General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. I have been doing a bit of travel recently—rather more than any sane person would want to do—but it has at least given me one opportunity to look at the political process through the fractured lens of the Labour and Green parties, and then to look at the reality facing New Zealand. So, without wanting to sort of caricature it too much, the argument from the Green-Labour side of the House is: “The country is going nowhere. The Government does not have a plan.” OK? But let us just look at the facts—let us just look at the underlying facts.

This country, along with Australia, is growing faster than any developed country in the world, and has excellent growth prospects. This country has got a cost of living increase of less than 1 percent. That is about as low as we have had in three decades. And if we drill down into the highly sensitive issue of food prices, I wonder whether members on the Opposition benches saw the figure for the increase in food prices in the 12 months to April 2013. I wonder whether they saw what the increase was. It was zero—actually, I am not quite correct; it was negative 0.1 percent, all right? Does that not make the Labour Opposition look foolish for its stupid, botched strategy of trying to eviscerate GST by removing GST from fruit and vegetables? It was prepared to butcher a well-constructed policy to solve a non-existent problem.

We are looking at unemployment, which is too high for the more disadvantaged elements of our society, but the unemployment rate is half—is half—the unemployment rate of 17 countries in the eurozone. We are looking at after-tax wages, which have increased by 20 percent—20 percent—since 2008, which is twice the increase in the cost of living over that time. We are looking at mortgage interest rates, which are the lowest for 50 years. Sure, if you buy a house in an upper-income area of Auckland, you will not see the full benefit of this. But roughly 90 percent of New Zealanders who live in their own houses are living in houses they have owned for more than 2 years. If they are paying off a $300,000 mortgage, they are $230 a week better off—$230 a week, which would be over $300 in pre-tax terms. That is what this Government is delivering through sound, orthodox policies that are trying to fix problems at the root, not this rinky-dinky stuff coming out of the Opposition.

New Zealanders are in their homes, enjoying the benefits of a stable Government, and crime is lower than in the last 30 years. New Zealanders are safe in their homes because of the policies of this Government. What does that tell us? It tells us that this Government is focusing on things that matter to New Zealanders, that it is not obsessed with its own political navel, that we have isolated the problems that need fixing in this country, and that we are laying the foundations both in the Budget tomorrow—and I am looking forward to Mr English’s fifth Budget; it will be a great Budget and it will track the way forward for the next 12 months—and in the progress we are making on a sustained plan called the Business Growth Agenda, which is going to lay the foundations for more progress of the type that I have just outlined. This Government knows what it is doing and it has a set of Ministers, backed by strong support from our caucus, who are focusing on the problems that matter to this country. If you just comb through some of the statements that have been made just in the last 3 days, what you get is a picture of Ministers who are working to a concerted plan, know exactly what they are doing, and are focusing on real issues.

In the social policy area, there is the decision to turbocharge the scheme to provide trades training for young Māori and Pasifika people. Six hundred places were established in 2011. We are going to turbocharge that to 3,000. The Minister of Housing has just announced $377 million worth of new housing for 500 State houses, and, to accommodate the larger families of today, another 3,000 bedrooms. This is a Government that knows exactly what it is doing, has got a very firm plan to put that in place, and is making great progress.

I would like to thank the National Party’s visiting international guest speaker whom we have just heard from. Mike Moore once said about Tim Groser that the problem with Tim Groser is he did not get enough credit for splitting the atom. There is one thing we know for sure about tomorrow’s Budget: whatever crumbs National might decide to throw out to New Zealanders, whatever tinkering around and robbing Peter to pay Paul that National will do, this will be a Budget for National’s mates, not for the people of New Zealand, because that is the record of this Government. While our economy drifts along—the Government promised 175,000 more jobs; that is about as likely as a Christmas card from Steven Joyce to Judith Collins—it is focused on a narrow set of vested interests.

This is never more obvious than the shameful and shabby deal done by this Government with Skycity. It is casino politics from the gambler-in-chief, John Key. This deal has stunk from day one. The Auditor-General said it was flawed, it was not transparent, it was not even-handed. The moment that John Key wrote “close off the SkyCity angle” on those papers, that is what those officials did—that is what they did. They went into a deal that was not transparent and even-handed. Let us remember that there were options for this. The Government did not have to go down this path to build this convention centre, but it chose to. It chose to do a dirty, shabby deal off the back of problem gamblers.

When we look at that deal, there are 230 extra pokie machines, 40 extra gaming tables, cashless gaming machines, more high-denomination notes, and the kicker—a 35-year deal, a 35-year extension. If this side of the House chooses to pass laws that change something about gambling that is included in this deal, we will have to pay for that on behalf of taxpayers. That will be John Key’s legacy to New Zealand. If we want to change our own laws, we have to pay for it. That is the legacy of this Government. We have to pay an Aussie-owned corporate if we want to change our own gambling law. That is a shameful, shameful thing.

As the Dominion Post said, John Key’s legacy is a shrine of misery. It also said in the same editorial: “Every pharaoh deserves a pyramid.” and John Key will get one. That is what the Dominion Post said. Well, if I can mix up my metaphors, this pharaoh has got no clothes. He has got not only naked self-interest but empty promises that were not kept about jobs and wages and the cost of living.

