Dyson Ruth: General Debate 
Dyson Ruth: General Debate 
[Volume:641;Page:11586] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 It has been an extraordinary year for watching the National Party move its policy. To get a National Party position on any policy is like picking up mercury with chopsticks—one thinks one has it and it slithers around the plate; one thinks one has it and off it slithers again. During question time today my colleague Sue Moroney asked about paid parental leave extensions. I was able to show that three woman members of the National Party have all put on the public record completely conflicting views on paid parental leave—Anne Tolley Judith Collins and Kate Wilkinson Then we had Jackie Blue National’s spokesperson on women’s affairs who at the Health Committee in respect of the Inquiry into Obesity and Type II Diabetes in New Zealand opposed paid parental leave as a way of supporting new mothers’ breastfeeding as a contribution towards reducing obesity. So on the record of Parliament we have National now opposing that for the most vulnerable mothers and the most vulnerable— 
Sue Moroney 
: What’s their policy? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: My colleague asks what National’s policy is. I just want to recall what John Key said in one of his most definitive statements. When he was asked whether National supported or opposed paid parental leave and whether it would scrap paid parental leave if it became the Government he said: “Yeah I think we support paid parental leave.” What an extraordinary comment from the leader of a party who from 2002 is consistently on the public record of this House as being opposed to paid parental leave. It is not surprising. There are so many other examples. 
I heard the latest version of National’s position on the Iraq war from the strategist Murray McCully who is out strategising on the rugby field in Paris at the moment. He said that actually National had never supported American United Kingdom and Australian troops going into Iraq that that was never National’s position and that National certainly would not support troops going to Iraq. Well that is the opposite of what National members said in the House. Certainly it was the opposite of what Simon Power said on the public record—“Where they go we will go.” That is out of the Book of Ruth in the Bible; it is a very good quote. But what Murray McCully said is that National supported their right to make a decision. It is just extraordinary. 
When we are talking about committing the lives of young New Zealand men to fight in a war that had not been signed off sanctioned or supported by any United Nation recommendation that party has a moral responsibility to the public of New Zealand to have one clear unequivocal position. There are very few issues more serious that a Government can consider than the issue of risking the life of another. That is literally what that decision is about and that party is cheating the public of New Zealand by not coming clean on its views. 
On housing John Key had the audacity to go to a State house in Christchurch and say that that was where he grew up and what a fabulous upbringing he had all credit to his mum and then go back to his electorate—which is not where his home really is; he does not live there—where he enrols to vote and where he opposed the building of State houses. So it is all right for State houses to be in his past life but not in his backyard. 
On the therapeutics negotiations with Australia where we had worked for months to get a sensible deal to protect New Zealanders against the importation of dangerous products in natural medicines what we got from John Key and Bill English was deceit and changed policies every second day regardless of what commitments they had made to the Minister for Food Safety or indeed to other Cabinet colleagues. 
Climate change—which the member who has just resumed his seat had the audacity to raise in this House—was a hoax to those members not very long ago. Now we have the little monkey singing: “I’m a believer.” It is just extraordinary. On student loans on Working for Families on superannuation on every policy they are gone by lunchtime. 
The issue that I would like to challenge the National Party on relates to a discussion document it has released today—[ 
Interruption 
] 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the Minister but there is a two-way debate going on between members who do not have the floor and it is totally out of order. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The challenge I would like to put to the National Party is to come clean with senior citizens in relation to its aged-care discussion document which says not one word about National’s commitment on asset testing. Asset testing which National in its 9 years in Government did absolutely nothing about is now under threat in its own discussion document. There is not one word not one commitment on asset testing in its document. It is under threat and those members need to come clean on it.