Peters Winston: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Inquiry into Expressions of Interest Process; Urgent Debates — Accident Compensation Corporation—Resignations 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peters Winston: Urgent Debates Declined — Skycity Convention Centre—Inquiry into Expressions of Interest Process; Urgent Debates — Accident Compensation Corporation—Resignations 
[Sitting date: 13 June 2012. Volume:680;Page:2914. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 There are some people in this House who seem to think that Bronwyn Pullar and Michelle Boag are heroes in this matter. I want to remind them that those are the very people from the National Party who began this attack on ACC’s re-visioning under Nick Smith and backed him all the way until one sad day it affected them. Then they wanted to be different from all the rest of the people around New Zealand who were suffering massive cutbacks of physiotherapist services all around the country. All those other people were on the outside because of the policy that they in the National Party promoted and all of a sudden one of their own got caught by their own policies—and some people are trying to forgive them and paint them as heroes.  
What is happening with the National Party and ACC? You see Bronwyn Pullar was a National Party campaign organiser. Michelle Boag is a former National Party president. Despite the fact that she had been convicted of trying to pervert the course of justice at a commission of inquiry by this country’s leading judge she still went on to be promoted to being the president of the National Party. This is extraordinary. Then you have got Nick Smith the MP who was a Minister in the National Government. Collins is a National Government Minister and of course there was Wayne Mapp who used his influence as a Minister to push for Bronwyn Pullar’s case before an insurance company to extract millions from it.  
Now what are the coincidences of this here? It is no coincidence at all that the involvement of these people and the National Party officers with ACC is as though it is some private little fiefdom for themselves. The National Party is using ACC as some sort of private agency. Nick Smith was acting for Bronwyn Pullar against his own department. Then you have got the repatriation of Nick Smith by National as we speak. That is why he is being given all this speaking time and why he has been allowed to ask all these questions. It is because National intends to bring him back even though he was found out to be a totally inappropriate Minister at the time. We all know that. [ 
Interruption 
] Oh no no we are not going to have two standards here for the case of Simon Bridges. No sirree!  
I want to ask Simon Bridges whether you have read this article. Have you read this article today in the  
New Zealand Herald 
? It sets out the words and the writing from one Michelle Boag the former National Party president. You see she is trying to appear as pure as the driven snow but I want to know from Simon Bridges who claims to be a lawyer and a prosecuting lawyer at that—we know that the prosecuting licence is held by the firm and not the private individual although Simon told us otherwise did he not? Back to my point. Michelle Boag writes: “You will see in the correspondence attached to the email I am forwarding that while Mr Murch asked for the return of data he did not acknowledge that this would be contingent on reaching an agreement acceptable to both parties which was our understanding.” Mr Bridges does that sound to you like extortion? Because it does to me. It does to me.  
Look just last month Justice Young revealed that ACC had to take legal steps to prevent a man publicly releasing another person’s case notes which the corporation had sent him in error. So there is a court case in the High Court stopping a man doing exactly what these people were threatening to do as part of their resolution plan. That is corruption. That is extortion. The Minister involved in that one is no longer involved here but he knows what I am talking about. Even though it was happening right under his nose he pretends that he somehow was innocent. No he is not and I want to know from the present Minister for ACC what on earth she is doing not going for these people: Bronwyn Pullar and this woman Michelle Boag. Or is it because if you are in the National Party you can do any old thing?  
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What did the police do? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: What did the police do? I am asking Mr Nick Smith the former Minister. Does this not sound like extortion to him? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I think it’s for the police to decide. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: No no excuse me. It is not for the police to decide. It is not for the police to decide; I am asking that member over there. When you write these sorts of words: “You will see in the correspondence attached to the email I am forwarding that while Mr Murch asked for the return of data”—which he was entitled to ask for. He was entitled to have it given to him before the meeting even started. If there was any good faith here any bona fides here or any sort of fair play they would have handed those 6000-plus files back before the meeting. But oh no they did not. This is what she said: “… asked for the return of the data he did not acknowledge that this would be contingent on reaching an agreement acceptable to both parties which was our understanding.” I do not give a darn about what TV3 ran the other night. What I am interested in is what you think those words mean. “We are not going to give back the documents until our case for Bronwyn Pullar is satisfied to our satisfaction.” That is what is being said. There is a word for that. It is called extortion—standover tactics. It is just wrong.  
I want to ask Mr Smith and Judith Collins what they are doing about it. Why is the National Party so silent over there right now?  
Andrew Williams 
: They protect their mates. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh no. Those members are looking downwards now because they are protecting their mates. It stinks. There is an acrid stench arising out of this House and it is clear as daylight that it is unacceptable. 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: Well tell Andrew Williams to leave. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I beg your pardon? 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: Tell Andrew Williams to leave. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh no no. Mr Williams understands what justice is about. Mr Williams understands that justice is universal. He understands that these principles of justice and democracy are immutable to all people not just to the National Party.  
What we have got here is a cover-up—a total cover-up. There is their former darling head of the party caught red-handed seeking to extort money out of the Crown and what does the Minister do? Oh well she does not want to say anything because that might be an administrative issue. That might be an administrative issue. Meanwhile Mr Smith over there is defending it—defending it.  
Where is the accountability now? What was the role of a board member in setting up a meeting between two senior ACC managers and Michelle Boag and Bronwyn Pullar? What is going on here? Why has the Prime Minister ruled out an independent inquiry? Why has he ruled it out? Do you know why? Because all his friends get nailed if there is an inquiry. Hence no inquiry. And is it not convenient that the chairman John Judge and two of his senior colleagues have been let go—“Don’t come Monday.”? Dead men of course tell tales. It is time to lift the lid on the whole affair. It is time for the National Party to stop protecting its mates.  
It was rightly pointed out by previous speakers that this was a portfolio taken over by the Hon Nick Smith who can be a right “loony tunes” ideologue when he wants to be. He can be a right off-the-wall “loony tunes” ideologue when he wants to be. I will give you an example. He gets the job and the first deceit he runs deceit No. 1 is he says that the whole place is broke—that the whole place is broke. He says if it was an insurance company it would go bust. Well it is not an insurance company. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: Yes it is. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: It was never an insurance company. Read the Woodhouse report. 
Michael Woodhouse 
: I have. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh no you have not. I will give you a bit of advice. Go and see Justice Thomas QC. Justice Thomas’ serious defence of ACC is on that very basis. With respect I saw that member playing rugby on Saturday. Somebody must have hit his head too hard because he does not remember the facts. The facts are these. It is a pay-as-you-go scheme and the question has always been about the tail. What Mr Nick Smith sought to do was first of all cry havoc and let loose the dogs of increased prices. And that is what he did. The second deceit of course was that he booted up the levies. Then of course the whole thing got somewhat upset when it was found that they were ahead of the surplus so they had to take the opportunity to come into this House and say: “Look we’ve been so brilliant we are going to cut the levies.” which were massively put up wrongly in the first place by one Nick Smith.  
But I want to close and say this. Why is this woman not being charged with extortion? It is all there in her own documents. It is all in her own documents. She wanted to enter into an arrangement that went this way: you get the 6000-plus copies back— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: No no. It is ACC. ACC will get the 6000-plus copies back contingent on reaching an agreement acceptable to both parties. That is extortion. Why is the National Party allowed to defend its mates when its members shout blue murder and “three strikes and you’re out” for everybody else? They are contaminated with this cant. There is a word for it that starts with “h”— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No no. The member knows that he cannot use that at all. It is a circumlocution and the member is trying to get round it and he knows better. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Can I just ask you this question then: why is it that these mendacious sybarites still remain in office?