General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. Gerry Brownlee said on Newstalk ZB last week in respect of the Canterbury earthquake that people were being impatient. He was right. The Canterbury earthquake, like the lack of planning and strategy from this Government, is a very down-to-earth, practical example of the fact that the Government is a shambles. There is no plan for the people of Canterbury, as there is no plan for the people of New Zealand.

Let us look at the evidence around that proposition. Early childhood education centres around New Zealand are cut to the bone, yet the Minister of Education stands up day after day as we present example after example—Swannanoa Preschool has received a $100,000 cut—and says that there is no cut. We have 158,000 New Zealand citizens—Kiwis—unemployed. One in four young people leaving school is going on the scrap heap.

Where is the plan around that problem? The only plan articulated by the Government was the Job Summit. Do members remember that? Then we had a cycleway. Then New Zealand was to be a financial hub for the world. Then we had the clanger: Gerry Brownlee, the man who is interested in earth movements of all kinds, suggested mining in national parks. I say that the Government’s programme has more cracks and gaps in it than the Canterbury earthquake or a cheap version of the Borat movie. That is what I say.

Gerry Brownlee and the other Ministers get up every day and say that the people are being impatient and should settle down. I say to Mr Brownlee that the people of Canterbury are impatient not only for a plan and a strategy but for any sort of coordinated, managed effort in respect of their crisis. He should tell his colleagues that every New Zealander who is unemployed, every mum and dad who is facing a $25 to $80 a week increase per child in the price of early childhood education, and every early childhood education centre that is facing hundreds of thousands of dollars of cuts, like the 34 in my patch facing nearly a million dollars of cuts, are, by God, impatient. They are impatient for any sort of action.

They are also impatient to know how far the asset sales programme that those members have articulated will take New Zealand. They are impatient to know that, given that it was tried last time by that crew over there when they were in Government. They were told that everybody would be better off as National flogged off assets willy-nilly, but they were not. They are impatient to know why National is doing it again. They are impatient to know why mum and dad Kiwis—according to that crew over there, benevolent Government that it is—will be first in the queue to buy back what they already own with their own money. They are impatient to know the logic around that.

The people of New Zealand are impatient to know how foreign interests that gained 51.8 percent of Contact Energy when it was sold off will be prevented from eventually gaining our assets. The people of New Zealand are impatient to know where the revenue streams will come from as the Government flogs off revenue-earning assets. The Government talks about purchasing non-revenue earning assets like, for instance, schools. It is a great thing to build a school; we built heaps of them. But Gerry Brownlee, as the resident genius, should tell me—and the people of New Zealand are impatient to know—how a school can generate revenue as opposed to, say, a State-owned power company. Many schools, of course, are in the disaster zone of Christchurch. That man, Gerry Brownlee, stands as a stark example, given his lack of action in respect of the crisis in Canterbury, of the inaction, the shambles, the lack of planning, and the lack of strategy exhibited across every portfolio in this Government.

I say to Mr Brownlee that he is right: people are being impatient. People are impatient to know how they will get a job, especially the 158,000 unemployed Kiwis. They are impatient to know how they will get a job, how they will make ends meet, and where these mum and dad Kiwis will get this windfall of cash so as to be first in the queue to buy back assets that they already own. According to National these 158,000 unemployed New Zealanders and others have tons of dough! They are impatient, they want a job, they want action, and they want a plan. I say to Mr Brownlee that he should try to deliver one.

First, I would like to take a moment to extend my sympathies to the family of Private Mila and the other families involved in the incident in Afghanistan. Private Mila will be sorely missed, and I wish those injured the speediest recovery possible.

Today is a special day in the Australia - New Zealand relationship. Australia and New Zealand have one of the most open economic and trade relationships of any two countries. Australia has a population that is five times the size of New Zealand’s, and the thing that should give pause for thought to every member in this Chamber is the fact that the Australian economy is seven times the size of New Zealand’s economy. Australia is the most important trading partner we have, and it is New Zealand’s closest neighbour.

It was a real pleasure to hear the Australian Prime Minister speak in this House this morning. It was also pleasing to hear her observe, as have almost all Australian Prime Ministers before her, the importance of Australia being an open economy, and the recognition of the importance of the economic reforms of the 1980s and 1990s—painful though they were for both countries—in giving Australia the prosperity that it enjoys today. Indeed, the enduring consensus on economic policy in Australia is undoubtedly one of the strong reasons for its continued economic success.

I have to say that that contrasts with some of the economic debate that this country sticks itself with from time to time. Here, what describes itself as the fraternal party of the Australian Labor Party seems to be starting to advocate 1970s-style, Fortress New Zealand policies as some way of attaining economic nirvana. That is undoubtedly not correct.

Australia knows that a lot is to be gained by encouraging foreign investment. It has the economy and the income to show for it. Therefore, the easier we can make it for companies to operate in both countries by removing unnecessary barriers, the greater the opportunities for business to have confidence, to make substantial productivity gains, and to take up new opportunities that will help to underpin growth and jobs. That is, incidentally, something the former trade Minister Phil Goff used to believe in and work towards. Now, sadly, in this House in the last 2 weeks he has been using xenophobia to make cheap political points about German and Australian investors, just as the previous speaker did in this general debate today.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I take offence at the accusation that members on this side of the House have been using xenophobia. Some of us find that accusation deeply offensive.

