Imprest Supply Debate

We are in the estimates debate, and we have been, for those people who are watching at home and following this debate, decrying the record of this Government and its failure to address the really big issues that are confronting New Zealand society. We have a Government here that is distracted by scandals, that is focused on cronyism, and that seems to be about employing its own folks, those with National Party connections, to many of the top jobs.

The Skycity deal that has been struck is one that is recent in our minds, and we can see there the way that that deal has been skewed—skewed—towards Skycity, which knew that it had the Government over a barrel. It knew it did. Skycity knew that the Government had politically committed to doing the deal with it. The Government stepped outside the normal transparent process for tendering and said to Skycity: “It’s you or nobody.”, effectively. And Skycity—well, it is a business operator; of course it maximised the deal.

But we see now that in Australia, where similar deals are done, there is a price to pay for extending the gambling rights for as long as Skycity has extended them, on top of the additional gaming machines and tables. Skycity has got a steal. It has got an absolute steal out of this Government, because the Government has backed itself into a corner, it has done a shady deal, and the taxpayers of New Zealand are left picking up the bill.

That is just one example. There are so many more. The Government Communications Security Bureau scandal, which is dogging the Government right now, has the Government wondering where it is going to go next, because one minute John Key does not seem to know what is going on, then it turns out that he has had a conversation with his staff member but it is not officially a report or a meeting, and so the story goes on. John Key here is donkey deep—he is donkey deep. Ordinary New Zealanders do not know whether they can trust him any more, and they certainly do not want to be spied on in their own homes by an agency that is supposed to be protecting New Zealand’s interests.

Labour, on the other hand, has a plan. It will adopt a more hands-on strategy to make sure that ordinary people are put first. It will create hope and opportunities for New Zealanders. We will create more jobs and better wages, unlike this Government here, which is still sitting on higher unemployment than when it took office, despite all of the attempts to fudge the figures. Median wages are dropping. Inequality is higher than it has been at any time in recorded New Zealand history. This is not a just society, this is not a fair society, and this is not a society that reflects New Zealanders’ concern for social justice. National has let New Zealanders down. It has lost touch with the people who are struggling to meet the needs of their family or even to get a job.

I know that from my home town, as Dunedin gets more bad news today with another rail contract going overseas. As if the Hillside gutting was not enough, we now have Invermay in the past week losing 85 highly skilled jobs out of Dunedin. That is on the back of Steven Joyce saying that local institutions are imperative to support the development of a high-value regional economy. Well, that rings very hollow in Dunedin right now—that rings very, very hollow. And the Otago Daily Times—congratulations go to the Otago Daily Times, the local newspaper, New Zealand’s largest independent newspaper—is standing up. It is saying that enough is enough. It is time for central government to deliver on the empty promises it has been making. Regional New Zealand is hurting right now, and it is begging for a Government that has an economic development strategy, unlike this Government, which seems to have precisely none. It is not so long ago, just a matter of weeks, that New Zealand Post closures were also announced in Dunedin, and the shifting of the postal centre away from the regions, from the small towns, to be concentrated in Christchurch, where, of course, there is a housing issue.

This Government, while it is distracted by cronyism, while it is seeing median wages drop, while unemployment remains high, is not looking after the interests of ordinary New Zealanders. In the meantime, a David Shearer - led Labour Party is putting plans out there. It is saying that every child should be able to have a world-class education at their local school—every child should have a world-class education at their local school. Then we are saying that we will build affordable housing. We will tackle the housing issue. We will build 10,000 quality houses that are affordable, every year for the next 10 years. We will also make sure that there are warm, dry rentals for those people who are living currently in cold, damp homes. Well, I can tell you that that also will make a big difference in my home town of Dunedin. We are sick of the speculators. We are sick of the offshore speculators. We are also going to close down those loopholes and adopt policies like they have in the Pacific Islands and in Singapore, similar ideas to what are adopted in many countries close by. But this Government will not. It says: “Hands off! Hands off!”.

Let us look at the power market. Well, Mr Bridges over there is very quiet. He says nothing. I look across and I see Mr Bridges saying precisely nothing. He is very quiet on this now, but previously he has said that the New Zealand power market will work. He says that rising costs, which go up and up and up, are a result of a power market that is just not mature yet, and the Bradford reforms, which happened 15 years ago, just have not bedded in. Well, ordinary New Zealanders do not agree with that, Mr Bridges. What do you say now from across there? Silence from Mr Bridges again. He is stunned into silence because he knows he is on the wrong side of this argument.

