Dalziel Lianne: General Debate 
Dalziel Lianne: General Debate 
[Volume:648;Page:17556] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Commerce) 
: 
 John Key told a National Party audience in Christchurch last year that he was going to say some things they would not like hearing over the coming months but asked them to hold their nerve. There were things that would have to be said if National was going to be elected to Government. However not even National’s strongest supporters thought this signalled a complete back-down on all of Labour’s policies but particularly on Working for Families. They cannot believe it. They have already heard Mr Key describe Working for Families as a complete complex bureaucratic and costly welfare monster a last-ditch election bribe and then finally communism by stealth and now he states: “National wants to offer New Zealand families certainty about the future of the Working for Families system. That’s why we intend making no change to it.” 
I am sure though that National supporters were heartened by the attacks on the employment rights of the most vulnerable of workers who do not have collective agreements and whose terms of employment are dictated by the employer not negotiated across a level playing field. However the decision to remove the mandatory employer contribution from KiwiSaver which we now know is the real deal has drawn a mixed response. Some employers have made their employees pay for their contribution while pocketing the tax credit. But those who really understand that we need a broad-based savings culture in New Zealand in order to generate depth in our capital markets—and KiwiSaver is already delivering on that—are deeply concerned about the uncertainty that National has created by having this coming and going position on KiwiSaver. They want certain messages and they do not want the messages they are receiving from National. I find it hard to believe but I truly think that National really would repeat the greatest single act of economic vandalism this country has ever seen which of course was the National decision in 1975 to reverse the Labour workplace savings scheme that was in existence then. 
Despite the trouble New Zealand faces in terms of the inevitable flow-on effects of the global credit crunch the international commodity prices the impact of the American dollar on our exchange rate the climate change challenge and the instability and conflict in many regions of the world we have nothing from National that offers any solution or any way forward. Labour on the other hand has taken a truly responsible approach to managing the economy including future-proofing New Zealand superannuation through the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and seeding the savings culture needed in this country through KiwiSaver. That makes me wonder why anyone thinks it would be good to change to a party led by a former money market trader who happily traded against the future value of the New Zealand dollar when there was money to be had. 
What else would be for sale under a National Government? Crosby/Textor says: “Just don’t tell anyone what you are going to do and then do it anyway.” and of course that was the message that John Key gave his audience in Christchurch last year. 
I found a rather revealing insight into the attitude of those in the commodities market in a film called  
The Corporation 
 which I watched earlier this year. I have a quote from a commodities trader who said: “I’ve got to be honest with you. When the September 11th situation happened … It was a really bad thing. It was one of the worst things I’ve seen in my lifetime you know. But I will tell you and every trader will tell you who was not in that building and who was buying gold and who owned gold and silver that when it happened the first thing you thought about was ‘well how much is gold up?’ The first thing that came to mind was ‘my God gold must be exploding’. Fortunately for us all our clients were in gold. So when it went up they all doubled their money. Everybody doubled their money. It was a blessing in disguise. Devastating crushing heart shattering but in a financial sense for my clients that were in the market they all made money. Now I wasn’t looking for this type of help but it happened.” 
And then the commodities trader goes on to talk about the US bombing Iraq back in 1991 and that when “the price of oil went from $13 to $40 a barrel … we couldn’t wait for the bombs to start raining down on Saddam Hussein.” He carries on by saying: “There was not a broker I know of that wasn’t excited about that. This was a disaster. This was … catastrophe happening. Bombing. Wars. In devastation there is opportunity.” Why would anyone vote for a party led by someone like that?