Sowry Roger: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Sowry Roger: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3442] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 I start by moving an amendment to the motion that is before the House at the moment. I want to add the following words to the last amendment that was moved: “ 
and that this House opposes the sale of shares in Air New Zealand by the Government to Qantas 
.” It will be very interesting to see how the Government’s very good friend the United Future Party decides to vote on that particular amendment. I predict now that like every other vote that United Future casts in this House and despite what it says outside the Chamber it will fall back into line in the Chamber roll over and do exactly what the Government wants.  
The speech from the Prime Minister which opened this Parliament lacked vision. There was nothing in it that will help the economy grow. The Prime Minister said that the speech would be boring and it was—exceeding her own colleagues’ expectations. I have never in my time in Parliament seen so many Labour members of Parliament getting up to give speeches and saying “Well you know it was a boring speech but I’m really happy with it being a boring speech.” That is what they said through gritted teeth. That is what they came to Parliament for. They came to Parliament for boringness and they came to Parliament through boringness. Labour member after Labour member has stood up here and said that the speech was boring but that they were happy with a boring speech. I say to the Labour members that the nation is not happy with a boring speech. The nation wants some leadership. The nation wants some vision. The nation wants a political party that will go out there with a legislative agenda to make this country grow faster.  
Nothing in the Prime Minister’s statement at the beginning of this session showed that Labour members have any understanding of that at all. Let us look at the legislative agenda. Here we are: Parliament has come back and the Government has a chance to lay out its plan its legislative programme and what has it got? It has the Television New Zealand Bill. Well we have been promised that for about 4 years. It has the Responsible Gambling Bill. That is the bill whereby the Government will take the pokie money off the hotel trusts that distribute it and give it to other bodies—such as Lotto and we understand local government—to distribute. It is the bill that will up and down the country neuter sports clubs that rely on pokie money for equipment travel assistance and all sorts of other things. It is the bill that the Minister will not table the amendments for. But there will be more about that; that is the Government’s big bill. But it gets worse. There is the Racing Bill. That will make the country go faster! That will make us grow more! The Resource Management Amendment Bill is another bill that is on the legislative programme. Labour members have been talking about that for about 5 years and they have not processed it at all. I predict right now that they will not process that bill during this period. The Government even has the War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2) on its legislative agenda. 
Pansy Wong 
: Which war? 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: Yes—which war? Those are the sorts of visionary pieces of legislation that we got from the Prime Minister. What we did not get from the Prime Minister was the real agenda. What she did not refer to in the House and what she will not talk about at the knowledge wave conference next week is the agenda that Margaret Wilson so carefully laid out in a much underrated and under-reported speech just a couple of weeks ago. I refer to the agenda that talks about what Labour with the help of United Future is going to do to business. This is what Labour and United Future will vote to do to business. They will start by enacting pay equity legislation. That is the piece of legislation which United Future will vote for whereby some bureaucrat decides that someone sitting in the local racing office for example has worth equal to that of somebody who is working in another particular area of the economy and therefore should have pay equity. It is that sort of a bill; a bureaucratic nightmare whereby bureaucrats decide the value of the worth of the labour in the marketplace. That is what Labour and United Future are voting for.  
The Prime Minister did not talk about the holidays legislation which Labour was not going to enact at all. Weeks before the election Labour promised hand on heart to the business community that it would not deal with that legislation during the next term then all the Labour members traipsed into the House and voted for it just before Christmas. Now Matt Robson is sending out newsletters to everybody and saying: “That’s OK. Labour has voted for that. It will deal with it this year. We’re going to get the 4 weeks’ leave.” Labour members will not be saying that at the knowledge wave conference.  
Margaret Wilson talked about adding sale-of-business provisions and contracting-out provisions to the Employment Relations Act. Those provisions are the ones that Labour took out of the bill after a barrage of opposition from business but it will go back and sneak them in this year. Margaret Wilson laid that out in her programme but the Prime Minister had her mind on loftier things such as the War Pensions Amendment Bill (No 2). Perhaps Margaret Wilson did not get the list of legislation to the Prime Minister in time for her to include in her speech or perhaps the Prime Minister does not want to talk about legislation that is bad for business just as she does not want to talk about treaty issues and education programmes. That is what I suspect. There was one speech from the Prime Minister one speech to the business audience and one speech from the rest of Cabinet to another audience. 
It is a bit like the situation with the transport bill currently before a select committee that deals with public-private provision for the building of new roads in this country. The Prime Minister said that the Government would pass that legislation this year. The Minister of Transport Paul Swain and the Prime Minister are scurrying around and saying to local government leaders and to business people: “Look the bill won’t work. We know it won’t work.” I quote the Prime Minister. Last week in a private meeting she said: “I’ll be happy if you can convince the select committee to de-Green the bill.” Paul Swain is saying to mayors all over the country because they are ringing up: “Please go hard with your submissions because we have to control the Greens on this.” So they sneak around bagging the Greens behind their backs and saying something quite different. That is a bit like Labour members up and down the country who are outraged about the lack of roading in their districts. I have read that Labour members all over the country are going to make strong submissions to the Minister for extra roading funds. I can tell members that none of them will be successful. 
Rod Donald 
: That’ll be right. 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: The Greens know that no Labour member will be successful. I can tell the Greens that Labour is out there shafting the Greens on the road transport bill all the way around the country to the point where yesterday a large group came to see the National Party and said: “At the select committee will you please vote with Labour to stymie the Greens.” I tell Labour members to come to us with a proposal and we will see what happens then. 
Hon Annette King 
: Who said that? 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: Annette King sits there and chirps: “Who who who?” She should say inside the House the things that she says to the local government leaders in this region. She should say them inside the House where everyone can hear them. She should not say to local government leaders: “I’ll have a meeting with you but I won’t have Roger Sowry in the room. If he comes into the room we’re walking out.” Why is that? Because those members do not want to be held to account. Annette King does not want to be held to account. She wants to be able to say to the mayors: “I’m on your side. I agree. Paul and I want the Greens influenced. We want it taken down. Make a strong submission. We’re there.” She wants to say all that stuff in the safety of her own closet.