Rich Katherine: General Debate 
Rich Katherine: General Debate 
[Volume:630;Page:2706] 
KATHERINE RICH (National) 
: 
 I suggest that that member leave Shakespeare alone and concentrate on the shameful position that Helen Clark has taken on PlunketLine. If we are going to bring out the old cliché of “to be or not to be” we should remember that thousands of mothers and families who use the Plunket service are wondering just that question. The Prime Minister’s position on PlunketLine is duplicitous dishonest and just plain dumb. We have seen an explanation in the House today from the Prime Minister that demonstrates exactly the misinformation that the Government is pedalling about PlunketLine. 
Jill Pettis 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is unparliamentary to refer to a member as duplicitous and dishonest and I ask that that comment be withdrawn. 
KATHERINE RICH 
: Speaking to the point of order Mr Speaker if the member had been listening she would have heard that I did not refer to Helen Clark; I referred to the position and the argument. I am able to do that under the Standing Orders. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you. Just before the member resumes her speech I tell members that the use of cellphones in the House is not permitted. They should be switched off within the debating chamber. The use of cellphones is against Speakers’ rulings. 
KATHERINE RICH 
: If we are looking at misinformation we need to look only at the answers that were given in the House today. Helen Clark and Pete Hodgson continue to point out that PlunketLine handles only one in nine calls. What they do not point out is that PlunketLine is contracted to handle only a certain number of calls and the number of calls to PlunketLine far outnumbered the volume of calls paid for by the Government. What they also do not point out is that Healthline had a huge resource that was not available to PlunketLine. 
In terms of the low call-answering rates Ministers ignore that at certain times Healthline had three times the number of nurses answering one-third of the call volume that PlunketLine had to face. Of course Healthline looked like a star. What Helen Clark and Pete Hodgson have not explained is why the Government has snubbed a national icon for a multinational. Being overseas-owned is not in itself an issue but if one looks at the directors on that board one will find that there is not one domiciled director of McKesson New Zealand Ltd. Members can contrast that with PlunketLine. Kay Crowther and Plunket are supported by hundreds of thousands of Kiwi mothers and babies who use that service. 
The Government does not point out that it has given the Well Child service to an organisation that has limited experience in handling Well Child calls. McKesson does not even have enough nurses to answer the calls. Evidence of that can be seen in the local papers where it is advertising for Well Child nurses. It is salt in Plunket’s wounds that most of the nurses will actually come from its own service to staff the new service run by McKesson. 
This Government continues to put out misinformation and to promote the idea that Plunket has made huge mistakes. Actually Plunket was caught between a rock and a hard place. The Government paid for it to answer only up to 70000 calls. Plunket surpassed that contracted figure; it answered 76000 calls. The problem for Plunket was that it was a successful service and double that number of people tried to call. The Government should introduce a bit of honesty to the debate and take into account how New Zealanders feel about that service. 
One of the things that many New Zealanders already feel for Plunket is a great amount of trust; they do not feel that trust for Healthline. When mothers speak to a Plunket nurse or a PlunketLine nurse there is already an inherent trust that has been built up over a hundred years. They do not feel that way when they talk to any other Government agency—a Department of Child Youth and Family Services worker or a worker from Work and Income New Zealand. They will talk about certain sorts of things with Plunket nurses; they will not do so with other people. 
PlunketLine is a well-known brand. Now the Government will give millions of dollars to Healthline so it can be promoted. That was not necessary because most New Zealanders know PlunketLine—it is probably one of the most well-known brands in this country. One of the things that needs to be emphasised is the connection that organisation has with New Zealand families and that has been built up over a hundred years. That connection cannot be replaced by a new organisation. 
The key issue here is the two-faced way that some members of Parliament who are still in this House campaigned while in Opposition to save PlunketLine yet they do something else when they are in a position of power. Helen Clark led protests up and down this country to save the service. She said: “Don’t let PlunketLine go cold.” But she is the very person to axe it—the very person who has made the decision that PlunketLine will not be supported. So I think she needs to look at herself in the mirror. Her political nose has gone off. Now she is backing something that in Opposition she spoke very strongly against.