Gosche Mark: General Debates 
Gosche Mark: General Debates 
[Volume:615;Page:11309] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 It is interesting that the Leader of the Opposition wants to have a debate about important questions. I have some important questions. But first of all let us just recap on some of the answers the Leader of the Opposition has given in recent times. He has been asked whether he would appoint a Minister of Maori Affairs. The answer was: “I haven’t crossed that bridge yet.” Would he axe Maori TV? The decisive Mr Brash said he was not sure. Would he abolish Maori scholarships? “Ah I’d like to think about that.” he said. 
Well I would like to ask the National Party about its policies of need. The country is asking why Dr Brash needs $160 per week more to live on. Is it because he has come down from a salary of $550000 a year to $195000 a year? Is that a policy of need? To compensate him for that terrible drop in income he needs $160 per week? Is that the National Party’s idea of looking after need—Dr Brash’s need? Or maybe it is to help him wash his socks. He is well known for washing his socks. Maybe he wants to get somebody else to wash his socks for him. The amount of $160 a week would wash a lot of socks. 
Of course Dr Brash does not want poor workers to have a minimum wage of $9 an hour. No he is opposed to that. He does not think they should get 4 weeks’ holiday sick leave or anything. It would not cost $160 a week so he does not need that. Or maybe Dr Brash needs to buy more Neil Diamond CDs because as we know his taste in music goes in that direction. But for $160 a week he could go to The Warehouse and buy the entire collection of Neil Diamond—so no $160 a week is not to replenish his Neil Diamond CD collection. 
Maybe just maybe it is because he needs $160 a week to save for retirement because as we know the National Party does not think that elderly New Zealanders should get the level of superannuation they get now and it does not believe in Dr Cullen’s ideas that superannuation should be funded by a superannuation fund. So maybe Dr Brash needs $160 a week more in his pay packet to get ready for retirement in a couple of years because we know he is not too far off retirement. Or maybe he is thinking he will shift the age of retirement to 70 because that is the other way that National Party policy has gone—either cut the level of superannuation or put the age out to 70. 
So maybe the needs-based policy of the National Party is to give Dr Brash and his colleagues $160 a week to get ready for retirement. Or maybe it is to have the lumps taken out of their throats surgically. They have spent so much time flying back into New Zealand at the taxpayer’s expense the lumps have built up. People like Judith Collins who is well known for overseas travel would have a lot of lumps in her throat as she came back to New Zealand and felt the guilt of who paid for those trips along with Dr Brash who used to travel at the taxpayer’s expense. 
So we would like National Party members to tell us all about this policy of looking after people in need. I would like them to tell the people in my constituency who are on $20000 or $30000 a year why they get nothing and Dr Brash gets $160 a week. Why does he need that and they do not? Why do poor people in New Zealand not deserve a tax cut of $160 a week but Dr Brash needs $160 and therefore he should get it because the National Party believes in looking after people in need? 
This Government has dealt with the needs of New Zealanders rich or poor black or white brown or yellow or whatever they may be. If there are children in our community who are not immunised and need it we put programmes into place to make sure they are immunised. If a lot of those children are Pacific Island children it is quite sensible to use Pacific Island nurses to do the immunisation. But that is terrible according to the National Party. We should not do that. Well that is what Dr Brash says. But of course when Gerry Brownlee is confronted with it on a television programme he suddenly finds a new answer for the National Party. 
What are we to believe in this debate? In a debate one usually debates with someone who can at least keep the answer the same for more than half an hour. But not the National Party; no. We need to know all about its policy of need.