Peachey Allan: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Peachey Allan: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill Electricity (Renewable Preference) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:650;Page:18740] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I appreciate having the opportunity to take what I hope will be a shortish call on the legislation and to speak against it. One of the things that prompted me to take a call was listening to the appalling effort of the deputy leader of the New Zealand First Party Peter Brown. In many ways the contribution of that member to this third reading debate sums up exactly what is going wrong with this legislation. He had nothing at all to contribute in terms of the merit of the legislation or what it will mean for New Zealand and he chose instead to indulge in a diatribe against the National Party. I have one little bit of advice for Mr Brown. It must be terrible for the member sitting here in the House trying to keep his head down and freezing every time his cellphone rings. He must be wondering whether the call is from Serious Fraud Office employees to say that they want to talk to him and that they suggest he bring a lawyer. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Marian Hobbs) 
: The member will come back to the legislation. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. 
When National members spoke during the Committee stage member after member myself included asked a question that the Minister never ever answered: why the rush? What is the hurry? This is the most fundamental profound change to New Zealand’s economic system to be legislated through this House in some 20 years. What are we doing? We are not sitting back and reflecting on its significance. We are not examining the implications for New Zealand in any detail at all. What we are doing is rushing this legislation headlong through this House and Opposition members cannot understand why. But one does begin to get a little bit of an insight when one listens to what— 
Peter Brown 
: Will the member take a question? 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: I think Mr Brown’s cellphone is ringing. He had better answer it. 
I listened to the previous contribution from the junior Government whip Sue Moroney. She talked about this legislation being a defining issue between the discredited socialists who sit over there and the National Party— 
Sue Moroney 
: One of the many because there are plenty! 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Yeah right! I guess there is some distinction between the two major parties in respect of this legislation. The first point of distinction and this will not be lost on the people of New Zealand is that on the Opposition side of the Chamber we do things properly. The Government is not doing this properly. It is bent on driving this legislation through the House. Why? I repeat the question to members opposite: what is the hurry? Where is the analysis from Government members? Where is the understanding of the potential harm to the New Zealand economy that this legislation as it is currently structured will cause? 
The Government—known now as the “Clark-Peters Coalition”—is showing no respect for and no understanding of the New Zealand business community and even less respect for the agricultural sector. Surely the Government and its coalition mates would at least show sufficient respect for the agricultural sector the backbone of this country for generations and take a little bit more time—and less rush—to consider the legislation and debate it in the House. How can one drop on this House as happened last week some of the biggest legislation that I have seen in my short time here— 
Chris Tremain 
: And the most complex. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: —and certainly as my colleague Mr Tremain says the most complex—then throw in 785 amendments and expect New Zealand to take this House seriously as we rush it through? This legislation is being rushed through because that Government’s coalition partner New Zealand First part of the Clark-Peters cabal that has run this country for 9 years wants to get it through. We did not receive any explanation in the Committee stage and I have heard nothing in this third reading debate as to why the New Zealand First Party is so keen to help that crowd to get this badly structured legislation through the House before it rises. 
When the country goes to the general election in I suspect fewer than 2 months’ time the electorate will make a judgment. But there is still time for this House to step back and acknowledge the validity of what this side is saying which is that the legislation is rushed that it is far too complex to be given such a short time for consideration and that it is full of 785 amendments. There is still time for this House to vote this legislation down which would give us time later on to introduce considered and constructive legislation that will not rip the heart out of the New Zealand agricultural sector and therefore our economic system.