Parker David: Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Parker David: Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:634;Page:5874] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Energy) 
: 
 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—the same people who had private detectives tailing me and other members of Parliament and who took part in other disreputable practices—of which not one cent was included in its election return. 
The 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. 
There 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—Mr Ewen-Street the former Green member—and 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. 
It 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. 
This 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.