Cosgrove Clayton: Estimates Debate —  Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Cosgrove Clayton: Estimates Debate —  Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:610;Page:7271] 
CLAYTON COSGROVE (NZ Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 For a moment I want to concentrate on the debate on Vote Serious Fraud Office. I rise with a little bit of sadness in one respect in that when one reads in the estimates some of the work that the Serious Fraud Office is engaged in and some of the people it is chasing in order to stitch together the lives of some Kiwis who have been done over it is quite heartbreaking. I know that last year both John Tamihere and I tried to assist a number of people who were ripped off in scams and dodgy investment schemes. They still lost their dough their life-savings. 
In referring to the estimates I congratulate the Minister in the chair on the Budget for 2003-04 with funding of $5.365 million. One of the primary roles the Serious Fraud Office will be concentrating on as it always has done is white-collar fraud. That is something that I know nearly every member in this House would want to stamp out. 
Hon John Tamihere 
: Not ACT the rort party. 
CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Although the rort party from ACT of course may take a different view. I want to— 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Possibly you were not listening because I am somewhat surprised you did not intercede on what the member who is speaking has just said. Perhaps your attention was distracted but he accused another party of being the rort party and made a lot of derogatory statements that are clearly unparliamentary and unacceptable in this Chamber. I would ask that you call upon him to withdraw and apologise. I certainly took offence at the statements he made. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Any reference to a party is taken in the same way as to an individual. If the member has taken offence under Standing Orders 116 and 117 on personal reflections I ask the member to stand withdraw and apologise. 
CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I withdraw and apologise. Maybe my language was slightly tough. Maybe I should be more precise. If members look at the trends in the appropriations in relation to the Serious Fraud Office it is interesting to see the ongoing trends of mortgage frauds and overseas investment scams that continue to feature amongst its work to try to protect New Zealanders. It notes that New Zealanders lose literally millions of dollars a year to overseas investment schemes despite warnings and despite the work of the Serious Fraud Office in prosecuting some of those people. 
If members look at the money that will be used in this year’s estimates and then to the statutory management issue that is in process—which I will not allude to because it would be wrong to do so—in Tauranga where I believe Mr Shirley lives from the work Mr Tamihere and I did last year on the Investors International scam I recall in those speeches we said that people must be warned and the work of the Serious Fraud Office must be reinforced. I recall asking Mr Hide who participated in the famous Fiji conference—the investment scam conference—why he did not use his position as a member of Parliament to warn people not to be involved in those schemes. 
A year later the same problem is in Tauranga where I note that millions of dollars have been fleeced out of a community. The funding in the estimates of $5.3 million will be used to chase those criminals out of town. My point is did Ken Shirley the ACT party representative here do anything about that? He lives in the area. No he did not. I note the $5.3 million that the Serious Fraud Office will use; still my question to Mr Hide is: why did the great scambuster not warn people use every office he could to warn people not to invest and warn them that they could be ripped off by those scumbags in those investment schemes. 
He remains silent. Yet tonight we see and over the course of this Parliament we have seen that the ACT party is very quick to expose anything Maori any corruption or any scam; it is into it. But do ACT party members of Parliament get off their chuffs to assist the Serious Fraud Office? I commend the director of the Serious Fraud Office who will be charged with actioning the Attorney-General’s $5.3 million spend. I commend David Bradshaw for the work he does. Like any person charged with upholding the law in this country every citizen’s duty is to assist the police and the law-enforcement agencies. That applies to everybody especially members of Parliament except those gurus in the ACT party. If members want to know why it is patch protection. That is what it is about. If anybody in this House would know about white-collar scams—and Mr Shirley can take this in any way he likes—it would be him and Rodney Hide. They have uncovered a few that is true but they are very selective about the ones they uncover and they do not like it— 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Again I am somewhat surprised that you have not interceded. Clearly the member has breached a whole succession of the Standing Orders. Furthermore the specific reference to Rodney Hide has been the subject of a personal statement in this House. The member has been banging away on that now for about a year. He has been brought to order before on it and he continues to breach that. Mr Chairperson I ask you again to ask him to stand withdraw and apologise for his outrageous unfounded inaccurate statements that caused offence. 
Hon Mark Burton 
: I was paying very close attention to what the member said. In fact in the part the member has taken exception to it seems to me that clearly the member was simply suggesting that Mr Hide and Mr Shirley had indeed engaged themselves in uncovering some scams but of a selective nature. I cannot see how he can possibly take exception. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I refer to Standing Order 117 which deals with personal reflections. The member has taken offence and I ask the member on his feet to withdraw. 
CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I withdraw. I want to talk about one point that has been raised about a personal explanation.