John Key is right: there is something dying in Wellington—it is his Government. It is his decaying Government, because there is no brighter future for New Zealanders as wealth concentrates in the hands of the 2.5 percent who could afford shares in our energy company. There is no brighter future for the 146,000 New Zealanders out of work and out of hope. There is no future for the 270,000 kids in poverty. The only people who have got a brighter future under this Government are the mates and cronies of this Government—the vested interests who have made super-profits off power consumers, and the corporates who get laws written for them, all at the expense of problem gamblers.

If the Budget tomorrow were a Labour Budget from David Parker, it would be one that changes the settings of our economy to build and create jobs and prosperity for all New Zealand. It would build a fairer tax system. It would give hard-working people a break with cheaper power. It would invest in regional development that protects and supports our environment. It would be a Budget for the people from a Government that is proud of, and has faith in, our people. That would be a Labour Budget. But, instead, what we will get is a Budget from a Government mired in its own scandal and focused on deals, selling off our laws, jobs for its mates, and governing in vested interests, running a casino economy where the house wins and the ordinary people suffer. New Zealanders know this and the demise of this tawdry Government has begun.

It seems to me that it is becoming clearer and clearer that we have two types of Opposition party in this House now. We have the type whose members inhabit “Planet Labour”, who should know better, actually. They have been in Government—heaven knows how they got there, but they have been in Government—they do know what it takes to run a country, they do know what is involved, yet they will just say anything to get back in power. They know better and they should do better, but, frankly, for them, being back in power means that they will sell their souls and do what it takes to get there.

Then we have their friends the Greens—we have their friends the Greens. The Greens patently have no understanding—no understanding—of what it takes to run a country, no understanding of how an economy works. They patently have no idea about how you create jobs and what you actually have to do to create opportunity and prospects, and no idea that the path out of poverty—the only path—is to get into work, to create jobs, and to help people into those jobs. They clearly have no idea what they are doing or what it takes to run a country, and that is becoming clearer by the day.

The reality is that if you want to make an actual difference to the lives of New Zealanders, you have to do something as a Government. You cannot spend 9 years, as Labour did, issuing reports, working out strategies, empowering working groups, and sitting around and talking about what you might do one day. You have to actually make a difference, and that is what this Government has spent the last 4½ years doing. Tomorrow’s fifth Budget from Bill English will be a continuation of that.

Increasingly, we have a very obvious difference between the Government and the parties that support the National-led Government, and the Opposition—the Labour-Green Opposition. Increasingly, it is clear that what used to be a party of the centre-left is now swinging out to a Chávez-style Opposition controlled by Russel Norman and Metiria Turei. That is the clear difference now facing New Zealand.

We have an Opposition that is totally unconcerned about the damage it does to New Zealand—totally unconcerned. It does not care about our reputation and how it damages it. It does not care about our attractiveness to investment. It does not care about our ability to create opportunities. It is all about Opposition members doing whatever they have to do to get their hands back on the levers. They are shameless, self-serving, power hungry, and indulgent—and that is just David Cunliffe. Labour is a party that has shown that it is totally unfit to lead.

Meanwhile, we are getting on with it. We are getting on with it every day, as we have done since 8 November 2008, and tomorrow’s Budget will continue to do that. We understand that to have jobs, to have opportunities, and to raise incomes, you have to create an environment where business is able to invest, where investment wants to put down roots in New Zealand, and we are doing what we can to make that happen. Every time we do—every single initiative that creates jobs—the Opposition opposes it. Every time we come up with sensible strategies that will mean more jobs, more opportunities for New Zealanders here in New Zealand, and better outcomes for our people to stay in New Zealand, Labour and the Greens oppose it.

One of the big changes that we are looking to make is reforming the Resource Management Act, not to lower environmental protections but to ensure that there is much greater certainty and that it does not take years and years and years, and millions and millions of dollars, to get decisions. Just recently we have had the Statistics New Zealand report come out. That indicated that in the last 2 years alone up to $800 million worth of projects had been cancelled, mostly due to concerns about the uncertainty with the process. They know what the rules are, they know what the standards are that they have to meet, but there is a complete lack of clarity and too much time and cost involved in the process. That means less choice for New Zealanders.

Getting the Resource Management Act right is about more jobs, cheaper houses, and more certainty for communities, and it is not about throwing moneys into the pockets of consultants, lawyers, and planners. It is about ensuring that the system works for us and looks after the needs of New Zealanders. We are prioritising it. This is a Government of action. We have done more in environmental protection and freshwater management than any Government has ever done. That is the difference between a John Key - led Government that makes a difference and a Labour-Green Opposition that cares about nothing but itself.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Tēnā tātou katoa. Yesterday the House debated ACT’s charter schools bill, which Māori Party members voted for. They did not speak to it—heck no. They were too embarrassed to do that. Hell, they were not even in the House for it. They must have cringed when their National and ACT Party buddies sang their praises over it, but they still voted for it.