💬 Chris Tremain: Surely this is a debating point, and not one that the member should take offence to. To call a member xenophobic is hardly a criminal offence in this House.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: Mr Speaker—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I do not want to take any more time on this. I will ask the member to withdraw the comment, but I do not want to be too pedantic about ruling out words; we can all take offence at all sorts of things. Members must be very careful not to accuse another member of being racist, and I guess one could claim there is a connotation here. So I ask the member to withdraw, but I will not rule out words forever because offence might have been taken on one occasion. If the honourable member would withdraw that word please.

I withdraw, and say that the member is now using criticism of German investors and criticism of Australian investors a number of times, as did the previous speaker in this House.

Today a very important investment protocol was signed between our two countries, which sets a higher threshold for trans-Tasman investment so that it does not have to go through a screening process. This will do much for the confidence of New Zealand businesses growing in Australia, and in the two countries, where they will have a combined domestic market in the order of 25 million people. It is this sort of work that will help New Zealand companies to grow, that will create jobs, and that will give companies the opportunity to create a stronger economy in New Zealand.

It is interesting that this should occur on a day like today, when Fletcher’s, our largest listed company, which is very active in Australia, has recorded an improved result. It just goes to show the potential of strong economic growth and a tighter economic market between our two countries. That is what this House should be focusing on. The opportunity today is to focus on that, because we need this country to grow much more strongly, and working closely with Australia will allow us to do so. I salute the investment protocol that was signed by our two Prime Ministers today.

It is interesting to follow on from Steven Joyce. I just note for the record that Phil Goff, as trade Minister for New Zealand, helped to create hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs by signing free-trade agreements, and negotiating free-trade agreements like the one with China. That is far more than that hollow man over there will ever do. He can stand up in this House and crow about his focus groups and what he learns from them, but the real work of being in Government, of being a trade Minister like Phil Goff was, of actually helping to create jobs, is not what that Minister is doing. He is part of a Government that has overseen 158,000 people being unemployed—158,000. That is what he has overseen. Once again from Steven Joyce we have heard the theme of this Government: that someone else is to blame.

There is always someone else to blame. Today the Prime Minister stood in the House and said beneficiaries were to blame. They were making a lifestyle choice; that is what the Prime Minister said today. The three women who came to the electorate clinic that I held in Wellington Central on Saturday, who were all in their 40s or 50s, all out of work, all desperate to get a job, and all trying to redevelop their skills to get a job, are wondering what the Government is doing for them. They want to know what the Government is doing for them, to help to create jobs for them. But no, Mr Key stood in the House today and said they were to blame for being unemployed and they were making a lifestyle choice. I say it is not a lifestyle choice for those people, and Mr Key would know that if he actually talked to people on the ground.

But Mr Key himself has come up with something else today, for which someone else is to blame. This is the purchase of the BMWs. The story has moved on three times today. Firstly, it was Labour’s fault, because it had locked the Government into a contract whereby it had to purchase a new set of BMWs. Of course, that turned out not to be the case. In fact, it was an option to renew the contract, so it was not the case that Labour had locked the Government into a contract. The Prime Minister moved on and said it was the Greens’ fault, when actually it was Bill English’s. But the Prime Minister moved on and said it was the Greens’ fault, because they were interested in a fad called lowering carbon emissions. Apparently, the fleet of BMWs was to have lower carbon emissions. Apparently lowering carbon emissions, doing something about climate change, is a fad, so it is the Greens’ fault.

But then the third story was that it was the fault of the Department of Internal Affairs. Apparently, Mr Key is “furious” with the Department of Internal Affairs, except that that is fudging the story a bit, because the part of the department that is responsible for the purchasing of those cars is Ministerial Services.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: He should read the papers.

Who is the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services? That would be the Prime Minister. So in actual fact if Mr Key is blaming the department he is blaming Ministerial Services, and he is the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. As Mr Mallard said, Mr Key is clearly not reading his papers. If the Prime Minister wants to take some responsibility for this fiasco, it is in his basket. He is the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services. He cannot blame the department, he cannot blame Labour, and he cannot blame the Green Party.

That is the problem with this Government. Although it has no plan, there is always someone else to blame. It is not good enough. The State sector is being fingered as the area to blame, because apparently it is bloated and inefficient. Yet Standard and Poor’s has said today it does not regard the State sector in New Zealand as being bloated and inefficient. Kyran Curry, its analyst, said in the New Zealand Herald today: “Generally, we look at the Government in New Zealand as being relatively small and compared to its peers it’s quite efficient.” That is right. Standard and Poor’s, the rating agency that the Government puts so much investment in, says that actually it does not do anything. The State sector is not bloated and inefficient. But once again from this Government there is always somebody else to blame.

