Brown Peter: State Sector Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Brown Peter: State Sector Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7364] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I have to say to the member who just resumed his seat that he read that speech exceedingly well. Perhaps after a little more rehearsal he will have it off pat. Then perhaps he will understand exactly what he is talking about. 
Hon Annette King 
: Keep practising those walk-outs. 
PETER BROWN 
: I know nothing about walk-outs. The way this bill has been handled in this House is absolutely disgraceful. We have here a 12-page bill and a 12-page Supplementary Order Paper that appeared in this House last Wednesday and has not been referred to a select committee but changes things dramatically in terms of the Department for Courts. The member over there Mr Smith said he was not aware that the Supplementary Order Paper abolished the Department for Courts. I shall read clause 3(b)(iii): “the abolition of the Department for Courts and the transfer of its functions to the Ministry of Justice.” Members of United Future voted for that for no select committee and clearly they did not even understand what they were told at their briefing. They call themselves the common-sense party—the party that is dedicated to the interests of New Zealand and New Zealanders. That is the biggest load of waffle that I have heard for some time. 
Whilst the bill was going through the Committee stage I took special note of who made a contribution and to what extent particularly from the Government. There was only one speech from the Government and that was from the Minister on the title. 
Stephen Franks 
: He then denied what he said in the next interjections. 
PETER BROWN 
: I think he did. I think the member is correct. There was nothing at all from the Government members from the Labour members. There was not one single contribution during the whole debate when the bill went through the Committee stage. There was nothing at all from the Greens. There was not one single contribution from the Greens. The abolition of the Department for Courts is quite radical stuff and the Greens sit there in silence. There was not one speech from United Future in the Committee stage. 
Stephen Franks 
: They know everything. They’ve been briefed. 
PETER BROWN 
: I know. They have been briefed. They did not even know. They interjected on the Hon Richard Prebble and denied that the Department for Courts was to be abolished. They did not even know that. They did not know that the Department for Courts is an employer of nearly 2000 people. That member can sit there and smirk and say that they voted for it that they do not care that the public has no say that New Zealanders have no say; they voted for it because they are the common-sense party. That is what they are saying to New Zealanders. 
Stephen Franks 
: It’s called prerogative. 
PETER BROWN 
: That is the polite term for what it is. I can think of another term. It is disgraceful. One thing that makes me hot under the collar in this House and it has happened on too many occasions now is that bills go through with fairly significant Supplementary Order Papers not being referred to a select committee. This House stands for democracy and we should all stand for that. We should all be proud of the democratic process we have here. The public expects it. Indeed the public demands it. We have no right to come to this House and take them for granted. That is absolutely treating the public and the people of this country in contempt. If that is the best that United Future members can do it is absolutely not good enough by a long way. 
When the bill first progressed there was no United Future. It did not have a “Future” and the United Future member without the “Future” was voting with the National Party. When United Future got a “Future” it went backwards and became autocratic. It knows better than everybody else. United Future is displaying that it knows better than anyone else. Now it votes exactly the opposite to what it did when it did not have a “Future”. That is the quickest way I can think of to be written into the history books and to become “United Past”. 
New Zealand First recognises that there is some merit in what the Government wants to do in this bill. But the procedure to push this bill through with no democratic process whatsoever is absolutely disgraceful. We will not be supporting this bill—not at all. I regret that a new political party can come into this House and display the arrogance that it knows it all and is not prepared to refer a significant bill like this and a significant Supplementary Order Paper to a select committee. United Future should be standing up for New Zealanders and ensuring that their democratic rights are looked after. New Zealand First opposes this bill.