So what is all the fuss about? It is that the Māori Party is backing charter schools over kura kaupapa Māori. That is what the fuss is all about. It knows what it is doing, too, because Pete Sharples—Associate Minister of Education with responsibility for Māori-medium education and co-leader of the Māori Party—is supposed to be the big daddy of kura kaupapa Māori. The Māori Party knows that Governments have starved kura of funding and imposed rules on them that no other school has to adhere to, yet kura kaupapa Māori remain one of the most successful educational initiatives for Māori by Māori of the last 100 years. But last night the Māori Party voted with ACT to spend massive amounts of money on charter schools while kura kaupapa get bugger all. That is what the fuss is all about.

Massey University professor of education John O’Neill said that early indications are that charter schools will get more than twice the level of funding that mainstream schools and kura kaupapa Māori get, Mr Bennett. It is one thing to watch the rich white boys give their mates all the lollies, while the poor little Māori kids get by on scraps, but it is bloody embarrassing having to watch their Māori mates cheer them on. The Māori Party members should be ashamed about turning their backs on kura kaupapa Māori. That is what the fuss is all about.

Māori fought long and hard to establish kōhanga reo and kura kaupapa Māori, because we know that making a commitment to Te Reo, to whānau, and to kaupapa Māori is critical to providing for successful outcomes for Māori students. The kura have proven that to be the case time and time again—and that is a quote from Mr Henare. But will the charter schools that the Māori Party supports make those same commitments? Hell no. Charter schools will have no accountability to whānau, no commitment to Te Reo, no responsibility to Te Aho Matua, no obligation to put registered teachers in front of our kids, and no transparency under the Official Information Act, and they are going to get heaps more money than kura kaupapa Māori ever got. And the Māori Party supports that? That is what the fuss is all about, Mr Bennett.

Charter schools will not have to worry about the Office of the Auditor-General, either. Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu’s submission on the bill says: “Overseas experience shows that Charter schools are highly susceptible to fraud, waste and abuse ...”. Dr Bronwyn Hayward, a political scientist and senior lecturer at the University of Canterbury, referred in her submission to the problems of crony capitalism, tax evasion, fraud, and corruption that have plagued charter schools elsewhere. She described them as “a naive and reckless governance model”—and the Māori Party is voting for them! That is what the fuss is all about.

Mainstream schools are not exactly pathways to high achievement for Māori students, and clearly there is much to be done to change that, but that is what the Associate Minister of Education is supposed to be doing—identifying and promoting better models, not backing expensive, high-risk, low-accountability charter school ventures that, as 20 years of research shows, achieve nothing that cannot be done without them. [Interruption] That is what the fuss is all about, Mr Henare.

The Māori Party talks about how important it is to be at the top table. Well, tomorrow we will find out whether that is true or whether it is just a big, fat lie to keep those members on their big, fat salaries and in their big, fat limos while delivering a big, fat zero on Māori education. If tomorrow the Māori Party can get for kura kaupapa all that it is giving to charter schools, if it can get an extension in mainstream schools on the Te Kotahitanga programme that it brags so much about, and if it can get manaaki tauira reinstated to help all Māori students get a tertiary education, then it deserves a pat on the back. If, on the other hand, it does not achieve these things, then it will have failed, its mantra about being at the top table will have been exposed, and its support for charter schools will be shown up for what it really is—a plea for scraps from a Government whose actions prove that Māori issues rank with the Government somewhere between nowhere and obscurity.

That is what this fuss is really all about, because our kids—all our kids—deserve the very best in education, not the failed experiment that charter schools have proven to be. Kia ora tātou.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I appreciate that the general debate is a robust debate, but I have actually got some concerns about Mr Henare, given the amount of time he has spent yelling through two of the three speeches we have had—almost continuously in mine and then almost continuously in Mr Harawira’s speech.

I thank the member for his contribution. There has been quite a lot of interjection throughout this debate. The Hon Tau Henare has not been the only one to raise a very loud voice.

Tēnā koe. Tomorrow we will have a Budget that shows that National has forgotten that New Zealanders care about the environment. It will be a Budget that shows that National has forgotten that New Zealanders are proud of our country, our stunning landscapes, and our distinctive plants and wildlife, from the melodic kōkako—[Interruption]—which is much more melodic than Mr Henare—to the kauri, and that it has forgotten that New Zealanders want our lands, our waters, and our coasts well looked after. This Government has shown that it does not care about our environment. It has got very weak policies, like the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management.

This Government shows that it does not care by its attacks on one of our most important environmental laws, the Resource Management Act. The Minister for the Environment claims that it is not about lowering environmental protection. That is not what the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has said. With the emphasis on quick decisions rather than sound decisions, the Government is reducing the ability of local communities to have their say. With its proposals to gut the heart of the Act by stripping out the environmental criteria that are supposed to guide decisions, it is turning the Act into one that promotes economic development at the environment’s expense. The Government is weakening our environmental laws so that high-impact development projects get less scrutiny by councils, get less scrutiny by the community, and get a faster and easier ride through the resource consent process.

At the same time as it is weakening the regulatory regime, it is giving more handouts to intensive agriculture. Tomorrow’s Budget will subsidise irrigators by an $80 million grant to the Government’s new irrigation company, to spend on large regional water schemes. This is despite the fact that nearly every study on water quality shows that land-use intensification leads to water pollution. The Government is proposing to provide further handouts to irrigators by spending some $400 million from the proceeds of selling our energy companies. The Mighty River Power share deal will mean that New Zealanders lose the dividends that that company provided, so that dairy farmers—and in areas like Hawke’s Bay it will be dairy farmers, because they will be the only ones who can afford the water—can take over on the Ruataniwha Plains rather than horticulture and other more varied land uses.

