National’s  Selwyn MP, Amy Adams, is the new chairwoman of the  finance and expenditure select committee. She replaces Craig Foss, who is taking over the portfolios of outgoing minister outside Cabinet John Carter. Also on the committee is Stuart Nash. Despite their row over the amount of tax farmers pay, the Labour list MP says Ms Adams is a hard worker and will do a great job as chairwoman. He says the row was exaggerated. ”It was just a Labour member ribbing a National member who was ribbing a Labour member.”

Like Stuart, I also think Amy will do a great job as Chair – as she did with the Electoral Legislation Committee.

It’s dangerous for me to make predictions about MPs futures, but I am very confident in predicting that Amy will become a Minister if National gets re-elected.

The strong performance of National candidate Hekia Parata in the Mana byelection has boosted her chances of being promoted this week.

It certainly has not harmed it. And the fact the PM did not announced last week the new Minister night suggest he was waiting to see how Mana went.

Ms Parata, a former public policy and Treaty of Waitangi consultant, not only slashed Labour’s majority, but performed well under pressure and ran a strong team.

Counting against her is that she is a first-term MP. Her promotion ahead of the class of 2005 could put some noses out of joint.

The leading contenders in that pack are Craig Foss, the MP for Tukituki and chairman of the finance and expenditure select committee, and Chris Tremain, MP for Napier and the chief Government whip.

I think both Craig and Chris know that their ascension is a matter of when, not if, which would help molify them if Hekia jumps ahead of then. But having said that, 2010 is far preferable to 2012 in terms of ascension.

What may count against them this time is that if they are promoted, then there has to be a minor reshuffle. While Hekia can slip in and take over Pansy’s portfolios directly.

Selwyn MP Amy Adams, in the same cohort as Ms Parata, is also tipped for future promotion in a commerce or economic role.

Or Agriculture. Or Justice. Amy is multi-talented

Mr Key could save a little money by appointing no one to the Cabinet and appointing another minister outside the Cabinet. He could make an even bigger saving by appointing no one at all and upsetting no one.

This is the only error in Audrey’s article. If the PM makes no appointment at all, this will in fact upset every single Backbencher. Reducing the size of the Ministry means more people competing for fewer places. A smaller Ministry is regarded by backbenchers with the same loathing as teacher unions performance pay.

Personally an Executive of 28 is larger than we need. However the time for change would have been when first forming the Government, rather than doing it by attrition.

But that would suggest Mrs Wong’s role was surplus to requirements in the first place.

Well …..

Mr Key is not seen as a slave to “political correctness”; he is not oblivious to gender and identity issues in National’s line-up either.

It is a factor, but not the sole or even the dominant factor.

The importance of the Mana byelection is that a promotion would be seen on the basis of talent, not tokenism

Yes, a promotion would be seen as gained on the basis of performance.

Making one appointment outside of the Cabinet to take over Mrs Wong’s two portfolios makes most sense, and of the contenders, Ms Parata’s sphere of interest is best suited to the vacancies.

We may find out later today who it is.

Talking of Mana, kudos must go to Phil Quinn who predicted a Faafoi win by just 1,000 votes.

Because no one died, it is tempting to downplay the impact of the earthquake, or in fact earthquakes in Canterbury. I recommend people listen to Amy’s speech.

Amy also blogged a couple of days ago on the quake:

The early hours of Saturday morning were without doubt some of the scariest of my life. Wrenched from deep sleep by violent tremors and a deafening roar, the mind can’t even comprehend what is happening.

Once I realised it was an earthquake the next thought was quite simply that we were going to die. There just didn’t seem any way the house could withstand the forces throwing it around. In those moments your instinct is simply to reach out for your family.

Grabbing my husband we both started screaming out to my daughter (my son was thankfully away in a safe area) and as soon as we could stand we pushed through debris in total blackness to my daughter’s room. Later when the sun came up I would learn that the fish tank that flew across her room missed her head by mere inches before crashing on the bed post but at that moment the priority was getting everyone into the kitchen and under our very solid table.

