Peters Winston: Historic Places Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Peters Winston: Historic Places Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:2956] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I just want to say to the previous speaker—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh yes that is another genius from the National Party who will be here for 5 seconds before she goes. I say to the previous speaker that he made a comment at the end of his speech about a claim that I had made. If he is any sort of a gentleman he will produce evidence to this House tonight to back up what he said or he will get up and apologise. I tell the MP from the West Coast not to listen to Mr Henare but to listen to the member who is asking him to back up what he said or be known around the West Coast as someone who does not behave like a West Coaster. 
The previous speaker made a claim that he knows he cannot back up and the reason is that the National Party drafted his speech for him and sent him here innocently naively and wantonly to repeat a lie—something that is not true and National knows is not true. It is just like Gerry Brownlee’s comment today about Mr Foote having got funds from America. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What’s that got to do with this speech? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: He raised the issue. He made the point twice. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am allowing the member at least 2 minutes in rebuttal; then he will come to the bill. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Here is the real point. The member came to the Chamber with a National research unit speech. He was challenged on it and he still could not finish the speech after points of order without repeating the allegation which was false. I will ask him one more time. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: I seek leave to table my speech notes. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member has sought leave to table his speech notes. He has sought leave at the wrong time but he is entitled to seek leave. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I do not want people to find out that he was the person who wrote that speech. He was asked during the time he was delivering it who wrote that rubbish. He did not say he had done so but now he is saying that. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Can we now come to the bill. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This has gone beyond making a point. [ 
Interruption 
] I know the member has to speak but he is implying that my colleague who has spoken was referring to him. I have been listening to this debate at length. There is no justification for what the member is saying and I ask that he be pulled into line and asked to talk about the bill that is before the House. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am sure he will talk about the bill. That is sufficient in rebuttal. But it is not right to say that the previous speaker was not referring to the Rt Hon Winston Peters. He was referring to him. That is my view of it and  
Hansard 
 will show that too. 
Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. During the course of the point of order raised by the chief National whip he was interjected on very loudly by Mr Henare. I wonder whether you heard that because you did not appear to reprimand him for interjecting on his own whip. There is an understanding that members will hear points of order in silence. I cannot see why Mr Henare does not believe there should be one law for all in that regard. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The member is absolutely right and perhaps I was a bit lenient. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: What has been evidenced— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: When did you get a copy of the bill? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: It has been around a long time whilst that member was out of Parliament for the last few years— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: And look what happened. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: —whilst that member was not in Parliament. The listeners to tonight’s radio broadcast of Parliament will have detected that National Party members are very good at dishing it out but boy do they have a thin skin when they have to take it—and take it they will. This is an unfair contest actually; they should all be here. While I am at it where is the “Dead Man Walking”? 
Anyway I come back to the point I wanted to mention in particular. Clause 19 of the bill inserts new section 42 “Membership of Board” into the principal Act. Subclause (3) provides: “At least 3 of the persons appointed under subsection (1)(b) must in the opinion of the Minister after consultation with the Minister of Maori Affairs be qualified for appointment having regard to their knowledge of te ao Maori (Maori worldview)”— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Te Ao Maori. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: That was no expert in Maori language who just shouted out over there. People can just ask any Maori in this Parliament whether or not he is an expert. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: More expert than you are bro. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Well that is true but in a very limited way. Subclause (3) goes on to state: “and tikanga Maori (Maori protocol and culture).” 
What is important is that that is the way to make appointments: on the basis of qualifications capacity and ability rather than just by saying we will make an ethnic choice and hope for the best. New Zealand First has always subscribed to doing that—which is one of the reasons why having argued for a long long time for appointments to be based on ability and talent regardless of race we were disappointed to have a political party come along and purloin our policies. [ 
Interruption 
] Oh yes! Do members see? As I said at the time it is one thing to walk out of a saloon and steal a man’s horse but it is something else to stay on its back while he is heading out of town. 
The National Party is voting against clause 19. National is not voting for it; it is voting against it. Although that party can purloin policy it does not have any understanding of commitment to or comprehension of what is being said here. That is why one day those members support the Maori Party and the next day they do not. National’s deputy leader has said he wants the Maori seats to remain and the leader says that he does not want that. 
Paula Bennett 
: What year are you in? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: National members say they are in favour of the Maori Land Court one day and it goes the next day. Then those members walk out on a powhiri. Along come the three women—so-called—steeped in Maori culture of course. One of them Ms Bennett is sitting over there. They say they do not care what Maori protocol is and that it has to be changed to their protocol because they are National Party MPs—or in other words they are goddesses. 
Eric Roy 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You have cautioned the member to come to the bill now and he is again attacking members in a way that has no relevance at all to the debate that should be in progress. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I am trying to make an analogy— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I know what you were trying to do. Could you come back to the bill please. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Well how was I going? [ 
Interruption 
] Do members see the issue? If they look at subclause (3) of clause 19 and have it explained to them by people who do know what they are talking about—namely Mr Donnelly and myself—then they will see that that is the way to choose people for their positioning rather than on the basis of ethnicity and the hope that somehow because a person is Maori he or she will be right and good for Maori culture. On many occasions in the past that has not been what has happened. 
Just by way of illustration I say we have to understand Maori culture in order to comprehend what Mr Donnelly and I are saying and what New Zealand First is saying. Members cannot go swanning along to a powhiri sit themselves down the front and say they are goddesses of the National Party—they are MPs—and regardless of what Maori have been doing for a thousand years because those members are so important they want Maori to change their protocol. When we look at subclause (3) we have to understand the full ambience and nuances of Maori culture. I could ask those of us who are Scottish whether they have ever seen a Scottish clan led by a woman. Aha we do not see that do we? It is OK for the National Party to behave like that but when it comes to Maori those members are all over the place—and I knew that when Tau arrived in this House he would be no help at all in that respect.