This will not be a Budget about sustainable development, because that is not a concept that this Government understands; it will be a Budget about debt. It will be about increasing the ecological debt on present and future generations because of this Government’s focus on exploiting nature for short-term gains. We have seen that in Minister Joyce’s Business Growth Agenda and the regional report he put out recently. We have got petroleum block offers in Northland and Taranaki; minerals exploration permits in Northland; irrigation development in Hawke’s Bay, Canterbury, and the Wairarapa; and the commercialisation of conservation land in Tasman, Nelson, and Marlborough as the route to economic nirvana for the regions. It is a Budget that burdens present and future generations with more water pollution, with polluted waters and aquifers, because the Government has not noticed that its promotion of irrigation has a huge cost to the environment and to people. In Selwyn District—the Minister for the Environment’s own electorate, the centre of dairying, with a big Fonterra factory—there have been dozens of problems with gastroenteritis in Darfield, and communities in Arthur’s Pass, Springfield, Sheffield, and Rolleston have had to or are having to boil their water.

This is going to be a Budget that does not recognise that we need to invest in the environment as a basis for a healthy economy and a healthy society. We have seen the Franz Josef Development Society telling the Minister of Conservation that we need to invest in conservation because of the importance of conservation to the West Coast economy, and that we need well-resourced Department of Conservation offices. Yet what we see is the Government finding $158 million for tourism promotion but a paltry $5 million for the Department of Conservation, despite the protection of those conservation assets being central to the “100% Pure New Zealand” brand. The Green Party believes that we need a Budget and a Government that look after our environment and look after all New Zealanders, not just the top 2 percent.

The country is looking forward to the delivery of another Budget tomorrow, Bill English’s fifth Budget, and I am looking forward to it too. It is going to be a Budget that is built around four principles. Firstly, it is about responsibly managing the taxpayer’s dollar. On this side of the House we understand that the Government does not have any money of its own; it takes it from the taxpayer. It is not an endless source, and if we are taking too much from taxpayers, there is not enough for them to be able to make ends meet. That is why this Government lowered taxes, and that is why this Government has been frugal in the way it spends them.

The Budget is also about building a more competitive and productive economy. What we know is that over nearly a decade when members opposite were in Government the productive part of this economy did not grow at all. It did not grow a single job. The Budget is about delivering better public services. What that party, the Labour Party, did when it was in Government was to grow the Public Service so big that it was like a millstone around the neck of the New Zealand taxpayer. We are setting about putting that right.

The Budget is about supporting the Christchurch rebuild, because as the second-biggest city in this country, that has to be a priority. What the parties on that side of the House have never understood is that a Budget is about jobs and growth if it is about nothing else. What they absolutely hate is that in the last quarter unemployment fell by 6.2 percent. They hate it. They absolutely hate it.

In my electorate of Whanganui, which includes South Taranaki, we see firsthand that this country is built on pastoral farming, and the Greens hate that. I want to ask the Greens a question, and the question is this: how much free education, health, and welfare would you have in this country without pastoral farming and, principally, without dairying? The answer is stuff-all. And they do not care. They do not care where it comes from. They believe that farmers involved in dairying are dirty dairyers. They hate all that sort of stuff. They have no recipe whatsoever to replace the income that we would lose if they had their way. In Taranaki we have got 480,000 dairy cows—in the Taranaki province. The contribution—

💬 Grant Robertson: Name them.

Well, I will start with Blossom and Elizabeth, and I will get to your ones after that. On a single site at Whareroa we produce 2.5 percent of this country’s gross national product. How well do you think this country would do without a site like the Whareroa Fonterra site?

Shortly, in the next 18 months or so, Todd Energy will be drilling 41 more wells around Taranaki, and I say “Good on them!”. Todd Energy is building a rig right now to be able to do that. In Taranaki, for instance, and in Whanganui, within my electorate, with dairying and oil and gas we add to this country’s growth. We add money into the taxpayers’ coffers, because, of course, those people are paying tax and they are paying royalties on these things. And what does that do? That educates our young people. It keeps people well and healthy so that they can work, and Labour and the Greens hate it. We know that they hate it.

If, God forbid, Labour and the Greens gain power in this country, what are they going to do? They are going to introduce a capital gains tax. That is one thing they are going to do. They are going to raise personal tax rates. They have said that they are going to raise personal tax rates. The hard-case thing is that one day they believed you are rich in this country and on the top tax rate if you are earning $60,000 a year, and the very next day, with no explanation whatsoever, they doubled it and said: “Oh no, you’re not rich unless you are earning $130,000 a year, and we’ll charge you the top tax rate after that.”

They are going to increase the carbon tax, and through that they are going to make it more expensive to do business. They are going to purchase generating capacity, which will lead to higher power prices as well. The other answer they have, which they may well do, is to print money. God help us if they ever get the opportunity to do that. Then they are going to put up the minimum wage to $15 an hour, so on any public holiday any little dairy owner is going to have to earn $52.50 just to make ends meet. It is absolutely dumb and ridiculous. Let us look forward to this Budget to be announced tomorrow. Jobs and growth—that is what it is all about.

