Cosgrove Clayton: General DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCosgrove Clayton: General Debate[Sitting date: 22 August 2007. Volume:641;Page:11360. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Minister for Building and Construction): Mr Hughes made a good point. I listened to Mr English very carefully. Amongst the things he talked about he alleged that we were a self-serving Government and that it is “all about us”—apparently. Then he spent 2½ minutes talking about what the National Party may get to spend and what the Labour Party may get to spend. He talked about National wanting to get into power and about not liking the fact that we are in power. Well if that is not self-serving I do not know what is.Mr English made another interesting point. He tried to illustrate what the voters want to see. Here is what I think the voters want to see. If John Key wants to become the Prime Minister then the voters will want to see truth consistency and credibility. It does not matter how many speeches that member makes over there whilst every 5 seconds looking up at the press gallery grinning and trying to drag out a bit of adoration because he knows that theNew Zealand Herald for instance on the topic of therapeutic goods sliced him open. He had four dictaphones under his nose and he still could not come out and give a consistent position on that. The New Zealand people want a bit of credible consistent truthful leadership and they ain’t getting it out of that man.We should take a look at Mr Key’s past. Of course it is all right for Bill English and the mob over there to have a go at us on election spending and on all sorts of other issues but when we have a go at them and challenge their leader to be consistent on Iraq on therapeutic goods on where he lives and on climate change which are all pretty simple questions they cannot hack it. They send in the man who is deputy leader who is himself inconsistent. For 8 years on superannuation for instance he said he was not going to cut it then a couple of months ago he said it was too generous and told the old folk that the votes of the 20-year-olds were not won by telling them they would be secure in their retirement and that by the way National might have to cut it and to means test it. So as I said in another speech he is about as consistent about as solid as a jelly on a hotplate; it sort of oozes out from all sides. I say to those members that ifthey want to show real leadership then they should stand up today—not even bothering to give us some policies; we know that is too difficult for them—and tell us what their position is on Iraq on climate change on measures relating to therapeutic goods on where John Key lives and on the other issues Mr Hodgson raised.Those members talk about accountability and they throw arrows across here demanding accountability but when we say: “Hang on a minute you’re inconsistent. The member’s not credible.”—I cannot use the “t” word but their leader is fast and loose with a number of points in his history—they do not like it do they. They cannot hack the pace. But if our democracy is so precious—to quote another member—then the people are owed explanations by all members of this House by all political parties whether they be Government or Opposition parties. We do not ask today for the impossible. We do not ask today for a policy on climate change a policy on housing affordability a policy on therapeutic goods or any of that. That height-bar is just too high for that new member and his deputy. We simply ask on behalf of the New Zealand people that he comes clean on a series of issues.Mr English challenged us to say what we have done for our core constituency. Well I say to Mr English that there have been 350000 new jobs since 1999 and we have the lowest Māori unemployment figures on the record of counting. Under the Working for Families programme 350000 families are getting their own money back in tax credits of on average 110 bucks a week. That can be compared with yet another inconsistent point which is that he wants to gut Working for Families and pull out 50 or 80 bucks a week from that average sum. Opposition members have all gone a bit quiet—the old bantam hens over there—have they not. To quote fromDad’s Army they do not like the old cold steel. Well I say that if they are going to get in the ring throw it about and exercise their democratic right to call individuals in this House to account then they should look in the mirror and be prepared to stand up—especially the Cheshire cat in the back row—and answer some basic questions.