Shirley Ken: General Debates 
Shirley Ken: General Debates 
[Volume:618;Page:13860] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (ACT) 
: 
 On 16 October 2001 Winston Peters the leader of the New Zealand First Party issued a press release. It was titled: “Gross incompetence in fisheries. Heads need to roll.” He was calling for a dismissal of the chief executive of the Ministry of Fisheries and he claimed that the ministry was guilty of gross incompetence faulty allocation of scampi quota wanton disregard for due process and unlawful treatment of fishers. He called on the Minister of Fisheries to invoke an immediate inquiry. He said that the allocation of scampi was to be taken away from the ministry as it could not be trusted. Those were very serious allegations and some even called them reckless. It was classic Winston Peters innuendo. 
Six months later on 24 April 2002 in the general debate—this very debate we are having now—Winston Peters lambasted the Minister of Fisheries for not taking action. He accused the Ministry of Fisheries of condoning corruption aiding and abetting corruption and involving itself in that corruption. Winston Peters said: “I will produce evidence that the ministry knowingly condonedthat corruption.” He went on further to say: “In the next few weeks I intend to demonstrate with voluminous evidence and affidavits why this ministry should be removed from its job and the Serious Fraud Office asked belatedly to do its job.” 
Eventually a parliamentary inquiry into the scampi allegations was instigated by the Primary Production Committee following a very high-profile  
Assignment  
programme that screened on television. One would have expected Winston Peters having made those allegations to rejoice at having got that inquiry but oh no he gave not a whisper not a murmur. He quickly replaced Doug Woolerton the permanent New Zealand First member on that select committee and then spent his time focusing on narrowing and closing the terms of reference for the committee. It was all one would say rather curious. 
The Primary Production Committee sat for several months consumed an enormous amount of Parliament’s time and reported on 2 December 2003. Winston Peters produced no evidence to support the reckless allegations he had made and he certainly did not table the “voluminous evidence” he had promised. He was as quiet as a lamb with barely a whisper. 
Last night on television further allegations were made and reference was made to a sworn affidavit. The functioning of this Parliament and its processes was raised and the programme focused on a former member of this House—perhaps one of the most unsavoury members who has passed through this House—a Mr Ross Meurant. 
 It seems that a former member of Parliament Ross Meurant was engaged by Simunovich Fisheries as an adviser and lobbyist. Concurrent with that of course—and a lot of people do not realise this—Mr Meurant was also hired by the New Zealand First Party and was on its payroll; actually on the taxpayers’ payroll through the Parliamentary Service. 
We were told that Mr Meurant attended several meetings together with principals of Simunovich Fisheries. Mr Meurant’s former partner of some 9 years Yvonne Theresa Dossetter swears that Ross Meurant met at the Simunovich’s olive farm following the infamous Kermadec restaurant meal and the proposal was put that the payment of $300000 to Meurant would be a good investment for the Simunovich business. It is alleged that the deed was done and that the money would be available from an Australian bank account. Subsequently it is alleged that Mr Meurant boasted to Yvonne Dosseter who has sworn an affidavit that the money was paid and that Meurant indeed had it in a brown paper bag. 
This is an extremely serious allegation and it brings into question in the public’s mind the functioning of our representative democracy. What we have to realise is that Winston Peters was in there with him. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 With that serious and considered debate from the Hon Ken Shirley we see now why the ACT party has made such a mistake with its change of leadership. It had a choice of having someone with brains someone who could make a case someone who could front up when needed someone with appeal around the country and it chose Rodney Hide. It is sad but that is the way it goes. 
I want to bring the debate back to the nuclear issue. I want again to focus on Don Brash who I presume was having a sleep today. The last time I saw him in the House was when he had question 3 on the Order Paper and he missed the call on it. The reason was that he was asleep. If one is going to be a member of Parliament a politician or the leader of a party one cannot have a siesta between 2 pm and 2.15 pm. If one has a question in to Parliament and comes along to ask it one has to be awake long enough to actually do it. 
I have yet to see Don Brash awake in this Parliament since that day. On that day someone did wake him up. I think it is fair to say that Murray McCully pulled the string and woke him up so he could ask the question. But since that time has he come to the conclusion that he cannot stay awake in order to ask questions and has taken the wise approach and had a sleep in his room? Or has he just given up? Is he so sick of being beaten by the Prime Minister in the House so sick of entering a battle of wits with Dr Cullen unarmed—[ 
Interruption 
] Well I think there is an interesting point about John Key. The mumblings are coming from the National Party members. I am told that he has not been taking his policy announcements to their caucus which does not bode well for someone who is meant to be a rising star. What is more he keeps on sitting on the front bench. We thought he had been promoted. 
Simon Power 
: We thought Ross Robertson had been promoted. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well no we are not silly— 
Simon Power 
: You’ve got nowhere to go on that one! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I did not think he was sitting there. I thought Michael Cullen was—such gravitas has the member who is also the Assistant Speaker. He looks like the Deputy Prime Minister I am sure—especially if the angle is right and if he puts his head down and greys his hair slightly. 
But let us get back to the point. The mumblings are happening in the National Party about John Key and his attitude and how he thinks he has been promoted already. Simon Power understands. He spent 4 years studiously doing nothing trying to look like Keith Holyoake in the past making one statement—flogged I think from Peter Fraser— 
Darren Hughes 
: Michael Joseph Savage. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: “Where America goes where UK goes we’ll go too.” he said. The only statement he has made that we can remember is one that almost got him fired. So he has gone back to the policy of the last 4½ years of saying nothing. But he sees his spot going to John Key and he is worried. He is leading the mumbling we understand. 
I want to ask Don Brash about the nuclear policy. When was he telling the truth? Was he telling the truth when he said: “This is an issue where the country’s interests are not well served in having policy flip backwards and forwards.”? Was he telling the truth when he said: “I think the electorate expects the National Party to have quite clear policies on all these issues and I do not think we want to fudge these issues at all.”? When was he telling the truth?