In the darkness the house felt totally unfamiliar and progress was slow picking our way through the remains of our once treasured possessions. In bare feet broken glass was the biggest challenge and once we reached the table it felt like a refuge. We huddled together there for a while before venturing out for blankets, shoes and our civil defence kit which luckily enough we had.

Treasury are now talking $4 billion as the total cost.

However I have enjoyed the blog posts by Amy Adams about her week “Amy in the Navy”.  An extract:

I do have do mention though that even in gently rocking open seas, showering was a bit of a skill. Washing shampoo from my hair without falling over involved deploying a three point bracing system of two feet and a shoulder in various parts of the stall, ungainly certainly but managed to complete the mission.

and

When I nervously asked what the gun was for I got the simple response “sharks”. Not sure if that was good or bad news for the poor man overboard.

Highlight of the drills for me though was when, unexpectedly, up went the shout “man overboard!” I was on the bridge at the time and of course I rushed outside to watch what would happen next. What I wasn’t expecting was to see one of the crew immediately grab and load a semi automatic rifle and point it towards where the dummy was floating. Hell, I thought, that’s a little harsh as a way to deal with the situation; clearly there are few second chances in this Navy.

Heh I love the culture clash.

It is set up to specifically include all seven Parliamentary parties, to try and continue the consensual approach Simon Power has fostered in this area. The difference between this and Labour’s approach to the old Electoral Finance Act is massive.

According to Dave at Big News, the committee is:

1. National (4) – Amy Adams (Chair), Hekia Parata, Paul Quinn, Chris Tremain
2. Labour (3) – Lianne Dalziel, Pete Hodgson, Darren Hughes
3. Green (1) – Metiria Turei
4. Maori (1) – Rahui Katene
5. ACT (1) – John Boscawen
6. United (1) – Peter Dunne
7. Progressive (1) – Jim Anderton

Not that I expect too many divisions on partisan lines, but note the CR parties have six members, CL five members and Maori Party one member. So neither CR nor CL have a majority.

The appointment of Amy Adams as Chair is notable, as she has only been an MP for just over a year. Amy is hugely competent, and a very strong performer. I expect she will be the first of the Class of 2008 to become a Minister.

The first is the Fair Trading (Soliciting on Behalf of Charities) Amendment Bill by Selwyn MP Amy Adams. The notes explain what it will do:

The Bill requires professional third party collectors to disclose to potential donators that a portion of the donation will be retained by the collector.

This only applies if the proportion retained is more than 20 percent.

If the proportion retained is between 20 and 50 percent of the total donation then the collector must simply disclose that a portion is being withheld by them, but does not have to disclose the amount.

If the proportion retained is more than 50 percent then the collector must disclose the percentage being retained, to the nearest percentage point.

Transparency is a good thing. There have been a lot of horror stories about people donating money to what they think is a charity but finding out less than half gets to the charity. I can’t imagine anyone will vote against this bill going to select committee. WIll be interesting to hear what the charities say about it.

Rotorua MP Todd McClay had his Shop Trading Hours Act 1990 Repeal (Easter Sunday Local Choice) Amendment Bill also drawn. I can’t find a copy of it online, so this is based on reports.

This is a minor liberalisation, which will allow each local Council to decide whether or not shops are allowed to open on Easter Sunday.

This will be lots of fun because you get the unholy coalition of the union left and religious right joining forces to stop even the remotest sanity occurring over Easter Trading. Hopefully Todd’s bill will make it to select committee – the challenge will be getting it back out.

I find it hilarious that the actual public holiday is Easter Monday while the day retail shops can’t open is Easter Sunday. And that Easter Saturday has no significance at all, so people can’t even get a guaranteed long weekend off. The current law really is a dogs breakfast.

This is the primary reason why National did not want a bar of Payne. Breaking a written undertaking is no small thing. In fact it normally leads to expulsion from the party, let alone precluding future candidacy.

Oh dear. Here the Justices fund Mr Payne misled the court.

No you did not misread this. Mr Payne has had 70 court hearings on other issues, and personally sued three Judges. I almost feel sorry for the three High Court Justices who made up the Electoral Court – he will probably now go after them.