We saw that again today from Anne Tolley on early childhood education. Once again the increase in fees is the fault of the kindergartens and the early childhood centres, or it is the fault of the parents. But it is not. It is the fault of this Government for taking money out of a vital sector. Once again, the Government says someone else is to blame. Anne Tolley says she is not to blame for taking money out of the sector; it is the centres’ fault for putting up their fees. It is not. It is the fault of this Government, which has absolutely no plan for this country to grow the economy and no plan for jobs. Once again, Government members stand in the House and try to find someone else to blame. It is time for this Government to look in the mirror.

This is a sad day for our nation. It is also a day of celebration, of firsts, and of greatness. Let me acknowledge a fallen New Zealand soldier overseas. I join others in the House and the various party leaders who made speeches earlier. This is a sad, sad moment. But it is also a day of celebration and firsts. It was an honour and a pleasure to hear the Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, speak to the House.

Today was the first time a leader of a foreign Government has spoken to the House—using the word “foreign” and the word “Australia” just does not seem to work—and it was a pleasure to hear the way she delivered her speech, the content of the speech, and her acknowledgment of the realities of the position of both our countries. Sure, New Zealand is small and Australia is much larger, but that presents opportunities to both of our countries. We acknowledge our shared past, our shared whakapapa, if you like, in many, many of the historic moments around our country.

However, I must say “Open the Gate, Mate”. That was the catchcry of the Aussie apple protests that began in 2005 and picked up on 90-odd years of protests before that. The angle was not particularly acknowledged. Hawke’s Bay is a large apple-producing area, as are Nelson, Otago, and areas of the Wairarapa, etc. The apple industry is a very large industry for New Zealand. It employs many low-skilled people, and, of course, some higher-skilled people along the way. The point is that New Zealand apples could not get into Australia.

I will not relitigate the various debates, as I think members know them very well, but I acknowledge the Australian Apple Access Group from the Hawke’s Bay that, with its partners in Nelson, got the momentum and the ball rolling again. I still recall jumping on the steam train to come down to Wellington from the Hawke’s Bay, to march on Parliament in May 2005. Good friends of people in Hawke’s Bay got the message to the Government of the time to start some action. Some action did start to happen, to be fair. Attention came to the issue and to the inherent unfairness of it. The gate is now open, mate.

I acknowledge fully Prime Minister Gillard’s comments in the House and elsewhere about the issue. I would like to quote the headline from the Australian newspaper, which reported on the Australian Prime Minister’s speech, because it captures it all: “PM applauded as she declares apple war truce in historic speech to New Zealand MPs”. We have to look forward. The agreement creates huge opportunities for the apple industry and for New Zealand.

The investment protocol, which the Hon Steven Joyce was just talking about, brings the opportunities of a 25 million purchaser-consumer market on the doorstep of New Zealand, and another of our primary products will now be accessible over there, probably by next season, with a bit of luck.

The point is that it is not a fight; it is a partnership. It is about seizing the moment and seizing the opportunity. The global umpire of world trade, the World Trade Organization, has made a ruling and the Australians have accepted it, and now we are both working hand in hand to seize the opportunities of the moment. Parallel to that is the investment protocol, and the work that Simon Power is continuing. As the Minister of Finance acknowledged earlier today, much of the work was begun under the previous administration. We freely acknowledge that fact, although it does raise the question as to why various other speeches made by the Leader of the Opposition seem to be contradictory. Some time back, Mr Goff essentially said he would renegotiate CER, I think, and here we are today celebrating a growth of CER.

Anyone who ever doubts the worth of CER to New Zealand and to all of Australasia should imagine New Zealand without CER. Imagine how many jobs would be lost, where our interest rates would be, and how vulnerable our finance sector would be, particularly following recent events. Today is a celebration of our mateship and comradeship with our good friends and colleagues in Australia. As both Prime Ministers alluded to, we are almost family.

I look forward to our Australian friends and family enjoying New Zealand apples, alongside New Zealand wine, and I look forward to welcoming them as we continue our discussions and negotiations towards having one open domestic airline market, if, in fact, we can get there. The goodwill shown by both leaders today—and across the House, to be fair—points towards a very positive future indeed. Thank you, on this very great day of celebration.

This week it has all unravelled for the Government. This week we have seen that all the eggs the Government had in terms of an unemployment plan not only were few but also were broken. In the face of unemployment at 6.8 percent, which represents 158,000 people, the Labour Opposition demanded from the Government a plan. Indeed, the 158,000 people in the dole queue demanded a plan. The 52,000 people who have joined that queue since the Government came into office demanded a plan. The one in four young people—the school-leavers, who have not even had a chance to enter the workforce—being left on the scrap heap because there are no jobs demanded a plan. We cannot forget the 12 percent of unemployed 20 to 24-year-olds, which represents a good chunk of young graduates who have left university with skills that they are willing and wanting to use. They also demanded a plan because they, too, are waiting for work.

