not have a rush of blood to the head\u2014that is true. This Government did not play politics with the issue\u2014that is true. This Government waited until we had a final report and then reacted to that. Anybody with a logical mind\u2014and I do not include Nick Smith in that definition\u2014anybody with a calm, low-tempered mind, who did not turn red as he or she took a third glass of water, would think that that was a logical procedure to undergo, unless one had a brainwave or a rush of blood to the cranium, as one or two people over that side of the Chamber are wont to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EWhen we talk about validating legislation, let us look at some of the past precedents when there has been inadvertent use of appropriations. The \u201CPrince of Darkness\u201D, Murray McCully, came down and, as Michael Cullen quite rightly said, tried to lecture us on what was moral fibre. I remind Mr McCully that back in 1995 and 1996 there was a thing called the Tourism Board. There was a mess-up in appropriations of around $56 million, and the expenditure could not be aligned with the appropriations. So what did National do?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234ef5ce013304f1381786ab24b1f006c\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Call in the medics.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229feaeda6077a48118f98db9d5e763500\u0022\u003EHon CLAYTON COSGROVE\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, Mr Smith is nodding in agreement with Mr Brownlee. That member might need a medic or a weight-watcher\u2014one of the two. What did Mr McCully do and what did the National Government do? They validated $56 million worth of expenditure. They validated that $56 million of expenditure because that is the appropriate thing to do, as per the Treasury advice. So they validated $56 million of misappropriated tourism expenditure in 1995-96. Members opposite cannot have it both ways, and that is where Mr Hide\u2019s logic, as Mr Copeland pointed out, falls down. If we have mismatches in appropriations for departments, for instance, year to year, the National Party says: \u201CLeave it. Let it sit. She\u2019s right.\u201D Mr Brownlee says that. That shows how much he knows about the finances and the books. Then the Auditor-General raises it every year, and we look like a laughing stock as a First World economy. That is what validation is for, and that is why the National Government did it to the tune of $56 million in 1995 and 1996.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EI say this: if we are going to get the ledger right, and if the National Party is going to portray itself as lily-white in the whole scheme of things, then I ask National members to do this. As Dr Cullen said, Simon Power knows, as a lawyer\u2014I am not; he is\u2014that $112,000 of GST presents absolutely no barrier in respect of the National Party paying that back. If National members want to bring back confidence in this institution, they should tell us what they did with their leader\u2019s budget, because the Auditor-General had a problem. The Auditor-General could find Labour\u2019s records of expenditure, but there was a bit of murk around the National Party leadership budget. He could not quite find the records. I also say this. When it comes to fronting up, as Steve Maharey said: \u201CTell us about the trusts, Gerry. Tell us about those. Tell us why you hide the money.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EThe second thing I say is that, in respect of the Exclusive Brethren, we had the biggest attempted hoodwink in political history, to the tune of $1.2 million. I ask those members to come clean. Will John Key tell us whom he met with that afternoon? If we look at the reruns shown on television, we see that the faces are blacked out. Can he tell us whom he met? He could have given a personal explanation when he protested about the fact he was challenged on it. He could have given a personal explanation, which is unchallengeable in Parliament, and which is also on the record of the House, but he chose not to do so. I also say that National members should tell us about the legal representation that the Brethren have received. I ask the lawyers in the National Party, those formerly from law firms, to tell us about the legal representation that for a long time the Brethren have received, and the connection there. Dare I say, and they know who they are, that there is an untold story that will be told at some point. Tell us what favours were accrued in that respect! Tell us what promises were made!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EIf members opposite are serious about restoring integrity, transparency, and confidence in what is probably the most important institution in the land, then they cannot debate in this House, hour on hour, and say they did not sin when they did sin, to the tune of $10,000 at least. They were caught by the same rules as every other political party in this House, but that has been conveniently forgotten in the minds of National members. They were caught by the same broadening of the definition as every other party, and that is a fact. Nick Smith accused one of our members of getting in the gutter when that member reminded him of that. I say that Mr Smith has broadened the definition of gutter politics, because now, under that definition, when facts are raised that Dr Smith does not agree with, he hides behind that little, smug definition. I say to the National members that they should front up. They have spent their hours in the House being holier than thou. They have commitments from all the political parties as to where they stand. It is an open sea now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EBut the unanswered questions around the last election remain. The unanswered questions are about collusion with a sect that is quite happy, as Steve Maharey said, to send other people\u2019s kids overseas to be killed, but not theirs; that is quite happy to go around the country saying: \u201CWe are praying for you all.\u201D As a Catholic, but not such a good one\u2014Mr Brownlee and I would agree on that\u2014I say that National members should front up, that they should not try to hoodwink the public. They should not have a sort of Ronald Reagan amnesia, as Dr Brash did: \u201CI cannot recall.\u201D How many times did he say that he could not remember whom he met with, what he said, what commitments were given, and what he was told? I say to Mr Brownlee\u2014because he and I both know the truth\u2014that, like some other members, he feels exceptionally uncomfortable about that situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003EWe now have a bill that opens the whole thing up, but the questions remain on that side of the House. I challenge members opposite to tell us about the trusts, to tell us when they will pay back the GST, and tell us why they validated $56 million of misappropriated expenditure in 1995 and 1996. Then, when they have answered those questions, they can stand up and portray themselves as lily-white. The next cab off the rank is the scone-doer from Tasman.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u00223cd7acea8c4f49de884989698034bb60\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223cd7acea8c4f49de884989698034bb60\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E Tonight is a really sad and depressing time for this Parliament. I know of no time in my 17 years when I have seen a bill that will bring this Parliament into as much disrepute as the bill before us. It is a matter of folklore that in 1987, when we had the last Labour Government, an MPs\u2019 superannuation bill was bunged through late at night, through all three stages, that went down in political folklore as one of the great breaches of the public trust. Even this year, the New Zealand public remember that duplicitous act. Well, this piece of legislation\u2014[Interruption] He is just breaking my speech up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e541dccc35f42d9a299b4cd6a2c7cf2\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It should be pointed out that the National Party\u2019s voting record on that superannuation bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e5fb7e38cde47ea991e40aefd357848\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is not a point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022669d63af708448f1997d33487de2df83\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: They voted\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227961d3eced944b6cb1fb6aa4067d126e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am on my feet. It is not a point of order. The member has been here long enough, and he knows that. Frivolous interjections or points of order used to break up a speech are themselves disorderly. The member is warned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022982a2c9be0b941539d9cd5cfe620f737\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave for my speech to begin at its original 10-minute time to take into account that that was deliberate breach of the Standing Orders aimed at breaking up my speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b72bcd9454024ce99fef78b7beb44843\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I will consider that, Dr Smith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022126f3a89505f4ff0a804d30bb3261699\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s so embarrassing we agree.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298984ca3afc740af9b0cb198d163b781\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: They are agreeing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227767cdbbc227489aa5bf5fd1180472e4\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: Tonight is one of those sad, depressing times when every member of this Parliament knows that we are bringing this democratic institution, on which the tender flower of democracy is based, into gross disrepute. Why are we passing a bill under urgency to make lawful what Labour had done that was unlawful? We are being asked, simply, to rush a bill through to somehow make Labour\u2019s breaking of the law right. Well, no matter how many bills those members pass, and no matter how many pathetic speeches we hear from the likes of Clayton Cosgrove, the public of New Zealand knows that this is rotten, that it is sick, and that it is the hallmark of a corrupt Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI use the word \u201Ccorrupt\u201D with care and wisely, because the question that no member opposite has answered is this: \u201CWas the pledge card electioneering?\u201D. Well, Mr Clayton Cosgrove has a lot to say for himself. I ask whether he could answer that point for the House, whether the pledge card was electioneering. The silence is deafening, because every member of the public who received Helen Clark\u2019s pledge card knew that it was electioneering, and every Labour Party volunteer who delivered that pledge card knew that it was electioneering, but there are two people\u2014Helen Clark and Heather Simpson\u2014who told the police that it was not. What does that say about the leadership of the Labour Party that it will try to put that sort of porky past the New Zealand Police? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe reason that this issue is so sick and so rotten is that a fundamental part of our electoral law is the spending cap. It limits Labour\u2019s spending at $2.4 million. What the Labour Party did during that election campaign was to knowingly breach that cap, not by a little bit\u2014not by 1 percent or 2 percent\u2014but Labour spent more than it was allowed to spend by $820,000. Under the Electoral Act, that amounts to a corrupt practice in the law. I say to members opposite, who watched with glee as my colleague Bob Clarkson was put through the courts: \u201CIf he had got it wrong, would we be having retrospective legislation to make sure that he could keep his seat in Parliament?\u201D. In fact, I know that Bob Clarkson is a member of integrity. He would not have had the audacity to ask for retrospective legislation if he had got it wrong. So I ask how 50 members of the Labour Party can sit in their seats in this Parliament when they know that they were elected through deliberately breaching the Electoral Act and committing a corrupt practice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a39d4230054e443581b7904b10b6c62c\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re illegitimate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bad918716bfd45308a192c9bd626f74b\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: My colleague Maurice Williamson says they are illegitimate. There is another word for that, but I will not lower the standards of the House by saying it. I challenge the Steve Mahareys, the Harry Duynhovens, and the George Hawkins to tell the House how they can sit in this Parliament when they know that they came here on the basis of a corrupt practice. What sort of moral mandate do they have? How can a Minister of Revenue go to the people of New Zealand and say they should pay their taxes according to the law, when that Minister has broken the law? How can a social welfare Minister in this Government say that those thousands of New Zealanders who claim social welfare benefits should fill out their forms honestly, when that Minister did not do that and broke the law? How can Labour members sit in a Cabinet room passing laws and expect New Zealanders to obey those laws, when they break them, they break them blatantly, and then they introduce a dodgy bill into this Parliament to say that even though they have broken the law, they will just pass a bill retrospectively, under urgency, to somehow make the situation lawful? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002211febe5cef86468f8f0e69952da36354\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: What did the judge say about you?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c07715a8655c4addaf17bb5030f879bd\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: It may make it lawful, I say to Mr Cosgrove, but it is wrong, and the people of Waimakariri know that it is wrong. Tonight this Government loses the moral mandate to be the Government of New Zealand. With this bill, it loses the moral mandate to govern this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThen we come to the Auditor-General and the disgraceful conduct that this Government has gone down the road of\u2014and for me it was particularly interesting in regard to the Solicitor-General. People may recall that the Solicitor-General believed that I broke a law and, at the time, Labour members said that I had to face the consequences. They said I had to roll over to the High Court and face the music. Would Labour members\u2014who actually passed a law only 3 months later repealing the very law under which I was prosecuted\u2014have accepted a retrospective clause to undo it? Not on your life! Not on your nelly! That is how duplicitous those members are. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThen we come to what is proposed in this bill in respect of electoral spending. This bill will\u2014under urgency\u2014override the Auditor-General\u2019s report. The Auditor-General\u2019s report provides us with complete clarity now about what we can and cannot do. Any members who pretend that there is any doubt now as to what is lawful and what is not are kidding themselves, but has Labour accepted the ruling of the Auditor-General? I know that the people of New Zealand have. I see that the Auditor-General is already being nominated as the New Zealander of the year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ESo have Labour members said: \u201COK, the rules are there now and we will accept them.\u201D? No\u2014what we have in this bill is to provide a new meaning of what funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes are, which basically throws the Auditor-General\u2019s report into the bin and allows Labour to get its sneaky little fingers back in the tin of public money and back to its old tricks of using public money for political purposes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003ELet us remind ourselves of just what is in this sneaky little bill that Labour wants to pass tonight. Clause 7 states that the term \u201Cfunding entitlements for parliamentary purposes\u201D is to include performing the roles and functions of a party. That is State funding for political parties, in drag. Under this bill the pledge card would be quite lawful. I think that there is a good chance there will be a snap election or an early election in this term, such will be the loss of public confidence in this lot that pretend that they are a Government. If we have an election before the end of next year, Labour will again be able to produce a pledge card and again have it funded by the taxpayer. I simply ask whether that is the public will. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI would ask Labour members whether they have asked their constituents whether they want legislation that will allow the Labour Party to use public funds for political purposes again. Have they asked their constituents whether they want legislation that would allow another dodgy pledge card to be funded by the taxpayer? You see, this bill is really State funding for political parties, in drag. What Labour is doing, quite sneakily, quite secretively, and under urgency, is passing legislation to allow it to put its sneaky fingers back into the public tin again\u2014and National says that that is wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EThe final point I will make in my contribution to the second reading is to ask why the need for urgency. Why has the Prime Minister not contributed to this debate? It is because Labour members know in their heart of hearts that this is a morally corrupt law and that they are throwing away their mandate to govern. This is the nail in the coffin of this Labour Government\u2019s mandate to govern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u002227e086da012647c3960009c08e61dfbe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002227e086da012647c3960009c08e61dfbe\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E Every now and again, in the annals of Parliament and in the history of the debates of this great place, we seem to reach a debate in which one side of the House decides that to scream the loudest is to win the argument, that to show the greatest anger is to display the most accuracy, that to be thundering is argument in itself, that shouting down is a good idea, and that a running tirade of abuse against the speaker on his or her feet somehow represents debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EWe have seen Dr Nick Smith become physiologically frightening. God knows what he did to his systolic pressure as he trotted out the words \u201Ccorrupt\u201D and \u201Clacking moral authority\u201D as many times as he could fit them into a sentence\u2014as if there was a thread of logic around the unctuous prattle of that simple man. That was not an argument; that was a tirade. That was not a debate; that was high-tension abuse. The gentleman headed off into hyperspace. He demonstrated kangaroos in the top paddock. Minute after minute his blood pressure rose, his redness became more and more ruddy, and his shouting grew as the argument faded. He thought he had made some good points. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EWell, here is something to think about. The Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill lets no one off any hook of refunding any money that needs to be refunded, whether or not the legislation is passed. One would not think that, judging by the tirade of abuse that has come from the National Party, whose members have gathered in their numbers for this historic debate. One would think that there is a link between refunding unlawful expenditure and the passage of this legislation, but there is none. One would not think that there is any uncertainty about the Auditor-General\u2019s ruling, though the Speaker thinks there is, Treasury thinks there is, and every party in the House except the National Party thinks there is. But one would not think so, listening to the National Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003ENational members have made it up. They do not want to understand what is in this legislation, because it does not suit their purposes to know that what they did today might also be unlawful, that what they do tomorrow or over the weekend might also be unlawful, that that is the state in which we find ourselves, and that we have plenty of legal advice that says we need to fix it\u2014one would not think those things by listening to the tirade of the most angry Hon Dr Nick Smith and other speakers before him. One would not think that there was logical, strong, official advice in favour of this legislation\u2014oh no! This is somehow a cover-up, a loss of moral authority, and something that the House has apparently never done before! The House does it often, but one would not know it in this case, because National members have got themselves into a high little lather, as if they will seize the benches of power like the born-to-rule folk whom they consider themselves to be, on the basis of this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EWell, I say to the National Party that we should talk about television, and television expenditure, and we should begin by looking at the law. The law says that there shall be an amount of taxpayers\u2019 money to be divided by an independent commission, using criteria that are in New Zealand statutes, that that money shall be spent on television, and that no other money can be spent on television. That is the rule. The rule is that there is a quantum of money that is identified as expenditure for that purpose. It may all be spent on that purpose, but not one dollar more may be spent on that purpose. That is the New Zealand law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EDo members know what happened? Every party in this House obeyed that law in this election, as they have done in every election that I have had anything to do with. But the National Party overshot its spending on the grounds that it did not realise that it was a GST inclusive figure. We are expected to believe that, and we are further expected to believe that the National Party does not want to pay the GST, because it will then break the law! Actually, the trouble is that the law is broken already. That is why the police investigated it. Let me say that again. The National Party has, in respect of television funding, already broken the law, which is why the police investigated it. Why did the police take this matter no further, as indeed they took other matters no further? Well, the answer is that they did not know whom to take to court, because they did not know who had broken the law. Why did the police not know who had broken the law? It is because the National Party said it was its agent, the agent said it was its client, and that was where the matter was left to rest. The truth is that the law has been broken by the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eea45929b5ab4c758abc3313704765a1\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: No, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022804408ff24584fe7b5d479f7e4e7396a\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: It does not matter how often Dr Brash says this is not true\u2014the law is there, it has been broken, and the National Party knows it. So its little attempts to introduce legislation to make itself within the law\u2014including, indeed, earlier today\u2014are simply an attempt to smokescreen. National has broken the law, and if it pays the GST, the law will still be broken. It will not be newly broken; it will be broken as it already is. Will National pay the money? No. National has not said it will pay the money; it has decided to try to convince this House that only by paying the money will it break the law, and therefore it needs some sort of absolution from breaking the law in order to pay the money. That is nonsense. The law has been broken by the National Party, and its members simply will not admit it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003ESo if those members want to do unctuous, if those members want to do angry, and if those members want to do \u201Chigh moral authority\u201D and put together the nastiest adjectives one can ever think of\u2014especially a big string of them in one sentence\u2014then I have to say that the National Party, unfortunately, has broken the law all by itself, and it denies doing so. I say to National Party members that they should climb off their high horse just a little bit, peer underneath the tail, and see whether there is anything nasty\u2014I suspect there is. I think the National Party needs to get some more legal advice. Quite apart from the fact that it managed unlawful expenditure itself in the last election in respect of the Auditor-General\u2019s opinion\u2014in that respect it did manage to act unlawfully as well, but one would not know it; the only difference is that the amount was much, much less\u2014the next time it decides to throw a bit of mud around it should remember that in respect of television advertising the law has been broken. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe law has been broken by the New Zealand National Party, not by any other political party in New Zealand, or in any previous election in New Zealand that I know of. The National Party is in denial. It has broken the law already in respect of television. Its members are busily denying it, even as I speak. They are shaking their fingers at me and saying I am wrong. Well, there is nothing wrong about what I have to say. The law has been broken, and the National Party should pay the money back. We could get a chorus up saying: \u201CPay the money back.\u201D, but, hey, that is old hat and it has been done before. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe truth of the matter is that the National Party does not like being told that it is not lily-white. There is nothing lily-white about National Party members. These are the people who put 92 percent of their funds through a blind trust in order to obscure the origins of the donations, and in order to directly frustrate the spirit of the Electoral Act. These are the people who decided to climb into bed\u2014to an extent that we are still uncovering, a year later\u2014with a very strange group of people who gave them $1.2 million of support in such a way that it would not be counted within the laws of the land. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EThe National Party decides to get on its high horse, and it has nothing to get on its high horse about. No one has ever rorted the trust system to the extent that the National Party did in the last election. No one has ever done third-party funding in the history of this country to the extent that the National Party has, and no one else has broken the broadcasting legislation in respect of television in the history that I know of this Parliament. Those are the things that the National Party stands accused of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003EIt is just a shame that National is not part of this legislative debate, because the truth of the matter is that the National Party has done much wrong, and National, all by itself, in one election, has triggered a review of the electoral legislation. There is no doubt that that will be needed, because the rorting has gone on forever. It is about time National members took a bit, instead of giving it, it is about time they got off their high horses, it is about time they stopped doing unctuous, and it is about time they stopped trying to shut down the speaker in full flight, because these guys have dirt written all over them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022 data-id=\u0022176b57daf6d04856a2914c7ee7917761\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022176b57daf6d04856a2914c7ee7917761\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. First, I want to assure you, and your predecessor in the Chair, that earlier this afternoon when I was asked to leave the House, I certainly moved to do so, and did not intend, in any way, to disrespect or disobey the Speaker\u2019s direction. I was simply, under Standing Order 85, doing as I was asked, but I was informing the acting chief whip that I was the duty Minister, so he needed to arrange for someone to replace me. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003EMy second point relates to the current debate. We have heard a lot of interjection from the Opposition, and, on occasions, I suppose, we might even expect it to be a little witty. We have been disappointed, so far. However, a large number of the interjections have been made by people who are not sitting in their normal seats. Former Speakers have ruled, on many occasions, that interjections should be rare and reasonable, and hopefully witty, and should be made by members who are sitting in their seats and not deliberately moving to be closer to the member who is speaking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca8bb9dbb3784352b96e0628af16b7f2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Duynhoven. I will be the judge of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00222d94c5fab87a40ed883ca373e0b2c95b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222d94c5fab87a40ed883ca373e0b2c95b\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E We accept that the Hon Harry Duynhoven should be taken at his word, when he said he had not deliberately dallied in the House but was notifying the senior whip that he was the duty Minister. I am sure the senior whip was greatly appreciative, because, quite clearly, he would not have been following proceedings at the time, and probably of his own volition could not have worked that out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EOn Mr Duynhoven\u2019s second point, I assure him that all of the people on this side will try not to speak at a greater audible volume than they would from their normal seats. But if he thinks we are speaking too loudly, he should take another point of order and we can have some further discussion about the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022260d3a52954d49a6962157862ccff56e\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Brownlee, but that was not a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u0022136c93e11e974a57a6449985a83e7717\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022136c93e11e974a57a6449985a83e7717\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E We have just sat through 10 minutes of personal abuse from the Labour Party\u2019s strategist, Pete Hodgson. That is the man who went on television and said: \u201CWe will not pay it back.\u201D Then he was overruled by Helen Clark, who said he should not have said that, and was not authorised to say that. I presume the 10 minutes of personal abuse that he threw at this side was authorised. Because in not one word did Pete Hodgson mention the bill we are supposed to be debating tonight. Not for one moment did he seem to think he should address the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EBut why would he want to? This bill is such a disgrace\u2014just like that Minister opposite. The reason it is such a disgrace is that 1 year and 1 month after the election was stolen, this Parliament is back here tonight, under urgency, rushing legislation through to make legal what is clearly illegal. Some wonder why people out there say the law is an ass. The reason the law is an ass is that people push through legislation that has no right to be legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EMost people in this country try to be law abiding, at least most of the time. Some people who are beneficiaries occasionally rip off the benefits system, and we know that. Those people get prosecuted and can end up in jail. For $2,000 they will be prosecuted and forever condemned as cheats, thieves, and dishonest people. But not the Labour Party! No, no; it can take taxpayers\u2019 money, misuse it, hide it, know it is wrong, be told it is wrong, but it gets to pass a law to make it all better. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003ELet us look at the example of those beneficiaries whom I sometimes deal with. Through no fault of their own, they end up in debt to the Ministry of Social Development\u2014the ministry that deals with beneficiaries. If beneficiaries try to come off the domestic purposes benefit, or the unemployment benefit, and get into work, they can sometimes have their benefit paid for 2, 3, or 4 weeks after it is supposed to have stopped. The mistake is made by the ministry, but the beneficiary gets a note telling him or her to pay back the money. We are talking about people with very, very little money, who do not have savings accounts or credit cards they can use. These people have no option, yet they get threatening letters from the ministry telling them to pay back the money that the ministry wrongly paid them. Do they get retrospective legislation making everything better? They certainly do not. They, in fact, get stood over, and bullied and harassed by the very people who made the mistake in the first place by keeping on paying them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003ESome of us have dealt with estates, and the situation when people have died and the old-age pension is being paid from New Zealand superannuation, and is paid for another few weeks, or whatever, and the estate gets a nasty letter saying the money must be paid back. Someone is grieving for his or her partner, and gets a letter saying there has been an overpayment and to pay back so many of the hundreds of dollars. That is the sort of way in which the most vulnerable people are treated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EYet the Labour Party, the New Zealand First Party, and United Future are all giving, really, not a huge commitment to paying it back. We hear Helen Clark say there is a target. Well, we all know about targets, under \u201CHelen Clark\u2019s land\u201D. It is a \u201Ctarget\u201D that at some stage they will pay back. Apparently, it is within some financial year. Maybe it is this financial year, or maybe another. We have heard bleeding heart stories from the back-bencher Dave Hereora that he might have to pay it by means of time payment. Tell that to the beneficiaries who have to pay by time payment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWhat about New Zealand First! It is the most disgraceful element in this matter. No wonder Winston Peters has been quiet throughout this entire debate! Not a peep have we heard from Winston Peters. Why is that? He, of course, is in a situation where he is in an unholy alliance with the Labour Party, all for the baubles of office. That is a man who is the first to go around telling other people how they should live their lives, and what they should be paying. We are talking about \u201CMr Wine Box\u201D, of course! Unfortunately, it was $160,000, was it not, that he stole from the taxpayer? The poor old taxpayer! Who paid for those billboards\u2014the \u201COh, I\u2019ve got something on my shoe!\u201D billboards\u2014that he had up and down the country? The taxpayer paid for them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EOne of the most disgraceful things about this legislation is that as soon as it is passed\u2014and it will be, because those people are in this unholy alliance to do exactly that, to cheat the people of New Zealand\u2014there will be no legal obligation to pay. It is all right for the Prime Minister to say: \u201COh, well, we\u2019re going to pay in the Labour Party; we\u2019re going to tithe them.\u201D It is so sweet that Labour is going to tithe. Then what will happen in New Zealand First? It has said it will go to court. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b1088ddd7814373aa803567fa34ee9c\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: The \u201CDance of the Seven Lawyers\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222f02f0c3558b4d33b255b316b324cade\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the \u201CDance of the Seven Lawyers\u201D. As soon as Winston Peters gets into trouble, he says: \u201CWe\u2019ll charge off to court.\u201D That is what he will do. But there will not be any point because, at the end of the day, this bill that I hold in my hand will make it all better, anyway. It is like putting a little band-aid on. Winston Peters said: \u201CWe will pay what is lawfully owed.\u201D, but nothing will be \u201Clawfully\u201D owed. It will all be gratis. So anything he does pay\u2014and it will be nothing\u2014will be a bonus and he will be able to traipse around the three old-folks homes that will have him back and say to them: \u201CI paid back more than I legally had to do.\u201D He will be right, because it will all be right. This is a clean slate bill for Winston Peters and Helen Clark. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EIn fact, in this country most of us, as I said, most of the time try to respect the law, but occasionally people like the Chief Electoral Officer come along and say: \u201CIf you keep spending like this, you will have broken the law.\u201D That is what happened to my friend Bob Clarkson. He was spoken to, and Bob listened to the Chief Electoral Officer, who said that if he kept spending like that, he would be outside the law. Bob listened, because Bob respected the law and respected the Chief Electoral Officer. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EBut what happened to the Labour Party? It heard as well, but, unlike Bob Clarkson, it did not stop spending. Members in the Labour Party said: \u201CLet\u2019s not be like Bob Clarkson; let\u2019s keep on spending and rark it up, because we\u2019ll get into Government and have our mate Winston in there. It won\u2019t matter, we\u2019ll shove through any legislation, and do whatever to remain in power.\u201D That is what they did, and that is exactly what they are doing now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003ETell me again, why do people think the law is an ass? It is because of this sort of legislation, and because of the disrespect that those on the other side of the House have towards the taxpayers of New Zealand. They are so used to being at the receiving end of other people\u2019s money, time and time again. They do not care. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThese are the same people, of course, who with the unions went around the factories and told people lies upon lies, took their union fees off them, and paid them through to the Labour Party. Those poor people today now have to say that they agree with this nonsense, where suddenly the Labour Party, New Zealand First, and United Future are wiping off their debt, all for the baubles of power, for their limousines, for all the accoutrements they get\u2014the taxpayer benefits. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThis bill will allow that pledge card to be legal\u2014legally paid for by the taxpayer, next time. This is, in fact, a declaration of war on the taxpayer. The poor old taxpayers might as well know that they have never approved State funding for parties, they have never voted for it, they have never been polled on it. What will they now have? State funding, legalised through the back door! It is State funding in drag\u2014State funding by another name. That is what this Parliament is about to go and vote on, and it is an utter disgrace. The members over there should be looking glum because when they go back to their electorates they will be told exactly what the people of this country think. They know that this is nothing more than a whitewash. These people are dog-tucker, and it is about time they went.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u00229efb8ecffd104e4d871f47365cd66f79\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229efb8ecffd104e4d871f47365cd66f79\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E I am pleased to take this opportunity to participate in this debate. The people of New Zealand need to know that opposite the National Party today sits an illegitimate Government. It is an illegitimate Government because it stole the 2005 general election. Don Brash has shown conclusively that that party opposite spent $750,000 on the election that it should not have. That $750,000 was spent on top of the $2.4 million that it was allowed to spend. The party opposite spent $3 million - plus on the election. The legal limit was $2.4 million. Labour broke the law. Section 214B of the Electoral Act says to the Labour Party that if it spends more than $2.4 million on an election, that is a corrupt practice. Labour spent $750,000 on top of that. It stole the election. That $750,000 made a material difference to that election. It was a knife-edge election. It was the closest we have seen in a generation. Every foot soldier counted, every telephone call counted, and every dollar counted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWhat has outraged me the most was the Minister of Justice, pontificating from his seat this afternoon. He is a man whose 10,000 majority in Taupo was shaved to 1,100. I say to Mark Burton that if Helen Clark had not taken that $750,000 of taxpayers\u2019 money and spent it in electorates like his, he would be out of Parliament today. Steve Chadwick, the person who took a 10,000 majority in Rotorua down to 686, is there only because of the good people of Kawerau. The people of Rotorua wanted to kick her out and replace her with a dentist from Auckland. That tells us something about what the people of Rotorua thought. Steve Chadwick is in this House today only because Helen Clark and Michael Cullen spent more than the electoral law allowed. That $750,000 made a difference in Rotorua. Steve Chadwick would be out of Parliament today if Helen Clark had obeyed the law. Let us look at the back bench. The fact is that Maryan Street would not be a list MP in Parliament today if Helen Clark had obeyed the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWhat is clear is that Labour was told that the limit must be obeyed, and it deliberately ignored it. As our good leader Dr Don Brash has said time and time again, before the election the Labour Party was twice warned by the Chief Electoral Officer, David Henry, that the pledge card spending would have to be included in Labour\u2019s election return. Remember that week before the election, when the chief returning officer announced that he had told Bob Clarkson not to spend any more money? Well, Labour saw that press statement and thought: \u201CMy God! We\u2019ve got this letter from the chief returning officer telling us that this pledge card spending had better be included in it.\u201D So what did Mike Smith and the Labour Party do? I am sure he went to the Labour campaign committee, and immediately a letter was dispatched, saying: \u201CYes, we\u2019ll declare that in our spending return.\u201D What do we know? What happened after the election was the Labour campaign committee said: \u201CNo, it\u2019s not going to be part of our spending return.\u201D, because Labour had worked out that it had spent the $2.4 million already, plus the $750,000 that has been declared in the Auditor-General\u2019s report, and that put it way over the limit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWhat makes it worse is that in the 2 weeks before the election the Labour Party campaign committee members would have been fully aware of the warning from David Henry, but those Labour Party campaign committee members still decided to spend well over a million dollars on newspaper advertising, when they were fully aware of the warning that had come from David Henry. So they could have stopped overspending, they could have obeyed the law, but that Labour campaign committee decided that it would carry on and spend the money. So this is an illegitimate Government, because this Government would not be there if Labour had not spent that three-quarters of a million dollars that it spent unlawfully in the last election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258cbcdb8b23046d182d679240544a0a5\u0022\u003EHon David Benson-Pope\u003C/span\u003E: What about the Brethren? Tell us about the Brethren.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d8240d9f13d48f8a1fc976cd092b4d0\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: David Benson-Pope can pop in there and throw a few things around. But the fact is he would not be a Minister in this Government today if the Labour Party had not overspent in the last election. This is an illegitimate Government. How many members in this House receive The Parliamentarian magazine from the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association? How many times have we read complaints about Caribbean and African Governments whose members overspend their election limits then pass legislation to authorise their misappropriation of public money? We read that, we tut-tut, and we say: \u201CWhat banana republics! What illegitimate Governments! What corrupt people!\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWell, what is different here? This is a Labour Party in which Helen Clark, Michael Cullen, and Heather Simpson must have knowingly allowed themselves to breach section 214B. Oh, Dr Cullen shakes his head. Was Dr Cullen on the Labour Party campaign committee? Who were the other people on the Labour Party campaign committee? I ask Dr Cullen who the other members of this House are who sat in on those decisions. How about telling us? I reckon this House would be very surprised to know those names\u2014would it not, Madam Speaker? Who were the Labour MPs sitting in on that discussion, Madam Speaker? If their names were made public, I am sure it would be very embarrassing for the Labour Party. They sat on the campaign committee and made the decision that they would overspend.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThis is a Government that is not legitimate. More and more people in New Zealand realise that this Government broke the law to secure its electoral mandate. The law is clear. David Henry spelt it out. He told the police, who said: \u201COh well, you know, we\u2019re all a bit confused by it.\u201D David Henry set it out very clearly. He warned the Government twice before the election that the pledge card must be included in election spending. Days before the election the Labour Party admitted that the card would be included\u2014solely to prevent David Henry from putting out a press statement like the one he did about Bob Clarkson. As a result, we now have a Government that has secured its mandate through committing an electoral offence. It must be an electoral offence. If the limit is $2.4 million, and Labour spends over $3 million, then that is a breach.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EMichael Cullen would not be Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand today, he would not be travelling the world at taxpayers\u2019 expense, and he would not be sitting in a limousine\u2014[Interruption] Oh, that is the bit that winds the Labour Party members up\u2014the overseas travel and the limousines. Dr Cullen would not be sitting over there, Steve Chadwick would be out, Cosgrove would be out, and Street would be out. MP after MP would have been kicked out of this Parliament, because this is an illegitimate Government. The Government stole the money, they spent more money than they should have, they broke the electoral law, and they were let off.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe National Opposition will make sure that the people of New Zealand know that there is no legitimate mandate that supports the Labour Party in office. Its members cannot break the electoral spending cap by three-quarters of a million dollars and stand up and say they are, honestly, the legitimately elected Government of this country\u2014they are not. That three-quarters of a million dollars made a material difference to the election. It made a huge difference. Remember that this was an election on the knife-edge. Government members spent all that money in the last week, when they knew they had breached their spending limits. That is how they secured a fraudulent victory in the 2005 election. The sooner they are back on the Opposition benches the better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022 data-id=\u002239697774c0da4f05b3d5914f76a0dffb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002239697774c0da4f05b3d5914f76a0dffb\u0022\u003EMARYAN STREET (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The issue that made the material difference in the last election was the fact that previous years of promises had been kept by the Government, as opposed to the years before that, when the National Party in Government broke promise after promise after promise. That is what made the material difference in the election. As other speakers on this side of the House have said, this debate should be to do with restoring faith in political institutions and in Parliament. The National Opposition should, in fact, be playing its part in doing that by explaining to New Zealanders why legislation like this is necessary. This debate and the circumstances around it have reminded me of that situation whereby the very proud mother is watching the military drill\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b155b26ce5d4e7099b74461a379d336\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It is becoming difficult to hear the member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4ac8f1810a5433bad01be1752e59f33\u0022\u003EMARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: The debate has reminded me of that situation whereby the very proud mother is watching the military drill and says that everybody is out of step except her Jack. The truth of the matter is that the Auditor-General\u2019s summary and conclusion mean that every party in this House, bar one, offended according to his definition. Labour will be refunding the money\u2014we have made that perfectly clear. As somebody who has conducted and run Labour Party campaigns nationally\u2014unlike those novices over there\u2014I say to members opposite that we have done the same thing before and that it has never previously been considered illegal. The fact is that this Labour Government\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a2382f2f29e43cfbbea70e4a8fdcdfe\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It is impossible to hear the member. As we know, the Standing Orders say that interjections are permitted, but we are starting to barrack again. If members want to remain in the House to participate, they should please lower the tone and give the member the opportunity to be heard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260241788a19c40399102fc2e567434b7\u0022\u003EMARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: We have had recounted previously the need for validating legislation to have been used in the past, particularly in respect of the Tourism Board, but in the history of this Parliament there have been other examples, as well. When mistakes have been made, or mistakes have been imputed to have been made, then validating legislation has sometimes been used by National when in Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EMy challenge to members opposite is why not elevate this debate, for the sake of New Zealanders. Why not take the opportunity to explain the issues adequately? Why not take the opportunity to lead the debate about how democratic processes in this country ought to be funded? What about a debate about disclosure? What about a debate about State funding, and its pros and cons? What about leading that debate, and taking the opportunity to do it? Does the House know why members opposite cannot do that? Because they have not the wit to do it. If they had\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1cc5e1147864223a00bf1261eb91f6f\u0022\u003EHon David Benson-Pope\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt my colleague, but I am barely more than a metre from her, yet I can hardly hear her speak. You have just made a ruling. The barracking is just ridiculous, and it is not acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e3949d3396d45aeaa619f2f6bd7e750\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am sorry but I cannot hear either, so I am afraid some members will be leaving the Chamber if this continues. Unfortunately, some members have louder voices than others. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a270371edff142ae887ae222c9183641\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. If you are going to be hard on members on this side of the House for interjecting, then I think you need to listen to the content of the speech being delivered. The general tenor of that speech\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222746a099d8204adbb63dad984bbda75c\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: You can\u2019t hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249ba96a5b0c34f7596ea7b410c56342b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please continue with his point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022540fe80c470a4ff08c6444f79b67d529\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Well, Madam Speaker, is it OK for my points of order to be interrupted by Damien O\u0027Connor? National has had people thrown out of the House left, right, and centre today for that sort of thing, but he apparently can just sit there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022733e036e4e2449e6be0437dd1c985c71\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Did the member interrupt?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224115e634881043e3a2e4eae8d80d79e5\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor\u003C/span\u003E: I did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222246844ec00c4300bc285eea09b36be5\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please leave\u2014from now until the end of today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003EHon Damien O\u0027Connor withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d24394f5e65b4519911f0c9e822866cc\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please come to the point of his point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc896be071734d51bf6f4189df6ca46e\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the general tenor of that speech is quite insulting to the Opposition\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4347fe1f35b4d6cae3f84b4839c8cd4\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the member, but I might agree with the member if I could hear it. So would the member please continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230d0113de01740c5a8c107ff4e082d8d\u0022\u003EMARYAN STREET\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I was trying my best to make myself heard, but I prefer not to raise my voice. The issue is that here we have an opportunity to describe the facts and the reasons for this validating legislation to the public, but the Opposition has not the wit to lead or participate in that debate. Those members have not the wit to do it. Here is a moment when some integrity can be restored, and when some faith can be held again in political institutions, because we are doing the right thing\u2014we are refunding the money. Even though we disagree with the finding that caused that action, we will do it because we believe it is necessary to assist in the restoration of integrity and the restoration of faith in the processes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227df975cd-93d2-4f55-9bc5-d2790e28e043\u0022\u003EThere are a number of things I regret about this circumstance. One of the things I regret is the Opposition\u2019s facile opportunism. I regret the lack of integrity of its members in dealing with the real issues. But, most of all, I regret their inability to seize the moment appropriately. In the end, they are probably too limited to recognise my final line as a quotation: \u201CThey have not the wit to do it.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022767a0de1428e48cabbae402720ba83c3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002226796c4f0de14f4aa39c4653b30030b2\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225c1548eff39a4644b4392d651b4da87d\u0022\u003EPart 1  Preliminary provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00227c0c989b06344fc98049a9199ebf2742\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227c0c989b06344fc98049a9199ebf2742\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E This is the part of the proceedings when the bill is discussed part by part. Really, I am imploring you, Mr Chairman, to ensure that the part by part debate is a genuine clause by clause analysis of this bill. I say at the outset that the National Party has put a considerable amount of time into the preparation of amendments, which will be tabled first thing in the morning, for consideration by the Committee. We thought we might supply those amendments ahead of time in order that the Labour Party might be able to consider them, but then we thought that if the Labour Party was not considerate enough to give us the bill ahead of time, then why would we be particularly concerned about doing that? Having said that, I point out that a large bundle of papers has just been put on the Table. They are some of the amendments that will be delivered to the Table as we proceed through this bill over the next short while, because this bill is one that needs a great deal of work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe first part of that work must surely start in the purposes clause. It is interesting to read that the purposes of the bill include doing everything that the Labour Party has been saying we should do, such as validate the appropriation and follow the instructions of the Auditor-General, except that the Labour Party, with one hand tied behind its back, has limped into the House today having to follow this particular course of action. We know that the purpose of the bill is to validate illegal activity done by the Government. The purpose of this bill is, on the one hand, to make legitimate the extreme over-expenditure of the Labour Party last year, and, on the other hand, to make legitimate the dipping into of the taxpayers\u2019 fund\u2014the Parliamentary Service fund\u2014to fund the pledge card and, it would seem, a great deal of advertising in the electorates of sitting Labour members. So we must amend the purposes to reflect just that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThis is the \u201CGet the Government Supporters Out of Trouble Bill\u201D. This is the bill that New Zealand First members sit smugly over there happily awaiting, because they know that their leader, Winston Peters\u2014who is running up and down the country saying: \u201CI\u2019m going to court to sort this matter out.\u201D\u2014is going to shove up his hand at the third reading to vote for the bill, knowing that he then will not have to go anywhere near a court because of the actions he took having been made legal. I am not sure exactly how the Committee will end up wording the purposes clause to this extent, but the National Party most certainly will be giving people an opportunity to amend it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe next bit in this part of the bill is clause 4, \u201CInterpretation\u201D, containing the interpretations. Here we can see some extremely creative work from the Government. A number of things are described, one of them being \u201Cexpenditure\u201D. \u201CExpenditure\u201D in this bill is very, very tightly defined. The clause states that expenditure \u201C(a) includes the spending of public money and the incurring of any expense or cost; but (b) excludes any expenses incurred on or after the day on which this Act comes into force.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EAt some stage the Minister of Finance will explain to us what that means. He laughs, but, you see, we are aware of the Tamihere warning, which is that Michael Cullen, with just the slight shift of a word here and there, is able to pull the wool over the eyes of the New Zealand people. Everyone would have to agree now that that is absolutely right, because that is what Labour members did at the time of the last election. It is what they did in 2002. It is what they did in 1999. The former Labour Party president who ran those campaigns stood up here today and said: \u201CIt wasn\u2019t a problem in the past, so why should it be a problem now?\u201D. Well, in case that new member did not notice, this bill actually goes way back. It recognises that there was a problem way back in those years\u2014in fact, all the way back some 17 years, from the time that Sir Geoffrey Palmer first introduced the legislation to put the Parliamentary Service into effect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI know that a large number of National Party members want to have a say on this bill. They have been denied a say on the Parliamentary Service Commission so far, therefore they have every right to speak.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00221ed1384ac9414072996cfd01538b331d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ed1384ac9414072996cfd01538b331d\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E First of all, I will deal with that extraordinary assertion that Mr Brownlee\u2014or maybe it is not an extraordinary assertion in his case\u2014does not understand what is meant by: \u201Cincludes the spending of public money \u2026 but (b) excludes any expenses incurred on or after the day on which this Act comes into force.