The Court finds that Payne does not even have standing to bring an electoral petition. It is all over at this point, but for the sake of completeness the Justices helpfully make findings on several other issues.

This confirms that electoral petitions are about elections – not about internal party issues around candidate selections.

And here they concur with a previous court case that the National Party rules comply with the Electoral Act.

A private group such as the National Party is not required to have “natural justice”, as per public bodies. But here the Court rules that even if there was a natural justice test, the verto of Payne’s nomination did not breach the Act.

And here the Court finds that Payne lied on his nomination form, or as they put it “made untruthful and inaccurate statements”.

Usefully the Court also finds no evidence of wrongdoing by President Judy Kirk, Regional Chair Roger Bridge, and Electorate Chair John Skinner. The former two men especially have had their names dragged through the mud by Mr Payne.

And here we have the dismissal of the petition, the confirmation of Amy Adams as MP for Selwyn and a reservation over costs.

This has cost the National Party an immense amount of money – over an issue that was always doomed to failure. Sadly I suspect that no matter what damages the Court orders paid, the party will never actually see the money.

Arguably there was some minor good from the case – the rulings on electoral petitions and candidate selections under the Electoral Act are useful confirmations of the law.

It will be a relief to Amy Adams to have it all out of the way.

UPDATE: And the Speaker has announced that the determination of the High Court is that Amy Adams is confirmed as the MP for Selwyn. Goodbye and good riddance Mr Payne. What a waste of time and money.

Normally an electoral petition has a huge amount of media coverage. This has had none to date (but will be some today), because to be blunt there is no chance of sucess. It has been brought by serial litigant Roger Payne.

He was vetoed by the National Party Board as a candidate. There were excellent reasons for this. He broke his solemn sworn word in 2002 when he went for the Rakaia nomination, and having failed to win, stood for Christian Heritage – despite signing a pledge he would not stand for any other party in that election.

Readers can read previous material about Mr Payne here.

If the petition is sucessful, then Amy Adams would lose her seat and there would be a by-election. As I said at the beginning, I do not believe there is any chance of this occuring. Payne is a serial litigant and a very costly nuisance.

The lesson for National is they should never ever have let him rejoin the party after he was automatically expelled in 2002 when he stood for Christian Heritage. I helped get him refused from joining Wellington Central (knowing his history) but he eventually conned some sucker in the South Island into taking his $5. That $5 has probably cost the Party 1000 times that.

Tim Macindoe

Tim Macindoe set out to shatter any illusions that the road to Parliament was as smooth as his leader John Key had made it look.

Last year’s election was fifth time lucky for Mr Macindoe, who has been a National Party candidate in every election since MMP was introduced in 1996.

Fifth time lucky!

The former chief executive of Arts Waikato, deputy principal of St Peter’s School in Cambridge and prison tutor at Christchurch Women’s Prison said education and dealing with children at risk were among his priorities.

“I have been concerned for more than a decade that our country is in danger of losing its soul. Every tragic incident of child abuse or illegal drug sale to the young and the vulnerable or senseless violent crime that occurs in our country is an attack on our society as a whole and the values that most of us hold dear.”

Tim will no doubt be concentrating on holding the marginal Hamilton West seat. Hamilton West has been held by the Government of the Day for over 40 years, except from 1993 to 1996.

Kelvin Davis

Background:
Ngapuhi iwi, married with three children, lives in Kaitaia. A teacher in Northland since 1988, his most recent job was as principal of Kaitaia Intermediate from 2001 to 2007. Likes rugby, fishing, shooting and boating.

In his own words:
“It’s time we stopped wallowing in self-pity and instead looked for solutions … blaming the system implies we are too weak as a people to help ourselves, that we are victims.”

I was hugely impressed with his maiden speech.

Amy Adams

Personal:
As a lawyer and farmer, she said she was recently called a “typical Nat”. She said before people stereotype her they should know she was brought up by a solo mother who struggled to put herself through a psychology degree before working with disadvantaged families.

In her own words:
“[Agriculture] was our past and it remains our future. It is the primary sector that will help us as a country find our way through these troubled financial times.”

