Blumsky Mark: Local Government Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Blumsky Mark: Local Government Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:632;Page:3747] 
MARK BLUMSKY (National) 
: 
 I will take the opportunity to pull us back to the fact that this is the Local Government Law Reform Bill. I want to do that because it came through in the examination of the bill by the Local Government and Environment Committee that this is an example of the Government being very selfish. The Government has totally ignored the fact that it will not be doing the work. The Government will not be doing the policing. It will not be in front of the public when the public gives councils arseholes for this stupid bit of legislation. I say that quite sincerely because I have just had the pleasure of spending a couple of days in Hamilton at a stand where people have been queuing—they have not needed to be encouraged; they have been queuing—to sign the petition of the member Kate Wilkinson suggesting that farm dogs be exempt. 
The point that seems most relevant and had the greatest impact on me is that these are people of all shapes sizes ages and sexes and every single one of them cannot come to grips with why this bill is before the House. They cannot come to grips with the fact that this bill is here. I heard many words that I would not use in this House to describe the performance of the Government on this legislation. It is very very sad. The saddest part is that one must have a huge degree of sympathy for every council that goes out there and tries to do what it soon may legally have to do. That is very sad because councils will get a shitload of abuse from people out in the community. [ 
Interruption 
] Apologies. 
Maryan Street 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I need to take exception on two counts now to language that I consider unparliamentary. I do not think it is even appropriate for National Radio. 
MARK BLUMSKY 
: I withdraw and apologise. I was giving the House just a small taste of the language I confronted when the petition was being signed. 
One of the problems I heard about when the public and in particular kids were signing the petition is the same problem I have in my household. Winston is a dog who regularly walks down Lambton Quay and Courtenay Place. He regularly eats and drinks in that area. Many women come up to him and he attacks them viciously with a huge lick. Winston is my Norwich terrier. He is a lovely little dog—and I can assure the Committee that he is no poodle—named after the honourable Winston Churchill as I am sure members have rightly recognised. One of the problems I have with this legislation is that at the end of the day my little gorgeous 2-year-old the fluffiest wee thing whom they just love to bits when I take him for a walk—he is the best dog to go walking with by the way because we get a lot of attention from people who just want to pat him—will have to be microchipped. Why on earth will I have to spend up to $100 to get him microchipped? Why will he have to be microchipped? He is the fluffiest most gorgeous little thing. He has a collar he is registered and we are classed as good owners. But from 1 July all new owners of dogs like Winston will have to get them microchipped—will have to be absolutely wrapped up in the bureaucracy of the Government. I think that that is an abuse of why we are here. 
When I was Mayor of Wellington I used to have to stand up and defend—even if I disagreed with them—the rules and regulations that council put out into the community. I cannot see how any member of Parliament can stand up in any community and defend ludicrous legislation that leaves many hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders asking why. Remember the days of closing the windows when we thought a van with radar on its roof might come round to see whether we had a TV in the house and our mums wanted us to shut the windows because they did not really want anyone to know we had a TV in the house when the house was not licensed to have a TV? I can see us going back to those days. It is very wrong it is very retrograde and as I said it is just not what Parliament is really here for.