How can the New Zealand public be expected to believe, when such a big deal as the Skycity deal is announced by the Prime Minister on television on a Monday morning, and a few minutes later the Minister for Economic Development briefs the media, who trumpet the deal, that the very basis of that deal—the footprint on which it is being built: the land and the ownership of the land—is not complete? The deal on part of that land, which was announced for this big project on Monday, has not been done. The land is owned by another organisation, Television New Zealand (TVNZ), which says that it has not been approached. If you want to look at this picture I have here of the new design, you will see that a critical part of that building that is integral to its design is actually owned at the moment by another organisation. It is like signing a deal to buy a whole house from someone who owns only a bit of it.

Skycity is not silly. It would not be signing a deal to invest $402 million in a new casino, with lots of sweeteners chucked in to make it worth its while, if it was not sure that it had the land to do it with. The Government may be sneaky, underhand, and even downright corrupt, but it is not silly. It wants the casino built, and it is not going to let anything get in the way of that. But I took TVNZ at its word when I was told last night that it had not been contacted about this issue, which was backed up by its public relations person. It was reported in the media yesterday that TVNZ had not been contacted about selling this land. TVNZ is saying that publicly. Somebody is not telling the truth.

In February, when TVNZ appeared before the Commerce Committee, it insisted—four times it insisted—that there were no discussions with the Government or Skycity about it getting access to or selling that land. Under intense questioning TVNZ eventually revealed: “Oh, wait a minute, but we have engaged an architect to have a look at the building and what the options might be for the future.” But apart from a very brief conversation, admitted to by the chair of TVNZ, with the broadcasting Minister some time last year in which the Minister denied knowing anything about the issue, both the chair and the chief executive officer of TVNZ denied that they had been approached about this issue.

Contrast this with what John Key had said on the very day TVNZ appeared before the select committee. He put three statements on the record, saying that there were discussions in train and that it was all going ahead. But—surprise, surprise—the very next day he said that he was happy to accept the assurances from TVNZ that no approach had been made. It was all very fishy. And yet we see now from the Deputy Auditor-General’s report that Skycity had indeed been in discussions with the Government about acquiring that land. Somebody is not being upfront. Somebody is not telling the truth. There are two options here: either Skycity knew and the Government knew but somebody forgot to talk to TVNZ or somebody is not telling the truth.

So let us have a look at who is on the board of TVNZ. Mr Barrie Saunders—he is the co-founder of Saunders Unsworth. He is a former editor of the National Business Review, and guess what? His business partner, Mark Unsworth, is Skycity’s lobbyist. Guess who else is on the board. Mr Richard Long—Mr Richard Long, who spent 2 years working as chief of staff in the National leader’s office. Both men are very cosy with the Government. Both men are very cosy with National Ministers.

I put it to you that it is simply unthinkable that the Government would have announced a deal with Skycity to build a $402 million casino and convention centre, with fanfare and huge concessions and with it nodding and agreeing, if it had not sewn up the land. Yet TVNZ insists that it has not been approached. Who has shaken on this deal? Who are the shadowy figures in the background? Who is paying for the land? Is it Skycity or is it a sweetheart deal with the Government trading the land for a new casino and convention centre? What say has TVNZ had? This is prime inner-city land. If there is a price being paid, who gets the money: TVNZ or the Government via a special dividend?

I once had respect for the Labour Party. I once thought of it as a party that had principles and stood for what it believed in. But I have lost that respect for the Labour Party. It is a meek group of weak individuals who cannot put up a decent fight in this House. It has been taken over by the Green Party. The great Labour Party of old is gone. The Labour Party of today is a faceless group of factions that has been slaughtered by the Norman invaders. The Normans have come and they have slaughtered the Labour Party, and look at it. Look at the policies that the Labour Party has fallen over on in the last couple of months. No. 1 is economic policy. The Normans now govern the economic policy of the Labour Party. The Labour Party is going to print money. It is something that it does not need to do, but it has been forced to do it because it has been told by the Green Party what to do. The Green Party would put up the capital gains tax. Do not let any Labour member ever say that they wanted a capital gains tax. It is a Green Party idea. The Green Party wanted it, and the Labour Party took it on board because it has got nothing else.

Let us talk about another issue: energy—that great energy issue. The Labour Party has given up to the Green Party again. The Green Party’s nationalisation idea has been accepted by the Labour Party.

💬 Hon Member: Who is Labour’s energy spokesman?

Actually, I had a look at that. It is Gareth Hughes—that great young man from the Green Party! I had to look up who the Labour Party’s spokesperson on energy is. Who is it?

💬 Hon Members: I don’t know.

I do not know. I could not find it. It was Moana Mackey. Tell me that. I have never seen her doing anything.

The next one is transport—Iain Lees-Galloway. He has got a great future, but he has given in to Julie Anne Genter. I do not know why. I do not know why Julie Anne Genter has got it over Iain Lees-Galloway, but she has. The Labour Party is giving up on the roads of national significance. It is saying to the people of the Waikato and Hamilton: “We don’t want your votes. Don’t vote for us. Vote for National.” And we in Hamilton are going to say: “Good on them.”