Amy has a safe seat for life, but it won’t take that long for her to start moving up the ranks. She could be our first female Minister of Agriculture!

We seem to raise strong politicians on the Canterbury plains. I come from the same part of the country as the great Sir John Hall, a farmer, and former premier of New Zealand who, in the 1870’s, formed and maintained a government in a period of change and great instability. Sir John is particularly to be remembered for one of his final acts of public life which was to successfully sheppard the women’s suffrage bill through the House in the 1890’s.

Living in a world where women in NZ have risen to the top in almost every profession, and now dominate the universities, it is hard to believe that only just over 100 years ago they didn’t even have the right to vote. And it was not until WWII, that women seriously started to enter the workforce.

In the passage of time we seem to have lost sight of the enormous contribution Sir John made and as a woman now representing his home area, I want to take a moment to acknowledge his legacy.

As a farmer, he and his brothers formed one of the first large-scale sheep runs in the South Island, which later became Terrace station. And as a politician for the original Selwyn seat, he was respected for his integrity, and huge contribution to the developing nation’s landscape.

Sir John was a staunch conservative, who felt women would bring more decorum and civilized behavior to politics, plus would be least likely to countenance official extravagance.

Women, he noted “instinctively possess a far keener insight into character than men, and the result of giving them a vote would be that a candidate’s chance at election would depend more on his character, for trustworthiness, for ability and for straightforwardness than upon mere professions made on the hustings.”

I find it interesting that even enlightened MPs such as Sir John argued women should get the vote not on the basis of it being a fundamental right for all adults, but on the basis it would produce better outcomes!

I come to this House as a commercial lawyer and a Canterbury sheep farmer and based on that just last week in Wellington someone called a “typical Nat”. I make no apology for that side of my background, I am proud of what I have worked hard to achieve, but for those looking to stereotype me it is worth pointing out that I also grew up in a sole parent household, always short of money, with my mother putting herself through a degree with two pre-schoolers underfoot, eventually becoming a psychologist bonded to the education department.

All these new MPs are making it very hard for those fighting class wars from the 50s to portray National as the party of inherited privilege.

At this time, we need the rural sector more than ever. We need to treasure our rural communities, not trash them.

Something that worries me is how many New Zealanders have lost touch with the land. Most kiwi kids don’t visit farms anymore, they don’t see lambs in spring, and they don’t grow up knowing that farmers care about their land, its health and its future. It’s not in their interests to pillage nature. Farmers farm for future generations, and they farm for the prosperity of all New Zealand.

Actually it worries me too how few kids gets exposed to the outdoors and rural NZ. I was very lucky that growing up we had a few acres in Reikorangi, and over the summer would help the local farmer out mustering stock, dagging etc etc.

We must also remember that the plight of the agriculture is not just about the success of our economy. The world has a massively expanding population and UN predictions are that feeding those people will be one of our biggest challenges in years to come. We cannot afford to let our agricultural industry shrink in NZ where we have the proven capability to produce some of the best, and most environmentally sound, foodstuffs in the world.

And if we follow a fundamentalist approach to climate change, the only way to reduce emissions enough will be to slaughter livestock, rather than have them produce food for the world.

Making laws that effect people’s lives is a very grave responsibility. And when the law does put restrictions on people, we owe it to them to make the rules clear and concise, and not open to subjective interpretation leading to wide inconsistencies of result.

Indeed.

Mr Speaker, business in this country has often been demonized in recent years as large, heartless corporations making money off Kiwis for their international owners.

But in reality the face of New Zealand business is a couple of guys working in a workshop out the back of town fixing cars. Or a mum selling kids products via a website from home. Or builders, sparkies and cleaners. Lawnmowing contractors, painters.

The productivity of this country is in their hands. They form the bulk of New Zealand businesses, and they will be very exposed in the coming economic storm. They are the infantry of our economy, and they are fighting on the frontline right now.

So are we sending in reinforcements? Or are we going to abandon them?

Well Labour and Greens are fighting to make it harder for small businesses.

