Mark Ron; Carter DavidRON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): It is my privilege to rise on behalf of New Zealand First in this debate. I have got to say sometimes we sit here in New Zealand First in the middle of this Chamber and we look at National and Labour going at each other and—please forgive me—sometimes it just looks like two old drunks fighting. The question is: which one is going to fall over first and are you going to be able to contain yourself from splitting your sides? As Labour gets attacked for its new-found position opposing immigration and wanting to shut down immigration and opposing the mistreatment of immigrants or visitors then we have the revelations that Steven Joyce has been trumpeting out but you know here we go. That is all about camouflaging up National's own serious gaffe and failings in leadership.It is really interesting. We were talking this morning if you stay around this place—we used to have a saying in Waiōuru: if you stay in one spot long enough in Waiōuru you are going to meet everyone in the New Zealand Army because everyone comes through here. Well the same thing happens in this Chamber. If you sit here long enough you are going to hear the same old debates coming up over and over and over again. The only difference is the media is going to report them as though they are something new and they are not.In that respect let us go back to 2009 when former Māngere MP Taito Phillip Field was found guilty of 11 charges of bribery and corruption among other things. He used a Thai tradesperson to do work on his properties in Samoa and New Zealand in return for giving them immigration assistance. It sounds a little bit familiar to something that is happening right now we would say. While we might need to be corrected Mr Field's conviction was the first time a member of Parliament had been convicted under section 103 of the Crimes Act. The former Prime Minister the now Sir John Key commented at the time and said: What I can say is the whole event has been a very sorry saga and I think although it was an isolated incident it reflects badly on the New Zealand Parliament." Hold those words.Former Speaker the now Rt Hon Sir Lockwood Smith added at the time: "It demonstrates that all members of Parliament are accountable for their actions and that none of us are above the law."—none of us are above the law. Reflect on that because another section in the Crimes Act section 102 is entitled "Corruption and bribery of Minister of the Crown" and in light of events National this is worth reading: "Every Minister of the Crown or member of the Executive Council is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who corruptly accepts or obtains or agrees or offers to accept or attempts to obtain any bribe for himself or herself or any other person …" and it goes on talking about their capacity as a "Minister or member of the Executive Council."So what does Sir John Key and Todd Barclay both knowing that a crime was committed mean? Proving that it is never the action but the ham-fisted cover-up they then allowed taxpayers' money to be misappropriated for the purpose of a settlement. This enabled Mr Barclay to slip away and saw the case closed at least for the time being. How do we know this? Well as the text messages from the now Prime Minister Bill English himself backed up—with stories that shift like sand yet those messages admit a crime happened and that money was paid in the hope that it would all go away. Some might argue that that is perverting the course of justice. Some might say that actually their inability to use leadership and command authority and tell Mr Todd Barclay to get down to the police and make a statement and to cooperate with the police might have actually been interfering with the police in the performance of their duty—some might have argued.Now we have got a mixture of sex drugs and surely rock and roll will follow not far behind. But look at the size of the money the amount of money. On Radio Live former Labour Party president Mike Williams put the payout at $100000. Well New Zealand First wants to know that now. New Zealand First is interested in what Parliamentary Service has paid out. New Zealand First will be asking under the policy—collective employment agreement 2 individual employment agreement. When the breakdown in employment relationships results in 4 weeks' notice and 12 weeks' salary how come we end up at a figure of $100000? What is going on?New Zealand First is not going to let it lie there. We do not think the leader's budget should be used like a piggy bank or certain leaders should be allowed to negotiate their way out of embarrassing situations with special payouts. We want to know whether these payouts were legal whether they are accounted for and whether they are in compliance with the Parliamentary Service rules and regulations.It is really interesting. But the final comment surely has to go to the Prime Minister. If you are any sort of a leader Prime Minister why did you not act when you knew that Glenys Dickson had been threatened over the phone and a man had made a statement that "Your son has got a very pretty girlfriend."? Do not go to the selection—Mr SPEAKER: The member's time has expired."