What did we get in the face of those demands? First came the excuses. Every time the unemployment figures came out and shocked the Government just a little by increasing, the Government claimed that figures tend to be volatile and to move around a bit. Second, the Minister for Social Development and Employment, Paula Bennett, who is AWOL currently, claimed that the unemployed just needed to take a positive attitude if they wanted to find work. Today we heard the Prime Minister claim that some people on the benefit are making a lifestyle choice in the way they exist. Finally, at some point in the debate we heard the Government acknowledge the real issue that was at play: Kiwis want work, but there are no jobs—there are no jobs. That is the real reason that 158,000 Kiwis are currently seeking work.

It is time that, instead of making excuses, the Government starts doing something about it. Our expectation was that after 2 years there would be a plan. What have we seen instead? We have seen a series of gimmicks. I do not use that turn of phrase lightly. At first, there may have been some hope that something concrete could come out something like the Job Summit. We also saw the cycleway idea. I am the first to acknowledge that I do not have a problem with the concept of a cycleway. In and of itself, I think it is a positive thing, but it would never have been the answer, and it has proven not to be the answer, to a growing unemployment issue in New Zealand. In fact, we have seen a grand total of 214 jobs created out of the cycleway. It is just not good enough.

What was the other option the Government gave to us? It was a youth unemployment package: Job Ops and Community Max. The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research told us that the Government deserved a C on that package. Why? Because it would at best assist 8 percent of young unemployed people.

What have we seen for the 8 percent of young unemployed people who have had some contact with those schemes? Well, let us look at Community Max. Work and Income claimed it would be a chance to upskill young people and move them into jobs. At a cost of $100 million in total for Job Ops and Community Max, I would have thought we could expect that at the very least. But when we scratch the surface, what do we see? Some projects have delivered what it was claimed they would deliver; others have proven to be a dismal failure. If this was indeed a chance to upskill our young people, why was Work and Income not checking that the subsidy it was giving to providers to train people was being appropriately used? The general public would expect that, if we are spending $18,000 to put fewer than six people into a job where text messages are being sent, we would see some outcomes. What skills is a young person getting for a future career by sending text messages all day to defendants, reminding them of court appearances? Absolutely none. If we are to spend over $300,000 on a gardening project, we should at least upskill the young people who are in that project. Instead, we see half of them without jobs at the end of it.

The Government has claimed that 70 percent of people on Community Max have not presented at Work and Income again or gone on to main benefits again. That is an absolute distortion of the truth. Seventy percent of people have not walked through the Work and Income door again, but that does not mean they are employed. We know that 40,000 young people in New Zealand are not in employment, education, or training. Community Max participants have joined that dismal number. Where is the plan?

Firstly, I offer my condolences on the loss of the New Zealand soldier Private Kirifi Mila. My thoughts and prayers are with the soldier’s family and friends today and for the next weeks, which will be hard for them.

I would like to respond quickly to the Wellington Central member of Parliament, Grant Robertson, who earlier in this debate said that National did nothing for growth and to get New Zealand ahead. When filming of The Hobbit in Wellington was at risk, we did not hear a word from that member. He was silent on what was happening with The Hobbit. If he is really serious about getting some industry into Wellington he has to stand up and back what is happening within Wellington, and The Hobbit is absolutely crucial to Wellington and to keeping Peter Jackson in Wellington.

Today we saw a part of history. Today the forty-ninth Parliament of New Zealand had the privilege to witness the first address by any foreign leader in our House of Representatives. Today New Zealanders from around the country were able to watch live as the Prime Minister of Australia, the Hon Julia Gillard, spoke in this very debating chamber. Australia and New Zealand were together in our debating chamber; we are two nations whose histories are innately entwined, and today we became two nations whose futures together are boundless. Today history was made, and the National-led Government’s vision for an even closer friendship, relationship, and union with Australia was born. The ongoing development of a trans-Tasman single economic market and a seamless operating environment for Australian and New Zealand businesses are the ends that our Government is working towards, and today that was the vision Prime Minister Gillard committed to. The relationship between New Zealand and Australia has always been one of great importance to us.

In her speech the Prime Minister said that Australia and New Zealand were island nations that nobody owed a living; if we gained any advantage in the world, it would be because we fought for it and earned it. Today, as our Prime Minister signed the Investment Protocol to the Australia and New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement, the National-led Government achieved a milestone fundamental to that fight. Enhanced economic relations between our two nations are fundamental to National’s goal of a single economic market for our nations. For over 30 years New Zealand and Australia have pursued greater economic integration and partnership. We believe that a strong economic relationship between our two countries will benefit both of us. Julia Gillard talked in her speech about the cross-pollination of ideas and innovations between our nations, and in particular between our countries’ business sectors. She said that we would be able to share the wealth of knowledge in businesses. We would be able to learn and we would be great. As we worked towards the common goal of a single economic market, our economies would be able to complement each other with our strengths, and pull each other up from our weaknesses.

At the end of last year I attended the HER Wellington Businesswoman of the Year Awards. There were fresh ideas, innovation, and recipients who through their hard work and passion were leading the way in their fields. The winner of the supreme award, Camilla Welch, owner and general manager of a label-making and printing business in Pētone, was selected for her personal drive and business sense. She proved that business excellence and environmental friendliness can be mutually rewarding. Tourism, agriculture, film—New Zealand has the knowledge to lead the world in many fields. But as John Powell once wrote, the only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing. The easier we make it for companies to operate in both New Zealand and Australia, the more we will learn and the greater the opportunities for business will be. Refreshing ideas, innovation, and expertise underpin long-term business growth in New Zealand, and underpin a strong economy for our country.