The state is here to help, but its role is not to run your life, tell you what to do or how to do it.

The role of Government is not to wrap us in cotton-wool to ‘save us from ourselves’.

I can assure you that I will stick up for the right for kiwi kids to play on swings, see-saws, skateboards and cycles, and to climb trees and build treehouses without having to apply for a building consent!

Absolutely.

The full speech is over the break.

Mr Speaker, It is with a great deal of respect that I rise to present my maiden speech in this Chamber and I offer my congratulations to you sir, on your election.

I stand before this house as the representative for the newly formed Canterbury seat of Selwyn and I am conscious of the great debt I owe to the people of my electorate for the faith they have shown in me. I would like to begin today by pledging to them my commitment to work in their interests and for their advancement over the time that I am here.

I would also like to pay a personal tribute to the Prime Minister, the Honorable John Key.

Our Prime Minister is a man of great honour, real charisma and a man with a heartfelt empathy for the people of New Zealand. He has been an inspiration to me, my electorate and to all New Zealanders and I am especially honoured to be serving in his Government.
——————————————-
We seem to raise strong politicians on the Canterbury plains. I come from the same part of the country as the great Sir John Hall, a farmer, and former premier of New Zealand who, in the 1870’s, formed and maintained a government in a period of change and great instability. Sir John is particularly to be remembered for one of his final acts of public life which was to successfully sheppard the women’s suffrage bill through the House in the 1890’s.

In the passage of time we seem to have lost sight of the enormous contribution Sir John made and as a woman now representing his home area, I want to take a moment to acknowledge his legacy.

As a farmer, he and his brothers formed one of the first large-scale sheep runs in the South Island, which later became Terrace station. And as a politician for the original Selwyn seat, he was respected for his integrity, and huge contribution to the developing nation’s landscape.

Sir John was a staunch conservative, who felt women would bring more decorum and civilized behavior to politics, plus would be least likely to countenance official extravagance.

Women, he noted “instinctively possess a far keener insight into character than men, and the result of giving them a vote would be that a candidate’s chance at election would depend more on his character, for trustworthiness, for ability and for straightforwardness than upon mere professions made on the hustings.”

“A clever ready-tongued political adventurer” he said “may cajole a set of dull-witted men, but if he has to pose before a number of women they will see right through his real character. It will be of no use trying to get around them with blarney and humbug; they will soon discover whether he is the unselfish patriot he professes to be or a selfish hypocrite who wishes to make use of the people for his own benefit. Women’s intellect would be a surer guide in cases of this kind, Sir John said, than that of the majority of men.”

One hundred and fifteen years since that pivotal moment in our history, I am extremely proud to represent the new Selwyn electorate and I wish to acknowledge the many notable members of this House from the area who have come before me including two former prime ministers; the Rt Hon Sidney Holland and the Rt Hon Jenny Shipley.
————————————————————–
I come to this House as a commercial lawyer and a Canterbury sheep farmer and based on that just last week in Wellington someone called a “typical Nat”. I make no apology for that side of my background, I am proud of what I have worked hard to achieve, but for those looking to stereotype me it is worth pointing out that I also grew up in a sole parent household, always short of money, with my mother putting herself through a degree with two pre-schoolers underfoot, eventually becoming a psychologist bonded to the education department.

Her job working with some of the most unfortunate families meant we grew up all over the place… Ngaurawhaia, Hamilton, Wellington, and eventually Auckland.

Compared to many Kiwi kids though, I was fortunate because I came from a family of self-starters who believed that anything was possible if you worked hard enough.

One of my grandfathers was an engineer and inventor, who started a factory in his Wellington garage that employed many people for decades. My other grandfather is a well-respected accountant in Motueka, who again built his own business from the ground up – a business which has strong roots in the agricultural and farming communities in the Tasman region.

For myself it was while I was at Canterbury University and met my husband Don that I began my relationship with farming and the rural sector.

Back in Sir John Hall’s day, New Zealand was a young country building its fortunes on the sheep’s back, an agricultural economy with a bright future.

