Heatley Phil: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Heatley Phil: Veterinarians Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:628;Page:959] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 It was with amusement that I read the schedules during the select committee inquiry into this legislation. I am reminded of them now because clause 1 of schedule 1 provides for the “Term of appointment or election” clause 3 provides for “Removal from office” and of course clause 7 provides for “Remuneration and allowances of members and others”. Of course it dawned on members on this side of the Chamber who had been naming the likely Labour Party picks for this particular Veterinary Council—I think we had a number of them. We had Pete Hodgson David Benson-Pope Rick Barker Jim Sutton and a whole lot of others and of course Ann Hercus’ name was raised. I note that it says here that a member appointed holds office. So any member appointed by this Government holds office for 3 years or for a shorter period stated in the notice of appointment and may be reappointed but may not be a member for 9 consecutive years. It dawned on members on this side of the Chamber that the Labour Party could decide to make ministerial appointments with those Ministers for whom the sun is setting on their careers. Many of them are looking at sitting on this council as an interim 3-year jaunt so that in the 2008 election they might come back and have a crack at the seats they lost in 2005. 
In other words how do we keep our backsides warm and how do we keep the money coming through the door over the next 3 years? We want to toddle off and try something else but because we lost our seats so dramatically we would like to have another chance in 2008. MPs come to mind. Rick Barker is one. How did Rick Barker lose the seat of Tukituki? How does one lose the seat of Tukituki after holding it for about 20 years? 
Dr Richard Worth 
: 1951. 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: Since 1951. How does one lose it after so many years? Rick Barker may wish to go on the Veterinary Council and come back in 3 years’ time. He could have a job in the interim and run again for another seat. Jim Sutton is another. There is an opportunity for Jim Sutton to do something for 3 years and perhaps run for another seat for the Labour Party in 3 years’ time. David Parker did well—he is another one—and Russell Fairbrother who lost the seat of Napier. I think that seat has been held for a good 40 years. 
Dr Richard Worth 
: Since 1951. 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: It has been held by the Labour Party since 1951. Russell Fairbrother who was a rising star for the Labour Party took the bitter pill of chairing the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee that diddled Maori and every other New Zealander. He was the fall guy for that and we can see the sun setting on his career. So he might like to be on the Veterinary Council for a 3-year period and then come back. Of course there is an opportunity to stand again in another seat somewhere in this country. 
Of course there is the seat of Tauranga. I do not think Winston Peters can spend 3 years wandering around the world drinking and dining and going to rugby games in Scotland. I do not know that that will be enough to entertain him. Perhaps he would like to sit on the Veterinary Council board absolutely as a non-contributor and that is what the council would like because I think vets would prefer to have laymen who do very little. Winston Peters could take that opportunity and in 3 years’ time he could perhaps stand again in Tauranga against Mr Clarkson and take the campaign to new lows. Perhaps he could dig up more dirt. We would go to new lows. There could be another court case where he could claim that other candidates had spent $14 billion on their campaign when in fact they did not. So there are opportunities there for Labour Party members when the sun is setting on their careers to take up this 3-year term to feel fulfilled in some sort of role in this country and perhaps get some other opportunity to enter the Labour Party as the tide goes out on them in the 2008 election. 
Moving on from that I want to talk about clause 3 “Removal from office” of schedule 1 which I will call the Prime Minister’s clause. It states: “The Minister may remove a member from office by written notice to the member … at any time for any of the following reasons proved to the satisfaction of the Minister: (a) neglect of a member’s duties; or (b) failure or inability to perform … or (c) misconduct by the member; or (d) bankruptcy.” There is an opportunity for members of the Veterinary Council to be removed due to neglect failure or inability to perform misconduct by the member or bankruptcy. I call that the Prime Minister’s clause simply because it is usually the Prime Minister’s prerogative—in this Government for example—to remove Ministers from office. 
We have seen it hundreds of times. We have not seen it with David Benson-Pope but we have seen it with all sorts of other people. We saw Ruth Dyson’s removal from office. We saw it with Lianne Dalziel who I believe did not tell the full truth. She was removed from office. I do not believe that David Benson-Pope has been removed. No he has not been removed from office. We saw it with Dover Samuels. He was removed from office was he not? 
Hon David Carter 
: What did he do? 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: I do not know what he did but he was removed from office. 
Hon Member 
: Tamihere? 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: John Tamihere was removed. Was David Benson-Pope removed? No David Benson-Pope was not removed from office. John Tamihere was removed from office I recall that. Phillida Bunkle was removed from office. Has David Benson-Pope been removed? No he has not been removed. Phillida Bunkle was removed from office but I do not know that David Benson-Pope was removed. Did he neglect his duties as a member? Did he fail or be unable to perform? Was there misconduct on his part? Was he bankrupt? I do not know the answers to those questions but I do know that “The Minister may remove a member from office by written notice to the member … at any time for any of the following reasons proved to the satisfaction of the Minister:” 
I think it is a good thing that people can be removed from the Veterinary Council if they neglect their duties if there is a failure or an inability to perform if there is misconduct or if there is bankruptcy. It should reflect the case of what has happened in this House time after time when we have seen people like Dover Samuels Ruth Dyson Lianne Dalziel John Tamihere and all sorts of others fall on their swords and put up their hands to say that they surrender. 
I acknowledge Ruth Dyson for doing that. I thought it was honourable at the time and I mean that genuinely. We hope that David Benson-Pope in the same way will say: “Listen I surrender I did something that was misconduct. It was some years ago. I misrepresented it in the House I leaked documents to a Sunday newspaper in the weekend I’ve done all these things. I’ve tried to cover up I’ve failed and I surrender and I resign.” I would like to hear that from David Benson-Pope before Christmas. 
I range off the topic so I come back to it. The National Party will support clause 3. We will be voting for this clause. 
I move to clause 7 “Remuneration and allowances of members and others” in schedule 1 “Further provisions applying to Council and its members”. That clause talks about the entitlement of those Labour Party hacks who will be put on the Veterinary Council as the sun sets on their careers and what they will receive in terms of funds remuneration and allowances for the services they perform. Now it will likely not be some sort of performance remuneration because they will effectively be lay members on the council. Subclause (2) states: “The Council may also approve payments for services to members of complaints assessment judicial or any other committees appointed by the Council in accordance with the same framework.” I support the fact that there should be some sort of allowance but the National Party will be watching very very closely in order to ensure that this does not become some quasi-quango where Labour Party members settle for the rest of their careers.