Anderton Jim: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Anderton Jim: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:629;Page:1081] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 I take great pleasure in supporting the Prime Minister’s statement. I have to say that the hypocrisy of some of the things I have heard this afternoon knows no bounds. My party did not use— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Could the member be seated please? That word is not parliamentary and it has been ruled out of order in the past. I ask the member to withdraw. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I withdraw and apologise. The double standards that I have heard this afternoon know no bounds. My party did not use a cent of Parliamentary Service money and I saw Parliamentary Service money being used for a variety of causes. But I have seen that for years: billboards ACT brochures National brochures—members can name them—with Parliamentary Service all over them and when they are being sent out parties pretend that they are not appealing for anyone to vote for them. Give me a break! 
Then in the new year after the election when members call on the Parliament of New Zealand to give some vision—and Don Brash talked about vision—what do we hear? We hear an argument about who is spending the Parliamentary Service’s money. The truth is that every single party in the House is spending the Parliamentary Service’s money. Yet that is the big issue that New Zealand is seized with! How many members of Parliament who are electorate MPs can say with their hands on their hearts that they have had anyone come into their electorate office and mention that? I see 1500 people a year in my electorate office—it is like a railway station—and not one single person has raised it. One would think that this would have happened because there are a lot of Labour and non-Labour people in my electorate but no. 
This is the big issue that will raise the vision of the people this year in New Zealand! It really is a bit sickening when one thinks about it. This is the big chance to set out the vision for the future and what the parties of the House want to do and what happens? We have an argument about Parliamentary Service expenditure—that is the big issue for New Zealand. We have Rodney Hide ranting and raving about it. It is pathetic really when one thinks about it. There are some real issues and there are some real challenges for the Government in the health system and in the world economy. All sorts of issues could have been raised but no we hear about Parliamentary Service money. It is ridiculous. 
I suggest one of the things that Don—or Mr Brash—and others should think about is why no one in this Parliament not even ACT can work with National. It is a funny thing that the party that criticises National the most is the party that actually promotes itself as an alternative to National. There are only two of them there but they cannot get on. The Maori Party makes some noises about assisting National but in truth the Maori Party would require the National Party to give up its core policy position so I do not think that that will happen. The Greens will not support the National Party and Labour and the Progressive party will not support it either. The New Zealand First Party and the United Future party have signed up support agreements with Labour so what is wrong with National? 
What is wrong with National is what we just heard in the debate. National speakers knocked New Zealand. They said that everyone wants to live in Australia and they talked about how much better Australia is than New Zealand. Have National members actually had a real look at what the issues are in terms of attractiveness and all the rest of it? Have they looked at the relative competitiveness of the two countries? Because I say to Mr Brash that the Ministry of Economic Development did do a study on that. I have heard people like him say that so often. Even the business community who are encouraged by people like him say that things are all much better in Australia and everything else— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but members should be called by their correct title—Dr Brash please. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. As far as I am aware that is an academic title; it is not a medical title. Doctors are called— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: Please be seated. [ 
Interruption 
] Silence! I am ruling on a point of order. The point is that members indicate quite clearly to the Speaker how they will be addressed. The member will be addressed as Dr Brash. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Dr Brash should ask himself—and I think this is another example of it—why the other parties in this Parliament are not working with National but are working on the Government side of the House. One of the reasons is that most of us who have chosen not to work with the National Party are proud to be New Zealanders and we are proud of the reputation of this country in terms of what we are doing for New Zealand both domestically and internationally. 
I have just come from a regional fisheries management organisation international meeting at Te Papa. 
Hon David Carter 
: What was your caucus like this morning? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Members can see the small stuff we get. We are talking about— 
Darren Hughes 
: He’s a “big picture” man. 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Yes a “big picture” man. When we are talking about 29 countries from all over the world coming to New Zealand to work out a regional management fisheries organisation that will conserve fisheries in the South Pacific Ocean what do we hear from that member? “What was your caucus like this morning?”. Maybe that is why David Carter is on the Opposition side of the House and we are on the Government side of the House. That is true because the people of New Zealand had every incentive to vote for the party that Mr Carter represents and had all the bribes that could be named in terms of tax cuts and all the rest of it. But what did they do? They did not do it. They had the chance to do so but they did not. The reason in the end relates to all the stuff about minimalist Government which is what we have just heard about from Rodney Hide. That is what he was talking about—small Government and everyone looking after themselves. If someone is really starving on the street and in the gutter ACT and National might let that person line up by the post office and see if he or she can get a job! That is what we heard from the former Governor of the Reserve Bank Dr Brash; that was his solution. 
This Government wants to empower every New Zealander to have the same rights—of course it does. But what does that mean? It means the right to a job—that is what it means. What right to a job do people have now? They have almost an unfettered right. I have been through periods of history in this country under both National and Labour as a matter of fact where mass unemployment was virtually an economic policy that was being followed by the Government. That is not a policy that is being followed by this coalition Government and demonstrably we have a very good employment situation. 
Good news abounds everywhere. The fishing conference that I was at this morning is looking at a regional organisation that will conserve the environment of the South Pacific Ocean. But even better the fishing industry in New Zealand approached the Government before Christmas and said that since there is now an enlightened Minister of Fisheries—dare I say it; present company excepted of course—the industry wanted to propose a policy that sets aside 31 percent of the entire South Pacific Ocean in the exclusive economic zone area and 42 percent of the sea mounts. The fishers wanted to offer some of the best fishing areas in New Zealand waters to be kept in perpetuity so they do not touch them and there are pristine areas that will never be bottom trawled. That was their offer. The truth as former Ministers of Fisheries know is that if Government members had sat down and worked out our best possible position in terms of a request to the fishing industry to do that we would not have had the audacity or vision to come up with the proposal that the fishing industry came to us with. That proposal has been accepted by the Government which is working it through. 
So is there good news? Normally the fishing industry is in court every second day litigating things all over the place. Whenever the Government has a regulation a law or even a hint of some problem the issue goes to the court with Crown Law being involved with millions of dollars being spent and with time delays. We could have by October the largest conservation area of any ocean in the world under an initiative proposed by the fishing industry itself without one piece of litigation. I give that example as something today that is good news. But what do we get? We have had: “How much money has been spent from the Parliamentary Service budget?” and: “How was the caucus this morning?”. Well the people of New Zealand are looking for a bit more than that from this Parliament and I would hope they get it. 
The primary sectors of New Zealand have the best productivity record of any sector in New Zealand. I heard Dr Brash say that productivity is abysmal in New Zealand. The productivity of the primary sector in this country has been a stand-out performance for 15 years. Why did we not hear something about that? The National Party proclaims itself to be the representative of the rural community but we do not hear one single word of praise for the rural community or the private sector. It takes an urban boy from west Auckland and Sydenham to support help and assist the primary sector industries of New Zealand. We did not get a word of support for that from the leader of the National Party in his long speech to this Parliament—not a word was mentioned. Some people in the farming agriculture horticulture aquaculture and fishing industries are starting to recognise that they have some real friends on the Government side of the House and that some of those on the Opposition side of the House have lost the plot in terms of where they are. People cannot tell me that National Party members were not briefed today by the fishing industry on how good the deal I have mentioned is and on how much support the industry would like to give the Government of New Zealand on this matter. 
We in this country have a lot to celebrate and it is well past time that the National Party caught up with the reality of how well New Zealand has done is doing and will do under this coalition Government.