Ryall Tony: Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Ryall Tony: Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:634;Page:5829] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 I am pleased to take this opportunity to participate in this debate. The people of New Zealand need to know that opposite the National Party today sits an illegitimate Government. It is an illegitimate Government because it stole the 2005 general election. Don Brash has shown conclusively that that party opposite spent $750000 on the election that it should not have. That $750000 was spent on top of the $2.4 million that it was allowed to spend. The party opposite spent $3 million - plus on the election. The legal limit was $2.4 million. Labour broke the law. Section 214B of the Electoral Act says to the Labour Party that if it spends more than $2.4 million on an election that is a corrupt practice. Labour spent $750000 on top of that. It stole the election. That $750000 made a material difference to that election. It was a knife-edge election. It was the closest we have seen in a generation. Every foot soldier counted every telephone call counted and every dollar counted. 
What has outraged me the most was the Minister of Justice pontificating from his seat this afternoon. He is a man whose 10000 majority in Taupo was shaved to 1100. I say to Mark Burton that if Helen Clark had not taken that $750000 of taxpayers’ money and spent it in electorates like his he would be out of Parliament today. Steve Chadwick the person who took a 10000 majority in Rotorua down to 686 is there only because of the good people of Kawerau. The people of Rotorua wanted to kick her out and replace her with a dentist from Auckland. That tells us something about what the people of Rotorua thought. Steve Chadwick is in this House today only because Helen Clark and Michael Cullen spent more than the electoral law allowed. That $750000 made a difference in Rotorua. Steve Chadwick would be out of Parliament today if Helen Clark had obeyed the law. Let us look at the back bench. The fact is that Maryan Street would not be a list MP in Parliament today if Helen Clark had obeyed the law. 
What is clear is that Labour was told that the limit must be obeyed and it deliberately ignored it. As our good leader Dr Don Brash has said time and time again before the election the Labour Party was twice warned by the Chief Electoral Officer David Henry that the pledge card spending would have to be included in Labour’s election return. Remember that week before the election when the chief returning officer announced that he had told Bob Clarkson not to spend any more money? Well Labour saw that press statement and thought: “My God! We’ve got this letter from the chief returning officer telling us that this pledge card spending had better be included in it.” So what did Mike Smith and the Labour Party do? I am sure he went to the Labour campaign committee and immediately a letter was dispatched saying: “Yes we’ll declare that in our spending return.” What do we know? What happened after the election was the Labour campaign committee said: “No it’s not going to be part of our spending return.” because Labour had worked out that it had spent the $2.4 million already plus the $750000 that has been declared in the Auditor-General’s report and that put it way over the limit. 
What makes it worse is that in the 2 weeks before the election the Labour Party campaign committee members would have been fully aware of the warning from David Henry but those Labour Party campaign committee members still decided to spend well over a million dollars on newspaper advertising when they were fully aware of the warning that had come from David Henry. So they could have stopped overspending they could have obeyed the law but that Labour campaign committee decided that it would carry on and spend the money. So this is an illegitimate Government because this Government would not be there if Labour had not spent that three-quarters of a million dollars that it spent unlawfully in the last election. 
Hon David Benson-Pope 
: What about the Brethren? Tell us about the Brethren. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: David Benson-Pope can pop in there and throw a few things around. But the fact is he would not be a Minister in this Government today if the Labour Party had not overspent in the last election. This is an illegitimate Government. How many members in this House receive  
The Parliamentarian 
 magazine from the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association? How many times have we read complaints about Caribbean and African Governments whose members overspend their election limits then pass legislation to authorise their misappropriation of public money? We read that we tut-tut and we say: “What banana republics! What illegitimate Governments! What corrupt people!”. 
Well what is different here? This is a Labour Party in which Helen Clark Michael Cullen and Heather Simpson must have knowingly allowed themselves to breach section 214B. Oh Dr Cullen shakes his head. Was Dr Cullen on the Labour Party campaign committee? Who were the other people on the Labour Party campaign committee? I ask Dr Cullen who the other members of this House are who sat in on those decisions. How about telling us? I reckon this House would be very surprised to know those names—would it not Madam Speaker? Who were the Labour MPs sitting in on that discussion Madam Speaker? If their names were made public I am sure it would be very embarrassing for the Labour Party. They sat on the campaign committee and made the decision that they would overspend. 
This is a Government that is not legitimate. More and more people in New Zealand realise that this Government broke the law to secure its electoral mandate. The law is clear. David Henry spelt it out. He told the police who said: “Oh well you know we’re all a bit confused by it.” David Henry set it out very clearly. He warned the Government twice before the election that the pledge card must be included in election spending. Days before the election the Labour Party admitted that the card would be included—solely to prevent David Henry from putting out a press statement like the one he did about Bob Clarkson. As a result we now have a Government that has secured its mandate through committing an electoral offence. It must be an electoral offence. If the limit is $2.4 million and Labour spends over $3 million then that is a breach. 
Michael Cullen would not be Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand today he would not be travelling the world at taxpayers’ expense and he would not be sitting in a limousine—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh that is the bit that winds the Labour Party members up—the overseas travel and the limousines. Dr Cullen would not be sitting over there Steve Chadwick would be out Cosgrove would be out and Street would be out. MP after MP would have been kicked out of this Parliament because this is an illegitimate Government. The Government stole the money they spent more money than they should have they broke the electoral law and they were let off. 
The National Opposition will make sure that the people of New Zealand know that there is no legitimate mandate that supports the Labour Party in office. Its members cannot break the electoral spending cap by three-quarters of a million dollars and stand up and say they are honestly the legitimately elected Government of this country—they are not. That three-quarters of a million dollars made a material difference to the election. It made a huge difference. Remember that this was an election on the knife-edge. Government members spent all that money in the last week when they knew they had breached their spending limits. That is how they secured a fraudulent victory in the 2005 election. The sooner they are back on the Opposition benches the better.