Prebble Richard: Families Commission Bill — First Reading 
Prebble Richard: Families Commission Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5620] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the ACT party to speak on this bill. I note that Opposition parties thought it sufficiently important for the Leader of the Opposition to speak for the National Party and I as leader of the ACT party am speaking for it. However I note that Mr Peter Dunne the leader of United Future who has 18 years experience in Parliament has realised that it is not a good idea for him to speak to the bill and that he had better get one of his more junior members to do it. I suspect that that is because Mr Dunne realises what this bill is. 
The ACT party is opposed to this bill because we know and the Government knows that this bill is an attack on the family. There is no doubt about that at all. A State-funded commission is an attack on the family. Labour and United Future are moving down some crazy “let’s not offend anyone” politically correct path that just does not acknowledge the reality of life for the average Kiwi. It is not about making a harsh judgment on other lifestyles—single people gay couples or de facto couples—but it is about saying that marriage is the chosen lifestyle of a majority of people and let us not back away from that. What does the Minister say to that? 
Hon Annette King 
: You tell me what a family is! 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Perhaps United Future members might like to let me know what they think about that statement. Marriage is not even included in the bill. Here we have a bill that states that a single person is a family. It is also saying that the Mongrel Mob is a family. I say to members opposite that that quote actually came from United Future members. They were saying that 6 months ago. 
Hon Annette King 
: Hypocrisy! 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: The Minister is dead right. I did not use the word hypocrisy but the Minister recognises it when she sees it. 
Hon Annette King 
: Talking hypocrisy! 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Yes absolutely! The Minister said it is hypocrisy and I agree with her. 
Whether we view United Future policy as biblically sound or just plain common sense we serve a common cause. Does the Minister believe that the Mongrel Mob meets the biblical description of a family a marriage or gay marriages? Judy Turner said she was opposed to having a narrow definition because that was ideological. Prior to the election she said hei policies were biblically based. Every member of this House knows how the United party was elected. That party’s real name is United Future and the Future party were the Christian Democrats. It went around the electorate and funded that party. It went around the electorate church-by-church and said: “We will make a stand for traditional Christian values.” Judy Turner said it was biblically sound. I say to the House that no member thinks that about this bill. The Government would not even think of putting Christian values into this bill. United Future did not ask for them. 
I make this point which was made by Brian Donnelly—the Government would not put Christian values into a bill but it is quite happy to acknowledge the needs values and beliefs of the following groups: Maori as tangata whenua—that is interesting tangata whenua means not just Maori so I guess that that is sort of pre-Christian and is OK—Pacific Islands peoples of New Zealand and other ethnic and cultural groups. This Government has said that it is quite prepared to legislate for any values except Christian values. That is the reality and that is what United Future is doing. I think Peter Dunne has done it on purpose because he wants to move his party away from being seen as a Christian party. 
I say to those members that the people who voted for United Future did not expect to see a Families Commission—and we all know what it is going to do. There will be a UN definition of the family. The commission will be politically correct. It will advocate on behalf of gay couples—there is no doubt in my mind about that—and it will actually advocate on behalf of single parents. It will go out there and make an attack on the traditional family. There is no doubt about that and every experienced MP knows it. 
Hon Annette King 
: What’s a traditional family? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: The member opposite tells me she does not know what a traditional family is. What has the United Future party been doing? Prior to the election when the United Future party was asked that definition it was “Mum dad and the kids” but now we have a Labour Minister calling out across the House that she does not know what a traditional family is. 
Hon Annette King 
: What’s your definition? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Let me make it quite clear: the ACT party does not believe that taxpayers’ dollars should be spent on family commissions. We have never supported that. We would not vote for it today or tomorrow—unlike the other parties who have all said that they are in favour of a families commission only if it is defined the way they want it. The ACT party says it is not in favour of the State—[ 
Interruption 
] The member is calling out to me. I am not in favour of the State getting involved in advocacy of this sort Minister. 
Hon Annette King 
: What is your personal definition? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: I am in favour of “Mum dad and the kids”. The member asked me—and that is my family. That is what I think about it but so what? The Minister should not be involved. Why are we having taxpayers’ money spent on this talk shop? I ask the Minister to name me one good proposal that will come out of this commission. Come on Minister—you made a promise call out to me! 
Hon Annette King 
: What happens to your family when you die—is it not a family anymore? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: The Minister wants to know what will happen to my family when I die. That is very comforting! I sincerely hope that the Families Commission will have nothing to do with them. God help them if it does! 
I say to the Government—and every MP knows it—that this a $28 million waste of money. It is the United Future party’s sell-out of every single one of its voters. No voter for United Future thought he or she would see a party MP get up and describe “Mum dad and the kids” as an ideologically narrow focus. That is how Judy Turner described the family. Prior to the election she said: “Our policy is biblically sound.” After the election she calls people who are biblically sound “ideologically narrowly focused”. That may be a reasonable view but not of a party that used to be called the Christian Democrats—not of a party that was funded by churches up and down New Zealand. [ 
Interruption 
] Now the member is saying she was not funded by churches up and down New Zealand. Talk about denying three times! Here is a party that is even denying its background. Peter Dunne was smart enough not to speak to this bill. He knows as we all know in this House that whenever we see anything that says “family law” it is an attack on the family. Family law is divorce law. A Families Commission is an attack on the traditional family. The pensioners of New Zealand should not be paying extra for their drop of sherry to pay for this ideological nonsense. 
But I make this point to the United Future party and the Labour Party: if this bill is so good then why is the introduction date put off to 1 July 2004? It is because Peter Dunne knows that this bill is useless and so does the Labour Party. It is laughing about it. It is actually a squalid political deal and will do nothing for any family in this country. It will not add value; it will just provide jobs for the boys and girls. They will be going on UN trips to study the family in Geneva and New York and they will not be helping the average battler. If the Government really wants to help the family how about a tax cut for mum and dad who are working so that they have a bit more money for the family? That $28 million would have gone a long way towards helping many low-income families in New Zealand. 
The ACT party is against this sort of politically correct claptrap—a squalid deal that gives a bad name to MMP—and will be voting against this commission. ACT members will be saying to every New Zealander who voted for United Future: “If you want to support the family the best thing you can do is get rid of those United Future—what was the word you used Minister?—hypocrites.”