Hughes Darren: General Debate 
Hughes Darren: General Debate 
[Volume:662;Page:10334] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 For members of the public who are listening that was the state of the nation speech from Sandra Goudie the member of Parliament for Coromandel. It is impossible almost not to like her in a lot of ways for her substantial contribution in that respect. 
Today in the general debate we have heard from the Minister for Economic Development at a time when our economy is still very fragile. We have heard from the Minister of Justice at a time when law and order is out of control and we have a record number of murders in our country. We have also heard from the Minister for Social Development and Employment at a time when the employment rate is the highest it has been in 10 years. But from those three Ministers we have not heard anything at all about the policies they are pursuing for the country to try to address the crises that exist in their particular portfolio areas. All we have heard from them was their obsession with the Labour Party’s rebranding exercise. If after 18 months in Government those members have run out of talking about their policies and if all they want to do is talk about the Labour Party then we know that we are absolutely on the right track. 
That is not the first time that political parties have looked at their brand. 
Paul Quinn 
: You need help so we’re helping you. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: I remember—long before Mr Quinn took an interest in politics so at least 2 years ago—the National Party taking on the Coldplay song “Clocks” from Chris Martin without any permission or copyright from the band Coldplay. John Key was being introduced all around the country as that song was being played on his DVD. His DVD was bright and shiny but hollow in the middle which I always thought was quite reflective of the Prime Minister’s political principles in that particular respect. 
I will take up some of the issues that Mr Hodgson has come up with today with regard to conflicts of interest. But before I do I will touch on the issues that some speakers have mentioned with regard to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We have seen no better example in the last 2 days of the troubling matter of this policy than the responses of the Government itself. Catholics believe in three Gods in one—the Trinity. In New Zealand we have three parties in one in the Government. But one of the points about three in one is that they are meant to speak with one voice. In New Zealand we have the Maori Party who has said that signing up to this declaration is the most amazing victory for Maori people ever and that Maori should be swinging from the lamp posts in the streets so happy should they be about it. Another member of the Government the ACT Party has told us that it is the end of the world that the Government has signed up to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Prime Minister himself from the National Party has said that it does not matter it is aspirational and it is non-binding. But he was not able to answer Mr Goff’s question about a single thing that would change for life in New Zealand as a result of our taking on that declaration. 
That goes to the heart of the problem. If something does not mean anything why sign up for it? If we sign up for something we should have a consistent view about what it means. I say to Mr Harawira and the Maori Party—and I would say to Mr Te Ururoa Flavell but I know that he is in other places at the present time—that when things actually count for Maori on policies that has an effect on Maori people living in New Zealand every single day. An example is representation every single day on the Auckland super-city on which the Maori Party was rolled by the National Party. The Maori Party failed to change the mind of the National Party. Maori members cannot point to a single thing in this declaration that makes any difference for Maori in work. The declaration does not put a single unemployed Maori back into a job it does not lift a single dollar an hour in a wage for Maori in our economy and it does not improve Maori representation around council tables or here in Parliament. That is why we are saying the declaration does not mean anything; that is where John Key is right. He has agreed to ratify something he does not believe in. 
We know about the National Party; it was the great party of “Iwi/Kiwi”. It was the great party of “no deals: the beaches are for everyone”. When Bill English was Leader of the Opposition he paid for Parliamentary Service - funded billboards outside every airport in New Zealand. That party also campaigned on “one standard of citizenship for all”. I listened to Simon Power give his speech in Parliament yesterday. If a Labour Government member had got up and said those words the National Party would have been right out there; they would not have even bothered with the dog whistle. They would have gone right on to talkback radio and said that the Labour Party was giving New Zealand away to Maori. Paul Quinn laughs and smirks because he knows that that is absolutely right. National members are statesmen when they are in Government but when they sit in Opposition they are divisive. That is why they sign up to these deals that mean nothing for Maori. And for Hone Harawira and the Maori Party to act as thought they have achieved some great thing is absolutely unbelievable given the record and what is happening for policies in this country. 
I have written to you Mr Speaker about a matter that I do not want to go into today. It is a question of privilege with regard to the declaration of pecuniary interests of members of Parliament. I do not want to go into the details of that until I have had a response from you. But there is a wider issue that has been reported in the media which I do want to touch on and that is the funding of legal expenses for members of Parliament by the Parliamentary Service. Section 4.53 of the  
Cabinet Manual 
 makes it clear that if a Minister has been represented at the expense of the Crown and costs or damages are awarded in the Minister’s favour then those monies should be regarded as public funds and paid into a Crown or departmental bank account unless Cabinet directs otherwise. That is a very good principle under which we are governed and an example of what should be happening in the National Party.