Today agriculture is still the backbone of our export based economy. It was our past and it remains our future. It is the primary sector that will help us as a country find our way through these troubled financial times. However the farming sector is under threat from all sides. And the threats facing the rural sector in New Zealand are serious and will need commitment and innovation to find solutions.

At this time, we need the rural sector more than ever. We need to treasure our rural communities, not trash them.

Something that worries me is how many New Zealanders have lost touch with the land. Most kiwi kids don’t visit farms anymore, they don’t see lambs in spring, and they don’t grow up knowing that farmers care about their land, its health and its future. It’s not in their interests to pillage nature. Farmers farm for future generations, and they farm for the prosperity of all New Zealand.
Environmentally we must find a workable balance between the needs of the environment and those of the rural sector as well as other stakeholders. But when we talk about sustainability, as we must, let us not forget the need to also be economically sustainable in the international marketplace. While the issues we face will be challenging and at times contentious, I’m confident that if all sides can approach the issues collaboratively, solutions can be found and implemented.

We must also remember that the plight of the agriculture is not just about the success of our economy. The world has a massively expanding population and UN predictions are that feeding those people will be one of our biggest challenges in years to come. We cannot afford to let our agricultural industry shrink in NZ where we have the proven capability to produce some of the best, and most environmentally sound, foodstuffs in the world.
—————————–
Mr Speaker, the management of water and in particular the need for large scale water storage facilities in Canterbury is one of the most difficult, but also most important, matters facing my electorate. Water is life and no where is that more true than on the farm. In rural homes throughout the country the amount of rain that has fallen and the forecasts from the rain radar are more than just small talk, they can mean the difference each year between survival and foreclosure.

To resolve the matter we must look for the optimal solution and then ensure the law enables it to be achieved. Decisions shouldn’t be driven by who got in first or which option is most expedient under the Resource Management Act. Rather a macro analysis of long term outcomes and community needs must be the central consideration. We as politicians must ensure the law supports, rather than hinders, such an approach.

Which brings me to infrastructure.

For too long politicians have dodged the issue of infrastructure development. Time and time again infrastructure has been shunted into the too-hard basket. Infrastructure requires long term thinking, long-term funding and long-term commitment.

I have no doubt that short term thinking has already cost this country considerably. We have to start thinking as a nation, not as individuals. It really is a case of doing it for the greater good. And it’s not just the economic cost – communities suffer when schools, roads, libraries, broadband services and the like don’t keep pace with local growth. The lack of community infrastructure is a major issue for many parts of Selwyn. I don’t want our communities to be nothing more than a place where the locals sleep. For communities to support their people, we must first support our communities.
———————————————————
For New Zealand to succeed, we can’t keep saying no to infrastructure projects because they involve change. The process should instead focus on fairly balancing all competing interests, including wider public needs. To build New Zealand’s productivity we need to get innovative, take some risks and do it fast.

15 years as a commercial lawyer has taught me that there already are hugely innovative and talented people in our business communities. But we are making it very hard for them to succeed both locally and on a world stage.

All over the country these businesspeople are telling me that one of the biggest challenges is getting a straight answer from central and local Government. People are generally happy to work within the rules, they just want to be told definitively what the rules are. Businesses need to have certainty and to be able to plan ahead – confident that the playing field won’t change every few years.

And being told by central or local government that the system means it will take months or even years, and often cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in consultants and legal fees, to work out if something can be done, is not OK. It’s a huge drain on business. It’s pouring productivity down the plughole.

Making laws that effect people’s lives is a very grave responsibility. And when the law does put restrictions on people, we owe it to them to make the rules clear and concise, and not open to subjective interpretation leading to wide inconsistencies of result.

Here’s an example. A farmer in my electorate was building two sheds, exactly the same, a few paddocks apart on his farm. One council; two building applications; two different council officers. The approval for the first shed took just a few weeks and was issued without the need for further information. The second identical shed, took months and required the furnishing of considerable further information and reports and of course extra costs.

How is that right?

Of course we must have regulation but let’s think very carefully about what any restriction on people’s freedom actually gives to society. If the benefit is minimal and the compliance or productivity cost is high, let’s not do it.

