Donnelly Brian: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Donnelly Brian: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:629;Page:1309] 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 It is probably a blessing in disguise that this debate is nearing its finality and the previous speaker’s contribution is a perfect example of why. Throughout this debate National MPs virtually to a member have maintained the monotonous refrain of slamming Labour for using taxpayers’ money for its pledge card and with feigned indignation have demanded that Labour pays back the money. Labour MPs have retaliated by claiming that National had done the same and that it did not include GST in its returns and have thrown in the Exclusive Brethren’s involvement for good measure. 
But the reality is that the only conclusion any listener to this debate could draw is that both—and I mean both—the two old parties which between them have almost 80 percent of the members in this House continue to treat the taxpayer with cynical disdain. Between the two of them those parties have actually written the rules for expenditure and when they break their own rules they both claim that the rules are unclear. I leave it to Joe Citizen to work out what is really going on there. But I shall start 2006 in the same vein as I plan to proceed for the year and that is positively—to look at some positives. 
 The first comment I wish to make is to congratulate Toa Fraser on the success of the film  
No. 2 
. I do so not only in my role as arts and culture spokesperson for New Zealand First but also because I have a personal connection. I grew up next door to No. 2—or No. 55 to be more exact. The State house I grew up in in Mount Roskill was right next door to the Frasers—Toa’s grandparents father uncles and aunties. Those were the days of pepper-potting policy and all I can say is that there was a very amicable friendly neighbourly relationship between the Frasers and the Donnellys. Indeed the only tut-tutting I ever heard was when the Fraser men prepared the chickens for Christmas. They evidently chopped off their heads and let them run headless around the backyard. My mother did not think that was quite the right thing for suburbia. I never witnessed the spectacle but spent the lead-up to Christmas in the next few years trying to look over the fence to find out when they were killing the chickens. My brother remains close friends with Toa’s father who for those of us old enough to remember the first few years of black and white television was one of our first pin-up newsreaders a man by the name of Eugene Fraser. 
My second bouquet is offered to Karen Sewell acting chief executive officer of the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. It is not news to those from the last Parliament that the select committee that I chaired had a fair bit to do with the New Zealand Qualifications Authority and I have to say it was not an organisation that inspired one with confidence. Moreover I believe that the organisation had got itself into such a defensive role that it was going to be very difficult to analyse its own errors and fix them up. It is therefore a credit to Karen Sewell that she seems to have very quickly changed the culture of that organisation in respect of the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). The year before last NCEA was a dog’s breakfast and this year NCEA seems to have gone pretty smoothly. The fact that subjects like agriculture horticulture and technology showed variations in standards is explicable—the first two because of the small number of students and teachers involved over the years the latter because of the relative newness of the area. The important thing is that the New Zealand Qualifications Authority recognised quickly that the variations were too great publicly acknowledged this and moved to do something about the problem. This is a credit to the New Zealand Qualification Authority and most especially a credit to Karen Sewell. 
The final point I want to make is this. I have just enjoyed a fantastic Christmas break; the weather was great the fish were biting and there were opportunities aplenty to meet up with friends and family. As we caught up with old friends ranging from crusty old farmers in the far north to business people and professionals from Auckland everyone had the same message: “You guys in New Zealand First did a marvellous job in your post election negotiations—good on you.” The message was consistent: “Those additional frontline police are going to make a huge difference.” or: “An extra $10 a week will really make a difference to what I can do as a pensioner.” The praise went on and on. People I had never seen before came up to me in the mall in Cameron Street in Whangarei and thanked me for the gold card. People I knew to be true blue voters congratulated New Zealand First on ensuring that the Greens and the Maori Party were kept out of the Government. People who have always advocated ACT policies shook my hand and said: “Thank God you saved us from another election before Christmas.” Then there were those who said that Don Brash could try to pinch New Zealand First’s immigration policies but that we were actually doing something about immigration problems. 
New Zealand First is a non-aligned party of the centre and I hope that one of the outcomes from the last election is that the media may have realised that this is the case.