Cosgrove Clayton: General Debate 
Cosgrove Clayton: General Debate 
[Volume:667;Page:14212] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 There is a Maori proverb that says “To utter the name is to invoke the presence” or to put it another way “To steal the name is to steal something precious from a family”. My heart goes out to the family who suffered the crime of identity theft—members opposite may not like it of course; they treat it with disrespect—perpetrated by a representative in this House covered up by a Minister of the Crown and protected by the highest office holder holding a seat in this Chamber as of today the Prime Minister. The perpetrator was protected by him. 
As the Prime Minister wrapped his arms around Mr Rodney Philip Hide did anybody believe Mr Hide’s story that he did not know the detail of Mr Garrett’s crime—that he did not know the detail that Mr Garrett stole a dead baby’s identity and that he did not know there was a permanent suppression order? The argument that he did not know is false and the falsehood lies in the fact that Mr Hide covered it up. The only reason Mr Hide covered it up is that there was a permanent suppression order in place. If there had not been a permanent suppression order in place Mr Hide would have said to Mr Garrett that he would not be a member of Parliament in ACT—well he might have. 
Paul Quinn 
: Aided and abetted. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: But I suspect that Garth McVicar stands charged as a hypocrite today because to use Mr Quinn’s term he aided and abetted a man to get off a conviction with a reference. He aided and abetted a man to get permanent name suppression. As Phil Goff said I wonder whether Garth McVicar and David Garrett were complicit in all this with Rodney Hide— 
Paul Quinn 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am a bit confused. I understand the speaker is accusing me of aiding and abetting— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member knows that that is not a point of order. If the member is concerned about something the member in debate is speaking about he can take the next call. National has further calls. I apologise to the Hon Clayton Cosgrove. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: They were aided and abetted by Rodney Hide. Did any of those gentlemen—hear no evil speak no evil see no evil; Hide Garrett and McVicar—ever consider that in putting in place assisting and standing up for permanent name suppression which they all railed against in public they had gagged a 93-year-old woman and her family from ever speaking out on this crime? Did they consider that they had tortured that family day after day year after year as that 93-year-old woman had to watch Mr Hide Mr McVicar and Mr Garrett gallop around the country calling for zero tolerance? They railed against suppression orders. 
What Mr McVicar said is very interesting because he stands charged with utter hypocrisy. He said on 13 January 2007: “We are here for the victims a voice for them”. I ask Mr McVicar whether he has rung up the 93-year-old woman and asked her to join the “sensible sentencing club”—which to quote him no one wants to be a member of—given that she is a victim at his hands and his best mate’s hands of a crime that was covered up by Mr Hide and protected by the Prime Minister. 
Mr McVicar said the public was sick of watching as well-known defendants appear to use their position to get lighter sentences. He also said on 15 December 2007: “If a role model goes off the tracks the court should be sending a deterrent message.” I wonder what Mr McVicar says today and what the Sensible Sentencing Trust thinks of him. He never revealed the fact that he gave a character reference to get Mr Garrett off a conviction and that he provided an excuse and character reference for permanent name suppression. I wonder what he says to the Sensible Sentencing Trust. 
He sent me an email on the night the “three strikes” legislation was passed reminding me that he stands up for victims. Well he stands accused of hypocrisy and I invite him to go and meet those victims. I invite him to reconvene the victims’ conference he had in this Parliament and explain himself to those who were there because he is still wrapping his arms around Mr Garrett. 
I look at Mr Hide’s statements and I see a man whose truthfulness and factual statements are all over the place. On 15 September he told  
One 
News 
 that obtaining the fake ID was a prank. Later on  
Close Up 
 he was asked whether he had said it was a prank and he said that no it was horrific. On 15 September Rodney Philip Hide told  
Close Up 
 that he had known the circumstances of this case before Mr Garrett became a candidate. He reiterated that in the  
New Zealand Herald  
on 15 September. But on 17 September he said to Mr Garner that he could not remember whether Garrett had told him he had stolen a dead infant’s identity: “I don’t know what level of detail I knew.”