————————————————-

Mr Speaker, business in this country has often been demonized in recent years as large, heartless corporations making money off Kiwis for their international owners.

But in reality the face of New Zealand business is a couple of guys working in a workshop out the back of town fixing cars. Or a mum selling kids products via a website from home. Or builders, sparkies and cleaners. Lawnmowing contractors, painters.

The productivity of this country is in their hands. They form the bulk of New Zealand businesses, and they will be very exposed in the coming economic storm. They are the infantry of our economy, and they are fighting on the frontline right now.

So are we sending in reinforcements? Or are we going to abandon them?
———————————————————-

And it’s the same situation in the social sector. We need some long-term thinking, focused on early-intervention initiatives that can make a real difference.

We’ve got serious social issues to confront as a nation and while there are some outstanding programmes in place we need more. We need major attitudinal change right across this country.

I believe that the key is fostering a strong sense of individual responsibility. And as a parent I can tell you there is only one way to teach responsibility – that’s for there to be clear and consistent consequences for your actions.

If three-year olds can get it, I think other Kiwis can get it too.

And that means that to be part of the very special community which is New Zealand, we expect people to take responsibility for themselves and their families. The state is here to help, but its role is not to run your life, tell you what to do or how to do it.

The role of Government is not to wrap us in cotton-wool to ‘save us from ourselves’.

I can assure you that I will stick up for the right for kiwi kids to play on swings, see-saws, skateboards and cycles, and to climb trees and build treehouses without having to apply for a building consent!
—————————————————

Mr Speaker I want to take the opportunity to publicly acknowledge my husband and my two wonderful children who are here today for their unending love and support and for making sure my feet stay firmly on the ground. Don, Thomas and Lucy, you are the reason for everything that I do and I love you deeply.

Thanks must also go to my wider family, my parents and my sister Belinda in particular, and to my new Selwyn electorate family for all their tireless work supporting me over the past year. There are simply too many of you to name but you know who you are. My thanks also to the National party, its president Judy Kirk, our regional chairman Roger Bridge and my caucus colleagues for your unfailing support and guidance.

—————————————————

I want to conclude by saying that in my view, for most of the past decade New Zealand has been heading down a no-exit street…. economically, socially and psychologically.

We’ve been penalizing the hardworking families struggling to keep their heads above water, loading them with higher costs and higher taxes.

We’ve been strangling businesses with red tape, making it hard for them to hire staff and bogging them down in a mire of regulatory uncertainty.

We’ve been downgrading the education system, creating meaningless qualifications, giving kids poor work habits, and loading teachers with responsibilities that should really rest with families.

For too long we have had a culture where the state thinks it knows what’s right for every family and every business.

A culture where every social problem is renamed a ‘condition’ that people shouldn’t be held responsible for.

A culture where violent offenders seem to have greater rights than their victims.

Well that’s not OK with me. I have higher aspirations for this country, and I have a strong belief that we can achieve them.

I’d like to finish back in 1890 with the words of Sir John Hall. “We cannot afford as a nation for [our politicians] to stand aside from the work of the nation: we need all their spirit of duty, their patience, and their energy in combating the sorrow, and sin, and want that is around us.”

Mr Speaker. I look forward to serving the people of Selwyn and of Aotearoa for as long as they allow me the privilege of representing them.

I thank you.

Another nice blue area, but with only three seats.

Selwyn replaces the old Rakaia seat, but on very different boundaries. On the revised boundaries National won the party vote by 15% in 2005, and in 2008 it went to a 29% gap. The Connell majority of 6,700 blossoms into a 10,200 majority for Amy Adams.

Rangitata is an oddly shaped seat that includes Timaru and Ashburton. National were 7% ahead on party vote in 2005 and 14% in 2008. Goodhew’s also gets a majority of 7,600.

Waitaki is the old Otago less Queenstown and moving North. In 2005 the party vote gap was 8% and in 2008 it is 21%. Jacqui Dean holds off David Parker again with a massive 10,000+ majority, up from 4,300 in 2005.

