Brown Peter: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Brown Peter: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10815] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I listened to the Prime Minister with interest and I have read her speech in full. This country—and I am sure I do not have to tell you Mr Speaker or this House—is an island nation tucked way down at the bottom of the South Pacific. As such we have to be a trading nation and as such we rely very very heavily on our exporters. I was disappointed to read and to listen to the Prime Minister’s speech because she made little or no reference to the hardship that exporters are suffering at this point in time. The overvalued New Zealand dollar is hurting our exports and our exporters and something must be done. 
Dr Cullen told the Finance and Expenditure Committee—he was certainly well reported in the media—that he had several options at his disposal that he could use and that he could handle this resurgence in the New Zealand dollar. He has done nothing except sit on his hands. The Prime Minister implied in her speech that we depend on logic when she stated: “Logic would suggest that the growth in the US economy should cause its dollar to appreciate again and that New Zealand’s growing trade and current account deficits should also act to check our dollar’s rise in time.” Exporters and exports are behind the success of this country in every way shape and form. I believe that if our dollar continues to appreciate at the rate it has been appreciating it will be an urgent pressing issue. 
At the last election New Zealand First identified three major issues. The Government with some reluctance has listened to some degree on one of those issues—that is the issue of immigration. New Zealand First emphasised that overall the number of immigrants should be reduced and that immigrants should speak English and the Government has reacted positively to that request. We emphasised that immigrants should have a job and the Government has reacted positively to that request. We advocated that there should be increased training of New Zealanders. We do not need or do not want immigrants to come into this country because of a lack of training of New Zealanders. Pleasingly the Government has followed the line adopted by my colleague the Hon Brian Donnelly when New Zealand First was in coalition with the National Party and has increased training. 
I might add that under the direction of the Hon Brian Donnelly apprenticeships nearly tripled during New Zealand First’s time in office as a result of his efforts. Although the numbers have gone up significantly they have only just more than doubled during the Labour Government. So New Zealand First kicked the thing off in a very good measure. We made one little mistake: we did not change the name to “apprenticeship”; we just kept “training scheme”. I think we would have had a few more public relations points if we had changed the name. 
In terms of immigrants New Zealand First said that all immigrants should be subject to a health check. The Government has taken that on board at long last. It is slow in implementing it but it has taken it on board at long last. We said a few other things and we will be monitoring the situation. 
I raise all of this because the Government has largely listened to New Zealand First’s immigration stance and we urge it to listen to us just as genuinely on the Treaty of Waitangi problems. The Government’s actions on the Treaty of Waitangi and all that revolves round it are splitting this nation. That is why Don Brash’s Orewa speech made such headlines. The average New Zealander wants to bring these issues to a satisfactory fair closure. Unfortunately—and it is unfortunate because I think we have taken more than a step back with the National Party line—National has adopted a 1920s-type policy. 
I find it inconceivable that National sacked Georgina te Heuheu because she would not subscribe to the policy after it had announced it. I found it disappointing to hear Wira Gardiner who was once the senior Maori vice-president of the National Party say on Radio New Zealand that he had not even been consulted. Where does the National Party think that will take this country? It has given a platform for radical Maori and moderate Maori have said: “Well we cannot trust that crowd.” That is reflected in the responses coming back to New Zealand First. 
I say to the National Party in particular that once those qualities of understanding logic fairness and dare I add tolerance are removed from a dispute situation—or a situation where there is a significant difference of opinion—and one’s will is imposed the door is closed on fairness and respect and opened on tension friction and abuse. That is what happened on Waitangi Day and I regret to say a little bit of that happened in the House a few moments ago before I stood to take the call. I say to the National Party that some New Zealanders may react positively now to its approach but thinking New Zealanders will say that it is not the direction they want to go. They are currently telling us that they are concerned about the way Labour is handling things. I have to be honest: they think Labour is opening the door too wide too frequently and too generously on Maori issues. But they are equally concerned at the way National is handling the thing. We must recognise that there are differences and those differences must be resolved and they must be resolved harmoniously and fairly. It will take time but as I say it must include understanding fairness and tolerance from both sides. 
We are facing an energy problem in this country because of the Government’s commitment to renewable energy. We have millions of tonnes of coal in this country. We sell about 2 million tonnes of coal each year to nations that have not signed up to the Kyoto Protocol and we are about to introduce legislation on what is called Project Aqua. That is almost daft. We have energy to burn in this country and we should be using it. 
I could go on for quite some time but I will say that the Prime Minister made a speech that was somewhat patronising somewhat gloating— 
Hon Dover Samuels 
: Visionary. 
PETER BROWN 
: —certainly not visionary and certainly not reflecting the concerns of the average New Zealander. It disappoints me that National to some considerable degree has taken itself back to the dark ages. But people can rely on New Zealand First. We will be there to steer this country down a centre path.