Robson Matt: General Debates 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robson Matt: General Debates 
[Sitting date: 15 October 2003. Volume:612;Page:9198. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon MATT ROBSON (Deputy Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 Today is a members’ day which reminds me that the last members’ day 17 September was a black day in this House. It was the day that the United Future party filibustered on the Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill brought in by Steve Chadwick. The performance of Mr Dunne was an attempt to take up as much time as possible in order to stop the inevitable from happening. The inevitable that I am talking about is of course the fact that an overwhelming majority in this Parliament supports the health and safety measures contained in the bill. The overwhelming majority in this House is anxious to protect the often not-well-paid workers in the hospitality industry from the cancer-causing fumes directed at them in their workplace. 
There is nothing unusual about the bill. Major cities and advanced nations around the world are well ahead of New Zealand in this field. Although it is of course fair enough that United Future opposes legislation it if wishes it is a conservative party led by a man who was elected as a Labour MP only to end up in Jim Bolger’s National - United Cabinet. It is a party whose members have made it overwhelmingly clear over the past 2 months that they would choose a National-ACT—possibly joined by New Zealand First—Government over our Labour-Progressive coalition after the 2005 election if they ever had the power to choose. The filibustering started in August when we saw United Future working with its old ally National on the smoke-free environments legislation which will protect workers—workers who belong to families but get no help in this House from the party branding itself as pro-family; workers who would benefit from 4 weeks’ annual leave so that they can afford to remain in the productive workforce while also having families; workers whom the pro-family party seemingly could not give a toss about. 
Back in 1992 Mr Dunne told the  
New Zealand Herald 
 that he wanted all members of Parliament to sign a code of conduct pledge aimed at restoring public respect for the institution of Parliament. But the reputation of Parliament not only has been damaged by filibustering it has also been damaged by those who supported the ruthless programme of selling assets to any old foreign bidder in the administrations of the 1980s and 1990s. Mr Dunne participated in the two administrations that did that. He participated in both sides along with the ACT party leaders. He was part of an administration that sold public assets and ruthlessly broke firm electoral pledges such as that on the superannuation surtax. 
Parliament’s reputation would be enhanced if United Future and New Zealand First would tell the public whether they will support our coalition Government or a Don Brash – Richard Prebble coalition. United Future will not enhance public confidence in Parliament by filibustering and signing meaningless pledges about codes of conduct but Parliament’s reputation would be enhanced if United Future and New Zealand First would tell us about their post-election intentions before people vote. United Future does not in fact have the courtesy to tell voters whether it will support the Labour-Progressive coalition or a National-ACT alternative after the 2005 election. To divert attention from this issue its leader has mused aloud about one day being Prime Minister himself but the only real contest at the next election is that between our side and the looming Brash-Prebble—and possibly Peters—coalition. 
The Progressive party leader Jim Anderton the chairperson of the ministerial committee tackling drug and alcohol abuse will hold a public debate on Tuesday next week with the Green Party’s pro - cannabis legislation campaigner Mr Nandor Tanczos. That is one of the real debates—the question of drug abuse particularly amongst our young people. The Progressive party and the Greens are the two parties that will be campaigning openly at the next election to join with Labour in a coalition. The Progressives’ opposition to a liberal easy-going and “me first” drugs policy stance is not based on some abstract morality principle. It is a practical concern about the effects on young people of their abusing alcohol P cannabis and tobacco because young people are the most vulnerable in our society and need guidance firmness and leadership from their Parliament. Teenagers in Kaikohe or Gisborne who deserve the respect of parliamentarians need to be told firmly what they may not want to hear: “If you smoke dope if you abuse alcohol then what you’ll find when you are 20 and ready for a job or training is that employers may not want you because you haven’t got the right work habits life skills and attitudes.”