Power Simon: Valedictory Statements 
Power Simon: Valedictory Statements 
[Volume:676;Page:21754] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I have been surprised by some of the reaction I have had to my decision to retire. All sorts of motivations have been ascribed to my decision. One of my Cabinet colleagues who is always concerned about how these sorts of things will look for the Government was keen to spread the rumour that the real reason could be traced to the existence of a series of incriminating photographs. I was alarmed at the speed at which Murray McCully was able to invent such a scenario—well maybe not. Some think it is unnatural that a politician might choose to leave politics well before they absolutely had to. As recently as last month a constituent wrote to me angrily demanding my resignation. He will get pretty excited when he catches up with the news. 
Although I prefer to focus on the past 3 years there is no escaping the fact that I have been here for 12. I was elected to Parliament in late 1999 as a 28-year-old following a very narrow victory in the great seat of Rangitikei by 289 votes. When I first came to this House I was encouraged to be partisan an aggressive debater and a contributor to the partisan approach and told that the most important thing in Opposition was to hold the Government to account. I say thanks to Roger Sowry. That was a view that I passed on to others who came after me and on one level it remains fundamentally correct.  
I am not one of those who yearn for a question time devoid of robust exchanges where members might acknowledge points made by their opposite number with a genteel “Well played sir.” Question time is for those who know how to use it still the best opportunity to fulfil one of Parliament’s primary functions: scrutiny of the executive. But my perspective on politics changed dramatically in my third term in Opposition when I nearly went round the bend with the grinding negativity and lack of progress that can become so entrenched on the Opposition benches.  
So I began to plan for Government not knowing whether we would win as a means of doing something constructive. With a few close colleagues I started to piece together what a justice and commerce agenda might just look like. Politicians must have a plan; a plan that is in place early and one that they are prepared to lead. I believe that politics is 90 percent preparation and 10 percent execution. 
At a day-to-day level politics particularly at ministerial level can quickly deteriorate to the daily management of tasks: dealing with papers the media Official Information Act requests question time written questions and expectations from colleagues and your party—tasks that can become all consuming and tasks that in the end do not improve the lives of New Zealanders at all. That is not why we run the Parliament. We run to lead agendas to improve the lot of our countrymen to push change and to execute on ideas. 
People do not spend years getting elected more years wanting to get into Cabinet to then say: “Well I’ve managed that week well. I’ve minimised risk had no view took no decisions and stayed out of trouble. Well done me!”. Once in office you have to do something and that is why having a plan matters. 
Ideas also matter. In politics ideas matter more than the political players themselves because all of us will come and go but the ideas will endure. Politicians should manage less and lead more. I love the quote from the influential Republican media adviser Roger Ailes who was moved to quip: “When I die I want to come back with real power. I want to come back as a member of a focus group.” 
Actually taking a position and selling it persuading and debating is what politics is all about. Yeah it sounds idealistic and maybe it is but I always told myself I would leave politics before the idealism left me. That does not mean that we should not be open to compromise where it improves the eventual decision in a more democratic way. 
A formative experience in my last year in Opposition triggered a fundamental shift in the way that I viewed politics. As chair of the Privileges Committee in the last term of Parliament I had to chair the inquiry into the matter of certain donations to the New Zealand First Party. My view of politics and how best to participate in it was altered from that point on. This was a highly partisan issue in front of a parliamentary committee that had a history of being above politics. I realised then that working with other political parties to reach consensus where possible was a legitimate way to advance legislation and to progress an agenda. Not everyone agrees with me on this approach but I know I am right. 
My experience has been that expanding the decision-making mandate without sacrificing the kernel of the idea has improved the quality of the legislative product immeasurably. That means not being afraid to back down not being afraid to reconsider a position after listening to an alternative view and at least in one case not being afraid to amend the bill on the floor of the House in response to high-quality debate. It may not have been understood by all and you have to grit your teeth a bit through the inevitable “Government Back-down” headlines but with the support of the Prime Minister and the freedom he gave me to operate in that manner on many many bills it worked. 
So much of Parliament’s time is spent attacking each other trying to outmanoeuvre each other and just plain loathing each other. It can be an incredible waste of energy and time and whenever I was sitting in frustrating cross-party discussions or in the House during a particularly rough debate I was always reminded of Michael Corleone’s edict: “Never hate your enemies. It just clouds your judgment.” 
Good and meaningful policy is also informed and shaped by personal interactions. To the day I die I will never forget sitting in the lounge of Gil and Lesley Elliott in Dunedin listening to them describe to me their experiences of the justice system. It had a profound effect on me and the way that I viewed our legal system. Good decent kind people whose lives were destroyed by tragedy deserve our help not a slow-motion replay of the horror that they went through. My interactions with the communities that deal with victims of sexual violence have similarly affected my view on how our justice system should operate. Likewise the way our court system deals with children is unacceptable: long delays barbaric practices all in the name of tradition and precedent—all abject nonsense. 
There is still so much for others to do and many problems remain deeply embedded in our country’s culture. What the hell is it about the psyche of this country that we feel the need to go home and hit someone be it a partner a child or another family member? This is totally unjustifiable. It is wrong and it is an indictment on us as a society. Our legal system needs to protect these people and I hope I have made a small contribution to remedying these despicable acts of injustice and cowardice. 
