Cunliffe David: General Debate 
Cunliffe David: General Debate 
[Volume:646;Page:15058] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I will begin today by reflecting on the definition of a word we often use but sometimes do not think about. It is the word “integrity” which comes from the verb to integrate or to keep together to join up to be one whole. It is a word that nobody is using about John Key because John Key simply cannot take a position and stick to it. 
Lesley Soper 
: Slippery. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: He is slippery. He is slippery but let us understand why he is slippery. He is slippery because he does not do strategy. He is a position-taker; he is a trader. It is OK for people to change their positions but if they do not have a consistent strategy then others will not trust them. We live in turbulent times; we had Bear Sterns go to the wall last week. Who does the public want to trust? Do they want to trust people like Helen Clark or Michael Cullen who have their heads right across the portfolios of Government and who ooze integrity? Or does the public want the phone to go at 3 o’clock in the morning and to have a bloke pick up the phone who did not know what his position was when he went to bed the night before? Slippery John—let us give— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No— 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: That was a quote Mr Assistant Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I do not care whether it was a quote. The reality is that it is a personal reflection under Standing Order 116 and also under Speakers’ rulings 26/6 and 26/7 as it can be referred to as a nickname. The Minister will use the member’s proper name. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: Mr John Key has been described as slippery by the media and with good cause. He slipped up on New Zealand’s Fast Forward programme for two reasons—firstly he cannot tell a core constituency if he falls over it and secondly he cannot tell the difference between interest payments and a capital drawdown. He said that it was interest-only even though the policy was that “We will spend the lot on agricultural research.” He needed to be more decisive so he took positions on Air New Zealand and on Auckland airport. But it took him eight goes to get to “Um”—eight goes to get to “Um”. He is not the kind of guy people want to pick up the phone at 3 o’clock in the morning when there is a global meltdown: “Oh Bear Sterns has gone to the wall—um.” If he was to be asked what he would do to free up liquidity his answer would be: “Um.” When he was asked whether he would have gone to war in Iraq he answered: “Um—well no; well yes.” Here is the bit I like: “No that was never my position.” That is interesting and that is different because it crosses the line between position-taking and forgetfulness—which is kind of forgivable—and that word we started with today which is “integrity”. 
Integrity is what the public want at the end of the day. They do not ask much of politicians. They want someone with half a brain who works hard and who is basically honest. John Key has half a brain but he really really tests the honesty test when he slips and slides over the truth like that. Well at least he is doing better than Tony Ryall—Tony “the mouse” Ryall. Why is the media calling him “the mouse”? It is because he has been leaking confidential reports inside the House for the last month. And what is he doing outside it? He is slamming his office door in the face of TV cameras and hanging up on Radio New Zealand National journalists. Do members know that Tony Ryall has been banned from Radio New Zealand National for 2 weeks? Its journalists will not interview him because he will not pick up the phone and answer their calls. Why? It is because he is afraid that he might be asked— 
Simon Power 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think that the Minister despite the brilliant eloquence he has been engaged in for the last 3 or 4 minutes knows that bringing a member’s courage into question is outside the Standing Orders. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: It was borderline but I will ask the member to desist because if he does bring in courage then it is a personal reflection. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I withdraw the word “afraid”. But I would like to go to the integrity of the member’s position because so weak is his case on the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board—which by the way everybody including the people of Hawke’s Bay now knows because there is 200 pages’ worth of proof on the table—that the best arguments he can muster about that district health board come not from the independent review but from the Ingram inquiry. That is fantastic—it is the wrong case. That was to do with Taito Phillip Field; it was not the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board. I do not think that Taito has ever been to Hawke’s Bay— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member will use the member’s full name. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I do not think that Taito Phillip Field has been to Hawke’s Bay and that matter is totally irrelevant. Let us compare Mr Ryall’s position on the Hawke’s Bay matter and his denigration of the Director-General of Health with the National Party’s position on Madeleine Setchell. In the case of Madeleine Setchell did National members say that it was OK to denigrate a neutral civil servant? 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Oh no it was terrible. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: No it was terrible. But is it OK to denigrate Stephen McKernan? 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: And Ian Wilson. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: And Ian Wilson? Oh those members say that doing that is fine. I say to Mr Ryall that he like his leader should get some integrity.