Prebble Richard: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prebble Richard: Smoke-free Environments Amendment Bill — Referral to Health Committee Procedure In Committee 
[Sitting date: 15 October 2003. Volume:612;Page:9213. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I would just like to comment to the member who has just resumed her seat— 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: Dr Scott. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: —Dr Scott yes—that no ACT member of Parliament smokes and I am not in favour of promoting smoking. But I find it intriguing that that politically correct committee in exempting marae ignores the fact that smoking by young Maori women is a significant problem. When I ask why that is I am told: “That’s our home.” If one asks a returned serviceman what his home is he will say it is the Returned Services Association. In the case of returned servicemen Parliament provided them with free cigarettes during the Second World War and made them all addicts. Now we are turning our backs on them and saying that because they are returned servicemen we will be tough on them but we are so politically correct we will ignore the problem with young Maori women. 
I turn to a question that I have—[ 
Interruption 
] I ask the member not to interrupt. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: I’m trying to help. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: The member is not helping me. I have a question for the promoter of the bill. She is also the chair of the Health Committee and that is a clear conflict of interest. I want to know whether the member knew that the Ministry of Health was paying $2.1 million to lobby MPs on behalf of her bill. Did she know? If she did that is a disgrace. If she did not know why did she not vote for Mr Dunne’s amendment that the bill be sent back to the select committee so it could have had Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) come before it to be asked why it did not tell the committee it was being paid by the Government to do that lobbying? I say to the Committee that in my time in Parliament I have never seen that. I think it is corruption. There is no doubt that it is against the public service code for— 
Hon John Tamihere 
: The member has seen a lot about corruption. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Did the member who is interjecting on me know about it? I want to know whether he knew $2.1 million was being spent. Did he know that the contract states: “Promote a supportive public climate for enhancing smoke-free environment protection in legislation” “Engage secure support from the public and political networks” and “Visit key portfolio MPs and Maori MPs”? That member is a Maori MP. Was he lobbied by ASH? 
Hon John Tamihere 
: I can’t recall. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Now he cannot recall. The amount was $2.1 million and he cannot recall whether he got his share. Did ASH bring it in a paper bag or does he get paper bags full of money so often that he cannot remember when they arrive? [ 
Interruption 
] Koha yes. Someone from ASH would have come and said: “I’ve got some koha for you here Minister—our share of your $2.1 million—and we’d like your support for Steve Chadwick’s bill.” 
I want ask Steve Chadwick whether she knew that these lobby groups when they appeared in front of the committee were paid political lobbyists—paid for by the Government? She is being silent now. Does she not think she has any obligation to the Committee? 
 I ask the member why we should support her bill when she is not even prepared to answer questions like that. She sat there as chair—apparently she volunteered to stand down—but I ask whether she cannot see that that is a conflict of interest. Does she not see that her bill has compromised this Parliament? Where is the integrity of any MP who can vote for this bill knowing that he or she may have been influenced by money being paid—I believe improperly; I actually believe illegally—to ASH the smoke-free environment group and the other Maori group. 
I note that those groups were instructed to write letters to the paper but did they say they were being paid by the taxpayer to do that? Did Steve Chadwick know or was she just a tool? If she was a tool why will she not take an opportunity—and why did she not take the first available opportunity—to set the record straight? Or is she so convinced of the political correctness of this cause that she believes the end justify the means—which of course is what the left always believes? Will she take a call and set the record straight.