Cullen Michael: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Cullen Michael: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:632;Page:4140] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 It is clear that this is audition afternoon for challengers to the leadership of the National Party. They are sort of bobbing up one after the other and coming behind is the wee puppy dog who always votes for the incoming leader and is the first to go and do nasty things outside the kennel as soon as things start going wrong—Mr Murray McCully. But what an interesting disposition that was from Mr Key. It was shallow as always but it asked a very simple question from a National Party perspective. “Damn the rule of law” he said “you can be found innocent in a court of law but we are going to find you guilty.” That was the National Party speech. That was the National Party’s notion of the rule of law. 
Hon Bill English 
: It wasn’t in a court of law. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That is what he said. What he said was that it is all very well that the member might be found innocent in a court of law but he will be found guilty in the court of public opinion. What a wonderful approach from that member—the member who could not work out where he lived for the purposes of the electoral roll and wants to rely on the court of public opinion pretending he lived in one place when he lived in another! He was the member who said he did not own a house in Sydney and hours later had to admit that his wife owned the house in Sydney. That was a technicality to get off in a court of law if ever I heard one when it comes to issues of property within the family. 
And then he asked questions like: “Why would anyone go to Taito Phillip Field’s office on an immigration case?”. Gee that is a sinister-sounding question! In fact he said it was a “sinister event” to go to Phillip Field’s office on an immigration case. Phillip Field handles more immigration cases than probably the whole of the National caucus put together. Why? Because he works hard—unlike that lazy shallow member—on behalf of his constituents. That member is a man who does not want in his electorate the kinds of people who might have immigration cases. He is opposed to the building of State houses in his electorate because he might get those kinds of people living there. He does not want those coming through his electorate office door. He does not want those kinds of people sort of befouling the nice little atmosphere he has of the wealthy and the privileged that he runs in that office. It is kind of a branch of Merrill Lynch somewhere in the Auckland area because that is his notion of what an electorate office is meant to be. 
Why did that person go to Samoa? Well it was for the very simple reason that he was an overstayer. He had to get out of the country to apply for permission to be here because if he did not go he would not be able to stay. It is as simple as that. And he did not agree to do things on the house—the member should read the report again. He offered in the end to do the work. But of course the National Party would not understand that kind of thing either because nobody on that front bench offers to do any work except to be the last person to plunge the knife in the back of their current leader. That is those members’ notion of work. 
Then the member asked whether it was not awful for anybody to receive any kind of money. Well yes I agree. But from a party that took $1.2 million in advertising expenses and I think a $500000 donation from the Exclusive Brethren suddenly they are all incredibly— 
Hon Member 
: What a load of rubbish! 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Well that was $1.2 million of advertising expenses from people who claimed they would not vote and some of whom actually appear on the electoral roll as voting at the last election. Those members are very quiet now are they not! This is such a pure National Party on matters of cash matters of support and matters of being open and honest within Parliament and within the public arena! It is no wonder the court of public opinion has spoken—National members are going down and the Labour Party is going up.