Tamihere John: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Tamihere John: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10811] 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Minister of Youth Affairs) 
: 
 It is a privilege to rise in the House today to support the Prime Minister’s statement. It is one of the great speeches that the Opposition will hear in this Parliament in regard to setting out a clear vision and a range of policies backed up by legislation. 
It is always a treat to follow Gerry Brownlee in a debate. He casts an awfully big shadow. The truth is that he is the newly promoted spokesperson for the very powerful and much-vaunted National Party on Maori-related matters but we just heard a 10-minute speech and he did not even talk about them. He did not raise even one positive issue. We know that he can count to 10 in Maori but that is about it. 
I want to concentrate on a number of marvellous outcomes for New Zealanders under this Government in terms of its stewardship—particularly in the economic commercial and business life of the nation. Is it not interesting that the Leader of the Opposition—the great “money-man” the ex-Governor of the Reserve Bank extraordinaire—did not raise debate on the matter of the stewardship of Treasury or the nation’s chequebook on the welfare of business or commerce in this nation or on its economy but he picked—what? He picked Maori race-based policies. That is what he picked to trade on. 
We have one of the fastest-growing economies in the OECD. From 1992 to 2002 it grew at an average annual rate of 3.6 percent defying global downturns. Last year our growth was the highest rate—at the top of the OECD ratings. At 4.4 percent unemployment is at its lowest level since the mid-1980s—in fact for 16 years. Sixteen years ago the Leader of the Opposition was 50 and that is what we have today—a very short memory. At the same time my colleague the member for Waimakariri was 15. That shows the chasm between the views being expressed in this country. We have a bloke over on the Opposition benches who was 50 back then and now we have reached a great outcome of a 4.4 percent unemployment rate the greatest outcome in 16 years. 
Government debt at 27 percent of gross domestic product is the lowest it has been since the mid-1970s. The greatly vaunted powerful ex-Governor of the Reserve Bank does not want to discuss these issues. He does not want to discuss the beauty and marvel of Kiwi businesses going forward; he wants to raise a race-based policy debate. Why does National do that? The insidious nature of the issue is to move people into areas of comfort with the National Party. I could go out into my communities and set them on to immigrants. I could tell them why they could hate and despise others but that is not leadership. That is not stewardship; that is insidious. 
When Maori policy was debated in the National Party and treaty clauses were fashioned by Doug Graham treaty clauses were voted on by those people over there on the National benches and they voted for need-based Maori delivery mechanisms. The policy is now race-based and they have very selective memories. It is disgraceful conduct—disgraceful. The National Bank’s  
Small Business Monitor 
 indicated that the small-business sector grew 4.9 percent last year. That compares with the growth in the economy as a whole of 3.1 percent. These are all great stories—stories to rejoice in and celebrate. But what does the other side of the House tell us? It tells us why we should despise divide hate and degrade one another. 
On this side of the House at least I am proud enough to say there is moderate leadership. We will not have extremists. I never thought that I would be able to stand up in this House and compare Don Brash as an extremist with Hone Harawira down the other end of the spectrum—and neither of them should win because they are off on their own tangents and off on their own tracks for ugly reasons. Here is the trick of it: they are both on the taxpayer’s teat. They are both getting paid for expressing absolutely divergent opinions. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is a wide-ranging debate. It is a debate in which there is a degree of robust contribution but I think the member in his most recent comments has gone well beyond what might be considered reasonable debating material. It is not appropriate for any member to stand in this House and lay out personal insult to another member. It has never been accepted. I would ask you to reflect very carefully on the words that Mr Tamihere is choosing to use and the way in which he is implying that those titles belong to another member in this House and then ask yourself whether that is truly in the spirit of the Standing Orders. I know that we stray from the Standing Orders quite frequently and wander all over the place but when it comes down to how members in this House treat each other and the level of respect we show—and there has been a little bit of disappointment and outrage expressed in the House today about some matters at Waitangi—surely in this House there should be a much higher example shown than there is anywhere outside. So I ask again that you consider the words that Mr Tamihere is using and ask yourself whether it is acceptable for him to go further than imply—in fact to confer the words and meanings of his words upon another member of this House. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I thank the honourable member for his contribution and refer him to Speaker’s ruling 38/4. The member himself made the point that words or phrases that are used robustly in debate but do not impugn the honour of a member will not be ruled out of order unless of course they are “… offensive on the face of it.” which is contained in Speaker’s ruling 41/1. Mr Tamihere was coming close but I now ask him to come to the point in the debate. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: He does not like it. The big fella does not like it when people are talking straight. And the member for Rangitikei sits over there on the Opposition benches. He has a large Maori population in his electorate. The member for Helensville sits over there and accepts this nonsense and accepts this type of policy. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Things could go right off the rails here so I am asking you to be very careful about this. Although I can take any barb at all that anyone wants to throw across this House I am going to ask you to rule right now. In future contributions to this House would it be all right for me to refer to Mr Tamihere as the “black fella”? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: That sort of thing can lead to disorder and I take it that the member is referring to Standing Order 116 which deals with personal reflections. If the member is concerned about the reflection in the terminology the honourable member used then I would ask that member to withdraw and apologise. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: No no. Let us be clear. I do not want him to withdraw— 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Speaking to the point of order the honourable— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: No no. You asked me a question. How can he speak to a point of order when you have not got it straight in your head— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: When I am on my feet both members will be seated. Mr Brownlee you had spoken I had responded to you Mr Tamihere called a point of order in between and I may have missed the point of order being called but he did call a point of order to respond. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: How can you ask him to reflect on a point of order when you have got it wrong? You said: “I assume the member is referring to a Standing Order.” Let me assure you when I take a point of order and want to refer to a Standing Order I will give you the name of it. I do not want to be second-guessed by the Chair. I asked for a ruling—a simple ruling—not some dive off into the Standing Orders that exist telling me what is what and what is not. I want to know if that is acceptable from him and the Chair does not pull him up in the future can I refer to him and his colleagues as the black men?