Maharey Steve: General Debate 
Maharey Steve: General Debate 
[Volume:639;Page:9050] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Can I just follow on from my honourable colleague here to say to Mrs Collins that we are more than happy at any time today tomorrow the day after or the day after that to receive that name. If the member has that name she has a duty to give it to us. She tells us she has that doctor’s name and the Minister for Social Development and Employment will welcome receiving that so we can deal with that. She is an honourable member; she will undoubtedly take the step of giving us that name. 
Following the departure of Mr Don Brash from the leadership of the National Party the warring factions of the National Party came together a little like a blended family under the civil union leadership of Bill English and Mr John Key. In the early days it looked a bit like a rerun of  
The Waltons 
. Mr Williamson of course is nodding; I know he is a fan of  
The Waltons  
and he could see that the outbreak of peace in the National camp was exactly what he was after. But we all know that after a little while all that blending starts to pay its price reality starts to bite and people have to live up to what they are being asked to do. 
For example National Party members have been asked what they will do and amazingly they have told us. And they have told us! We have Mr Groser Mr Foss and Mr Ryall. We have Jacqui Blue we have Jo Goodhew we have Chris Tremain we have Colin King we have John Hayes and we have people one did not even know were in the National Party. We have John Carter we have David Bennett Mark Blumsky Nathan Guy and Bob Clarkson—there are pages and pages of promises to spend money from National Party members. Every time they are asked what they will do they rack up yet another multimillion-dollar promise from the tax-cutting National Party. 
Now this is something the leadership could not allow to carry on. As civil union leaders they knew they could not be outdone by all the promises coming from virtually every sector of the party—unknown people rushing in to promise roads art galleries education spending and whatever they could lay their hands on. So of course we have watched Mr Key and Mr English do the same. One promises huge tax cuts; one says we should not have tax cuts. One says: “I don’t think we like the Working for Families.”; the other says: “We do.” Someone does not like the KiwiSaver but says: “We are now promised; we will have it.” Someone says: “The loan system was the most evil nasty thing to do.” but then says: “We’ll have it after all.” 
This is the one that most upset Mr Williamson: State housing—the thing that Mr Williamson said should be sold off because people should just buy their own house. He has had to eat the dead rat because the other National Party members say they like the rental policy and like State houses. Mr Williamson quite reasonably wriggles in his seat as though he has been hit by a hail of something—policies no doubt from all around him—as he realises that he is going to have to carry on eating that rat. People like Tim Groser over there have to eat their foreign policy; it is embarrassing for someone of his sophistication to hear Mr Key wrecking the foreign trade policy of the National Party. Mr Hutchison who is very aggrieved that he is not the health spokesperson watches Mr Ryall do his job. Mr Brownlee is very bitter that he is not in the civil union; he is just the head boy in the family these days. 
The list of people who are disgruntled goes on and on but it has been highlighted by Sue Bradford’s bill. Congratulations should go to the National Party for seeing a compromise—well done! But let us look at the process. This is the party that said one should not be whipped on this issue. We see it has now been whipped on the issue. This is the party that said it was well run by Mr English who said that his strength was not marketing that that was John Key’s strength but that he had the experience in policy and government. There was no consultation. The entire front bench—Mrs Collins over there is virtually foaming in the mouth at her opposition to the “Bradford bill”; people are just about killing themselves. Mrs Bennett over there sent out 19000 letters and got 400 replies and on the basis of that non-statistical sample said: “I’ve got proof”—she was grasping at straws here—“so I can change my mind now.” So she changed from supporting the bill to being against it and then a minute later—no consultation nobody asked her nobody asked “Is it all right?”—National whips said: “I’m sorry Paula Bennett you’re going to have to vote for it now.” This is the kind of thing that we know blended families find very very difficult to cope with and that is why the National Party is falling to pieces.