Mr Key says that the prices New Zealanders are paying are fair. That is what Mr Key says. He says that the prices that ordinary New Zealanders are paying are fair. Ordinary New Zealanders do not agree with him, and I think Mr Key knows that he is wrong. If we listen, what does Mr Key have to say about that now? Mr Key? Precisely nothing. Mr Key is also stunned into silence because he knows that he is on the wrong side of this argument about power prices.

Well, Labour will take a hands-on approach to power prices. We will make sure that ordinary New Zealanders are paying a fair amount. We in this country used to have one of the cheapest power prices in the OECD—one of the cheapest. Now we are paying right up there, and that is because, since the Bradford reforms, power prices have gone up at twice the rate of inflation. They have gone up five times the rate of inflation in the last year, and that is in a time of dropping demand. It is unbelievable, but it is happening, and Mr Bridges and Mr Key think that it is all fair. They take their hands off and just watch those power prices skyrocket out of control, and that is as the assets are sold. As the assets—those precious energy generating assets that used to pay for our schools and hospitals—are sold offshore, the revenues dry up. Treasury says that it will send us backwards by $100 million a year—$100 million a year—and this Government is happy to let it happen. It is happy to let New Zealand taxpayer - owned companies be sold, for the assets to drift offshore, for the profits to drift offshore, and for the current account deficit to rise inexorably. This Government has lost touch with ordinary New Zealanders. It is selling off our best assets. It does not have a plan to address power prices. Mr Bridges is still silent. I can say “power prices” as many times as I like and Mr Bridges says nothing. Mr Key says nothing, but previously he said that he thinks that it is fair that New Zealanders are paying what they are paying for power right now, while people who cannot afford to turn on their heaters in their homes—and I talk to these people in my electorate—are saying that it is not fair.

We should be paying only what it costs to generate that power plus a fair return on assets. That is a fair model. That is what NZ Power proposes. That is the Labour model. I think that after two more winters, the New Zealand public will realise the benefits of this policy. They already do. They know that the average family will be $300 a week better off as a result of Labour’s NZ Power policy. They know that those affordable homes will matter for the struggling young Kiwis trying to get into houses. They know that the kinds of policies Labour wants to adopt, like pro-growth tax reform, will make a difference. They will make a difference, as will research and development tax credits and a capital gains tax that takes away speculation signals that are in the market and makes sure that productive business is supported. They know that universal KiwiSaver will help with New Zealand’s capital debt problem. They know that exchange rate issues need to be addressed.

Let us face it—this Government is not across all the portfolios. Mr Joyce came before the Finance and Expenditure Committee and did not have the answers prepared on the supplementary estimates. He asked for an extension. He was the only Minister to do that. He is stretched because he is fronting so much for a Government that is struggling. I moved a resolution, which is on the record of that select committee, that we postpone the meeting until such time as the Minister is across his portfolios.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Oh, you’re so clever.

And what did the Government members do, Mr Henare? What did they do? They voted it down. They said that they could not wait for Mr Joyce to get across his portfolios. They did not have that much time. Nobody has that much time. Mr Joyce is struggling and the Government members know that. They knew that, so they would not wait. They voted it down. They said: “We can’t postpone this meeting until such time as Mr Joyce is across his portfolios. We simply can’t do it.”

This Government is struggling. It is dogged by cronyism and dogged by dodgy deals. A Labour Government would take a hands-on approach and make sure—

Order! [Interruption] Order! The member’s time has expired.

That speech is a very good example of why one should not have too much coffee before 9 a.m. But I do have to thank Dr Clark, the previous speaker, for giving me the platform to just lay out some information that I think he and New Zealanders will be interested to hear.

The fourth Labour Government, from 1984 to 1990, saw power prices increase by 98.7 percent. The fourth National Government, from 1990 to 1999, saw power prices increase by, yes, 47 percent. The fifth Labour Government, from 1999 to 2008, saw power prices increase by 72 percent. The fifth National Government—the Government that is presently on the Treasury benches—from 2008 to the present has seen power prices increase by 16.2 percent. So when the previous speaker criticises the Bradford reforms, this graph will show you exactly what has happened. The Bradford reforms came in here, where we see that power prices actually decreased, and then, of course, a Labour Government came back into power and all the reforms in power that had come in were erased by what members opposite say was economic development, but what I would say was reckless spending—reckless spending.

