Peters Winston: Social Security (Entitlement Cards) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Peters Winston: Social Security (Entitlement Cards) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:639;Page:9160] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Associate Minister for Senior Citizens) 
: 
 The Privacy Commissioner is not being made fun of. The Privacy Commissioner has been consulted and has raised in today’s paper the issue of function creep. Well that is a warning that we would always be apprised of no matter what technology we were dealing with and we are not ignoring it. 
The second thing I want to say is that it concerns me to see repeated in 2007 the kind of tribalistic behaviour that says that if a photograph is taken of someone it somehow leeches something from that person’s soul or spirit or mana or physical being and therefore should be resisted on any and every occasion. One does not expect MPs in 2007 to be repeating that sort of primitive tribalistic mantra but they are. 
The third thing I want to say is that if Sandra Goudie wants to quote the New Zealand Law Society let me say this: we wrote to the New Zealand Law Society that with regard to some of its submissions we believed that it was wrong and gave the reasons why. You know what? We are still waiting for a reply from the Law Society. It is not always right. I can give examples of occasions when it has been wrong. 
Ms Collins rises to her feet and asks how we know that that is all the births deaths and marriages register information on this card. The answer to that question is pretty obvious: because the law will specify it. It does now and it will under this legislation. She then went on to talk about her friend who went abroad and lost thousands of dollars in a case of credit card fraud. Let me tell her that that is not related to this legislation at all. But let me also give some sound advice to her friend: when people go abroad they should never let their credit cards out of their sight. That applies in this country too sometimes. That is wise advice I give to her friend—and to her too because she has demonstrated some appalling naivety in this Chamber today. 
She raised the question of partners who are not spouses. For goodness’ sake the National Party should make up its mind. Everything I heard from the National Party in the past was about the law covering partners who may not be spouses. 
Judith Collins 
: There’s no registration of them. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh she says there is no registration of them. We know there is no register of births deaths and marriages that covers partners—because they are not married! But do we stop there because we see that small hill or do we use some experience in consultation with others and realise how we can get past this problem? I can understand though why that member would be so full of conspiracy theories. If one began one’s political career by stabbing a fellow party member a sitting MP in the back one would have a propensity for thinking that way. 
Judith Collins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The member needs to come back to the bill and I ask him to withdraw and apologise for those comments as I take offence at that language. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: She cannot just get up— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Are you speaking to the point of order? 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Yes I am. She cannot just get up and demand that a member withdraw when that member has stated a fact. [ 
Interruption 
] Oh yes she has. The long-time description of that sort of behaviour as we have seen it in the past—and  
Hansard 
 is filled with it over decades and decades—is to stab a colleague in the back. That is what she did. That is why she is a conspiracy theorist. She thinks everybody behaves like her. 
Judith Collins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The member has not withdrawn and apologised. He has simply gone on and made the matter worse. He actually has misled the House because in fact there was no collegial relationship as he should have known. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Can—[ 
Interruption 
] No I do not need any help thank you Mr Cosgrove. I would just like to know at whom the alleged remarks were directed. 
Judith Collins 
: I presume from what the member has just answered back to me that he was relating them to me. He was speaking about me at that time. He was talking about Judith Collins; he had said my name just beforehand. His comments have nothing to do with this part of the bill. They are just another attempt at bullying which that member always does whenever he is in trouble—as he is now. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I know but originally they were I thought directed at Sandra Goudie. If they were directed at Sandra Goudie then it is up to her to object to them not any other member. 
Sandra Goudie 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I have no way of thinking that there was any relationship between myself and any of the comments that Winston Peters was making. In fact it is very hard to understand what he is meaning but my limited understanding did lead me to believe that he was talking about Judith Collins. That was about the full extent of my interpretation of his particular language. 
Judith Collins 
: Mr Chairman I have taken offence and I wish that matter to be dealt with. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I am dealing with it Ms Collins. You have taken the member’s remark as a reference to yourself and you have taken offence. If you could withdraw and apologise please Mr Peters. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Let me make it very clear that to set a new standard in this House whereby someone’s past history cannot be recited is really a very sad day for this Parliament and a terrible low in our parliamentary behaviour. I am talking about a member who challenged the candidature of a sitting member—namely Warren Kyd—to get into this Parliament. Now she is offended because I have described what that was. That should not be allowed. I can recite members in this House John Carter and others who have had to wear this allegation year in and year out and along comes this little prissy who does not like it being made about herself. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is not a point of order. The first point of order was dealt with; there was a withdrawal and an apology and that is the end of the matter. The Minister had been making some very valid comments and he still has time left if he wishes. 
Judith Collins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I take offence at the last comments from Mr Peters. He referred to me in a very derogatory way and called me a name that is not my name. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Mr Chairman I referred to her as a little prissy—“p-r-i-s-s-y”. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: You will have to withdraw that. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Well I withdraw and apologise on that score and say that Bill English was right—she was promoted way beyond her ability. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: You may talk about that but not in the context of a withdrawal and an apology. 
Judith Collins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. How can that be a proper withdrawal and apology when the member just continued with another insult? My understanding of the rules is that he should just withdraw and apologise and that is it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is exactly what I said Judith Collins—that it must not be qualified. If the Minister could make the withdrawal. He may raise that matter at any other time but if he would make just a straight-out withdrawal. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I apologise and withdraw. 
I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I want to make this point of order by way of an explanation. Bill English was right— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No no. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: This is the point of order now. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No you are compounding it. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Thank you. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Is it a fresh one Mr Cosgrove? Thank you. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I am not challenging your ruling but I have two points. Apart from Ms Collins continually attempting to break up a member’s speech I would ask you to consider this. As far as the term Mr Peters used—to stab someone in the back—is concerned I do not think there is a ruling in the Standing Orders saying that that language is unparliamentary. I would ask you simply to consider—not to waste time on it now—that it is a long-used term to describe a wide range of political behaviour over many many years in politics in this country and I fail to see how somebody could take offence at it. I do not challenge your ruling; I am asking you to consider it. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is good. We have dealt with the issue and I thank members for enabling the Committee to deal with it.