Sutton Jim: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Sutton Jim: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:623;Page:18332] 
Hon JIM SUTTON (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 I have a lot of good news to impart about this Government’s policies but the speech we have just heard reminded me that I should respond to the National Party leader’s initiative of introducing to New Zealand a one-child family policy. Just as the People’s Republic of China moves away from that policy the National Party leader of New Zealand seeks to introduce it here. I have been fielding comments from New Zealand women since that time expressing their rage and concern at what is going on and at the constructive dismissal of National’s second front-bench woman spokesperson in two Orewa speeches. The first was Georgina te Heuheu. She was driven from her position last year because no self-respecting Maori policy expert could stay holding that position given the Maori-bashing policies introduced by Don Brash in his Orewa I speech. 
The National Party having successfully alienated the hapless National Party from Maori voters—and I might remind the House that in about 20 years’ time approximately 50 percent of New Zealanders will have some Maori in their whakapapa; so this is National’s plan for being a niche party—moved this year to ensure that it alienated 51 percent of the rest of voters by a systematic attack on women. There will be a one-child family policy for any woman who wants income support from the State. Well that happens to be everybody with a family because the Working for Families package will greatly reinforce existing policies that provide assistance for families. But Dr Brash’s National Party wants to exclude from that assistance any woman who has the temerity to have another child—unless she complies with Dr Brash’s social standing. 
Darren Hughes 
: Social engineering. 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: Social engineering it most certainly is. It is repugnant and National’s excellent spokesperson on social welfare Katherine Rich was driven from her post because she could not stomach that wicked policy. She was not on her own. Of course if there were exceptional circumstances perhaps women who have a second child while receiving a benefit may be allowed to get a little more help from the Government. But I think what that means is that they would have to appear before Judith Collins MP in an inquisition to see whether their circumstances were exceptional enough. They will no doubt receive a stern lecture on the wickedness of their ways. Getting pregnant after all is against National Party policy for beneficiaries. So if they can handle that they might get a bit of help. If that policy were ever to be introduced I think we would see a return to the bad sad days of old when young women who fell pregnant would sneak away and secretly give birth. They would go down south or up north and secretly give birth and adopt out their babies. And that is another National Party policy. National will pressure unmarried mothers to adopt out their babies. It used to happen. Young unmarried mothers would be pressured into adopting out their babies which led in so many tragic cases to a lifetime of heartbreak—for two parties at least. 
For any party in the 21st century to be contemplating the reintroduction of those sorts of social attitudes I think is despicable. This House should reject it. Certainly the voters of New Zealand will. Fortunately Mrs Rich was not without support even on that side of the House. It is reported that Lynda Scott—who is leaving Parliament; she cannot take any more of this—was visibly angry and she expressed her anger. Georgina te Heuheu pointedly refused to endorse Dr Brash’s policies and actions. I think that Judith Collins applauded them. She is being promoted but of course she is not getting ahead of the brat pack. All the brat pack applaud this move. They all move up one more place. Members of that brat pack think they are on the way back but there is one thing they have not taken into account— 
Darren Hughes 
: The polling! 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: No—the rising new star of National’s rural hinterland. I speak of none other than— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: John Key? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: No no—Brian Connell. 
Darren Hughes 
: Who? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: Brian Connell the self-styled international business consultant the holder of senior positions in large multinational companies— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Which Brian Connell is that? 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: The Brian Connell who presented himself to the National Party branch in Ashburton seeking the nomination he successfully got. They could not find anyone better. [ 
Interruption 
] He had been overseas for 20 years then came back. It turned out later on investigation that by “overseas” he meant Wellington. He had crossed Cook Strait. Let no man say that Brian Connell is not a man of his word. But he is on the move up too. He at least had the courage to publicly state his opinion of the shabby treatment of Katherine Rich. He said he was very disappointed and thought the decision was stupid. Well he might because earlier—in fact on 3 August 2002—he told the Christchurch  
Press 
: “I’ve got to have ambitions first of all to get into Cabinet. On the basis of doing a good job there the prime ministership is certainly in my sights.” 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Your next leadership bid! 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: Mr Connell is in the wrong party. He will never become Prime Minister by rising to the top of the National Party. It will not be long before he works that out. Perhaps he will work it out by the time the next election campaign is over and make his big move then. I recommend that he move to ACT because the ACT party will not have any MPs then and he might go right to the top. Who knows on the basis of doing a good job there what might happen. 
Darren Hughes 
: He could do a “Banksie”. 
Hon JIM SUTTON 
: He might go back overseas. I thought it necessary to alert the House to some of these developments in case they had not come to members’ attention. 
I want to spend the last moment or so of my time referring to international trade and the exciting developments under way in my trade negotiations portfolio. This country depends on international trade to sustain its aspirations for a First World lifestyle. We will not achieve a First World lifestyle by running big Budget deficits as Dr Brash advocates. We will achieve a First World lifestyle by earning First World level incomes and by achieving First World level productivity. This Government stands for growth in productivity. To achieve growth in productivity of that order we must be able to specialise in the things we do well and especially in those things we do better than anyone else in the world. To be able to specialise like that our specialised products must have access to the markets of the world. We have a tiny domestic market and to achieve First World levels of specialisation productivity and income we have to trade internationally.