Peters Winston: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
Peters Winston: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:4001] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 There is some truth in what the Minister of Finance has said. However this is a Government leading a country with no economic plan in real First-World terms at all. If I were to ask any businessman or business woman in the main street of any city or town in this country: “What is this country’s export plan?” they would not be able to give me an answer because the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance cannot. As a consequence all the evidence surrounding this year’s Budget Policy Statement irrefutably points to a country in economic decline and down the ranks of the OECD countries. It is irrefutable; it is all there. 
In the last week the Prime Minister has admitted that she herself never really had a plan and that she has no idea where this country will be 10 years from now; and that is dramatically serious for this country. We saw a party come to power in 1984 and it is in power again now and although Dr Cullen talks some sense he refuses to acknowledge that every other First-World country has plans and policies and programmes to help its business people and in particular its exporters and we here in New Zealand have none. We can have all the knowledge wave conferences and talkfests and all the flim-flam and ballyhoo we like but this country is on a slide and this Government has no plan to arrest it because it is trapped by its own past. It does not for example like Australia have 75 different policies and mechanisms to help its exporters. What do we have here? We have the export credit guarantee scheme. How many applicants have been successful? None. 
We wonder why people rise in this House every day to argue about education and health and social welfare delivery when we know full well that we do not have the economy to sustain the arguments being mounted every day on this issue. It is of paramount importance that the people out there who claim to be commentators for goodness’ sake understand that if we want to compare economies we have to compare New Zealand’s economy with like-sized economies elsewhere. How do we compare with Scandinavia? Well we do not. How do we compare with Ireland? We do not. How do we compare with Singapore and Taiwan? We simply do not compare and that is because we have had successive Governments—apart from a brief 2-year period—that are believers in the hands-off laissez-faire approach with a bit of social tinkering around the edges. As a consequence the number of beneficiaries since 1984—and I notice Dr Cullen did not use 1984; he used 1982— 
David Cunliffe 
: This member was a National patsy finance Minister. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh I see. That is not what he said back then but then again Mr Cunliffe suffers from a malaise called “recognition hunger”. Do members notice how he loves to be seen around and near newspaper people and near the photographers? He suffers from something called “recognition hunger”. I do not always agree with Richard Prebble but the day we first saw him Richard Prebble said: “This member will become the most hated member in Parliament and particularly on his side.” Know what? He is—and all in the space of a very brief career. 
But I come back to my point. All the evidence suggests that the economy is in permanent decline. Our dollar is rising disastrously. Our dollar in an export-dependent economy is rising disastrously. What does the Government do? It does nothing at all. I heard Don Brash say today that the dollar has risen more rapidly in the last 9 months than ever since it was floated in March 1985 where it started at US44c and ended at US72c. Our exporters went from a feast to a massive famine and we are experiencing it all over again as happened under National in the years 1994 1995 and 1996 when the dollar rose by 26 percent. That was disastrous for exporters. What does this Labour Government do? Nothing whatsoever. 
So we are an economy in decline—but I want to say this: our economy has one feature that is totally repugnant and unparalleled anywhere in the world. It is the propping up of an economy by a process of imported consumerism. In the 12 months to the end of January this year 70700 non-New Zealand permanent arrivals came to this country. I repeat: there were 70700. I ask those Maori members opposite what on earth they think they are doing in allowing this to happen in their country. What on earth do they think they are doing being slapped around the ankles and the head—and the pants no doubt—by the Prime Minister and told to keep quiet? When will they rise and do something for their constituents on this matter? When will the so-called working-class representatives who purport to be Labour members do something about their membership and stop this absolute abysmal fiasco of a so-called immigration policy? This policy of imported consumerism is a bubble that is bursting in front of us as we speak right now. That is why all the projections as to where this economy is going have been rapidly modified—and dramatically downwards. We will not have the so-called services that the Minister of Finance prides himself on; all of which I might add came about for no reason at all to do with the present Government. In fact the only reason that it was happening was a very very export-sympathetic dollar—a low dollar. The Government is allowing it now to take off disastrously. 
The other day a Japanese student died in New Zealand. As it turns out—as the Minister of Immigration admitted when answering questions in the House—the person came here as a visitor in July 1997 and further investigation showed that seven of the other eight people who are subject to a court case came here on visitor permits. I know of no country so reckless in its approach towards immigration and visits from people abroad. Those people—all eight of them now—came here and filled out at the airport or on the plane a visitor tourist arrival card. That is all they did. 
David Cunliffe 
: This is supposed to be the Budget policy debate! 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh johnny-come-lately the new boy on the block says that this is a Budget policy debate. Why? Because I have struck a nerve and it is hurting. We are going to get out amongst his so-called supporters amongst blue-collar New Zealanders and make them patently aware of the absolute scandal that is going on in their name by so-called people who put their personal ambitions and their future careers above all else. [ 
Interruption 
] It is not rich coming from me. I am a person who was sacked from Cabinet twice and I never shut up and I never apologised—did I? I never apologised unlike the members opposite. When the Prime Minister says “Jump” they ask “How high?”. 
Darren Hughes 
: Are you proud to have been sacked twice—laid off twice? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Yes because it was a matter of principle. One of the issues was a failed economic plan which the National Party was pursuing and a scandalous issue to do with this country in respect of Sealord’s. 
Let me come to the point. There are eight people here who say they are visitors and 6 years later they are still here. But this is my point: last week I asked the Minister of Immigration how many people came here as immigrants last year. Do members know what she said? She said: “I don’t know.” Lianne Dalziel is a byword for indolence sloth incompetence and massive disinterest. She does not know. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You might have been slightly distracted at the time but I think that the level of personal abuse which was occurring just then was certainly unparliamentary. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: The words “incompetence” “disinterest” “inertia” and “sloth” are all apt and acceptable descriptions of this Minister according to the Standing Orders and that member knows it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: In recognition that this is an open and robust debate I just ask the member to be careful with the use of parliamentary language. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh no I will not! I am not going to stand by while 70000 strangers come to this country and we are told by the Minister that that is the accurate figure. The reality is she has no idea because those eight people—just a random eight people—do not enter the stats. They then applied for student permits but where in their application procedure did they get on to our records and stats as long-term permanent arrivals? Well they did not. So we asked the Minister how many overstayers we have. She said that we may have 14000 or we may have 20000. That is a byword for incompetence. 
David Cunliffe 
: Ha ha! 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: He laughs now but if there is a terrorist outbreak in this darn country he will not be laughing then. We are looking at the guilty party. It is just plain irresponsible. Incompetence is what we are seeing every day in the House. The Minister has no idea whether 70000 people arrived permanently or 200000 for that matter. She has no idea. But worst of all she admits it. I have never seen an administration with so many useless Ministers—just plain useless. The Minister of Maori Affairs every day drags the image of Maoridom right down to the gutter. It is not an image that Maori young people can be proud of. We have young Maori out there who look up to parliamentarians yet that Minister would not survive in any other administration I have ever seen. Then there is Lianne Dalziel—totally incompetent.