Like most New Zealanders, I have experienced firsthand how the unique relationship between our nations allows Kiwis and Aussies to lead successful lives in each other’s countries. For the past 25 years my sister has lived and worked in Australia. At any other time in history taking my family to visit her or for her to visit me could have been a completely different story. But today it has never been easier. We visit each other continually, back and forth across the Ditch. Australia is our closest ally, and the idea that people can move, work, and live across the Ditch is often taken for granted by New Zealanders. People in many countries cannot do this with the ease we ourselves do it. For business and investors to enjoy such a seamless transition is a goal of our Government. As Prime Minister Gillard stood in front of our colleagues today, she said that New Zealand might be a small nation, but we were one with a bold vision of its place in this world.

Earlier today we saw a rare show of respect in this House between the people of New Zealand and our closest neighbour. But where is the respect from this House when it comes to allowing the people of New Zealand the chance to have their say?

This House will soon be debating the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill. The way this bill has been dealt with to date is a travesty of justice. It shows why the public has lost its respect for politicians. In 2004 the Labour Government took away the rights of Māori to go to court. The hīkoi that concluded outside this Chamber was the largest New Zealand has ever seen. The opposition to that bill, from Māori and non-Māori alike, spelt the end of that Labour Government. The Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill continues the injustice, and the nation has again mobilised against it. Submissions to the Māori Affairs Committee on the bill were overwhelmingly negative; 5,000 written submissions and 500 oral submissions left the committee in no doubt that this bill is fatally flawed. The committee’s response was to shut down debate, and it surprised this House by reporting back early. The committee recommended no changes to the bill, yet the Minister in charge of the bill has clearly indicated that changes need to be made. Officials recommended that 89 of the 124 clauses in the bill be changed. They recommended an average of four changes per clause—a total of more than 380 changes. The bill was reported back to the House with none of those more than 380 changes. As the bill stands, it will still allow for backroom political deals without public scrutiny. It will still not clearly spell out that access to the foreshore and seabed will remain free. It will not respect any of the submitters who gave up their time to participate in a democratic process.

This is the House of Representatives, and in it we need to respect people. The people put us here, and the people decide when we leave. That is democracy; we disrespect it at our peril. The Attorney-General has promised that he will seek to make changes through Supplementary Order Papers. Those Supplementary Order Papers will be presented to us without notice at the Committee stage. Backroom deals, hasty changes, and improper process are not the hallmarks of a respectful relationship. We would not be accused of treating our neighbouring countries this way, and we should not treat our own people this way.

The people are waiting for a plan. They are waiting for this Government to come up with something concrete, something realistic, about youth unemployment. They are waiting for an acknowledgment that, particularly in Auckland, there is a housing crisis, but it does not appear, from the Prime Minister’s comments in question time today, that he even accepts there is a problem. They are waiting to hear when this Government will do something about the number of apprentices that are being laid off. They want to know when this Government will come up with a plan to grow the economy and get us out of this mess.

But while people are waiting for a plan, the people in Auckland over recent weeks have been handed a fiasco and a shambles. We have seen that shambles in the creation of the Māori Statutory Board on the Auckland Council, put in place by this National Government. The board will appoint unelected Māori members to council committees, where much of the work of council is done, and those members will be given full voting rights. That is an abuse of democratic principles. What is worse is that the Māori Statutory Board, according to the most recent estimates, will end up costing the Auckland ratepayer up to $1.9 million a year. That is an outrage, and Aucklanders are angry. They do not understand why the Government has done that. They are being hit in the pocket to fund that undemocratic Māori Statutory Board.

Let us recount a bit of the story that will explain how we got there. Back in 2009 Rodney Hide threatened to resign at the prospect of dedicated Māori seats on the Auckland Council. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister did not accept that offer. The Prime Minister did a shabby deal with the Māori Party to instead insert a Māori Statutory Board into the Auckland Council. He bypassed a perfectly good proposal for democratically elected Māori seats on the Auckland Council, and instead put unelected people there. Then, at the behest of the Māori Party at the select committee, a deal was done—a shabby deal—to give the members of those council committees, appointed by the unelected Māori Statutory Board, full voting rights alongside councillors who had been elected by the people of Auckland. That is an outrage. The columns of the New Zealand Herald are full of it, and Aucklanders do not like it.

I see that TV3 has just launched a new satire series. It is a comedy series designed to send up Rodney Hide’s super-city. But TV3 does not need to make a comedy, and it does not need to make a satire; it should just come here and listen to Rodney Hide in this House, because nobody could write this stuff. This is the self-styled “Minister for Ratepayers”. He is the fallen perk-buster. Yet what has he done? He has stiffed the Auckland ratepayer for $1.9 million a year to fund his statutory board. He claims to be the great apostle of the one person, one vote principle. He claims to be the great champion of democracy. Yet what has he done? He has imposed on the people of Auckland an unelected board with decision-making powers as members of council committees. That is wrong.

