Peters Winston: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peters Winston: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2012. Volume:678;Page:1166. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 There are times when you wait in this debate for an enlightened contribution but unfortunately that was not one of them. Did we hear about the per capita GDP of Finland? Oh no—cannot mention those facts. Or the total GDP per capita compared with Finland’s? No comment about that. Or the take-home pay of the Finnish people compared with New Zealand’s? No that member could not mention that because that is a comparison that National members cannot even stand up against. 
But our Government has a  
Cabinet Manual 
. Clearly Merrill Lynch never did. And all over New Zealand there was a huge sigh from local government at 2 o’clock this afternoon. There was a massive sigh from local government all around this country. But if the Prime Minister and Nick Smith think that they have dodged the bullets over the ACC dispute or debate then we have got news for them and it is all bad. We want to know the facts behind this. 
We remember that John Key said: “I expect high standards from my Ministers.” If those are high standards then you could parachute them out the backside of a rabbit. That is what you could do with them. He said: ‘I expect high standards.” That was his boast. If any member of Parliament from another party had written as a Minister a letter on ministerial letterhead like this National members would be screaming for blood. But there they sit all mute on the backbench hoping: “Well Nick’s gone; maybe they will put me there.” You can see the egregious self-centred concern they have not for Nick. They remind me of the Highveld in Africa where there are a whole lot of animals grazing there and out of the long grass comes this lion. And they all run like nobody’s business to get out of the way. But as soon as the lion gets the first one they all stop and start grazing. That is the National Party. That is the National Party. They emulate and resemble nature. 
 The Prime Minister Mr Key knew about this case. My question is: when did he know and how much did he know? That is where this issue is going now. He can think he can hide behind the second letter pulled out from 2010 as being the second unforgivable sin—not the one just last year. The unforgivable one was the one in 2010 which we did not know about. We want to see all the emails all the texts between Miss Pullar and Nick Smith. 
Su’a 
 William Sio 
: Were there any photographs? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Well there may be photographs. I am not pushing it too far because we are going from what we know and we are not going to speculate on what we do not know. 
Let me make it very very clear. What did the Prime Minister do about it when he knew? He knew for example that Miss Pullar was putting pressure on Nick Smith. What did he do about it? Apparently nothing. Did he advise Nick Smith as to what should be done? Did he advise any of his other colleagues? He knew what was going on. Take former party president Michelle Boag. Why was she involved? Why was this woman involved? She is someone who got lined up at court for trying to pervert the course of justice—do you remember—in a massive commission of inquiry. And she got fined for it. Nothing—no problem for the National Party. Talk about standards! They have not got any. 
Today we learnt about the second error the letter of 2010. You know something? This is not going to be a Pansy Wong situation where she jumped ship and said: “Look I’m resigning. I’m coming home Sammy.” Oh no. We know that there was a lot behind the Pansy Wong story which goes all the way to a former National Prime Minister—and they know as well. The problem with this Government is it did not press on and it should have. In this case we are. We are going to find out what it knew when it knew and what it did not do about it when it should have acted. 
Why did the Prime Minister not instruct his Minister to tell Miss Pullar to go and get help somewhere else? Why did he not do that? The issue is not a case for the Privacy Commissioner—[ 
Interruption 
] Pardon? 
Hon Shane Jones 
: We want to know. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Because he thought he could slide by and none of us would know. But unfortunately this is a small country and the National members are now finding out again what they should have acted on when they first knew. 
It is not a case for the Privacy Commissioner any more. This goes to the quality and transparency of Government.