Financial Review Debate — Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

The question for the Government to answer is this: where in this appropriation has it made decisions that will achieve a step change in this country’s economic performance? The answer is: nowhere. There are two hugely contrasting approaches to the New Zealand economy in this House. Both sides know that our economy has to do much better. Over on that side of the House, the Government’s entire programme for transforming New Zealand is to increase GST, drop the top tax rate for the most affluent New Zealanders, and—oh, yes—build a cycleway. That is it—that is the Government’s one shot. On this side of the House we have a long list of ideas to foster innovation, create jobs, and increase incomes: research and development, investment in science and skills, and partnerships with the sectors, the businesses, the institutions, and the people who can bring great New Zealand ideas to market. National says it supports them, but this appropriation tells a different story.

Where is the research and development investment here? The Government cut $700 million from the New Zealand Fast Forward Fund. That is a total cut of $2 billion in New Zealand innovation, made up of $700 million from the Government matched dollar for dollar by industry, and interest earned over 10 years—$2 billion. The Government abolished that and replaced it with a primary partnership, which has, so far, completely failed. Eighteen months have been wasted. Not a single project has been funded, and not one cent has been invested. Those are months we will never get back.

I thought that when the Government axed the Fast Forward Fund it was coasting in neutral, but it is much worse than that. It is actually going backwards. It is overseeing the axing of 40 jobs in AgResearch. Fifty jobs have already been lost in biosecurity. How will that help innovation and science in the most productive and innovative part of our economy? It will reduce growth further. Our future prosperity and jobs depend on science and innovation, and the sector where innovation and science make the most difference in New Zealand is the primary industry sector. It makes no sense to hack off the jobs of 40 scientists. What does the Prime Minister say about that? He says that the Government is “not inclined to step in to save the jobs.” He is relaxed about it. The Prime Minister calls it “a necessary adjustment to deal with the structure of AgResearch as it currently finds itself” because it has “too much capacity in certain areas”. That is nothing less than double-speak. In the 1980s we heard quotes like: “We have rising unemployment around a falling trend.”, or, when we closed post offices and post banks it became not closure but “transferring their resources”, and we are getting the same kind of double-speak now.

I will tell members why AgResearch has too much capacity. It was meant to be working in partnership on research projects that would have been funded by the New Zealand Fast Forward Fund. The Government has chopped science funding, and now, of course, we are losing scientists. The farmers themselves are not inclined to stump up for research in areas like wool, because they know the Government has sawn them off. They are not going out there alone when the rug is being pulled out from under them.

So the Prime Minister says AgResearch has “too much capacity”. That can only be possible if the Government thinks that too much science is already being done in New Zealand. What has this Government got against science, anyway? It seems to be on a crusade to smash every limb of science, research, and innovation in New Zealand. The very first policy that the Government brought to this House after the last election was to impose the largest increase in company tax in New Zealand’s history. It targeted very carefully our most innovative companies. By removing research and development tax credits, $700 million was gone over just 3 years for that purpose. Is it any wonder, then, that we are lagging behind in ways that we never envisaged? What was supposed to happen was that we were to come out of this recession—which, of course, has been worldwide—with our wheels running really fast.

I look through this appropriation to try to find the pro-science policies that have replaced the research and development tax credits. Where are they? Tragically, they do not exist. John Key still says we will catch up with Australia. Yeah, right! We will catch up with them, all right. I am waiting for the next speaker to make my day. This is a disaster.

One often wonders where Mr Anderton has been over the last 18 months when he suggests that there has not been a substantial step change in the way that agriculture is now recognised in this country. We had a decade of absolute ignorance by the previous Government of the importance of agriculture to this economy. The farmers were treated like dirt by Mr Anderton. He completely ignored them, but now they have a Government that cares about the farming industry and responds to its needs, and it is time that Mr Anderton woke up to that.

Let me deal with research and development. Every time that Mr Anderton gets on his feet he talks about the Fast Forward fund. Let us analyse the Fast Forward fund. The previous Labour Government borrowed $700 million, put it into a fund, and said industry would support it with dollar for dollar. Not one industry player put a dollar into Fast Forward. Those players knew it was ridiculous from day one. I say to Mr Anderton that we campaigned on research and development. National campaigned to the farmers of New Zealand on the Primary Growth Partnership, and who won? The Primary Growth Partnership now has $175 million worth of bids before it.

Last week I was down in Otago in the Ben Nevis range, a beautiful part of the country. There were 500 high country farmers there, and they are delighted with the performance of this Government. [Interruption] I say to Mr Parker that this Government respects the fact that farmers have a property right, and this Government will not trample on their property rights. This Government will give them a reason to farm the high country, and a reason to farm it sustainably and carefully. We are not talking about a 600 percent or a 6,000 percent increase in rents, in an attempt to force farmers off their land. We actually respect the job that those high country farmers do.

The other thing we did, immediately upon becoming the Government, was to modify the emissions trading scheme. The previous Labour Government had put in place an emissions trading scheme that would have completed gazumped the agricultural sector.

💬 Hon Jim Anderton: Oh, yeah.

Mr Anderton laughs. He thinks that is funny. That shows how out of touch he was with the sector.

💬 Hon Nathan Guy: Tell them about Jim’s chainsaw.

Well, I do not think that Mr Anderton would have ever operated a chainsaw. He certainly never owned a pair of gumboots; we know that.

Mr Anderton suggests that the Government has cut the AgResearch budget. That is wrong again, I say to Mr Anderton. We have not cut the budget of AgResearch. The farmers voted not to support their own wool levy. That has meant less funding going into AgResearch, and AgResearch has responded to that. But it is absolutely incorrect for the former Minister of Agriculture to stand here and suggest that this Government has cut expenditure to AgResearch, because we have not. In actual fact, this Government has put an absolute emphasis on science. As we face the challenges of climate change, science will provide the solutions.

Mr Anderton spent 10 years talking about agriculture, but he never delivered anything to it. This Government will not make that mistake. We are well and truly on board with our farmers, and all around the country farmers are saying there has been a step change in the way that this National-led Government relates to this important constituency. This constituency is the backbone of the New Zealand economy, and Mr Anderton should have realised that when he spent so many years as the Minister of Agriculture. He was a disgrace, and farmers are pleased to be rid of him.

Report noted.

Ministry of Research, Science and Technology

Report noted.

Ministry of Transport