There is a reason Aucklanders do not like it, and we have heard over the last few days some interesting voices. Mike Lee, the former chairman of the Auckland Regional Council, has called this an appalling fiasco. He has said that Key and Hide should fix it. What has Cameron Brewer said? Cameron Brewer is not exactly a leading light of the left on the Auckland Council. What has he said? He has said that the Auckland Council has been let down by poorly drafted legislation. Mayor Len Brown is trying to make the best of a bad deal. He is trying to work with the statutory board and abide by the terms of the legislation. What is Pita Sharples, the Minister of Māori Affairs, and Rodney Hide’s ministerial colleague, saying? He is saying that Rodney Hide should either stand by his legislation or resign.

But we saw in the House today that Rodney Hide has no intention of resigning. Rodney Hide has refused to take responsibility for this mess and this fiasco. It is in his DNA. We have seen it before in the House. We saw it when he took his girlfriend on a trip to London, Toronto, Portland, and Los Angeles, and spent tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayers’ money. There was a week of news interviews, door-stopping in the corridors of Parliament, and embarrassing revelations, before Rodney Hide finally backed down, took responsibility, and paid back some of that money. We saw it with his withholding of information for years about David Garrett, the ACT Party’s former law and order spokesperson.

It is a pleasure and an honour to speak today. Today is a historic day for the House of Representatives of New Zealand. As has already been noted by other speakers, the Prime Minister of Australia is the first world leader to address this Parliament, albeit outside sitting times. It was an honour to hear her words of encouragement. It was an honour to hear what having a relationship with New Zealand means for her and her country.

Australia is our closest ally. She spoke about Australia and New Zealand being family. She spoke of the history that was forged on the battlegrounds of Gallipoli and around the world. Of course, the history was also forged in our similar cultures—in the culture we share with Australians—and on the sports battlegrounds.

Today is a day of celebration, but it is also a day of sadness. We heard that another member of the New Zealand Defence Force sadly lost his life overnight. It is a sad day when we lose defence people in foreign lands, but we salute Private Kirifi Mila for his service to this country, and we certainly salute him for the service he gave to democracy and freedom around the world.

We heard today that the partnership—Closer Economic Relations—between New Zealand and Australia has been enhanced. It has been enhanced through an investment protocol. The investment protocol is critical, because as we climb out of the global economic recession, it is important that investment continues to flow to our New Zealand businesses. When I visit the businesses in the Maungakiekie electorate—spanning from Onehunga in the west to Mount Wellington, Penrose, and Panmure, the heartland of manufacturing and industry in Auckland—they say that the keys to their success will be the upskilling of people but also access to capital. The investment protocol for New Zealand and Australia ensures that more funds will flow to those businesses and that there will be more investment opportunities and more jobs and food for our people and for New Zealanders around the country.

The protocol is more than an economic agreement, as we have heard from the Prime Ministers of both New Zealand and Australia. We heard from Ms Gillard that it is about highly mobile and educated populations. It is about having capable and effective armed forces harnessed in partnership. We have committed to working with the Australians in a range of different areas, including defence. Our own Prime Minister, the Rt Hon John Key, referred to Australians and New Zealanders establishing friendships and leading successful lives in each other’s countries. Having lived in Australia and having forged a number of close relationships with Australian people, I concur with our Prime Minister.

I will share with members a little story. Over the Christmas break I visited Australia. I visited a friend of my mine, a brother, and someone I consider to be a family member. He is suffering from cancer. [Interruption] If Mr Twyford thinks it is funny for me to tell a personal story then I feel sorry for him. I visited my friend. I have known the bloke for over 15 years. He is married to a New Zealander. He has a New Zealand - Australian child. I consider him a brother. Our passion for our families, for sport, for business, and for the Australian and New Zealand way brings us together as friends but also as brothers. I wish him well: Mark Robert Copping.

Finally, I will make a statement in Samoan about our fallen soldier. Ua vala’auina e le Atua le uso le Susuga a Kirifi Mila. E momoli atu ai o matou alofa’aga ma tatalo mo le ’aiga fa’anoanoa. Ia pa’i atu le ’a’ao fa’amafanafana o le Atua. Ia manuia ma maua le filemu. Soifua. Thank you.

The Green Party welcomes the enduring friendship between Australia and New Zealand. We were pleased to have the Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, address our Parliament in a special session in a way that did not undermine a long-held parliamentary convention. It is interesting that because of the same parliamentary convention we will not allow the Queen or the Governor-General to address our Parliament in the Chamber when it is in session, yet most parties were only too eager to abandon the convention for the sake of Julia Gillard.

It is also interesting that many members of the House have waxed eloquent about the warmth of our relationship with Australia and about how much we respect and admire Australians, yet in the same Chamber our co-leader Dr Russel Norman is subjected to constant abuse by many members of the House, particular by those on the National side, simply because he is an Australian. I do not hear members shouting abuse at members who originate from England, India, or Sri Lanka, but it is almost as though it is a sin or a crime for Dr Norman to be an Australian. He has to tolerate that level of abuse in the House. What does it say about our real respect for Australians? I learnt from the Prime Minister of Australia that one of our foremost Prime Ministers, Michael Joseph Savage, was an Australian. I wonder whether he too was subjected to similar abuse for the crime of being an Australian.

