Dyson Ruth: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee 
Dyson Ruth: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee 
[Volume:654;Page:3806] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 The Minister responsible for the Families Commission Paula Bennett has developed a bit of a reputation for liking to get stuck into things. Sometimes it is a brawl and sometimes it is a controversy. It seems that she less frequently is prepared to get stuck into an answer. I would like to give her an opportunity to answer this question which the Prime Minister could not answer at question time today: will she remove Christine Rankin if it turns out that she has been lying over the last few weeks about allegations that have been made about her? Will the Minister remove Christine Rankin from the Families Commission? 
Well there we are. That is just about as good an answer as we got from the Prime Minister. So it is all right for the Minister to totally ignore not just common courtesy but also an agreement made with the Hon Peter Dunne in regard to the future of the Families Commission as part of the establishment of the Government. It is all right for the Minister to ignore that and it is all right for the Minister to be squeaked through a Cabinet row by the Prime Minister who then hung her out to dry. And it is good enough for Christine Rankin to be appointed a Families Commissioner getting taxpayers’ money when she herself admitted she did not even know what the commission did. 
Those are fantastic standards that David Garrett and Roger Douglas are backing in this Parliament. That is a fantastic new standard set by Paula Bennett. No wonder John Key has his staff running round the press gallery rapidly distancing him—saying that he had not been told these things. I am sure that he will distance himself further and further from his weakest link—proven to be not only arrogant but also stupid and dismissive—more rapidly than any of us can imagine. 
It is not often that people in this House hear me praise or defend the Hon Peter Dunne. He and I have had more political battles with each other than I have even had with the Hon Sir Roger Douglas. But I want to put on record that I think Peter Dunne is honest and has integrity. I disagree with many of his political beliefs but I have worked with him within my own party and outside it and in the context of a confidence and supply agreement and he has not misled me personally or the party. 
I would not support Peter Dunne’s politics. He said that he went to Paula Bennett and told her he had strong objections about Christine Rankin and that Paula Bennett said that she heard his concerns and would get back to him. Her way of getting back to him was sending him a copy of the press statement stating that Christine Rankin had been appointed. That is about as arrogant and stupid as any Minister could possibly get. 
I want to raise another concern about Christine Rankin. There is a long list of concerns and they have been aired publicly; some of those concerns are very personal and very tragic and they have been denied. But I raise another question that I am sure the Minister has been alerted to because Wellington is a village. We all know what other people talk about and hear about in this little village. 
Hon Member 
: You want to hear what I know about you! 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: When Christine Rankin was with David Garrett’s colleague on  
Dancing with the Stars 
—[ 
Interruption 
] 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member. Members cannot use the word “you”. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Thank you Mr Chairman. When Christine Rankin was on  
Dancing with the Stars 
 with Rodney Hide—I think she made it to only the first round; that was a pretty strong indication of public opinion—she was raising money for a trust called For the Sake of Our Children. This was the good cause that she was raising money for. 
The three people who texted “Christine” to  
Dancing with the Stars 
 to donate their tuppence ha’penny were donating to an organisation that employed two people and did no research did no service delivery but did only advocacy. The two people employed by For the Sake of Our Children were Christine Rankin and her son. That is a very unusual charitable organisation for which one would say publicly on television: “I am dancing for a good cause.” 
Report noted.