Mallard Trevor: Budget Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mallard Trevor: Budget Debate 
[Sitting date: 16 June 2004. Volume:618;Page:13644. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I would like to make some general comments about the Budget but first I think it is incumbent on members when they are speaking to make sure that what they say has some relationship with the facts. I will take the last comment made by Nandor Tanczos to start with—students do not pay 7 percent interest. The member should wake up breathe the fresh air read the papers notice what happened 4 years ago and catch up with the facts and then he might be taken a bit more seriously in this House. 
I will comment first of all on the beginning of this debate and say how disappointed I was in the first Budget contribution from the Leader of the Opposition. I would have thought that in an area of so-called strength—economic policy—we would have had a delivery that had belief resolve information and some facts behind it. What did we have? We had a tired old delivery from a ditherer who really supported the Budget but knew he could not quite say so. He sort of knew that the form was to oppose the Budget even if he believed in it but he could not even put his heart into opposing it. 
What did he do after that? He wandered off to the United States. He told them that the nuclear policy would be gone by lunchtime he thought. 
Simon Power 
: Come on! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Maybe he did not say that but he will not say what he said. Did he dither again? The only question I have is this: which of National’s policies comes first its industrial relations policy or its pro-nuclear policy? The importance of the ordering for a lot of New Zealanders is vital. 
Hon Paul Swain 
: Gone by lunchtime. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: If he abolishes lunchtime he will never get around to doing the other policy. That is what I understand the current debate is—National is not really dithering about the nuclear policy it is industrial relations. Will National abolish lunchtime or not? That is what we on this side of the House want to know. One of the National members shakes his head and one of them nods. That just shows the divided National Party. There are three National Party members in the House—one shaking his head one nodding and one looking stupid. What an approach from the National Party. Mr Assistant Speaker I will make it quite clear that I did not count you in that group at all because I would not bring you into the debate. 
Then after the Leader of the Opposition had 2 weeks off to prepare for his first question back after the adjournment—about question No. 3 yesterday—he went to sleep. He was asleep in the House for the third question. He did not take the call. He needed the puppeteer Mr McCully in behind him to pull his strings— 
Simon Power 
: Come on! That’s against the Standing Orders. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No it is not. One can refer to members being advised and led by other members and he was led along on a string by Mr McCully the puppeteer. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: There is a long history in this House of not being allowed to accuse people outside the House of manipulating members but it is quite clear and anyone who has seen television can see that the Leader of the Opposition is a puppet on Mr McCully’s string. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I understand that but I think it is a disparaging remark to call a member of the House a puppeteer. Please continue. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I would have thought it would be more disparaging to call someone a puppet rather than a puppeteer. But I will move along and say that maybe there needs to be a ring through his nose so that the Leader of the Opposition can be led in a way that is a bit better. One thing that Dr Brash has to know is that if he is to perform in this House he has to stay awake—at least until he has asked his question. I think that is a vital approach. For the first 10 or 15 minutes of question time it is incumbent on the Leader of the Opposition not to go to sleep. He might find it boring. He could have a siesta after his lunch before he comes down to the House. He could have a snooze and get some advice from other members of the House as to appropriate times of the day to sleep so that he can be in peak performance condition to come down here. 
We have to keep on writing notes up every time National changes its leadership and I do not think we want to do it anymore. We are quite happy with the Leader of the Opposition that we have at the moment. We do not want the leader to change and we would like to give him some advice in this area—when one comes down to the House even if one has not been involved oneself one should have a look at the Order Paper to see whether one has a question. And if one does have a question— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Did he know he had a question? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I do not know whether he knew he had a question. It depends on whether Richard Long wrote it or whether he did—I do not know. But in this case one should look at the bit of paper and if it says “Question No. 3 Dr Don Brash” one stands up and asks it when the Speaker says: “Question No. 3 the honourable Dr Brash.” It is a pretty simple lesson. He does not need Sandie Shaw to tell him how to act in that particular circumstance. It is a great song and I hear that Sandie Shaw’s song sung with no shoes on will be the theme song for the National Party at the next election campaign. In fact if those members do not play it we will at a number of their meetings I am sure. 
I do want to say a little bit more about the Budget and how it is good for families. It is good for families and good for the economy. It is a fiscally prudent Budget. It is one where a lot of care has been taken. I think it is fair to say that the Minister of Finance looked carefully at the money available for spending without increasing debt and he made some calls in that area to get the money to where it was needed the most. This has been done in a number of ways including improvements to early childhood education about which I will say some more. 
Tertiary education will become more affordable benefiting more than 36000 students. I know that the National Party voted against that and did not want it to happen but it will happen. We have doubled the number of publicly funded major hip and knee replacement operations. Again mainly because the National Party hates older people its members voted against extra operations for older people. When we get on the hustings again next year we will remind Grey Power and the senior citizens groups that National members opposed extra hip and knee replacement operations. That is the approach of the National Party. That is fair enough; those members do not care about old people they are not their priority and those members do not think older people should have their operations but I wish they would stand up and say so. 
I want to make just one comment about early childhood education. I want to thank Sue Thorne for her support of the increases in the childcare subsidy and in the number of working families eligible to get it and I want to thank the  
Dominion Post 
 for its glowing editorial on that area. The average private sector early childhood centre receives $140000 extra over 4 years as a result of this Budget; the average community centre receives only $50000. I know that there is unevenness there and that I am being criticised by community centres for not giving them as much on average as we are giving to the private sector centres but I think it is quite a well-balanced package and that what will happen is there will be a lot more people with real choice as to whether they work. This is a good Budget.