Mark Ron: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mark Ron: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20009] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I rise to speak on behalf of New Zealand First on this bill. As my colleague Dail Jones has already said earlier today New Zealand First has on a number of occasions reaffirmed the view that whilst in Opposition we seek to be responsible and support legislation that we think is good and overall to the betterment of the country’s well-being and oppose legislation that we believe does not advantage New Zealanders at all. 
This bill is a mix of both. Its overall intent is meritorious. It is probably appropriate to congratulate Dianne Yates whom I have described before in this House as probably the luckiest MP in the place given the number of members’ bills she has had drawn out of the ballot. I congratulate her on the work she did with her member’s bill and on the part she played in seeing her legislation incorporated in the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) as her Crimes (Drug Rape) Amendment Bill was passed over. The issue she sought to deal with is one that New Zealanders are increasingly becoming worried about concerned about and angry about particularly in this day and age when certain politicians in this House chose to lower the drinking age and put more young women at risk in nightclubs and bars where the doping of drinks with party drugs regularly occurs. Such acts are carried out by despicable men who quite clearly do not have a social life and find that the only way they can actually get a relationship with a woman is to drug her into a state of unconsciousness then take advantage of her. New Zealand First abhors that sort of behaviour and would like to see these people reduced to what they actually are—and that is nothing more than pet food—and disposed of. But of course the only way we can do that is with this legislation by ensuring that the penalties are there for the justice system to be able to deal with them. This bill reflects Dianne Yates’ concerns and appropriately incorporates the necessary changes to the Crimes Act. 
But this bill also stands as a testament to what John Tamihere said. Do members remember John Tamihere? He said that men’s problems are dealt with by the criminal justice system and that women—and I will try to quote him as accurately as I can—“get a bloody Cartwright inquiry and millions of dollars thrown at their breasts and cervixes.” That was what he said and the one thing that stands out in this bill is that the politically correct feminist sisterhood brigade that is alive and well—and which John Tamihere spoke of so vehemently and passionately—decided in the Labour caucus to keep rape as purely a crime that can be committed only against women. That is amazing given the Labour members of the select committee who disagreed with that. 
The Greens said that rape is a crime whether it be committed against a woman or a man. For every woman who can tell us how violated a woman feels by rape it is just as possible to find a man—we need only visit some of our prisons—who feels precisely the same way about being violated. The Greens argued that rape should be defined as a crime against a man or a woman New Zealand First argued the same point United Future argued the same point the Labour caucus members who were on the select committee agreed on the same point and National agreed on it yet they were overrun by the very women in the Labour caucus whom John Tamihere so aptly described. 
That is an indictment and is clear evidential proof of what John Tamihere was saying about his own colleagues. It is clear evidential proof of what John Tamihere said so publicly so vehemently and so forcefully to the nation about the women in his own caucus. They despise men. They hate men. They do not like men. They spend every day they are breathing thinking of ways in which they can denigrate men and put them in their place. This is one little victory they have scored. Rape by legal definition in this day and age should be recognised as a crime that can be committed against a man or a woman. 
Judith Collins 
: Men can be victims. 
RON MARK 
: Men can be victims and it would be nice if some of the women in the Labour caucus—I am meant to say “wimmin” to be politically correct in this day and age—would accept that or come out of the closet and tell the country why they do not. It is sad. 
At the select committee we worked closely together struggling to come to terms with some of the very complex and detailed issues. The Hon Tony Ryall was quite correct when he said that this bill should have had more consultation. New Zealand First stated in its minority report: “Whilst the aim and intent of the bill is meritorious New Zealand First believes that the vast majority of the concerns expressed in the minority views of National the Greens and United Future are valid and as such New Zealand First is disappointed that the Government did not accept the need for wider community and legal consultation.” We cannot be fairer than that. We are saying here that the Government is trying to do the right thing. We are saying that it has recognised and identified some issues that must be dealt with. But what we are also saying here is that it is damn arrogant. 
The Labour Government is arrogant because it believes it has all the answers to everything. Despite what it says out there on the hustings about being a broad church and being inclusive and committed to consultation the one thing that this Government just did not 10 or 15 minutes ago was deny the opportunity to have this bill referred back to the select committee for further discussion. How can Helen Clark tell the nation that she is a believer in a broad church and wide community consultation while her Minister Phil Goff turns down and rejects such a proposal? How can Labour members say that they do respect men they respect the views of men they recognise crimes against men and that John Tamihere is wrong when they sit there and jealously hold on to one definition so that rape is a crime against women only? They ignore the fact that they have just passed legislation legalising same-sex marriages and that within those same-sex marriages a situation may well be happening now or have happened yesterday or might happen tomorrow where one homosexual man rapes his partner. But of course it is not rape because Jill Pettis says that men cannot rape men. 
Jill Pettis 
: When did I say that? I have not opened my mouth. 
RON MARK 
: The member is saying that by voting for it. She is saying that by what she said in her caucus. She is saying that by endorsing every one of the other Labour women who rejected the pleas of Mahara Okeroa and Georgina Beyer who said that the definition should be broadened. The Labour women— 
Jill Pettis 
: Oh you’re jealous of us. 
RON MARK 
: Jealous of them! Well that is one for the books is it not? John Tamihere just about summed it all up. 
There is one other area I will touch on. The Minister said that the bill takes into account a United Nations convention that seeks to provide protection against child exploitation and child prostitution. How rich is that given that we have child prostitutes walking the streets in Christchurch? Ever since this Government decriminalised prostitution it has not done one thing to get those child prostitutes off Manchester Street. There has not been one prosecution. Not one man has been convicted. A task force team has not been put together. This is a Government that talks about protecting children and stopping the exploitation of young women; that talks about preventing children from going into prostitution; that signs up to a United Nations protocol enshrines it into this legislation and expects to be applauded and patted on the back for it; yet turns a blind eye to the child prostitution that is going on in its own streets in Auckland Christchurch and Wellington. It has done nothing about that whatsoever. There is a word for that. We cannot use it in this House. It applies to so many of the things the Government has allowed to happen in this Chamber. 
It is with regret that New Zealand First has to criticise the Government on these points. We will support the legislation by voting for it. We will seek amendments in the Committee stage and we hope that the Government will be true to its word that it will listen and work with other parties and recognise that it does not have a franchise on what is right and on intelligence.