But the best is yet to come. The best is yet to come because the next policy off the rank is foreign affairs. Guess who is going to govern that?

💬 Hon Members: Who?

Kennedy Graham. Kennedy Graham is the next Minister of Foreign Affairs under a Labour-Green Government. Kennedy Graham is going to bore the North Koreans out of war. Kennedy Graham will be setting up offices in Damascus for this country. That is the next step for the Labour Party policy.

But there is more. Tell me who the Labour Party spokesperson on foreign affairs will be. Nobody knows. Here is the next one. Who will be the Labour Party spokesperson on agriculture? Steffan Browning has got it—Steffan Browning has it. He is going to make everybody go back to the communes on the farms, and we are going to have these great 10-year plans that the Labour Party will fall into bed with. That is the future of the Labour Party.

Treaty negotiations—who should we give that to? I think Catherine Delahunty. I think Catherine Delahunty has served this Parliament well—more than any Labour Party member has—in regard to Treaty negotiations. The Labour Party will give in to Catherine Delahunty. Catherine Delahunty will be setting up the Treaty negotiations policy for the next Labour Party.

That is a shame. It is a real shame for that Labour Party—a Labour Party I once thought great things about, but now I cannot see why anyone would vote for it. It is the Green Party in drag. The Labour Party is not the real Opposition here; the Green Party is. That is something that is very sad for those Labour members. Look how meek and quiet they are, and they have given up. They have got no fight in them. They have got nothing left in the belly. They have got nothing in the tank. They have got nothing there. Mr Cunliffe is smiling. He is smiling because he knows that if they have got nothing in the tank, he is next in line. The Labour Party is over. It is a good thing for New Zealand, but it is a sad thing for those members over there. For people like Mr Little sitting there, who had such a future in this House, it is over—it is over. The Green Party is the real Opposition. Thank you.

It is always amusing when National puts up its D-team in the general debate. “Little National-no-friends” is what we are looking at over there. There is no John Banks, or at least not for long; there is no Māori Party, or not for long; there is already no Mana, in more ways than one; and now not even Aaron Gilmore can be bothered sticking around as National’s polling inexorably sinks towards the magic number of 39 percent. Beware two things: the first is “Bring Back Winston”, and the second, as they shudder in their twinsets and pearls—remember this, gentlemen and ladies—is if Judith Collins is the answer, what on earth is the question?

Today the Labour Opposition has got to note a very sad day in New Zealand politics. It is the announcement of an extremely dodgy deal around the Skycity convention centre. The convention centre deal is built on a foundation of—and I do not use this word lightly—dishonesty. It is dishonesty that it would not cost taxpayers a cent when there was a multimillion-dollar slush-fund subsidy for Skycity in the design, and dishonesty in the fact that the Ministry of Economic Development would not release the records of its multiple meetings with Skycity. It was behind closed doors, just like John Key’s meeting with the Skycity board. It was dishonesty about nothing being dodgy in how John Key personally suspended the proper process, which had four bidders, and only Skycity got a look in. That was dishonesty in the words of the Auditor-General’s office, which said it was “flawed” and “unfair”, that “the SkyCity proposal was always going to be the most attractive”, that it was not “transparent or even-handed.”, and that that applied to both Ministers and officials.

It is dishonest to say that there is going to be a sinking lid on pokies in Auckland, when they have just voted for another 230 of them and 20 more gaming tables. It is dishonest to say that the criminal ticket-in, ticket-out technology will reduce problem gambling. The reason it is illegal is that it gives the casino so much information about the gamblers, so that it knows what buttons to push to get them addicted. It is dishonest to say that there will be no cost to the country to plonk the hulking pokie palace right on top of Television New Zealand. Who is paying for that? It is dishonest of Peter Dunne to feign concern, saying that the Government “did play very fast and loose at times.” with the deal, when he holds the casting vote. This is Peter Dunne’s palace as well as John Key’s.

There is egregious dishonesty in claiming that Labour did the same thing in 2001, because it was none other than Judith Collins who was the then chair of the Casino Control Authority, which used a law that National passed and Labour abolished—just like her office—to put through the last increase in pokie machines. There is one more dishonesty that tops them all. It is the mother of all rorts, and that is the dishonesty of using Government legislation to give a gold-plated guarantee of compensation to a private company. That is a slippery slope in our constitution. There is dishonesty in the numbers. As David Shearer has said, Skycity has hit the jackpot. By KordaMentha’s estimates, it can make up to $530 million on a $402 million outlay. That is a 32 percent premium for a no-risk investment, and it still owns the building at the end of the 35-year gold-plated period.

This is a very sad day for New Zealand’s democracy. The Government has already sold the law on The Hobbit to Warner Bros. It has already sold the rules about spectrum licensing to MediaWorks. Now it is selling the gambling laws about casinos to a casino. It is giving the casino a gold-plated guarantee. It is selling our law. It is compromising the sovereignty of Parliament. But I have got news for this Government: those laws that can be made can be unmade. Any future Government can repeal the compensation provisions and deal with the issues in the interests of New Zealanders, as it is required to do. Let us be very clear. The Labour Party has no truck with the dishonesty that is on display from this Government. We are willing to bet that neither do New Zealanders.

