Dyson Ruth: Crown Entities Reform Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Crown Entities Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 04 October 2011. Volume:676;Page:21658. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 That was a tragic attempt at a valedictory and I am very disappointed that the member Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi chose to talk about an increase in police in some parts of the country when the Crown Entities Reform Bill is about destroying the lives and careers of hundreds of public servants who are dedicated to ensuring that all New Zealanders have access to high-quality public services. That member got up and defended this bill. He should be ashamed of himself. We have already seen nearly 2500 Public Service jobs lost because of the direct actions of Ministers in his Government at a time when our unemployment rate is rising dramatically. How stupid can that member and his colleagues be? Well the answer is “extraordinarily stupid” actually. There is no sense at all in cutting back jobs and access to services in our communities during a recession when we are trying to grow our economy or for the Government to say: “We will show leadership in this area. Let’s cut a whole lot of jobs. Let’s make a whole lot of people unemployed. We’ll give them great career options in Australia where they do pay their public servants well and they do offer them strong career prospects.” 
That member defends it. It is just short-sighted stupid and wrong and that is why Labour is opposing this legislation. We want to see high-quality public services delivered in New Zealand communities in an accessible way. People are entitled when they pay their taxes to know they will get access to high-quality information in a way that makes sense to them as a result of their contribution. That is how a healthy society works. That is why some members on the other side of the House have lived as public servants for years and I am sure they thought they were doing very fine work. In fact I have heard some of them say how good their work was. Then they come into Parliament and think that everyone else is a slug and should lose their jobs and that all of these departments are suddenly so inefficient and need to be merged. This is just short-sighted nonsense. It has not improved the delivery of services one single dot nor will this work at all. 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Services have been improved. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: For that member who used to have high standards and principles and was prepared to stand up for reasoned debate— 
Charles Chauvel 
: Oh it’s been a while. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: My colleague says it has been a while—that is true. I remember that member standing up to his colleagues for values he believed in but he is now prepared to see both the Alcohol Advisory Council and the Mental Health Commission—two critical areas in the lives of a healthy society—lose their mandate. How can that member justify that when his Government has been so timid in implementing the Law Commission’s alcohol recommendations and when it has been castigated around the country for parading a problem but not being prepared to present an answer? National is now taking away our country’s No. 1 alcohol watchdog. The group that — 
Jo Goodhew 
: No they’re not. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: —has been empowered to lead this debate is now being gutted. The current member—soon to give a valedictory—for Rangitata Jo Goodhew who has been paraded in her home town for not fronting up to public meetings on this very issue is prepared to back it as well. She will go in with her hand up on the vote for this legislation. 
It is the same with the Mental Health Commission. Despite what Jonathan Coleman the Minister said in this House we know that mental health needs to be protected and treasured and that the Mental Health Commission has done an internationally well-regarded job of ensuring that mental health is no longer the Cinderella of the health ball. There are always huge competing demands in the health system. There are always areas that will put political pressure on the Minister of Health and that will raise concerns in our community—and rightly. Mental health is never seen to be the issue that will light up public awareness. People will align themselves far more with something that is seen as an attractive health issue to back. Mental health must be an issue that the whole of Parliament continues to give priority to. 
I have never been as proud of two women of opposing parties as I was when I saw how the Rt Hon Jenny Shipley and the Rt Hon Helen Clark—from completely different sides of the political spectrum—both put mental health as a priority within our health system. Their record on that should be continued to be admired. But instead we are seeing Tony Ryall saying we have finished the work in mental health. The work will never be finished. I think that having that focus undermined and rejecting the value of the Mental Health Commission is just wrong. 
The other spin that the Minister has quite unsuccessfully put on this story is that we are cutting backroom services and increasing front-line services. But we can see up and down the country in health in inland revenue and most recently in conservation where front-line services—particularly in provincial towns—have been destroyed. I have yet to hear the members of Parliament for Whanganui Napier Tukituki or Wairarapa stand up for their communities anywhere. They could come in here under parliamentary privilege and say: “I think the Minister got it wrong in my town.” They might get away with it. They are probably so scared that they would be placed low on the list having been rejected by their community as being a total waste of space because they never stand up for their community. They should just come into this House and at least go out on a proud note—at least be seen to stand for something. But none of those members of Parliament have ever raised concerns in this House during any debate about the direct loss of their constituents’ access to services. 
We cannot get more front-line than a local tax office—the local office of the Inland Revenue Department—where people used to be able to go in with their concerns. They did not have to be put on to an 0800 call centre wait for an hour and put in a whole lot of numbers. Those members should get into their local office of the Inland Revenue Department. Those services have gone. They were front-line. Not one National member of Parliament stood up and said: “My constituents deserve access to services.” and what is more: “My constituents want to keep their jobs.” They have been doing those jobs well for years and they should continue to do them. 
We know that front-line services are being reduced and not bolstered. We have lost them in the Department of Conservation just in the last sitting week. I challenged the current Minister of Conservation to tell us why the scientists who were doing the work on the protection and management regime of the North Island kiwi were losing their jobs. The Minister came back with an extraordinary answer. She said that I should be aware that Genesis Energy had recently fronted up with some money to better support the blue duck. Well that was extraordinary news. That was very interesting. Of course everyone in the House already knew about it because it had been in the paper but having Genesis supporting the blue duck good though it may be does nothing to help the scientists who are doing the protection and management programme of the endangered North Island kiwi and those scientists are losing their jobs. 
New Zealand prides itself on our regard for our endangered species and so we should. Various parties leading the Government have said that we need to commit ourselves to ensure that New Zealand does not rank highly on the list of nations that have got rid of a whole lot of species. We put in some energy and effort into protecting those species. What does this Minister of Conservation do? Scientists—just flick them off—not important. They are critical not only to the future reputation but also literally to the future existence of our most endangered species. 
What this legislation shows most of all is that John Key and Tony Ryall are out of touch with New Zealand communities which know that they want and value public services that are accessible in their community. Labour opposes the first reading of this bill.