Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:17010] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 When I listen to this unholy confused alliance and when I listened to the last speech which was mistaken on every point it brings to mind the famous words of Jonathan Swift who said: “When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign that the dunces of the world are all in confederacy against him.” That is the case with this bill. As clear as daylight in the bill are the fundamental things that matter: the rights of access in clause 6 the right to be on the public foreshore and seabed the right to enter remain in and leave it the right to pass and repass—all those rights are there as clear as daylight except where they are changed by some other Act under clause 6(3). It is the same in clause 7 which sets out the rights of navigation the right to pass and repass and the right of passage except where some other Act circumvents or forecloses on that right. The right even to “remain temporarily in a place until wind or weather permits departure or until cargo has been obtained or repairs completed” is a total right when it comes to navigation. New clause 7A “Existing fishing rights preserved” states: “Nothing in this Act affects any rights of fishing recognised immediately before the commencement of this section by or under an enactment or a rule of law.” It is as plain as daylight. Any right that people may have had they still have under this legislation or it lies in other legislation. How about clause 11 “Public foreshore and seabed vested in the Crown”? What could be clearer than that?  
Why would National not support that? Why would National line up with the Maori Party or the Greens or any other group out there that has no interest in national unity or cohesion? Members should go to clause 12 “Public foreshore and seabed not to be alienated”. That is the reason why National is not happy with this legislation. National has always been dead keen on flogging off this country’s assets to anybody and everybody whether foreign or local. Public foreshore and seabed—[ 
Interruption 
] Mr Prebble says that that is his policy and he is right. The public foreshore and seabed is not to be alienated—it is not to be sold. That is why National opposes the bill. It has always been after the privatisation of somebody else’s resources.  
Clause 34B(3) sets out the issue of reserves. It concerns the issue of status in respect of the seabed and foreshore and the issue of access and the rights of navigation. I have mentioned all those provisions. There is a total assurance to any and every New Zealander that the rights of access and use will not be threatened at all. So why does the National Party put up its least-qualified person who has the least understanding of the issue and make him the No. 1 defender of its position? Where is the great communicator to lead the charge? Do members know why he is not here? He is not here because he cannot front it. He does not have a case or an argument and he does not have any contentious— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The member cannot talk about the absence of another member. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thought the member might raise that. The member has been here a long time. I suggest he look at Speaker’s ruling 23/7. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Mr Chairperson to whom do you think I was referring when I referred to the “great communicator” or the great debater? I did not refer to the person National jacked up with the Toastmasters club in June of this year to be called the great communicator. I have not referred to any name or personality at all. The assumption that the person who does not have the guts to get down here and show himself is the “great communicator” is beyond me— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member has gone too far now. To infer that someone lacks courage is out of order. It is a personal reflection. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: But who is it? 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I do not know who some people may think Mr Peters is referring to. I know that he is referring to the Prime Minister and I think it was very offensive for him to refer to the Prime Minister as “he” in this Chamber. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: We have had our fun. We have a serious debate here and members should take a deep breath and get back to it.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: It is as clear as daylight to any doubting Thomas that the rights of access the rights of navigation and the personal fishing rights of New Zealanders are not attacked or interrupted in any way. The bill specifically sets that out. Just because it clarifies Maori rights and has greater definition as to what they may be does not mean that every other person is threatened. That is fundamental to the bill. It means that there can be some national cohesion and unity on this critical issue.  
Not one National Party supporter out there could possibly be happy with the argument that is being mounted by the National Party in the Chamber today—or rather the lack of it. That is why the great communicator would not come and communicate. He would not come and debate this legislation. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The member may be referring to the Prime Minister or he may be referring to the Leader of the Opposition but he was clearly referring to a member of Parliament because only members of Parliament can come here. Therefore his statements are out of order. I think given the fact that he is now a repeat offender you should terminate his speech so we can all go and have lunch.  
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Mr Prebble always has something to add. I thank him and again refer the member who was speaking to Speaker’s ruling 23/7. He must not refer to the absence of members.  
Sitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.