Eckhoff Gerrard:  
Eckhoff Gerrard:  
[Volume:622;Page:17312] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
: 
 In case anybody is wondering that speech was made by Steve Maharey who was enhancing his reputation for approaching every issue in this House with an open mouth rather than an open mind. 
For the last 4 weeks or so I have been touring the heartland of New Zealand in ACT’s bright yellow bus and I have been talking to the real New Zealanders who want to listen—but not to the claptrap we have just heard from that Minister. My journey has taken me all over this country where rural New Zealanders heartland New Zealanders and peri-urban New Zealanders want a party to stand up and fight for their property rights and goodness me they have that in the ACT party. 
The people of this nation are outraged at this Government’s proposal to steal their property rights. Their personal security will be gone biosecurity will be gone and property security will be gone when that legislation finally reaches the House. 
I tell the Government that the farming community property owners and the forestry community are not prepared to stand back and see their property rights taken by this Government. Even the mild-mannered people out in the provinces are now saying that there will be civil disobedience. They say they will not allow this to happen. These people simply want to retain their property rights. They want the right to say no to a busload of tourists or whoever it might be. They want the right to say: “No you cannot enter my property for these reasons.” The Government is hell-bent on taking that right away. 
I learnt one thing very quickly on that tour: this issue will be a major vote-loser for the Government. It is absolutely certain that David Parker for example who is the constituent member for Otago—not that anybody knows that—is toast. If the legislation is passed he will be toast. In Ashburton for example we hosted 80 people who turned up at short notice to voice their opposition to the legislation. Not one Government member would dare surface to attend those meetings to give the Government’s point of view although one of its lackeys did attend and told the meeting: “Well we are going to exclude Maori land from this land grab because we don’t want another Maori land war.” Eighty or 90 people heard that woman—Julia somebody or other—say that that was the case. 
In Blenheim 200 people lined up to hear what I had to say. I asked members of the public whether they would care to give us their views over the microphone on the yellow ACT bus. People lined up. There must have been a dozen of them and half of them were women. The legislation will impact on rural women more than anybody else. It was rather poignant to turn up to a meeting and see Mrs Agnes Nicholas sitting in the audience nodding her head in approval. She was nodding her head about the outrage coming from this Government. 
There was a nice little incident at the A and P show in Christchurch. This fellow said to me: “Gerry rural New Zealand now believes in the ABC of politics.” I said: “What on earth is that?”. He said: “Anybody but Clark.” That is the attitude in the provinces. We will get rid of her. We are delighted to support the people who believe that socialism has to go. 
In Taumarunui—a small town in the King Country—175 people turned out to hear what the ACT party had to say and they applauded us. Just a couple of days ago in Masterton 100 people turned up and they condemned the Government. Their representative the new candidate for the Wairarapa said that she did not believe in property rights. 
Let me tell the House what the Government is about to be called. During the war years there was a man called Quisling from Norway. He was regarded as a collaborator and a traitor. The people of rural New Zealand are calling Jim Sutton a quisling. They are telling me that he has collaborated with the Government and no longer stands up for the people he should be supporting. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That word has been ruled out previously and the member should withdraw and apologise. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Yes I was calling for order. The member will please withdraw and apologise. 
GERRARD ECKHOFF 
: Speaking to the point of order Mr Speaker I am merely repeating what rural heartland New Zealand has said. I did not refer to the Minister as a quisling; I am merely repeating what has been said out there. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The fact is that it was said in the House and I on behalf of the House take objection. The member will please withdraw and apologise. 
GERRARD ECKHOFF 
: I mean no disrespect to you Mr Assistant Speaker nor the Chair but I cannot withdraw and apologise for speaking the truth in this House. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Yes the member can. 
GERRARD ECKHOFF 
: I guess that is my choice and my choice is to say “No sir I cannot.” 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: It is not a matter of whether it is the truth. It was clearly offensive in the House in the way that the member said it. That is the way I took it and that is why objection has been raised to it. I simply ask the member to withdraw and apologise please. 
GERRARD ECKHOFF 
: I regret Mr Assistant Speaker I cannot. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The member has a number of seconds left but I am not willing to allow him to have them.