Smith Nick: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Smith Nick: Civil Union Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17472] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 Let me remind the Committee that we are under urgency and I want to know because no Government member has yet said why the Civil Union Bill is being rammed through the House under urgency. Sometimes a tax bill has to go through by a particular date and sometimes the expiry of some other legislation requires Parliament to take urgency. But the only reason Parliament is in urgency this evening on this bill is that Labour members know that it is unpopular. They know that this is not what the people of New Zealand want but they want to clear the decks before election year. It is as simple as that. I say to Mr Parker the member for Otago that if he genuinely believes— 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Current member 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: His days are numbered. His speech sounded like a suicide note. If the member for Otago really believes that he can carry the argument with the people of Otago why does the Government not just let this bill take its normal process through the House? Why are we in urgency? Can any Labour member tell me why? I have seen lots of controversial bills in my day but this is the first time that I have seen Parliament in urgency on a conscience motion. 
 I note that Labour members almost like parrots have been keen to dump on Don Brash who made a very thoughtful contribution to this debate. 
Hon David Benson-Pope 
: Ha! 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I ask that Mr Benson-Pope compare it with this: why have we not heard from the Prime Minister? 
Hon David Benson-Pope 
: “Flip-flop Brash”. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Well let us hear about Helen Clark. Her record on this issue is that she said the only reason she married was because she was entering politics. What sort of cynical human being would go into something as important as marriage simply because she was entering politics? I will say something more about the Prime Minister. Helen Clark said then that she would prefer a civil union. It is interesting that now she is Prime Minister she is imposing her view on Parliament. [ 
Interruption 
] Is it not sensitive? It is all very well for Labour members to get stuck into Don Brash in speech after speech but the moment we bring the Prime Minister into the debate they all get sensitive. Jill Pettis starts sounding like a cat. We see them all get jumpy. But let us get the record straight. Helen Clark’s book says it all. She says—[ 
Interruption 
] What is Jill Pettis threatening me with? 
Jill Pettis 
: Be very careful. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: What is the member threatening me with? 
Jill Pettis 
: I am not talking to you. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Oh I see. Well let us be very clear. Helen Clark said back in the 1980s that she did not want to get married that she wanted to have a civil union and now she is imposing her view on the people of New Zealand. The Prime Minister Helen Clark has not participated once in this debate yet every one of us knows that she is pulling the strings from behind the scenes. We all know that on the opposite side of the House there is a list to be ranked in the next few weeks. I have no doubt that the Prime Minister has been on the phone saying what might happen to members’ list ranking if they do not vote for her little pet project of imposing civil unions on the people of New Zealand. 
I say again to the Minister in the chair the Hon David Benson-Pope that he should be upfront with New Zealanders and tell us that he is imposing gay marriage because that is what he is doing. I have not heard from any Government member a single legal difference between civil union and marriage. I have heard things like: “Oh well culturally they might be different.” Well hang on for a second we are lawmakers. What is important here is what we are putting into law. In every single statute Labour is stating that civil unions marriage and de facto relationships are identical in law. To pretend somehow that that does not undermine marriage is simply dishonest.