King Annette: Member Vacancy — Epsom Electoral District—Hon John BanksText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKing Annette: Member Vacancy — Epsom Electoral District—Hon John Banks[Sitting date: 18 June 2014. Volume:699;Page:18656. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai):The Labour Party supports the motion that is before the House today that no writ be issued for a by-election in the Epsom electoral district. We will not be party to forcing a by-election in this electorate because it is not in the public interest. We all know that we are very close to a general election and a by-election is unnecessary and would be a waste of taxpayers’ money. They are expensive and it would be seen by voters to be a frivolous political stunt and I think there have been far many of them already in the Epsom electorate. We would like to take the opportunity today in this debate to say to John Key that it is time that we did change the Electoral Act to stop the coat-tailing provision that enables parties like ACT to come in by winning a seat. It is time that we took these issues seriously instead of looking only at the close political advantage that might be gained from them.But I want to begin by saying that I think this is a very sad day in the New Zealand Parliament—a very sad day. It is a day when because of the actions of a member of this House we are debating not issuing a writ for a by-election. It has been caused by the conviction of a member of Parliament for electoral fraud. It is a sad day for John Banks and I feel sorry for him at a personal level. He is a man who has come from the school of hard knocks. He was brought up in a number of foster homes. He was pushed from pillar to post. He was estranged from his parents who spent much of their lives in and out of jail. He was a man who decided to make a better life for himself and his family. He pulled himself up and became the member of Parliament for Whangarei. He was proud to be a member of Parliament. He was proud to be the people’s representative as he used to say living in God’s own country. He became a Minister and he strutted his stuff as Minister of Police. He was very proud that he could pass the police fitness test—probably the only Minister of Police who has. He could be funny he could be outrageous he could be caring and he could be courageous.But he has been proven to be cunning to be conniving and to have been careless and in the end he was convicted. That is why we are here today debating this issue. So I feel sorry for him on a personal level but I feel sorry for this Parliament as well. None of us like to be here doing this. It is not the way to end a political career. Most of us would like to have the opportunity to stand before our colleagues and make a valedictory speech as many will come July. Some of us are sent to the wilderness for a short time when the voters vote us out; others end as John Banks has. Fortunately that is not very often. My cousin Christopher Finlayson when he went through the list and the litany of problems—always mentioning only the Labour Party—was generous enough to mention that probably there has been only one real fraud issue that of Phillip Field.So I think it is a sad day for this Parliament and I wish we did not have to do this. It is sad because the truth is that John Banks had been misleading this House for almost 2 years and a blind eye was turned to that. A blind eye was turned because when you look at the evidence that was provided from the witnesses it was as plain as the nose on one’s face that Mr Banks knew he had received anonymous donations. He had solicited anonymous donations from people he knew. It has been clear to many including Mr McCready who lives in my electorate and Mr Brooking that this member of Parliament was misleading the public and knew that he had got anonymous donations.The sadness is that the Prime Minister knew that as well. It was his job to uphold the highest standards. I have listened as we have gone through the list of members of Parliament who were Ministers who have lost their jobs under John Key and how he upholds the highest of standards. And I think in the beginning he did. I think in the beginning he wanted to show that he was upholding standards and was looking very carefully at how he managed his Cabinet. But as the years have gone by those standards have slipped and they slipped to the very bottom when it came to John Banks. John Key knew that John Banks had done wrong but John Key turned a blind eye because he needed that one discredited vote from the ACT Party. He needed it because he needed to pass legislation so he did not want to know that wrong had been done.I have to say that it is the sort of cynical manipulation of our democratic system that many of our old soldiers went to war to oppose. They do not like cynical manipulation of democratic systems but that is what has happened under the leadership of John Key. Let us have a look at what he has been saying about holding on to power. He does have his motto. He has said: “Whatever it takes.” That is what he has said. That is a quote—“Whatever it takes.” He said: “We are going to do what we practically can to … form the next Government”. That meant taking the vote of John Banks with a deal that was done over a cup of tea—a deal that has been discredited and criticised ever since. He was so desperate to do a deal then that he is prepared to continue in that vein at this next election. He is prepared to put aside the fact that in September 2012 Colin Craig a person he is going to do a deal with sent out 20000 leaflets in Mr Key’s own Helensville electorate telling the voters of Helensville not to vote for Mr Key because he was “too gay” to be their member of Parliament. That is a quote. That is a direct quote from Mr Colin Craig. I would be wondering whether I would want to do a deal with him. But the deal will be done just as it was with John Banks. So the sadness to me is that a blind eye was turned when it should have been investigated and action taken 2 years ago.We have had enough of those dodgy deals but they are going to happen again in this election. But what happened from that grubby deal and blind eye was that we had legislation passed with John Banks’ vote that many in New Zealand had opposed. The most obvious example is asset sales. Thousands of New Zealanders signed a petition against asset sales. The vote was so close in this House because many parties also opposed it. But with John Banks’ vote the Government was able to sell off our assets—a hugely unpopular policy. Of course it was sold to the public that they had given the Government a mandate to do it. Well I do not believe that when people vote they vote on just one thing; they vote on a number of things. There are some things they like and some things they do not like. For example they took the Prime Minister at his word that he would not increase GST but when he came into Government he did. But then they returned him to power 3 years later so they forgave him for that. So when the Government said it has a mandate to sell assets it did not listen to the voices of the people when it came to the oldest form of talking to the Government: a petition to this Parliament. The Government relied on the vote of John Banks.Another example is charter schools. I could go through a number of pieces of legislation passed over those 2 years with the vote of a person who has been convicted of electoral fraud and the National Party knew that 2 years ago.