Robertson H V Ross: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Robertson H V Ross: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10813] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Can I just say that again Mr Brownlee I am taking it that you are taking an offence— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: No I am not. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: You are not taking an offence to anything? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: No I would have said so. No offence taken; I am asking for a ruling. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: In that case I think it inappropriate if you were to refer to the member in that way but the member himself can of course take offence under Standing Order 116 if he wants to. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: Speaking to the point of order I think the reality is the member asked a very clear question and he came clean. He asked whether it would be appropriate for him to call me a black fella—that is what he said. He asked you a question he came clean and for the first time showed quite clearly what the National Party is all about. He called me a black fella—that is what it is about. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am not going to have this lead to an unruly session. I have ruled for Mr Brownlee. Out of courtesy I called the honourable Minister. I ask the Minister to continue with his speech. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The insidious form of politics being practised at the moment in terms of dividing this nation has to be challenged and challenged robustly. I cannot sit in my communities and ask them to compromise and to sit down while people purposely play the race policy systems that have been played. We cannot tolerate that and will not tolerate that. Those are the types of policies being propagated by the people over there and this House is the right place for us to bring them out in the open. That member Gerry Brownlee just came out in the open—that is a fact. He has just come out in the open and stated what the member for Ilam is all about. He is the new Maori affairs spokesperson and that is what he thinks of us. That is what he thinks of the people he is now the spokesperson for—that is disgraceful. That is the conduct that we have finally got them to come out of the gutter on. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You will have to grab hold of this because it will go terribly awry and there are quite a number of hours ahead of us. I did not take any offence at the intended insult sent in my direction by John Tamihere but I did ask whether it would be within the Standing Orders if I were to use a term—but I did not use that term; I asked if I were to use that term—to describe him. You told me “No” and interestingly the member has shown offence. Not only has he shown offence but he is now attempting to totally misrepresent the point that I was making. I want to say to the member in the context of the point of order and the response that you allowed him to the point of order if in fact his concern is about having to go to his communities to try to explain himself— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: A point of order should be terse and to the point. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I know but when dealing with someone who has probably taken the point of order some steps further I think I have a right to respond to everything he has said. What he said was that he could not go to his communities and indicate that the Parliament was allowing him to be spoken to in that way. Well why should I do that? Why should I have to sit here and tolerate a personal insult because John Tamihere makes it? He says: “It is OK for me but you cannot do it back to me because I have this special community that I have to go to.” 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is going too far now and is making a speech. The member has made his point. 
Stephen Franks 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was not sure whether you did rule that it was acceptable or unacceptable. If you were minded to rule that it was unacceptable I would urge that you be cautious because there are circumstances in which it is quite appropriate in a debate to have a reference such as the big fellow the white fellow the Pakeha the Maori or other reference because it may be germane to the point in issue. Therefore if you were ruling I would like to know the basis of the ruling. I may have misunderstood and it may be that you have not ruled but I certainly would not take offence in many contexts if I were referred to as the little fellow the big fellow the white the Pakeha or a designation that related to the topic of the debate. Therefore I do seek clarification as to whether you ruled or did not rule. If you did not then my point does not need to be taken any further. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I have ruled and I am always guided by the circumstances of what is happening in the House. Also I am guided by Standing Order 116 “Personal reflections” as to whether members take offence. Given the circumstances in the House and whether it could lead to disorder is also something that is taken into account by myself as a Speaker. Rulings are not on hypothetical situations but actual circumstances. People must not allege racist policies as stated in Speaker’s ruling 38/6. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: We have not heard one jot of policy from the National Party today—not one jot. Here is the actual policy hidden under a smokescreen of the Orewa speech. It is about increasing the age of eligibility for New Zealand superannuation—beware and be afraid elderly Kiwis! This speech was by the Leader of the Opposition to the funds source conference in Auckland on 7 March 2003. The privatisation desires of the present Leader of the Opposition are no secret to this House. Those members will flog off New Zealand Post they will flog off Air New Zealand again they will do Landcorp they will do TVNZ they will sell Kiwibank they will sell the Meteorological Service of New Zealand and they will sell Radio New Zealand because the National Party is about the big end of town. It is about the big end of town peopled by the few who always do well in the name of the many and when the many fail the many get the blame. This party works for the many and is proud to do that. We will not flog off things privatise things or attack the elderly. 
Another amazing speech was made by the Leader of the Opposition. He wants to abandon State-funded kidney dialysis for those with type 2 diabetes because he thinks that if people contract type 2 diabetes it is their fault because they have had a poor diet. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: That’s a lie. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member on my left will now stand withdraw and apologise. He knows that the use of that word is not permitted in this House. It is a reflection against the House. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I withdraw and apologise. The member is reckless with the truth. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: If that is the case hard-working Kiwis who ground down their hips did so by themselves and therefore they should pay for their hip replacements. That is how far this goes with those members and they have to be identified. They have to be drawn out. They have to be nailed on detail. What do they stand for? We know what we stand for and we are proud of it. What is the hidden agenda over there? Dropping all benefits to the able-bodied scrapping the statutory minimum wage introducing capital gains all over the place and so on and so on! This is the debate we should have; this is what they stand for. This is what Kiwis really want to hear. They do not want to hear about why we should hate one another—that is the easy base thing to do. That is the easy thing to do. The hard thing to do on this side is not to be an extremist and we will manage our extremism. We only hope that the members over there will manage their extremism put it away and get back to proper politics. They should put it away and worry about the nation and the national interests not their own selfish interests.