Horan Brendan: Budget DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Budget Debate[Sitting date: 21 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18185. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent):Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I welcome the Government’s move to fund doctors visits for children under 13. That is required urgently. However the detail of the implementation requires scrutiny. For under-6-year-olds parents will find that doctors visits are not truly free and still incur significant charges. How many parents understand that New Zealand’s children will have to wait another 13 months before free doctors visits come into effect? The legislation is required immediately. How many children will suffer in the next 13 months because of this delay? We all agree that there should be free medical care for children under 13 and I call upon this Government to advance the legislation to come into effect before the House rises on 31 July. I welcome the move to extend paid parental leave to 18 weeks but again parents will have to wait nearly 2 years for the 18 weeks to apply.I turn to education. Sure money has gone in but most of it is being used to fix leaky buildings and to create a restructuring—executive teachers executive principals. Where in this Budget is the planning for 2020? Steven Joyce has been quoted as saying that ultra-fast broadband will revolutionise the way we trade the way we operate and the way we communicate and he is right. But the reality is that New Zealand is seriously lagging behind the rest of the world on two fronts: planning and infrastructure. We need ultra-fast broadband immediately. Where in the Budget is there money to upskill our children young people and the existing workforce to provide us with the digital literacy that is required?We are fast moving into a world of predictive computing wearable computing and quantum computing where computers will mimic and synthesise in seconds information that currently takes months. Retail as we know it is changing dramatically. We are moving from a world where the consumer goes to the market to one where the market goes to the consumer. Thousands of jobs will be lost but thousands more will be created. Where is the identification of and planning for the skills and competencies of children young people and the existing workforce to operate and to face these challenges? By 2020 we will have 3-D printers just like—Hon Trevor Mallard: He should have read it through first out loud.BRENDAN HORAN: —we used to have fax machines. They will be ubiquitous. There is a word for you—sorry Mr Assistant Speaker; it was Mr Mallard I was referring to. And manufacturing as we know it today will end. We need money in the Budget so that New Zealand businesses can compete in the new world that is coming. Our workforce needs these skills and competencies and so do we. So where is the plan?I turn to housing. In the Budget the shame of housing is Christchurch. It is a stain on the soul of New Zealanders that the people of Christchurch are still suffering. Last week I met a couple—a 70-year-old and a 74-year-old—who after 3 years are still living in unhealthy conditions because of the bureaucratic failure of the Earthquake Commission and Southern Response. This couple had their first claim turned down because inspectors were too lazy to lift the carpets so a 70-year-old and a 74-year-old had to do it themselves. Then they paid over $20000 to private engineers and found that the concrete flooring slab had cracked and that the waterproof membrane was breached promoting an osmotic effect and lifting the water up into the house. How can these people still be suffering after all this time? They are still fighting for fairness.The truth is that there is a complete lack of accountability in Christchurch. Who is accountable for the bungling bureaucracy that has forced people in Christchurch to live in squalid and unhealthy conditions for over 3 years? Who is the person responsible for holding up the cheques to the people in need? Who is the person responsible for ensuring that work done meets the required standards? Who is responsible for Southern Response’s low-ball settlement offers? Who is responsible for the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment guidelines that were supposed to provide uniformity for reinstatement? These guidelines actually breach the Building Act because they provide for a lower level of repair and reinstatement than that Act requires. The citizens of Christchurch have been treated with contempt.We need an urgent inquiry into building practices and into billing by contractors. I know of jobs being overcharged. Here is an example: $200 worth of materials $600 worth of labour and finally the Earthquake Commission being invoiced for over $15000. Added to that the Government is saving money off the backs of suffering New Zealanders breaching trite law by operating to section 9 of schedule 3 and substituting that section of the Earthquake Commission Act ahead of the primary definition which is to reinstate homes to as similar a condition as when new. Trite law requires that an Act must be read in its entirety but the Earthquake Commission is reading andoperating section 9 of schedule 3 in isolation. In Christchurch we need accountability and we need it now.I turn now to Vote Parliamentary Service. Recently I have received information that raises real questions about the use of parliamentary funding by a party. I am writing to the Speaker asking that the Parliamentary Service investigate these matters and report to him. There was a clear precedent for this when in December 2001 the then general manager John O’Sullivan reported to the Speaker on the Alliance electorate liaison unit. That report swept aside any uncertainty that might have existed and clearly stated the rules. The leader of New Zealand First cannot claim to be ignorant—Richard Prosser: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.BRENDAN HORAN: —but in the past 18 months has ignored the rules—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! There is a point of order.Richard Prosser: The Budget debate is around the Government’s allocation of funding for various means and the use of that funding—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No. Look—[Interruption] Order! The member will sit. The member in opening talked about Vote Parliamentary Service. That is what he is speaking on and he can continue in that vein. I am listening very carefully to what he is saying. That comes under Speakers’ rulings. I am inviting Brendan Horan to continue.BRENDAN HORAN: It is good to see he had a voice there but it is a shame he does not have vertebrae.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! That is completely out of order. That is an attack on the integrity of a member of this House. The member will withdraw and apologise for that comment.BRENDAN HORAN: I withdraw and apologise for that comment.