Goudie Sandra: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — In Committee 
Goudie Sandra: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:13127] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 Never before in the history of New Zealand have we seen such an undermining of our democracy as we have under the current regime. This is absolutely tragic for New Zealand—but guess what? Have I got news for members on the other side of the Chamber! The New Zealand public really do know about it. Here we have on the front of the  
Challenge Weekly 
: “The Electoral Finance Bill—no way”. If they understood the implication of this particular bill and what it meant in relation to the Electoral Finance Bill they would be saying “no way” to that too. Here we have John Boscawen who has started a campaign and is working with Grey Power and the Sensible Sentencing Trust to take legal proceedings against the Attorney-General and the High Court has set down an urgent hearing on 27 November for a judicial review. 
Hon Member 
: That’s about the next bill. 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: It does not matter which bill it is for whether it is the Electoral Finance Bill or whether it is for this Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill it is all part of the same package; it just constantly undermines democracy. Do not forget what Harry Truman said: “Once a Government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition it has only one way to go and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” I have to tell members that this Government is doing exactly that. It is shutting down opposition in any which way it can. 
My excellent colleague Anne Tolley has quite clearly spelt out what that means in terms of this bill that we are discussing here tonight and its relationship with the Electoral Finance Bill. If members look at the part we are talking about here in the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill the key point—which was made by Anne Tolley and by Tony Ryall—is that this is about keeping the jobs going for those MPs who have the privilege of being in Parliament right now. 
It makes it very difficult for people outside of Parliament to do anything about becoming representatives of the people. It stops them from being able to fully participate on an even playing field alongside those people who already have the privilege of being in Parliament. Clearly a number of people from the Government benches just do not understand that distinction. They clearly do not understand some of the basic principles of democracy and that is what is wrong with this current Government. That is why we have this atrocious bill that we are talking about here tonight. That is why we had the horrified questions raised about the bill from some other parties in this Parliament—namely New Zealand First whose members clearly had a bit of trouble understanding the bill. But obviously some members from the Government benches do not want people to be able to challenge them in their seats. They like having that ultimate authority. They do not want to be challenged by anybody outside of Parliament. They want to keep their cushy numbers and their MPs’ salaries and they are actually passing legislation so that that happens and so they can put out all sorts of advertising blurbs. 
I just wonder whether these advertisements from Labour’s last election campaign would actually get off the blocks and get approval. What do they say—apart from talking about Labour’s tax package? Hello! I wonder what Cullen thinks about that. I wonder how much of National’s policy has been incorporated into this stuff under the guise of Labour policy. These advertisements actually say that “You are better off with Labour.” Well I tell the Committee that there will not be many people who think that when they are listening to the debate on both this bill and the Electoral Finance Bill because the public understands the meaning of democracy. They also know the difference between flimflam and reality. They understand the difference between spin and what is real. 
I have to tell the Committee that the airbrushing on this pamphlet just passes credibility. I mean the teeth being as even as that? It is ridiculous. We all know what Helen Clark’s teeth look like and whether they have been sharpened at the edges is a moot point. It is clear that some questions will be raised about this advertisement because I do not know whether they can get away with saying “You are better off with Labour.” However Labour is clearly making the most of it.