Leary IngridINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): Three weeks ago today I said farewell to my elderly mother. She passed away and we had her funeral. My mother was 87 and she is someone I would describe as a born-again non-smoker. So when I grew up my mother smoked—she smoked a bit. She smoked quite a bit actually. And then I remember when I was about seven years old that mum had a really bad asthma attack. And I remember her pointing to a number—it was 111 on a piece of paper—and indicating to me that I needed to call that if she was going to pass out. That was the last time that my mother—who had cut back to two cigarettes a day—ever touched a cigarette. And after that she became an ardent non-smoker.I mihi to her today and I am so proud of her for making that choice because my mother lived to 87 years old and she got to meet my three children the last of whom is 10 years old. That would not have happened if my mother had kept smoking. She got to spend holidays with them. I got that joy of seeing the relationship between my mother and my children. It's something I am so grateful for.But my best friend did not have the same experience. Her mother also smoked at the same time my mother did. My best friend Beth and I I remember we would go on car trips. In those days the tobacco companies were really pumping out a lot of misinformation about the harm from tobacco including passive smoking. And I would feel physically sick at the end of the drive for two hours as she chain-smoked in the car. When my eldest son turned one year old my best friend Beth's mother passed away from lung cancer. She never got to see any of her grandchildren. My best friend has missed out on that whole journey with her mother and so have her grandchildren.This is the reality of what we are talking about in this House today. This is a product that kills half the people that use it. I find it appalling that members of the Government stand and read off notes that they have not acquainted themselves with the arguments of this incredibly serious matter before us today. I take the point that my colleague Tangi Utikere said—it is not too late. This is your nuclear-free moment. This is the moment. Through you Madam Speaker I address members of the Government to say You can cross the floor." It happened in 1984 when Marilyn Waring was nearly stopped from speaking on a nuclear bill. She threatened to cross the floor and it resulted in a snap election. That is how seriously she took her duty to her constituents. It happened in 2004 with Dame Tariana Turia and the foreshore and seabed legislation. Well guess what? It's 2024—let's have another 20-year cross of the floor. Let's see the Government members find their conscience and do what is right for them for their constituents and for their communities. That is the justification for crossing the floor. Because Tangi Utikere is absolutely right: this should really be a matter of conscience. Alcohol and drugs are matters of conscience. For some quirk of history or perhaps it is the misinformation peddled by the tobacco industry this has not been included in the conscience voting. And I guarantee you if it was they would not have the numbers there today.It is absolutely incredible that the Government who has not campaigned on this is taking this incredibly serious matter and using the numbers providing MPs with notes—MPs who have not engaged with select committee who have not engaged with the hui around the country—to just read off notes to do one- or two-minute speeches and rush this through urgency.The experts are saying that this is wrong. The experts—9000 doctors—not just my colleagues. And I have to tautoko to Dr Ayesha Verrall here who did incredible work leading the smoke-free legislation—world-leading work. That has not been acknowledged. And she was continuing a journey that was from Governments of all stripes. So it is disingenuous for the previous speaker Cameron Brewer to say that it was their Government. This has been an ongoing trend where Governments of all stripes have taken the responsibility seriously. This is the first time there's a break in that. The experts wrote to the Prime Minister. They asked for this to be repealed. And they said "If it cannot be repealed at least put it to a select committee so we can hear from communities whose whānau will die as a result of this."—the 8000 whose lives would have been saved by this legislation. But no that hasn't happened.What about the $5.5 billion to the health system? That is not only cost savings for those who would have not smoked but we know the strain on the system. What about all the other people lining up for other health-related issues who will not get their operations who will not get their interventions who will not get their scans because it is being taken up by a new generation of smokers?The amendment before us has been described as weak deceptive and embarrassing by Health Coalition Aotearoa. They have collected more than 50000 signatures and yet this Government persists in the face of all that opposition. Why? I'll tell you why because they seem to hate Māori—they seem to hate Māori. On Radio New Zealand 10 minutes ago there is a story by Guyon Espiner which says that the Minister was told that putting this bill through would be seen as a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi—she was told that. She was told that the health gains for Māori would be five times that of the general population. That might have done something to bring the smoking rates down from 17.5 percent to the 5 percent that this Minister purports to want to achieve. Well I don't know how she's going to do that unless she can come up with something radical in this ghost paper that we have not seen yet going to Cabinet.This is an affront on the day that this Government has dismantled the Māori Health Authority; in a week where this Government has said that cultural reports will no longer be available to those who cannot pay for them in our judicial system which is going to put more Māori into prisons. That is the advice that the actual justice Minister Paul Goldsmith gave to Cabinet—it is on the record. He said "This will put more Māori in prison." But no they're going to do it anyway.The thing that offends me the most is the sneaky insidious way that this is being done. Where is the health Minister? Why has this number one public health issue that has so much impact been delegated to an Associate Minister of Health? Where is he? Why is the Associate Minister rejecting any compromise at all carte blanche? We heard from Dr Tracey McLellan that perhaps there could be changes around the nicotine levels that were a compromise or the age of sale or perhaps at least—at least—get the outlets away from our schools. But no carte blanche. What does that mean? Why does the Minister seem to have lines that echo very clearly with those of the tobacco lobby? I will quote from the Public Health Communication Centre: "Tobacco companies have an overwhelming commercial interest in opposing effective tobacco control policies … They have made misleading or false assertions lobbied and influenced decision makers manipulated research 'evidence' undermined independent researchers and developed alliances by creating or cultivating front-groups to promote their goals." That is an evidenced report which is more than I have seen from this Government.Their data is shonky. There's been the question that Dr Ayesha Verrall has raised time and time again in the House about the inexplicable handwritten note about an excise tax change for tobacco companies. We have not heard adequate answers to that. There have been Official Information Act requests on vaping from leading New Zealand media. The Minister has failed to answer any one of them. She has said that she will answer when she puts this bill in the House. I take that as an indication that this Minister is going to stand up at the committee of the whole House stage—given that there is no select committee and that this is in urgency—to answer the very very very many questions that we have. Because as other people have said this Government did not campaign on this. They cannot say they have a mandate within their 100 days. It was not transparent they are doing this under urgency they have not got the consultation and the voice of community that has been demanded by experts by communities by petitioners.So Madam Speaker through you I urge members of the Government—it is not too late—to do the right thing. Do the right thing by the constituents that no doubt are lobbying you and walk across the floor and cast your vote according to your conscience. I guarantee if that happened we would have a historic nuclear-free moment and this Parliament would have done its job."