English Bill: General Debates 
English Bill: General Debates 
[Volume:610;Page:7445] 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 Is it not interesting that Nick Smith said more worthwhile and insightful things in that one speech than Helen Clark has said about the treaty in 4 years as Prime Minister of this country? No Prime Minister in living memory has shown less willingness—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There will be no more interjections from that quarter at all. That member interjected in the second person. He will not interject again during this 5 minutes either. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will not have a point of order raised on it. The member will be seated. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member had better have a new one. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I ask you to refer me to the Standing Order or Speaker’s ruling that states that a Leader of the Opposition gets special protection. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes I can. Every person is entitled to have interjections made in the third person. The member knew he interjected in the second person. I rule in that way now. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: No Prime Minister in New Zealand has shown less willingness than Helen Clark to face the responsibilities of being the leader of this country which are to talk openly and courageously with the New Zealand public about the significance of the treaty and what the Government will do about it. 
I am fascinated to find that the Government now describes the position National has taken as “inciting racial hatred” because the person who first took that position was Helen Clark. She came out on 19 June and said: “We will legislate to ensure that the Crown has title to the beaches and the foreshore.” She is the person who said that first. That is not the only thing; Labour claimed that that statement had boosted her poll ratings. Yet now Labour members turn round and say that when National says that I am inciting racial hatred. They cannot have it both ways. If the issue is complicated why did Helen Clark not say that on day one? If there is an occasion to be risen to why did Helen Clark not do that on day one instead of doing what she did which was to react with panic and more panic and then back off to a position that she knew would rip the Labour Party caucus apart? 
The problem for Labour is not that our message appeals to a narrow range of New Zealanders but that it appeals to almost every New Zealander. That is the problem and I say to those members that when people are out on the street in Nelson to protest that issue one knows that most New Zealanders share the same view that we do. Nelson is not the redneck capital of New Zealand. Nelson has voted not just solidly but overwhelmingly for this Government in the last two elections. The  
Nelson Evening Mail 
 was able to show that over half the people who marched were committed Labour voters. They are responding to our simple positive message for New Zealand which is that there should be one standard of citizenship. 
In fact the power of one standard of citizenship is precisely that it appeals to people from a wide range of cultures and beliefs. I have discussed it with the Korean Indian Chinese and Pacific Island communities and they all responded positively to the idea that they are regarded as citizens of equal value and worth in this country. I have discussed it with Maori some of whom disagree with it and some of whom do not. Of course John Tamihere disagrees with it. Who is inciting racial hatred if it is not the man who goes out and says that the leaders of iwi who make that claim have psychiatric problems? I have never said anything as rude or insulting about people who are carrying out difficult and dignified roles of leadership in this country. I have never said anything like that. 
The real enemy here is not Maori. The real enemy is a Labour Government that is now navigating without a compass. It has no map and no idea where it is going because its paradigm of the treaty invented in the late 1970s has failed. Margaret Wilson who has apparently dedicated her life to the theory of the treaty is failing in practice. She is failing this nation. So is Helen Clark and they will pay for that.