The decisions we face are often difficult but that is why we are here. I was surprised to learn when I became Minister of Justice that many of my predecessors had delegated the royal prerogative of mercy applications to an Associate Minister. I have found this to be some of the most interesting and challenging work I have done as a Minister. However I remain troubled by a number of these cases. Though I do not criticise those involved in the process at all I think there is merit in reinforcing the independence of the advice from the Ministry of Justice and moving decision making to a separate independent body. Although the Peter Ellis matter was straightforward in the end—because appeal rights had not yet been exhausted; a basic requirement of the exercise of the prerogative of mercy—the wider case worried me and continues to worry me. 
It is our job to tackle the tough issues the issues the public pays us to front up to and come to a view on. There are many many debates that Parliament does not want to have for fear of losing votes or not staying on message: abortion adoption law children’s rights and sexual violence issues. I do not share this timid view. The truth is if we do not have those debates here where will we have them? 
Surely people do not run for Parliament claiming they want to make a difference only to vote for the status quo. Otherwise presumably they would be so satisfied with the way the country was running they would not feel the need to seek public office in the first place. Phrases such as “It wasn’t like that in my day” “Precedent and tradition matter” or my personal favourite “It never did me any harm” to justify no change simply do not reflect the new reality of a fast-moving modern country. 
I have a great deal of confidence in the New Zealand public’s high level of intelligence and engagement in discussing those issues at some point whenever that may be but I also have great confidence that Parliament is capable of rising to the challenge and dealing with those issues with dignity and distinction. 
I have been privileged to serve with some wonderful people. Some have said that I am going too early; some have not. But I have loved every minute of it and that is exactly the right time to go. 
A few specific thanks are in order. 
To the Prime Minister whose confidence I have enjoyed and who has given me plenty of rope some of which I have used. Of the 462 papers I took to Cabinet on only one did you phone and say: “I can’t support this one Simon.” and I am extremely grateful for those that you did Prime Minister. Thanks for everything John. You have been great to work with. 
To my friend Bill English. Loyalty in politics is sadly a rare commodity but it matters in this game. Thanks. Your depth and breadth on policy matters and personal grit I greatly admire even for a dour South Island social conservative. 
My benchmate Gerry has the best instincts in the game is often ahead of the pack and has a wonderful self-deprecating humour. I have really enjoyed your company on the benches Gerry. Nothing sums Gerry up more acutely than the time we went to get fish and chips for the caucus during urgency in the early hours of the morning in the year 2000—it must have been about 4 o’clock in the morning. He stormed into the fish and chip shop. There was this tiny little man behind the counter and Gerry stormed up and said: “I want 42 pieces of fish 40 scoops of chips and 31 hotdogs.” Then he looked at me and he said: “And what do you want?”. [ 
Interruption 
] Half true? 
To the class of 1999: Tolley Tisch Heatley and Hutch. We still have a drink every Tuesday the House sits and you have provided me with a wealth of grounded opinions and reflections. 
To my friend Chester Borrows for your gentle common sense. 
To my old political friend Katherine Rich a great source of advice and wisdom. The “dark years” as we called them were better for a whisky and a chat about the day’s events. Katherine you would have been a stunning Minister. 
To my team in the Rangitikei: Bruce Norma Suze Jacky Sonia Christine Viv Stuart John O Merv Marion Helen and Di. Thank you for everything. Thank you for getting me here. 
To the people of Rangitikei I will always be grateful for your confidence in me. 
To GJ. I would not be here if it were not for your help in 1999. Thanks very much. And of course the Mole. A plan conceived in a pub in Auckland in 1997 was executed. Thanks Mole. 
To Professor Margaret Clark for first turning my mind to a political career and for keeping me on my toes since then. 
To Peta Bamber who spent 5 years with me in Opposition—grim times; I do not know how you coped. Thank you. 
Thanks to my seconded departmental private secretaries who bought into the cause and to Sarah for keeping my whereabouts orderly. To my ministerial staff the best in the Beehive. To the Pit: Stephen Kate Brent and Rachael. They are simply the cleverest hardest-working fairest people I know in politics; utterly objective scrupulously honest. You are all stars. 
To Jemma my senior private secretary who has been with me for 7 years and who is referred to in my office as “the left side” as in “the left side of his brain”. Jemma you have run my life for so long that you will be ready for something new outside of Parliament. I have never met anyone or worked with anyone as professionally competent as you are. Thank you for everything and you can feel free to roll your eyes behind my back. 
Finally to my friends and family. Friends put up with so much when one is in politics. As my close friend James said to me when I told him I was retiring: “Thank God. You’ve become such a pain in the arse.” Well I am keen to make up for it and brothers I thank you for your patience. 
To my family. Thanks for your unstinting support mum and dad when I decided to get in then out of politics. 
And to Lisa Sam and Harry. I think some of the best advice I got as a Minister was on the sports field sidelines on Saturday mornings watching the boys’ sport and that is where I intend to spend more time. Each day while I was shaving I would look in the mirror and ask myself the same question: will those two boys be proud of what I do today? I hope you will be. Lisa thank you for everything. Private life awaits. It will be fun; I guarantee it. 
So Mr Speaker I bid you farewell and leave you with one thought. We all know that it is a privilege being a member of Parliament. But the most satisfaction should come from doing rather than being. 
Sitting suspended from 6.05 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.