Auchinvole Chris: General Debate 
Auchinvole Chris: General Debate 
[Volume:668;Page:15175] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 We have just heard from my parliamentary colleague Sue Moroney. Yet again she concentrated on Mana. It seems to me that Labour members are concerned about Mana and indeed they should be. If they do not get more than their current majority then it says a lot about Labour. 
It seems that Labour cannot even run its own caucus; I dread to think how it would try to run the country. [ 
Interruption 
] Yes it really does pose questions. One need look only at the votes last night to see that Labour is at sixes and sevens as a party. 
Hon Member 
: Six and 17. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Yes six and 17. On a matter of national significance a bill that ascertains how we are seen internationally Labour splits its vote. It seems it is as divided on this matter as it is on the party leadership. The Labour Party cast 23 votes in favour and 11 votes against and four abstentions—abstentions. These members of Parliament are paid to make decisions not to sit on the proverbial fence twiddling their thumbs leaving the hard thinking to the rest of Parliament. If they abstain on this one one wonders what else they might abstain on. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There have been previous Speakers’ rulings about tedious repetition. There is tedious repetition from one speech to another. Maybe they should just table the research unit notes. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We will not have any further points of order on this. The member should not interrupt the member’s speech like that; that is not fair. 
Hon John Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sorry to interrupt. There have also been Speakers’ rulings about idiot interruptions through points of order. The member should be brought to order; it is not good enough. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not know where the member has been for lunch but it is not hard to see that I am on my feet. He will be silent. Points of order should not be used to call a member what that member just called him; I will not repeat it. I have already reprimanded the Hon Trevor Mallard for frivolously interrupting a member’s speech. At least it was in moderate humour and it was not nasty. The member raised this point of order in quite a nasty way and that is not helpful. I go back to the first point that members should not interrupt especially in the general debate. 
Hon John Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am quite embarrassed by the comment you made about my lunch. It was quite inappropriate actually. For lunch I was not very well and I had a piece of chicken if that is of any use to the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat immediately. If the member was not aware what he said I say that he called another member of this House an idiot under a point of order. That is totally unacceptable. He continued to interject when I was on my feet. He will not do that. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Thinking of the point of order that was raised by the Hon Trevor Mallard it is interesting that he talked about repetition. Goodness me! After wondering who the shadow Leader of the House is one has to wonder at the repetition of his points of order—it is all the time and it goes on. 
Let us come back to the point that I know minds are seized with and that is the fact that the country cannot afford to be mired in the sort of prevarication that Labour members have been. In military parlance yesterday’s performance by Labour can be seen as the “Charge of the Labour Extremely Light Brigade”. Those members not only charged in the wrong direction—the wrong way—but they went in all directions at once. My parliamentary colleague Mr Damien O’Connor—back in the saddle I am told—leapt on to the horse and went in completely the wrong direction altogether. To top it all off we had a number of desertions from the ranks. 
On a slightly more serious note why do Labour members hate success? They hate success. It seems that everything that might benefit New Zealand such as  
The Hobbit  
and the cycleways Labour is dead against—dead against—and it will do everything it can to vote against it. Is Labour seriously trying? Is this perhaps a cunning Labour plot to seriously damage New Zealand’s tourism potential? We in National fortunately are more focused and we are working hard on the real issues that affect New Zealanders on a daily basis. The National-led Government has maintained a clear and unrelenting focus on employment in the midst of a recession. 
I was very taken by the very beginning of the Prime Minister’s statement which stated that we would protect the entitlements of beneficiaries. We have done that. When we have made changes to the cost of living when we have made changes to GST we have compensated for that. I do not remember Labour engaging in any such activities. 
Let us go through a list of the things we have done. We have a growth-enhancing tax system and we have better smarter public services. With respect the resolution of the neurosurgical questions in Dunedin came to me as a surprise during question time. I think the answer was fully deserving—fully deserving—of strong and sustained spontaneous applause because that is what it merited. We are lifting education we are lifting skills and no matter how rude Labour might be towards our Minister of Education she is doing a great job. We are boosting productive infrastructure we are pursuing an ambitious trade agenda and I say well done to Mr Tim Groser for his efforts in that direction. We are cutting red tape and regulations. 
To conclude on the matter of cutting red tape and improving regulations I have been going around a number of councils lately. We did not just reduce the number of complaints about the Resource Management Act; we stopped them altogether.