The Green Party strongly supports building closer relations with our kith and kin across the Tasman. I doubt whether any politicians in the House have closer relations than we do with Green MPs in Australia. We have joint sessions and we have made joint submissions to Food Standards Australia New Zealand, so we are very committed to having strong political and other ties with Australia. We acknowledge that we have more special ties with Australia than we do with any other nation, but we want our relationship with Australia to be a partnership between two equal nations. We do not want to become, effectively, the seventh state of Australia, or a country that is more and more controlled and dominated by Australia.

Already, most of our banks and many of our key institutions are owned by Australian businesses. The agreement today for further investment liberalisation will speed up that process. Lifting the threshold for Australian foreign investment that does not require any regulatory approval or scrutiny from our Overseas Investment Office will simply mean that more and more of our companies—and, of course, any future assets that the National Government puts up for sale—will end up in Australian ownership. The Government’s pledge that New Zealand investors will get the first crack at buying shares in any future sell-off of State-owned assets is simply a hollow pledge—pure spin, really—because everyone knows that there is no way to prevent those shares from being sold offshore after a certain date. So on a day when we welcomed the Prime Minister of Australia into our Chamber, I think it is appropriate that we reflect on our growing political as well as economic subservience to Australia.

Some may sneer at that statement, but the truth is that we have already forged one relationship—the treaty that set up Food Standards Australia New Zealand—whereby we are completely subservient to Australia and we have the same status as Tasmania. A previous National Government signed up to a deal in the mid-1990s whereby we ceded our sovereignty over food labelling and composition to Food Standards Australia New Zealand. That organisation is based in Canberra, was set up under Australian legislation, and is chaired by an Australian Minister for Health and Ageing and serviced by an Australian ministry. We have one vote out of 11 on the governing council—I repeat; one vote out of 11. That is hard to believe, and when I point that out to New Zealanders they are outraged by it.

The problem with our membership of Food Standards Australia New Zealand is not just that it is dominated by Australia and we have one vote out of 11 but that, in joining up with Food Standards Australia New Zealand, we gave up our jurisdiction—the jurisdiction of this Parliament—over all of the issues that we ceded to that body. We cannot pass laws in this House about food labelling or food composition. I discovered that when I introduced my Consumer’s Right to Know (Food Information) Bill. I went to the Clerk, who said I could not say Parliament should introduce GE labelling or mandatory country-of-origin labelling. The Clerk said our Parliament has no jurisdiction over these matters. We have ceded that to the Australian-based body, where we have one vote out of 11.

I will carry on from what Sue Kedgley, the previous speaker, was saying. I will talk a little about the brotherhood of men and women in Australia and New Zealand, and I will touch on one aspect the previous speaker mentioned. It is not the case that we do not like Russel Norman because he is an Australian; we just do not like his politics.

I will talk about some of the things that link my family to Australia. Some members may know what is on the A$10 note. If members ever have an A$10 note, they should pull it out and look at it one day. On the A$10 note is one of the most famous socialists in Australia we could ever have met, Dame Mary Gilmore. Dame Mary Gilmore was a journalist, a literary writer for many years, and a poet in Australia. She was one of the most famous journalists and writers in Australia, and she was a very well-known socialist with the Australian Workers’ Union, as I am sure some members opposite know. One of the neat things about her being on the A$10 note is that it shows us some of the links between our country and Australia that are to do with aspects other than those we have traditionally talked about relating to sport and our defence forces.

I will talk particularly about some of the changes that have been signed off today. Those changes are in the field of business. One of the things that have been announced today is that New Zealand businesses will be able to invest up to $1 billion in Australia. There has been a lot of worry and concern about Australian companies investing in New Zealand, but having New Zealand companies being able to invest up to $1 billion in Australia is a very good thing. I will give members a couple of examples. Right now a very large New Zealand company in the building products area is in the process of taking over a very large Australian company. That transaction is worth about $700 million or $800 million. Ordinarily, such a transaction, in a simple sense, would require some sort of approvals, but with the signing of the protocols today, such transactions do not need such bureaucratic approvals and can go ahead in a more efficient manner. That is a classic example of the benefits of Closer Economic Relations and the extension of the protocols between our two great nations.

We heard Jacinda Ardern talking earlier about some of the issues around skills. She said she was worried about wasted skills in terms of teaching people how to use text messages in jobs. Well, I ask whether that member wants everybody to sit on a production line doing nothing and learning nothing for the rest of their lives. Teaching young people skills is one way of getting them better, higher-paid, and more productive jobs, which is what our Government is about.

