Bennett DavidHon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): Thank you Madam Chair. I'd just like to follow on from that excellent speech and the points that were raised there around ministerial roles in this regard. When you look at Part 1 clause 5 it amends the principal Act's definition of Minister" to enable responsibility for different provisions to be given to different Ministers. I just want to encourage the Labour Party to reflect on what that actually means. Now I'm no great fan of the Labour Party; you know we disagree on virtually everything. But I do—Hon Ruth Dyson: I'm shocked.Hon DAVID BENNETT: I know and this will come as a shock. I do respect the Labour Party because it is one of the major political parties in New Zealand. I don't believe what they think but they do genuinely believe what they think and they have a certain position that they wish to see for the future of New Zealand and that's fine. That's their personal belief. They're a party that's been there for many many decades and have governed this country sometimes well sometimes averagely and sometimes poorly as in the case we are at the moment. But—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Where are we going with this?Hon DAVID BENNETT: No it's a very important point that the Labour Party needs to reflect on. So I'm saying that when you have a combination of Ministers there can be an issue. You could have a Labour Minister who is relatively sensible and could do the right thing—might be misguided but might do the right thing. Then you could have a coalition partner Minister that doesn't do the right thing that is not sensible and that is not reasonable.Hon Scott Simpson: Can you think of an example?Hon DAVID BENNETT: I can think of an example. Well actually I can think of a few examples but many of them aren't to do with this bill.Hon Scott Simpson: Can you think of a recent example?Hon DAVID BENNETT: I can think of a recent example that directly impacts on this bill.Hon Todd McClay: Which one?Hon DAVID BENNETT: That is the example where a very reasonable member of the Labour Party David Parker—puts himself out there as a reasonable member of the Labour Party—listened to what his officials said and came to a conclusion that was what the official said. This is about ministerial conflict. He did exactly what his department recommended. But then his ministerial approval required another Minister to agree with him and that other Minister went against her department and went against a reasonable Minister that was upstanding. That is a member that declined an application when she had a 96 percent approval rate of all other applications. She has had over $5.5 billion of land sold under this Government to overseas interests and approved them all basically apart from one—apart from one. One time she overrode the other Minister.This is something I want the Labour Party to reflect on because this legislation creates exactly the same problem where you could have a reasonable Labour Minister being overridden by an unreasonable Green Minister. Then it happened in the OceanaGold case just recently. That Minister overrode a reasonable Labour Minister—overrode a department just for her own interests. And we know that—Hon Member: Say "communists".Hon DAVID BENNETT: No no I'm not saying "communists" because I don't think the Green Party are communists. I think they're worse than communists. Communists actually believed in what they were doing. The Green Party don't believe in what they're doing. They go out there and fly this green flag every election but they don't believe in it. Look what they do when they're in Government: nothing for the environment—nothing. All they do is pounce around this country on planes using up carbon. I remember the Green Party when I first came into this Parliament every Green member used this word all the time "peak oil" "Peak oil; it's coming." Where did that go? Now it's "climate change climate change". What's it going to be in 10 years' time? The Green Party has got no principles. The Labour Party has principles. Even if they're wrong they have principles. Eugenie Sage has no principles. She did exactly the opposite of what her department requested.Hon Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): A point of order the Hon Tracey Martin.Hon DAVID BENNETT: New Zealand First Party well they've got no principles either. But we know that. Their leader has got no principles.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Mr Bennett I have called a point of order. Will you resume your seat please.Hon DAVID BENNETT: I thought you were going to give me another five minutes—OK sorry.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Thank you."