Bennett Paula: General Debate 
Bennett Paula: General Debate 
[Volume:630;Page:2077] 
PAULA BENNETT (National) 
: 
 First I acknowledge the speaker before me Dr Pita Sharples. I have felt the chills go down my spine many times while standing on a marae in a meeting or something like that. But to watch telly the other night and see those skinny white boys doing their thing made me feel every chill as well. I felt they did us really proud and it is one of those moments when one feels proud to be a Kiwi. 
I have been here for 6 months. I came into Parliament on 17 September so obviously I am a new MP. I did not expect to agree with how Labour was running the country. I stood for Parliament because I did not agree with the Government’s agenda and with a lot of things that were happening. I felt that it was not listening to the people that “Big Sister” knew what was best and that there was not a real debate going on in society about what sort of society we were going to be. Instead things were getting pushed through and decisions were being made at that level. That is what drove me to stand for Parliament. 
Things have changed in this term. It is not so much that I do not agree with the Government’s agenda; I have discovered in my short term that I do not feel that it has one. I am struggling to see quite simply what this Government is doing and what it intends to do in this term. It is tired and there is a real lack of vision. Well maybe the Government does have an agenda actually and maybe that agenda is to do as little as possible. 
Hon Annette King 
: Give us one policy today from the National Party and I will go home happy. 
PAULA BENNETT 
: I have just realised that that is something as well—I thank the member for raising what the National Party policy is—because everything is our fault! Even though the National Party has not been in power for the last 6½ years everything is actually our fault! Labour has done nothing to fix the Resource Management Act which it put on our shoulders and everything else but that is our fault. The Minister can stand up and veto a decision made by our courts and it is our fault that he is vetoing that decision. So everything really is about the National Party. I am quite happy for everything to be about me quite frankly but it is not. 
It has been 6½ years I tell those Labour members so it is time to take some responsibility. It is time to actually see a vision. It is time to actually give us some direction on where the country is going and what they will achieve. They cannot make up their minds about anything. They just say “Let’s review review review.” There is no vision; there is just meddling. An example of it today was when the Minister of Health answered questions. [ 
Interruption 
] Sorry I should rephrase that really should I not? The Minister of Health did not answer the questions. He did not know— 
Hon Annette King 
: Why not ask the questions you want answered? 
PAULA BENNETT 
: Well you probably could have answered them Annette King— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order— 
PAULA BENNETT 
: Sorry I should speak through you Mr Assistant Speaker. I am sure that Annette King could have answered the questions because she has been there for some time— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No no. The member brought the Speaker into the debate by using the word “you”. 
PAULA BENNETT 
: Sorry I do apologise for using “you”. As I was saying through the Assistant Speaker I feel that answers could perhaps have been given in some other way. But the Minister did not have answers so he could not answer those questions. 
Let us talk about Working for Families because I notice an agenda is going on with Labour Party members this afternoon. They have all sat down and decided what they will talk about today and they will talk about Working for Families. I am quite happy to talk about that package. I can give quite a few examples but here is a nice key one. There are two workers in Auckland in a company I used to work for who sit next to each other and do pretty much the same job. They have the same key performance indicators and they are on the same salary. They are doing the same work they are enjoying their jobs and they are doing the same hours. But quite simply under Working for Families one of them will be getting through the benefit system a heck of a lot more money than the other one. Why is that? Because one has younger children and the other has adult children. So are you going to say— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member has done it again. 
PAULA BENNETT 
: Will we say that the work of one of those workers is worth more or less than the work of the other? Will we actually make a judgment like that?