I would like to just commend my colleague David Bennett for a great speech. I looked across the House and saw Kevin Hague, and he smiled more than once, and I think he agreed with that speech. Then I looked across to that side of the House and saw David Cunliffe smile more than once, and I think he agreed with that speech, because he knows his day will yet come. He knows that Labour is desperate, and he knows that the Greens are gleeful and that we are seeing Labour’s desperation to find traction with the New Zealand public. We see that it is making Labour vulnerable to the Greens’ ultra-socialistic policies.

Labour over there believes that it can enhance competitive power pricing by becoming the monopolistic buyer of wholesale electricity in the country. It will not be a free market any more; it will be constrained with generators and retailers brought to their knees, and Labour loves it. It is a daft idea, and we welcome all Labour’s daft ideas, because it just goes to prove to New Zealand how sensible and how solid the National-led Government really is. Colin Espiner, no friend of the Government, calls this “Third World, funny-money stuff.” Nationalising electricity has been likened by the New Zealand Herald to a 1930s command economy solution, not unlike what Soviet Russia would employ. These comments are from people out there who are commentators; they are not people who are taking political sides.

We know that Shane Jones is a political survivor, but, Shane, this is one big dead rat that you have to swallow. We have always thought that you were smarter than the rest of them, but it is sad to see you trying to convince yourself that this is good policy. Shane, this is just the beginning of the dance, and there are lots of rats coming. This is the classic “rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic” policy of the Labour Party—lower power prices and a reduced dividend to Government. Labour will have to jack up and rearrange taxes to compensate. Its power policy requires a taxation increase that is similar to the reduction in electricity bills. Will Labour lift taxes? You have got it. This is the dark cloud in its silver lining. It is redistribution of wealth—it is plain to see. Labour would fund the Government’s loss of dividend revenue with increased taxation from the growth sector of the economy. That is what it is going to do.

Expect company tax to increase. Expect capital gains tax to come into play. Businesses and farms will be paying more through the nose. Expect the marginal tax rates to increase, especially for the top half of earners. Expect emissions trading scheme increases. Labour will strip the private sector of capital through excessive taxation and obstructive regulation, and by necessity the Government will become the bailout investor in the electricity infrastructure, simply because at reduced rates of revenue generators will not develop new generation assets. We know that. The revenue from those assets will not cover the costs of building them, so it is going to be the Government that is going to bail them out. And guess what, everybody? That means higher taxes. The final responsibility of security of supply will fall on the Government.

You would have thought that David Parker understood this after the debacle in 2008, when, as the Minister of Energy, he was calling for 15 percent cuts in electricity consumption. Back then the New Zealand Herald criticised the planning and management of electricity supply, describing it as a maze to get through. This is the cartoon by Mr Body. Right there in the middle, there is the maze—there is the maze of the Labour Government’s management of electricity. The scary thing is that you will go into that maze and you will find Trevor Mallard in there. You will find Phil Goff in there. You will find David Parker in there, and David Shearer in there. That is the frightening thing. And they are all lost.

What we need to acknowledge is that 2008 was the second-driest year in the last 81 years. It was a drought time for New Zealand. [Interruption] It was a tough time, David. But what many people do not know is that the single driest year in the last 81 years was last year, 2012, and no one knew about it. Congratulations, Mr Brownlee, on your 2010 electricity reforms. You took us through a very difficult time. National has got the policies that will lead this country; Labour and the Greens continue to have daft ideas.

I take a call on behalf of New Zealand First, and I ask the question: what do New Zealanders want from the Budget? That is the big question—what do New Zealanders want from the Budget? Tomorrow is a critical Budget, and New Zealanders will be watching it with interest.

New Zealanders do not want more empty phrases and self-promoting rhetoric. They are sick of that. Their patience is wearing thin. After 4½ years of a National Government, they are asking themselves: “OK, after 4½ years, when are we going to get the brighter future we were promised—when are we going to get the brighter future we were promised?”, because they are waiting for it. New Zealanders are waiting for that brighter future. They want to see more than words. They are looking for a Budget that will deliver real improvement in their lives. So what do they want to see?

First, they want to see a Government that actually has a plan—a Government that has a plan. They do not want to hear comments such as those the Prime Minister made about Wellington, when he said that he did not really have any idea what to do to improve Wellington. They do not want to hear words like that. New Zealanders want to know that this Government has a plan. They want to know that this Government is capable and is not just meddling along, stumbling along, in a piecemeal fashion. They do not want that. They want a plan and they want to know that it is a positive—positive—outlook for the country.

But what have they been hearing from this Government in recent times? Basically, what they have mainly been hearing about is deals. New Zealanders are getting tired of just hearing about the deals. Typically, the deals are corporate deals. They are deals that normally involve foreign interests and foreign interests doing well out of the deals put forward by this Government.

Kiwis deserve more than a Government that survives just by doing deals with the likes of Warner Bros, China Southern Airlines—allowing visas for high-rolling Chinese gamblers to come to this country—Mighty River Power, and the list goes on. Kiwis do not want to see these sorts of deals going on in this country. The Skycity deal is just the latest example of how easily the public interest is traded off in a back-room deal. That deal will create enormous social harm, a cost this country will have to bear for the next 35 years.