We have Shane Jones on radio calling Katherine Rich Katherine Witch, but then clarifying that she isn’t a witch any more as she is leaving National’s Caucus.

And the Herald reports on Trevor Mallard:

In the House last week Mr Mallard couldn’t resist firing a barb in the direction of National’s female MPs, saying they looked very similar and it was hard to work out who was who.

“Some of us have a little bit of a problem in that a number of the women on the National Party benches look very similar,” Mr Mallard said.

“Certainly in looking at their hair colour, I can say it looks like they share their shampoos or hair dyes, and they do look somewhat similar.”

Yeah, and all those grey haired women in Labour look the same too. Well that is the equivalent of what Trevor is saying.

The blonde brigade includes Otago MP Jacqui Dean, Aoraki MP Jo Goodhew and list MP Nicky Wagner.

Indeed, they all are. At least Pansy Wong and Georgina te Heuheu are not blond or Trevor would be getting them confused also. Here are the three MPs:

Jacqui Dean

Jo Goodhew

Nicky Wagner

You really only have to meet them all once to tell them apart. There are those cunning subtle differences such as different faces.

And it seems that National’s production line of blonde women is far from finished, with three new candidates in this year’s election _ Nikki Kaye (Auckland Central), Louise Upston (Taupo) and Amy Adams (Selwyn) _ also fitting the bill.

Ms Upston and Ms Adams both brushed off Mr Mallard’s comments.

Both said they would prefer people judged them on their abilities and what they stood for, rather than their hair colour or appearance.

How novel. Some Labour MPs might agree with them.

But how will Trevor cope with three new MPs to tell apart. Well again it should not be difficult:

Amy Adams (Rakaia)

Nikki Kaye (Auckland Central)

Louise Upston (Taupo)

Now again, those subtle differences such as different faces, different heights, different hair styles may help Trevor cope.

So far there have been three ballots, and it is down to the final ballot between Amy Adams and Alex McKinnon. This is pretty much a win-win as both of them are exceptional candidates, and someone at the meeting described one of their speeches as “Prime Ministerial” and the other as “Outstanding”.

I’ll update with the final result when known. There are several hundred voting delegates so it can take a while to count the votes.

UPDATE: Amy Adams won on the fourth and final ballot. Huge congratulations to Amy and commiserations to all the others – great to have such a good contest with so many good candidates. The big winner is actually the residents of Selwyn who are going to get a superb MP.

Amy is a bit of a super-woman. She is in her 30s and manages to be a mum to two kids, a lawyer, a lobbyist for the NZ Health Trust, helps with the farm, chairs the local school board of trustees, is a director of various companies and oh yeah is training for triathlons.

It has been great to see so many good people being selected as candidates.

If you have the names of any missing candidates, please let me know. And if a candidate has a website I am not linked to, send that through.

National has two more candidates. Hekia Parata was selected a couple of days ago as National’s candidate for Mana. And I was at the selection meeting last night for Rimutaka where Richard Whiteside won a three way battle. Richard is one of those rare creatures in politics – a small business owner. Amongst his various endeavours, he owned for around a decade what is now called the Speights Ale House on Tinakori Road in Thorndon.  Richard has firsthand experience of what it means to invest your own money into a business, and the environment needed for small businesses to succeed. He’s also been involved with local environmental issues – specifically the toxic sludge from the Hutt based Exide factory.

National has also announced the names of the five candidates seeking the nomination for what should be the very safe Selwyn seat.  They are:

• Amy Adams
• Alex McKinnon
• Dugald McLean
• Todd Nicholls
•  John Stringer

I know, or have met, four of the five candidates over the years.  It will be a hard fought contest, and I suspect it will go to all four ballots on the night.

I blogged previously on how gruelling the National Party selection process can be with 60 delegates to meet and impress. Well Rakaia is even worse for the candidates. Not only does it stretch out over a couple of hundred kms, but they have sought and been given permission to have universal suffrage for the selection meeting. That means that instead of 60+ delegates voting, over 700 local members (who have been members for at least six months) can and generally will vote.  So I predict a lot of travel over the next couple of weeks as the candidates get around Canterbury.