\u201D That means we are validating expenditure up to the point the Act comes into force. I will come to the reason in a moment. Moving forward, we come to Part 2, which is why Part 2 comes straight after that line of the bill. Part 2 provides definitions for expenditure moving forward. So there is no need to provide validation for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhy is that so? I invite the member to turn to paragraph 32 of the Speaker\u2019s report: \u201CWhile the 2006 report deals only with advertising expenditure, it is clear that the principles articulated by the Auditor-General will have general application to all expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service appropriations at all times and not only in relation to the three months prior to a general election.\u201D Then there are examples of where various activities occur that are funded from Vote Parliamentary Service. They are standard activities, such as research staff proving background information for a speech about one\u2019s own party\u2019s achievements in some kind of public meeting\u2014the kind that Mr Key frequently holds in his electorate to a dazzled audience of three or four. Those are matters that, under the current Auditor-General\u2019s rulings, would potentially be tainted by electioneering and, therefore, unlawful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe reason clause 3 states \u201CMay\u201D\u2014and I notice a rather cute amendment to something else\u2014is that we simply do not know, going back to 1989-90, what might or might not be included within that. The Auditor-General\u2019s report gives us no clear guidance around that point at all. All we know is that in some vague way, expenditure used for a range of purposes, such as public meetings, newsletters to one\u2019s electorate, or flying off to sign up a member for the National Party, could be tainted by electioneering. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat is more, there is the former Solicitor-General\u2019s legal opinion about the entire expenditure in that area. For example, did any of the members opposite at any point talk on their cellphones to members of the Exclusive Brethren about the funding the Exclusive Brethren was engaged in, or, for example, the polling they were carrying out in electorates? [Interruption] Oh, I am supposed to believe that Mr Foss\u2014oh, he was not an MP at the time, but that none of those members who were MPs ever called up anybody about those matters on their phones? So all the meetings were face to face. I thank the member for that confirmation. We now know that all the meetings were face to face. But was any money expended on getting to any of those meetings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d71074cd41ca4feba1d4df901e990804\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: No meetings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236ccc1371df44c10a2be6b82645b31c8\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, they did not have any meetings? Mr Key had no meetings with the Exclusive Brethren. He would like to put on the record right now, would he, that he had no meetings with the Exclusive Brethren? So who were the shadow-faced people on television that Mr Key was meeting? But the point does not matter. Dr Brash finally admitted, after denying it, that he did have meetings with the Exclusive Brethren, and if the Parliamentary Service paid, in any shape or form, for the travel, then I am afraid the whole thing was out of order and tainted by electioneering, and the expenditure was unlawful and needs to be validated\u2014unlike the payment of GST by the members opposite, where all they want validation for is to avoid conviction and a fine. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EDebate interrupted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200610174bf4f0c89ec94617a74292df55897246000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f0329ea88ce944ae824338a8d9869eac\u0022\u003ETuesday, 17 October 2006\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002202a229eadd304418b247e2222f5d291c\u0022\u003E(continued on Wednesday, 18 October 2006)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002277a010d60dfa41d2a9c36c8be7b3e99e\u0022\u003EAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cb72ee0434a74fbf936824c748eef10e\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000005\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e10204a7b381439c88541b389f104c41\u0022\u003EPart 1 Preliminary provisions (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00226b43e2c1293940cc9fe3702f2ff72c1b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b43e2c1293940cc9fe3702f2ff72c1b\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Before everybody starts to practise fake outrage again, I make one very, very simple point. It is that nobody in the National Party has so far managed to cite any words in the Auditor-General\u2019s report for 2005 that say the interpretation that everybody had followed up to that point was wrong and that parties should not follow it during the period up to the 2005 election. They cannot find it because it is not there. Once that is found to be so, then the entire case that the National Party has tried to make collapses. The real attempt to steal that election was the $1.2 million that came from the flaky fruitcakes in the Exclusive Brethren, who do not vote but want to choose a Government, and who will not fight but want to defend the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa311de79f43414b9d45a918d645ea95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa311de79f43414b9d45a918d645ea95\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I start by alerting the people who are listening to this debate about the rules on election spending. The rules on election spending down at the electorate level are incredibly strict. They state that if candidates knowingly spend more than $20,000, they have committed a corrupt practice and they are gone from Parliament. That happened in the Wairarapa in the 1987 election, when a candidate for Labour called Reg Boorman was found to have knowingly spent more than the limit. I think in those days the figure was $10,000, because electorates were smaller and it was a smaller limit; in fact, it was probably not even stated in dollars but might have been in pounds back then. Reg Boorman was found to have done that, and he was gone from Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI would say the public think that is a particularly good regime to have. I think the public\u2014more than anything\u2014have been gobsmacked of recent times to find that whereas those very strict rules apply to each MP down at the local electorate level, they do not apply to an overall political party that does exactly the same thing as that: it knowingly spends more than its limit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cd68647e3cb4101a5354917a2ee7e9d\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Did the Deputy Prime Minister know?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3bf09eb972a46509e0286b4aaff1f08\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: My colleague Tony Ryall asked whether the Deputy Prime Minister knew at the time. I guess the answer hinges on the word \u201Cknowingly\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ENow I want to explore just one thing, and I would be very keen for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Michael Cullen, to respond to it. I have heard\u2014and he can confirm this or not\u2014that the former Chief Electoral Officer, David Henry\u2014he is now gone, but he was the Chief Electoral Officer back in September of last year\u2014wrote a letter. Not only did he do that, but he started off with a phone call. The phone call and the letter both told the Labour Party that if it went ahead with the pledge card and distributed it, then that would be accountable election expenditure and Labour would be over the limit. If David Henry did not write such a letter, I want the Minister in the chair to tell us\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3aa654be87842b498ebe483c8671817\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Did he send the letter?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b882493341014c4b9c29214fda868cb4\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I do not know. The Minister has a good chance to tell us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EBob Clarkson went under the blowtorch for his expenditure in Tauranga. Fortunately, he was like most of us, who always leave a little bit of leeway so that we never spend an amount quite close to 20 grand, in case we are in trouble. I always make sure I am way under that, so I cannot be caught. That is what we have to do in order to stay in compliance with the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EBut if the Chief Electoral Officer wrote to the Labour Party in early September and said that if the party put out that pledge card\u2014even if we forget about the fact that it was funded by the taxpayers, which is another outrage\u2014then it would breach the cap, I say that makes this Government an illegitimate Government. It is an illegitimate Government if, by breaching the spending cap, it broke the law of the land\u2014and for an illegitimate Government to be now trying to legitimise itself in Parliament would make Robert Mugabe happy. That is what this legislation would do. If members got here by false pretences and they now use the false mandate they acquired in order to make themselves the legitimate Government of the land, it would be laughable in any despotic regime in the Horn of Africa. Someone such as Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlins would have pulled off that sort of trick in order to make himself part of a legitimate Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ESo the central question that this Parliament needs to know the answer to today is whether Labour was informed in advance that if it spent the money on the pledge card, it would be accountable, because that would take it to over its limit and it would breach the spending cap that applies to political parties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022909c825c-6cf3-49bd-9c74-6df837480631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7637c98553e487d8de33ccf71c7d407\u0022\u003EBob Clarkson\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re crooks!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b750a22b192d4208a72c39f760b69dba\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: If Labour members did know that in advance\u2014my colleague Mr Clarkson calls out that they are crooks\u2014in my view they are guilty of a corrupt practice, because that is the term the Electoral Act uses. I am not trying to get into pejorative terms or nasty words; I am trying to explain what the Act actually states, which is that that is a corrupt practice. If that is not the case and the Labour Party says it does not care about the spending cap\u2014that it will spend whatever it likes, then face the consequences afterwards\u2014then let us just get rid of any spending limitations and let the situation be a free-for-all. Would Labour be prepared to do that? No, it would not. It would want the strict limits to be enforced on everybody else. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EBut David Henry is the key to this issue. The Chief Electoral Officer wrote to the party\u2014not after the event, not after the election, not some time later\u2014and then it went: \u201COh dear, these are the rules. Maybe they have changed, and maybe we have been caught out.\u201D No sirree, he wrote to Labour before the election and it ignored him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u00224dcf96db4e1649688415619e5bb387ca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224dcf96db4e1649688415619e5bb387ca\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E This legislation would have to be one of the most cynical bits of chicanery that this Parliament has seen for many years. Why do I say that? The Government had choices. It could have, for instance, validated just 3 months, but what has it done? It has tried to pretend that for 17 years this Parliament and the Parliamentary Service have participated in illegality. That is a completely cynical manoeuvre. They know it is not true. They know that is a lie, but they are trying to perpetrate\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217bd948a1d4243ed9ffb1e324bf656c3\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I just want to point out that this is going to be a robust debate, and I accept that, but there are still limits and the member just transgressed beyond that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f84289791514219ab692dd4908c82bf\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I think I heard the member say what you indicated, Dr Cullen. I ask the member to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d344ec0a76047a9b6fd02a4ab0d67ab\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. Labour members know that that is the most cynical manipulation of the law that this country has seen. What is more, they expect to be able to just wipe the proceedings from our courts as if they never mattered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EOne of the most important things we have in this country is independent courts\u2014courts that examine what Governments do. People in the House and in this country can cite decisions of the courts from over the years\u2014Fitzgerald v Muldoon, the New Zealand Maori Council case. These are cardinal decisions. They set out the rules for the future, they set out the limits of parliamentary power. I have no doubt that in the case of Darnton v Clark, the court would have made a declaration that the spending was fundamentally unlawful. It would have set out the limits of parliamentary power. That is how democracy works. On the one hand we have Parliament, which makes the law, but on the other hand we have the courts, which set out the limitations on parliamentary power. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThis Government wants to completely overturn those fundamental constitutional principles. It wants to set itself up as the complete arbiter of all the law. It is as if it thinks it has papal infallibility. It wants to pretend that the unlawful becomes lawful\u2014as if it never was unlawful. That is a cynical manipulation of the public, and the public sees it exactly for what it is. I want to point out to the former Attorney-General that this is a view shared by the editor of the New Zealand Law Journal. For instance, in September this year he said that there were two severe threats for the future of our democracy. One was the State funding of political parties; the other was retrospective legislation validating Labour\u2019s chicanery at the last election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ESo what are we seeing here today? We are seeing a Government shoving this bill through in urgency with no consultation with the public, and using a cynical manipulation of parliamentary procedures to put through retrospective legislation validating its thievery at the election. I find that abhorrent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI find it appalling, firstly, that we are spending this time in this Parliament today in the pretence that every single party for the last 16 years has done something unlawful, when that is not true. The Auditor-General focused only on 3 months. He made that perfectly clear. The second thing I find reprehensible is this Government\u2019s cavalier approach of removing the right of citizens to have its cases heard in the courts and to have judges declare what the law of the country is and how it should be interpreted, so that we now have a Parliament that places itself effectively above the law. That is wrong, and that will be judged harshly by the public in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u00225ee813e627a5434da0fb3a25e8611a96\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225ee813e627a5434da0fb3a25e8611a96\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E I have a couple of questions this morning in this debate for the Minister in the chair, Dr Cullen, and I would love him to address them. The first question is whether he has spoken to Winston Peters about the Government\u2019s strategy to kill off this issue through retrospective legislation. I heard the Minister Winston Peters on the radio this morning, and he said to the interviewer: \u201CEverybody knows, and New Zealand First knows, that the Labour Party\u2019s pledge card was electioneering. Everybody knows that.\u201D That is what Winston Peters said. He then went on to say: \u201CBut we\u2019re different.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWe would expect that from Winston Peters. He gave all sorts of reasons why New Zealand First has not broken any rules, why it can challenge the Auditor-General\u2019s ruling, and why, apparently, it is whiter than snow. But Winston Peters, a Minister outside Dr Cullen\u2019s Cabinet, said that Labour knew that the election pledge card was, in fact, electioneering. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EMr Peters went on with an entirely different strategy than that of this Government and of Dr Cullen. This morning he tried killing the truth off through a death of a thousand cuts, and went on to dance on the head of a pin. He gave every possible red herring to the interviewer to avoid the very fact that he has no intention of paying the money back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EWinston Peters raised issues such as New Zealand First\u2019s use of taxpayers\u2019 money on publications that it would use after the campaign, not just before it. He said that the Auditor-General never spoke to him about his report. Winston Peters said that he was shacked up in hospital after a bite by an insect and that he knew nothing about the details of the Auditor-General\u2019s report. He said that he had just had a knee operation and did not know the details. Winston Peters pulls every red herring he can out of the pile\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df37c79f4c4648269f228cd43fd8ec5a\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Did he mention his bunion?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ddb664a0640d4c2bad4352d57499b702\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014he did not mention his bunion\u2014so that he can avoid the bottom line the public is asking for, which is for him to pay back the money. Winston should just pay back the money! He is dancing on the head of a pin. That is New Zealand First\u2019s strategy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EThe Minister outside Cabinet clearly has not spoken to Dr Cullen. Dr Cullen\u2019s idea of killing off the truth is not through a thousand cuts and diversions\u2014Labour has tried lots of diversions over the last 6 months and has failed\u2014but through one thrust of the knife. This retrospective legislation will make legal what is illegal, so Dr Cullen thinks he can walk out of this Chamber whiter than snow. But it is not working, because Dr Cullen, Helen Clark, and the Labour Party have already been tried in the court of public opinion and found wanting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b1e4912d2f54187b83dcecb1201db8b\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Guilty!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fb5103e6f2c14aed967144ad46bfad3b\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY\u003C/span\u003E: They are guilty in the court of public opinion\u2014absolutely found wanting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003EI have another question for Minister Cullen: how much did he know about this pledge card being developed, being delivered before the election, and being used during the campaign? I can guarantee that he would have had very close contact with the campaign committee. Clearly, one would not have Pete Hodgson going out there on the campaign committee by himself, without someone holding his hand. How much did Dr Cullen know about Heather Simpson and Helen Clark\u2019s decision to use taxpayer funding for this electioneering expense\u2014$450,000 worth? I ask that question, because Dover Samuels has to write out a cheque for $10,000, and he never made the decision. Mita Ririnui has to write out a $10,000 cheque, and he never knew the decision. Dr Ashraf Choudhary\u2014the member opposite who abstains\u2014would have abstained from the decision about using the pledge card. But he still has to write out a $6,000 cheque. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u00222c43f46179ed475d8413c54b4472308e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222c43f46179ed475d8413c54b4472308e\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National):\u003C/span\u003E I want to focus, initially, on clause 3 of Part 1 of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, which sets out the purposes of this legislation. The first purpose is to validate expenditure, but we all know that validation of expenditure goes beyond the appropriations found to be unlawful by the Auditor-General. The second part of that purpose clause is to provide an interim meaning of the term \u201Cfunding entitlements for parliamentary purposes\u201D. But, again, we all know that it is unnecessary to use legislation to change the rules in the interim; all that needs to happen is for the Speaker to issue new directions that substitute new definitions of parliamentary purposes and electioneering. So this legislation, quite apart from the fact that it is shabby, is unnecessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EI propose in the Committee to move an amendment to clause 3, because the key issues that the people of New Zealand are interested in are, first, that the moneys are going to be repaid and, second, that there is an adequate reporting mechanism so that they know the moneys can be paid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206844054a0ef4278bd1d497d93568802\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I apologise sincerely to the honourable member for interrupting his speech, and I hope it does not break his pattern. But I have to take this point of order as per the Standing Orders; if I have a point of order, I know I have to raise it as quickly as possible, and I have just come down from my office. I have heard some absolute\u2014I cannot use the word \u201Clie\u201D, can I, Mr Chairperson?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229021618a98514c0285e0ddb82c67fd4a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, you cannot.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ee066b0b3b04e8b917dc2f8c1942a42\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Then I will not. I have heard some untrue statements made by Phil Heatley. I seek the leave of the Committee to table the transcript of the interview between John Banks and Winston Peters this morning, to prove that Mr Peters did not say he was laid up in hospital from a spider bite, so did not get to hear the Auditor-General\u2019s comments or meet with him, and to prove that he did not say\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003EDocument not tabled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d636d51557b742179f8bc76dc89a89e0\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Sort him out, whip!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cdcd28c6cc9f42738ccf1c20f3c06cef\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will now come back to his seat and withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278ec2335a87b43c29f0698f7df83b6ca\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: What am I apologising for, Mr Chairperson?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280455bf3d0574069a50ea5a9b8e294fb\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: For the context and the threat he threw across the Chamber, I ask the member to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a12c9512a7894b0487d179cf4fcd5761\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Well, Mr Chairperson\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ebf92ef7f6d408d8537991a002500e1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No. I ask the member to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d5b79c6eff94060825691311c9bbe37\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise for saying \u201CSort him out.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ccf2bc62cd0243158f887fceb93acc23\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Mark. That is all that is necessary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022389a3801d98f4e8493215bd62f589ee8\u0022\u003ELindsay Tisch\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. After the member apologised, he again said: \u201CSort it out.\u201D, as he walked out of the Chamber. That is a challenge to the Chair, and you should bring him back and then kick him out for the rest of the day. That sort of behaviour is unacceptable. It degrades the character of this House and its members. I ask you to take action now against that member.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221584aa45e4614b6cbc0c1386ccb5729a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: I have some sympathy with the point made by the member, and if you do that, Mr Chairperson, it will be a very important signal to a number of members opposite not to issue threats to the person in the Chair, which I think is actually the offence that Mr Mark committed by telling you to do something. It is happening far too often in the Chamber that people are trying to give orders to the Speaker, or to the Chairman in Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cba965bb-864f-4e06-99dc-6fcdfd007ad5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220105add5b7cc45f482c0238d27cc005e\u0022\u003EPita Paraone\u003C/span\u003E: The comments the Opposition has referred to were solicited only as a result of the behaviour of members opposite. So there are two sides to the story. If you decide to make the decision that has been suggested to you, Mr Chairman, I hope you take into consideration the exchanges that give rise to this sort of situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228841244436d147c88505601f10ef791e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I have heard enough. I know this is a rather heated debate with a lot of ill feeling on all sides of the Chamber. I also recognise that members make statements out of frustration that they might not do in normal circumstances. In this particular instance, I am going to ask the member concerned to come back to the Chamber and apologise for the manner in which he conducted himself. I am prepared to be tolerant in recognising the complexity in which we are conducting this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cd9b490758643798b1d50e9cc4303d9\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chairman, out of respect to you and the office you hold, I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256b35f59e81a4cada3effb07bad11d83\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Mark. I appreciate that, Mr Mark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205b9dce558834da2a76ef86113c481cc\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Can you give the Committee some guidance by stating the Standing Order that allows me to seek redress when a member knowingly and wilfully stands up and says something in this Chamber, on the record, that clearly is not true, and will be proven to be untrue by the documents I have sought access to and sought leave to table? What can we do when a member dares to do such a thing and brings this Committee into dishonour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce6578063bd748ae8a6bdfa7d7d9718c\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: The first thing that would be helpful is for us to try to lower the temperature. Mr Mark\u2019s point is one that should not be raised by a point of order. He is actually raising an issue of a breach of privilege, and that is dealt with by means of a letter to the Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257e96cc3b59e475f85c236520e0454b7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. Thank you very much. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b9e04aa3f3c4d5687905863706b5f30\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: As I was saying, I have proposed a number of amendments to clause 3, the purpose clause, which foreshadow further amendments that will be introduced when we debate Part 2. The first of those amendments is to provide, in the purpose clause, that any expenditure the Auditor-General has found was unauthorised must be repaid. The second issue of concern to the public is dealt with in paragraph (d) of my proposed clause 3, which provides a reporting mechanism to ensure that members of the public can be satisfied that any party that has incurred any unauthorised expenditure has repaid that expenditure, because the Parliamentary Service Commission, as we know, is not subject to the Official Information Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003ESo these are mechanisms that I seek to introduce, and I foreshadow ones in Part 2, to try to address the real concerns of the public, because at the moment there is no obligation to repay. Mr Copeland, in his second reading speech yesterday, said there was a moral obligation. That is not good enough. We want a legal obligation, and expenditure that is unauthorised should be repaid with interest and penalties, if not paid on time. It is interesting to hear the kinds of things the Inland Revenue Department is proposing to do to miscreants who do not pay their tax. There will be heavy penalties. In the interests, as the Attorney-General said, of lowering the temperature and conducting the debate in a seemly way, I am proposing that interest not be paid at Inland Revenue Department rates but pursuant to the interest provisions of the Judicature Act\u2014a mere 7.5 percent\u2014which I think is very generous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E Perhaps the most odious aspect of this legislation is that it removes litigation rights, and the litigation rights of those who have commenced a proceeding in the High Court. As Dr Mapp said, in Fitzgerald v Muldoon the Government changed the law after the litigation was concluded. Even Dr Cullen, as Minister of Finance when the Ng\u0101ti Apa case was decided, changed the law after the Court of Appeal decision had come out. But here in the Darnton case the litigation has not even been determined in the High Court, let alone at the appellate level. That is why I support amendments, which my friend Dr Mapp will be introducing shortly, to say that the High Court case of Darnton is not to be affected by the passage of this litigation. Litigation rights should be preserved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThis legislation is an abuse of parliamentary sovereignty, and I venture to suggest that it is so odious that were Lord Cooke still sitting in the Court of Appeal today, he would be sorely tempted to pick up the words he said in Taylor v New Zealand Poultry Board and have it struck down, because it is an affront to democracy and it is an affront to the rule of law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022882f9d4a574d4c02b9e1f60845916a72\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: Judicial activism.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228269f387373d4c76bdf318542a33b64f\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: It is called decency and common sense in a democracy, I say to Dr Cullen\u2014something that his Government does not seem to know too much about. The Attorney-General and his cohorts are people who are staring into the abyss; they are people who are led by a Prime Minister who increasingly suffers from delusions of decency; and this legislation is proof, if proof be needed, that changes need to be made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00229814988116034f888a6d052b677f8826\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229814988116034f888a6d052b677f8826\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I am happy to follow that speaker, because now we have heard something very interesting in this debate. We have heard the National Party spokesperson on legal matters arguing that the court should have the right to strike down Acts of Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2e36cee64a34f42ab3ca5a111d6b3c3\u0022\u003EChristopher Finlayson\u003C/span\u003E: No, I didn\u2019t say that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8c6b32d00fe491fb1af2ea34d6c1b31\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh yes, he just said precisely that. I thought sooner or later he would fall into that trap in this House\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bed8f799a05045fd89b408efbcee3eee\u0022\u003EChristopher Finlayson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The Attorney-General must learn to listen very carefully. I said that if Lord Cooke were alive today, he would be sorely tempted to pick up words he said in Taylor v New Zealand Poultry Board. I did not say that that is what we are in favour of. He should learn to listen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ef534e06e0e456c86842820184809b7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. Mr Finlayson, that is what we call misrepresentation. You cannot raise that while Dr Cullen is on his feet. When his speech is finished, under the misrepresentation provisions in the Standing Orders and in Speakers\u2019 Rulings you can rise, say what you said, and say that what the other member said was incorrect. You cannot do it now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264925515e77a4837b7dd4bbbee5f5d80\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: So what we have is a member who fully supports\u2014obviously, from the tone of his voice, from the dripping sincerity that came forth\u2014that Lord Cooke would have struck down this bill, but he himself did not support that. Well, why on earth did he make the statement? What was the point of making the statement in that respect? What a silly, foolish, prissy little statement to make in this Committee, if he did not actually mean that he thinks courts are able to strike down Acts of Parliament\u2014which would get us into the awful mess that jurisdictions of the United States are in, in that regard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003ELet me come back to the point I was making right at the start. There is so much fake sincere anger on the opposite side that it is almost impossible to believe. I am waiting, yet again, for a lecture on morality from Mr McCully. What else did we have? We had a lecture on the rule of law from Dr Nick Smith. The only person in this House to be convicted of contempt of court comes and lectures us on respect for the rule of law. [Interruption] Now we hear Sandra Goudie speaking, who last week gave, I think, the funniest point of order I have ever heard in this House in my 25 years in the place. She seemed to have a brain that was completely disconnected from her vocal chords at that particular point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003ELet us come back to a very simple point. What the National Party cannot demonstrate, in trying to justify the position taken by the Auditor-General, is that there is a single sentence in the 2005 report that says the then assumed interpretation of the spending rules was wrong. It is nowhere in that report. All that happened is that a year later the Auditor-General said that he had said something like that. But he did not. All he said in that report was that the rules are unclear and need to be clarified after the election, and people should obey the rules as they were. It was like a referee during a game of rugby saying what the going-over-the-top rule is, then, after the game, pinging somebody and saying he had breached the rule, although no explanation was given at the time. That is what the Auditor-General has done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe entire case actually rests upon that point. National Party members are trying to say\u2014and I want to get this very clear\u2014that they are the only party in the House that knew that the interpretation of the rules had changed. Clearly, nobody else did. Yet they went ahead and broke the rules as they understood them\u2014the only party to do so. What every other party has said is that the rules were such that the spending was legitimate, and the Auditor-General has changed the interpretation of those rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThis bill takes us back to the status quo ante in terms of the interpretation of the rules. That is a totally different issue; the issue before this Committee has nothing to do with it. The issue before this Committee is what the rules should be. National Party members say they deliberately broke the rules, just as they deliberately broke the GST rules on broadcasting expenditure, but they happened not to have\u2014believe it or not\u2014a written contract with their advertising agency for nearly a million dollars worth of expenditure, so nothing was traceable. There are no fingerprints because there are no documents\u2014so there could be no fingerprints. I say to Mr Finlayson: \u201CHow about that for proper legal procedure?\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022af3ac293b71f4951a687f6aed46cb041\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022af3ac293b71f4951a687f6aed46cb041\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223133bf0cc048467385bffffa7108a995\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Finlayson, you can say what the previous speaker claimed you said, then give the correct version.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b8f1c5b36174ca486fc4ac4e2932626\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E: I think I have more or less traversed the arguments in my earlier point of order. The Attorney-General was reduced to saying that he thought, from the tone of my voice, that I was supporting what the late Lord Cooke said. His comments are clearly wrong, and, by the way in which he picked up the statement after the point of order, they come perilously close to breaching Standing Order 400(b).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022 data-id=\u00224b0904deeaf64baaa4c3a566fc2c5d03\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b0904deeaf64baaa4c3a566fc2c5d03\u0022\u003ESANDRA GOUDIE (National\u2014Coromandel):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to speak, following the rather poor previous speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220729f099d01f472f9355cbaba32fafd9\u0022\u003ELindsay Tisch\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Dr Cullen is interjecting and his microphone is on, and that is not fair on our members. During previous debates Dr Cullen also interjected when the microphone was on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022baf6b39cfb554aa7a9e683ab255e1100\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise, Mr Chairman. In light of the fact that Mrs Goudie is speaking, I will withdraw.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222222a693addb439ab1589fce2d9d9f8f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: It is a longstanding convention that during the Committee stage members in charge of legislation shall not take unfair advantage of the use of a live microphone by way of interjection. It is good conduct and common courtesy not to do so. Courtesy is contagious; we will all prosper if we keep within the spirit of our Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 rulings.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223349a38e0dac48cd85a20a82c1bc12a6\u0022\u003ESANDRA GOUDIE\u003C/span\u003E: The actions of Dr Cullen do not surprise me, but I am surprised by some of the comments made by the previous speaker to this debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EI want to say a few words about the Auditor-General\u2019s comments. The Auditor-General\u2019s report stated: \u201CSome MPs and parliamentary parties have said that I have acted unfairly by \u2018changing the rules\u2019 after the event. I have not changed any rules.\u201D The proposition that has been touted is that the Auditor-General\u2019s report indicates that millions of dollars have been misspent since 1989, and that this spending needs to be validated. That is absolutely false. The Auditor-General, as Labour members have repeatedly pointed out, has already signed off the annual accounts from 1989 right through until 2003-04. Therefore, there is nothing illegal to validate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EIf we look at the purpose of this legislation, we see that it is a validation bill. But there is nothing to validate, other than what Labour has got itself caught up in with regard to its pledge card. What makes it even worse is that if this legislation is passed, Labour will more than likely be free to indulge once again in spending $800,000 or more on similar pledge cards using taxpayers\u2019 money. It is nothing more than a con job on a grand scale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThis validation is not required; all it does is make legal the spending Labour has indulged in\u2014and, yes, Labour has claimed it will pay it back, but will it really do so\u2014so that Labour can come along and say: \u201CHey, we didn\u2019t do anything illegal anyway. That has already been identified by the fact that we have put legislation through the House.\u201D So Labour is putting legislation through that it has a pecuniary interest in. It means that Labour\u2019s spending is legal, and it then does not have to pay it back, in spite of the fact it said it would. It is nothing more than a con job on the New Zealand public, and Labour is playing fast and loose with taxpayers\u2019 money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EI bring everybody\u2019s attention to a report by Roger Kerr from the New Zealand Business Roundtable. He comments that some politicians\u2014and I would certainly say this applies to those members in the current Labour Party\u2014do not know how hard taxpayers work for the money they have to pass to Government, to be spent in an appropriate, efficient, and effective manner. Taxpayers would prefer their money to be spent only when they cannot spend it better themselves. We have to ask how taxpayers can have any confidence in a Government that passes legislation to protect the wasteful expenditure of their money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThere is absolutely no way that the majority of the New Zealand public will see this legislation as being anything other than a con job. The New Zealand public are not silly. They know what is going on here. They know that the legislation is designed to get members of the Government, the Labour Party, and Helen Clark off the hook. How many times has Helen Clark been in situations where she has got off the hook? It is no wonder the New Zealand public are becoming increasingly cynical about Parliament, when we have a Government and a leadership that is bringing it into disrepute constantly. It is a never-ending battle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EIf we look at Part 1 of the bill, \u201CPreliminary provisions\u201D, we see that it is called a validation bill, but we know that it is not a validation bill\u2014it is worse than that. The New Zealand public do not realise the further con that has been perpetrated here. A question needs to be asked about whether this legislation will also open the door to State-funded and taxpayer-funded election spending\u2014and it does.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002225f8c78b-f301-4aca-a936-366f00a26bc9\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand public need to stand up and say that enough is enough. They need to beat their chests, to beat their drums, to get on those talkback radio programmes, and to get in touch with all their media outlets. They need to talk to all their members of Parliament, and to talk to whomever they can talk to\u2014and get out on the street with a megaphone\u2014in order to say they are not putting up with this. And they need to do it today. Why? It is because the Government\u2014this Labour Party and Helen Clark\u2014is rushing through this legislation, under urgency, and ignoring what the New Zealand public and the taxpayers of this country feel about that. Those Labour members do not care what the public feels about that. They do not care that members of the public cannot have some input into this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022 data-id=\u00228b32d84935354e2b95d25210e056a9bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b32d84935354e2b95d25210e056a9bd\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Chairman; thank you for the opportunity to make a contribution to this debate. In my time in this House I have certainly heard a lot of debates, and I have heard a lot of reasons for those debates. I have enjoyed some of the quality aspects of debates, and I have also enjoyed the cut and thrust of many debates. The last speaker just said the New Zealand public is not silly. I actually concur with that. I believe that the majority of people are aware of what is going on in this Parliament. Unfortunately, we can say a lot of things in this Chamber\u2014[Interruption]; if members will stop and listen, and learn\u2014and a lot of members do, but they are not accountable to anybody. There is no accountability outside. Those members can say anything and make a lot of allegations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003EI want to raise an issue. I am not a lawyer or an academic but I have been around a long while, and I just say, in terms of the perception of the New Zealand public, that the question that has to be asked and answered is fundamental. In the last election, did the National Party overspend, or did it not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1269a41459042bc97b0f6c389639bae\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: We didn\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcfd01656fde48d485210ef0780202e7\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: Taihoa, taihoa. Did you overspend, or did you not? That is the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b73963fdbbad481c85c6896a52856db3\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: You are bringing the Chairman into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022248ebe827eb64f049d8118176afefdde\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: That is exactly the issue. Did you overspend\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f70e93edf3af4075a57e39c4fc1ab391\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. I did not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022597e8e51f045448fb9d110031bd72239\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: I am addressing this to the National Party. Did the National Party overspend, or did it not? That is the question that should be asked. Did the National Party overspend, or did it not? Come on! Members can say anything in this Chamber. Did the National Party overspend, or did it not? If it did not overspend, then why did it pay the money back? Come on! Tell the truth. Address the facts. Did the National Party overspend, or did it not? If it did not overspend, then there would have been no need to pay back any money. It is very simple. If the National Party did not overspend, then why did it pay back some money? This is what the public is asking. Why did the National Party pay it back? The simple reason is that it did overspend. That is the simple reason. These are the facts. The National Party did overspend. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003EThen the question remains as to what extent it overspent. Yes, it did not overspend as much as any other party but it still committed the offence. It did still overspend. Simply paying the money back does not exonerate the National Party from having committed the offence. It still committed the offence, and the New Zealand is aware of and awake to all the shenanigans, the excuses, and the talk and rubbish about its taking the moral high ground. What a lot of bullshit! Absolute bullshit!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224d8578d226a34a0abadbf757181fc8dc\u0022\u003ELindsay Tisch\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Chairman\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2740fa4ff714a41aab6c6985eb0b0dd\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: This is what the New Zealand public understands\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a55bafc4537430da5e84265e9aecf87\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Both members will be seated. Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022601a30207cce4c7f90bf8dd57d8bc7f6\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224cd2f4db90af4faf94b0211f38819fa1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I was going to ask the member to withdraw and apologise. He has done so. I call the member to order. Please continue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022658520f5f6484b41a43c7ee0258f9c41\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: What I am trying to reiterate is that ordinary New Zealanders out there know that the National Party overspent. Does simply paying back the money mean that all of a sudden it becomes holy? Those members opposite sling abuse at every other party and say they committed an offence but National did not. That is total humbug, and the New Zealand public knows it. I will come back to the point again, because this is really the crux of it. Did the National Party overspend, or did it not? It did. It overspent. So there has been absolute hypocrisy in this Chamber on the part of the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220141fbc3ec6649fd8171cc3f07be2f64\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b833f2326034d4e94faa068fe01cb61\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc59479064374380a9b0f7c2b7877283\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279006e516ef3451a82eacf27b439c889\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: I come back to the point\u2014a point that is very valid and basic to this argument. If the Labour Party overspent and the National Party overspent, then the principle is exactly the same. The National Party is saying that it is whiter than white. It committed the offence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8f3f10e90224aa99921d718d3afe4c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8f3f10e90224aa99921d718d3afe4c1\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH (National\u2014Nelson):\u003C/span\u003E Let me nail the point that Dover Samuels has just raised. Let us make the analogy with the issue of a speeding ticket, because the extent of Labour\u2019s offending is 88 times greater. Let us take the analogy. If someone in an urban street was travelling at 51 kilometres an hour, would the average common-sense citizen say that that was a huge offence? Whereas, Labour would be travelling at 138 kilometres an hour in a 50 kilometre-an-hour area. I ask a common-sense member like Dover Samuels whether he is really saying to the public that travelling at 138 kilometres an hour in a 50 kilometre-per-hour zone is the same offence as travelling in that zone at 51 kilometres per hour. Of course it is not! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EBut what is even more serious is why this Government chooses to break two of the most basic principles on which our democracy is founded. If we go all the way back to the Magna Carta, we see that there are two important principles. The first of those is that no one is above the law. But these Labour Government members say that they are above the law. If they break the law they say they will just pass a bill to fix it up. The second important principle of the Magna Carta is the issue of public money not belonging to the king\u2014one cannot help oneself to money unlawfully. This Government has torn up those two fundamental principles of our society, and it has made this country look like a joke. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EBut the situation is even more serious than that. What this bill proposes to do is to completely overrule what the Auditor-General quite sensibly determined as to what was appropriate expenditure. What Mr Samuels and his colleagues are saying is: \u201CWe don\u2019t give a stuff what the Auditor-General decides\u2014we will spend public money as we will!\u201D, and the most shocking feature of this bill is that the pledge card could be done again tomorrow. A party could bring out that pledge card tomorrow, I say to Mr Samuels. I ask him whether he has asked his constituents whether they think it was appropriate? Does he think the New Zealand public thinks it is appropriate to fund a pledge card in an election campaign with public money? The public have said no, the Auditor-General has said no, the Solicitor-General has said no, and the Chief Electoral Officer has said no, but this bill, being rammed through under urgency, says yes, and I say to Mr Samuels that that is an outrage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003EI say to Labour members opposite that their desperate efforts to cling on to power by breaking any law and any convention bring this Parliament into disrepute. If they cannot understand that, they are not fit to sit in this House of Representatives. We have a duty here to act in the public interest, and that public interest is being completely ignored with this gross bill that we are being asked to pass under urgency. I say to members opposite that they are an illegitimate Government. They did not cheat by just a little bit. Do members opposite understand that this amounts to a breach of\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee299f158df44ae48f53a30937cc05d8\u0022\u003EHon Dover Samuels\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I take offence at someone calling me illegitimate. That member may be illegitimate but I am certainly not. I am a member of this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022083a7916496247e380c2d6ef61350bf7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has taken the comment as a personal reflection. Would the member on his feet withdraw the comment please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214d7ab8f442a4066ad7958e40a134321\u0022\u003EHon Dr NICK SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. This Government is an illegitimate Government. Let me explain why to Mr Samuels. The extent of the Government\u2019s overspend amounts to about $14,000 per electorate. Does he know how hard it is for party volunteers, with their raffles and with all the work that goes on, to raise that little bit of money? And the Labour Party cheated by $14,000 per electorate! Members opposite say it is OK because they will pay the money back. Well, it is still a rort, and I will tell members why. They are being asked to pay back only $800,000 but they have benefited by over $2 million from their rort.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u00226be84673a1824d28bc854f76225f63f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226be84673a1824d28bc854f76225f63f2\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E I want to pick up on the point the Hon Nick Smith made about the illegitimacy of this Government. The fact is that those members opposite are in Government today only because they spent three-quarters of a million dollars over the legal spending limit. The last election was a knife-edge election\u2014every doorknock counted, every pamphlet counted, and every dollar counted\u2014and the Labour Party used so much public money in addition to what it was legally allowed to use that it stole the election. It stole the election, and those members sit opposite today, completely illegitimate and without any right to sit in those positions. They used three-quarters of a million dollars over the legal spending limit to secure an election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EIf we read about a country in the Caribbean or on the African continent where the Government broke the legal spending limits then passed legislation to legalise its fraud, this Parliament would be outraged. Well, what is the difference between that and what this Government has done? It knowingly spent more money than it was legally entitled to. That money made a difference. Labour spent $14,000 over what it was legally entitled to in each electorate. It stole the election; it is an illegitimate Government. Helen Clark and Michael Cullen sit there atop Government in New Zealand through an electoral fraud. Any other country in the world where a political party used taxpayers\u2019 money over the legal limit to which it was entitled to spend in an election campaign would outrage this Parliament\u2014and that is what the Labour Party did. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EI want to hear today in this Committee how much Michael Cullen knew about this overspending. How much did Helen Clark know? I think she knew everything because I read that Mike Williams said that Heather Simpson does not do anything without Helen Clark ticking it off. Well, Heather Simpson is the person who signed off on all the electoral spending\u2014she made the decisions, along with Helen Clark and Michael Cullen, that see Labour in this position. I have to ask the members opposite what they think about Heather Simpson\u2019s involvement in this. Will Heather Simpson pay $15,000 of her fat salary because of her and Helen Clark\u2019s mistake? Dover Samuels has to pay, George Hawkins has to pay\u2014what will Heather Simpson have to pay? She, along with Helen Clark, Michael Cullen, and the rest of the Labour Party campaign committee, has now put that party in Government through illegitimate electoral fraud. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EIf a party breaks the spending limit, that is a corrupt practice. Dr Brash has produced evidence in this Chamber that makes it crystal clear that Labour knew that spending that extra money on the pledge cards and brochures would be a breach of the spending cap. When a party breaches the spending cap, that is a corrupt practice, and that is what this debate is all about. This Government sits atop politics in New Zealand through an electoral fraud. It is illegitimate. It has no right to be in that seat, because it spent more on the election than it was legally entitled to\u2014$14,000 more in each electorate. It was a knife-edge election\u2014every dollar counted, every doorknock counted, every hand shaken counted, and Labour stole the election by spending $14,000 extra per electorate than what the law allowed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWhat does the Prime Minister do? She sits there and says: \u201COh, nothing to do with me!\u201D. That is what she said, but she was right in there with Heather Simpson. I want to hear from each of those Labour front-benchers, and particularly from the Labour Party strategist, Pete Hodgson. Who actually decided he was the Labour Party strategist, by the way? Helen Clark?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022adcbbed326bd41aa91438738e0e49f3d\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: He did!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002246907a450e644b2d8641dd51b25f1010\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: He did? I see all the chuckles from the Labour members opposite\u2014the heads are nodding, they wonder about that, too. But we want to know how much each of those front-benchers knew about this electoral fraud. This Government has no legitimacy. It stole the election and does not deserve to be there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022b2f454f602324b0ea74706767b5a84c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b2f454f602324b0ea74706767b5a84c5\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES (Labour\u2014Otaki):\u003C/span\u003E Did the contribution of Tony Ryall not show to members what the problem with the National Party is? All he could talk about was the fact\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228eb1a83a43fa40f7a11fe925a616e067\u0022\u003EHon Murray McCully\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. During the last contribution to the Committee I watched with some interest as the Hon Dover Samuels interjected loudly, continuously, and at length throughout the speech. I make some allowance for the fact that he has probably had one of his regular meetings with the Prime Minister where she asks him, again, to retire, but I do not make allowances for you, Mr Chairperson, because I would have expected a presiding officer to intervene in this matter. I simply ask for consistency in this regard, and I want to know whether you are giving a ruling that there is some new low standard being applied by the Chair today, because\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228da8c2625ac4adba1991388ec94112c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you Mr McCully, you have made your point. Please be seated. Mr Samuels was called several times and he desisted when I called him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273a5a5c40e2d4f2f99d1e9cd65ed33f3\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: The National Party needs Part 1 of this legislation to be passed. The National Party expended appropriations in the last Parliament before the last general election that were unlawful. The National Party spent about $10,000 that it should not have, and by passing Part 1 of this bill, the legislation will validate that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI support the legislation because all political parties in the Parliament\u2014with the exception of the Progressive party\u2014operated under a set of rules that the Auditor-General\u2019s report brought down last Thursday has changed. It is necessary for this legislation to validate the spending of all political parties in Parliament because all parties have been found\u2014apart from one, the Progressive party\u2014to have actually been outside the scope. This bill is therefore necessary for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EIt is very unusual to hear the yelling, screaming, and fake false sincerity from the National Party members as though this is some sort of huge issue of principle for them to stand on. They come into the Chamber yelling and screaming as though they are members of the purest political party ever to have existed in political party history. If that is the case, why did they overspend their own budget in the 3 months before the last election? There is silence from National Party members for the first time this morning in the Chamber as not one of the screamers can explain to us why they overspent and why they misspent their budget before the last election. Why was that? Why was that money misspent? They cannot tell us why and that is why we need Part 1. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EWe need Part 1 of this bill to make sure that the spending has been validated. In addition to that, another thing has happened that has nothing to do with the bill\u2014that is, parties have said they will refund the money. The Labour Party is committed to refunding money and the National Party has said it will refund the money and has paid its $10,000. But that does not change the fact that law is needed to validate the spending. Let me ask National Party members this question. Did they misuse any of their spending at the 2002 election? There is silence again. For the 2002 election, did the National Party use any of its funding in a way that was outside what the Auditor-General ruled last week? There is no answer to that. In the 1999 election, did the National Party use any of its money in a way that the Auditor-General, based on his ruling last Thursday, would have found to be inappropriate? There is no answer to that, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ESo the National members are now telling us that for three general elections in a row, they needed Part 1 of this bill to validate their spending. So I think that pretty much cuts to the chase quickly; National members have no idea why they are opposing Part 1, apart from the fact they see some sort of political game in throwing around words like \u201Ccorruption\u201D and \u201CZimbabwe\u201D and a whole lot of stuff that is really stupid to say and silly and way outside the way anything happens in New Zealand. But that is what they have come to Parliament to try to do, because it is about their raw politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ELet us turn to the politics. Mr Ryall just asked us whether the Labour Party had overspent because of the spending return that we had put in to the Chief Electoral Office at the last election. What did we do? We included the money that was spent promoting a Labour-led Government by organisations like the unions. That was included in the return that the Labour Party put in. Let me ask the National Party this. If not breaching an electoral spending cap is so important, why does the National Party not include the Exclusive Brethren money spent in its support? [Interruption] One of the members said they did not need to. The Labour Party did not need to include the union spending as part of our return, either. We did not need to do that; there was no legal reason to do it. But we did it because the money was spent in support of a Labour Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ESo let me ask the National members why the Exclusive Brethren money was not used in the same regard. There is silence again. There has been a lot of noise in Parliament in the last few days and the last few hours, but whenever National members are asked a question, there is silence because the paucity of their argument is clear for everybody to see. They have no idea why they are opposing Part 1. Part 1 helps the National Party. Part 1 validates what their own leaders did. Most of the noise is coming from new members of Parliament who were not here in the 3 months before the last election. That is why they have the most to say about it, even though they cannot answer any questions about it at all. They have nothing else to do, which is why they are sitting down here yelling and screaming. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E Let me ask the National members this. If they had $10,000 of misspending in the 3 months before the election, how much would it have been if the Auditor-General had gone back 4 months? What is so special about 3 months before the election, from the point of view of Parliamentary Service spending? What is special about that? There is nothing. What if we had gone back 4 months? Where would the National Party have been then? I want to know why the National Party did not include the money from the Exclusive Brethren, when the Labour Party included money that was spent in its support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u00227684883bb2a54de2bbcabd08980e82fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227684883bb2a54de2bbcabd08980e82fd\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I say to Darren Hughes that that was the greatest mimicking of Steve Maharey I have ever seen, right down to the hand gestures and even the colour of his face. As they talk for 5 minutes their faces becomes redder and redder. Do members know why? It is because they are not telling the real story. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EPart 1 is about telling the real story. It states: \u201Cappropriation means any of the appropriations under Vote Parliamentary Service\u201D. Why is it not just the money that those people across the Chamber stole out of the cookie jar, misappropriated out of the cookie jar, corruptly took out of the cookie jar, and used to steal the election? People around the world will be thinking, when they look at that group over there, that this is a banana republic like no other. The Prime Minister prattles on about Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but she should look in the mirror and see how she stole the election, and how Heather Simpson stole the election. It is absolutely appalling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EWhen we saw the accounts from the Labour Party it said they included union donations. What about the money it stole off the Service and Food Workers Union? What about the money it stole off the members of a union without the union members actually saying: \u201CHere\u2019s a donation for your election campaign.\u201D? How much was it? It was $400,000. That is what it is all about. This is a banana republic. Labour stole the election, that is it, eat that, end of story. That is it, it is all over. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EBut it is not really all over because poor old Dover has to fork out $10,000. Helen Clark has to fork out $18,000. But who is the real culprit here?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e6dc479639f4c3892e73b717bb721b0\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CH2\u201D!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293d3daa659c84209b8153b2bb62e4f1a\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: It is \u201CH2\u201D\u2014Heather Simpson. What will Heather Simpson pay? If I had done this when I was working at the K\u014Dhanga Reo National Trust or for Newstalk ZB\u2014that fine radio station\u2014I would have been slung out on my ears. This is nothing but a rort that no business person in his or her right mind would stand for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1fa807307a14b45afa0a7d9886fc42b\u0022\u003EDr Jackie Blue\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a con.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022626aebab9c154521b6742eb61d955b92\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: It is a con, that is what it is. This bill should be called \u201CThe Sting Bill\u201D, \u201CThe Con Bill\u201D, or the \u201CCover Your Tracks Bill\u201D, because that is what it is all about. There is nothing in here that needs to be done today\u2014nothing at all. We should be able to sit here for 6 months talking about how we are going to improve the system, because systems always need to be improved, and that is what they say this will do, but it will not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EThere is something sinister in this bill. It is a sinister attempt by some people so that at the close of play today, when this bill goes through\u2014well, hopefully, it will not go through. The Greens are going to abstain. They are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to come here and vote, but what do they do? They turn up, eat their lunch, and do not even vote, for goodness\u2019 sake! What a have they are. [Interruption] Marian Hobbs should be quiet. She is one of those who rorted the system before. For goodness\u2019 sake, the Government benches are full of them! The front bench is full of people who know how to rort the system, and rort the system they do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1719e090d0d4752a696a9298f8c2e6b\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: What did Marian do?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222eaa191f328c4a5c9fb0ca5072622fe6\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I do not know, she bought some curtains or stayed outside her area somewhere and then claimed expenses\u2014I do not know, it was something like that. But it does not really matter, we are not really talking about Marian, we are talking about a thieving Government. It is a Government that stole the election from the rightful winners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022 data-id=\u00226797f0b79f664582afc9f0aa57ab4fb8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226797f0b79f664582afc9f0aa57ab4fb8\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State):\u003C/span\u003E After the great performance from the \u201CKing of Waka Jumpers\u201D, I thought I should take a short call. I am one of the members of this Parliament who do not suffer from amnesia. I remember very well the history of that member. He said that Labour stole the election. That is the garbage that comes across from members on the other side of the waka. The \u201CKing of Waka Jumpers\u201D has just delivered the most prominent speech he has ever delivered in this Chamber. This is the garbage that comes across to us from the other side of the Chamber. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003EI want to share with members what I think the New Zealand public thinks about that comment. At the end of the day, they are the ones who elected this Government to Parliament. At the end of the day, we went through a democratic election process\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022252b3b7567704f8fba2f7d6fc9444592\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. With Dover Samuels berating members on this side of the Chamber and us responding to him\u2014and I acknowledge that\u2014I think there would be more calmness, less heckling, and less shouting from this side of the Chamber if Dover Samuels would simply table his cheque. I seek leave for Dover Samuels to table his $10,000 cheque.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af92d8e130644d858569229d38ee3c7f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member will be seated. That is a frivolous point of order. It is out of order, and the member is warned about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcab5ad3face4dbdb304c1d5aa29eb4a\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: It is amazing that some members of the Opposition do not want to hear the facts. The fact is that we won the election. What I am hearing from members on the other side of the Chamber is that they think the people of this country are bonkers\u2014that they are stupid. You are talking about public integrity. It was the public of New Zealand who elected this Government to lead this country. You know what that was based on? It was based on the very clear policies put forward by the Labour Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003EThe National Party had its chance and the Labour Party had its chance, but now that we have become the Government, those members are crying sooky bubba. You are using all those findings and all those tactics\u2014and do you know what you are doing? The National Party is undermining the public of this country. They were the ones who went to the ballot box. Now you are saying that the election was a stolen election\u2014that, in fact, somebody stole something. So if you are saying that, are you saying that the public of New Zealand are dummies? Are you saying they are stupid? That is the implication of your comments. Are you saying they are stupid? Do you think they were rorted? Do you think they are stupid? Is that what the National Party is saying? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003EWe went through a public election. We went through a proper democratic process. The Labour Party won, we are the Government, and you do not like it. So you get up in the Chamber, and you throw all that rubbish across the Chamber about us being thieves\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226d12e67f29942bcb9907d41272b0b27\u0022\u003EHon Murray McCully\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Reluctant though I am to spring to your defence, I tell you that the member who was on his feet has been using the word \u201Cyou\u201D and following that with some accusations that are colourful but not very seemly. I suggest to you that it is unseemly for him to bring the Chair into the debate in that way. I am surprised you have not pulled him up on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222955a456faf94a86a52ad56110467543\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr McCully, for drawing that to my attention. I did raise that issue with Mr Samuels several times before, and, given the nature of this debate and my realisation of the temperature in the Chamber, I have chosen to ignore Mr Samuels on that particular issue. But now that it has been drawn to my attention, I ask the member to please not bring the Chair into the debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228914e8ab4bc1405083af6ea00469ee24\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. I will refer to the National Party as the parties with the Tories in it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022486da4eb282149c2823c112d182dd57f\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Your ruling puts the rest of us in an interesting position. Presumably, it means that the standards around bringing you into the debate have now been relaxed, and that during the remainder of the Committee stage and in the third reading members of this side of the Chamber will not be pulled up in the same way that the Standing Orders would otherwise have anticipated, because the discretion you have extended to the Hon Dover Samuels will now be extended to other members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002228bd2209535f4fa9868122531cbdc0e6\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, that will not be the case. The reason is that a presiding officer looks at the context that the word is used in and also at the way that a debate is going. Just because I have previously overlooked Mr Samuels\u2019 use of that word, that does not mean it will happen all the time. I appreciate the fact that the member has drawn that matter to my attention, and I will listen with a great deal of interest to hear whether Mr Samuels continues to use \u201Cyou\u201D in the debate. He will be ruled out of order if he brings me into it again, and so will other members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dd50c2223ed490cb21d80c9c8d7d6d0\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Now we have a further variation on the ruling, because you are now telling the Committee that the matter of whether an individual member can bring the presiding officer into the debate is one of context and of the nature of the debate. That just cannot be right, because the Standing Orders make it very clear than under no circumstances are the Chair or the Speaker to be brought into the debate. If you are now widening that ruling to include a wider contextual element, I suggest, if I may, that you do so in a formal way that gives a clear ruling to the rest of us as to how the standard, which until this point has been very clear in the Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 rulings, is being relaxed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022580d51bab599404faef7390ebf8602de\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the ruling will not be relaxed, Mr Power, and the presiding officer is never to be brought into the debate. The reality in this place, as the member well knows, is that members on both the Opposition and Government sides of the Chamber often bring Chairs of Committee and Speakers into debates. Sometimes, if you like, because of the context and the state of order in the Chamber at the time, we do not pull people up for that. If we pulled everybody up all the time, we would continually be doing that. So we have to use our judgment on those matters. I appreciate what Mr Samuels said, and I will certainly be very intent and listen to what he says, because it is not the job of members to bring the presiding officer into the debate, and the rule on that has not been changed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a55b14d768a4e68a0e927ea032fe754\u0022\u003EHon Murray McCully\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I understand the point you make, and I understand the need for you to exercise discretion. I simply ask for your undertaking that in exercising your discretion, you will seek to be absolutely fair to members on both sides of the Chamber. It is important to us that we have that undertaking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220d860770fd9f4bbdb55f7d7684fde303\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: You always have that undertaking when I am in the Chair, Mr McCully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a49dca82b62f48189d0ef51930ecb60c\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: I thank Murray McCully for suggesting that I am making a colourful contribution to the debate. I thank that member for giving me credit for that. But I think we all understand that this debate has been colourful. The colour has come from both sides of the colour spectrum. It would be unfortunate if this Parliament allowed colourful debate to come from only one side of the Chamber and not the other, because there have certainly been a lot of accusations. A lot of colourful adjectives have been slung from the Opposition side of the Chamber. Unfortunately, those members do not like to take; they like to give.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022664faf334f58441ba405f3f94e8ced9f\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I ask for some guidance from you, because when my colleague the Hon Tau Henare was speaking earlier, I saw you pick up the bill and wave it at him as an indication that you wanted him to speak on the part that was before the Committee. I have been listening to the Government member, and I have not heard him once refer to the Committee stage that we are in, nor have I heard or seen you pull him into line at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022726d19736a02461e8d0481d899d0ab23\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Ms Bennett. I will now indicate the bill to Mr Samuels.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221286f0af37d44689a6a613803383bc59\u0022\u003EHon DOVER SAMUELS\u003C/span\u003E: If that member had been listening, she would have heard some of the statements made by members on her side of the Chamber. It is incumbent upon those of us who are on the Government side of the Chamber to respond to those statements, and that is exactly what I am doing. Earlier in my speech, I raised the fact that Mr McCully was talking about the colourful contribution that is coming from me as an MP. My response to that is to say that a number of colourful contributions have come from all sides of the Chamber. There have been some mischievous contributions, and some adjectives have been used that, in my view, have not been complimentary to the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022 data-id=\u00224c8da00b31a2458fb6625ecb3ebea331\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224c8da00b31a2458fb6625ecb3ebea331\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT (National\u2014Hamilton East):\u003C/span\u003E Today we are debating the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. I will start by looking at what New Zealand First members have been saying. They are here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022129ee0a339724ca0a9f8ac83f36834a4\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: What a surprise!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022586b67519d084290b2f443adf8deb9bb\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Why would I start on them? Let us not let them get away with another day off. There is a reason why New Zealand First members are doing what they are doing. It is because they know they will be out of this place in 3 years\u2019 time, and they will leave a $150,000 debt with the public. That debt will be all tied up in the courts for the following 2 years, and they will never pay it back. This is all part of their strategy\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba96b04f65d1499dbc382e7cca90f25b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member will please be seated. I say to members that the practice of members engaging in a constant barrage of interjections amounts to heckling, and it is entirely intolerable in the debating chamber. I am trying to listen to the honourable member on my left. There is a lot of noise, and I am having difficulty listening to him. I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member, but I ask members to give him a fair go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022415091914e7042fdb948d799307e912a\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273ac068660504ade89e4edc0c1575766\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. New Zealand First has no objection to the member reciting exactly what we said, but if he is going to distort the truth we will interrupt him with points of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222dca935f3c94e80a0ab2de3b466fb01\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Mr Brown that we have dealt with a similar issue this morning. The correct procedure for that situation is privilege, and the member knows how to handle those situations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227eef4cbc048429199b48bb14dc676a1\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Why are they so sensitive?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022064789383214465db1d0198a2ff25a65\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: Those members are sensitive because they have an exit strategy out of this House. Their leader has a new job. What will they do? They will leave the taxpayers with a $150,000 debt. These are the people who said they would be honest and stand up for the ordinary New Zealander. Well, what have they done? They have stolen from the ordinary New Zealander, and they have not even had the decency to pay the money back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278296822387046f9bd54ad84ef6e3c66\u0022\u003EChris Auchinvole\u003C/span\u003E: Will they pay it back?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205e023a329c74eacb377ab9f3b475970\u0022\u003EDAVID BENNETT\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is disgusting. On the other hand, Labour will actually pay the money back, by the looks of things. Labour is having the great whip-round, as we can see on TradeMe. People can buy a Labour Party deck of cards\u2014\u201CLabour is trumps\u201D\u2014that is sold by the New Zealand Labour Party. On the TradeMe website it says that no one has traded with the New Zealand Labour Party yet, and it has been a member of TradeMe since October 2006. No address is verified, but the seller allows pick-ups. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EWhat does the website say about the chances of getting a Labour Party deck of cards? It says: \u201Cthey\u2019re still wrapped in cellophane and in mint condition.\u201D\u2014never been used. The description continues: \u201CIf you prefer not to unwrap them they\u2019d surely also make a fabulous addition to any mantelpiece.\u201D That is what Labour Party voters have on their mantelpieces\u2014a pack of Labour Party cards that has never been opened! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThere is also a Labour pledge card on TradeMe\u2014as new. This is quite possibly the most expensive piece of cardboard for sale on TradeMe; it is an absolute collector\u2019s item\u2014it is brilliant stuff! Or do members want a Labour Party autograph book\u2014\u201C1st Labour Govt, 1936\u201D\u2014that will be a good one, will it not? The description states: \u201CYou are bidding on a genuine New Zealand Labour Party autograph book \u2026\u201D. It continues: \u201CKeep them in Power and New Zealand is safe.\u201D Yeah, right! This item was also put up by the New Zealand Labour Party, but no one has traded with it yet. There is another item\u2014the New Zealand Labour Party journal. It is described as a large, soft cover book, but the book\u2019s state is \u201Cfair to good\u201D\u2014certainly not worth trading on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EMembers should look at what the public has been saying about Labour\u2019s trading; these remarks are quite interesting. In regard to the pledge card a question states: \u201CNo i was asking if they are the only ones stupid enough to pay for it twice. Considering its been paid for already\u201D. The answer to that question states: \u201CI think Labour MPs will be paying for it twice. Firstly with stolen money and now, very reluctantly, with their own.\u201D That is the truth of the matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003ESomeone else asked: \u201Ccan I pay you in april 2008\u2014with a pack of chewing gum?\u201D. The answer to that question is: \u201CTry bubble gum. That effort will have to be inflated quite a lot for anyone to go for it.\u201D This is the stuff that the public has been thinking about what Labour has been doing to them. Other questions include: \u201CWhat happened to my bid? That was deadly serious.\u201D The answer to that question states: \u201CYour bid was retrospectively legislated against. Just pretend it never happened.\u201D That is the reality of what people have been thinking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EAnother question on the website asks: \u201CIs the signature authentic?\u201D. The answer to that question states: \u201CArt experts disagree. It\u2019s a difficult question because if the signature is real, then the card may be fake. Politics is all about integrity.\u201D These are beautiful comments, are they not? Another question asks: \u201CIs this card used? Or just tarnished?\u201D. The answer states: \u201CThis card is not only used, it\u2019s been heavily abused.\u201D Finally, a question asks: \u201CAre these the same tired old promises, and are these pledges ever likely to be fulfilled?\u201D. The answer states: \u201CThe promises are not worth the paper they\u2019re written on. Rest assured though that the paper they\u2019re printed on was very expensive.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003EThat is what the public of New Zealand think. They are sick and tired of this Government taking advantage of Government money and using it in this way. This Government stole the last election. Members of that party would not be in this Parliament if they did not have that $14,000 per electorate. That is theft.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u0022d54e855e70eb4cf09075944f306cfa12\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d54e855e70eb4cf09075944f306cfa12\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I took a point of order a few moments ago. I did not want to interrupt the member\u2019s speech again, but shortly after I sat down he accused New Zealand First of stealing money. I take offence at that remark, and I ask the member to withdraw.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207983fbe627643f8bf1cfd2aff7c0c26\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has taken offence. Will the member withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee32f2c9962440efbd405a8aa52e9d3c\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab0c840317294e95a809cbdeaf3d89c4\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I beg your pardon?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273c069e326114f3a91ad9dcdf4edfdb5\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c464febba36048f6b2223f82ea9bf634\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u0022d8bff82306d545debf0eb397119ad0df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d8bff82306d545debf0eb397119ad0df\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Minister of Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u0022c6f965ec1db7482ca6fed9e398f1c249\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c6f965ec1db7482ca6fed9e398f1c249\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I listened to the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Finance, earlier on as he explained, in relation to Part 1 of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, how the Government felt that it had been ambushed by the Auditor-General. He told his tale of woe, and I sat, and I listened, and I asked myself how that man could do that with a straight face. How could Michael Cullen stand in this Chamber and complain that he did not know that it was coming? Because everybody who took any interest in New Zealand politics knew that the Auditor-General was expressing concern about this Government\u2019s practice of spending taxpayers\u2019 money unlawfully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EI will remind the Committee today precisely how that happened, and tell the Committee about the Treasury report released by Mr Cullen\u2014belatedly, of course. The Opposition asked for it in advance of the bill; we got it on the eve of the bill being introduced. Mr Cullen claims that in bringing this bill to the House, under urgency, seeking retrospective validation, he is acting upon officials\u2019 advice. This Treasury report shows that claim is absolutely and utterly wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThis report shows that Mr Cullen has officials\u2019 support for one proposition, and one proposition only. I quote from the report: \u201C\u2026we recommend that these expenses be validated.\u201D So he does have the endorsement of his officials for the proposition of validation. Treasury goes on: \u201CAs a matter of course, unappropriated expenditure occurs every year in a number of votes. The validation of such expenditure is a usual part of the overall budget legislative cycle. For instance, last year\u2019s Financial Review Bill included validation for the $309.843 million in relation to the recognition of the forecast liability under the Kyoto Protocol.\u201D What this report states is very simple: this process should work according to the normal Budget cycle. The example provided is for the normal Budget cycle being followed in respect of the Kyoto overspends, and the financial review bill of last year being utilised as the vehicle. That $309 million is a lot more money than we have at stake here on the table, and the remedy is that the Government should use the proper bill as part of the legislative process\u2014that is, a financial review bill, which, from time to time, will come before the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EBut that is not what we have here. We have a special bill to deal with the Labour Party\u2019s unlawful expenditure. It is being dealt with under urgency. It is not being subject to public scrutiny, to the select committee process, or to any of the other normal procedures of the House, because it is being dealt with outside the normal Budget cycle. The Minister\u2019s officials have told him, in black and white, that he should validate the expenditure but to use the normal legislative vehicle\u2014use the normal Budget cycle. But the Minister of Finance has done the absolute opposite, and had the barefaced cheek to come to the House, in respect of Part 1, and say that he was doing what his officials had recommended that he should do. That is very far from the truth, indeed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EI remind the Minister of Finance, who claims to have not known the Auditor-General\u2019s report was coming, that this is what the Auditor-General had to say in his report in June 2004: \u201CIt is a generally held principle that taxpayers do not pay for political parties\u2019 publicity, except to support a party\u2019s parliamentary activities or the conduct of ministerial business. This is broadly consistent with the accepted position in New Zealand that the State does not fund political parties.\u201D That is what the Auditor-General stated, in black and white. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003ETo make his point, on 28 April last year, he wrote to the Prime Minister of the country and said that he would like to talk to her about that report, which says that we do not allow political parties to be funded by the taxpayer of New Zealand. The Prime Minister of New Zealand, having received a request from an independent officer of the Parliament\u2014the Auditor-General, no less\u2014told him to go and take a running jump. The Prime Minister of New Zealand told Mr Brady to get lost, and that she was not going to meet with him. The reason for that was that she already knew the pledge card was going to be paid for with public money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022 data-id=\u0022be1ff62301dd4e919398e61986905f69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be1ff62301dd4e919398e61986905f69\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u0022d99b6124e23a4dceb9db3d443e68aac5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d99b6124e23a4dceb9db3d443e68aac5\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National):\u003C/span\u003E Part 1 of this bill is very much cobbled-together legislation. I delved into it, wondering what on earth prompted it. We have seen Labour suddenly burst forth with validating legislation. Was it really just Treasury having a word in the ear of the Minister of Finance, to which immediately he gave an electrifying response, straightaway, with no delay? Such a response must have impressed Treasury\u2014such a change from considering commentaries from Treasury as an expulsion of wind, which is what that Minister has done previously. But no, Treasury has stated that we must have validating legislation, so the Minister of Finance has rushed a bill into the House, and called for urgency to put it through. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EI think, however, along with most of the population, there is far more to that than this. So what is it that is driving Labour? Is it a sudden sense of guilt? Dover Samuels\u2019 speech today would leave any 8-year-old child with an impression of that. Is there a sudden realisation that Labour\u2019s action is, in some way, unethical? Well, that would be right, but Labour has the order of correcting it wrong. This is one of the major problems that this Government has: it does not understand\u2014from the Prime Minister down, in my view\u2014how to right things when it gets them wrong. The public are increasingly aware of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EMembers should think of it this way. In this case, Labour is seeking absolution without any of the prior conditions of acknowledging what has gone before. Perhaps, in an abstract sort of way, Labour feels that giving itself absolution is in itself sufficient acknowledgment that it has done something wrong, without having to acknowledge, really, that it has. My Catholic friends have spoken to me, on occasions, about the process of ethical restoration. For over 2,000 years Catholics have used a formula, and this is how it works. First, there is recognition of transgression; an awareness that they have done something wrong. Next is the process of confession to the transgression\u2014the righting of the wrong; an act of contrition\u2014which is then followed by an absolution. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003ENone of that has happened here. Oh no! Self-forgiveness, self-absolution, and no contrition, no confession. They have done nothing wrong. They have cast a stain on the soul of the body politic and they seek to ignore that fact and legislate their way out of it. Clearly, not only do they see themselves as above the law but, as an earlier speaker suggested, they have given themselves papal grandeur. I think it could be taken further. I would go further and say they have raised themselves to the height of previously unimaginable deity\u2014getting to heaven for this Labour Government would merely be a stepping stone, such is the cavalier way its members are behaving. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EI will be told, no doubt, that this Government is proud of its secular profile and ethical response to problems. But it gets worse. The Government\u2019s sycophants, the New Zealand First Party members, are the b\u00EAte noire of my friend\u2014or perhaps he is their b\u00EAte noire. It gets even worse, because they do not even see the need to forgive themselves. This represents an awful enormity\u2014a shocking level of denial, complicity, and guilt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EOther speakers far more experienced than I have declared this to be an illegitimate Government on the basis of what has gone on. I fully agree with that. The illegitimate partner, United Future, is creating a presence of denial in a priggish, self-congratulatory oratory. Thank goodness for the honesty of the M\u0101ori Party. It is more my style of doing things. Mind you, as a Scotsman I can imagine the level of internecine argument that has occurred within their caucus over who should contribute how much towards the $45. How much should the co-leaders shoulder? One can imagine the wrangling, the tears, the torment, the raffles, the cake stalls, and the appeal to members. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EThe question is also a matter of leadership. It gives me sadness to find that the leadership of the present Government is so much at fault in this poor brand of trying to solve the problem. There is a total lack of responsible leadership. But let us take it away from any emotional or political aspect. Let us look at it purely from a commercial point of view. The whole thing flows into other areas, as it always does. A debt is a debt. For those of us who have commercial experience, there is always associated vocabulary and behaviour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022 data-id=\u002271df9d13308a48e6a930d87e2d83a95a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f4112fc5-c53f-4aa9-bf6d-5a05ce6252cf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002271df9d13308a48e6a930d87e2d83a95a\u0022\u003EERIC ROY (National\u2014Invercargill):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I seek your assurance at this stage. Given that there are some moves to close this debate, can I have your assurance that you will consider Speakers\u2019 rulings 60/7 and 60/8, regarding the harshness of your judgment on the closure, given that there is no select committee scrutiny of this bill and given that a large number of amendments have been laid on the Table? Given that there is a great deal of anticipation about participating from this side of the Chamber, I seek your assurance that you will consider that when you accept or decline a closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1d0d5b817904824a66fd266e4201be1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I say to the member that the Chairperson acts under the Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022 data-id=\u0022b1eafce8afc041228bb1ff46481af851\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b1eafce8afc041228bb1ff46481af851\u0022\u003ESUE MORONEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022 data-id=\u0022b48cc8c730e1450d864f8fa3e10dc4b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b48cc8c730e1450d864f8fa3e10dc4b5\u0022\u003ECOLIN KING (National\u2014Kaikoura):\u003C/span\u003E It is quite interesting to hear those members across the Chamber say the New Zealand public are not overly interested in this issue. The inside front page of this morning\u2019s Dominion Post refers to the \u201Cday of shame\u201D, and quite honestly that is the position that this House has been put in. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EIn speaking to Part 1, I say that it is quite worthwhile mentioning that some very meaningful amendments have been suggested to clause 3, and I look forward to the Committee giving serious consideration to proposed paragraphs (c) and (d) to underscore the importance that the money will be paid back. There is also a proposed paragraph (d), courtesy of Dr Wayne Mapp, that there can be public confidence that this is the case. It is quite important that serious consideration is given to this bill, so that we do go some way to restoring the confidence that this House should have in the minds and aspirations of all New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI would like to consider the purpose clause in Part 1. It is quite interesting when we look at a reasonable definition of the word \u201Cpurpose\u201D. It is the reason for which anything is done, created, or exists. So that is a fair definition of the purpose clause. I would also like to draw members\u2019 attention to the definition of validation. A fair meaning of validation is to give legal force for the purpose of confirming an action. What we are talking about here is making an illegal act legal. We have had that summarised to represent a sum of some $14,000 per electorate. We are talking about something that is hugely significant. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EIn Part 1 we are talking about validation, in a bill that will try to make straight something that was terribly wrong. There is a proverbial saying, that once something has been made crooked, it cannot be made straight. What are we referring to here? We are referring to Parliamentary Service money that was wrongly used for the purposes of electioneering. The members on the other side of the Chamber\u2014namely, Labour Government members\u2014would tell us that this all happened incidentally and by pure accident, and was unintended. I contend the Labour Government knowingly and deliberately ignored the rules governing such spending, and as such we are now confronted with this validation of expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EI like the way it is put in clause 3(a), which states: \u201Cthat may have been outside the scope or purpose of an appropriation \u2026\u201D. We know, quite categorically, and all New Zealanders know when they read the papers published throughout the country, that this action was deliberate. Labour arrogantly breaks laws, and will in the future, and will justify those actions because it thinks it is above the law. The old saying \u201CA leopard doesn\u2019t change its spots\u201D sums it up. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ffff330f-1757-41d6-9973-25244f0fdada\u0022\u003EWe know that a lot has gone on. We know that David Henry, the then Chief Electoral Officer, telephoned, wrote, beseeched, and communicated with the Labour Party campaign committee. The Minister of Finance, Dr Cullen, introduced this bill, and it would be very interesting to know just how much he knew. I contend there was a deliberate mind-set at that time, when the sign-off was given to the \u201CHelen Clark - taxpayer funded\u201D pledge card. Labour\u2019s state of mind was: \u201CWe\u2019ll get away with this. We\u2019ll put through validating legislation after the fact, and if we play our cards right, the Auditor-General will have smoke and mirrors around him. We\u2019ll ensure that this issue won\u2019t come up until some 12 months after election day, when the public will have forgotten about it.\u201D I say that Labour is guilty on all counts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022 data-id=\u00225230d7ad2fd3408fbd8dd2b4a6bf2f31\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225230d7ad2fd3408fbd8dd2b4a6bf2f31\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c3d45e48d20d4c0394f85f64e020088d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000216\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 3 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000217\u0022\u003Eto omit this clause, and substitute the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000218\u0022\u003EPurposes\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000219\u0022\u003EThe purposes of this Act are to\u2014\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000220\u0022\u003E(a)\tvalidate expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service that have been found by the Controller and Auditor-General to have been outside the scope or purpose of an appropriation or other enactment;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000221\u0022\u003E(b)\tprovide an interim meaning of the term \u201Cfunding entitlements for Parliamentary purposes\u201D as used in the Parliamentary Service Act 2000;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000222\u0022\u003E(c)\tprovide that any expenditure which the Auditor-General has found was unauthorised must be repaid by the party responsible for that unauthorised expenditure; and\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000223\u0022\u003E(d)\tprovide a reporting mechanism to ensure that members of the public can be satisfied that any party which incurred any unauthorised expenditure has repaid that expenditure to the Parliamentary Service.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c6104475330f411c87f47b26cb8380d5\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000224\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp to clause 3 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000225\u0022\u003Eto omit paragraph (a), and substitute the following new paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000226\u0022\u003Evalidate expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service that was found to be outside the scope or purpose of an appropriation or other enactment by the Controller and Auditor-General in the report entitled Advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election; and\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022808d73a4de6245dbbb18dc10a26cb0c9\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000227\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Kate Wilkinson to clause 3 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000228\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (a) the word \u201Cmay\u201D, and substitute the words \u201Cwere determined to\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226fef2e8a6bf341388ab68b15c38ee389\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000229\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Gerry Brownlee to clause 3 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000230\u0022\u003Eto add the following new paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000231\u0022\u003Erequire the repayment of expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service that was found to be outside the scope or purpose or an appropriation or other enactment by the Controller and Auditor-General in the report entitled Advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f65ea48d12964d54bd7238a6dfe2d4b1\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000232\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Simon Power to clause 3 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000233\u0022\u003Eto add the following new paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000234\u0022\u003Esatisfy, at least in some part, a desire on the part of the public for certain elected representatives to acknowledge the impropriety of their actions with regard to the use of taxpayer funding.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00225566ae039e64448abd2430432fe456b1\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000235\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Murray McCully to clause 3 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000236\u0022\u003Eto add the following new paragraph:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000237\u0022\u003Eprovide the catalyst and deadline for the long term review of the use of funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228885585795244a929c36ce37d1f42c25\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000238\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chris Auchinvole to clause 4 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000239\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cfor any of the financial years 1989/90 to 2006/07\u201D, and substitute the words \u201Cfor: (a) the financial years 2004/05 and 2005/06\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002251d7a75fe398426bbdf0dc5315ac65b6\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000240\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to clause 4 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000241\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthis Act\u201D, in the first place where it appears, and substitute the words \u201Csections 3 to 5\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002259ab751cd4e24639bd3628c34f35bbbb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 66\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229b7d6bbf11cc4921bdd835689b17f8d4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 66\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 5; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00225668d6687fba431b9845794b94dfabbe\u0022\u003EPart 2  Validation of expenditure and interim meaning of \u201Cfunding entitlements for parliamentary purposes\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae15721fd00440f693cac470f1fa9362\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae15721fd00440f693cac470f1fa9362\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E The Committee, having dealt with the purposes and interpretation in Part 1, now comes to the body of the bill\u2014the largely operative clauses; the bulk of this legislation\u2014and I look forward to this being the first of my four calls on this part. I expect that, given the substantive nature of this part of the bill, many members on this side of the Chamber will be looking for multiple calls on this particular part of the bill in accordance with the Standing Order that provides for such multiple calls. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EPart 2, which deals with the actual validation of expenditure, is, of course, the crux of the matter. National, as the Committee will be aware, is opposed to this bill, and in particular we draw members\u2019 attention to an amendment in the name of Christopher Finlayson to insert new clauses 5A and 5B. I know that Mr Finlayson will be anxious to speak to this amendment himself, as he has spent a considerable amount of time drafting it. At the risk of putting myself in the same legal league as Mr Finlayson, I will begin National\u2019s contribution to Part 2 by outlining some of the provisions proposed in this amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe most important thing about Mr Finlayson\u2019s amendment to this part is that it essentially requires that before validation can occur, repayment must have been made. In the modern lexicon we would refer to the clause as the \u201CNew Zealand First clause\u201D, because under this clause\u2014if it is accepted by the Committee, and I am sure it will because it is a sensible clause\u2014validation of spending will occur only in the event that repayment has been taken and receipted. We know from the media this morning that all political parties, except New Zealand First, have now agreed to repay. But this clause requires that no validation will occur until repayment is made. There is an incentive for that course of action in Mr Finlayson\u2019s proposed amendment, under clause 5A(2), which states: \u201CIf any party neglects or refuses to pay back [money] \u2026 which was outside the scope of an appropriation \u2026 together with interest thereon, on or before 31 December 2006,\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003ESo those parties that are proposing to set targets for repayment by some vague date in the ether that may or may not be met\u2014depending on the public\u2019s reaction to this issue if this legislation passes\u2014must pay. Otherwise, if payment is not made on or before 31 December, \u201Cthen that party will become liable to pay a penalty of $500,000, which penalty must be paid on or before 30 June 2007.\u201D So this is a carrot and stick amendment for legislation that actually does not require the repayment of the moneys. The legislation validates the spending, but this amendment will require the repayment. That is quite a big difference from the parent legislation\u2019s suggestion. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EAt that point, if repayment is not made, together with interest and penalties, by 30 June 2007, Mr Finlayson\u2019s amendment provides that the Speaker will have the power to sequester the assets of the party that has not made the repayment, the power to institute bankruptcy proceedings against any or all of its parliamentary representatives, and any other powers exercisable by receivers and liquidators. In other words, parties must pay by the due date. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EIf a party does not pay by the due date it will be penalised by half a million dollars, which must be payable by 30 June. If the payment plus the penalty is not paid by 30 June the party will lose assets, its members will be sued personally for bankruptcy proceedings, and it must submit as well to any other powers needed by receivers or liquidators. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EWell, this is the missing clause in the parent legislation. This is the clause that gives teeth to the validating legislation, and requires the repayment. The original bill does not require repayment. Darren Hughes knows that. He is happy about having to write out a cheque for seven grand. He will be pleased about that, but not as pleased as a first-term MP. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u0022c289086ec1bf44c48d632ab4d1ee5b91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c289086ec1bf44c48d632ab4d1ee5b91\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I want to take a short call on this part to describe and explain the Green Party\u2019s vote on the various amendments to it. We will be voting in favour of the Minister\u2019s amendments to the bill, and we will also be voting in favour of one of Mr McCully\u2019s amendments to it. Of National\u2019s many\u2014impressively many\u2014amendments, we will be supporting Mr McCully\u2019s addition of clause 6A, which states: \u201CNothing in this Act prevents political parties repaying any expenditure identified by the Controller and Auditor-General as being outside of the appropriation for any financial year.\u201D I think it is important to state that in the legislation, because it is the Green Party\u2019s view that parties should pay the money identified as being unlawfully spent. We have said clearly and repeatedly that we do not believe we have breached the rules, at all. Yet the Auditor-General does, and in respecting his office we will concede to his view on the matter. But that does not mean we agree we actually made a mistake. So it becomes a moral obligation on political parties to do the right thing in the eyes of the public and for the benefit of Parliament as a whole. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThat is one reason why we will not be supporting Chris Finlayson\u2019s amendments, which are very detailed and which involve penalty payments, interest, enforcement, and all those sorts of things. This is not about making a legal obligation; in fact, a moral obligation on political parties is actually much more potent. It is about the decision, then, of political parties to do the right thing without being forced to\u2014to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. We think it is much more important for the public to understand that there are parties prepared to make that decision, for their own benefit and for the benefit of the community as a whole. So we will support Murray McCully\u2019s amendment, but that is all, and we will vote against all other National amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EWe were interested in the idea of the reporting aspect in one of Chris Finlayson\u2019s amendments\u2014that the Speaker would report at some stage on whether parties had paid back all the money. It is an interesting idea, and one we would not necessarily oppose, but we certainly do not agree with the exposing of all the details of the expenditure, which, unfortunately, his clause includes. That is unfortunate, I think, for Mr Finlayson, because it is good to have transparency in the process, and that, in and of itself, is not a particularly evil thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EIt is very important for the public to remember that the Greens support the legislation, insofar as it is a clear enunciation of the rules. It also has to be made clear that it is a temporary enunciation\u2014an enunciation until the rules can be sorted out properly and effectively. We think it is important to take the time to make sure the rules are effective, clear, and workable for the public and for politicians. But that is where the Auditor-General has dismally failed. He has dismally failed to provide any clear direction for MPs and political parties in Parliament as to how they might then proceed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EI refer to some of my own ads that have been ruled unlawful\u2014for example, an ad inviting the public to a section 59 repeal bill meeting during the election period. The meeting concerned legislation that was before the House and that was a matter of intense public interest to the community as a whole, but because I put a little weeny tiny ad in a little community newspaper inviting people to come and talk to Sue Bradford about that legislation, the Auditor-General ruled that to be unlawful electioneering. That is one of the mistakes he has made. His interpretation has been wrong, and he has not given me any direction as to how I might then advertise public meetings about legislation that is relevant to the community. So any attempt at this stage to clarify those rules is absolutely essential. I cannot now communicate legally to the constituency of interest and to the constituency of locality that I represent and am involved in, because I do not know what is legal now. Will I have to send all of my ads to the Auditor-General, for him to ascertain their legal validity, before I place them? If that is what the Auditor-General wants, I am most happy to do that. I am sure it would take up enormous amounts of his own resources if every MP was forced to do that in order to make sure we were spending our money lawfully. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003ESo the rhetoric and hysteria coming from some Opposition benches I think is extreme and unnecessary, and is failing to clarify other important issues for the constituency and the public. The public wants us to do our job, to do it right, and to do it properly. The Auditor-General has not enabled us to do that, so we must find the mechanism. This bill is a temporary mechanism, and the Greens will support it to that extent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u002282671061c649440094485b13ed474a1e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282671061c649440094485b13ed474a1e\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National):\u003C/span\u003E As always, I listened with interest to what that honourable member said, because I value her views, so I thought it would be helpful if I tried to put in context what exactly I am seeking to do with my amendments to Part 2. I have quite a number of amendments, and on this call I want to focus on my proposed amendment to insert new clauses 5A and 5B, because there is a yawning gap in the legislation as it is currently drafted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EClause 5 seeks to validate expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service, but there is no mechanism for repayment of unauthorised expenditure, and there is no way in which the public can be satisfied that moneys have been paid back if honourable members do the right thing and act\u2014as Mr Copeland said yesterday they would do\u2014on the moral imperative to repay. So new clause 5A seeks to introduce a repayment clause, and it is limited only to the expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service for the financial year 2005-06 that was outside the scope of an appropriation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThe key provision in subclause (1) provides that the expenditure that was unauthorised must be repaid on or before 31 December 2006. That gives political parties a couple of months to get their act in order. It also provides, in paragraph (b), that the funds are to be repaid with interest. Where is the harshness in that? If people do not pay on a judgment given against them, they are required to pay interest under the Judicature Act. If people do not pay their fines or their terminal tax on time, they are clobbered by the Inland Revenue Department. If they do not pay their credit card debt on time, they get an interest bill component in their next bills, or they get their credit cards taken away from them. So it is only fair that there should be an interest component, and rather than going for some of the higher rates of interest\u2014which I could have done, and I have come under some criticism in my own caucus for being too soft, I must say\u2014I have picked the interest provision under section 87 of the Judicature Act, which is at a rate simply of 7.5 percent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201e69ee9f89e46db9ed786e43111bc9d\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226f02e7b36b64627a3f76e2dff071520\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014and I am sure that the boy wonder from \u014Ctaki could afford that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThe second point is that if unauthorised expenditure is not paid back by 31 December, it will attract a penalty. The penalty is to restore confidence in this institution, and it is for $500,000. That penalty has to be paid on or before 30 June 2007, but at the same time people are not exculpated, if you like, from having the obligation to repay the expenditure with interest. So that sort of concentrates the minds of the miscreant parties, and makes them focus on their obligations to this place and to the political process if they do not pay by 31 December 2006. If we face continuing disobedience, in respect of what the Auditor-General said, after 30 June, then the Speaker may appoint a manager who can take whatever steps are considered necessary to ensure that unauthorised expenditure is repaid to the Parliamentary Service. That will include some of the matters set out in my proposed new subclauses (4)(a) to (4)(c). Subclause (5) simply states that \u201Cthe liability of any Parliamentary representative for that expenditure shall be joint and several.\u201D That is the first part of my amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThe second part is new clause 5B, which concerns the reporting function. This is an extremely important clause, and I am grateful that the Green MP indicated at least some interest in it, because it is fundamental to regaining the respect of the public. People are entitled to know that those sums have been repaid, but at the moment there is no mechanism for ensuring that that is the case. As we know, the Parliamentary Service Commission is not subject to the Official Information Act 1982, so how are people in the general public to know that the sums have been repaid? This proposed new clause attempts to address that. It also addresses both the amount paid and a detailed breakdown of the way the amount was calculated. That is really what this critical clause is about, but I do not think I have time on this call to go further.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022f7cfef7cf26241adbec343baf4da433e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f7cfef7cf26241adbec343baf4da433e\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E I have amendments to Part 2, and they relate to saving and allowing the courts to hear the case of Darnton v Clark filed earlier this year. What is Mr Darnton seeking? He is seeking the fundamental right of all citizens to hold the Government to account. We do not do that just through elections. As citizens, we also want to know whether Governments and parliamentarians are lawful\u2014whether they obey the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThat is one of the fundamental checks in our democracy, and there is no more powerful a case on that than Fitzgerald v Muldoon when, back in 1975, the Government of the day sought to overturn superannuation by a non-legislative procedure. The courts were absolutely emphatic that one cannot do that\u2014that one must pass law to establish the law of the nation. In essence, the same principle arises here, does it not? Surely it is the right of Mr Darnton to know whether the actions of the Labour Party last year followed the law\u2014whether it breached its Appropriation bills or whether it did not. Surely that is a fundamental right of citizens in holding the Government to account. So what does the Government say? The Government is saying: \u201CNo, we don\u2019t want the courts to judge our actions. We\u2019re going to pretend\u201D\u2014because that is what we are actually doing today; let us not fool the public here\u2014\u201Cthat what was unlawful is now lawful, as if it never happened.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe public will not be fooled by that. The public will judge the parliamentary Labour Party and its followers, the New Zealand First Party and United Future, harshly for that. They know that the fundamental right of citizens is to have their cases heard and to have judgments from the courts that in essence ask whether these actions\u2014the actions of the parliamentary Labour Party last year\u2014were lawful. It is a fundamental right of citizens to know that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ec9a420587e4a2693a5b1f6f30126b4\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: And the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b9de5f4e8c949f2bf900c604c9045f4\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: I might say to the junior whip on the other side that there is a case in the court. The court is adjudicating on whether he obeyed the law. Surely citizens have a right to know whether that was the case. But this Government is saying that it is going to take a high-handed approach and remove the right of citizens to know whether the Government\u2019s actions were lawful, as if there were never an issue in the first place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI find that reprehensible, because Western democracies\u2014countries we model ourselves on\u2014are, we say, countries of laws. Our actions are judged by independent courts. But in this case the Government says no. It is going to reduce this country to the level of a Third World democracy, where courts are routinely browbeaten by the lawmakers of the day, and that is, of course, what this legislation does. The Government is saying to the courts and to the citizens that their rights do not matter. It is saying that it has absolute power and will use it ruthlessly to its own end. Well, I say to Mr Deputy Prime Minister that the public will judge it harshly for that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThat is why I have this amendment today, which I ask the Government to actually vote for so that citizens are allowed to have their cases heard and judged to determine, simply by a declaration, whether those actions were lawful. If those members are true to their word\u2014if they believe in the rule of law\u2014then they will be willing to be judged. They will be willing to have their actions submitted to an independent test of the courts. They can make their submissions to the courts. They have, in fact, filed a statement of defence. They can have the judges of the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and their Supreme Court adjudicate to find out whether this Government, this parliamentary Labour Party, actually obeyed the law. Surely that is a fundamental right of all citizens.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022 data-id=\u00227ff41d9ed2d84ccb8fbb62db929626f3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227ff41d9ed2d84ccb8fbb62db929626f3\u0022\u003ESHANE ARDERN (National\u2014Taranaki-King Country):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to take a call in respect of Part 2, \u201CValidation of expenditure and interim meaning of \u2018funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes\u2019 \u201D. I will start by reminding people of what we are debating today. First of all, in 2002 the Auditor-General put out a report saying he had some concerns about the way political parties\u2014he did not identify any particular party\u2014were using taxpayer funds, Parliamentary Service funds, for political activity for which those funds were never intended to be used. That is the first point. We should bear in mind that our democracy exists on the basis that politicians do not use taxpayer funding for political party campaigning. That is one of the fundamental principles of our democracy in New Zealand, and it is one that works in most of the Western World.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThen the Auditor-General came back to the Prime Minister of New Zealand, in April 2005, and said to the Prime Minister, through her staff and her advisers, that he had some concerns about the road that Labour was starting to embark on. He said he had some concerns about the credit card expenditure and other expenditure that the Labour Party intended to go forward with in the upcoming election. The Prime Minister refused to see the Auditor-General. How did that happen? How can that happen in a democracy? Where in the world would that ever happen in a Westminster-based democracy? Nowhere. That is the first point that all of us need to remind ourselves of in terms of why we are having this debate today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party proceeded with the credit card anyway, promising all sorts of things\u2014things it claims it delivers but never does\u2014and it spent something like $450,000, or thereabouts, on that campaign activity. It spent a huge amount of taxpayer money on that campaign activity\u2014blatant campaign activity. Labour said it was not campaign activity; it was policy. It said it was about what Labour was offering. It said it was not illegal\u2014and we went through months of debate on that. It said it had not overspent and would not pay anything back. In fact, Labour\u2019s great strategist, Pete Hodgson, went on television and radio, saying that Labour would not pay it back\u2014end of story, no more discussion. Then we read that Labour would pay it back, and that all the MPs in the Labour Party have been requested to put their hands in their pockets and front up with between $8,000 and $15,000, depending on which article we read and whether the members are Ministers or back-benchers. Well, which is it? Is the spending illegal or not illegal? Are they meant to pay it back or not pay it back? Did they get it wrong in the first place, or not? The public will not be as easily fooled as that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EHere is the greatest tragedy of this whole scenario. We had an election campaign, and we can witness the outcome by the votes in the Chamber today: Labour 50, National 48. That was the outcome. The whole direction of the country, the Government, is decided on the basis of a political party\u2019s ability to convince the voters as to where to put their votes. That is how it works in a democracy and that is how it should stay. But we have found that Labour spent money illegally to win votes\u2014buy votes\u2014and the outcome of the election was decided, potentially, on that. So I just say to the Prime Minister, and to the Deputy Prime Minister\u2014the Minister in the chair\u2014that when they are elected to this place they are elected to exercise their judgment on what is right and what is wrong. When they knowingly take taxpayers\u2019 money, having been warned by a senior Government adviser that to do so is wrong\u2014when they ignore that advice\u2014they are not exercising that judgment. The public of New Zealand will judge them harshly on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221c818ce2-6ca3-4c4a-9e6a-2e3a67d070e1\u0022\u003EWe have heard all sorts of debates about what it was that the Auditor-General may or may not have said. But I have a few of his statements here, and I think it would be interesting to advise the Committee about them at this point in time: \u201CSome MPs and parliamentary parties have said that I have acted unlawfully by \u2018changing the rules\u2019 after the event. I have not changed any rules.\u201D That comment comes from page 30 of the Auditor-General\u2019s report. \u201CI deliberately decided to publish my 2005 Report before the Election to provide a clear signal\u2026\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea35cc40521a4a9188b81896b69070ab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea35cc40521a4a9188b81896b69070ab\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I first of all draw the Committee\u2019s attention to the fact that there is literally a small technical amendment to be made to clause 7(1)(c) and (d), which involves simply a matter of getting the technical terminology correct, and we come back now to one or two key points. First of all, let me make it clear that the Labour Party accepts the Auditor-General\u2019s view is that unlawful appropriations occurred, and that they occurred across all parties except for the Progressive party. But one thing that appears to be now established is that the National Party is the only party that claims it did so knowingly; all other parties claim they engaged in unlawful expenditure unknowingly. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EAs we respect the person who determines the rules around this matter, we will be refunding the expenditure involved. If the National Party were in the same position, of course, it would not do so, because it shows its contempt for whoever is the referee almost daily, if not hourly, within this Chamber. The challenging of the Speaker\u2019s authority is more than an hourly occurrence; it has taken sometimes all of an hour, continuously in this House. But Labour does believe that the Auditor-General\u2019s opinion is wrong, and that it is certainly unworkable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EEven Mr Brownlee, this morning in the Parliamentary Service Commission meeting, finally began to understand what the implications were\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b3ffa69a417444586cf9bccbbe381ce\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: You weren\u2019t told.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e4a880e0a251486b9638833673f8221d\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: It is not a select committee; I am sorry. It is not bound by the rules of privilege.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002201be7771f07144d3a75a518dbdc0599e\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: You can\u2019t talk about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293a3e6d0367e48d5be6ba46d1a999be7\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I can talk about that, and I am going to. Mr Brownlee had it explained to him, with the General Manager of the Parliamentary Service and the accountant present, what the implications were of the Auditor-General\u2019s ruling and what it would mean if he went to a meeting in Auckland. If questions started being raised about National Party policy and he answered those, that could render invalid the expenditure of the money engaged entirely in that visit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e585e58642734ed5b4d07f1cb561a00e\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I think it is worth pointing out that Dr Cullen was not at the meeting this morning, and that the situation he outlines was a most absurd and preposterous suggestion put to the commission by Mr Mark Burton, the \u201Cjustice Minister extraordinaire\u201D, who is behaving as if he were some sort of sycophant to the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General. In no way does this reflect a reasonable approach to the Auditor-General\u2019s report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229d94039daf6d4543ad84035d32395a51\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. That was not a point of order, and the member knows it was not a point of order. It is a matter for debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022460d99e37e8145259a4f7ff97dc09780\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. You simply cannot sit there and condone Ministers of the Crown getting up and purporting to give an accurate report of meetings that they have not attended. That is misusing the parliamentary process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204eeadc0d3134ee7a86b0b42e71a614b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Brownlee, I should warn you that I have ruled on that point of order. It is clearly a point of debate. There is no way that the Chairperson can know about the content and be in a position to rule on that matter. It is a point of debate, as are all the things that you raised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022842880bb1fec40b792d4fdb4ba8fc65f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I also come to this point. The extraordinary claim made by Mr Ardern, who appears to have inhaled the tractor fumes rather too much recently, was that somehow or other no parliamentary funding is ever used for political activity. I ask whether he would care to explain to me what paid for National Party billboards in 2002, what paid for National Party billboards on the foreshore and seabed legislation in 2004, what paid\u2014this year\u2014for questionnaires with politically leading questions being put out by National Party MPs around the country, and what paid for their pledge advertising in 2002. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EAnd when Mr Ardern finally realises that all that funding came from the Parliamentary Service, could he tell us something else, because yesterday I challenged National members and I have not had an answer. What did they spend their leader\u2019s budget on in the few months before the 2005 election? What was it spent on? Was none of that money to do with the election at all? It was all about flower arranging, was it, in what was purported to be Ms Bennett\u2019s office when she finally got here after the election? Was it nothing to do with Bryan Sinclair, nothing about polling, nothing about anything else? [Interruption] Oh, they are not going to commit themselves to saying that\u2014because we know. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe point is that the Auditor-General did not look at it, and he said himself that he is aware of other practices that could be unlawful but did not have a sufficient audit trail. Well, why not? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EIf we look at the National Party\u2019s own advertising contract, and I have in front of me the report, we see no written arrangements were entered into for conducting the advertising campaign, despite the amount of money involved\u2014nearly $1 million a year spent. A contract was entered into without a written agreement, so the police could not pin down who overspent with the GST. So the National Party escaped prosecution. [Interruption] Well, I will quote it to the member; I thank him for that. \u201CThe issue for police is to establish, in the absence of a written agreement, what each person communicated to and understood from the other party. Police cannot attribute responsibility for the GST overexpenditure to either the New Zealand National Party or their advertising agency Rainmakers, and are not therefore in a position to charge either person.\u201D That party deliberately made sure there was no documentary trail, in the same way that there was no audit trail on the spending of its leader\u2019s budget. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247e82b4b1f584659b135b3e5cde16bdc\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I think you should ask Michael Cullen to come back to the point of the bill, because at the moment he is straying into the area of election spending from funds that this Parliament does not have to have any account of, and he is trying to confuse two things. The reality is that we are here because the Labour Party misspent Parliamentary Service funding, not because of anything to do with the National Party election campaign or otherwise. But I would now seek leave\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c6f49e458e240c69d5313bb13449336\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. I want to rule on the point of order before you seek leave. I say to Mr Brownlee that certainly the first part of the debate was wide-ranging, and the points Dr Cullen has brought into the debate are ones that members have brought in all morning, and they continue to bring them in. Therefore, I caution members about keeping to the clauses of the bill, but I do accept that every member has brought in those points in a wide-ranging debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002299fd472dade74d638fa06ba5f73b2e3f\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for your ruling. It probably explains why this particular process is taking so long. I seek leave for the bill in the name of Don Brash that would allow National to pay the GST to be introduced to the House immediately upon the vote on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea4e35366865449d9884641444d8b73d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: We do have a problem with that, because it is not actually within the competence of the Committee to do that. So the member has to put that to the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222687e74618dd4313b71caddd95a79160\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: When that leave is sought it will be declined, because we are not letting that party off being convicted and fined for overexpenditure, which is what the import of its bill is. The only reason National members want it is so they are not convicted and fined. But I note that they cannot tell us what they spent their leader\u2019s budget on, because they know it was spent on campaigning. They had their feet in the till and they are criticising us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022dcd7b1ef97544d96ace4430e5d1901b3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dcd7b1ef97544d96ace4430e5d1901b3\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I make this point because I think that no one who is taking any time to listen to this debate should be left under any false illusion. The Auditor-General knows full well what the National Party spent its leader\u2019s budget on. All of those accounts were made available to him by the Parliamentary Service, which pays out all the money for the leader\u2019s budget\u2014which is why the Labour Party is in trouble.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202f6bb56e3d14dd1b19e415b30c015c1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Brownlee, I just warn you again that those are all points of debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022 data-id=\u0022113a4f2952ce4584b18a9fb0873571e4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022113a4f2952ce4584b18a9fb0873571e4\u0022\u003EKATHERINE RICH (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to rise in opposition to the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, which all National Party members have spoken out against wholeheartedly. It is interesting to hear Dr Cullen\u2019s comments, because he wants to create the impression that somehow all parties are in the same boat, and that all parties have erred equally. Well, I would like to hear him explain why he runs that point, when the Labour Party spent some 14,000 times what the M\u0101ori Party spent unlawfully. Dr Cullen overlooks the fact that the Labour Party spent 70 times the amount spent by the National Party. Dr Cullen wants the public to believe that this is somehow about validating Parliamentary Service expenditure. Well, it is not. It is about validating Labour Party expenditure in the last election. It is about validating the expenditure on the pledge card.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EWhen Kiwis got their pledge card in the mail, most did not think for one second that they had paid for it. Most Kiwis thought that it would have been paid for by the Labour Party. The Labour Party was told that it was an electioneering expense, and we have heard Pete Hodgson confirm that it was an electioneering expense. So this bill is all about validating that expenditure and opening the door for the Labour Party to do it again in the next election. Well, I do not think there is a member of the public who thinks that is a good use of parliamentary time. I do not think there is a member of the public who believes that is the reason we are here\u2014to pass legislation that makes up for the Labour Party\u2019s mistakes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EOne other point is that Dr Cullen also overlooks the fact that if one looks at the major area where there has been some debate, one sees it is in the area of the leaders\u2019 budgets. While he calls on the National Party to expose what we spent our leader\u2019s budget on, I do not see him offering to the public information on what Helen Clark spent her leadership budget on, other than the pledge card. Well, we know that the pledge card was unlawful, and this is all about validating the pledge card so that Labour can do it in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EIt is also about heading off a court case. Although members on that side of the Committee might be feeling delirious and slightly sick at having to get out their cheque books and write personal cheques, this is all about ensuring that they do not have to have their day in court. It is typical Labour Party behaviour\u2014when the chips are down, it will change the law to suit itself. It is quite obvious that Helen Clark has misjudged this situation. For months she kept saying that this was an issue that was not of interest to anybody past the beltway. She ignored the fact that every single paper did an editorial slamming her position. She ignored the fact that talkback ran hot day after day, calling on her and the Labour Party to pay it back, and proving to her that it was not an issue just for the beltway.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EI turn my attention to some of the fine amendments put up by my colleagues Chris Finlayson and Wayne Mapp. I would like members of this Committee to stand up and explain why they will not allow an amendment to be inserted that would require parties to pay the money back. Peter Brown is sitting there. I have not seen him take a call, but I would like to hear why New Zealand First is trying to wriggle out of its obligations, and why it will not support an amendment to ensure that the money is paid back. The way this bill reads at the moment, once it is passed and becomes an Act all expenditure will be validated and will not be required to be paid back. In fact, some members\u2014it will not matter what they have done with their budget\u2014will not be required to do anything, because it will all be valid expenditure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002295ac7206-f497-429d-bf58-715224d5160f\u0022\u003EWe have seen some spurious contributions from the Labour members. They want us to believe that everything they have done was kosher. Well, it was not, and four different independent Government organisations have told them that it was not. They were told before the last election that they were to include the pledge card in their election expenses. The amount that they overspent on the election\u2014frankly, buying the election\u2014is an issue that should be dealt with separately. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022897421654ca94e8c98d11f4119f99d0e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022897421654ca94e8c98d11f4119f99d0e\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES (Labour\u2014Otaki):\u003C/span\u003E We are debating Part 2, which is the part of the bill that the National Party needs. We have just heard the member Katherine Rich speak. She is, by streets and streets, one of the smarter and more considered members of the National Party. Notwithstanding that, there were two or three factual errors in what Katherine Rich said that we need to correct now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThe member Katherine Rich said that if this bill was passed into law it would all relate to the 2008 general election. This part contains a sunset provision of 31 December 2007 to allow the parliamentary parties, working with the Parliamentary Service Commission, to come together with a proper and legal definition of \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D so that no political party gets back into the situation that all parties\u2014with the exception of Progressive\u2014were in before the last election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EThis is the part about the National Party that I cannot understand. National members are quiet in the Chamber only when they are asked a question. When they are asked a question they have nothing to say, because they cannot understand the inconsistency of their own position. When they are not debating that, when they are not answering questions, they yell and scream because that is what they are expert at. But here is the point: the National Party is saying that it is somehow without any fault or sin here. How come it had to pay back $10,000? National members\u2019 argument here is that because they did not get it wrong too badly, they are therefore perfect, but everybody else, because they got it wrong by more, therefore did something wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ENobody accepts that as a point of logic. Nobody accepts that as a point of fact. The National Party is caught by that in the same way that all parties have been. That is why we have introduced Part 2. And that is why there is a sunset provision in there, which Katherine Rich did not refer to. She got it 100 percent wrong when she said it was about the 2008 election; it is not. There is an opportunity in here for the parliamentary parties to get this put right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ELet me now ask members of Parliament this. What page of the Auditor-General\u2019s report clarifies what \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D means? What page number is that on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224e5080000194610889a7c1d3107dbc2\u0022\u003EMark Blumsky\u003C/span\u003E: Page 27.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204eb2261ebe6456db025a60096325602\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Mark Blumsky is giving us advice. He says it is page 27. Knowing Mark Blumsky\u2019s command of detail and fact, I am not even going to check page 27\u2014I know Mark Blumsky is wrong. So we will put Mark Blumsky to one side in that regard\u2014in terms of credibility\u2014and say that the Auditor-General did not come back and report to us last Thursday with a clear definition of parliamentary purposes. That is why we need Part 2, unless the National Party proposes to spend none of its leader\u2019s budget between now and 31 December. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003ELet me ask National Party members another question. What law currently exists that requires money to refund the money misappropriated, that would be changed by Part 2?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228348691c5fd3463ca026c0f134dc9b2c\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: No it won\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220384897fd3c4af4bacfe550debefbdb\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: I am asking Tau Henare a question and he answers me by saying \u201CNo it won\u2019t\u201D. That is not the answer. What law exists right now that requires the money to be refunded, that is altered by Part 2?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022304971262f20485fa22d433b26a816c0\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s why you\u2019re scared.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257f153c11d3b452b99dda37a2a83c978\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am hearing nothing from Tau Henare. I ask the shadow Attorney-General what law changes with Part 2 and he points to Tau Henare, and Tau Henare points to Mark Blumsky, and pretty soon we have the parliamentary National Party. So National members have no answer for any single question the Government is trying to ask, as we debate Part 2. The only answer they have is for anything apart from Part 2. So I ask National members to join the debate on Part 2, and to give us the examples rather than the abuse and the \u201CTau Henare, I\u2019m still in talkback land\u201D kind of swagger, which does not pay a single dollar back. I also ask them to explain to us why $10,000 was misspent, when the National Party said it knew what the laws were around that issue. I ask National members to answer me this question. Why did the National Party spend the money if it knew the rules had changed? Labour did not know they had changed, New Zealand First did not know they had changed, and United Future did not know they had changed. Even the M\u0101ori Party, which has been lauded by the National Party, got it wrong as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003EI accept the amounts of spending are different. What I do not accept is that somehow parties get away with it if their amount of spending is different, and that therefore they understood what the rules were. They did not understand the rules, and National members have to come up with some sort of clear argument against Part 2 if they are going to vote against it. I want to know, first, when they found out that the rule had changed; second, what law is altered by Part 2\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224bc54a8d3e56421ba03f2eee0997e0b7\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Sit down and we\u2019ll tell you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c728b468a8b41caaa4ae9e1ca03a68b\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Tau Henare tells me to sit down so they can tell us. Will Tau Henare yield if he gets it wrong? Tau Henare will argue the National Party position\u2014 \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b7f08bfb39004d29a139dc6926e92d67\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot shout continuously like that. That is not an acceptable interjection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a3d88017eb048aaa67fc94ae6d8b04e\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I just want some clarification. When I am continually named in the debate and the member who was on his feet is asking me for a reply, is it within the bounds of the Standing Orders that I do reply?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224cd8ab77041d421a881a4cd4bb8ec50a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, the member knows very clearly that\u2014[Interruption] I will rule on the point of order. The member knows that reasonable interjections are tolerated\u2014six barraging calls in a row are not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022282d8aae18654bd68fc6ac491537c783\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I do not want to interrupt the member who is on his feet any longer, but I draw your attention to the fact that Mr Tau Henare is sitting in the wrong seat. He comes out with these rather loud insults from time to time, and I think he should be at the back of the Chamber where he belongs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224fef6df61ad47ea8486163265301db2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just clarify that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fe094c4659d4f8db8ed43dbd87a8f10\u0022\u003EHon Dover Samuels\u003C/span\u003E: What about Gerry Brownlee?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea495a80a94d4c8688fa4e74e5dc6e16\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Silence! Points of order are being dealt with. The point is that the member has not moved his seat for an advantage. He has been sitting there for a long time, and that is acceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7056aae2d9b48c8b90359943b63b838\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairman. Throughout this debate, from its beginning, members have been warned on several occasions not to interject on points of order. Some members have even been thrown out of the Chamber, and for the right reasons. During that point of order, Dover Samuels interjected. I am not asking you to throw him out or do anything. I leave it in your hands.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275764ce91e9f49fc9813edb79d0c7029\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is quite right. I have not given a general warning today, but certainly a general warning was given yesterday. I warned members earlier and there have been a number of interjections, so I really think the member should leave, because he should not interject during points of order or when points of order are being dealt with. I ask the member now to leave.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EHon Dover Samuels withdrew from the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a62605d4abe4e5b955830a68e68e33d\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: How much time do I have remaining in this speech?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273c2938b890040909257ad2b852836dc\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: About 16 seconds.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f4f51f1d43c944f0bb12ae332d8a789f\u0022\u003EDARREN HUGHES\u003C/span\u003E: Sixteen seconds leaves me just enough time to mention Murray McCully and validating legislation. That man over there, with his $56 million Tourism Board fiasco, required validating legislation in this House. I know that none of the new National MPs have any history of their own party, but I say the man who is their strategist cost us $56 million.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022 data-id=\u00227b4f4a9fea2b48f0a1d35c1d84cf4fc2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227b4f4a9fea2b48f0a1d35c1d84cf4fc2\u0022\u003ENICKY WAGNER (National):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to oppose Part 2 of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. I want to make it quite clear to anyone listening to this debate just how significant this bill is. It is significant not so much in terms of the actual wording, which is designed to look innocent enough, but in what it says about Labour and how Labour views the political process, how Labour thirsts for power and control at any cost, and how Labour is even prepared to pass retrospective legislation to validate its misdeeds and its wrongful expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EAs a new MP, fresh from the real world of work, kids, respecting the law, and paying my own way, and who was not here during the last election, I would like to think that I have an uncorrupted take on the issue. But coming into Parliament and watching this Labour \u2013 New Zealand First Government at work, I have learnt a few lessons. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003ELesson 1: there is one rule for us and one rule for Labour. As National candidates, it was drilled into us just how important it was not to overspend during the election campaign. We were told horror stories of MPs who had won on the night and who had lost their seats for the sake of overspending a few of their own dollars. We were all very, very careful. And then the worst happened. Bob Clarkson was accused by Winston Peters of overspending and of buying the election. Mr Peters instituted a very nasty, very stressful, and very expensive court case, which, of course, Bob Clarkson won. It was a classic case of Peters using bully-boy tactics while, all along, he and his Labour mates were rorting the system and using taxpayers\u2019 money to underpin their own campaigns. Labour members believe that there is one rule for them and another for poor old honest Joes like Bob Clarkson. That is not the sort of behaviour the public of New Zealand wants or expects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003ELesson 2: one who thinks one is all powerful can treat electoral officers with contempt. On 30 August David Henry, the Chief Electoral Officer, in his role of monitoring spending, rang Mike Smith, the general secretary of the New Zealand Labour Party, and warned him that it was wrong for the Parliamentary Service to pay for the pledge card. David Henry said it did not matter who paid for it; it did not need to call specifically for the party vote to be considered electioneering. On 2 September David Henry clarified his warning in writing, citing sections 221 and 214B of the Electoral Act 1993. On 6 September Mike Smith wrote back arguing the case, but on 12 September David Henry wrote again asking Mr Smith if there was any reason why this matter should not be referred to the police for investigation of an illegal practice. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E Forced to answer, Mike Smith wrote a long letter arguing the case, but he finally agreed to accommodate David Henry\u2019s concern, saying: \u201CI would be happy to include the cost of the material in the return furnished by the New Zealand Labour Party.\u201D So far so good; it was all sorted. David Henry had done his job. We should remember that this was on 14 September, nearly 2 weeks after the issue was raised and days before the election itself. We can imagine David Henry\u2019s surprise when he received a letter from Mike Smith on 5 October that stated: \u201CI have now had the opportunity to reconsider the matter and I wish to advise that I withdraw my offer to have the amount expended on the material in question counted as an election expense.\u201D So lesson two is that if one thinks one is all-powerful, one can treat electoral officers with contempt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003ELabour agreed to the rules before the event, then deliberately and cynically changed its mind when it thought it was too late for the officials to be able to do anything about it. The New Zealand public is lucky that it has a public servant of the calibre of the Auditor-General, Kevin Brady, who refuses to be cowed and bullied by Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022 data-id=\u002220aae89b0d1c4a7daee7a5e9a8eafb72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002220aae89b0d1c4a7daee7a5e9a8eafb72\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak to Part 2, \u201CValidation of expenditure and interim meaning of \u2018funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes\u2019 \u201D. In particular, I would like to comment on a number of amendments I have to this part, especially to paragraph (b) of clause 5. There are four Acts that I would like to add to the list of Acts in that paragraph. They are the Income Tax Act 2004, the Proceeds of Crime Act 1991, the Public Records Act 2005, and the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908. In addition, I have an amendment to subclause 7(4), where I would like to omit the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D and substitute the expression \u201C20 April 2007\u201D. I would also like to spend some time on clause 7(4). \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EBut before I talk about that I want to focus on subclause (2) of clause 7, which describes exactly what \u201Celectioneering\u201D means. It is defined in that subclause, which really says that if this shoddy, shaky, shabby Government collapses and there is a snap election, then the Labour pledge card would be paid for by public funds. That is absolutely appalling! That is why my amendment proposes to bring the date forward by 6 months. It is to limit the time that this shabby, shaky, shoddy Government, if it does call a snap election, could use the pledge card and pay for it out of public funds. I tell members, quite frankly, that that has been termed currently a \u201Ccorrupt practice\u201D. But if this bill is passed it clearly will not be a corrupt practice; it will be part of electioneering, and New Zealand will be going backwards. I certainly hope that my amendment will get the support of the Committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EI also support the amendments to this part in the names of Chris Finlayson and Wayne Mapp. There is an unsung hero in all of this shabby, shoddy, shaky mess the Government has caused, and that is Bernard Darnton from the Libertarianz. He has a lawsuit against this shabby, shaky, shoddy Government\u2014Helen Clark and her caucus. If this bill is passed in its current form, it will mean that Bernard Darnton\u2019s lawsuit will certainly not proceed. He issued a press statement yesterday in which he basically said that the Government\u2019s changing the law to escape charges against it was something he would expect from a Third World dictatorship, and that, sadly, New Zealand has no constitutional protections to prevent that type of abuse by a Government that is quite literally out of control. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003EI could not agree more. We have a banana republic. It is a Mugabe-type Government. This Government is trying to ram through legislation without allowing public comment and without having a select committee process. One would think that maybe the public is not interested but, believe me, the public is very interested in what is happening. People will not forget. They will have long memories about this shabby, shaky, shoddy Government and what it is trying to ram through this Parliament, under urgency, to pass a law to validate its overspending in the election campaign. It is doing so because Labour members are self-interested, cynical, and out for everything they can get. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eaf79431-1033-44f1-a633-22633da52c0d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c1f5a765cfa4bc48e9710247d919d27\u0022\u003EDavid Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: They\u2019re corrupt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b93d62e2dba4360ae904905b7f554c1\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly. The public interest in this case is very high, and when 81 percent of the public said \u201CPay it back.\u201D, and when 75 percent of Labour supporters said \u201CPay it back.\u201D, Labour was finally shamed into saying that it would pay it back. But there is a catch. We do not know when it will pay it back or, indeed, if it will ever pay it back. This bill, in its current form, gives no time line. It gives no guarantee that any party that has outstanding money will pay its money back. Helen Clark talked about a target. What does a target mean? It is a pretty nebulous term and there is no guarantee that any money will be paid back. We know that Labour MPs are having to write personal cheques, but when will we see the colour of their money? When will taxpayers be refunded? Even New Zealand First is trying to duck and dive. It is in cahoots with this shoddy, shaky, shabby Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022968e9bafd1cb4e88b642611f999298e7\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: Read it again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229470411a4062477286f8fb3648526fc0\u0022\u003EDr JACKIE BLUE\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Darren Hughes, the marginal member from the marginal seat of Otaki, that I do not have to. Mr Hughes will not be here in 2008, because my colleague Nathan Guy\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022 data-id=\u00224b00b67ee7234ab5b8504d584c869ac1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b00b67ee7234ab5b8504d584c869ac1\u0022\u003EKATE WILKINSON (National):\u003C/span\u003E Can I start by clarifying\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222618f6c8da3b4fada6111fc31c24013a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the member but there are two members, one each on either side of me, interjecting. They are not permitted to interject when they do not have the floor.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e111d51f6c9848c68c49529e0740461f\u0022\u003EKATE WILKINSON\u003C/span\u003E: I start this call on Part 2 of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill by clarifying for members opposite that there is every difference in the world between, one, accidentally overspending, realising it, admitting it, and paying the money back straight away; and, two, blatantly and intentionally overspending by $800,000, denying it ever happened, trying to hide it within the beltway, shooting the messenger who dared to disagree, then attempting to legislate under urgency to make lawful what was unlawful and to validate actions, having still not paid back one solitary cent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EWe have heard in debates today that this bill will make legal what was illegal, but the moral obligation to pay back the money that was misappropriated remains. How on earth do we enforce this moral obligation? How can we be expected to believe that this Labour Government, which blatantly ignores its legal obligations, will now conscientiously subscribe to some moral obligations? If Labour\u2019s legal obligations have not been obeyed in the past, what suggestion is there that its moral obligations will be obeyed in the future? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EI refer to the amendment proposed by my learned colleague Mr Finlayson to insert new clauses 5A and 5B, which addresses the fact that there is absolutely no legal obligation, under the proposed bill, to repay any money. Mr Finlayson has rather eloquently imposed an obligation to pay the money back. The public expects the money to be paid back. The public expects a legal obligation for it to be paid back. The public will not trust the Labour Government to obey some moral obligation to pay the money back. We urge support for this amendment. What is wrong with a proposal that states that the parties will pay the money back? After all, that is what they said they would do What is wrong with a provision in clause 5A(2) to impose interest, as an incentive on a party to pay the money back? What is wrong with imposing a penalty for not paying the money back, when we have already heard promises that parties will pay the money back? What is wrong with having provisions to appoint a manager to take whatever steps are necessary if the money is not paid back, and what is wrong with the manager having the power to sequester the assets of a party and to initiate proceedings, and having all the powers and authorities exercisable by receivers, to ensure that this wonderful moral promise by the Labour Government is, in fact, honoured?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EI urge the Committee to support the amendment proposed by Mr Finlayson. As an addition to that, as provided for in the amendment to include new clause 5B, it is only common sense that members are made aware exactly when the money is paid back, so that it cannot be just swept under the carpet and \u201Cmoved on\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022136da8c4-afc7-483e-a39c-c66812f71774\u0022\u003EI would also like to address the amendment proposed by Dr Mapp to insert new clause 6A. This addresses the process. I will talk about the process for a minute, because we have been told that this is an urgent matter. Nobody has yet enlightened us as to where the urgency is that is being demanded of us. The money has already been misappropriated. Whether the bill passes today, tomorrow, or next year will not change that fact. Even if we accept that clarification of the rules is required, there is no desperate urgency that the clarification be codified now, today, tomorrow, or even this year. Dr Mapp\u2019s amendment, in fact, suggests that nothing in the Act shall affect the existing High Court proceedings, which seek a judicial declaration as to whether the expenditure was lawful or whether it was misappropriated. Why not wait until the Darnton case is judicially determined? Why push this through under urgency?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022 data-id=\u002230283dbce11641f79833274d5001d910\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230283dbce11641f79833274d5001d910\u0022\u003ESTEVE CHADWICK (Labour\u2014Rotorua):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to take a call on this bill. Yes, there is urgency about it, and yes, I am glad we are sitting in urgency, because this Government has taken the responsible position and will clean up the situation, following the recommendations that came from the Auditor-General. The Opposition is failing to acknowledge the steps that went into the Auditor-General\u2019s report to the Minister responsible for Vote Parliamentary Service. That Minister reported to the House, as we were told, that seven parties breached the spending rules at the last election, including National. National members, on their high horse, say that it was just a little breach, so it was all right. But the Opposition did breach the electoral spending rules, and this bill will validate that overspent electoral spending. It is fine for National members to get on their high horse about this matter, but the public out there are pleased to know that we are getting this validating legislation passed. We will get the issue cleared up, and the validation will lapse at the end of next year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EI want to talk about one of the amendments in Part 2 of the bill that has come from the Hon Bill English. He wants to omit clause 7(2)(a) and substitute the following: \u201Cencourages or persuades or appears to encourage or persuade voters to vote for a particular person or persons:\u201D. Well, let us get that cleared up, for once and for all. Who paid for the National Party candidate in the electorate of Rotorua to put billboards up 6 months before the election? The report on overspending looked at the communications spend in the Parliamentary Service only for the 3 months from the date of declaration of the electoral campaign. But for 6 months before the election, National Party billboards were up in our electorate, telling us who to vote for. \u201CWho is Gilbert Stehbens?\u201D, they asked. Then, before the 3-month spending period had even begun, a little van drove around Rotorua, saying \u201CMP Rotorua\u201D. The candidate was not the MP for Rotorua. Who paid for that, prior to the 3 months of the electoral spend that the Auditor-General has looked at? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EAnd who paid the salary for National\u2019s candidate, who was absent from his job in Auckland as a marketer and a cosmetic dentist\u2014the one who fixed up Dr Brash\u2019s teeth? Who paid for him to come to Rotorua and go door to door, telling everyone what a lousy local MP they had, and that she was so unsuccessful she was not even in Cabinet. Who paid that salary? It was probably paid for from the Leader of the Opposition\u2019s spend, which is unaccounted for line by line, because the Leader of the Opposition spent all his allocation up until the election. What did he spend it on? National has no accountability at all on that. But we knew the spending was something we had never seen before. It was absolutely unprecedented. There was no party machine helping the wannabe candidate in our electorate\u2014but the whispering campaign had begun. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EThe Opposition also chooses to ignore the $110,000 overspent on GST. How can Opposition members say they did not break the spending rules, leading up to the last election? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003EI am pleased about this validating legislation. We should get this spending cleaned up, and then we should get into the review that will look at the rules on overspending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022 data-id=\u0022b95f1cb4130a4d3f853c7b57063931a6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b95f1cb4130a4d3f853c7b57063931a6\u0022\u003EJACQUI DEAN (National\u2014Otago):\u003C/span\u003E I do not buy a word of what MP Steve Chadwick has just said. I do not buy a word of what the Deputy Prime Minister said today. I do not buy a single, solitary word that has come from any member on that side of the Chamber on this issue, and I will tell members why. When I look at the Order Paper that we should have been addressing this week, I see the heading \u201CBusiness before the House\u201D, and I see a number of bills under that heading that should have\u2014and would have\u2014been debated in this House this week or the next, were we not in urgency. What are those bills? We have bills like the Sports Anti-Doping Bill, a disabled persons bill, a bill to do with children, young persons, and their families, the Criminal Procedure Bill, and the Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill\u2014and what do all these bills have in common? They have come before the House to benefit the people of New Zealand. The fact that we may or may not support them and vote for them is irrelevant, because the intent behind the bills is to benefit the people of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003EI turn to the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, which we are debating today, and I ask who it is designed to benefit. Is it designed to benefit, as those other bills are, the people of New Zealand? No, it is not. Of course it is not. It is designed to benefit the Government of the day. There is the difference. This bill is designed purely to get the Government out of a very, very tight spot, and I do not buy a single, solitary word of it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003EThe then Chief Electoral Officer wrote to the Labour Party and told it that if it put out the pledge card, then it would breach the spending cap. Let us just leave aside the fact that the Labour Party used taxpayers\u2019 money and our money. Labour was warned that the use of the pledge card would be regarded as election spending. We badly need to know\u2014and I would love an MP from the Government to take a call on this question\u2014whether Labour had been informed in advance that the use of the pledge card would be regarded as election spending. If Labour had been informed of that, then it knowingly exceeded the spending cap. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003EBob Clarkson was challenged about exceeding the spending cap. Bob Clarkson spent a considerable amount of time and money to prove that he had not exceeded the spending cap. Had Mr Clarkson exceeded the spending cap, he would have lost his seat\u2014but not the Government, because the laws of the land, obviously, do not apply to the Government. The laws of the land that apply to me, my colleagues, and my party do not apply to the Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a25943b-cb3b-49c3-bd10-74316fae17f1\u0022\u003ESo we have Government members sitting in the Chamber with a worthless piece of paper, hoping they will get away with it, and hoping the people of New Zealand will have forgotten about it by the time of the next election. But we will not have forgotten about it. We have a Government that knowingly and willingly breaks the law. So what did the Government do about that? How did it put that right? It introduced a shonky piece of legislation called the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, which is just a whole collection of words designed to make legal what is illegal.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022 data-id=\u0022171167391e2948d0a85c5df10a57ff01\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022171167391e2948d0a85c5df10a57ff01\u0022\u003EHon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Energy):\u003C/span\u003E What arrant nonsense we have just heard about accusations that we breached the spending cap. That party received over $1 million of expenditure from its friends in the Exclusive Brethren\u2014the same people who had private detectives tailing me and other members of Parliament, and who took part in other disreputable practices\u2014of which not one cent was included in its election return. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThe nonsense we heard about the so-called clarity around what is a parliamentary purpose is just beyond the pale. It is absolutely clear that the National Party used its leadership funds to promote its cause at the last election. It has not been pinged for doing that, for two reasons. First, the Auditor-General did not look into that matter as thoroughly as he did in relation to directly promotional expenditure. But of perhaps more concern was the comment of the Speaker of the House that those who had been criticised were those who had records, and those who did not have records had escaped scrutiny. She criticised that situation, and asked what sort of a way that was for Parliament to conduct itself. The answer to that question is that that is no way for this Parliament to conduct itself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThere most clearly is uncertainty here, as we have seen from the fact that every party in this Parliament except Progressive got the rules wrong, according to the rendition that the Auditor-General now believes is the correct one. For those reasons, we have said we will refund the money, but it remains abundantly clear that the very grey line that is left as to what is and what is not a parliamentary purpose must be fixed, as has previously been said. I ask whether it was a parliamentary purpose when Dr Brash went to Nelson to sign up a new member\u2014Mr Ewen-Street, the former Green member\u2014and use political profile in order to encourage people to vote for the National Party. That was paid for out of funds that come through the vote that is meant to be for parliamentary purposes. That is no less an electioneering purpose than the things we have been criticised for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EIt is arrant nonsense to suggest that one can separate parliamentary purposes from things that have an electioneering aspect. Just about everything we do here has the dual purpose of promoting good policy for the betterment of the country, and encouraging people to vote for us. That is what democracy is about; it is a contest of ideas. When we promote our ideas, the Opposition promotes its ideas. Through that promotion of ideas, and the different ways those ideas are promoted, those parties are encouraging people to vote for them. It is the essence of democracy that parliamentary purposes include encouraging people to vote for a party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f5d71749-ae91-4af7-b2bd-77260398912a\u0022\u003EThis amendment in Part 2 is absolutely necessary. Otherwise, the National Party, like every other party in this Parliament, will not be able to go about its business in the way that has happened for decades and decades. We have a sunset clause in the bill because we actually need to take a wider look at this legislation between now and the next election. But until we take that wider look, we need to make proper what we all do and what we always have done. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022 data-id=\u00221d6facce151b4d7ab95cc93007379d25\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221d6facce151b4d7ab95cc93007379d25\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW (National\u2014Aoraki):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak to Part 2 of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill with a sick feeling in my stomach, because I know that the public of New Zealand will right now be deciding how this Parliament should be judged.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EThere are vast differences in the ways we should be judging the various parties that are caught up in needing this validation of their expenditure. I start by referring to National. National overspent by approximately $10,000. It got it wrong, put its hand up, and paid the money back immediately. How different that approach is from that of some of the other parties! First of all, I need to say that the Progressive party was not guilty. The Green Party, the ACT party, and United Future were a little slower to act, but they put their hands up to pay the money back. Then we come to New Zealand First. New Zealand First members still say they will pay back only what they think they legally must pay back; we know that this validation bill will probably result in their not having to pay a single cent back, so some may say that is quite wise on their part. Then we come to the Labour Party members, who have been bleating on about confusion. They think that the signs about whether they should have spent the money on the pledge card were not clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EI quote from the Auditor-General\u2019s report, in which he refutes the claims made that he changed the rules: \u201CSome MPs and parliamentary parties have said that I have acted unfairly by \u2018changing the rules\u2019 after the event. I have not changed any rules.\u201D He continues: \u201CI deliberately decided to publish my 2005 Report before the Election to provide a clear signal to MPs and parliamentary parties about the need to be careful during the pre-election period.\u201D It seems the Labour Party ignored that advice. I can tell members that the public of New Zealand are wondering what this is all about. I hope they are not bluffed into believing that we are simply sorting out some sorry mess. I hope they understand that what we are doing today is trying to validate the behaviours of Labour Party members in particular, who, it seems, would be happy enough to be compared with the likes of Mugabe in a mutual validation society. Is that what we want the New Zealand Government to be compared with around the world? I think not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003EI know that some hefty sums will need to be paid back, and I am greatly distressed to hear about some of the ways those sums will be paid back. I suggest to Heather Simpson that if she feels she needs to contribute in some way, she should pay a visit to a Timaru supermarket, where she will find Labour Party people approaching customers and asking them whether they would like to make a donation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b636e7a4c4f4a098c110ff8b98b49f8\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s shameful!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c1b446b7181455d928fb31e542e698b\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW\u003C/span\u003E: How shoddy and shameful is that? Labour Party people in Timaru supermarkets are asking customers to please make a donation to Labour. Maybe that is one way that Heather Simpson can make a donation to this campaign. We have heard about TradeMe\u2014about all the various things that are being offered for sale in order to pay this money back. Everything we hear from the other side of the House muddies the issue. But the public of New Zealand are not as stupid as that: 81 percent of them have said that Labour should pay it back and get on with it, and stop talking about all the other stuff that Labour members think validates their behaviours.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003ELabour has pretended for so long that this is not a problem. For months and months\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ab6946825714c69b5bf7a33eb02a8a7\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: 13 months.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e4a4ea28b4f41c4b57f5dbf684ea369\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW\u003C/span\u003E: For 13 months, Labour has pretended that this is not a problem. Then its strategist, Pete Hodgson, said Labour would not pay the money back. Well, it seems he got that wrong. Pete Hodgson, the strategist, got that wrong, because now Labour says it will pay it back. Alarmingly, Labour seems to be helping its partners in Government\u2014New Zealand First\u2014to avoid having to pay it back. Why would New Zealand First bother? Once this bill is passed, the money will not have to be paid back. There have been weeks of obfuscation by Labour about whether it would pay it back. For months there have been denials by Labour that it knew about the pledge card funding before the election but intentionally carried on with it. That means Labour breached the spending cap. Section 214B of the Electoral Act states that one cannot spend over $2.4 million. Labour\u2019s spending of $800,000 on top of that means it is in doo-doo.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f44431ef-b505-4e94-9f57-a60b0a569bf7\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcc4f2e9a06b4344afe875dc8de37d53\u0022\u003EShane Jones\u003C/span\u003E: What about GST?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002260200136-9d63-4a82-b4f5-c00411adb1fd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cac7182c9b114272b98c60f435d010b3\u0022\u003EJO GOODHEW\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, it owes more! So Labour overspent during the election campaign. In my maiden speech I used a quotation from V\u00E1clav Havel, little knowing how soon in my parliamentary career this quotation would be reflected on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a598ef5109b140129793279709a81a9d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I call the Hon Tau Henare.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9c512a8-d532-4ef9-ad51-0fe8d752a893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208dab6aea5c94cceabf49b36d7a7d6bb\u0022\u003EHon Clayton Cosgrove\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, no! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022551294f7a000408d9274167f00ef9642\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022551294f7a000408d9274167f00ef9642\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I see the goons on the other side are laughing. Let me say something about the goons on the other side and, also, about the goon who is presently sitting in the Minister\u2019s seat. The member from Gisborne said: \u201CWhy don\u2019t you go and live in Zimbabwe?\u201D Well, I tell members that I have stayed a little time in Zimbabwe and there are similarities between the two countries in terms of the leaders. It is scary to think that in Zimbabwe, where they live a funny little life, and make rules and break them, the President\u2014the little fellow with a moustache\u2014validates everything that he has done wrong. This piece of paper in my hand shows what it looks like when one compares Clark and Mugabe, as the caption, \u201CMutual Validation Society\u201D, shows.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EWhen Helen Clark does things wrong, she does two things: she blames other people and says a law will be made that says that we did not do anything wrong. I know that, because clause 5 states: \u201CTo the extent that any expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service was outside the scope of an appropriation or was not made in relation to an appropriation,\u2014(a) the expenditure is validated;\u201D. What does \u201Cvalidated\u201D mean? It means that before being validated, it was illegal and unlawful. Those members stole; they are corrupt. This is all about making right what they did wrong. But in whose eyes? It is in the eyes of the members of the Labour Party caucus, because people out on the streets, when they have been reading about this in the newspapers and watching television, are saying around the fire: \u201CMum, I think they\u2019re a pack of crooks.\u201D, or, \u201CDad, I think those guys have taken us for a ride.\u201D That is what this bill is all about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EThen Darren Hughes stood up and prattled on about Labour wanting to pay it back, and so on. Well, this amendment in the name of Chris Finlayson is the mechanism to pay it back. It will make sure that everybody in the House pays it back\u2014even the people to my left, from New Zealand First, who have said they will pay \u201Cwhatever\u201D back. They have not even figured out that they owe $160,000-odd. That is what they owe and that is what they should pay. They should not make a point of standing in this Chamber and saying they will pay, when they know full well that the passing of this legislation means they will not pay. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003ENone of the people who have said they will pay are going to pay. Helen Clark says she has picked out a target. Well, where is the target? Where is the bull\u2019s-eye? Members opposite are all quiet now, because the truth hurts. It hurts that this is a rort on New Zealand\u2019s political system like never before. This is a corrupt Government, which needs a spanking, and it will get that spanking at the next election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EI say that, come the next election, this item will be the major item. It will be about honesty, it will be about credibility, and it will be about reliability. The fact of the matter is that if Labour members took the time to read my colleague\u2019s amendment, and I hope they have, they would see that if we had something like this in law, we would make real and significant progress. It would make people think before they go and spend what is not theirs, and then try to get away with it by bringing in legislation\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b04a34ec9abe4b09a8c959d8de5f3d81\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s it called?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236f71b54c4444579994ce1ea6a600589\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I do not know what it is called. In my language, I call it theft. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003EI seek leave to table a report with the headline: \u201CGoff out of line on election spending\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da9f955a76e8433a98477a11b3868c29\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1a717561c12450e8e98501844babc3e\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a report headed: \u201CClark\u2019s pledge card argument falls apart\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221da64136c10c4c808c80cb6595872f61\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022392719da7731466cb10a24317f9039dd\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291ff4ed44bdb4f1f941ea1dc11db4af0\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: There was comment from both sides.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228083e91f5911420297aec47be36e2730\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: Ah, different rules, eh? I seek leave to table a document headed: \u201CHerald has own \u2018spin\u2019, says Cullen\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c20fbc656ef43789d0b80b07a89f291\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225df16db9ba9b4f4095616f346f87da27\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a Radio New Zealand - Te Reo Irirangi o Aotearoa report headed: \u201CNational Party to oppose spending validation bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de065a18f6224a12a1a71616f83ed896\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf2f930291194b2aa1022c0e564a1dd8\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a Radio New Zealand - Te Reo Irirangi o Aotearoa report headed: \u201CParliament goes into urgency to consider validation bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc164804313c42e98617505aceb1b1e1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee5700b2f1404177a941d23cee7fbb41\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a Radio New Zealand report headed: \u201CAuditor-General\u2019s report on parliamentary election expenditure\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228e4eeff123fd49608f20bd820929da6b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002235700e786f2f4939b261695866e90ff8\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a report headed: \u201CNew Zealand First will pay when convinced\u201D that they have something to pay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227188f9e68a5b42a9b3875c600671f160\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252805cd69b5741288bcfe7370469820b\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a document headed: \u201CWhy Labour must repay taxpayers\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229213170612234b34a6b6369bf61c6cac\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022af21014124e04f648eca488e9108a84e\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE\u003C/span\u003E: I seek leave to table a New Zealand Herald report headed \u201CThe election spending row\u201D in question and answer form, beginning with \u201CWhat do Parliament\u2019s rules say?\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fffab2e010e34bb9b55ac864789d50c5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea9a170e542044c3befe36ca371239cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea9a170e542044c3befe36ca371239cc\u0022\u003EMARK BLUMSKY (National):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you, Mr Chairperson, for the opportunity to speak, because I know that many of my colleagues are very keen to contribute to the debate. I will speak specifically to the amendment put forward by my colleague Chris Finlayson. The amendment, in the main, talks about the need for payment to be made before validation. I stand to speak specifically to this because that is what the public want us to do. This is what the public want to see happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003EThe public do not have faith that the current bill, as it stands, will deliver on their expectations, and, in particular, New Zealand First is creating an illusion, maybe, of the fact that it is looking to escape from the need to pay the money back. I think, therefore, the only confidence we can give the public is to make sure Chris Finlayson\u2019s amendment is supported. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003EThe tragedy of all of this though, at the end of the day, is the fact that we are standing here, putting amendments forward, because we have not given the public the opportunity to make a contribution. There is real anger and frustration in the New Zealand community at the fact that this process is going through the House at speed. I had the opportunity last night, with leave, to visit a fund-raising promotion for a hospice. There were a couple of hundred people there, and the talk in the main was very much focused on the fact that this was happening in the House. A lot of people were concerned, a lot of people did not understand, a lot of people do not have the trust or the faith that we are getting it right, and a lot of people were commenting on the fact that they are not being given the opportunity to have their say through this process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003EI regularly take Winston out for a walk in the morning. I put him on his leash and take him for a walk through the streets of Wellington. I came back in this morning just after 7 and, lo and behold, on the TV one of the Ministers of this Government was standing up and saying, with great gravity and in a serious tone, that this bill is righting 17 years of supposed wrong. A Minister of the Crown was talking about how this bill is righting 17 years of what is supposedly wrong. Heck me days, wowee! Is it so urgent that 17 years after the wrong supposedly started, we have to right it tomorrow\u2014in fact, that we have to do it today? We cannot wait one more day, one more week, one more month for this process to occur, to allow the public of New Zealand to have an involvement in what is a very serious issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003EOne would think, from listening to the Cabinet Minister on the TV this morning, that the world was falling apart and that this legislation was the most urgently needed legislation in the world because for 17 years things have been wrong. Has the world fallen apart? No. The only thing falling apart is the Labour Party polling, and it is falling apart and falling down at a great rate of knots because the public of New Zealand understand exactly what is happening in this Chamber today. The only reason we are in urgency is that the Labour Party wants to put a stop on its slide now. Labour senses, quite rightly, that the public are incredibly concerned and worried about what they have seen from the Government in this House over the last few months. Labour members have said to themselves: \u201CHow can we stop this slide?\u201D. There is no better way than to pick it up and put it before the House as quickly as possible, in the hope that by next week the public will have forgotten. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224ff3e092-9caa-44d9-9171-5c8fca280d96\u0022\u003EThe public will not forget what Labour has done here today. The fact that there is no public submission through this process, and that there has been no opportunity for the public to have their say, is just an indictment on the sort of Government we have. It is sending a very strong signal to the public of New Zealand that the Government does not want to hear what the public is saying. The reason the Government does not want to hear it is that it does not like what the public is saying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022 data-id=\u0022b28f7caa71284fefb1509f3e40155888\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b28f7caa71284fefb1509f3e40155888\u0022\u003EMOANA MACKEY (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022 data-id=\u0022dffd78ab526d4aa788f381419f796fed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dffd78ab526d4aa788f381419f796fed\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS (National\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E It is a tremendous privilege to be able to stand in this Chamber. It is a tremendous honour to be able to be here to represent constituents. But I find that there is an amazing sense of history here, as we sit and watch events unfold today. The Government took nearly $800,000 from its leader\u2019s budget and applied it to electioneering purposes, and that money is now being laundered through the parliamentary process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThe only problem with sitting here and watching these events unfold today is that faeces splatter. Every one of us, in time, will recount the process that we have been going through over these days and hours as we sit in this Chamber now. Some of us may recount this process over a glass of whisky, and some of the really honourable members may recount it in black and white print as they write and publish memoirs. But every one of us will have to recall this process, because what is happening here today is a salient point in the history of this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt will be interesting, too, to note members\u2019 various responses to this process. I will be able to stand, sit, or whatever and say: \u201CYep, I was there. I remember the day.\u201D I will be able to say I voted against this legislation. Other people sitting around the Chamber today will have various explanations as to their part in this seedy business, as well. Dr Cullen will be able to say: \u201CYep, I was there, and it was my idea. I moved the bill.\u201D I wonder how that will be received by those who are listening to him. Maybe his grandchildren, when they are talking to him in years to come, will ask him why he moved the bill. He will have to fess up and say: \u201CBecause we were in the poo.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThe people who are new to this House consider it a privilege to be here. The people who want to push through this sort of legislation are arrogant and believe that it is their right to do so, as they money-launder their way through this legislation. I cannot understand why this legislation is not an amendment to the Crimes Act. That is exactly what it should be.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt will also be interesting to note the explanations of other members who are sitting in the Chamber today, including those of Mr Brown and other members of New Zealand First, and members of United Future. They will be able to look their grandchildren in the eye, or whoever is asking, if they are interested, and say: \u201CYeah, I was there, and I witnessed this seedy legislation go through. I voted for it because my leader said I should, and I was happy to do it at the time.\u201D If we cannot justify supporting this legislation now, will we be proud to have done so in 20 years\u2019 time? There are other people sitting in this Chamber now who, in years to come, will have to say: \u201CWell, I sat there on my hands and did nothing.\u201D Those people are the Green Party members, who have decided to abstain from voting in respect of this legislation. But they will be tainted, as well. As I said earlier, this stuff splatters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt is interesting to watch the body language and the jumping up and down of members on the other side of the Chamber. I have interviewed a lot of guilty people in my time\u2014people whom one is suspicious of. It is interesting to look at the body language of those people. They cover themselves, they keep pulling their clothes together, and they stand with their hands on their heart. The ones who are really guilty deny and deny\u2014\u201CIt wasn\u2019t me; it didn\u2019t happen.\u201D They protest and carry on, and they say it never happened. Then they move to the next stage, which is: \u201COh yeah, well it happened, but it wasn\u2019t my fault. I didn\u2019t know.\u201D They are the guilty ones. What about the innocent ones? What do they do? The innocent ones turn round and say: \u201COh, gee, I made a stuff-up and here\u2019s the money. I will pay it back.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThose are the two different responses in respect of overspending that we are hearing in this Chamber today. I find it hugely ironic to see the former member for Otago jumping up and down and waving his fingers at this side of the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220e7e8da2-a6a1-41bb-aeb0-a49be255a293\u0022 data-id=\u002285940f0299284741aaf2f98872146a9b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220e7e8da2-a6a1-41bb-aeb0-a49be255a293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002285940f0299284741aaf2f98872146a9b\u0022\u003EHon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Customs):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022 data-id=\u00225fe293066a994f2cacb8360b81d04ca0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225fe293066a994f2cacb8360b81d04ca0\u0022\u003EHon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National):\u003C/span\u003E I am very pleased to take a call on Part 2 of this legislation, although in the end this is a total disgrace. This whole debacle has been a total disgrace, led by Helen Clark and her Labour Party. This party has run fast and loose with taxpayers\u2019 funds, and it is now running fast and loose with the parliamentary process. The public out there know this. In fact, other than that, they probably expected that at some stage this Government would move to validate the unlawful spending and the overspending. The public made their judgment on this debacle long ago\u2014weeks ago\u2014and they have judged the Labour Government and the Labour Party guilty as charged. It has been fast and loose with the public\u2019s money, and now it is fast and loose with the democratic process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003E Here we are in urgency. The bill was introduced yesterday and it will be passed today, thanks to parties who really should not be supporting it, but are. The fact of this bill\u2019s passing will cement this in the mind of the public; they will not forget this. It may be 2 years until the election, but there comes a time when a Government takes one step too far. This Government has done so with this debacle here. If there are lessons that Labour Government members should learn\u2014and they probably will not; their record to date has shown that they do not learn from their stuff-ups\u2014the first one is that they can run but they cannot hide. Or, maybe, it is that they can ride but they cannot hide. Helen Clark did her best to ride roughshod over the issue until she realised, finally, that the Government\u2019s poll ratings were taking a dive. Government members can run, or ride, but they cannot hide; they need to learn this lesson. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EThe other lesson they need to learn is that the public will not tolerate an arrogant Government. The public, in a sense, have been reasonably tolerant; I do not know why they have been willing to give this Government the benefit of the doubt notwithstanding the number of stuff-ups over the last 6 or 7 years. But, on this one, the public will not forgive the arrogance that has been shown by Helen Clark, her party, and her Government in the way they have dealt with this matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI am absolutely grateful that we have an Auditor-General who has acted without fear while under huge pressure from the Government to do something different from what he did in the end. Sure, in the end he found that unlawful appropriations occurred across all parties, so, in a sense, we all have a lesson to learn from what has happened\u2014I do not deny that. But no one, no party has been as arrogant as Helen Clark and her Labour Party. That they think that their pledge card was lawful is so arrogant that I cannot describe it, quite honestly. As I say, the public have made their decision. They have made their judgment; they made it long before today. This bill just cements in their minds what an arrogant Government this is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bd5aa67-2f2b-4a13-a2b4-21a392396f11\u0022\u003EI am grateful that the Chair gave me a small call. Before my time is up, I want to refer to Murray McCully\u2019s amendment to insert new clause 6A, which states that there should be \u201CNo effect on political parties wishing to repay monies\u201D. I hope the Committee will support that amendment. With this legislation and the validation of that spending, there will be parties\u2014and maybe the Labour Party might even still change its mind\u2014that still might not repay the money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022 data-id=\u0022746bb6cf42494ab19aada608f8275c1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a40f5af7-f9b0-4b44-9669-9e63be1c3ced\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022746bb6cf42494ab19aada608f8275c1a\u0022\u003EDARIEN FENTON (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e4a4549de530473ab8b730758281a353\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224abdc4b595c14d108f3a3794297753f5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The first amendments are to clause 5(b), to add subparagraph (iv), in the names of the honourable members Dr Jonathan Coleman, Jacqui Dean, Nathan Guy, Craig Foss, Nicky Wagner, Colin King, Chris Tremain, Kate Wilkinson, Chris Auchinvole, David Bennett, Paula Bennett, Dr Jackie Blue, Chester Borrows, and John Hayes. Those particular amendments are out of order as they are outside the scope of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Christopher Finlayson be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003Eto insert the following new clauses:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E5A\tRepayment\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(1)\tAny expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service for the financial years 2004/05 to 2005/06 which was outside the scope of an appropriation or was not made in relation to an appropriation must be repaid to the Parliamentary Service by the party which incurred that expenditure:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(a)\ton or before 31 December 2006;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(b)\ttogether with interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(2)\tIf any party neglects or refuses to pay back any expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service for the financial years 2004/05 to 2005/06 which was outside the scope of an appropriation or was not made in relation to an appropriation, notwithstanding that it may have been validated under section 5, together with interest thereon, on or before 31 December 2006, then that party will become liable to pay a penalty of $500,000, which penalty must paid on or before 30 June 2007.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(3)\tIf any party is required to pay a penalty in the circumstances outlined in subclause (2) hereof it shall not, by reason of having to pay a penalty, be relieved of any obligation to repay that expenditure, together with interest to date of payment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(4)\tIf, after 30 June 2007, any party continues to refuse or neglect to repay any expenditure together with interest and a penalty, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives must forthwith appoint a manager who shall take whatever steps he or she considers necessary in accordance with the law to ensure that any expenditure is repaid to the Parliamentary Service. Such steps may include:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(a)\tthe power to sequester the assets of the party and its Parliamentary representatives;\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(b)\tthe power to institute bankruptcy proceedings against any or all Parliamentary representatives of that party; and\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(c)\tany other powers and authorities exercisable by receivers and liquidators.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(5)\tFor the purposes of subclause (4), the liability of any Parliamentary representative for that expenditure shall be joint and several.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E(6)\tIn this section, unless the context otherwise requires:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\tDate of payment means on or before 31 December 2006 or the date of actual payment, whichever is the later.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\tInterest means interest at the rate prescribed by section 87 of the Judicature Act 1908 (which interest is to be calculated from 12 October 2006, being the date of presentation to the House of Representatives of the report by the Controller and Auditor-General on advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election to date of payment).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E5B\tReporting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\tOn the repayment of expenditure (including interest and any penalty), whether as a result of the appointment of a manager in accordance with section 5A above or otherwise, the Speaker of the House of Representatives must report to the House of Representatives both the fact of the repayment and the amount that was paid, including a detailed breakdown of the way in which the amount paid was calculated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b78aed14e9ec4a159241b2f889cf08ef\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u00227f0b38e19b574b5381edd29112ed9b86\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f0b38e19b574b5381edd29112ed9b86\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Whip\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. As the vote was taken I listened very keenly, and I noticed that the Clerk was not calling for the ACT vote. Mr Chairperson, can you confirm that those members have disappeared or are not voting, or whatever?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ffd76d1780764fc9a43859b8a64bcbf2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: It is not a point of order. I confirm that the member is quite entitled to come to the Table to look at the votes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Gerry Brownlee be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003Eto insert the following new clause:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E5A\tPublication of electioneering material\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\tAny expenditure captured by clause 5 which resulted in the production of material deemed to be electioneering by the Controller and Auditor-General in the report entitled Advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election must be published by the Minister in charge of Vote Parliamentary Service to ensure that validating legislation of this kind is enacted in a fully transparent context.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022032357477f364a68aa82aff5c7d9a26f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000453\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Gerry Brownlee to clause 6 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000454\u0022\u003Eto insert, after the word \u201Ccriminal\u201D, the words \u201Cor civil\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227a5864b7ed594f60a8387d78fdecb59c\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000455\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Bill English to clause 6 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000456\u0022\u003Eto omit this clause, and substitute the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000457\u0022\u003E6\tAct does not affect criminal liability\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000458\u0022\u003E\tNothing in this Act affects the criminal liability of any person, including, for the purposes of clarification, offences under the Electoral Act 1993.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b941eb3278e24b7da940320a3ffaac5f\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000459\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Wayne Mapp be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000460\u0022\u003Eto insert the following clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000461\u0022\u003E6A\tHigh Court case not affected\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000462\u0022\u003E(1)\tNothing in this Act shall affect the High Court proceedings of Darnton v Clark (Civ No. 2006-485-1398) in which the plaintiff seeks a declaration that the expenditure on the \u201Cpledge card\u201D and related brochures by the Labour Parliamentary Party is a breach of the Constitution Act 1986, the Public Finance Act 1989 and the Bill of Rights 1688.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000463\u0022\u003E(2)\tThe High Court shall have the power to make a declaration in the proceedings referred to in subsection (1) of this section whether or not the expenditure on the \u201Cpledge card\u201D and related brochure by the Labour Parliamentary Party is a breach of the Constitution Act 1986, the Public Finance Act 1989 and the Bill of Rights 1688.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022903890c0252343969078f13eb308f930\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000464\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Murray McCully be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000465\u0022\u003Eto insert the following new clause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000466\u0022\u003E6A\tNo effect on political parties wishing to repay monies\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000467\u0022\u003E\tNothing in this Act prevents political parties repaying any expenditure identified by the Controller and Auditor-General as being outside of the appropriation for any financial year.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227662ff2991eb47e8a86e5d3ed61b6e26\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; Green Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000468\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000469\u0022\u003Eto omit subclause (2), and substitute the following new subclause:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000470\u0022\u003E(2)\tIn subsection (1), electioneering means any communication that has the purpose of\u2014\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000471\u0022\u003E(a)\tseeking support for the election of a particular person or persons;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000472\u0022\u003E(b)\tseeking support for the casting of a party vote for a particular political party or parties;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000473\u0022\u003E(c)\tencouraging any person to become a member of a particular political party or parties;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000474\u0022\u003E(d)\tsoliciting subscriptions or other financial support;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000475\u0022\u003E(e)\tpublishing a pledge or promise card in which promises are made about what a particular person or persons or political party or political parties will do if elected to government.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000476\u0022\u003EFor the purposes of this subsection,\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000477\u0022\u003E(i)\t\u201Cpurpose\u201D means a substantial purpose:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000478\u0022\u003E(ii)\t\u201Cthe pledge card\u201D shall include the pledge card promoted by the New Zealand Labour Party at the 2005 General Election:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000479\u0022\u003E(iii)\t\u201Csubstantial\u201D in connection with \u201Cpurpose\u201D means real or of substance.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002207b439684afb4af2a3e492970bbdab50\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000480\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Murray McCully to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000481\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (2) the word \u201Cexplicitly\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002293a00d0101eb439d8ded91305215b439\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000482\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Bill English to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000483\u0022\u003Eto omit paragraphs (a) and (b) from subclause (2), and substitute the following new paragraphs:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000484\u0022\u003E(a)\tEncourages or persuades or appears to encourage or persuade voters to vote for a particular person or persons:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000485\u0022\u003E(b)\tEncourages or persuades or appears to encourage or persuade voters to vote for a particular political party or political parties:.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b8f1e3a8b7684fde9db2532150b4bfe3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000486\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Colin King to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000487\u0022\u003Eto omit subclause (4).\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00223a116b6712624a1a85e9931339761edd\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000488\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chris Tremain to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000489\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226cffe6e9fa9343e5889de4cfc7187b38\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000490\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Nicky Wagner to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000491\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 November 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00228c93a3bd08734ed38b8a66091fd3bbf7\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000492\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Kate Wilkinson to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000493\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 December 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f586e18e1ca646e0a0f516c6e5e97818\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000494\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Paula Bennett to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000495\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C31 December 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224952d8175fba4f4c87719892b52201f5\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000496\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chris Auchinvole to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000497\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 January 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227ba042fcc67d4e69afb6f04d6967705d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000498\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of David Bennett to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000499\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 February 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227b67b50a4db54dc89aed4696e7dae5d2\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000500\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Paula Bennett to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000501\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 March 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022346767d78863475b84faad3d8225a345\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000502\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Jackie Blue to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000503\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 April 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022878c11630c54482c99b06206ad467d2e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000504\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chester Borrows to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000505\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 May 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022cb739874d6544175a4704e75e1bc3e8e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000506\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Jonathan Coleman to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000507\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 June 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c7acb12c0e9f4b33ae8289519ebcbd96\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000508\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacqui Dean to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000509\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 July 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b815fa08ebf448358ec5dc46da4bb206\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000510\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Craig Foss to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000511\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 August 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002262e55d13eb90406989a1947f00082d92\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000512\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Nathan Guy to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000513\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 September 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00220c38d809f21b47f399c038d402f03767\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000514\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of John Hayes to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000515\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 October 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002242b6ecccbd1a4cf39953ef30073b2500\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000516\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Colin King to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000517\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 November 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002232e3e4e8fd854b8ebe8970fa4a7096ce\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000518\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chris Tremain to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000519\u0022\u003Eto omit from subclause (4) the expression \u201C31 December 2007\u201D, and substitute the expression \u201C20 December 2007\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222dcb2f2cf6844c1cae6192c665013e70\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000520\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to clause 7 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000521\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (c) of subclause (1) the words \u201Cavailable to members of Parliament and their families\u201D;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000522\u0022\u003Eto add to paragraph (c) of subclause (1) the words \u201Cor any direction given by the Speaker of the House of Representatives under the Parliamentary Service Act 2000\u201D;\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000523\u0022\u003Eto omit from paragraph (d) of subclause (1) the words \u201Cavailable to members of Parliament and their families\u201D; and\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000524\u0022\u003Eto insert in paragraph (d) of subclause (1), after the words \u201CCivil List Act 1979\u201D, the words \u201Cor any direction given by the Speaker of the House of Representatives under the Parliamentary Service Act 2000\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002287499ced5c3d441083c9c89623111de2\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227b10a9ebea02447ca51af8b0def84429\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 2 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227769d5d34a714af2a1662fec1d8b005d\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022 data-id=\u0022f956d2d0cf91411693e529ef0819d934\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f956d2d0cf91411693e529ef0819d934\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP (National\u2014North Shore):\u003C/span\u003E This will be the last debate in the Committee stage. It is a shame, is it not, that this Government, using its majority, is ruthlessly putting through validating legislation. Government members seem to think that this legislation is absolutely vital for the health of the nation and, indeed, for the lawfulness of this Government. What arrant nonsense that is, I have to say. Government members have come in here with the completely facetious argument that everything that has been done back to 1989 urgently needs validation\u2014so urgently that no member of the public can make a submission. That is a completely outrageous lie that is being perpetrated on the voters of New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fbcfa858be64e2b8b443c2d28966f8b\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member cannot use the word \u201Clie\u201D. He knows that is out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022825db89edf8e4b4cae3c79e5d05dee9d\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I certainly know that one cannot accuse any member or, indeed, any party of a lie, but it has certainly never been the case that one could not describe legislation, or something of that nature, in those terms. The rule about the use of the word \u201Clie\u201D relates to individuals and parties, and to their personal and party motives, not to legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad04700fb6b54cdd8630039ae3cfca25\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Mapp, the previous Chairman, Mr Robertson, has advised me that the Committee was in the middle of a point of order before the lunch break, and that you had been asked to withdraw and apologise for the word you had used. So could you do that, please?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a54232ecf9bc43769db938817d46f125\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: I did not withdraw and apologise, because I did not accuse anyone, or any party, of a lie. I simply said that the legislation was a lie. My understanding of the Standing Orders and the rules of this House is that that could not be a breach of the Standing Orders. Therefore, I have nothing to apologise for.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229df41211d2b941428c10182bc2ae6fd6\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The word was not used against a person or a party?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdb9ddba189040ada6b0a9a5e8e81049\u0022\u003EDr WAYNE MAPP\u003C/span\u003E: No, it was not, and, indeed, the Deputy Prime Minister knows that to be the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThis is a tawdry little bill. It is unneeded and it is unwanted. I say to those parties that are going to vote for it, the Labour Party, the New Zealand First Party, and United Future, that they will be forever stained with it. They will be judged in the court of public opinion, and they will be judged at the next election. There will be an accounting. That accounting will be in the ballot box, and it will not be favourable. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI want to say this. When a party deliberately uses taxpayers\u2019 money towards its election expenses in excess of the spending limits, that is judged to be a corrupt practice under the Electoral Act. That is the case, and that assertion has been made many times in this Chamber and has never been denied by the Government. The Labour Party ought to live with its guilt. If one speeds, one pays the fine. That does not obviate the crime; the fact is that the record of one\u2019s guilt remains. Someone who had done that does not come to Parliament and try to change the law, saying: \u201CI never sped. At all stages I was within the law.\u201D But that is what this Government is trying to do now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe Labour members say there has been validation legislation in the past. But it has never been for a political party in relation to its own malfeasance. That is what this bill is actually about\u2014the deliberate use of taxpayers\u2019 money to Labour members\u2019 advantage, in order to turn the election in their favour. Now they want this Parliament to say that is OK\u2014that it is permissible, and that the public of New Zealand ought to forgive them. Well, the public will not. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EI say this very, very clearly to the Labour Party. It has committed a corrupt practice under the Electoral Act. Labour members should not be asking this Parliament to let them obviate the consequences of doing that and pretend that the unlawful is now legal. That is a fiction, and a patent fiction at that, and the public know that. That is why, on talkback radio and in letters to the editor, the Government is being judged very harshly. People see naked self-interest. That is the difference between this form of validating legislation and any other validating legislation in New Zealand\u2019s history. This Parliament has never passed law for the naked self-interest of members of Parliament; that has never happened before in the history of our land. That is why this bill is such a travesty of fundamental democratic constitutional principles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003EThe Labour members do not care about that. They are just riding completely roughshod over the foundations of our democracy, and they expect the public to understand that. Well, the public will not, and Labour will be judged accordingly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022669c792b4b0e4d15aea1037dc7947102\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022669c792b4b0e4d15aea1037dc7947102\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to the title of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, I want to go back a bit to what is being validated here. The Controller and Auditor-General identified $1,173,598 of illegal spending. A large hunk of that related to Labour\u2019s pledge card, so I just want to go back a little over that pledge card. It was not the New Zealand Labour Party\u2019s idea. In fact, it was an idea it copied off Prime Minister Blair from the Labour Party\u2019s campaign in Great Britain. The pledge card in Britain proved to be very, very successful; it was a very, very successful election strategy. So what Labour did in 1999 was to copy, as Helen Clark often did, what Tony Blair had done for the Labour Party in the UK. The whole third way approach of this Government was a sort of copy of Tony Blair\u2019s approach in Britain. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn 1999, when Labour first used a pledge card here in New Zealand, it was congratulated on what an effective election campaign strategy the pledge card was. I want the Minister in the chair, the Hon Dr Michael Cullen, to tell us who paid for the pledge card in 1999, when Labour itself took credit for how effective it was\u2014it was the centrepiece of Labour\u2019s campaign in 1999. I ask Dr Cullen who paid for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a55cd571f473482084a8cb55706d7b90\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: That would have been announced publicly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ce831c48e4542f3a356309ba9bc2768\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: So the taxpayers of New Zealand paid for it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b35f9f4cb6174df0a301c351b23eb906\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: That has been said frequently.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288d84176ac344601b66e777d1104ab8f\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to make sure that Dr Cullen acknowledges that the taxpayers of New Zealand paid for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThe reason why I believe that is important is this. When Labour gets caught like that, it tries to muddy the waters. No honest New Zealander could possibly have thought, in 1999, that that pledge card was not electioneering. No ordinary, honest New Zealander would have ever, ever assumed that it was not electioneering. So in 2002, when Labour\u2019s funding was also hidden, no honest New Zealander would have dreamt that anyone\u2014anyone, no matter how dishonest\u2014could consider it not to be electioneering. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThe reason this is important is that the Auditor-General did not look at technical, difficult reasons in making his decisions about what was illegal. He states, in paragraph 4.9 on page 35 of his report: \u201CI took a common-sense approach based on what I considered a reasonable member of the public would think \u2026\u201D. And any reasonable, honest member of the public would have treated that pledge card, absolutely and clearly, as electioneering. Dr Cullen, who is always very clever, seems to think somehow that it was not electioneering, because it did not ask for a vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EWhat makes this issue even more despicable is that the Minister responsible for Vote Parliamentary Service has been dragged into that dirty, dirty muddying of the waters by this Labour Government\u2014by Helen Clark and Michael Cullen. The Speaker of our Parliament has been brought into disrepute in her role as the Minister responsible for Vote Parliamentary Service. This report of hers is a disgrace. The report of the Minister responsible for Vote Parliamentary Service on the Auditor-General\u2019s report is a disgrace. As a longstanding member of this Parliament\u201422 years in this Parliament\u2014I am ashamed that our Speaker should be involved in that kind of tawdry cheating of the public purse of this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere can be no honest consideration of that pledge card that treats it in any other way than as electioneering. There is no possible honest assessment of that pledge card that could treat it in any other way than as electioneering, and Labour knows that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf70373bffed47eba05361c300d94cf4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf70373bffed47eba05361c300d94cf4\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. Earlier this morning the Chair of the Committee warned the Minister in the chair, Dr Cullen, that his microphone was live and that any comments he made were being carried. I have just come down from my office, where I was listening to the Hon Lockwood Smith in the debate, and I can say that Dr Cullen\u2019s voice was coming through the radio louder\u2014quite a bit louder\u2014than that of Dr Lockwood Smith. Dr Cullen had been warned about that this morning\u2014he actually chose to leave the chair because of it. I suggest, Madam Chair, that you give him another and final warning that if he carries on while his microphone is live\u2014[Interruption]\u2014yes, there was some pretty choice stuff coming through, actually\u2014you will ask him to leave the chair and have another Minister do the job. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022580937cd080045b9aedb1721b04d8de9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022580937cd080045b9aedb1721b04d8de9\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I apologise for making a comment in response to the member saying he had been standing in this Chamber for a long time. In fact, I left the Chamber this morning for a Cabinet committee meeting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThat was Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith PhD in full understatement mode, taking a moderate and balanced view in his speech. What he showed was a really important distinction. As I said this morning\u2014and I say again\u2014the Labour Party does not accept that the Auditor-General\u2019s views are correct. But we accept that he is the referee, and therefore we are paying the money back. I note that Dr Lockwood Smith did not agree with the referee\u2019s decision in terms of the Speaker\u2019s report, so what did he do? He attacked the Speaker and attacked the report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c50f040073424bbd802162f0b5db7726\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: As the Minister responsible for the Parliamentary Service.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aceb29b89ff841d18165823a699bd8e4\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, what a fine distinction he tries to make now, having been caught out booting the referee because he did not like the referee\u2019s decision on this matter. Is that not just typical of the National Party\u2014the born-to-rule Government it would like to be? When one does not like the referee, one boots the referee. We on this side of the Chamber are digging deep into our pockets, even though we disagree with the referee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EI note that not a single person opposite has yet picked up my challenge and quoted a single sentence from the 2005 Auditor-General\u2019s report that states that the interpretation of the rules then current was wrong. Such a sentence is not in that report. Indeed, what the Auditor-General said in that report was that advertising is broadly defined, leaving scope for the inclusion of considerable political content. That is a pretty clear warning to people that what they are doing is wrong, is it not? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWorse than that, the member forgot his own party\u2019s record. He went on to ask who paid for the pledge card. He has asked that publicly so many times, that it is a wonder he has not heard the answer. It came out of the leader\u2019s budget, which is why we argue that in 2005 there was no change, because we had done that in two previous elections. Having described all that as\u2014what did he say\u2014\u201Cdespicable, dirty, dirty electioneering\u201D, he forgot something. The National Party in 2002 placed an advertisement in the newspaper stating: \u201CMy pledge to you\u201D. That was Bill English\u2019s pledge\u2014paid for how? By the Parliamentary Service leaders\u2019 vote. Who paid for Bill English\u2019s billboards in 2002? The Parliamentary Service vote. Who paid for National\u2019s billboards on the foreshore and seabed issue in 2004? The Parliamentary Service vote. Who is paying this year\u2014when National members say they knew that the rules had changed completely\u2014for party political questionnaires, clearly designed to support the National Party, that are going out in electorate after electorate? The Parliamentary Service vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003ESo now Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith PhD is struck somewhat dumb. He has now described his colleagues, his former leader, his current leader, and the National caucus as engaged in despicable, dirty, dirty electioneering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad595c1797c84fb0a89bb3efbdc7baed\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Just muddy the waters further. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8ccd05ef6c3446b87ec4f38e41bad26\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: He calls this muddying the waters. I do agree\u2014if one throws a Tory into the water, it does tend to make the water look dirty. But that has nothing to do with what the Labour Party did. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EI challenge Dr Smith again: what was the National Party leader\u2019s budget spent on in the 3 months leading up to the 2005 election? We have still had no answer on that point from the National Party. The last thing National wanted was the Auditor-General to look into that. We wanted him to, but he declined to go beyond the issue of communications. He declined to go back to 2002, and he wonders that we are somewhat critical of his report appearing somewhat partial as a consequence of that. I make no apology for saying that. We do not believe that we did anything wrong, but, the referee having blown the whistle, we will refund the money. In the same way, a week or so back my soccer team got a penalty it should not have got. Thank God we won the game, because it was the first time we had won for a number of weeks, and we are very grateful for that. National is very grateful for the fact that we have to spend a lot of money, but, by golly, it wants the second part of this bill to pass. We have already heard that one member has had his Christmas card expenditure questioned under the rules the Auditor-General has now set. Who paid for Dr Lockwood Smith\u2019s Christmas cards last year? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f05c3d9998f84bc09d4da90b7054228c\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I see you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002262167470eaca460c8bea8d9233ababa0\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: See, see, see! Dr Lockwood Smith should answer the question. Who paid for his Christmas cards last year?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221103a54692514341b4e5fd5b5fc06fda\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Just muddy the waters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eef3d77c1b584a11935004dbb53054ca\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Ah, just muddy the waters!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00220647d4bc61c74778a456ac91389e8562\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220647d4bc61c74778a456ac91389e8562\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I am keen to discuss the title clause, the commencement clause, and, in particular, the amendment I am proposing to clause 2. Clause 2, \u201CCommencement\u201D, currently reads: \u201CThis Act comes into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.\u201D I am proposing, by way of amendment to clause 2\u2014the amendment having been tabled\u2014that to give this bill the necessary teeth it requires, and, in particular, to ensure that New Zealand First is left in no doubt about the nature of what this bill should do, the bill should come into effect \u201Cthe day after the date on which the Controller and Auditor-General reports to Parliament that he has received confirmation that all political parties have repaid \u2026 the amounts listed in Figure 2 and Figure 3 on pages 33 and 34 of the report \u2026\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe point of this amendment is straightforward. It is that validation will occur only in the event that all parties have repaid the moneys owed. I have heard Dr Cullen tell members on several occasions over the last couple of days that the Labour Party will repay the money, so I am sure he will have no objection to the validating legislation coming into effect once that repayment is made. The Greens, the M\u0101ori Party, National, ACT, and, yesterday, United Future have all indicated that they also will repay the moneys. So I am looking forward to their support on this amendment, which requires that repayment to be made before validation occurs. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThere is, however, one political party that has not made that commitment, and I ask Peter Brown, as deputy leader of New Zealand First, to stand during this part of the Committee stage debate and reassure other politicians\u2014but, more important, the public of New Zealand\u2014that the moneys owed by New Zealand First, as listed on pages 33 and 34 of the Auditor-General\u2019s report, will be repaid. It is a very simple statement for the member to make. Once he has made that statement\u2014and because he is an honourable member, I am sure he will make it\u2014then he too, like Dr Cullen and the Labour Party, should have no objection to my amendment, which simply states that once repayment has occurred, the validating legislation will kick in. It is pretty straightforward. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EThe danger in not voting for my amendment is that political parties such as New Zealand First will take the gamble that the New Zealand public will see this issue disappear into the ether. As a result, when the validating legislation passes, the legal requirement for New Zealand First to repay will disappear at that time. The obligation will then simply become a moral or political obligation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ec7b4748332496aa4d5be7186a8b3fa\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: There\u2019s no legal requirement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ab7702f09f594d1f8733065e139bf004\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Dr Cullen that that is my point. That is why we need the amendment\u2014to create the obligation for repayment to be made before validation can occur. On that basis, a perfectly reasonable, straightforward, and simple amendment should enjoy the support of all parties that have agreed publicly to repay the moneys owed as identified by the Auditor-General.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E Frankly, New Zealand First should take the opportunity now to take a call and reassure the public of New Zealand that it will repay the moneys owed and vote for my amendment to ensure that validation of the appropriation occurs only once that repayment has been made. In fact, I cannot think of a good reason why any political party that has agreed to repay the moneys owed would not vote for this amendment. It actually makes no material difference to its position in respect of the validating legislation currently before the House. It is a serious amendment. It is an amendment that is straightforward and makes sense, and I look forward to its support by all parties, because it actually makes a fair bit of sense. I also look forward to contributions from my other colleagues who have made amendments on the title and commencement clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022 data-id=\u0022b28aa957a0d9400d9c144907ee229184\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b28aa957a0d9400d9c144907ee229184\u0022\u003ERUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have come down to the Chamber to speak having listened to this debate on the radio and wondered whether we are in real land or in some gaga time. If there was any argument against the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, it could have been laid out point by point, rather than our having the abuse, the overstatement, and the chuckles we are hearing. Examples could have been given of current spending that is uncertain and should be validated. This is why I speak to the title and commencement clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003EI ask members to take, as an example, a member of Parliament who drives around in a truck with his name and the parliamentary crest on it, and also a logo and advertising slogan that have nothing to do with parliamentary business. Should that be paid for by the parliamentary budget? Is it advancing policy, or is it some form of ongoing electioneering? It seems to me that use of that truck, parked prominently at an airport, with, no doubt, the parking costs being paid for by the Government as well, comes outside the parliamentary vote. I am very sure that members who have trucks with advertising slogans on them parked in airport car-parks at parliamentary expense\u2014the slogans are not advocating policy but are promoting the members; they are politicking\u2014will be glad that this bill goes through and validates expenditure back to the last election. Because if it does not, there is further trouble afoot and further uncertainty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003EThat uncertainty will go through to Christmas, because members of Parliament who continue to run businesses will put out advertising circulars for their businesses with their names prominently displayed in a way that overlaps their political advertising. Of course, we would not encourage that, because one should not profit from one\u2019s actions as a member of Parliament. But when one appears prominently on a phone book cover in relation to one\u2019s business activity, with one\u2019s \u201CMP\u201D sign alongside one\u2019s name, on a similar advertising slogan in a similar place, the confusion is very easy. The confusion is now profound because no one knows where the cut-off point is. [Interruption] Listen to the brays! We have to have some clarity; otherwise, we could again have Lockwood Smith disporting his body for the world to see on his Christmas card or his calendar. I do not know what the point is in displaying the body perfect of Lockwood Smith on his calendar or Christmas card, but I am sure that if he had a photograph taken of himself with his logo on his chest, and put it on his calendar, then it would be approved. At least, his chest would carry something of merit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003EAnyway, I support this bill. I support the title of the bill. I support its immediate commencement, so that we will all know where we stand, and will spend our money legitimately\u2014not confusing our political activities with our business activities, not trying to rip off the public by spending money illegitimately to make private profit. If we are going to spend parliamentary money, let us have clear rules, let us know where we stand, and let those rules start tomorrow. I support the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022 data-id=\u00226f9d03ddad174638b56f68e95a47e9ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226f9d03ddad174638b56f68e95a47e9ba\u0022\u003ECHESTER BORROWS (National\u2014Whanganui):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak to the title and commencement clauses of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. It surprises me that the term \u201Cmoney-laundering\u201D is not in there, because that is exactly what is going on here. Here is money that has been unlawfully appropriated and we are putting it right by passing this legislation today\u2014I am expecting it will be passed, given the voting record of those who have shown their flag earlier in the day, and no doubt it will happen again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003ELet us look at ways other people appropriate money\u2014in the Crimes Act, for instance. There used to be a crime called theft by misappropriation. That was when people were given money for a certain purpose and they used it to do something else. That was a misappropriation. Well, some people would say if we are given money to complete our duties as members of Parliament and we use if for something else\u2014campaigning, maybe\u2014that is theft by misappropriation. There was another crime called theft as a servant. That was where someone employed by an organisation or a person used money, without authorisation, to do something else that was not in line with the immediate task. In 2002, the Crimes Amendment Bill renamed this to \u201Ctheft by a person in position of trust\u201D. I think that pretty clearly defines what has been going on here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EIt was interesting to hear Steve Chadwick, the member for Rotorua, say that the public are calling out for this validating legislation. I challenge her\u2014or any of her colleagues\u2014to name one member of the public who is not a card-carrying or pledge card - carrying member, or a relative of a member, of the Labour Party, who actually wants this legislation to go through. It is my contestation that nothing that this legislation does is wanted by the public. It will not change the public\u2019s perception of what has happened here at all. If members look at the New Zealand Herald website and some of the letters to the editor received by that newspaper over recent times, they will see that this point is made very, very clearly. Nothing that is done in this House today will do anything to enhance the public\u2019s perception of what goes on in this debating chamber. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EHere is a reader\u2019s view: \u201CThis is an absolute outrage! This corrupt, desperate Government who\u2019s only interested in retaining power at all costs has no option but to call a fresh election. If not, its a sad day for democracy. The worry is, is what spin will they put on this to weasel their way out of it.\u201D I thank Mr John Middleton for that contribution. Here is another: \u201CHolding another election is what is needed now. Enough of all the \u2018spin\u2019 - which is really another name for lies and deceit. Obviously, the Government, trying to be very clever, has us down as being totally naive easily manipulated.\u201D Bang on, I say to Mr Ian Findlay from Auckland. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003EThe point is that once members have been sitting over on the Government benches for as long as that Government has, they tend to think they have a right to be there and that they can bend the rules any which way they want in order to ensure that they can stay there. I ask members to look at the two different ways that the overspending has been received by the various parties in this House. On this side of the House, there was a cock-up. We said \u201COops\u201D, we had made a cock-up. We self-reported it and paid the money back\u2014just like that. What happened on the other side of the House? Members on the other side said: \u201CNo, we didn\u2019t, we haven\u2019t broken any rules, and stuff you, Jack, we\u2019re not going to pay it back.\u201D But what happened then? Now they are saying: \u201COops, well, we will, but the reason why we overspent was\u2014hang on, a minute\u2014no, it wasn\u2019t, it was that reason there.\u201D It was everybody else\u2019s fault but the Government\u2019s. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225f1453f8-c44e-4ce6-b699-64d600322276\u0022\u003ELet us see what Mr Ron Bruce has to say about that: \u201CTo over-spend $760K of our taxpayer money to get re-elected the Labour Party has to be either stupid or crooked. In either case, it\u2019s not fit to continue running the country - we need someone in capable in charge.\u201D That is a really good point. Someone has to be naively stupid or malicious to do what this Government has done. When an innocent person makes a mistake, what happens? The person says: \u201COops, sorry about that, I\u2019ll pay for the damage I have done and I\u2019ll try really hard not to do it again.\u201D What this legislation does is try to make right something that can never be put right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022 data-id=\u002246b11b6181b142f595e67752b514bd80\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002246b11b6181b142f595e67752b514bd80\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN (National\u2014Napier):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to take a call on the title of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. It was interesting to note that my colleague from across the floor Mr Fairbrother was having a crack at me about the current spending in my electorate. I go back to last year\u2019s election campaign, because the rules were made clear to me. As a new candidate coming into the election process, I was told from day one that the rules changed 90 days out from the election. After that time one could not spend over $20,000 at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003ESo what happened? I got into a seat that in 1999 had a Labour majority of 11,800 votes. In 1999 the loyal member, Mr Geoff Braybrooke, had a majority of 11,800 votes. Then what happened? Anne Tolley came along in 2002. Despite probably not the best performance from National over a period of time, and a party vote of 20-odd percent, Mr Fairbrother\u2019s majority dropped from 11,800 to 4,500. I thought that at the 2005 election, after his being in office for 3 years, the result would be interesting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EOn the Thursday prior to the election Mr Fairbrother was asked in a radio interview whether he was confident of retaining the seat of Napier. He said: \u201CYes, I am confident. I will retain it with the margin of 4,500.\u201D Anyway, when it came around to Saturday, what happened?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f528154c941d4f149288f41a12d16a00\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: What happened?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f42e75a76a4e46c9a6aae3a694f11687\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, unfortunately, he lost. The majority is now 3,600, give or take a few. It would have to be one of the all-time excellent performances from a Labour candidate, to go from an 11,800 majority to a 3,600 vote loss\u2014a turn-round of 15,400 votes inside 3 years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003ELet me tell members how fair it was going into the election. Did I have a painted office when I went into the election? No. Did I have three staff paid by the Parliamentary Service working for me? No. Did we have a parliamentary budget of $60,000 at that point in time? No. Did I have the benefit of 3 years in office? Did we have the Deputy Prime Minister of the country living in our electorate? [Interruption] We did, yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ec2514502344e98974a08c9cc104622\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: But that\u2019s not an advantage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f1f129a9ab44c3da9e0baff6c3e8116\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. On top of that, we now find out, down the track, that this party across the Chamber had an additional $14,000 per electorate put into it to help it win the seat of Napier. That is a fact. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EI will tell members what happened a number of times out at the Eastern Institute of Technology campus. What were Labour\u2019s people handing out by the hundreds?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f99bcf9e-1ad4-4ed4-9a97-1cccb5b1e11a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aafa9848e26d49e8b140ce12c8730495\u0022\u003EDr Jackie Blue\u003C/span\u003E: Pledge cards?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c1e800251894585bd98abbf0530b8c8\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, they were handing those out, as well. It was red pens\u2014as referred to in the Auditor-General\u2019s report\u2014with the Parliamentary Service logo written all over them. There were hundreds and hundreds of them, and that is a fact. But it was not only that; there were also the newsletters put out in the electorate by Mr Barker and Mr Fairbrother. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003EElectioneering is about being fair. I accept that there are rules leading into the last 90 days before the election. In the last 90 days before the election we were allowed to spend $20,000, and we stuck clearly within those rules. Members opposite broke the rules and that came home to roost with a change in the seat of Napier. I remind Labour members, because their colleague is keen to stand again at the next election and to front up and take me on, that in 1999 their majority was 11,800\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5bd61cd44e247db9b82b33296cba397\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: To Labour?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264327f04a4074a5dab6e936fd2b4a036\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: To Labour. In 2002 there was a majority of 4,500 to Labour. In 2005 it was a loss to Labour of 3,600\u2014a turn-round of 15,400. Do we know of anyone else in the history of the Labour Party who has been able to achieve that feat? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223bc0acb52701454bbffe3fa998f6af5e\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Imagine how well you would have done if they hadn\u2019t cheated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221368ba6c-25be-40f6-a2a0-8f81e1f78b79\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222335cc5366ea46a29d403d753000611a\u0022\u003ECHRIS TREMAIN\u003C/span\u003E: Exactly! Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022 data-id=\u0022acc1124950a447e8981bc4c461222432\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022acc1124950a447e8981bc4c461222432\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES (National\u2014Wairarapa):\u003C/span\u003E Madam Chairperson, it was impossible to hear your call or your comments. I say to the Committee this afternoon that the pledge card money that the Labour Government has stolen from the taxpayer simply represents the pollution of politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221356db62594b4861b66dae0c944c3094\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Hallelujah, brother!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b01ba14b910640d8836596bc6007ed74\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is time that Madam Pettis went back to Wanganui, where the people voted her out. She should stop wasting their money because, along with her party, she has done nothing but tread water this year. It is time that the Labour Government\u2019s mocking of the Auditor-General ceased and that, instead, the political establishment acknowledged the realities of our community. My phone has been going hot all of this week with calls from Dannevirke, Eket\u0101huna, Porangahau, Ngaw\u012B, Greytown, Martinborough, and Masterton. The phone has been going red hot and people have been saying: \u201CJohn, ask the Governor-General to dissolve Parliament, because the Labour Party and its supporting parties are thieves. They have stolen our money and we want to see the back of them.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e727e745245444c98bcccb698eaef239\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I do not mind what the member on his feet actually says, but if he starts calling people thieves he is inviting trouble. I object, I take offence at it, and I ask him to withdraw and apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022847ab5a91480410d93427b440ed7de41\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bdb92226ac0a4576a048edd5292e3a99\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, please be seated. As that member has taken offence at being called that, will the member please withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee3e87b5127441bf9e9699cb6d1c53cc\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise, but I would just like to say to you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dd1c3d98ec2b470ea2ce4853a2bc6b7d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, please be seated. I remind the member that when a member is asked to withdraw and apologise he does that alone and nothing else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217320edbc6484ce4b29a55a60b74ee3f\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise. The people of my electorate consider the governing party of this country to have stolen their money. Their view is backed up by the Auditor-General. In any Oxford Dictionary, taking someone else\u2019s money is called theft, and that is what has been going on here. So I call on the Labour Government to resign and allow a new election because that is what the people of my electorate want. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003EI am reminded of the words of Oliver Cromwell when he addressed the Rump Parliament on 20 April 1653. He said\u2014[Interruption] I would like Mr Duynhoven to have the decency to listen to me. Oliver Cromwell said to his Parliament, and I am repeating it here because it has major application today: \u201CYou have sat for too long for any good you have been doing \u2026 Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!\u201D. That is what my electorate is saying to the Labour Government\u2014just what Oliver Cromwell said to Parliament in 1653. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003EOf course, our Prime Minister disagrees with this view. She claims that allegations of corruption are intolerable in a Western democracy. What my electorate is concerned about is the way in which Helen Clark and her administration have tried to shut down dissent: through shouting from the former member for Whanganui, through intimidation, and through vilification of their opponents. She has tried to put down the Auditor-General and she has tried to intimidate him. I congratulate him on standing his ground and I congratulate my colleagues on supporting him. Ultimately, honesty will come through in this business. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003EThe Labour Government has tried to move the argument from issues around whether it took the money and spent it improperly; it has tried to blame the Exclusive Brethren. Hitler did that with the Jews and it was a very totalitarian policy to follow. I have to say, sitting in this Chamber, that there is a whiff of totalitarianism in the air and I will stand against it. Trying to silence the critics of this Government by shouting at them, or by trying to portray them as illegitimate or illegal, is in my view a very stupid thing to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E There is huge resistance in my electorate to what this Government has done. People want the Government to be held accountable. They want an election now, and they are completely flabbergasted at the action that we have been engaged in over the last 2 days. Parliament is being forced to pass retrospective legislation to allow an amount of $760,000-odd to be justified. None of the people in my community, if they break the law, can go to a court or to a parliamentarian and ask that the law be changed because they made a mistake.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u002231194e286b8c453b9fa56e3fa5735bcd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002231194e286b8c453b9fa56e3fa5735bcd\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I have listened to the debate with interest on the radio and here in the House today. I heard Dr Mapp talk about a speeding fine. He said that if one gets a speeding fine, one pays the ticket. It is interesting to consider that analogy a little further, because here the true analogy is that the traffic has been driving on the road since 1989, thinking that it knew what the rules were. Everybody on the road thought he or she knew the rules. Then, suddenly, the people charged with enforcing and interpreting the rules came out with a new interpretation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ae2b7233e34142deb434c117e9426be2\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I am sorry to interrupt my colleague, but the last speaker objected stridently to the noise in the Chamber. We are getting a barrage of noise from members on the Opposition side, including noise from people who are not sitting in their own seats, and the member who just spoke is himself one of those who are being very noisy right now. I wonder whether you could pull him back to order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022839f7ab8529541589efbdaba509948ad\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The noise level and the interjection level were certainly too high during the last few minutes of that speech. I just ask members to be considerate of, and respectful to, the person who is speaking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224fa33c8b1d674d6e84535cc12a919107\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL\u003C/span\u003E: So we found that the drivers of all the vehicles on the road, except for the Progressive one, were unable to say that they had complied with the rules. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EIn that situation, the analogy that Dr Mapp has used is actually quite a useful one. What does one do when the enforcement agency changes the rules that everybody thought they understood, and all but the Progressive party did not manage to comply with those rules, according to the new and novel interpretation of them? Of course, one goes back to the rule-making body and gets some clarification. One makes sure that protection is provided for the staff of the Parliamentary Service and of Ministerial Services, and for MPs, who, in good faith, have been following since 1989 the rules as they understood them. One provides some protection for those people so that they are not liable, having acted in good faith and having tried to interpret the rules that everyone except the Progressives got wrong at the last election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EIn light of the novel interpretation of the rules, of course we need to have validating legislation. Of course we need to say that people who followed what they understood to have been the rules since 1989 will not incur civil liability. That is the way to go. Otherwise, we would create an untenable situation for the people who have acted in that way since 1989. They cannot, and should not, be blamed for having obeyed traffic rules that were suddenly changed on them. That would result in chaos, and it would be stupid. The bill takes account of the reality that the laws were changed while people were driving, and that that put at risk everything the drivers are doing now. Let us face it, not only is the bill necessary to validate what has been done since 1989 but also it is needed to make sure there is clarity as to what we and our staff should be doing now. We should not put them in the gun and at risk through the novel interpretation of the rules. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe bill validates the actions taken in good faith by MPs and their staff. It is the appropriate way to go. It gives 14 months for there to be a proper, an open, and a transparent consultation as to what the rules should be, going forward. It means that no one ought to be in this position at the next election. Instead, there ought to be a proper and well-understood set of laws for people to follow. That will be a very good thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe traditional objection to retrospective legislation just does not apply here. The traditional objection to retrospective legislation is, of course, that it has the ability to impose penalties on people who did not know that what they were doing at the time was wrong. That is why retrospective legislation is objectionable in principle. But this legislation does exactly the opposite of that. This legislation provides that people will not be liable for following what were thought to be the rules at the time by everybody except the Progressives. It saves people from liability. It is an appropriate exercise. This is one of the rare occasions when it is appropriate to legislate retrospectively, because instead of trying to impose a liability the bill removes one, for the avoidance of doubt. And it provides for a period, going forward, in which we can actually get the rules right, so that this sort of situation does not arise again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThis is very good legislation, and I commend it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022 data-id=\u0022ddca0b85f27541e0ad13d786adaca13a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ddca0b85f27541e0ad13d786adaca13a\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022be322dd4b300402982f5225970628368\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022be322dd4b300402982f5225970628368\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to be able to take a call in this debate because I think the Labour members have been missing one very important point. Actually, they have been missing the truth the whole way through, but here is the key point. They are claiming they did not know. They are claiming they went along with the rules the way they were. They thought it was OK and now it has all turned to custard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EActually, that is not right. The Chief Electoral Officer, David Henry, both phoned and wrote to the Labour Party several weeks before the last election and said that if it went ahead with the pledge card, doing it on the leader\u2019s budget would make the spending illegal\u2014although I do not think David Henry was too fussed about that side of it\u2014and it would be accountable expenditure. He told Labour very clearly not to do it. So when Labour members come into this House, shedding all the crocodile tears they can and saying they did not know it was wrong, as it is how the rules have always been, why do they not mention David Henry\u2019s letter? David Henry has gone. I would not be surprised if Kevin Brady were not around for much longer, either. Labour will get rid of anybody who stands in its way. But that is what David Henry said. I challenge the Minister in the chair, Dr Cullen, to say whether that letter existed and whether that was what Labour was told. There is not a mutter, not a murmur, not a whisper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003ESo Labour members should not come into Chamber shedding crocodile tears and saying they did not know. They did know, and they went ahead and did it anyway. They stole the election. They became the illegitimate Government of this country, and now, like some Horn of Africa flight lieutenant who has taken over a country, they have decided to pass some legislation to legitimise their illegitimacy. It is absolutely unbelievable. It is unprecedented in the history of this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThen we have the member for Rotorua running what I think is the best line I have heard. This is a Tui ad. She says that the public want this legislation. Let me share with my colleagues the latest numbers from the Stuff poll. Here is the poll question: \u201CShould a bill validating illegal spending by political parties be passed?\u201D. Members should listen to the numbers. First, 13.8 percent say \u201CYes\u201D. That is probably the Labour Party membership plus a few of its cronies. How about this number: 84.7 percent of the public say \u201CNo\u201D. So we have the \u201Cin touch with the public polls\u201D Steve Chadwick telling us that the public want this. She is right\u201413.8 percent of the public do, and 84 percent think that this bill is legitimising corruption, cheating, and crookedness. I do not know why members on the Labour side of this Parliament have not learnt the first law of politics, which says\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224029b198-a7b2-4eea-867c-79ef46cafeb9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c8f062d466c543b0b5a085c8064d406a\u0022\u003EHon Dover Samuels\u003C/span\u003E: The first law is \u201CDon\u2019t listen to Maurice Williamson!\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3928c8c92ba440ab44e9cd4844d1313\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON\u003C/span\u003E: I say to Dover Samuels that he could really learn from this one. The first law of politics says: \u201CWhen you are in a hole, stop digging.\u201D So when Kevin Brady came out with his initial draft, Labour members could easily have deflected it. They could have said that they had a draft that suggested there may be some problems, that they would watch with interest until the final report came out, and that if the final report stayed with that finding, then they would most certainly comply. That is the way they could have handled this situation, and there would have been almost no ammunition from this side of the House to fire at them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EBut what did the self-appointed strategist Pete Hodgson say? He said: \u201CWe won\u2019t pay this money back.\u201D I saw him on TV and heard him on radio saying that. Members will love what Mr Hodgson said next: \u201CI was not authorised to say that.\u201D He was the chief strategist, he was put up by Helen Clark, and he said he was sent there by Helen Clark to represent her on breakfast TV. But then he said he was not authorised to say that. So every time we hear him answer a question in the House from now on, we will have to check with the Speaker whether the member was authorised to answer it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThis is an absolute outrage. Labour knows it, and it should have done something about it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u002224d912d37fc94d3186c5993a985b1563\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224d912d37fc94d3186c5993a985b1563\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I refer you to Standing Order 85(1), \u201CDisorderly conduct\u201D. It states: \u201CThe Speaker may order any member whose conduct is highly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the House during the period (up to the remainder of that day\u2019s sitting) that the Speaker decides.\u201D On a number of occasions I have been booted out of the Chamber and not allowed back in until the following day\u2014it was most probably my own fault. Having said that, I point out that one of the members of this House was asked to leave the Chamber earlier on today, and that member is now back in the Chamber. I ask you for some direction, Madam Chairperson. Did you allow that member to come back into the Chamber, or is there a new Standing Order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cebf0991a92a46ccb60dac2053beb142\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: No, there is not a new Standing Order. The member is quite incorrect. The Chairperson makes a decision about when a member will come back. That decision is communicated to the Serjeant-at-Arms, and the whips ask when that will be. So the member can ask his whip at any time when a member who has been sent from the Chamber can come back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022 data-id=\u0022401ab71763f7422eb2ee76e393c27d49\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022401ab71763f7422eb2ee76e393c27d49\u0022\u003EHon TAU HENARE (National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I will not dispute your ruling. Am I right in saying you have allowed the Hon Dover Samuels back into the Chamber after he was kicked out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221d421ab5efa4233a77c46b9dcef322d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member can check with his whip about this matter. That is the correct procedure to find out when, as decided by the Speaker, a member who has been sent out of the Chamber can come back. Obviously, all circumstances differ. Yesterday the members stayed out for only half an hour, because of the circumstances and the point that Mr Brownlee raised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u00220f79d704e5c64a74b05beb1aa6bf8ff4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f79d704e5c64a74b05beb1aa6bf8ff4\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Minister of Corrections):\u003C/span\u003E I have been in this House for a number of years, but I do not think I have ever heard so much hypocrisy spoken in this House for so long. A few facts need to be laid on the table. The Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill validates expenditure that the Auditor-General has deemed to be illegal. The question is which parties spent illegally, according to the Auditor-General\u2019s report. If we listened to the garbage coming from the National Party members, we would think that they did not spend outside of the law. They did. If we listen to and accept the Auditor-General\u2019s report, as we have done, we find that that report says the National Party spent money outside the law, in the same way that every party, other than the Progressives, did. So this bill will validate money spent by the National Party, by New Zealand First, by the Greens, and by the Labour Party\u2014all the parties in this House except for the Progressive party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI have a couple of questions. It is not good enough for National Party members to say they did not sin; the Exclusive Brethren might tell them to say that, but National, like every party in the House other than the Progressives, spent money illegally. The question is what did National members do. Well, they were the first ones to admit guilt, because, after a leaked report, they rushed to pay back money they had spent illegally. Labour Party members gave due consideration to the process, and awaited the outcome of the Auditor-General\u2019s final report. We got the report, and we have committed to paying back the money, in the same way that the National Party did. However, the facts are that the money was spent illegally\u2014according to the Auditor-General\u2014 because of confusion. We need to move to clarify the confusion, because it might lead to further spending of this nature in the future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI need to ask a couple of questions. Why did the National Party spend so little, when other parties were confused in the same way National was, and Labour spent a lot more? Well, National members will say that they knew the law better than Labour Party members did, and that they were far more astute than we were. Well, if they were more astute, and if they did know the law better, the question I have for Dr Don Brash is why he did not work out that GST was due on National\u2019s broadcasting budget. Dr Don Brash probably provided tens, if not hundreds, of reports to Governments that related to GST and its effect in this economy. Yet Dr Don Brash says he knew the law better than the Labour Party did, and that is why National spent so little. But I say to Dr Brash that National spent the money illegally though, did it not? Yes, he admits it. His party needs this bill as much as any party in the House does. The question is why the National Party spent so little when other parties spent so much. It is because National had money from the Exclusive Brethren\u2014it did not rely on this money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI understand that National is expecting interest to be paid on the money parties are to pay back. Well, the next question is whether National paid interest on the money that it paid back. The other question I have for Don Brash is whether National not only paid the interest on the $11,305 but also paid the GST on it, or did Don Brash forget about the GST in the same way he tried to kid us that he forgot about GST when it came to expenditure on the broadcasting budget? Let us see some consistency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217dd67df0e8c4569b8e386dd4ef49948\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Get the facts right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b979c490e624ec0b3102d5a8dd8a2f6\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: The facts are that this bill validates expenditure by all parties in this House, including that of the National Party, and it will provide us with a clear way forward so that MPs spend money legally, and so that we know the guidelines and the parameters for that expenditure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022 data-id=\u00227f2cef2e5e7343b2ba61d7a5f2a1f019\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227f2cef2e5e7343b2ba61d7a5f2a1f019\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e116816ddcd54ac3a2065622c4612983\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 67\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000639\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Jonathan Coleman to clause 1 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000640\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201CAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation)\u201D, and substitute the words \u201CAppropriation (Validation of expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service that may have been outside the scope or purpose of an appropriation or other enactment)\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222dd3bd4815df42c99e40717f9461169a\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000641\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chester Borrows to clause 1 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000642\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201CAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation)\u201D, and substitute the words \u201CAppropriation (Validation of illegal election campaign spending)\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022dd653a888db943f6bbe54c93f8221e21\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000643\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of David Bennett to clause 1 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000644\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201CAppropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation)\u201D, and substitute the words \u201CAppropriation (Validation of unlawful expenditure of Parliamentary monies for the purposes of electioneering)\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224fbc0bcf9e3744bbbc989bdbee44a0ff\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022767fcf7416ab4c93ace054bedb90cca7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022767fcf7416ab4c93ace054bedb90cca7\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The following amendments in the names of Dr Jackie Blue and Paula Bennett to clause 1 are ruled out of order because they are not serious amendments. The next two amendments in the name of Jo Goodhew are also ruled out of order because they are not serious amendments. The following amendments, in the names of Jacqui Dean, Nathan Guy, Craig Foss, and John Hayes, are all ruled out of order because they are not serious amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022 data-id=\u002224110bfd4b5d4030a236902490e3c7d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002224110bfd4b5d4030a236902490e3c7d6\u0022\u003EJOHN HAYES (National\u2014Wairarapa):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. Could you please explain why my amendment has been ruled out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022306259039e4c4d66abac61ef9dc6c3ef\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022306259039e4c4d66abac61ef9dc6c3ef\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: If the member refers to the Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 Rulings, he will see the rulings that have been given on the title clause.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EThe amendment in the name of Chris Auchinvole to clause 1 is ruled out of order because it is not a serious amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022c0304e714dce4970a1d3c17c35c0ba2e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 1 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 52\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f471c5a877334a3bbcc091b12cdcfcf5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I just remind members there should be silence when votes are being taken. It is very hard on the Clerk if we cannot hear because of chatter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chris Tremain to clause 2 be agreed to:\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C19 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229e95b4260398488b8388810c49e2b5d3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000652\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Nicky Wagner to clause 2 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000653\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C20 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022fbabfe4fbd2542a3ad67c27a3856edab\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000654\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000655\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Kate Wilkinson to clause 2 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000656\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C20 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002296baf3178df24df09b79a95c064dcd98\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000657\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chris Auchinvole to clause 2 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000658\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C22 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224f993eddf3144be4abc04c94caa9d097\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 71\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000659\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of David Bennett to clause 2 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000660\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C23 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022fc99ae2433d84eaa99e91d19c473837e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000661\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Jackie Blue to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000662\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C24 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00226bf47662549c43e393e387d342dc95b8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000663\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Chester Borrows to clause 2 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000664\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C25 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229b841909f12e4fccaf61a4bc3cd23ccb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000665\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Dr Jonathan Coleman to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000666\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C26 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a43acd8dca474ccd811d8537a18794e1\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote  was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000667\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Jacqui Dean to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000668\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C27 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022971ce97a0665462aaa904892c794812e\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000669\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Craig Foss to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000670\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C28 October 2006.\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002293fcc36891fd4ff3bf5593b9341cbbbb\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000671\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Nathan Guy to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000672\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C29 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e297519642914cdcad50b3400b7640fa\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000673\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Colin King to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000674\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201C30 October 2006\u201D.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022bc41b7f9e44e4c9586f5d6ede974e2de\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u00220a76fbba73174b8f90dcca6dd88cb4e8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a76fbba73174b8f90dcca6dd88cb4e8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The next amendment is in the name of Simon Power.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d8c7c784f854d1c8791294fbb8a2882\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I have two amendments to clause 2 in my name. Just as a point of clarification, is the Committee to vote on the amendment that would require confirmation from the Auditor-General that moneys have been repaid before validation? Is that this clause?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc148b9fb02e4a15b2f401d3010bee94\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc148b9fb02e4a15b2f401d3010bee94\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I will read the first amendment. This clause 2 amendment is to omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D and substitute the words \u201Cthe day after the date of the return of the writs in the next general election after the date on which this Bill receives the Royal assent\u201D, in the name of Simon Power. That is the first one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Simon Power to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201Cthe day after the date of the return of the writs in the next General Election after the date on which this bill receives the Royal assent\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f2345140f66348fa8bbb612302ec22fc\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 48\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd217c24f1ef4cd181904074a89d06c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd217c24f1ef4cd181904074a89d06c5\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The next amendment to clause 2 in the name of Simon Power is out of order. It refers to an indeterminate event, not to a specified time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00227d0756aadac945bf9bfbb260d0e6e0be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227d0756aadac945bf9bfbb260d0e6e0be\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. This is a sincere point of order\u2014not that there is any other sort of point of order. How is the date on which the Auditor-General reports to the House that all parties have paid back the moneys they owe before the validating legislation takes effect, an indeterminate point in time? That is a very determinate point in time. The point in time is when the Auditor-General reports back to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b29c70729ef4ed6a0501b71aa9541e6\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: If the member refers to Speaker\u2019s ruling 106/6, he will see that it talks quite clearly about amendments or parts of amendments that are too vague and therefore out of order. This amendment has been ruled out of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00220f27da03fb1c46a2b5e507238464950c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f27da03fb1c46a2b5e507238464950c\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. Speaker\u2019s ruling 106/6 refers to amendments or parts of amendments that are too vague. I would have thought that if the amendment required the moneys to be repaid prior to validation, then indeed, in my submission, it would be a vague amendment. This amendment requires the moneys to have been repaid, and for the Controller and Auditor-General to have reported to Parliament that those moneys have been repaid, prior to validation occurring. There is nothing vague about the requirement of that amendment. In fact, it was drafted very carefully to ensure that a specific act triggered a point at which validation could occur, for the very reason of avoiding any difficulties of the vagaries that would otherwise have been the case, had the inclusion of the reference to the date on which the Auditor-General reported not been included. I ask respectfully that you take advice and reconsider that ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u00222ecfb58b3fb944789070521447362d89\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222ecfb58b3fb944789070521447362d89\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I urge you to read Speaker\u2019s ruling 106/6 carefully. It provides a good example of a vague amendment, which proposes that local authorities should have \u201Csuch resources as would enable them to engage adequate services and to operate adequate technical facilities,\u201D, etc. I can understand why that would be ruled out of order for the reason you have outlined in this case. Mr Power, though, has made it very clear that a very precise process is laid out in his amendment. It has been established in that way for a particular reason. I put it to you that it would be quite wrong, in relation to the Speaker\u2019s ruling, for you to rule it out of order for that reason.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff29a13867954c34b9ac4a1ea9e6b8de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff29a13867954c34b9ac4a1ea9e6b8de\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E An example of exactly the same nature immediately leaps to mind. It would negate the view that this particular amendment is vague. How is it that legislation can refer to the date on which Royal assent is given, when no specific date relates to that particular action? The requirement in my amendment that the Auditor-General report to the House that moneys have been repaid before validation occurs, thereby triggering the validation, has the same, if not more, specificity as the act of the Governor-General giving assent to a bill. There is no difference between those two descriptions, in relation to the need to have a specific action or date occur. Thousands of pieces of legislation run through this House with the commencement date of each being \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D. This clause was designed specifically with that level of trigger in mind.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00224d2b83be8ade40b3b3a149ae78474238\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224d2b83be8ade40b3b3a149ae78474238\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E In respect of that last point, of course, I tell the member that \u201Cwhen the Royal assent is given\u201D is simply another way of saying \u201Cas soon as the formal processes are completed\u201D. The bill has to be checked for consistency and accuracy, and it then goes to the Governor-General for approval\u2014that is, if the process is not held up; that is as quickly as it can be done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EI think the Opposition has got itself into a slight problem. It has been arguing all the way through this debate that it has no assurance about when the money will be refunded. Having stated all the way through the debate that there is an uncertainty about when the money will be refunded, Opposition members are now trying to argue for some certainty about the date on which the money will be refunded.