Mahuta Nanaia: General Debate 
Mahuta Nanaia: General Debate 
[Volume:656;Page:5254] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 That was a glaring example of the National Government’s heavy-handed tactics—it took the speaking slot of its coalition partner. I want to highlight some of the concerning actions of this Government because those actions are heavy-handed and bullying and they are not resonating at all well throughout the country on a number of fronts. 
Let us take as an example Rodney Hide’s position on Auckland. He has just whipped through with his own proposition about what he will do to fix Auckland. Who likes it? Nobody. There has been resounding unrest through every community in Auckland but no Rodney turns up and says “Have I got a deal for you! This is the way things are going to happen.” In fact that highlights the theme of this National-led Government. It takes a heavy-handed bullying approach to the way it tries to introduce measures that affect people’s lives. 
More important we have seen in the House today something quite incredible. We have seen a Minister present information in the public domain without taking any advice whatsoever from her chief executive. That is unbelievable. Privacy issues regarding the details of that information should have been considered prior to the releasing of that information. 
All that those women wanted to do was say that the training incentive allowance has helped them to pursue other career opportunities. So they put their hands up and said they did not agree with the cuts to the training incentive allowance. They said they did not agree with the Government about the impact the change would have on solo mums throughout the country. So what did the Minister do to silence those criticisms? She released a whole lot of personal details into the public domain without taking any advice. It is very concerning because it is heavy-handed. It is a bullying approach to stopping people from expressing an opinion on real fundamental aspects of policy that affect their lives. 
I remember campaigning in 1999 when National cut the training incentive allowance to 60 percent of what people were eligible for at the time. There was huge criticism. Did National learn anything? No it continued to repeat the same mistakes. I know a solo mum who has taken up the training incentive allowance and pursued a law degree. I know another solo mum who has taken up the training incentive allowance and become a social worker. I have visited a community and voluntary organisation where at least two people have taken up the training incentive allowance. 
So we are not talking about just two women. We are talking about a lot of women in a whole lot of communities mainly in the community and voluntary sector. Some people have taken up careers like nursing and have used the training incentive allowance to support their pursuit of a career and to give their whanau a hand up. And what does the Minister do? She turns round and she dumps on them. Unbelievable! 
What I really want to know is whether she ignored any advice that she may have received from her overpaid political adviser? Did she ignore it? Did she even seek it? Or was the Minister just selective in accepting the advice that came to her so that she could say she did not receive the information and therefore could not make a decision based on it? No what the Minister said in the House today was that she made a personal judgment to release that information in the House. That has to be questioned by members on the opposite side of the House because making that determination to release private details is something other beneficiaries may well be concerned about. 
When will it stop? Community health providers are concerned about the way that the National Government is embarking on independent practice association - led health services in the primary health care sector. If those providers put their hands up and say that they disagree with a decision because it may impact on their ability to provide services in the community will their funding be cut? There is no answer. When will it stop? What about those on low and modest incomes who are concerned about the Government’s tax cuts? They get nothing. If people are earning $40000 or less they get absolutely nothing. These people are asking where the fairness is in that. Will they be stung in the pocket and made to pay more in other ways? 
When will it stop? What about superannuitants who are concerned about the sustainability of their pensions in the future because of the deferral of payments to the Superannuation Fund? What if their details are released into the public domain? When will it stop? That is what is most concerning about the Minister for Social Development and Employment making a personal judgment informing her chief executive officer after the fact but none the less releasing private details into the public domain. It is something that primarily affects the lives of people who are vulnerable. It should stop.