Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — Taser Guns—Introduction 
Hide Rodney: Ministerial Statements — Taser Guns—Introduction 
[Volume:649;Page:17978] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak in the House. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. The member knows that that was uncalled for. Everyone has a right to speak and I think that has been seen by the fact that on the issue that has been raised we have extended the right to speak to parties that have fewer than six members in this House. So I ask the member just to make his statement please. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Thank you Madam Speaker. The ACT party supports the use of Tasers by the police. Yes there are risks but I believe that those risks are far outweighed by the dangers posed by violent offenders in New Zealand and by the risks of going to the next level of response which is a firearm of a higher calibre. In fact it is a shame that this Government has taken so long to make Tasers available to the police. 
But the ACT party does not support the ministerial statement being made ahead of question time by a Government desperate to hold on to power. It is teetering on the brink and is desperate to do anything to protect the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The Prime Minister is clutching this Minister of Foreign Affairs to her Government in order to hold on to power however tenuously without regard to principle to any standard of good Parliament or good government or to any principle of integrity—and Helen Clark knows that. She knows that she has a Minister of Foreign Affairs who had been caught out lying. She knows— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. He has started again. He went for hardly 2 minutes and he started to infringe the Standing Orders. Would you ask him to withdraw and apologise and if he will not this day would you be more firm on him. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I will just ask the member to address what is before the House at the moment which is the ministerial statement on Tasers. Would the member please continue. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. He may not say what he just said. I am asking you to get him to withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes but I have said to the member that I did not think that what has been said so far requires a withdrawal and an apology. But I did say we should address the matter before the House. I have ruled on that matter. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. He is not going—and you are not going to allow him—to say that a member has been caught out lying. That is what he said. That is against every Speaker’s ruling and every Standing Order I know and I now ask you—I do not know whether you heard the comment; we all did down here—to get him to withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I did not hear him say “lie”; I admit that. I did not hear the member say another member was lying. If that is the case then I am sorry Mr Hide but as you know any member who makes that comment is asked to withdraw and apologise. Then could we please proceed. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: I withdraw and apologise. On the matter of the ministerial statement on Tasers the fact that we are having that now in the last few days of this Parliament before a general election when we are going to see a massive swing and a change of Government means we have a Minister who has been caught out and is in trouble and we have a Government that is desperate to delay any questions—to prevent questions to prevent scrutiny—so much so that it introduces a ministerial statement on a report it has been awaiting for months. That is something unheard of—something unheard of. And we have the Prime Minister delaying question time because she knows that scrutiny has to be avoided at question time of her decision to keep Winston Peters in Cabinet by having a ministerial statement on Tasers. 
The Prime Minister has put her tenuous grip on power ahead of principle and integrity and has turned New Zealand into a banana republic. We have a situation in our Parliament whereby MPs cannot ask questions and we are having our Parliament distorted— 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. That clearly is a reference to the events in the House yesterday. As you have very carefully pointed out numerous times yesterday and today Mr Hide was not prevented from asking a question; he was prevented from breaking the Standing Orders of the House. After his repeated attempts to do that you finally—finally at the end of a very long rope—decided that he had to leave the House. It is a bit rich now on an issue of law and order in front of the House for the member to be complaining that delay is occurring when he is delaying the House with his speech when it has nothing to do with the matter in front of the House and when he is questioning your ruling in the past. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No that is the point of order that has been raised. [ 
Interruption 
] No the member will please be seated; we will not have a repetition of what happened yesterday. I have ruled on that matter and members know that. I would ask the member to please just address what was in the ministerial statement. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: What was in the ministerial statement was a load of old cobblers actually. It is a desperate attempt by the Minister and this Government to avoid scrutiny of Helen Clark’s decision to keep Winston Peters on as Minister of Foreign Affairs—that is what is in the ministerial statement. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. With the greatest of respect the subject of this debate is a ministerial statement on the topic raised by the Minister. There are some restrictions to this debate and particularly when it comes from the only member of this House who could eat a banana sideways it is all a bit rich. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I would just ask the member to conclude his statement. He has only a few more seconds to go. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: I just wish we had—and I am looking forward to the time when we have—a Prime Minister who puts the country first who actually stands up for some principle who sets some standards for Ministers and who does not allow Ministers to just tell any old pork pie they like and think they can get through.