Burton Mark: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Burton Mark: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:629;Page:1263] 
Hon MARK BURTON (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 That was Chris Finlayson and I think he was referring with some lack of accuracy to the early points in the Prime Minister’s career. I suggest to him that it is good to consider the maiden speeches that are made in this House. The best advice I was given however was to regularly review one’s own maiden speech for the fine comments one makes. Mr Finlayson may recall the way in which only a few weeks ago he regaled this House with his views on the sad habit of so many members to get into personal attacks and abuse. I invite him to re-read his own maiden speech read the  
Hansard 
 of the contribution he has just made and perhaps have another think about his style in the House. 
Something that has been lacking from Opposition members in any of their contributions is the recognition of the great privilege it is for any of us to return to this House. I acknowledge what a privilege it is to have been re-elected as a Labour member of Parliament as part of a Labour-led Government and to be re-elected by my colleagues for a third term as a Cabinet Minister. This Government is making solid progress and will continue to do so. Yes it is good to know that Mr Finlayson has been taking some notice of that because some things do bear repeating. We are engaged in the economic transformation of this country because we want to have a strong enduring economy for our children and grandchildren. Yes we are indeed committed to our strong and unique national identity. Yes we do want to promote that to strengthen it and to celebrate it with New Zealanders. Why would we not want to? And yes families young and old are a strong focus of this country and this Government. We are committed to ensuring that more and more of our people young and old enjoy the security and the opportunities they deserve. 
So it is indeed a privilege to be back in my fifth term serving the good people of the south Waikato Taupo and Ruapehu districts as their local member of Parliament. It is great that despite the enormous trickery of the Opposition members—the members of the once-great National Party and of the never substantial ACT party—in their conning coercing and outright bribes New Zealanders were just too damn smart. In their wisdom they rejected the negativism divisiveness and shallowness that we have seen those members revisit day in and day out during this session. They said no to the National Party because New Zealanders as a people I think it is fair to say decided to support—as the Prime Minister said in her wide-ranging opening statement to Parliament—a Government that would continue to build on the solid progress that has been made grow the economy and drop the level of unemployment maintaining it at the lowest level in the Western World. That is something that the Opposition members are not interested in. We have not heard them comment on that. We have heard them call for more money for lawyers but they have said nothing about the celebration of more than a quarter of a million new jobs for New Zealanders—jobs that did not exist 6 years ago. 
We have invested in critical health services in education and in the police. We are proud to promote our rich culture and our unique identity which is a celebration of the diversity of New Zealand. We are proud of the work we are doing to protect our environment—which will continue—and to maintain our nation’s reputation as a principled independent and yes nuclear-free country. We have heard the latest gambit on that—the latest flip-flop. I do not believe a word of it. It would be nice to think that Murray McCully really meant it but we know that his mate Lockwood Smith certainly does not—he does not want a bar of it. We know that in my home town of Taupo there was a stoush over that one. Murray McCully said that National had to have a think about that issue because of where the votes are—a deeply principled National Party position just like Mr Brownlee’s paper tabled in the House today! Actually it was tabled because he did not want anyone to miss out given that it had been so widely leaked. There may have been a member who did not already have a copy. But boy have we seen the depth of principle of the National Party! I have never been a fan of Lockwood Smith but at least he stood up and said: “You do that and I’m gone.” Well I suppose that swung quite a few votes to Murray McCully. But I do not believe that although I would love it to be true. 
I think that what we saw during the election campaign was the same sort of puffery and self-righteous humbug we have seen over the last couple of days and it is what turns New Zealanders off National and ACT. It is nothing more than what we have seen over the nonsense about the use of parliamentary budgets on material to talk about policy. 
Shane Ardern 
: Tell us about your credit card. 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: The member opposite is squeaking about credit cards. The member knows—he has put out newsletters as has his colleague Katherine Rich. They have put out large amounts of material stating what their party would do if they ever got back into Government. It is not likely to happen; it is pretty fictional to be true. But the member knows that that is typical of the sort of material that has been circulated. 
I am absolutely gobsmacked that the member and the member’s party have learnt nothing. That is not what New Zealanders want from the once-great National Party. They want to see a demonstration of a party that has some substance and frankly we have seen no evidence of that at all. The once-great National Party—and I say that with difficulty but it is true; National was once great—is now nothing more than a repository for the shallow and for the negative whingers and the knockers and that is simply not the sort of future New Zealanders want. Most of all if we go back to Mr Brownlee’s paper we see the evidence of a party that is devoid of any defining principles at all in terms of its direction as to where it is going. The truth of the matter is that the wheels are falling off the National Party machine. As for ACT I think it is fair to say there is not much left of it except perhaps a worn-out— 
Hon Member 
: Needs a retread! 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: A bit of a spare tyre. 
But let us look at the wonderful public relations extravaganza the National members had at Wairakei. It was a great choice of location—the best place in the country. They went into the heart of the central North Island in the Taupo electorate. They spent 3 days at Wairakei and I do hear that it was very successful from the point of view of the local golf course and the pubs and bars—they did very well. So there was some gain from the National Party’s presence. On day one what dominated every single news report of that great public relations exercise? Well it was the leadership. It was about a certain gentleman—what do they call him; something “velvet”? 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: “National Velvet”! 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: “National Velvet”; that is right. He arrived and it did not look as though he was going to be the centre of attention. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: That was the name of a horse. 
Hon MARK BURTON 
: It was too. But the member started to talk about someone bagging him—one of his senior colleagues and he was not going to mention names. I thought through it. I thought of Mr Brownlee. No it is not his style. Obviously Bill English was a definite contender. But I actually think that Paul Swain got it right. My former ministerial colleague has taken the good sense to look after his daughter and to take a bit more time to reflect. I think he got it right: I think John Key leaked because the one thing John Key had to have was the headline that day at Don Brash’s expense. 
I certainly say this to Don Brash although I am running out of time and there is much more I could have said. “Bill English has my full support.” said Don Brash in April 2003. “There has been nothing which you would call a coherent or organised plot.” he said in April 2003. Do members know what John Key stated in the  
Sunday Star-Times  
in October last year? “There is no grand master plan behind the scenes like we go after him after six months.” In May 2003 Dr Brash said: “I was at no point aiming at leadership when I came into politics.” Interestingly Mr Key in the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 last year stated: “I have no intention of challenging Don”. We all know how the story will end. I say to Don Brash that he was right in what he said before the election; he should have gone with dignity. He will not do so now. No party—and certainly no leader of any party—can survive an array of headlines like that at the beginning of an electoral term. Those headlines include: “Are Don Brash’s days numbered?” “Gloomy Brash at odds with analysts” “Brash on a hiding to nothing” and “Don’t believe Dr Doom”. 
That most of all is the message to National. “Dr Doom’s” gloomy negativism is a thing of the past. New Zealanders do not want a bar of it. This Government is building a future for and with New Zealanders and that is why Labour is on the Government side of the House and National is on the Opposition side.