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Brendan Horan—continue.BRENDAN HORAN: He has deliberately withheld information from the board of the New Zealand First Party. The New Zealand First Party—Andrew Williams: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Under Standing Order 117 “Personal reflections” “A member may not make an imputation of improper motives against a member an offensive reference to a private member’s affairs”—Standing Order 117.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Look I know that this is a very interesting subject. This debate is about the spending not the person. We are in a debate on Vote Parliamentary Service. Anything to do with the appropriation and the way that money has been appropriated how it is being used and how it is being spent is a matter for debate and that is what we are on now. So Brendan Horan will continue.BRENDAN HORAN: The New Zealand First Party is using taxpayer-funded computer software for party political purposes such as campaigning and fund-raising. The program code named Vanguard—Barbara Stewart: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Again Mr Horan is transgressing Standing Order 117 making a personal reflection against a member or a—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No no. The member has talked about a party. He has not mentioned any individual in this matter.Hon Annette King: That’s cute.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry? And if we look at Standing Order 117 it says that “A member may not make an imputation of improper motives against a member an offensive reference to a member’s private affairs or a personal reflection against a member.” I am listening very carefully to this. The member must keep focusing on the appropriation to the Parliamentary Service the use andappropriation of that money and any concerns that the member may have if that is the way that his speech wishes to continue.Andrew Williams: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Speaker has in the last 2 weeks on numerous occasions advised members that if they have any issue in this regard it should be referred in the normal manner through the Privileges Committee or through other official channels; it should not be raised in this House. The Speaker has made that ruling on numerous occasions. We would like that to be upheld.Brendan Horan: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The member will sit. It may well be the case that there is a referral to the committee but this is a debating chamber and members in this House have freedom of expression freedom to express their views. I am listening very carefully to this. I will ask the member to focus on Vote Parliamentary Service. As I have mentioned before the debate is about the appropriation of the money and the use of that money and the member should not bring into account the integrity of any member of this House. All members are honourable members. I will ask the member to focus on that.BRENDAN HORAN: Vote Parliamentary Service—the New Zealand First Party is using taxpayer-funded computer software for party political purposes such as campaigning and fund-raising. The program code-named Vanguard is a constituent relationships management system that stores personal details of voters and is used for mass mail-outs. Other political parties have these programs too—Barbara Stewart: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This program has not been launched. It is not part of—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): That is not a point of order. I will ask members that on points of order they be relevant to the matter. That is not a point of order.BRENDAN HORAN: Other political parties have these programs too but they are funded by the parties themselves and operated outside of Parliament. New Zealand First paid tens of thousands of dollars out of the leader’s budget to develop this software and has its parliamentary staff working to run the program for election year. This is a clear breach of Parliamentary Service guidelines.An internal party strategy document dated 9 March 2014 states under the heading “Funds”: “Campaign fund request first 2 weeks April—Self-funding after initial distribution followed by use of Vanguard appeals to focus groups.” A memo to the party board by the president Anne Martin dated 10 March 2014 states: “The director of operations canvassed the use of Vanguard computer program. Suggest board advised of its uses including candidates’ college program as well.” This use of parliamentary resources for fund-raising appeals and political campaigning is more than questionable especially from the New Zealand First Party which promised a fair go in the last election. The public have a right to know what their money is being used for and whether it is being used legally.A company called Lone Star Market Research was registered on 1 August 2012. The company’s sole director is New Zealand First’s director of operations in Parliament and is a member of the party’s campaign committee. The company was set up with the intention of conducting political activity for New Zealand First. New Zealand needs an assurance from the Parliamentary Service and the leader of New Zealand First that Lone Star Market Research has not received one cent of taxpayer money nor had the use of parliamentary resources.Barbara Stewart: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.BRENDAN HORAN: The New Zealand First—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! There is a point of order from Barbara Stewart.Barbara Stewart: This information is totally incorrect. It is just fantasising and although I realise it is a wide-ranging debate—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No no; I do not need any help. I have indicated that anything relating to Vote Parliamentary Service is in order. If the member ties that into Vote Parliamentary Service that—Barbara Stewart: But it’s wrong.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Whether it is wrong or right is a matter for debate. This is a debating chamber. It is not for me to judge the accuracy of the information that has been presented. So long as it ties into Vote Parliamentary Service it is in order. Brendan Horan has 1 minute remaining.BRENDAN HORAN: Vote Parliamentary Service—the New Zealand First Party membership secretary present at board meetings and recorded in the minutes of those meetings is paid by Parliamentary Service for a full-time out-of-Parliament support role in the New Zealand First office in Bank Street Whangarei. That is a clear conflict of interest. This paper trail leads down the pathway to inappropriate use of public moneys serious conflicts of interest secrecy and a lack of transparency and accountability and all from a party that purports to hold everyone else to task. There seem to be clear breaches of the Speaker’s directions on the provision of services to MPs and parties. Staff would seem to be in breach of the Parliamentary Service code of conduct. I call upon the leader of that party to open his leader’s budget accounts to the scrutiny of the Speaker first and then to the public of New Zealand.