We heard Clayton Cosgrove bleating about earthquakes and talking about worries arising from earthquakes. Well, one of the great things about the links between New Zealand and Australia mentioned today by Prime Minister Gillard is the fact that down in Canterbury, where I live, many Australians are helping to rebuild our houses. They are helping to inspect houses and are providing us with skills we did not have. We did not have sufficient skills and expertise in Canterbury immediately after the earthquake. Australia did, and many Australians have been busy working and helping with the planning and rebuilding for Canterbury. That is a wonderful step forward.

At Pike River on the West Coast, Australians have been providing many resources and skills. That is a wonderful example of the joint nature of Australia and New Zealand. The fact that Australians came over and provided us with resources that we did not have access to shows the wonderful nature of the link between Australia and New Zealand.

Of course, there are also wonderful things to do with sport—in particular, the wider aspects of sport. Sport is a very global business these days, and the ability to buy, trade, and sell professional sports teams is increasingly part of the nature of the world of business transactions. Russell Crowe, a Kiwi whom we lent to Australia and of whom we are probably proud, is a major owner of the South Sydney Rabbitohs. It will be possible to buy into other major sporting franchises that are likely to appear.

Over time we are likely to see more and more examples of Australian and New Zealand businesses becoming increasingly intertwined. More jobs and expertise will be created, and trade between the two countries, which is currently something in the order of $21 billion, will be able to grow. It has been at over 8 percent per annum over the last decade, and it will continue to grow after the signing of the Closer Economic Relations protocol.

We have heard fear and loathing from Opposition members about having Australians coming to invest in New Zealand. Well, I ask them what is wrong with Australians bringing expertise and skills into New Zealand. What is wrong with that? Australians bring new skills and wealth into our country, which helps to employ New Zealanders. That is a good thing. Having productive jobs and investment is a positive thing. We did not hear that from Ms Ardern earlier on. She did not think training made a lot of sense. For her, training people in new skills seemed to be a complete waste of time.

Finally, I say to the Australians out there that we like them, but we do not love them. I deal with a lot of them, and increasingly the ones I meet when I am travelling round the world—

💬 Hon Shane Jones: “I’ve been everywhere, man.”

Shane Jones has been everywhere, man. Mr Jones is a classic example of one of the Australians who has done well.

Kia ora anō tātou. Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker Roy. I have been told there are 40 weeks left until the day that the National Party and its discredited friends come over to this side of the House into Opposition. It will not be a clean transition. The most recent speaker, Mr Gilmore, will not be a part of that group. The No. 1 reason is that he will disappear, like the much-vaunted assets he skites about, when he stands in Christchurch—because there is no place for him on the list. We know that in order for the scintillating intellect of Mr Paul Quinn to be preserved and projected forward, Aaron Gilmore has to go. That is a small but largely irrelevant piece of information.

I come back to Mr Hide. Rodney Hide is the man who threatened to resign. He is the man who said he would not be blackmailed into resigning if Māori became members of the super-city council. Today we have seen dodging, hiding, concealing, and camouflaging. That has been the style of operation from Rodney Hide. He introduced legislation reforming, altering, and adjusting the structures around the Auckland City Council and did not vote against the inclusion of a Māori Statutory Board, a board that has turned into a fiasco. That board is costing a great deal of money—too much money, it would appear to the Auckland ratepayers.

I ask who is responsible. Not Mr Hide! I ask at what point Rodney Hide will explain to the ratepayers that he is responsible for the increase in their rates in Epsom, or explain to Auckland ratepayers or his electors how Dr Pita Sharples outsmarted him. That may seem both a physical and an intellectual impossibility, but the reality is that the person with bragging rights here is Dr Pita Sharples, despite his having suffered considerable public injury for being ineffectual and for not bringing forward what ought to have happened to elected Māori representatives on the super-city. Taihoa, I say to whānau in Tāmaki-makau-rau—help is on the way!

The Prime Minister said after the hīkoi that nothing was set in stone. I bet that if he had the opportunity to say a similar thing now, he would not use the word “stone”. “Concrete” comes to mind in so far as Mr Hide is involved, because that man will not be back. He has misled Auckland, he has dislocated the small number of supporters he had there, and he has gone for popularity, which has diminished. When that man comes under pressure he refuses to step up to the plate and take responsibility, whether it concerns overseas trips or Mr David Garrett. Now it is the Māori Statutory Board. Rodney Hide was a key part of the architecture group; he refuses to admit it, and he refuses to accept any responsibility.

The person who is the most cunning of all in this, I have to say, is John Key. John Key needs to keep sweet with the Māori Party in order to govern again. That is why he is making only very mild remarks about the discredited Māori Statutory Board, which does not have enough representatives from the great bulk of Māoridom in Auckland. But wait! Help is on the way: there will be two elected Māori representatives. We will not have committees that are just adjuncts, which may actually cost a great deal of money that is not transparently arrived at.

The board will pass slowly into history when we are in power and when our model comes to pass, with two directly elected Māori representatives from the Māori roll. That model was originally demolished by Warren Cooper, who was part of the dinosaur discovery that emerged from the earth when the Christchurch earthquake spread further down the South Island. One of his enduring features was to have tossed out that particular innovation, which had been introduced in the time of David Lange. Help is on the way for Māoris in Auckland.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.