Borrows Chester: Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
Borrows Chester: Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:634;Page:5896] 
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the title and commencement clauses of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill. It surprises me that the term “money-laundering” is not in there because that is exactly what is going on here. Here is money that has been unlawfully appropriated and we are putting it right by passing this legislation today—I am expecting it will be passed given the voting record of those who have shown their flag earlier in the day and no doubt it will happen again. 
Let us look at ways other people appropriate money—in the Crimes Act for instance. There used to be a crime called theft by misappropriation. That was when people were given money for a certain purpose and they used it to do something else. That was a misappropriation. Well some people would say if we are given money to complete our duties as members of Parliament and we use if for something else—campaigning maybe—that is theft by misappropriation. There was another crime called theft as a servant. That was where someone employed by an organisation or a person used money without authorisation to do something else that was not in line with the immediate task. In 2002 the Crimes Amendment Bill renamed this to “theft by a person in position of trust”. I think that pretty clearly defines what has been going on here. 
It was interesting to hear Steve Chadwick the member for Rotorua say that the public are calling out for this validating legislation. I challenge her—or any of her colleagues—to name one member of the public who is not a card-carrying or pledge card - carrying member or a relative of a member of the Labour Party who actually wants this legislation to go through. It is my contestation that nothing that this legislation does is wanted by the public. It will not change the public’s perception of what has happened here at all. If members look at the  
New Zealand Herald 
 website and some of the letters to the editor received by that newspaper over recent times they will see that this point is made very very clearly. Nothing that is done in this House today will do anything to enhance the public’s perception of what goes on in this debating chamber. 
Here is a reader’s view: “This is an absolute outrage! This corrupt desperate Government who’s only interested in retaining power at all costs has no option but to call a fresh election. If not its a sad day for democracy. The worry is is what spin will they put on this to weasel their way out of it.” I thank Mr John Middleton for that contribution. Here is another: “Holding another election is what is needed now. Enough of all the ‘spin’ - which is really another name for lies and deceit. Obviously the Government trying to be very clever has us down as being totally naive easily manipulated.” Bang on I say to Mr Ian Findlay from Auckland. 
The point is that once members have been sitting over on the Government benches for as long as that Government has they tend to think they have a right to be there and that they can bend the rules any which way they want in order to ensure that they can stay there. I ask members to look at the two different ways that the overspending has been received by the various parties in this House. On this side of the House there was a cock-up. We said “Oops” we had made a cock-up. We self-reported it and paid the money back—just like that. What happened on the other side of the House? Members on the other side said: “No we didn’t we haven’t broken any rules and stuff you Jack we’re not going to pay it back.” But what happened then? Now they are saying: “Oops well we will but the reason why we overspent was—hang on a minute—no it wasn’t it was that reason there.” It was everybody else’s fault but the Government’s. 
Let us see what Mr Ron Bruce has to say about that: “To over-spend $760K of our taxpayer money to get re-elected the Labour Party has to be either stupid or crooked. In either case it’s not fit to continue running the country - we need someone in capable in charge.” That is a really good point. Someone has to be naively stupid or malicious to do what this Government has done. When an innocent person makes a mistake what happens? The person says: “Oops sorry about that I’ll pay for the damage I have done and I’ll try really hard not to do it again.” What this legislation does is try to make right something that can never be put right.