Of course, members of the Opposition are out there talking about their potential electricity reforms, and it is wonderful. I say it is wonderful because we had Professor Wolak in Wellington last week, and no doubt those members are very much aware of the comments and reports that he has made. But in terms of the position that we have I think established through the Bradford reforms and then with the Brownlee reforms in 2009-10, Professor Wolak said to a symposium here in Wellington that he cannot see why New Zealand would want to turn its back on the electricity market structure it has now. [Interruption] Exactly. This is the man whom Labour says has backed up those members’ policy, whom they quoted, and whom they said was the one who described the price gouging of $4.3 billion coming out of consumers’ pockets, which he refuted, of course. He said: “I never gave that figure.”, but their policy made it look like it came from him.

So, anyway, we know that our electricity market structure does need continual work. The Electricity Authority is continuing to work on building to have an even more robust, competitive structure to it, which is going to have the benefit of lowering prices to consumers with regard to electricity. Professor Wolak certainly gave us the clear impression that we should not ditch what we have got, but continue to improve it.

I have to say that I really love what Pattrick Smellie said in the Stuff business desk, because he then talked about the Labour-Greens single-buyer electricity policy, and he said that it “has a problem. While it remains politically resonant with voters who perceive power companies as rapacious and inescapable, the American academic whose analysis is a key plank of the Labour-Greens NZ Power proposal says the Opposition parties have got it wrong. Not only that, but Stanford University’s Professor Frank Wolak—a top US electricity markets academic and a one-time regulator—says that despite repeated assertions to the contrary, he never concluded that power companies here had ripped off consumers to the tune of $4.3 billion over the mid-2000’s. Unfortunately, that $4.3 b figure has been the smoking gun fact around which the political argument for the policy has been built.”

So if I can paraphrase what he is saying: keep what you have got, and ditch the shonky, snake oil stuff that is being proposed. That was my paraphrase.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Who are you calling “Shon-key”?

I am calling you shonky. So tell me, in terms of this Government—which I believe has great momentum going forward—who would you believe and who would you trust? Let us not listen to Opposition members. Who has the weight of credibility? It is National. It is not Labour and the Greens. You will not hear them attack those energy policies with any credence, with any facts, or with any sense of real depth of data and figures. They have lost the battle over energy—they really have.

This Government has got momentum. It has weightiness, it has gravitas, and it has velocity. It is taking this country forward. We have policies that have traction. That is what is moving this country forward. Economic growth is the highest in 5 years, after going through the worst recession in 60 years, which everybody conveniently forgets. We have seen the highest growth in 5 years, comparable to Australia, and higher than for almost every other developed country. Our economy is forecast to grow between 2 percent and 3 percent a year over the next 4 years. Wages are growing, cost of living increases have been modest, and interest rates are at 50-year lows.

💬 Tim Macindoe: And what does Dr Clark have to say about that now?

I cannot hear what Dr Clark has to say. In fact, the cost of living data shows that consumer prices rose by just 0.7 percent in the year to June. That is phenomenal. It is a phenomenal benefit to the New Zealand consumer that prices have been held at such a low rate, and that during this point in time, over the last number of years since 2008, household income has risen 20 percent in these last 4 years, and is expected to rise by almost 20 percent in the next 4 years.

I would say that, yes, we have our challenges—we are obviously aware of those; even those of recent times, with Fonterra’s issues—and we know that we have come through some very difficult times in this country, but we are a resilient people. We are a people who are innovative and industrious, and we put our hand to the plough. We work hard and we come up with great ideas that give us a competitive edge. What this Government is doing through all of its many innovative streams of support, funding, and investment is building on that great quality that New Zealanders have.

As a Government, we are responsibly managing the Government’s books. When you understand that this Government actually participates in the economy to the tune of about 30 percent, it is very important to understand that the way we manage the Government accounts is incredibly important, not only to set an example but also to improve efficiencies and stop wastage in this country, so that we can certainly get better value for money. We are building a more competitive and productive economy, we are delivering better public services, and we are rebuilding Christchurch. We are building a stronger, more stable economy that can again weather global storms and deliver opportunities for New Zealanders.

This is God’s own country. It has been in the past, and it will be in the future, where New Zealanders can grow up in this land, they can seize opportunities, and they can be supported through an education system that ensures that they all succeed—five out of five are going to come through high school with a qualification that is going to enable them to get on to tertiary and further learning, and to gain skills and to gain employment. The employment area is one of great importance. It is good to see that more and more people are becoming employed here in New Zealand as this economy starts to deliver more and more for New Zealanders.

