Hodgson Pete: General Debate 
Hodgson Pete: General Debate 
[Volume:631;Page:3556] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I think the question the Hon Maurice Williamson needs to answer is where his vote is going in terms of the leadership of the National Party. Where is his vote going? [ 
Interruption 
] It is going for Maurice! He said he is going to vote for himself. That means there are four in the ring and I hope the member when he puts his name up in his National caucus gets a seconder because if he does not there will only be three and that means the voting procedures will become less complex—not that they are not complex enough now. 
The prisoner’s dilemma in the National Party is as follows: people who voted for the Hon Bill English when he lost the leadership the last time that party had a spill do not want to vote against Don Brash the current leader because if they do that John Key will win. One thing we know about Bill English’s supporters is that they do not like Dr Don Brash but they like John Key even less. That is the prisoner’s dilemma. So those members are supporting the current leader of the National Party the very same person who defeated the Hon Bill English by accident—do members recall that it was by accident? Bill English’s supporters are supporting Don Brash now because they do not like John Key at all. 
The National Party went into the last election saying it was in favour of policies for the mainstream but it funded its campaign by use of Exclusive Brethren money which is the antithesis of mainstream. Shadowy white men who do not vote fronted up with more than a million bucks—[ 
Interruption 
]—National members do not like it—and the National Party had the gall to say it was representing the mainstream. 
The National Party put $11 billion on the table. There has never been a bigger bribe in New Zealand’s history—not ever; not even Muldoon went near that. The National Party put $11 billion on the table and its members took their laptops around the country to show individual New Zealanders how rich they would become. They bribed they deceived by saying they were mainstream and they lost. They bribed deceived and lost—and that is the lesson. New Zealanders are not stupid. They looked and they decided that the country would not be able to afford the $11 billion. 
But what has happened since? In every question time since the election the National Party has required the Government to spend more money—not that National would have had a chance to spend it if it had won the election because it would all have gone on its big bribe. Even in today’s question time the National Party said it wanted more money to be spent. But National members went to the electorate only 9 months ago with $11 billion worth of bribery and they lost. 
I am very very pleased that this Government is still here because it is delivering on Working for Families and it is delivering on transport. Do members know that $750 million extra went into the health sector a few weeks ago? If the National Party had been in Government it would have spent the extra $750 million that Labour has spent on the health sector across the entire Government vote. I do not know how much the health sector would have got. It would have got little or nothing. It might have had a decrease yet National members send letters to Ministers all around the place that say they want more money to be spent. Those members question the Government every question time demanding that more money be spent. They have an attitude to politics that is best summed up by a word beginning with “h” that is not able to be used in this House. That is the situation with the National Party. 
What we do not know of course is how secret its secret agenda is these days. Does Dr Brash still say: “Frankly I don’t care who runs the schools.”? Does Dr Brash still say: “I would have done what President Bush did in Iraq.” or that the nuclear-free legislation would be “gone by lunchtime”? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I just remind members to look at Speakers’ rulings 58/4 and 59/1. Those rulings relate to members not being able to move seats in order to facilitate their making interjections. I just caution members about that. Secondly Mr Hodgson made a hard-hitting speech so some interjections could have been expected but not so many as to drown out the member. The Chair will not allow a member to be drowned out.