Hide Rodney: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hide Rodney: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:3662] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I thank Ruth Dyson for her short contribution. We have to worry: fresh from victories in managing Television New Zealand “boo-boo” turns up with a high-sounding bill—the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (Stockholm Convention) Amendment Bill. This is what the general policy statement says and I ask Paul Swain to reflect on these words: “The enactment of the Bill ... will enable New Zealand to ratify the Stockholm Convention before or at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in August-September 2002.” The Minister is interjecting and getting all excited; I can imagine her concern. The legislative programme failed because obviously the Government could not ratify the convention in August-September 2002—[ 
Interruption 
]  
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. I refer members to Speaker’s rulings 51/5(3): “a running commentary of interjection is out of order;’’.  
RODNEY HIDE 
: Thank you Mr Speaker but I do not need any protection from Marian Hobbs. In fact I am quite pleased to agitate her and get her to do something.  
The other point I want to make is that in her speech to this great nation that we all inhabit the Prime Minister said we had a very full legislative programme. Yet I remind Dr Nick Smith that here we are in the second week of this Parliament and what do we have? We have a bill before us that should have been passed before August-September 2002. We look down the Order Paper to what this Government has been promising the people of New Zealand in terms of the amendment to the Resource Management Act and we see that it just sits out there. Nothing happens.  
It might upset Marian Hobbs that members of the Opposition want to point out the failure of this Government’s legislative programme its failure to do something positive for the economy and instead its grand gestures—as my colleague Mr Dail Jones has pointed out—that take up Parliament’s time. We will take the opportunities to hold this Government to account—not just for its policies but also for the handling of its legislative programme. 
David Benson-Pope 
: ACT should hold its members to account. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: David Benson-Pope is sitting over there getting excited but why does this Government not give some priority to bringing legislation to this House that will be of benefit to New Zealanders—something that Government members have been talking about over the summer break—rather than legislation that was not important last year? Here we are in the second week back in Parliament after the summer break and this bill is what the Government brings into the House.  
When members of the Government bring legislation to the House they should explain what is going on—both good and bad. They should not rely on the spin that comes out of the ninth floor of the Beehive to explain everything away. The Minister must try to treat this House with the dignity it deserves—that is with an explanation why this bill was not passed last year. The second paragraph on page 1 of the explanatory note states that it was supposed to be passed before August-September 2002—so that Ministers could look good at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. Clearly that time has passed and even the great Helen Clark cannot take us back there yet.