King Annette: General Debate 
King Annette: General Debate 
[Volume:638;Page:8197] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of State Services) 
: 
 Nothing grates more in politics than blatant hypocrisy whether it is hypocrisy by a politician a political party the media or the public. It could be the politician who makes pronouncements on a moral issue while undertaking in private the very sort of moral behaviour he or she rails about in public. It could be the politician who votes against legislation to curry favour with some voters but secretly supports it. It could be members of the media who get too close to politicians and use that closeness to push a party line in their publications. It could be a caller to a talkback show who criticises politicians but never lifts a hand to do anything constructive in his or her own community. 
The latest example comes from Tony Ryall the National Party health spokesperson and the occasional member Murray McCully. In a full blast of sound and fury Mr Ryall has spread around as much muck as he can. But I have to tell him that there is some coming back his way. He talked about lackeys—and I will talk a little more about that later. The issue of pathology services in Auckland is too important to be turned into a show pony display by Tony Ryall and Murray McCully. The provision of quality services is at stake here—the delivery of affordable reliable pathology services for a third of New Zealanders. 
I will make no comment about the services that could have been provided by either company. However I will declare an interest. I opened the new Diagnostic Medlab laboratory in Auckland when I was the Minister of Health. I was impressed by the technology it used and the dedication of its staff. But given what Tony Ryall has said about someone being held accountable I believe that New Zealanders need to know what the National Party’s involvement in this contract has been from the beginning. I believe that an investigation is needed to see what action any National Party member—whether in Parliament now or before entering Parliament—took in support of Dr Tony Bierre the principal of Labtests Auckland the company that won the contract but that has now lost the court case. 
First I found it interesting to learn that Dr Tony Bierre stood on the Citizens and Ratepayers ticket. As everyone knows that is the National Party. He is a National Party lackey well known in Auckland as a National Party stooge. He was not some appointed member to the board as was being claimed today by the National Party; Dr Bierre is a National Party stooge. He stood alongside Dr Jackie Blue who is now a member of this House for Citizens and Ratepayers—“Cits and Rats”. She is now a National Party list member of Parliament and a very very close friend of Dr Bierre. 
It is even more fascinating to read in paragraph 91 of the judgment that Dr Bierre solicited help from the then National Party shadow spokesperson on health Dr Paul Hutchison to press his company’s case. On 24 June according to the report Dr Bierre wrote to Dr Hutchison claiming that his company could provide a valuable alternative to what he described as the current monopoly service. Dr Bierre asked Dr Hutchison to send a letter of support. Dr Hutchison wrote to the chair of the board on 27 June 3 days later and attached Dr Bierre’s letter. Dr Hutchison did acknowledge that there was a clear conflict of interest. He then suggested that Dr Bierre’s letter should be considered. Dr Hutchison must explain why given the conflict of interest he still wanted the district health board to consider Dr Bierre’s letter. 
Dr Jackie Blue also needs to explain what she knew of the conflict of interest and what action she took to alert the board to the potential risks of her close friend’s plans. I also want to know when Dr Hutchison informed the current health spokesperson of the conflict of interest and of the dangers to the National Party of being tarnished by the association with Dr Bierre. I also think it is important that Dr Jackie Blue who is now associate health spokesperson and who sat on that board until her election to Parliament tell this House what action she took to alert the board to Dr Bierre’s conflict of interest. After all she was a very close friend of Dr Bierre’s. Did she brief Mr Ryall? These are questions that need be answered. We have heard nothing from the National Party about Dr Bierre today—and rightly so from the perspective of those members.