Jones Dail: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Jones Dail: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5508] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 I will speak on the commencement date of the bill which is 1 May 2003. I note the Minister’s Supplementary Order Paper to delete the expression “1 May 2003” and to substitute the words “the day after the date on which it receives the royal assent”. Obviously 1 May 2003 has passed and this bill will be rushed into law as soon as the Government can get it through the House and get a signature on it. 
As I think has been explained by Mr Shirley and other members of the Committee who have spoken in opposition to this bill it will be coming into effect only because of the support of United Future. As Mr Shirley said one has a grudging respect for the Greens. They have abstained from voting on the title. They will not be voting on this so it means that the Government must rely on United Future to get this bill through—that is the clear message that is coming through to the people of New Zealand. This bill will come into force only if United Future supports it. 
It is typical of United Future that on the one hand it says by way of a press statement that it has some criticisms of the legislation while on the other hand it is willing to give effect to the legislation and to let it become law. One cannot really have it both ways. United Future was calling this bill the “Thank God for United Future Bill” when it was being discussed in the first reading. I am very pleased that it has stopped using that sort of expression but it is taking full credit for this bill. So when it comes to the next election if United Future is still around then will it take credit for the fact that terms like “spiritual” “cultural landscapes” and “ancestral landscapes” are in this bill or will it vote against those clauses? That is what we really need to know. Will United Future be voting against those clauses? If it does vote against them this bill will not come into force. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: That’s why they’re doing it in parts. 
DAIL JONES 
: But if they are going to do it in the first part and if they try to vote against it in Part 1 are they assuming that the Greens will support words like “spiritual landscapes “cultural landscapes” and “ancestral landscapes”? Are those words to be deleted from the bill because United Future is going to stand up and be counted—so that this bill will not come into force because the Government may decide it will not proceed with it any further? That is what needs to be made clear by United Future. No doubt it will be made clear shortly. 
Of course the United Future member said that “you give and it shall be given unto you”. That is a nice trite phrase. OK United Future members have given but what will be given unto them? Will we find out at some stage? Limited notification is something the Labour Party has always wanted. The Greens said they did not want it and resisted any pressure to continue with the bill. We would like to know what has been given unto United Future. We have heard one part of that trite saying but what is the other part? What have United Future members got in return? So far we do not know that they have ever received anything in return for anything. 
Maybe this is an example of a psychological relationship between United Future and the Labour Party. United Future members like their psychological relationships. I think it will be a new phrase. In the Families Commission Bill they have this psychological relationship and maybe this “give and it shall be given unto you” is part of the psychological relationship that exists between Labour and United Future. It is a relationship whereby Labour gets something and psychologically United Future gets something in return. Just what it is psychologically we do not know; but psychologically it is getting something back—psychologically spiritually or in some other way or another. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Give and take. 
DAIL JONES 
: Labour gets it and United Future psychologically receives in return. I think that is a wonderful relationship for any Government to have with its minor party. Psychologically or whatever way this bill is going through this House only because of United Future’s support. Despite United Future’s objection to terms like “spiritual landscapes” “cultural landscapes” and “ancestral landscapes” and probably to matters to do with the heritage aspects of this bill—despite the fact that it says it opposes them—it would seem in practice that its members will lie down and agree with the Labour Party. They will be like lambs to the slaughter—a nice biblical phrase.