Wong Pansy: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Wong Pansy: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3408] 
PANSY WONG (NZ National) 
: 
 The Labour member Darren Hughes was so impressed with the Prime Minister’s speech that he could not sing her praises for more than 2 minutes! It was not a Prime Minister’s statement that was delivered in the House yesterday. Once again Prime Minister Helen Clark behaved like a dispassionate commentator rather than the leader of our country. She admitted that in her statement by saying that she would comment on the current state of the economy and on the Government’s key areas of activity for the year etc. etc. I am not sure though whether she would get a job as a radio commentator because the majority of her caucus members fell asleep and forgot to clap during her speech. How can any Prime Minister show such detachment and fail to articulate any conviction or vision let alone any purpose for New Zealand at this internationally challenging time? It is that lack of genuine conviction by the Prime Minister and her Cabinet that gives the public little confidence in the Government’s ability to deliver high economic growth and one standard of citizenship for all New Zealanders.  
In her 2001 Prime Minister’s statement Helen Clark attacked National for imposing high English-language requirements on potential migrants claiming that that stifled economic development. Just over a year later the Labour Minister of Immigration out of the blue announced the raising of the English-language requirements for potential migrants. It was laughable to hear the Prime Minister in her statement this year claim that raising the English-language requirements for potential migrants would contribute to economic growth. Can the Prime Minister make up her mind and explain to the country which of her statements is true? Currently the Association for Migration and Investment is suing the Government over the retrospective nature of that change. Two petitions have been lodged in Parliament protesting that change. Why does the Prime Minister continue to stay silent on that important issue?  
I would like the Prime Minister to explain her inconsistent attitude to all New Zealanders. Last night the Prime Minister hosted a Chinese New Year function and once again told the attendees there: “The Government recognises and values the importance of the Chinese community in New Zealand. It makes a huge economic and social contribution to our country. The many new Chinese migrants are also bringing new ideas a strong work ethic and valuable contacts with their countries of origin.” 
If that is the case why is the Government raising the English-language requirement in order to exclude more Chinese migrants? If that policy had been in place in the 1990s the size of the Chinese community would be well below 1 percent of the population rather than the current 3 percent. Interestingly the Prime Minister apologised to the Chinese community last year for the poll tax. The poll tax was imposed with the explicit intention of restricting Chinese migrants. I would like the Prime Minister to explain that inconsistent behaviour.  
Last night the President of the New Zealand Chinese Assocation warned the ethnic affairs office to achieve a positive outcome for the Chinese community in a few months’ time when the Government will be announcing its poll-tax reconciliation package. That warning should have been directed at the Government. It has done nothing to promote New Zealanders’ understanding of the pain and the hurt that the poll tax brought with it. Many affected parties are concerned at a possible backlash when that package is announced possibly around May. This irresponsible Government consistently puts short-term political gain ahead of taking necessary steps. The lack of public education and preparedness is leaving the Chinese community vulnerable to public hostility and is making it a potential scapegoat for political opportunism in the near future. I challenge the Labour Government to do the right thing: to start a public education campaign now in order to ensure that the members of the Chinese community will not be left to fend for themselves.  
Sadly the irresponsible and patronising attitude of this Government extends to many communities. We have learnt of the Hon Chris Carter’s graceless assault at Waitangi. Let us spare a thought for the Indian community. In the Easter break of 2002 I was invited along with the Minister to attend the Indian Central Association’s annual conference. For years Indian community leaders have given up their Easter break and travelled at their own expense to the national conference. Last year it was held in Auckland. I and other speakers carefully did our research and prepared written speeches in order to show our respect to those leaders. The Hon Chris Carter who represented the Prime Minister stood up spoke off the cuff and told the audience that Gandhi was a great man. I am sure that was news to the Indian leaders gathered there! His speech became worse: the leaders were then told that the Prime Minister loves eating curry.  
We then waited and waited with anticipation for the substance of Chris Carter’s speech but that was it. That was the speech that the Minister gave to the leaders of the Indian community—that Gandhi was a great man and Prime Minister Clark loves eating curry. He said that to the leaders of the Indian community who had travelled from throughout the country to attend the association’s conference. He treated them appallingly. The fact that the Asian communities are polite and determined to be hospitable to their guests does not excuse any Minister for not doing his or her homework. I want that Minister and other Ministers to stand up and explain the type of patronising arrogant behaviour that they show towards the ethnic communities while at the same time continuing to claim how important those communities are to Labour.  
The ethnic communities deserve respect. The Hon Bill English’s call for one standard of citizenship for all New Zealanders is timely. The ethnic communities have the right to expect to be respected and treated with dignity by the Government. This year there was not even a single mention by the Prime Minister of the ethnic communities in her statement. We must ensure that the participation of the ethnic communities in the political process is genuine and is not just window dressing. A debate on one standard of citizenship may be painful to the Labour Government because it tends to apply different standards to the different communities and to give them different speeches. But on the Opposition side of the House we believe that all citizens in New Zealand should be treated equally with dignity and respect.