So tomorrow Bill English must present a plan—a real plan with numbers, with times, and with targets. That plan must address unemployment, which is running at unacceptable levels.

💬 Simon O’Connor: It’s dropping.

They keep saying that it is down 6.2 percent, but out in the provinces in the areas where it is really, really affecting everyday New Zealanders, such as in Northland—where it is 10 percent on average, but for young Northlanders it is significantly higher than that—that is where it is really hurting New Zealanders. It is hurting young Māori and young Pacific Islanders—young people who simply do not have work, cannot get work, and see no future. They see their only future as being somewhere other than in New Zealand.

Right now there are 150,000 people who are unemployed. What we do not see is the other, similar figure of underemployed people in this country. People who have only 1 hour or more of work a week are classified as having a job. But many of these people would like to work a lot longer, a lot more, and would like to actually have a decent job, but if they have more than 1 hour a week, they are not classified as being unemployed. But they certainly are underemployed. In many cases, they are on the minimum wage and are not doing particularly well at all.

This Budget must deliver jobs, particularly for the younger workers. It must deliver on things such as electricity. The Government does assert that the electricity system is efficient, but back in the real world Kiwis are struggling with the cost of power bills. The elderly are struggling with the cost of power bills. So in tomorrow’s Budget, let us hope this Government does something about the cost of power. Let us also hope that it does something about the fact that there are 40,000 fewer manufacturing jobs in this country since this Government came to power—40,000 fewer manufacturing jobs. Let us hope it does something about that, because we have New Zealanders who are talented and enterprising, and we have the climate and the resources in this country. Let us hope that this Government puts something on the table tomorrow with a proper plan, and not just cuts, cuts, cuts, and more cuts.

It has been interesting, as we have listened across the House to the Opposition, that we are blaming the Chinese, as I think we just heard at the start of Mr Williams’ speech. We have had people make accusations and impugning, if you wish, the reputations of people who sit on boards. We have had people jumping up and down about how we dare allow a business to actually build a convention centre in the city of Auckland that will bring jobs and opportunity. It is an incredible amount of negativity.

But I want to talk around a different aspect today. As many of you will know, I have spent an awful lot of time in university—fortunately, most of it while also working. Because of those years in university, I have become an advocate of lifelong learning, and I am thrilled to be in Parliament, a place where so much learning is possible. From the National Party you can learn all about good government and sensible economic management. From the Labour Party, well, you can learn how a green tail can wag a red dog. From the Green Party itself, well, look, my stars—to use a quote—the things you can learn from the Green Party. Maybe we in this House sometimes take for granted the fascinating things that the Green Party says, given how often we hear from it, so I thought we would just reminisce a little.

We hear from Dr Russel Norman. He has delivered some extraordinary lectures on “Harry Potter economics”. From what I understand, his theory is that most economic problems can be solved with the judicious use of magic. With a wave of his wand he can create money out of thin air. I have learnt from him that quantitative easing is a way to make photocopying money seem like an economic policy.

But he does not just make money appear. He can make money disappear as well. For example, he and David Shearer, the “deputy leader of the Green Party”, made $500 million disappear from the New Zealand stock exchange overnight—overnight—with only a few words. They made $500 million disappear from ordinary Kiwis’ savings in the likes of KiwiSaver and the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. It was an amazing magical feat. But, you see, Dr Russel Norman has also found a way to make power prices disappear. His plan is to nationalise the energy sector, following in the footsteps of such great economic luminaries as Marx, Lenin, and Mao. Yes, Dr Norman never fails to delight when pulling rabbits out of his hat.

💬 Todd McClay: Out of his what?

Out of his hat.

But he is not the only Green Party member to have graduated from the “Hogwash School of Witchcraft and Wizardry”. It sounds like Metiria Turei is fairly similar, with puffs of smoke as well. You see, “Professor Turei” has taught all of us about enterprise and initiative with her small-business programme. It is entitled, if I read the lecture notes correctly, “Growing the economy by growing marijuana”. This past April she actually said, and I am quoting, that “There’s some real skills [in growing the drug] … some real entrepreneurial skills, some real horticulture skills …”. I understand that in the next semester “Professor Turei” will be teaching graduates of those classes advanced chemistry, in a course called “P labs: our path to prosperity”. Yes, children—you listening in—the Green Party believes that you too can grow up to be a drug dealer.

Sometimes when I listen to the lectures the Greens put forward, I am not entirely convinced—I am not entirely convinced. But learning is about being exposed to new ideas, and so I have listened. The word that comes to mind when I listen to the Greens is “ideology”. There are few political parties around the world as committed to their ideology as the Greens are. In the face of all the facts, despite all the evidence that says that their extremism will not work in the real world, the Greens stick to their ideology. And do you know what? You have to kind of admire that sort of dogged commitment. It reminded me of the lost Japanese soldiers in the 1970s who refused to accept that World War II was over. Like them, the Greens refuse to surrender to logic, to reason, and to progress. So I say “Soldier on.” to the Green Party educators. Bestow your wisdom on this House, let nothing stand in your way, and the Labour Party will be right there to support you to do whatever you tell it to do. I cannot wait to see what the Greens will teach us next.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.