Peters Winston: Social Security (Entitlement Cards) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Social Security (Entitlement Cards) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:639;Page:9152] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Associate Minister for Senior Citizens) 
: 
 I do not think the member Heather Roy should refer to her leader like that—talk about function creep! There are certain rules in this Parliament and there are certain standards. 
The member talked about function creep as though we are not aware that there are two great dangers. Function creep is a danger with any new technology; our job is to set parameters and to always be conscious of it. The other danger is that the technology soon becomes obsolete. Well that is life. 
But I suppose that member who thinks it is right to take 6 months in the army at the taxpayers’ expense—at her age—might have missed what every other member has been working on in her absence. She would not have been brought up to date. 
Sandra Goudie 
: Personal attack. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: It is not a personal attack. I find it an affront to the taxpayer for someone to desert her role as a member of Parliament for 6 months and think that somehow she is fulfilling her democratic and constitutional responsibilities—in particular given that her leader was off dancing with the stars at the time and the party was without representation in this House. 
Heather Roy 
: What’s that got to do with the bill? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: How is that relevant to the bill? Well if that member had been here when these discussions were going on she would know. 
Sandra Goudie 
: She was. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: No she was not. She was off with the army. 
I want to say this: how would the Law Society have known about the issue of the microchip if not for the fact that we brought it to its attention? [ 
Interruption 
] I know that the member wants to persist with looking in the mirror and talking about function creep but she should desist and get back to listening. 
The second thing is how the Privacy Commissioner would be aware of this issue. Well amongst other things we spoke to the commissioner and said we wanted to be alongside her office’s consideration of this issue because these are serious issues and we wanted to be certain that in attempting to ensure that people were brought up to date with the modern requirements of being a consumer and using their consumer power of numbers we did not somehow introduce any evil that was foreseeable or predictable. That is why the commissioner knew about the issue. 
The third thing is that these matters raised today were already part of the Cabinet paper and the Cabinet paper approvals. Although it is OK to raise the issue once to go on month in and month out knowing that these matters have been and are the subject of the Cabinet paper that brought this measure about is purely a waste of Parliament’s time. 
The last thing I want to say is this: to now talk about other cards being affected by this card’s technology is again drivel nonsense and scaremongering. It is scaremongering. It is not the case that other cards will be affected. This card is a stand-alone card. 
Sandra Goudie 
: He’s lost the plot. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Lost the plot? Well I tell that member that if all she has done in the time she has been in Parliament is talk about mangroves then she never had a plot in the first place. In fact when one talks about it that way one sees that her whole presence has been a conspiracy against her electorate. 
I thought Judy Turner handled this matter in a responsible way. I thought Taito Phillip Field handled his concerns in a responsible way. From National we are seeing the same kind of obstructionist behaviour that it indulged in when we sought to give the retired far better amounts in their retirement. National members shouted from the rooftops that we could not afford it. Then their leader Don Brash turned up at the last campaign and said they now agreed. On the question of savings they obstructed— 
Sandra Goudie 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Please clarify how the comments being made are relevant to the bill in question. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Speaking to the point of order can I say the comments are relevant to the bill because I am describing the kind of behaviour I see from certain National members as not being new. I am just talking about it in passing. If National members cannot take it then they should not come to this House. This is a tough arena here. They should not be so soft and pathetic. 
Hon Members 
: Mr Chair— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: First I have to dispose of the point of order. 
Heather Roy 
: The Minister raised the issue of Cabinet papers. He referred to comments made in Cabinet papers that none of us—certainly none of us on this side of the Committee—were privy to. I ask him to table those papers in the House so that we can see that they contain the things he says they do. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: We have gone on to a second point of order here. The one raised before by Sandra Goudie is disposed of. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Speaking to the second point of order which was raised by Heather Roy can I say there is a thing called the Official Information Act. The rest of us use it from time to time—some more than others. If the member wants to see the papers then she should leave off the military training and put in an Official Information Act request. 
Judith Collins 
: Mr Chairman I refer you to Standing Order 368: “Whenever a Minister quotes from a document relating to public affairs a member may on a point of order require the Minister to lay the document on the Table.” I believe that the matter should be dealt with in that way. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Speaking to the point of order I say that that Standing Order refers to a Minister quoting from a Cabinet paper. It does not state that a reference to the existence of a Cabinet paper requires one to table it. 
Judith Collins 
: You quoted from it! 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Just humbug! That member is a person with some legal training I am told. And there is the Whip sitting in her chair. Neither of them knows the Standing Orders. Their sitting here clearly is a total waste of the taxpayers’ money. After all this time holding down a seat— 
Judith Collins 
: I raise a point of order— 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I am speaking to the point of order. Sit down. 
Judith Collins 
: Well then get on to it. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Sit down there’s a good girl. Sit down. Do not be long about it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: We know the rulings with regard to points of order so we will not go down that track. I take it that the Minister was not quoting from an official document. Therefore that disposes of that point of order. Outside of that it is entirely up to the Minister whether he wants to table it.