Dyson Ruth: General Debate 
Dyson Ruth: General Debate 
[Volume:632;Page:3996] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 It is extraordinary that John Key does not understand the irony of his accusing Dr Cullen of having a secret meeting in the Boulcott Street Bistro because no members of the public ever go there when just about every one of those members including Rob Fyfe would be very well known to the public coming and going. After all Mr Key is the member who organised and attended meetings with the Exclusive Brethren and then forgot about them. He organised the meetings with the Exclusive Brethren set them up with his leader and attended those meetings but just like Dr Brash he could not remember anything about them. 
John Key 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have never attended a meeting with the Exclusive Brethren with my leader. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No the member will be seated. That is not a point of order. If the member wants to make a personal explanation that is another matter. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I am delighted to hear that John Key is visiting Palmerston North today. I was thinking of the differences between John Key and Steve Maharey but the list got too long. But I am pleased that John Key is visiting someone’s electorate even if it is someone else’s. I have heard that people in Helensville would like him to visit their electorate which happens to be his electorate. Steve Maharey actually lives in his own electorate unlike that member who does not choose even to reside within an hour’s drive of his. 
Then Mr Key has the audacity to say in public—while representing his constituency that is not good enough for him to reside in—that he does not want State houses in his electorate. He does not want people living in State houses in his electorate: “Why don’t they live in Shannon or somewhere? Why don’t they live further down the line?”. I say to Mr Key that someone who has a supposedly proud background of being raised in a State house should understand that security and affordability in housing are part of a good start to life and that is why we support building State houses not selling them off. That is why we would support State houses being built even if the poor tenants had to have that member of Parliament as their elected representative. I do not think that it would be for very long. 
This week is a very proud week for members of the Labour Party and for the organisation itself. As Steve Maharey said this week marks the commemoration of the 90th year of our establishment. When we look into the history of the Labour Party which is the longest-established political party in New Zealand—over 20 years older than the National Party—we see that the original vision of a more just society where every citizen is able to live in comfort and security remains totally unchanged to this day. That vision of a fair and inclusive society remains totally unchanged. In the intervening 90 years we have not had nearly enough time in Government but we are certainly doing our best to address that. We have set throughout that time progressive and sometimes radical agendas to ensure that security and opportunity for New Zealanders is entrenched as part of our vision. Even when we are out of office frankly we have often set the agenda for political debate. 
We came into being as part of a wider industrial support system for political action and as we became a major force in the 1920s we broadened our policies and our membership to ensure that our base reflected the aspirations of all of those people who wanted to build a better New Zealand. Nowhere is the difference in policies in those early days more obvious than after the Great Depression of the 1930s which demonstrated without doubt the failure of conservative policies both social and economic. Michael Joseph Savage led Labour to a sweeping victory in 1935 on the promise of radical changes. 
Labour then introduced a number of measures that have become an integral part of our social and economic fabric. For the first time access to health care became affordable for all. The State assumed a major responsibility to provide low-cost housing to those in need—I am not sure whether there was an attempt to put State houses in Helensville at that stage. A comprehensive social welfare system gave security to the elderly to the infirm and to those without employment. Access was opened to both secondary and tertiary education. Judicious Government intervention rebuilt our economy and reduced unemployment. Workers benefited by industrial relations legislation that introduced the 40-hour working week and made it easier for unions to negotiate on workers’ behalf. 
My colleagues and I are very proud to be part of the current Labour-led Government. It is a Government that is building on exactly those original traditions—in health in housing in education and in jobs.