Peck Mark: General Debates 
Peck Mark: General Debates 
[Volume:610;Page:7237] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 Let me say to that member that he should just be a little careful about believing his own rhetoric. I remember some very very brave words being said about Iraq. I wonder whether they have set up a website to say: “We’re sorry. We got it wrong on Iraq.” That member is young enough to have a bit of promise in this place and could be around for some time. It is right that he is not in the leadership yet. It is right he is not there yet but his turn is coming and I say to him that there is an old saying: “Act in haste and repent at leisure.” I counsel him to think on that. 
I want to talk about Bill English. I really do not know why. I suppose it is because he is so incompetent. He cannot even manage a sacking. He is so in control of his political party that he allows an advisory committee to hijack his conference. Let us get that clear: it was not Maurice Williamson who hijacked the conference. It was Bill English’s little friends from the south on the Women’s Advisory Committee who without Mr English’s knowledge decided to do something about Maurice Williamson. Why did they do that? Because they are the last vestige of Michelle Boag’s supporters. 
Of course Mr English was a very strong supporter of Michelle Boag and we all remember what Maurice Williamson said after the election. He said that it was time to lance the boil on the bottom of the National Party. He was talking about Michelle Boag and unfortunately for Maurice Williamson the boil bit back. The boil bit back with Bill English’s knowledge and support and it destroyed the entire National Party conference. 
How is that for management? Here we are listening to an Opposition that is trying to make out that the Government is in some trouble. I say to Simon Power that they will never be seen as an alternative Government while this side of the House laughs at them. When they stand in the House and make speeches they are laughed at because they are simply not believed. That is a shame for a once-proud political party and I tell him and his party that they have to start looking. 
We also remember that Bill English is blaming Maurice Williamson for the National Party conference debacle. Well let us go back to another thing that Maurice Williamson reminded Mr English about. It goes this way: it is a bit rich to blame the assistant tea boy when the ship is sinking rather than the captain and the officers on the bridge. That is the issue. What has happened as a result of the conference? Well Mr English’s little cheer squad is no longer around. The women’s organisation has been restructured. Not even Georgina te Heuheu could support Bill English’s rather badly chosen words about Maori recently. She could not support him and she is embarrassed by him. 
Who is the only woman on their board? There is one woman on their board and that is poor old Judy Kirk. I suppose Eric Roy will end up being the women’s officer on the National Party board. That is Bill English though. That is him—no judgment no strategic vision and no future. But that also explains one other thing. The question really is this: was yesterday’s decision to exclude Maurice Williamson from the conference unanimous? Was it? No. There are some wise people in the National Party led by Don Brash who were not prepared to back that resolution. Don Brash is prepared to lead a group of people who actually want to see some strategic vision and some thought put in. 
Who are the people who are actually supporting Don Brash in his sensible approach? None other than a very credible and thoughtful lawyer: Richard Worth! He is prepared to support an alternative approach to what the National Party has adopted. Also supporting Don Brash is the new face—the face that is actually going to push Simon Power into a position where he will have to compete—and that is John Key. Those members know that they cannot treat a member of Parliament the way they have treated Maurice Williamson. 
They know that; and let me tell them one other thing: while Mr English has been going around closing his electorate offices in Balclutha and Invercargill he has been putting up billboards going on about one standard of citizenship for all. What about one standard of citizenship for the National Party caucus? What is wrong with a member of Parliament taking on an alternative point of view when he does not agree with the leader? The message for the country is this: “If you disagree with Bill English we will get rid of you.”