Cosgrove Clayton: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cosgrove Clayton: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 25 July 2012. Volume:682;Page:3908. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour) 
: 
 I am very glad the National Party members are talking about their so-called glorious Nuremberg-like rally that happened on the weekend. The Prime Minister came out of that triumphant in his own mind that the National Party faithful—of course all of whom who could— 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was a completely unacceptable reference that was made by that member. He should be made to withdraw and apologise for it. You cannot use words that relate to that particular regime in this House in other contexts and it should not be used in the context of this debate when it is reference to another party as well. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think— 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I withdraw and apologise if any offence was given. I just say this for the record: I think the member has got it completely wrong but I withdraw and apologise. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Had the member referred to something to do with a Nazi-style conference that would have been out of order. I am loath to all the time keep ruling words out of order. I appreciate the member’s preparedness to withdraw it but I think we have just got to be careful to not be ruling words out endlessly over the years. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: It is not the words; it is the reference he made. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member should not be interjecting although I understand the depth of feeling around some of these issues. The reference is made through words. I thank the member for withdrawing his comment and let us let it lie at that. I appreciate that. I thank the member. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: With no link to that I think the member has gone troppo but we will not go there. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! That is not helpful. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: He had a bad day yesterday. We have it now in writing from a High Court judge confirming what everybody knows in Canterbury and around the place that Gerry Brownlee is incompetent and we now have the papers to prove it. But let us go back to the great rally of the National Party conference. Out of that came the Prime Minister and he announced a loyalty scheme as part of one of the biggest wealth transfers in our history—which I suspect we will look back on it as—from those who cannot afford it to those who can. He came into this House with a loyalty scheme that is an admission of defeat because if the Prime Minister felt as he has trumpeted as Gerry Brownlee has and as all the National Party members have that these shares in our assets will be retained almost ad infinitum in the future by ordinary Kiwi mums and dads then the question remains why you need a loyalty scheme and why that loyalty scheme will be paid on the back of all those who cannot afford the $1000 to $2000 parcels. 
The Prime Minister then came into the House yesterday from my memory—I note this for the press gallery because when we would get up in the House from time to time when we were in Government the press gallery as were the then Opposition were at pains to ask us to provide detail around costings and other things—he got up and was asked for detail around the loyalty scheme. Zero; he had not thought it through. He was asked for a costing around the loyalty scheme. Zero; he did not have the numbers. Then he decided to criticise this side of the House for references to an authoritative Treasury report from his own Government department but could not put a dollar figure on the costings a dollar figure on the impact no detail and no reference at all. There are those in the media who would term that perhaps as “policy on the hoof”. That term I think is too light for this. 
The Prime Minister on radio called me a fool for references I made around State-owned enterprises. Well I say this to the Prime Minister: only a fool would swap revenue-generating assets making around 18 percent for debt-servicing costs of around 5 percent and every Kiwi who can balance their housekeeping and make the budget work every day has worked that out. The fool is the Prime Minister. The fool is the Prime Minister because the Prime Minister has tried to say benevolently to people who already own the assets that they can buy those assets back for a second time—for a second time because we know that they already own them. Then he said to them that those who do buy in those who can afford $1000 or $2000—and if they can ordinary Kiwis I suspect will pay off 20 percent of the credit card rather than invest in this—will get a loyalty bonus. Those who cannot afford it get nothing. 
Then of course we have the issue of possible Maori tribal and iwi challenges. Yet the Prime Minister and his ilk go ahead bludgeon this through—bludgeon an initial public offering through under the worst market conditions you can possibly have and under the potential threat of legal action. I ask how that will be resolved. That will be resolved of course in the tried and true way of the Prime Minister making a deal. I suspect that it will be resolved through a share allocation. So we have a bonus share allocation. Kiwis are so loyal that they do not need it but the Prime Minister has thrown it in. By the way that bonus matures—hey presto—in about 3 years’ time. When is that colleagues? Just after the next election. I ask National given that it has not made up its mind on much whether it will guarantee that that bonus issue that loyalty scheme will mature prior to the next election—prior to the next election say in 2½ years’ time. That is a bribe and a con designed simply so the Prime Minister can say that all Kiwis are in—until they get the windfall bonus in the lead-up to an election and then we know Kiwis will be out and foreign investors will be the ones who are in.