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EI suggest that the member Simon Power might care to try his luck with the Committee\u2014given that the ruling is quite clear and consistent with the Standing Orders\u2014by seeking leave to have the amendment put, in any case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00224b90dfedd88b47e98da851248321a0f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b90dfedd88b47e98da851248321a0f0\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I thank the Leader of the House for that suggestion. On that basis, I seek leave for my second amendment, the one the Chairperson has just called, to be put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u002290d81809d05e492d9a84e10221ff6029\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002290d81809d05e492d9a84e10221ff6029\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u00229db22705b9c442a8a432794a81db0077\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229db22705b9c442a8a432794a81db0077\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. As the leave has been denied by the person who suggested that leave be put, I now require you to rule on the point relating to the Governor-General\u2019s assent being a similar trigger to that described in my amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac85ba33ce6f434e9a597d3112479df2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac85ba33ce6f434e9a597d3112479df2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s previous amendment provided a particular time. There will be a general election, and the date will be fixed for the return of the writ\u2014that is clear; there is a date there. But no such fixed event can be associated with this amendment; there is no requirement for the Auditor-General to report on those matters and, therefore, no determinate time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022d6bc1cb1089945ca89dd7c1830ec2d6d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d6bc1cb1089945ca89dd7c1830ec2d6d\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. I seek your further clarification. Is there a requirement that the Governor-General assents?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00229ccb726f3ed5447da126073dd234f58d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229ccb726f3ed5447da126073dd234f58d\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Since 1707. I think I can say it is pretty well established now, yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b26bd187c32a4dd98efec4541e45c9a2\u0022\u003ESimon Power\u003C/span\u003E: Is there a requirement? No, it is only a convention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df59531ee97349b988a904bc5d8ab8ef\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: It is a convention that has lasted now for 299 years. I think it would be an extraordinarily brave Governor-General who broke it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a66e89c913ae4850891dbe2de47d8ec0\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: And it is covered in the Constitution Act, Mr Power.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022df489c2058b145deb5f893447043e9ff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022df489c2058b145deb5f893447043e9ff\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Speaker be recalled to give a ruling on the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a33f3c83846a478e94f8164fc58ad101\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f6c1c632ab264847a5c9529964d1c064\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf28409dcd93423c9c75269425e13059\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf28409dcd93423c9c75269425e13059\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Assistant Speaker, there is a concern from Mr Power that the ruling I have given on one of his amendments to clause 2 is not acceptable. Mr Power\u2019s amendment is: \u201CTo omit \u2018the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u2019 (lines 5 and 6 on page 1) and substitute \u2018the day after the date on which the Controller and Auditor-General reports to Parliament that he has received confirmation that all political parties have repaid to the Parliamentary Service the amounts listed in Figure 2 and Figure 3 on pages 33 and 34 of the report of the Controller and Auditor-General titled \u2018Advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election\u2019 as being expenditure outside the scope of the appropriation.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EI have ruled that it is out of order because it refers to an indeterminate event, not a specified time. Furthermore, to enlarge on that, my advice is that this amendment of Mr Power\u2019s is distinct from his previous amendment to clause 2, which covered a particular time. With regard to the previous amendment, there will be a general election, and, therefore, there will be a fixed date for the return of the writs, but no such fixed event can be associated with the member\u2019s second amendment. That is the point. There is no requirement for the Auditor-General to report on these matters, and, therefore, no determinate time. That was why the amendment was ruled out of order, Mr Assistant Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u002268dea5770df44dfe92015213892150b2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002268dea5770df44dfe92015213892150b2\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E Madam Chairperson has summarised the factual position. She referred me, during the course of her ruling, to Speaker\u2019s ruling 106/6, which states: \u201CAmendments or parts of amendments which are too vague are out of order.\u201D The difficulty I have with the ruling that has been given is that the vagaries that the Chairperson has referred to do not exist in the amendment I have proposed, because a determinate event is outlined in that amendment. That event is the reporting to Parliament\u2014[Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c719e5a01b3424383a27c2f4ce49063\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: There is a point of order on the floor. That means absolute silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205282461959e4925b161920a8543e83b\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014by the Controller and Auditor-General that all political parties have repaid to the Parliamentary Service those amounts listed in figures 2 and 3 on pages 33 and 34 of his report. When that amendment is compared with my previous amendment, which substituted \u201Cthe day after the date of the return of the writs in the next General Election\u201D, one sees that the reason for putting in the reference to the Auditor-General\u2019s report to Parliament was to create the trigger that would actually result in a specific event occurring. It is no different, in my submission, from the situation that has historically been the case in many pieces of legislation, where the commencement date is the day after the Royal assent is given by the Governor-General\u2019s signature. The two events have no specific day, date, or time; nonetheless, they of themselves are actual events that will occur at one point or another. The inclusion of the Auditor-General\u2019s report to Parliament, as the event that triggers that, provides, in my submission, the necessary certainty to make that a determinate event.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003EWe have heard from the Leader of the House that there is no guarantee that the Auditor-General will report. Likewise, it is my contention that a similar uncertainty could exist around assent being given by the Governor-General. On that basis, if we are having an argument about the level of certainty around either of those events occurring, one must be treated much like the other. For the purposes of legislation in this House, the assent by the Governor-General, as a commencement date, has been seen as a definite event and a determinate event. So, too, in my submission, should my amendment be seen in that light\u2014that is, the date that the Auditor-General reports to Parliament that all parties have repaid the amounts owing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00222214c7a118524090b31a8a5baa0bb9bf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222214c7a118524090b31a8a5baa0bb9bf\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Assistant Speaker, that is a very interesting argument, but might I put a couple of contrary arguments to you. The first, of course, is that the procedure for the giving of the Royal assent is laid down under the Constitution Act, so it is an event that must occur. The problem with the member\u2019s amendment is actually quite a fundamental one: there is no requirement upon the Auditor-General to report on this matter, and he cannot now achieve that particular amendment. If there is no requirement, we would be placed in the extraordinary position where if the Auditor-General declined, for whatever reason, to report back on these matters, then the bill would never come into force. That, I think, would be a most unfortunate state of affairs, and one that should not be able to be placed in the hands of a particular individual, in that way. The Governor-General does not have that discretion open to him, under our constitution. There is a fundamental difference between those two things. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u0022b466931300e14bf6a36abc0950da9d12\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b466931300e14bf6a36abc0950da9d12\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E The considerations that have just been outlined to the House by the Leader of the House might be very good reasons why it would be inconvenient indeed for the matter proposed by Mr Power to be put to the Committee and approved by the Committee. But they are not good reasons why a member should be told that his amendment will not be considered by the Committee. I ask that you have a good look at the words in Speaker\u2019s ruling 106/6, which states: \u201CAmendments or parts of amendments which are too vague are out of order.\u201D The purpose of the ruling seems to me to be very clear: it is to make sure that the Committee does not embrace an amendment that is fundamentally meaningless, or about which there might be uncertainty. That provision in the Speakers\u2019 rulings is there to ensure we pass good law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003EThe proposition that Mr Power has put forward is a very straightforward one. It requires that the provisions of this legislation should not come into force until the date on which the Auditor-General has presented a certificate. That is a perfectly straightforward proposition; there is no dispute or argument about it. It might be that the Committee would not want to adopt Mr Power\u2019s amendment; on the previous voting patterns available, it is very likely that the Committee would not want to. But that is no reason why the Committee should not have it within its power to consider the amendment. It is a clear proposal, so there would be no uncertainty about what was before the Committee. I put it to you, Mr Assistant Speaker, that it is quite wrong for the Chair to rule it out\u2014on advice, I admit\u2014when it is clear that the member is putting a proposition about which the Committee would have a very clear choice and could vote accordingly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff0330f501ba4eccb9cff7f079036259\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff0330f501ba4eccb9cff7f079036259\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E Just following on from my colleague, and after listening to the Leader of the House\u2019s view of events, I put this point: this is not a trivial amendment. Many amendments have been considered trivial by the Clerk and by the Committee Chairperson, and those have been, in my opinion, rightly ruled out. This amendment was thought through very carefully, and I submit that the Committee, as the master of this legislation, should have the opportunity to consider by way of a vote what is not in itself a vague amendment. That is all I am seeking. I am not asking for the provision to be included; I am simply asking for the Committee to have an opportunity to vote on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u00223df279f587e5423faa374d5d7cd7d516\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223df279f587e5423faa374d5d7cd7d516\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Having sought some advice on the matter, I tell members that an amendment to a commencement date must provide certainty about when the Act is to come into force. An amendment that relies on an indeterminate event is not in order. The proposed amendment relies on the Auditor-General making a report to the House. There is no requirement for the Auditor-General to report, nor a time set for the report. The member compares the proposed amendment with his amendment providing for the Act to come into effect after the return of the writs. That is a time set by statutory requirements; there is certainty about such a date. The member\u2019s proposed amendment does not provide sufficient certainty. It is therefore not in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2e03d31aeb34480a86aa3a625c36891\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2e03d31aeb34480a86aa3a625c36891\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Your advice gives you, I suppose, confidence to say\u2014as you just have\u2014that the member\u2019s amendment does not provide certainty, and therefore cannot proceed. But where is it stated in our Standing Orders, or anywhere else, that there must be certainty in the way in which you have prescribed it? There is no doubt that the sequence of events would take place, if this amendment were passed by the Committee\u2014 remember that we are asking only why the Committee cannot even consider the amendment; it seems extraordinary that it has been ruled out so quickly. There is a clear sequence of events, and there would be a determined date. Why does this House, apparently, not have the capability to produce a law written in such a way?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae6a54310ac745599999a7dcbc174c65\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae6a54310ac745599999a7dcbc174c65\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Again, a ruling is being questioned. It is perfectly legitimate to call back the Speaker, but now your ruling, Mr Assistant Speaker, is being questioned, which is somewhat ironic in the context of the current debate before the House and the Committee\u2014but it is not for the first time during this process. The point is, of course, that determinacy is not a matter of a specific date but of the fact that that date must occur. There must be an election and the writs must be returned. That is provided for under statute. There is no requirement for the Auditor-General to report. Therefore, if he chose not to, the amendment would mean that nothing would ever happen. That certainly is very vague. It cannot be placed in the hands of an individual, in that fashion, as to whether an Act of this Parliament comes into force. I think that is the point being made. It is not whether it is 7 February or 12 March; it is the fact that there is no certainty about the date occurring, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022a770a6f688e04e1ba98d818310692c8c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a770a6f688e04e1ba98d818310692c8c\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E That is an interesting argument from Dr Cullen, but quite clearly the situation would be an expectation on the Governor-General and, as has been said repeatedly by members on this side, no greater or lesser expectation falls upon the Governor-General to give the Royal assent to any legislation. Dr Cullen is saying that the House cannot even consider this prospect because of his particular reading of this situation. He and others who want to back that suggest that leaving the Auditor-General with some obligation in this matter is somehow unacceptable. Well, this whole legislation is in front of us because the Auditor-General accepted his obligations. To rule out the opportunity for the House even to consider this type of legislation, I think, needs to be rethought.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022 data-id=\u00220cd035a8e0e84c24b57d4249744f5190\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225192f6d3-dca6-43c8-a55e-381e1d7c1225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220cd035a8e0e84c24b57d4249744f5190\u0022\u003EHon MURRAY McCULLY (National\u2014East Coast Bays):\u003C/span\u003E Members will all want to be able to follow the rulings of the Speaker. They often seek guidance from Speakers\u2019 rulings and the Standing Orders to enable themselves to do so. On this occasion\u2014and I am not questioning your ruling, Mr Assistant Speaker\u2014I invite you to provide a written ruling for the House, because the ruling you have just given to us orally goes a step further than Speaker\u2019s ruling 106/6. It adds a requirement for a new criterion to be met for an amendment to be within the Standing Orders. If members are to gain anything from this experience, I suggest it would be helpful if you were to provide a written ruling that can be added to the Speakers\u2019 rulings to give guidance to members in future.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc86528eaedb496cb449ba8978fda469\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc86528eaedb496cb449ba8978fda469\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for his consideration and understanding. I am sure that something along those lines will be considered. In the meantime, I now declare the House back in Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226dc54d9f38f74648b2c7d72008516416\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000719\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022db6546f004334c958bfd4cbb379f870a\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022 data-id=\u0022e780e7d8d575473da360d10ced63fa99\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022803002d1-e810-4bd8-b8e7-2e97d0d6f626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e780e7d8d575473da360d10ced63fa99\u0022\u003ESIMON POWER (National\u2014Rangitikei):\u003C/span\u003E Given what we have just undertaken in the House, I seek leave of the Committee to have my amendment put to the vote forthwith.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e9a3e660d2c74237accd409be28f784a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought for the amendment to be put. Is there any objection? There is not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the following amendment in the name of Simon Power to clause 2 be agreed to: \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003Eto omit the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent\u201D, and substitute the words \u201Cthe day after the date on which the Controller and Auditor-General reports to Parliament that he has received confirmation that all political parties have repaid to the Parliamentary Service the amounts listed in Figure 2 and Figure 3 on pages 33 and 34 of the report of the Controller and Auditor-General titled \u2018Advertising expenditure incurred by the Parliamentary Service in the three months before the 2005 General Election\u2019 as being expenditure outside the scope of the appropriation.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022f940d09fa7a744c49173aa9ce5c0355d\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 50\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 70\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; M\u0101ori Party 3; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8ee2fb14175471bbd5c5d6f28567f3a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The next amendment is to clause 2 in the name of Gerry Brownlee. This one has also been ruled out of order as it refers to an indeterminate event, not a specified time. The next amendment to clause 2 in the name of the Hon Bill English is also ruled out of order as it refers to an indeterminate event, not a specified time. The next amendment to clause 2 in the name of the Hon Murray McCully, to omit and substitute words in this clause, is out of order as it refers to an indeterminate event, not a specified time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e8aee65919084d73a2643dc40e706af4\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That clause 2 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000726\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000727\u0022\u003EBill reported with amendment.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022 data-id=\u0022855202b083594004ac344ffaf12b39e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022855202b083594004ac344ffaf12b39e1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002273c20ee60026427eb86c6b30dc5453d8\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the report be adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022034e945cacf94ef6acdfd0d4774b70a1\u0022\u003EThird Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022cf1d588c755649f584067995294a4128\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cf1d588c755649f584067995294a4128\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a third time. This has been an interesting and mildly lengthy debate. I think it has been to convince us that the National Party logo of the big \u201CN\u201D should be replaced by a big \u201CH\u201D, because throughout this debate National members have failed to answer some pretty important challenges. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EFirst of all, having been challenged time after time, they refused to tell us what the leader of the National Party\u2019s budget was spent on in the 3 months or so before the 2005 election. What was the leader\u2019s budget spent on? Does it meet the Solicitor-General\u2019s test of not being spent on electioneering in any shape or form, because any of it being spent on electioneering takes the whole of it outside the parliamentary processes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe second point is that they failed to explain a whole set of details about other National Party spending. We have had all sorts of wonderful speeches. We had Murray McCully lecturing us about morality and Nick Smith lecturing us about obeying the law and the rule of law. The only man in this House who has been convicted of contempt of court lectured us at length about the rule of law. Then we had Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith forgetting to tell us certain things in a speech in which he got so carried away that he ended up calling his own previous leader, in effect, a dirty, dirty cheat. He said that expenditure on the pledge card in 1999 and 2002 was somehow cheating, forgetting completely\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bfe285a30cf64c5f9d3c96cf606c8ee1\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d47f744c1fc4908a817db5907af4c74\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Well, what is this, I ask Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith? What is it? It is a pledge advertisement from National in 2002\u2014note the parliamentary crest\u2014paid for by Parliamentary Service. Not, of course that Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith has been backward in coming forward in using Parliamentary Service funding. I have a photo of him near naked in the company of a number of near naked young gentlemen, and he seems to be \u201CMr February\u201D on a calendar in 2002. Here he is with Miss Hibiscus Coast 2001\u2014she is the one with the flowers. Apparently, at this stage he was so out of sorts with his colleagues that his office is actually outside the building rather than inside the building and he is sitting at his desk somewhere out on the steps of Parliament. This was all paid for by Parliamentary Service. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003ENone of that would be legitimate under the Auditor-General\u2019s rules because it is clearly promoting Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith and the National Party in terms of its political interest. But, of course, it is all different because it is Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith and he speaks like this: \u201CI think you\u2019re right.\u201D He does that, whereas if we do it in the normal speaking fashion it is perfectly wrong and it is dirt and it is disastrous and it is cheating\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002263776108-58dc-4cab-baf1-95282c61d0de\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e682c0fd5bf74a278720adda390bdcd0\u0022\u003EPaula Bennett\u003C/span\u003E: Because you knowingly broke the rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022018c1a4ada0e4442acc3a5aededee765\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, my gosh! What was that? Oh, it was Paula Bennett. I should have realised. I thought it was Dr Nick Smith grasping himself even more firmly than usual. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThen we had the issue of the GST not being paid, and the National Party\u2019s generous offer to pass legislation so it does not get convicted and have to pay a fine. What a generous offer that was to the House, I thought\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb15c57235fa40d7add5b9fea586e606\u0022\u003EDarren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: From the chairman of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263c8a26fb7d9456b9ec7c6ca88572adc\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014from the chairman of the committee that introduced GST! And what is extraordinary about that, and I repeat it, is that there was no paper trail in terms of the contract for the National Party\u2019s spending in that regard. No written arrangements were entered into and therefore the police could not work out who was responsible, and therefore nobody could be prosecuted. So it is OK, Dr Brash is off the hook anyway, so he can go and pay the money. The police cannot prosecute him. There is nothing to stop him coughing up the $118,000 right now. I am sure a quick whip-round the Exclusive Brethren, wherever they are today, would quickly pay off that $118,000. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EWhat they would not tell us in this debate either, was the price they paid for that $1.2 million from the Exclusive Brethren. What was it? Something about banning parking in one\u2019s neighbours\u2019 driveways if they are not Exclusive Brethren\u2014that sort of strange stuff that the Exclusive Brethren are into? What did Dr Brash promise? Well, I do want to place on record\u2014because this could be quite interesting in not too many weeks\u2019 or months\u2019 time\u2014that Mr Key told the House he had never met the Exclusive Brethren.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258b17520b97a498ba289f7d53181bca6\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: No, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225afd0fe39957419995bc7417ed6e0dea\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Oh yes, I think Mr Key had better look at the Hansard again. He told the House he had not met the Exclusive Brethren, because I challenged him and he interjected and said he had never met them. I think he might want to change that story. He not only met them, he was deep donkey-doo in the process of organising Exclusive Brethren support\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2123c586b2646059dd923e772446012\u0022\u003EDr Don Brash\u003C/span\u003E: Not true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fbda895d79c041c69a937c7344ccc1e2\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: How do we believe Dr Brash, who claimed he had never met them or discussed the pamphlet, then had to admit he did? He claimed that he had not met them, after the election, then he admitted he did. How often does Dr Brash change his story on the Exclusive Brethren? I tell Dr Brash that they are the ones where the women wear the head scarves. They are pretty easy to see. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThis bill is necessary. It is necessary for two reasons. Firstly, it is necessary in order to put the public accounts in proper shape.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ee6ef385bb748b194aaafe7efb61300\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: Say you are sorry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a3416625fbb44fa9b14a9cdd24cee19\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I am not at all sorry for not breaking the law, which is our position. Part 2 is necessary because it clarifies current spending. Just in the last 24 hours a senior member of this House\u2014not in the Labour Party\u2014has been told that his Christmas cards are out of order under the Auditor-General\u2019s ruling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a144b20847da41fdad6f833109bdbe1d\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: That is rubbish.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232057827fccd4113ac145978010b4fbd\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is not rubbish. That is what Mr Brownlee does not understand. He does not understand it. He says that the previous Solicitor-General is talking rubbish, except when he is condemning the Labour Party\u2014then, of course it is absolutely true. Because the Solicitor-General said if there was any taint of electioneering, which he defined very broadly, that tainted the entire expenditure. And if members are sending out Christmas cards, and if Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith is sending out another calendar with himself near naked with another whole bunch of near naked young men\u2014the under-21 surf club from somewhere or other\u2014then that is clearly promoting Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith. I do not know what it is promoting him as, but it is promoting Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith, and in that case there is a taint of electioneering that disqualifies that expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EIf he happens to have rung anybody on his cellphone during the election campaign to discuss a problem that has been raised by that person while he was canvassing\u2014I am sure that has happened; I bet every member of this House has rung back constituents after canvassing, using a telephone\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221207bef3b78f468d836da1b54cd91508\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6144b6a8ad547d88bf0aec13e07fef7\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: No, Dr Mapp does not use a telephone to ring people. He is different from most of us, as one can see from the look on his face. But most of us ring people using a telephone. I tell Dr Mapp that it is a relatively old instrument by now, so he can catch up with it if he wishes. That use of a telephone is electioneering, and that then disqualifies one\u2019s appropriation for the use of that telephone. That is what the Auditor-General\u2019s report implies. That is why it has to be clarified. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EBut the biggest doozy of all was the amendment we finally gave leave to be put, which would have meant between now and some indeterminate date when the Auditor-General finally reported back on people paying back the money, we could spend whatever we like on whatever we like because the bill provides the validation for everything from 1989 through to the passing of the bill. It was an attempt by the National Party to write a blank cheque from here on for months to come, because it was all going to be validated eventually when the Auditor-General finally reported back when the moneys had been fully refunded. That was an interesting, ill-thought-out amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234fd4f550d57495d90568aef7f4e4ecf\u0022\u003EHon Trevor Mallard\u003C/span\u003E: Who moved it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f73f8b503a3e43a7ac7511646bae4fc1\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: That was moved by Mr Simon Power. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003EThe final thing I do need to say is that this has been a wonderful audition for all the pretenders to the National Party leadership. There is no question who won. It was Mr English. I did not agree with what he said, but he was the only one who actually hit home some hard arguments, whereas all the rest completely fluffed it. Mr English still does mock outrage better than anybody else on the National Party front bench.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022 data-id=\u00223f33b5d07ef04520b622217a8f78e1cf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223f33b5d07ef04520b622217a8f78e1cf\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition):\u003C/span\u003E In the last 24 hours we have heard Government speaker after Government speaker trying to defend the indefensible. Professor Bill Hodge of Auckland University has just made it clear that this bill tries to backdate further than any other bill in New Zealand history. He describes it as legally bad, politically bad, and morally bad. That is what he describes this bill as. What we know is that if this bill is passed, there will be no legal obligation on anybody to pay back anything. The Labour Party has said it will pay the money back. But we have seen other commitments by the Labour Party broken and broken again. Helen Clark says that Labour will try to pay it back this financial year. Well, she said that she would try to get New Zealand into the top half of the OECD in a decade. New Zealand First is even worse. It has said it will pay back what is ultimately found to be unlawful. Well, if this bill is passed this afternoon, nothing will be found to be unlawful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EWe attempted to move an amendment making the effectiveness of this bill conditional upon political parties paying back what they owe. As members of this House know, we were denied the opportunity of getting that amendment through. So there will be no legal obligation at all on anybody to pay back anything if this bill is passed. Furthermore, when this bill is passed there will effectively be no limit at all on what taxpayer funds can be used for in electioneering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EThis bill makes it clear that one has to ask explicitly for a vote, ask explicitly for money, or seek explicitly a party membership for one to be electioneering. The pledge card would not qualify as electioneering under that definition. Yet even Pete Hodgson made it clear that of course the pledge card was electioneering. As he said, if it had not been electioneering, Labour would have put out the card the day after the election, but it was put out before the election. The main Labour political strategist said that the pledge card was electioneering.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EThis bill effectively overrides the Auditor-General\u2019s report. The Labour Party has argued that the rules are unclear. We know, from a press statement issued by Pete Hodgson himself on 14 February this year, that \u201Cthe Auditor-General had met extensively with Trevor Mallard and the Prime Minister\u2019s chief of staff in the process of drafting a report on government and parliamentary party advertising.\u201D, in the first half of 2005. The rules were very clear, and the Labour Party knew the rules. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c45a64dc84f944d29d7aa2fccf220a7d\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. I say to members on my right that Speakers\u2019 ruling 57/3 states that interjections should be rare and reasonable. If a member wants to make a speech, then he or she can do so when the time arises. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229aef4837f53948589fac146b4558f444\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: Pete Hodgson made it very clear in February this year that the Labour Party was properly briefed. Mr Hodgson was briefed, Mr Mallard was briefed, and the Prime Minister\u2019s chief of staff was briefed. Labour members knew the rules, yet they flagrantly breached them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EIn fact, the Labour Party has been trying to mislead the public for years. On TV last week Helen Clark said that Labour had never made any attempt to hide the fact that its pledge card was paid for by parliamentary funding. Well, in 1999 the pledge card bore no parliamentary crest, and it was associated with a brochure that said: \u201CThis card was paid for and delivered by Labour supporters.\u201D In the vernacular, that would be called a lie. I am not going to call anyone a liar, because that would be unparliamentary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7d63a7f2d0145f2b00e9fe9048c7682\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: That would definitely be out of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c02432b6937a4f3aad672b4e4599d931\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely! I am not going to do that. But that brochure clearly misled the public. Even the Opposition did not believe that Labour would stoop as low as that. It is clear that the Labour Party has been breaching the rules on parliamentary funding for years. Now that it has been found out, it is simply passing a law to make legal what has heretofore been illegal. It is cynical and self-serving. Labour stole the election by misappropriating taxpayers\u2019 money on a grand scale.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EWorse than that, Labour also breached the law by breaching the legal campaign spending cap that section 214B of the Electoral Act provides for: $2.38 million. Going into the last election the National Party was polling ahead of the Labour Party, and in the last week the Labour Party spent up big. We were puzzled by how it could spend up so big within the electoral cap. We now know that it simply ignored the electoral spending cap. Labour spent up big, in total defiance of the law. It was allowed to spend $2.38 million; we know that it spent in excess of $2.8 million, and almost certainly in excess of $3 million if the expenditure caught by the Auditor-General is correctly attributed to the Labour Party election campaign. The Labour Party stole the election by breaching not one law but two laws. It misappropriated public funds and broke the legal campaign spending limit\u2014it simply ignored it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003ELast week in the Independent newspaper, Chris Trotter made the point that the institutions of the democratic State are fragile. He took the National Party to task for holding the Labour Party to account for its breaching of the law. The Labour Party broke the law by misappropriating taxpayers\u2019 money on a grand scale\u2014by $800,000\u2014and it broke the spending cap by exceeding it by at least $418,000, and almost certainly by much more. This, quite frankly, is an outrage. The assertions about GST made in this House by members of the Labour Party were outrageously dishonest\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e97cac5c0624c71a65a5dc3688d88e0\u0022\u003EHon David Benson-Pope\u003C/span\u003E: Looks like a pretty black kettle to me!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222461389e7bdf4fbeb54cf1456c78de3e\u0022\u003EDr DON BRASH\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014blatantly dishonest, Mr Benson-Pope, because they bore no resemblance to the facts of the matter, at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d48244fc-ceef-4ef5-9cee-851e4d439468\u0022\u003EI conclude by pointing out once again that the Labour Party stole the election. This is a fraudulent, illegitimate Government, and I believe that Helen Clark should go to the Governor-General, offer her resignation, and invite the Governor-General to call a new election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022 data-id=\u0022e0e88aa5cf854fc38c2c20aa4fdd5342\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e0e88aa5cf854fc38c2c20aa4fdd5342\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education):\u003C/span\u003E I do not know whether I am the only one in the House who noticed that this is a third reading debate. The third reading is when Opposition members who have fought their way through the dark of night and are now on their last lap come down to the House. It is when they have done themselves proud and are pumped up. Their leader comes down from his or her office and strides into the House. He or she leads the Opposition into the trenches. The leader gets up and makes a rousing address in the third reading debate, and usually what happens is that the Opposition members feel a little pumped by all that. They feel a little bit like they have done a good job. But I do not know whether I am the only one here who noticed that during that speech by Dr Don Brash it was almost like the life was being sucked out of everybody in the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EAs we tried to listen to a speech made by someone who looked a little like a constipated meerkat, as he bobbed up and down and tried to get some energy into his speech, we could see the leaders-in-waiting working quietly on their own. Bill English had his head down, quietly working, bathing in the praise from Michael Cullen. Mr English was the only one to make an impact during this debate. He did his bit, he led the way, so he could quietly sit and do his work and wait for the day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003ENext to Bill English, with his body turned slightly away from Bill English, was John Key, who has not done a great job in his audition over the last day and a half. He has not passed the audition. He is slightly worried at the success of Bill English in the last day and a half. On the other side of Dr Brash we have beaming Gerry Brownlee, who knows, in a way, that it does not actually matter who is leader, because he will end up OK. Gerry is acquitting himself well, as a person who does points of order and jumps up and down. He knows he will come through when Don goes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EI tell members on the Opposition side of the House\u2014and I challenge members of the National Party to get up and deny this\u2014that that was a life-sucking performance from the National Party\u2019s current leader. Maurice Williamson is like a picture of what goes on in the mind of the National Party. He was sitting there thinking: \u201COh my God, this man has to go.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThe reason National members really needed a good speech from Don Brash was that they have been desperate to run this issue in the last day and a half. I have sat here and wondered why they are so desperate. What is the desperation and hatred for? Why is Gerry so angry? Why has Bill taken extra lessons in being \u201CMr Angry\u201D? What has been driving those members for the last day and a half? Then I thought to myself: \u201CI know why.\u201D [Interruption] I say to Mr Clarkson that I know why. The reason is that the last time National Party members went through this situation, they were trying to character assassinate a number of people in the House. They put extraordinary energy into it. They worked for months on it. They tried so hard to bring people down. But the tactic did not work, so that behaviour stopped. They turned round like some sort of drunk after a party and realised that all that effort had come to nothing. They had put in everything to try to assassinate people\u2019s characters, they had made no impact on the polls at all, they still had the wrong leader, they still had no policy, they were in a position\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a41ec6b533084d59a731418fc1ee44d8\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I refer you to Standing Order 107(1), which states: \u201CAll debate must be relevant to the question before the House.\u201D I know that the third reading is a very wide-ranging debate, but we are actually supposed to be talking about the validation legislation. Not once in the last 5 or 6 minutes have I heard that member mention anything about the bill whatsoever.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252ea08d25bd945c2a890cb4ab07ea37c\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I remind members that points of order are to be heard in absolute silence. That means there will be no noise. Members have been warned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c18c9e288104dc6942f5b87e8a1be60\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: I know that it is a wide-ranging debate, so I seek some guidance from you, Mr Assistant Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223bd1068cf95e400b9587fa26e1d2bfd2\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for raising that point of order, and I will listen intently. I am sure Mr Maharey will come to the point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228672e5c1cb2c4e708465f76e9f4e9f54\u0022\u003EHon STEVE MAHAREY\u003C/span\u003E: As I was saying about the bill, the reason National members have fought it so hard is just fear. They are now left with no issue. As a newspaper said today, now that it is clear what the Auditor-General has said, and now that it is clear that Labour will be refunding money, the air has simply gone out of the issue. No one cares. The National Party has put so much energy into this issue, but the vision has now gone. That is what we are seeing. We are seeing a National Party that knows it has to go back to arguing about the issues. It has to go back to arguing about the leadership of its own party, and that is what is causing the fear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EI will mention three things the National Party might like to do as it considers the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. It might like to think about three things it could tell the country, now that this issue has gone. Firstly, it could go back to saying what is in the trust fund. Can we know what is in that trust fund? Who put money in there, how much was put in there, and what do the donators want for it? Secondly, can we finally have some truth about the Exclusive Brethren? Can we finally have that story? One man alone in this nation can tell us the full story of the Exclusive Brethren, and he needs to tell us. He needs to say on what days he met with the Brethren and what was talked about. He is sitting smiling now. He could tell us if he wants to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThirdly, in contrast to the issues in the validation bill that we are discussing now, Mr Brash might like to tell us about the GST. Is the cheque for $115,000 written out and ready to be passed over? There is no legal impediment whatsoever to paying that $115,000. I can tell\u2014because I am reading Mr Maurice Williamson\u2019s face again; as I said, he provides a picture of the thoughts in the National Party\u2014that the National Party knows it could pay back that GST this afternoon with a little stroke of the pen, so it could validate its own behaviour over the last little while. National broke the law, and it knows that it broke the law. National members are now saying they want to pay that money back. Now that this validation bill is going through and the issues around it have sunk away to nothing, we are looking at what is like a large rock stranded on the beach. I tell Dr Brash to pay the money back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThe other thing members of the National Party might like to do is to simply be grateful. They should be grateful today to the Labour Party and other smaller parties that have worked through this issue. It helps to clear the decks for people like Katherine Rich, whom we admire on this side of the House for her straightforward talking and for the way she has dealt with Dr Brash over the last little while. We admire that kind of behaviour. The National Party should be grateful that we have stuck by the issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EMembers should forget about all the months of leaked reports, debates, posturing, and all the things that have gone on. This is the actual story. We had the election; we had the Auditor-General\u2019s report, which was tabled last week; we have had a response from the Minister responsible, Dr Michael Cullen; and we have learnt that the Auditor-General has changed the definition of parliamentary purpose\u2014what money can be spent for. We have learnt that even if we pay the money back\u2014as National members like to tell us to do\u2014that would not clean up the legal situation. We would still be acting outside the law. Therefore, the Minister responsible has indicated that we should pass validating legislation. National Party members should be grateful that that is exactly what we are doing, because that helps them and everybody else by making legal the spending back to 1989. It also means that Mr Williamson can carry on doing his duties as an MP until the other suggestion of the Minister responsible is put into place. That suggestion is for an external review group to look at how the issue will be dealt with, by the end of next year, so we can then move through the next election campaign smoothly, as we all need to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EThat is why I tell National members to forget all the bluster\u2014this issue is all over, it is done with, and we are going to settle it. I ask them to please show a little bit of gratitude that this has been done on their behalf. I know that it has been hard work for them, but I ask them to be a little grateful that we have hung in there and dealt with the issue for them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022605133aa-6c88-4150-82dd-7d9fcf1824b4\u0022\u003EI leave the National benches with this parting thought. After all this is over and the dust has settled, can National members please pay back the GST? It makes them look dishonest. It makes them look dishonourable. It makes them look as though they cannot be in Government because they do not tell the truth. I tell them to pay the GST back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002251a77af768f842a78cbaffe2a3faa5b5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002251a77af768f842a78cbaffe2a3faa5b5\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I ask members whether they have noticed that neither of the last two speakers attempted to offer any justification for this legislation at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b48a5963b69044f5ac06f3a6dd9ad04b\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right, Don didn\u2019t. He didn\u2019t even in the last two speeches.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5a07558393940f687c68d6c2eca9d82\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, the last two Labour speakers, to make it clear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281b3d39045e246e78d0f4628a87fd6c7\u0022\u003EHon Annette King\u003C/span\u003E: You said the last two speakers!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022149e7b9d1d59444f90804e7b8b9360aa\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Well, most certainly, the Leader of the Opposition is not going to be justifying this legislation, I say to Ms King. She can sit over there, laughing all she likes, but the reality is that nobody in the Labour Party wants to be on the record justifying the indefensible\u2014the denial of corruption that this bill represents. There is no other way of looking at this whole situation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EInitially, it was all about the pledge card. It got expanded into a whole lot of other things like the Labour Party members putting out pamphlets with candidates on them, and various other sorts of things. But essentially it is about the pledge card. The Labour members always knew that they would have a problem with it\u2014the Auditor-General told them, the Chief Electoral Officer told them, and their own auditors told them. But they sat up on the ninth floor of the Beehive and said that they would do it anyway. They said that they would dip into taxpayers\u2019 funding, pay for that pledge card out of taxpayers\u2019 funds, and hoped they would get away with it. That was the plan\u2014a plan to deceive the people of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThat is, of itself, an action that one could say lends itself towards corruption. But the true corruption was that they knew that if they did this, they would breach the electoral cap and they would breach section 214B of the Electoral Act, because they knew that they were overspending. So there are two crimes here: one is that the Labour Party stole taxpayers\u2019 money, the second is that the Labour Party chose to knowingly breach the Electoral Act and spend more than they should. That is described as a corrupt practice. No one on the Labour side of the House wants to have a Hansard record that shows him or her justifying that action. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ESo we had Michael Cullen coming into the House today saying: \u201CWhy aren\u2019t you all grateful for what we are doing, because this is a plague on all our houses? The Auditor-General has come down hard on every one of us.\u201D That is wrong. The Auditor-General looked at a snapshot of advertising during the election because it was pointed out to him that the pledge card had to have been paid for from taxpayer funds, and he found that to be wrong. As he investigated further, he found another $400,000 to $500,000 worth of breach on the part of the Labour Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EPeople need to be aware of how this worked. Every one of us in this House was required to supply to the Auditor-General all of the advertising, all of the information, and all of the other activity paid for by the Parliamentary Service in that specific 3-month time frame, and he tells us in his report that he went through all of it page by page. He found that some parties had committed minor breaches, but he found the overwhelming amount of fraud, of corruption, and of theft was committed by the Labour Party. That is why we have this report in front of us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ESo there are two things. There is the issue of whether they should pay it back and whether they should pay interest to the taxpayer. The answer is yes. There are thousands of New Zealanders today who are a day or two behind on their tax payments, and they will pay interest on that. They will pay penalty interest at a high rate. If Labour were to pay penalty interest today on the 14 months it has had this money available to it, it would add another $150,000 to its bill, topping a million dollars robbed off the taxpayer. I simply ask the Labour members why they cannot treat themselves the way they treat other New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWe have been told that without this legislation today parliamentarians are virtually shut down and cannot operate. Dr Cullen gave the ridiculous example of members of a party in here being told by the Parliamentary Service that they cannot send out Christmas cards this year. The absurdity is that if they chose to send a stamped letter to each of their constituents, there would be no problem. If they chose to put \u201CMerry Christmas\u201D on that letter somewhere, that would be no problem. But Dr Cullen asserts that sending out a card\u2014something that in the corporate world is quite normal, and MPs will find that out through their letterboxes in the coming weeks\u2014is outside the law. Utter rubbish! Dr Cullen would also make an argument that everyone in this House today will have to ask the Parliamentary Service whether it is OK to travel home at its expense tomorrow. Let me tell Dr Cullen that members of Parliament, properly elected, have rights and we are not about to trade those rights away to make their very big wrong seem a little bit less than it is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ESo I am disappointed that the amendments put forward by the National Party\u2014the idea that there should be a date by which the Labour Party pays back, by which New Zealand First pays back, and by which all other parties that are required to pay back would do so\u2014which would have given this bill a little more substance, were not accepted. But Labour members do not want that because they think that over the passage of time this legislation will be forgotten, and if anybody brings up the pledge card, they will say: \u201COh, no, no, go and have a look, it was legal.\u201D, because that is what this legislation does. It lets them off the hook, and it also is a misuse of Parliament. It is an abuse of the trust that we have as parliamentarians sent here to be leaders in the country, and it is a reason why New Zealanders are turning away from the Labour Party in their droves. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWe have seen over and over this Government putting itself above the law, considering that if it does it, it is OK. Sometimes we struggle to understand that thinking. Dr Brash mentioned the justifications put out by Chris Trotter, that well-known left-leaning commentator. He put out a piece a few weeks ago that said that Labour took the money from the taxpayers, it overspent on the electoral cap, and thank goodness it did it because otherwise we might have had a National Government. If we are going to have a Government that says the ends justify the means, then we are giving away all of our democratic rights and we are allowing Helen Clark to establish herself as some sort of potentate dictator, which is totally unacceptable in a country like this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ESo when Dr Cullen says that too many members over here are outraged, he is wrong\u2014not enough members in this House are outraged. Some of us sit in our electorate offices several times a week listening to the concerns of New Zealanders\u2014people who have real troubles in their lives. They are people who need operations, people who are not getting the extra help they need at school, people who have issues with various Government departments, and people who are trying to do things in the economy but find massive brakes in their way. We listen to those people, we hear what they say, and we know that a Government that wants this country to make progress would focus on those things. But, no, this week the brakes go on, everything gets stopped, everything gets pushed aside, and the Labour Government chooses to throw Parliament into urgency to get itself out of trouble, to try to manage a political issue. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EAs the Prime Minister said on Monday: \u201CWe are moving on.\u201D As the previous speaker said: \u201CWe are moving on.\u201D I think it is time the Labour Government moved on, and I think the people of New Zealand will be giving it that message loud and clear in the months ahead. This legislation is in place to cover corruption, to cover bad practice, and to cover the theft the Labour Party perpetrated on the people of New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022 data-id=\u0022ffe992d0aaac4e67b7c5948da60873f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ffe992d0aaac4e67b7c5948da60873f2\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR (Minister of Corrections):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to take the brief time I have to put a few facts on the table, because I think the public will be somewhat confused if they have just turned on the radio and listened to the National members. This validation bill, as my colleague said, allows us, following its passage, to clear the decks and clarify some of the rules around the spending of the Parliamentary Service money that comes to each and every MP in this House. I do not want to go back too far and try to rewrite history, as the National Party has been doing, but I think it is important to put a few facts on the table. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThis Appropriation (Parliamentary Validation Expenditure) Bill validates spending by every party in this Parliament, including the National Party. It validates spending by every party except the Progressives. Its passage is necessary, for legal issues, to allow us to move on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI find it strange because Mr Brownlee was educated at the same school as I was and he has been brought up in the same religion as me, and I would have expected him to have the same principles and understanding of what is the truth. He should be able to understand the facts and understand what he is obliged to do. In spite of his being a Catholic and being able to go to confession and seek absolution, the reality is that he should tell the truth. The truth is that the National Party spent money deemed by the Auditor-General to be outside the legal appropriations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe National Party has been saying right throughout this debate that it did not sin, and that it is clearer, cleaner, and whiter than the driven snow. National members say they did not sin. That might be an expression used by their funders\u2014\u201CWe did not sin.\u201D\u2014but the reality is that if mistakes are made, big or small, sometimes we call them a sin.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E Mr Brownlee may seek absolution through confession. It will not remove the reality that the National Party spent $11,305. It spent that money in the same way that the Labour Party spent $800,000. We did not have access to a leaked report from the Auditor-General. The National Party did, and it rushed to pay back the money in order to seek absolution\u2014probably guided by Mr Brownlee in the hope that his confession might remove the reality that he had sinned. But if the Auditor-General deems the money was spent illegally, then Gerry Brownlee did sin. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThis bill seeks to validate the spending by National, Labour, New Zealand First, the Greens, United Future, and ACT. Each and every one of the parties in this House spent money in a misunderstanding of the rules around the appropriation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EIf the National Party was so much smarter and understood the rules clearly, why then did it get it wrong with its GST payment? Why has it refused to pay back $118,000 in GST? National members think that they were so smart and knew the rules\u2014or maybe they knew something else. Maybe they knew that they did not need to spend money through the Parliamentary Service appropriation. Maybe they knew that they had secret backers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe question is what they would have done for the $1.2 million spent by the Exclusive Brethren backers of the National Party to offset the money other parties spent by way of the Parliamentary Service appropriation. It is the question that I have had to ask through this whole debate. Maybe the National Party, when we pass this bill, will be able to move on and explain. Maybe it will pay back the $118,000 worth of GST it owes, explain to us what it did for its $1.2 million, explain to us how a group that says it prays for the Government\u2014and that would obviously pay for a Government\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236e59caf60e640dbb2ab7c9e9226142b\u0022\u003ETariana Turia\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am just not clear whether we are talking about the bill or about the National Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226104ca4b5bdd463ebac4966e050bb93c\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I have actually indicated to the member about coming back to the bill, and I am sure he will come to the point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e18c31e689dd486ba9225ac24e87ece1\u0022\u003EHon DAMIEN O\u0027CONNOR\u003C/span\u003E: I apologise, but it has just been very hard to try to understand what the National Party has been talking about through the debate on this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThis bill validates spending that every party\u2014including the M\u0101ori Party\u2014understood to be legitimate and to be legal throughout the campaign before the last election. I think it raises as many questions as it answers. It is a technical bill; it will allow us to move on and to ask questions about what legitimate parliamentary work is. The members opposite, especially those who are constituent MPs, will know that one has obligations to one\u2019s constituency. There are costs in providing services as an MP and there are obligations to go out and tell people what is factually going on in Parliament\u2014unlike the campaigns run by the National Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EThe questions I have to ask go back to previous spending, prior to the last election. I was rather sad that the Auditor-General did not choose to go back and analyse spending going right back into the 1980s, where there has been acknowledged expenditure by many parties that we would claim to be very, very similar in its application. I think we have every right, once this bill passes through the House, to put the heat on the National Party, and I am sure that Bill English, when he gets up to speak, will probably explain what the National Party will do to pay back its GST. It has not been validated through this bill and, as my colleague says, if National Party members were that smart, how come they spent over $11,000 illegally? Was that figure inclusive of GST? The other question, given National\u2019s righteous claims over interest, is whether National offered to pay interest on its $11,000 when it was so quick to pay back money after the leaked report. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EWe need to ask questions around how the National Party gained access to a leaked report. Why those members did not need to spend a large part of their parliamentary budget through this process is another question I would like to have answered. I see the guilt on the faces of those members opposite with regard to the payment made by a party outside Parliament\u2014the Exclusive Brethren. Lockwood Smith looks a little unsure about that. Those questions must be answered by the National Party as we move forward from the passage of this legislation, which is necessary in this Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022471dee54-f59e-4497-b3d3-c39044ce7169\u0022\u003EI welcome the passage of the bill. It will allow Parliament to move on and to clarify the rules around parliamentary spending and around the use of any parliamentary money prior to an election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022 data-id=\u00220a25d46ade3c4b899b9e669a8d642e7e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a25d46ade3c4b899b9e669a8d642e7e\u0022\u003ETARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader\u2014M\u0101ori Party):\u003C/span\u003E There is a lesson in all of this for all of us. Mr Brady was doing his job, which was to point out the need for tight controls in order to establish the legal legitimacy, let alone any moral authority, of Government and Parliament. This concept of doing the job is something that has resonated throughout the debate. We in the M\u0101ori Party have been very keen to learn the ropes\u2014mahia te mahi. We understand the importance of the rules. We know that it is expected of us if we are to be the best representatives we can be for our constituency. The best is to act with honesty and integrity and to uphold the notion of collective responsibility\u2014that we must all take ownership of our performance, our practice, and our behaviours. Collective ownership\u2014the ability to think of the good of the team, over and above the individual impact\u2014brings with it additional obligations and responsibilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EI acknowledge that the concept of collective responsibility is hurting many MPs today, who are now in the position of paying for mistakes that they may not have played a part in. The cost of making mistakes is far less for the M\u0101ori Party in terms of dollars and cents, but like the other parties in this House, we made a mistake. We stand here today knowing that with the exception of the Progressives, no matter the amount involved, there has been a misuse of public money by all parties of this Parliament, including ourselves. We do not need to point the finger at each other, or add further to what one paper called our \u201Cday of shame\u201D. No one is absolved of blame. Indeed, I recall the words: \u201CLet he who is without sin cast the first stone.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EHaving an eye to history, however, means we can learn from our past and ensure we never go down that road again. If there is one clear outcome from the Auditor-General\u2019s report, it is the hope that we all, as a Parliament, be focused on our application of parliamentary purposes. There is a greater waste of public money on a daily basis when the public and those of us in this Chamber are subject to the constant free-for-all erupting in the House\u2014the name-calling, MPs being labelled a bunch of fruit cakes, a pack of crooks\u2014and the general bluff and bluster that some people erroneously perceive as doing the job of an MP. We have had days, weeks, and months of abusive tirades and accusations of corruption, profiteering, leadership crises, and stolen elections, and now reports that confirm illegal activity, unlawfulness of parliamentary spending, and inappropriate and misappropriated expenditure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003E It seems to have been a contest of wits. Who can call each other the worst names? Whose crime is the greatest? The debate has at times bordered on desperation\u2014an air of hysteria is apparent as politicians scramble to denigrate each other. There is no reason why the value of robust debate has to be sacrificed by the constant barrage of personal abuse. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EThis whole issue has been about protocols, processes, and rules. We knew from day one that members must not use parliamentary resources to solicit money, votes, or membership. We also knew that as a M\u0101ori party we would be under higher scrutiny than the others, because this is our experience in the community. We have to be twice as good and twice as clean as others. We have been generally appreciative of the clear guidance we received from Parliamentary Service, the Members Services Committee, finance, and the parliamentary staff, who work so hard to create an environment that engenders respect. I would hasten to suggest that the rules of the job simply require some common sense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EMy colleague Mr Harawira referred yesterday to the description from the Clerk of the House, who defined the role of members as encompassing \u201Ca considerable amount of legal freedom\u201D. With freedom comes responsibility, and with responsibility comes discipline. A critical issue that has arisen as a result of this whole debacle has been the recommendation that Parliamentary Service will be required to immediately institute controls and processes to pre-approve expenditure. Dr Cullen himself has stated that this is to be a \u201Csignificant change from current practice\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EThis is one of the most critical issues in this legislation, and it is central to our opposition to the bill. The proposed changes raise a raft of constitutional questions around the very way in which democracy will work. Who will decide what expenditure is to be approved, and who will police the processes to make the critical judgments about what is a parliamentary purpose and what is electioneering? It is being said that the Controller and Auditor General\u2019s view threatens long-established conventions on how we do the job of an MP. I want to make it explicitly clear that the M\u0101ori Party absolutely supports the need to be accountable, and to be seen to be exercising responsibility in our use of the public purse. It is essential that we restore the public confidence in this regard. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EBut respect does not flow on as a consequence of prescriptive rules; it follows from the proper exercise of responsibility\u2014of kaitiakitanga. The high standards we follow in working within the legal freedom of an MP\u2019s role must be balanced by the application of common sense. I want to raise the issue today that although Labour has been the party most under the spotlight with this legislation, all parties in this House are equally open to scrutiny that may be defined as unlawful, whether or not we were aware of it at the time. The key issue for moving forward as an MMP Parliament is that we must all take ownership and all participate in the process of a broader solution. If we are all part of the problem, then let us all also be part of the answer. If there are to be significant changes, they must be signed up to equally by all the political parties, regardless of size. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EAs the debate raged on, last night, I came across a letter from the Congregational Leaders Conference of Aotearoa, which represents the Catholic religious brothers, priests, and sisters of our country. I want to share their comments, because there is a message inherent in their words that we should all consider: \u201CWe prize and respect our democracy and the values that underpin it. At this time we wish to express our distaste at recent events in the political arena. Not only are the character assassinations, innuendo, details of the private lives of politicians etc causing untold personal distress to politicians and their families, they also bring our democratic process into disrepute and are a misuse of taxpayers money\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EIt is no wonder that the faith of congregational leaders has been sorely tested. But all is not lost. I recall the advice of Te Ururoa Flavell in the first reading debate to move from a situation of paybacks\u2014revenge and punishments\u2014to a philosophy of pay forwards, which means investing in our future. We need to invest in honesty, integrity, and accountability. I welcomed the words of Gordon Copeland last night in explaining that United Future would pay back its debt because it was a question of public perception and moral judgment. These sentiments were also expressed yesterday by the Greens co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons, who described the obligation as a moral one\u2014as did Metiria Turei this morning\u2014to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c2dfe169-d946-4f87-8d43-0bcdb7d8bebc\u0022\u003EWe need to pay forward with consistent moral standards, upholding best practice, and abiding by the rules in pursuit of kotahitanga. We also need to value the capacity of the public service to deliver free and frank advice, and we should demonstrate the maturity to consider the advice in the spirit in which it is given. The M\u0101ori Party wants to be part of a Parliament that New Zealanders can indeed look at with admiration, so that they can tell us that they prize and respect our democracy and the values that underpin it. At this time of such turmoil and disrepute, we need to invest in a Parliament that can, once again, earn back the respect of the people whom we are elected to represent\u2014a Parliament not for politicians or for the public purse but a Parliament for the people, doing the job in the best way we can.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022 data-id=\u002245991801d5e3448b883d54da19bafb8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002245991801d5e3448b883d54da19bafb8d\u0022\u003EKEITH LOCKE (Green):\u003C/span\u003E I rise on behalf of the Green Party to follow up on what our co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said in the first reading debate. We will be abstaining on the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill, and I want to explain briefly why. It is for two reasons. The first reason is in terms of the content of the bill itself. The bill has many good points that help in looking forward and the process of clarifying what is appropriate expenditure on MPs\u2019 parliamentary business. But we are also concerned that the bill as it stands may convey the impression and the feeling that MPs can relieve themselves of the responsibility for spending money inappropriately. The Auditor-General, as the referee, has determined that that is the case, and we do have respect for his office in this parliamentary system in our system of government, whether he is right or wrong or whether or not some of the expenditure was misspent. In our case some of the money was wrongly spent, but in some cases, of course, we challenged that finding. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe will also be abstaining because we have a confidence and supply agreement with the Labour Party in Government, and that is an agreement to abstain on motions deemed to be those of confidence and supply\u2014which this one has been defined as. I would like to point out quite clearly that the Green Party will be repaying every cent of the money deemed by the Auditor-General to be inappropriately spent. It is not easy for the Green Party, as a small party with six MPs in Parliament, to do so, just as it is not easy for some of the other parties to do so. But we will do our duty in that respect. We will keep our faith with the process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe will also be working constructively with other parties in this House to clearly refine the laws on MPs\u2019 expenditure\u2014what parliamentary business actually is, etc., etc.\u2014because the report of the Auditor-General has put all MPs in the very uncomfortable and untenable position of not really knowing what is acceptable and what is unacceptable at any point in the electoral cycle. It is particularly problematic for small parties that are mainly made up of list MPs. For instance, in one of my own portfolios I am the foreign affairs spokesperson for the Green Party. Most of the subjects I speak on, like North Korean nuclear tests, have nothing to do with legislation in this House, but those subjects are just as important for the people of New Zealand and the people of the world, in both a political and a parliamentary sense. So the Green Party, in promoting the Green attitude on North Korean nuclear testing\u2014on which we have been very critical and on which we have tried to put forward some constructive solutions\u2014deems that very much to be parliamentary business. Also, of course, I in my role and other Green MPs in their roles want to get our views out to as many New Zealanders as possible\u2014to all New Zealanders, if we can\u2014so there should not be any restraint on our ability to do that in terms of it being deemed to be a parliamentary purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003ESo these are the sorts of things that we want to clarify as the discussions continue with the Parliamentary Service Commission, the parties, and the Speaker, and with proper legal advice as we go through. The Green Party will be very much a part of that process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EWe also hope there will be a much clearer definition not only of what is appropriate for election spending but also of money coming into the coffers of political parties for the financing of elections. We want a very clear definition in order to get away from these big anonymous donations, which can skew the electoral process. In a number of respects, problems have been identified with large anonymous donations and the way they are put into trust accounts\u2014particularly by donors to the National Party. Third-party spending is also quite a vexed question. We do not want to stop groups outside political parties from engaging in the democratic process, but we do not want it to be a cover for parties to in fact lift their spending caps through third-party campaigns and donations. So we want to be part of the process of defining that matter. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b8383f38-c78c-4e5d-8324-677d91e95c49\u0022\u003EThis whole issue has been very difficult for all of the parties, but, in another way, we should look on the positive side. It has forced us to grapple with the issue of parliamentary spending, to grapple with our accountability to the public of New Zealand, and to grapple with election financing by parties and third parties. With that positive perspective, the Green Party abstains from voting on this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd208a246cff4df5ac3e5208a36734a5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd208a246cff4df5ac3e5208a36734a5\u0022\u003EGORDON COPELAND (United Future):\u003C/span\u003E The Auditor-General, as is well known, decided that some expenditure by United Future in the 2005 election was electioneering expenditure, and he therefore concluded that that expenditure was unlawful. He did not say it was criminal and he did not say it was illegal. The word that he used was \u201Cunlawful\u201D. Anyone in this House, as has happened in this debate, who claims that this expenditure was criminal and that it represented thievery is simply guilty of politically motivated slander. That is the simple truth. Anyone who says the expenditure was illegal is plainly wrong. The correct term is that it was \u201Cunlawful\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EMadam Speaker\u2019s report to the House stated that \u201Creimbursement is not legally necessary\u201D. She went on to say, however, that reimbursement \u201Cmust be considered seriously if public confidence in the Parliament is to be maintained.\u201D United Future took those words\u2014and, I would suggest, that challenge\u2014from Madam Speaker very seriously indeed, because this is a very serious matter. We gave serious consideration therefore\u2014as we were asked to do\u2014to the whole question of whether we should repay the money deemed by the Auditor-General to have been unlawfully spent. Accordingly, we made a public declaration that we will repay the amount deemed to have been unlawfully spent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EI need to say that reimbursement comes at great personal financial cost to our small team of three MPs. I did the numbers and probably, on a per capita basis, the greatest cost will lie with the New Zealand First MPs, and we are No. 2. Why? Because we had eight people in Parliament when the money was spent, and now we are only three. Nevertheless, we are determined on that course of action because it is the right thing to do. I must say that for me personally it is not an enjoyable experience. But at least I have a clear conscience, in relation to any wrongdoing on my part or on the part of my party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EUnited Future acted in good faith throughout the 2005 election, and we carefully considered every expenditure we undertook, as to whether it fell within what we understood clearly to be the rules. Those rules have been substantially unaltered since 1989\u2014hence this validating legislation goes back to that date. We asked Parliamentary Service\u2014pretty much on a case by case basis, ahead of committing the expenditure\u2014whether it deemed that the expenditure fell within the rules. The Auditor-General himself conceded to United Future\u2019s leader, the Hon Peter Dunne, that at least our party\u2014I am not speaking for others\u2014acted in good faith throughout. That is very important to me; it is very important to United Future. To break the law inadvertently is one thing; to break the law deliberately is quite a different matter. There is a huge moral difference between those two situations. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EWe are also, as is well known, voting to validate the unlawful expenditure. We are doing that because, firstly, Treasury advised that we need to do it in terms of the Public Finance Act 1989, and, secondly, because it is part of our confidence and supply agreement with the Labour-led Government. It is a supply matter, it is a budgetary matter, and it is part of the budgetary cycle. Let me tell the House that United Future keeps its word. We are keeping our word with the Labour Government. If it turns out that, in 2008, we are working with another party, such as National, we will keep our word then, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003ESo we now come to the third reading of the legislation that will pass today to validate this unlawful expenditure. We now have the challenge before us as a Parliament to come together\u2014well before the sunset date of 31 December 2007\u2014and sort out the rules that are going to apply for the future, particularly for the 2008 elections, in terms of what is, and what is not, lawful electioneering expenditure. That is the challenge now placed before this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EI agree with Madam Speaker, Tariana Turia, and other people, who correctly point out that public confidence in this institution has been badly shaken. We have to work across parties on a fully consensual basis, if we are to see that public confidence restored. I do not think any party in this House is free of blame in terms of the erosion of public confidence. Yes, the facts as I have outlined them are what they are, but it does not do the process any good, either, if, for political gain, people exaggerate the situation, cry \u201Ccriminality\u201D when none is involved, and cry \u201Cthievery\u201D when none is involved, particularly in situations when they know perfectly well in the heart of their own conscience that they did exactly the same thing in previous elections. That is not debatable; that is simply factual. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EIt is time we moved away from that situation, because we are talking here about public confidence in this institution. This Parliament has had a proud tradition for 152 years. We are judged\u2014in all the polls\u2014to be the second-least corrupt nation on the Earth, next to Iceland. We have never, in 152 years, had a serious corruption scandal in this Parliament, to my knowledge. We have never had fisticuffs. We have never had a coup. I would say that we can lay claim to be the world\u2019s oldest democracy, because we gave the vote to the tangata whenua in 1867 and to women in 1893. We were therefore the first nation in the world to have universal franchise. We have a lot to be proud of. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EIn summary, United Future has acted honestly and openly throughout this process. We have faced the need to repay the money that was unlawfully spent, even though we acted in good faith. Here we stand. We can do no more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022 data-id=\u0022060ef0ee1e7e468fab16c46100ce8787\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022060ef0ee1e7e468fab16c46100ce8787\u0022\u003EHEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E I stand to speak on the third reading of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. Few things have generated as much media coverage as this issue. We should not lose track of the principle that lies behind it. We should be aware of the perversion of democracy that is taking place here today. A good Government is one that can win a battle of ideas. A bad Government forces through its dictates at all cost. Kiwis should have no doubt what kind of Government is facing us today. Societies become less democratic when their Governments become less transparent, less accountable to the public they are supposed to serve, and make laws for their own preservation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EToday this Parliament is passing, without any public consultation, retrospective law to validate Parliament\u2019s own spending. There will be no sending this bill to a select committee and no chance for the public to submit their opinions. As we opened our newspapers or turned on our televisions this morning we saw the crisis of confidence that is developing for Parliament and the Government in this country. This bill might pass a confidence and supply vote in this House, but Kiwi communities have no confidence in the politicians who pass it. No individual citizen and no company is in a position to change a law to suit itself. The Labour Party can, and is. Smaller parties frequently find themselves excluded from decisions, and often from parliamentary debates. Some MPs have hardly said a word in this House since their maiden speech. Government departments pay off whistleblowers to keep them quiet. Public servants are fired or suspended for asking questions that are unpopular or for speaking out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003ESince last year\u2019s election we have seen heavy-handed select committee chairmen tear up letters from committee members who raise serious concerns. For the first time in 103 years a Crown-owned company has been fined for contempt of Parliament. In 2003 the Government suspended an electoral law so that a Labour MP who had sworn allegiance to another country did not lose his seat or his salary. Again, this was done under urgency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb515564c0314e57adc570013926706d\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I assume the member speaking is referring to the difficulty I had when I wrote to the then Privileges Committee chair in relation to an issue that arose over citizenship. She is quite incorrect in saying that I had sworn allegiance to another country. I take that to be greatly offensive, and ask her to withdraw that comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3b173e5e3b949fbbda0db1993e89a3f\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has taken offence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a53ae77c2cb440b92c1c0896b80edf4\u0022\u003EHEATHER ROY\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw that comment. In 2003 the Government introduced legislation for a particular Labour MP. Again, this was done under urgency so that the public were denied the chance to comment, and again the legislation was retrospective\u2014Parliament moving back in time to cover the butt of a Government member of Parliament. Now this bill excuses parties from misspending public money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EHow can we expect other New Zealanders to follow the rules made in this House when our Government refuses to live by the rules, then changes the law to suit itself? How can we expect our Parliament and our democracy to be respected when we push through self-serving bills under urgency to protect ourselves? I admit that ACT did not escape scrutiny in the Auditor-General\u2019s report. Rodney Hide and I have paid our personal cheques to right the wrong that the Auditor-General found. We thought we had done everything correctly. We did what we thought we had to, to work within the rules. It hurts that despite our best efforts we were found to have spent money wrongly. We have repaid the Parliamentary Service from our own pockets, not those of our members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EIt is true that without this bill politicians would have to be much more careful about how we spend public money. But that would be much better than using our special privilege to stand here today and ram through a bill that the public have not had the chance to read, have not been able to comment on, and do not want. They have made that very clear. The Auditor-General\u2019s report has demonstrated why we need limits on the power of politicians: because otherwise they will use their power for political advantage, at the expense of taxpayers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EPeople are saying that the Government\u2019s response to this bill takes New Zealand closer to a banana republic and it raises serious questions of credibility for the parties supporting it here today. How can any party come to this House and talk about strengthening core institutions, when its members vote for a bill that undermines the rule of law? How can they discuss the behaviour of politicians, when they are willing to push through a bill that validates the wrongful acts of their own MPs? How can they talk about the breakdown of law, when they are terrified at the very idea of a transparent democracy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003EACT members stand against this big, powerful, privileged Government. We are opposed to politicians who change the law to suit themselves. We want a Government that people can trust and that trusts the people. We have never fought to defend privilege or take what belongs to others. We will not be turning on that record today, here in this House. Democracy requires more than the relentless pursuit of power. A genuinely democratic Government consults its people and governs in an open and accountable way. This bill defies the rule of law. It has not been subject to public submissions and it is out of place in any liberal democracy. That is why ACT stands here today and opposes this bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u0022ccb233c8757648919ae7f07530b67494\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ccb233c8757648919ae7f07530b67494\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I found that that was an unusual contribution from a member of a party whose leader for 12 weeks went dancing in fancy frilly shirts, whilst she spent some weeks wearing camouflage\u2014and it was all at the taxpayers\u2019 expense.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203e9a27c817c41cd89e2f3b55f553028\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: And who else pays Rodney?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261fba8ea0e10443bbc2ec7bdc1b24c9e\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: That is a good question, and I am not going to answer it; the Speaker wants me to come back to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First supports this bill for three major reasons. First of all, the Auditor-General recommends we have such legislation. The Auditor-General, in the very report we are all referring to, recommends that there is such legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cf43e5358f884331a53cd9fe8888fd54\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Does not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d72057ff96b74f43a56635598b823037\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: The honourable member should start reading the thing. I tell the member to read page 53.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022feb6a8d60ee249edb6212589c4f89a2a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Where does he support this legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296ff539cb1214125a3a24f32cbd1ec06\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: There is a little bit more reading for the member, then. He should read the Speaker\u2019s report and see what she has to say. She suggests that we need this sort of legislation. Finally, if the member is not convinced\u2014if he can read\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002293cbd2e0510140ef9b71f7bbe298b0c2\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do apologise for interrupting my colleague, who is being fairly severely interrupted by the National front bench, but a very unparliamentary comment was just made by Dr Nick Smith about the Speaker and I think he should be asked to withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227196f6307ed740a290481d20cb8d3ad0\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I did not hear it, but if Dr Smith made a derogatory comment I ask him to withdraw it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022052008dc4a7c41cbbcfe88cc55505b6c\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw. I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Was it appropriate for Mr Peter Brown to bring the Speaker into the debate?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268d0fc17ddac4322b101f43a6fd50a6b\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, it was not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f2b9e4d79da64667ada1e8c9d400b79a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Well, can you make him withdraw and apologise, too?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3a0345f87d24bf6815ddfb2b3e531d1\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please be seated. If the member brought the Speaker into the debate, then he should not do so. I ask the member now to continue his speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a70bf480273b43278955927f02611cbd\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I brought the Speaker into the debate insomuch as she has written a report we have all read, or at least members on this side have. I think I am entitled to refer to the Speaker\u2019s report on this very issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a96b4c1b83cc4436afc2759fbaedd1b7\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Brown. You are entitled to do so. Please continue your speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226a98bb8b093e4d34bdbd529f56c5c3d8\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: I reiterate what I said. We are supporting this bill because the Auditor-General himself, the Speaker, and Treasury in its reports to Cabinet, all recommend that we have such legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First has been accused of overspending in the same way that National members have been accused of overspending. Allegedly, the National Party has written a cheque and paid its so-called debt. National had the advantage that the Auditor-General had a talk to the leader of the party and warned him what was likely to happen. The Auditor-General did not do that for New Zealand First\u2014I do not know which other parties he actually went and spoke with, but he did not do so with New Zealand First. Don Brash, on the radio, said exactly that. The Auditor-General did not even go and speak with the Parliamentary Service, but he spoke with the National Party. National overspent, despite being warned and despite being advised. We can claim that we overspent without being warned and without being advised.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EBut the matter is more serious than that. In his report, the Auditor-General makes a recommendation that the Parliamentary Service should be the authority that agrees or disagrees with a particular item of expense. Indeed, the report states at paragraph 6.20 on page 53: \u201CI also recommend that the Service, in consultation with the Minister responsible for Vote: Parliamentary Service, take urgent measures to ensure that advertising expenditure incurred under the Party and Member Support appropriations is for a purpose within the scope of those appropriations. These measures should include: Revising the guidance given to MPs on advertising to provide clear instruction about what advertising costs can be incurred under the Party and Member Support appropriations.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI will not read on, but the fact that the Auditor-General says that clear instructions should be provided implies that the current instructions are less than clear. In other words, they are open to some form of interpretation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022270db2bb1e074eaaaf0fb348deca77ff\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Abuse!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228157164b60eb4ca9bc744eac4854fb13\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: They might well be open to abuse\u2014the member would know more about that than me.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003ENew Zealand First was exceedingly cautious in the election. We went and sought guidance and sign-off from the Parliamentary Service\u2014the body that the Auditor-General recommends should have that sort of authority. We went and asked the Parliamentary Service, and we got sign-off. But we went further than that. We went to the Electoral Commission and got our materials signed off. There may have been some small rats and mice stuff that we did in-house, but we got sign-off for the vast bulk of what we produced at election time from the Parliamentary Service and the Electoral Commission. Taking into account the fact that the Auditor-General says there needs to be clear instructions, and the fact that the rules can be interpreted one way or the other, we are saying that we want an opinion that states consistently what the rules are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226323e1214aa473bafec289edb80a8c1\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s wrong with the Auditor-General?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285f4df3c492c457fb18bcbc0b05efc4f\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We have not said we will not obey or follow the rules that the Auditor-General has stipulated; we have said\u2014and I want to make this explicitly clear\u2014that New Zealand First will pay any moneys it rightfully and lawfully owes. But we reserve the right to be convinced that they are rightfully and lawfully owed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI have heard other parties saying they will pay anything, everything, and everybody. Let me say to those members that party funds come from people who run raffles and sell raffle tickets. They come from people who hold\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a2175ab5501c41f8a1d0007ad2f89b98\u0022\u003EPhil Heatley\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s no justification for breaking the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb8b08b251c34aa686391de133d85bf3\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: There is no breaking the law. The member should read the report. He should shut his mouth and read the report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EWe will not pay 1c that we are not obliged to pay\u2014not 1c\u2014but we will pay everything once we are convinced that everything needs to be paid. And we will not treat our party people with contempt. Those members opposite may well dig deep into the party pockets of people who go out and sell raffle tickets on their behalf, but we have an obligation to look after the people who support us, and we will do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThis report opens the door for all sorts of problem areas, and that matter was well canvassed at the Parliamentary Service Commission this morning. We need to bring in this legislation, and with some urgency. As members well know\u2014or they might not know\u2014the Parliamentary Service only yesterday vetoed having Christmas cards financed from parties\u2019 budgets. I do not think that the members opposite know that, but they are in danger of having to fork out to pay for their Christmas cards if this legislation does not go through. The Auditor-General has told ACT\u2014and the ACT member speaking this morning raised this matter\u2014that he has not turned his mind to MPs\u2019 travel costs when they are engaged in going about their business. It could well be that we will all be caught with travel costs. Every National and ACT MP, and indeed every MP in this House, who wants to vote against this legislation should take note of that. This legislation is required so that all of us\u2014all MPs\u2014can do our jobs properly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022 data-id=\u0022b9bb43d6a4cc4ee9913bdadc30a01c7a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b9bb43d6a4cc4ee9913bdadc30a01c7a\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to make a personal explanation in light of the comments made by the ACT member Heather Roy, who preceded Mr Brown in speaking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225486656b78074427b551df8a78e666ea\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: In connection with what?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022557499eb235549ac9f4d5cf7ba8995c4\u0022\u003EHon HARRY DUYNHOVEN\u003C/span\u003E: To do with matters regarding citizenship that were raised in the House and were the subject of legislation. It is quite clear that the House does not understand what happened and why.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268ab5d65886d4177aa29af626cc34898\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member has asked for leave to make a personal explanation. Is there any objection\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226c1d5df8-ac1d-4ce1-a778-202845cfc69f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254cc4eb626b74a8ba29a0f50ad231fb5\u0022\u003EHeather Roy\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a81cbd9c7566491aa44dd6feea238793\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I have a point of order on the floor at the moment. Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000890\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221772e9f5-5379-4bfe-9d9b-eaffb4c61b02\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225786e953c57e4a1b951c71b1afedfa47\u0022\u003EHon Harry Duynhoven\u003C/span\u003E: You are a disgrace, Nick Smith\u2014an absolute disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e978865e-57e5-41d6-a7f6-b49daae78630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbef280cebd7424c882597508935f9a8\u0022\u003EHon Dr Nick Smith\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re the one who had retrospective legislation twice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u002217fbed654009416ca76bf7dbe8632e3f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217fbed654009416ca76bf7dbe8632e3f\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (National\u2014Clutha-Southland):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, this is Harry\u2019s second time! Let us just come right back to what lies at the heart of this debate and this legislation. What lies at its heart was a deliberate action taken by senior figures in the Labour Party in order to spend, during an election campaign, half a million dollars of taxpayers\u2019 money on a pledge card that\u2014as Dr Brash pointed out\u2014broke two rules: the rules of this House, in respect of the appropriation of parliamentary money; and the Electoral Act, in respect of the cap on expenditure on an election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party has not answered one simple question right through this debate: was the pledge card electioneering? You see, we have heard every other kind of distraction about what the Auditor-General has done and what the rules might or might not mean, but Labour members have never answered that question. Well, I did a little investigation. I went back and looked at the launch of the Labour election campaign for 2005 by Helen Clark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022893adc11-ce4e-419c-a079-08f04b3d75f5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298115d52d70f46b699da241ccd9fcf7a\u0022\u003ELindsay Tisch\u003C/span\u003E: What does it say?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e996f49e65d946df9b620bfd8b3ea2c0\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it was a campaign opening and a lengthy speech, and at the heart of that speech was the pledge card. Ms Clark said: \u201CWe pioneered pledge cards for our key commitments.\u201D Well, I say that it also pioneered taxpayer funding of them. Then she said: \u201CNow we are making fresh pledges on key policies \u2026\u201D. If that is not electioneering, then this is not Parliament. So that was Helen Clark\u2019s view. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWell, what did Heather Simpson say to the police when they asked her whether that was electioneering? She said something completely different. The person who was running the Labour Party campaign said that as far as she was concerned, the purpose of those publications was the same in respect of previous similar publications by Labour\u2014to inform the public of the position of the leader and the parliamentary team on the issues of the day. Then the police asked her whether she had followed the Electoral Act. That was a good question, because if that were electioneering, she had breached the Electoral Act. She said that her understanding of the Electoral Act was that it applied to elections, not to parliamentary business. So the Labour Party has lost the trust of the New Zealand public, because in just those two examples it has shown its willingness to argue completely opposite positions in respect of a critical aspect of the accountability and trust the public has in any Government, at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EIn fact, what has come through this debate is a fierce and ugly sense of entitlement on the part of Labour. It has a fierce and ugly sense of entitlement that it is able to do with taxpayers\u2019 money whatever it likes, to serve its interests. I have illustrated to the House that the Prime Minister was able to get up in front of her campaign opening event and show the pledge card, and wave it around as a centrepiece of her electioneering, then her chief of staff told the New Zealand Police, our law enforcement agency, that that had nothing to do with the election. That is why the Labour Party is forfeiting the trust of the New Zealand people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EIt is not new for Helen Clark; she has done it before. The police\u2014tell them whatever one likes! Heather Simpson, who is fully paid on a public salary by this Parliament, is now an employee of a new fiction: the \u201COffice of the Leader of the Parliamentary Labour Party\u201D. I have had a look through public records, and such an office never existed until Helen Clark got into trouble as Prime Minister. Labour made it up to avoid accountability for someone who is paid $150,000 of public money, and who used that time and money to break the law. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EI want to move to a probably more disturbing issue, which has not been canvassed extensively in this debate\u2014that is, what happens now? Let us say that this legislation is passed. It does not alter a fact of history, which is that a Government\u2014in this case, the Labour Government\u2014overspent in its election campaign by half a million dollars, and possibly more, and got away with it. So what will happen next election? The police effectively said that it was too much of a constitutional disturbance to prosecute the Government because it had exceeded the electoral cap. They said that they could throw out an MP, but that they probably should not throw out a Government. This Parliament has now left a situation where the next Government could do the same. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EWhat is there to stop Helen Clark from doing exactly the same, next election? Nothing! The police will not prosecute her because they are too scared to, and if she breaks the rules with taxpayers\u2019 money, Parliament will pass legislation to validate it. So what is to stop Helen Clark overspending by a million dollars next time, to secure a historic fourth term? She, Heather Simpson, Michael Cullen, and Chris Carter will sit in the Beehive and say that they got away with it last time, and that they will get away with it again. It is that deep and ugly cynicism underlying this debate that I have found so distasteful, and that dishonours this Parliament. Labour has demonstrated that it will wilfully break the law. Its members will then use the privileges of power to bully, hassle, and discredit anyone who criticises them. If that does not work, they will use the privileges and power of this House to change the law and defend their position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EIn that respect, I want to make some comments on the role of the Speaker. Parliament has, at its best, acted as a check on the executive, but in this case I am concerned that it has not. I was struck by the startling similarity of the Speaker\u2019s report on the Auditor-General\u2019s report, and the Labour Party\u2019s arguments against his report. In fact, Dr Cullen\u2019s arguments were rehearsed, word for word, by the Speaker. Instead of the Speaker doing what should have been done, which was to show deference and respect to the officers of this Parliament\u2014because the Speaker is one\u2014the Speaker rebutted, criticised, and discredited the Auditor-General, then used a slick and silly legal opinion to discredit the Solicitor-General. In fact, the legal opinion was so bad that it did not refer to any of the legal precedents in this matter, and if any student did that in a university legal exam, he or she would fail. The Speaker gave the appearance of being complicit in the Government\u2019s attempt to muddy the waters over this issue. That is a stain on the Speakership, and this Speakership will not regain the credibility it ought to have. When it really mattered, Parliament let the people down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002203cb22fc7f234bb8adc8a2f00201e150\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member is going too far, and I ask the member to withdraw and apologise about the stain on the Speakership.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227e8587efb07c4b9481b582f43fc6ee70\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I want finally to return to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e098163c96e049cba663da57471a4084\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I asked the member to withdraw and apologise\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239069680fe4842eaaad67e293da3a25e\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry\u2014in what respect?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204ecd926428d4ed29ae236cabc74ade5\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E:\u2014in respect of the comments just made about the Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223db992164aef450abbaa761f087e0b86\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw and apologise, Mr Assistant Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003ELastly, I want to deal with the issue where Labour claims that the Auditor-General has changed the definitions of parliamentary purposes. He has not, and he says he has not. He has not changed the definition of parliamentary expenditure. The whole argument that members cannot fly home or send out Christmas cards is absolute rubbish. Unfortunately, the Speaker has scared the Parliamentary Service Commission into making sure there is pre-approval. It is all rubbish; it is all a distraction. Labour has forfeited the right to the trust of the New Zealand people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022089b01d4e5c84487b9632ecea72b2861\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022089b01d4e5c84487b9632ecea72b2861\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National):\u003C/span\u003E In December 1776 the great American revolutionary Thomas Paine published his pamphlet, The Crisis, which stated: \u201CThese are the times that try men\u2019s souls \u2026 Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;\u201D. And I know how Tom must have felt, for these are indeed dark days for our democracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EA few days ago a very important report by the Auditor-General on unauthorised expenditure was presented to this House. The Government ensured that no opportunity was given to debate that report, which I would have thought was in the public interest. Instead, the Government moved to introduce the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill and force it through all its stages, without giving the public the opportunity to make any submissions. I would have thought it was in the public interest that the public make submissions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EI have a number of objections to this bill as it has emerged from the Committee. First, it is unnecessary. Secondly, it is incomplete. Thirdly, it is odious. First, as to necessity, the bill, as we know, contains two parts. It validates expenditure under Vote Parliamentary Service for the last 13 years and allegedly clarifies rules on an interim basis until the end of 2007. Yet the validation goes beyond the appropriations found to be unlawful by the Auditor-General. Secondly, it is unnecessary to use legislation to change the rules in the interim\u2014a point that has never been addressed by any Labour speaker in response.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EI said in the Committee stage that the Auditor-General\u2019s concerns arose from the Speaker\u2019s directions issued under section 8 of the Parliamentary Service Act 2000, and the directions\u2019 definitions of \u201Cparliamentary purposes\u201D and \u201Celectioneering\u201D. All that needs to happen is for new directions to be issued substituting new definitions. There is no need for clarification by legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EMy second objection is that the bill is incomplete. Significantly, there is no obligation for miscreants to repay any unauthorised expenditure; nor are there any reporting requirements. That is why I moved a number of amendments to Part 2 of the bill during the Committee stage. Those amendments sought to introduce provisions ensuring that unauthorised expenditure would be repaid with interest and penalties if the sums outstanding were not repaid by 31 December. It is notable that although some members emphasised the moral commitment to pay, they were not prepared to support provisions that would have made that moral commitment a legal commitment. Those provisions would have gone some way to improving this bill, but Labour refused to debate them. It was not prepared to put up any speaker to justify why repayment and reporting provisions were not needed but validating provisions were.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EMy third objection is that the bill is odious. It does not comply with fundamental common law principles. In 2003 the Legislation Advisory Committee republished its guidelines on good legislation. Part 1 of section 2 asks a very important question: does the legislation in question comply with fundamental common law principles? Let us look at some of those principles. Does this bill satisfy the principle that the citizen is entitled to have access to the courts? Well, no, it does not. It will remove litigation rights in the Darnton case\u2014and this is even before the litigation has been heard in the High Court. Secondly, there is the principle that everyone exercising public authority must act legally, reasonably, and honestly. This legislation grants one standard for the Labour Party and a much stricter standard for members of the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThirdly, there is the principle of the rule of law that no one is above the law. Enough said. This law places politicians above the law, particularly Labour politicians and their cohorts. Finally, there is the principle that all are treated equally before the law. Again, enough said. There is one standard for the Labour Party and another standard for the general public. The rulers have rewritten the rules to place themselves in a superior and privileged position.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThis bill does not comply with fundamental principles of the common law; nor, arguably, does it comply with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The Attorney-General never condescended to prepare a report under Part 7 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, but it is interesting that section 12 of that Act provides that every citizen has the right to vote in genuine elections\u2014and \u201Cgenuine\u201D is a very important word. How can there be genuine elections in this country when a bill of this kind is introduced that legitimises breaches of the Public Finance Act and the Electoral Act?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EWhat was it about the former Solicitor-General\u2019s opinion, dated 19 April 2006, that Labour found so difficult, thus necessitating its obtaining a contrary opinion from Chapman Tripp\u2014which I contend is an extraordinary thing to do, given that it was the Solicitor-General who gave the original advice? I refer to his opinion, where he set out a number of tests for determining whether expenditure was unauthorised. He said there was a bright-line approach, an apportionment test, or the dominant purpose test. But on any view of this matter, Labour\u2019s unauthorised expenditure was outside the rules. And what was it about the Auditor-General\u2019s actions that the Labour Party failed to understand? The Auditor-General spelt out the rules time and time again. I need not refer to his report, but he urged members of Parliament to be cautious even before the 2005 general election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003ESo there we have it: there is one rule for the Labour Party and another for the public, who are held to much higher standards. It is no wonder that this place is held in such low esteem. I myself was disappointed that other parties did not support my amendments. I did not expect the lost souls in the Labour Government to support them, but I had hoped the Green and United Future MPs at least would have considered the amendments. Those amendments would have enabled all MPs to regain some respect in the eyes of the public.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EMr Harawira, in his excellent second reading speech, commented that all members of Parliament are privileged men and women. Those in public life have been given much by the people of New Zealand. But of those to whom much is given, much is expected, and at the end of our time in this place, whether we are to be regarded as successful or as failures depends on whether we are seen as people who have integrity\u2014on whether we are people who are seen to be dedicated to serving the public good and the interests of all New Zealanders. This legislation does not serve the public good. It does not serve New Zealand\u2019s interests.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E It is not a question of inadvertently sinning, as was alleged by the member for Waimakariri. By the way, what is inadvertent sinning? It is an oxymoron, just like the Labour Party. In order to sin one has to do wrong. One cannot inadvertently sin. It has to be deliberate, just like Labour\u2019s actions. But instead of confessing, asking for forgiveness, and repenting, Labour has urgently legislated immediate absolution for itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EThe Government\u2019s actions have been opposed throughout all stages of this bill by the National Party, the M\u0101ori Party, and ACT. That opposition continues through this third reading. National will fail to prevent the passage of the bill this afternoon, but we will succeed in the end. I can assure the House that I, for one, and, I am sure, my National colleagues, will be zealous to ensure that any party that has not repaid any unauthorised expenditure will be held to account\u2014perhaps not this afternoon, but one day, for sure. I can promise those people that justice will prevail.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002249b051aa6c344e0ca153d4fd914e7848\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 61\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 50; New Zealand First 7; United Future 3; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 50\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a third time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id2006101745e382fde99d435e8526717f71092553000922\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 5.39 p.m. (Wednesday)\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"