Simich Clem: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Simich Clem: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10858] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I need no assistance. I think I heard the member quite clearly. The member was quite entitled to say that Mr Carlaw was lying. In my view that is allowable but the member compounded that by bringing it back to the National Party. Would Chris Carter please withdraw and apologise for what he said. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I do indeed withdraw and apologise. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: I am glad you have put this disorderly rabble in its place because the question that I was asking was: is there one business organisation in the country that supports this Labour Government’s Employment Relations Act? No there is not. There is not one respectable one anyway. I heard from an industrial relations lawyer in Auckland the other day that this is going to be a boom year for them and “Thank you Margaret Wilson.” is what they are saying. People from every small and medium-sized business in New Zealand are saying that this is one of the worst pieces of legislation that New Zealand businesses have been subjected to in decades. 
I will speak for a moment about compliance costs because undoubtedly they are one of the things that affect growth. I particularly want to talk about biotechnology because this Government talks a lot about biotechnology. And what did the Biotechnology Taskforce recommend for regulations? It said it wanted to have predictability transparency and world-best regulatory practice. Yet this Government in the hazardous substances and new organisms legislation has created one of the most complicated spiders’ webs of bureaucracy that I have ever seen. All one has to do is look at page 41 of the Biotechnology Taskforce recommendations and one becomes boggle-eyed. In fact it would make a tarantula boggle-eyed because of the complexity of it. 
The current regulatory framework for approving new biotechnology products has become so difficult not only because of its complexity but also because of the additions of the principles of the treaty in the hazardous substances and new organisms legislation that have taken away those basic elements of predictability transparency and world-best regulatory practice—all those things that this Government is insinuating through so much of the legislation of New Zealand are totally contrary to the possibility of growth in New Zealand. 
 Government members used to talk about the knowledge wave several years ago but suddenly they have gone silent. Why have they gone silent? It has been as they have capped the fees in universities. They have gone silent as they have made up inflexible profiles and charters throughout the universities. They have gone silent as the Prime Minister has presided over the loss of choice in our schools. 
The other day I spoke to a variety of children who were coming home from a prominent Auckland school after their first day. They were almost in tears because of the lack of quality of their teachers. The reason is that the Labour Government does not reward good teachers. It is this Labour Government that chooses mediocrity in its education policies. 
Martin Gallagher 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member opposite made a very serious charge against members of the teaching profession at a specific school. Through you I challenge him to name the particular school concerned. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is not a point of order. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: That was not a point of order. I repeat that I have spoken to several children who came home in tears about the lack of quality of teachers in New Zealand schools. They realised that it was because there was a Labour Government that does not recognise excellence or choice. 
One of the things this Labour Government promised 4 years ago was to reduce hospital waiting lists. The  
Health and Independence Report 
 of late last year is an absolute indictment on the Labour Government. In 1999-2000 the number of publicly funded surgical inpatient discharges was 160574. By 2002-03 it has gone down to 157000. Despite everything this Government has said about cutting down the waiting lists operations have gone down in the last few years. Moreover its active waiting lists have lost tens of thousands of people from the waiting lists themselves. 
The other day a constituent came to me who had been waiting for 2½ years for a hip operation. She is 79 years of age and was in considerable pain. She said that she has also been waiting 4 years for a cataract operation. The hospital clerk rang her up and said: “Can you get across the road?”. She answered that she could just manage to get across the road but that her eyes were fuzzy. The hospital clerk told her that she was sorry but that she would have to remove her completely from the waiting list. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: That’s outrageous. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: It is outrageous the claims that this Labour Government made about the waiting lists in New Zealand. In actual fact the service that ordinary New Zealanders get with regard to elective surgery—according to its own documents—has actually deteriorated. 
David Benson-Pope 
: That’s not true! 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: The other day I asked the chief executive officer and the chairman of the Waitemata— 
David Benson-Pope 
: That’s not true! 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: It is he that protesteth a lot who actually has little substance. We see that over there in the form of Benson-Pope and his colleague. The other day I heard— 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That member has been in this House long enough to know that he should not refer to members of this House just by their surnames. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: He did not do that. 
David Benson-Pope 
: He didn’t get it right either. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No he stumbled a little but he did manage to get out something that resembled Benson-Pope. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: Mr Benson-Pope is a man of little substance. I asked the chief executive officer and chairman of the Waitemata hospital board and the Auckland hospital board whether they had achieved anything tangible with regard to their first objective. Their first objective was to raise the health performance of Aucklanders. They both said: “No we have not been able to do anything tangible in raising the health of Aucklanders because we’ve been so busy trying to deal with our deficits. We’ve been so busy trying to deal with the deficits that have been made for us under this Labour Government that has created the most entangled bureaucracy of any health system that I know of anywhere in the world.”