Maharey Steve: General Debate 
Maharey Steve: General Debate 
[Volume:641;Page:11577] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Can I just say to Jeanette Fitzsimons before I begin some comments of a broader nature today that in the spirit of cooperation I will reflect back to the question she has raised. My understanding is that at the plenary session of the United Nations climate change talks in Vienna the negotiators made it very clear that New Zealand was willing to sign up to binding emission targets and they made that clear. They helped draft the material and even Greenpeace which does not seem to have an awful lot of love for this particular Government was very happy with the performance of Labour there. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Because you’re hopeless. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Greenpeace people if they were given a chance to talk about Nick Smith however would probably be a whole lot less kind because somebody who is at the coalface of this issue is probably not quite in the frame of reference that Greenpeace would use. 
Can I say carrying on with that mood of cooperation that yesterday we had a very good ceremony down at the Michael Fowler Centre where all the parties in Parliament—all the parties every single one of them—turned up to ensure that they showed their support for the family violence initiative called It’s Not OK. I was particularly pleased to see Mrs Judith Collins there. I even went over and said: “Good to see you Judith.” I said that in the spirit of cooperation around this kind of issue. It was great to see Mrs Collins there because Mrs Collins is the person who took the National Party out of the multiparty talks on family violence. Mrs Collins called those talks a “Kumbaya” session where people go along and they talk about these issues but they do not do anything. 
It was good to see that Mrs Collins was prepared to come to the family violence discussion down at the Michael Fowler Centre to try to bathe in the glory of people who had done the real work about it. She tried to bathe in that glory but at least she was saying that she was agreeing with it. The interesting thing of course is that it was produced by the same kind of process as the one she walked out of. It is the same kind of process; it is the Government and non-governmental organisations getting together and everybody trying to work on the ideas. The process produced that idea along with many other ideas. We never know what we will achieve if we actually do get together. 
The other thing I want to point out is that Mrs Collins had that change of heart and came down to the Michael Fowler Centre and Mr Key said the programme would not work and National did not want to fund it! So Mrs Collins was down there saying it was a good idea and Mr Key was back here saying he did not think it would work and he did not want to fund it. He said it would not work and what he revealed by doing that is that he did not actually understand the programme at all. He said that people who beat up their kids do not watch TV. I want to say to Mr Key that the whole point of having a programme like this is to try to get everybody else around people who beat up kids to say that they will not tolerate it any more and that they will do something about it because one of the things we learn all the time is that people know about this violence but do not pick up the phone to ring about it. We want them to do that. “It’s not OK” is what the message is. So Mr Key might like to pay attention to the reasons for the policy and then like Mrs Collins he might agree with it. 
In summary Mr Key opposes the programme and Mrs Collins goes to the launch. She will not allow National to go to the talks on violence but the National Party says that somebody should do something about this problem. Are members confused? Well they should not be because with National virtually every single issue is like this one. National has no policy its members agree with Labour on anything they think is popular and anything that is popular to do they will do. They have more positions than the Kama Sutra on virtually every policy because they do not have any policy. They hold many positions to try to ensure— 
Tariana Turia 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am really concerned at the nature of the speech given that Judy Turner was asked to ask Judith Collins to come along and be supportive of the family violence initiative. Now we hear Judith Collins being attacked in the House today. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry that is not a point of order and the member should know that. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Frankly I do not care how she got there. The fact is that Mrs Collins has repeatedly— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I say to the members on my left that when they move to facilitate interjection it is out of order. The member has been warned. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I cannot hear Mrs Bennett so it is all right. But I want to say to Mrs Turia that I do not care how Mrs Collins got there. Mrs Collins has repeatedly— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise to my colleague for interrupting but I think there was a further breach of order on the part of—I am not sure of the member’s name but she is next to Mr Williamson there. She referred to you Mr Assistant Speaker as part of her interjection and she was very abusive of you. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I just remind the member that she cannot bring the Speaker into the debate. The member knows that she is not actually sitting in her normal seat. If she wants to interject I invite her to go back to her seat. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I do not really care how Mrs Collins got there. What I care about is that the position of National changes so fundamentally on an issue like family violence all of the time—just like on every other issue. National has no policy; it holds one position after the other. National’s leader and its spokespeople never seem to talk to each other. The leader seems to have no real authority because everybody else tells him what he should think about these kinds of issues. 
Leaving alone the issue of family violence I just ask Mrs Turia to go to all the other issues that National members disagree on and for example to take something like climate change. One minute National members say it is a hoax the next time they say they have always believed there was global warming. They say student loans are a bribe then they say they think they will keep the scheme and then they say “maybe” they will keep it. On Working for Families they talk about “large” cuts and then it is “some” cuts. On superannuation they say they will raise eligibility and now they say they will not touch eligibility. When the Skyhawks were sold—and I say this as someone who comes from the Manawatu—the National Party campaigned on this emotional heart-wringing campaign to buy back a strike wing. National members came to Palmerston North they went to the RSA they met with soldiers and they have broken a promise on that like they have on every other single issue they have talked about.