We are delivering progress and optimism. Yes, New Zealand households and businesses have faced some pretty challenging times in the past 5 years. Although these challenges remain, the economic recovery is gaining momentum, driven by low interest rates, investment, and strong export prices. We are very thankful right now to have the likes of the Hon Tim Groser working hard for the benefit of New Zealand. He is a man of incredible capacity and great international linkages and relationships, and he is able to work through and carry us through in terms of some of the issues we are facing in this current time.

I believe that the Budget that has been presented by the Hon Bill English is a great Budget for New Zealand and is progressing this country into a better and stronger state, for the benefit of all. Thank you.

It is a pleasure to rise to take a call in the dead of the morning to debate the Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill. The member who has just resumed his seat, Jonathan Young, said that this debate is a test of credibility and asked the question to New Zealanders: “Who do you trust?”. The answer is that they are not going to trust the party that is trying to legalise blanket surveillance on New Zealanders. They are not going to trust a Big Brother State that is intent on doing it to them, not doing it with them. They are not going to trust National’s A-team in the House this morning. We have got an expert on shears here. He has shorn lots of them. We have got Tau Henare sitting up the back. He is giving his full attention to the estimates debate. We have got Maurice Williamson sitting down the front, the greatest leader the National Party never had. If this is National’s A-team, the country’s economy is in trouble, because their recipe for economic success is simply to milk more cows. Well, man, this week we have learnt about the risks associated with that. It seems like the Government should be surveilling the dairy industry, not surveilling every telephone call that every New Zealander ever makes.

New Zealanders are sick to death of this Government; that is the long and short of it. They did not like Muldoon last time around, and they do not like Muldoon’s mokopuna this time around either.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: What was the last poll? 29 percent.

My goodness me! Tau Henare has woken up. That coffee must have finally found its way through.

We had the temerity of the previous speaker lecturing the Labour Party about power prices and crowing that National had put them up by only 16 percent in the last 4 years. That is far more than the rate of inflation, and the reason for that, as my colleague has said, is that National has presided over the worst economic performance in 50 years. The economy has been struggling to get out of first gear. It has not got out of first gear. When we look at unemployment—the human face of National’s failure—we see that it has changed from 3.4 percent under Labour to 7 percent under National. It is sticking very close to 7 percent now.

The Government’s economic prescription has failed. Why has it failed? Well, it is shatteringly simple, and it is rooted in inequality. The idea was, and it is a very old idea, that if you give tax cuts to the rich and put up GST on the poor, suddenly the wealth that is at the top will trickle down and enrich all. It did not work for Ronald Reagan’s America. It did not work for Margaret Thatcher’s Britain. It did not work for Ruth Richardson last time around, and it is not working now. It is not working because the top 10 percent got 40 percent of the extra money. That is unethical in a country where 270,000 children are growing up under the poverty line.

National’s greatest achievement in this term of office has been to shift massive financial resource from the poor to the rich—from the poor to the rich—to massively grow inequality in this country. So its constituents increasingly live behind big walls and razor wire with their security cameras. We are living in a surveillance State. Meanwhile ordinary New Zealanders are struggling to pay their ever-growing power bills and are coping with rental house prices.

Labour has the answer to those problems. It is very, very simple: build affordable homes. Let us cut through all the nonsense and just admit that we are not going to bring down house prices until supply increases and demand cools off. So that is why we are going to hit the speculators with a capital gains tax. Let me say it again—we are going to hit the property speculators with a capital gains tax. If they are offshore, non-resident speculators, they are not going to play in our sandpit, because we are going to put New Zealanders at the front of the queue. National’s spin machine has been in overdrive over that issue because, as the New Zealand Herald told us yesterday, two-thirds of New Zealanders think it is a fabulous idea that Kiwis ought to be able to buy a home and put down roots—the Kiwi dream—in their own country, not play second fiddle to some foreign plutocrat who slips a few bucks to the National Party.

Labour will bring down power bills. I have had enough of being lectured to by the grandchildren of Max Bradford. The Bradford regime had every opportunity to work. Goodness knows, the previous Labour Government did its best. It put David Caygill in as electricity commissioner, and there were several rounds of reforms to try to perfect the market. The very same Stanford University economist whom Jonathan Young referred to declared a couple of years ago, after massive analysis, that there was a 20 percent monopoly price premium built into that market because it was not competitive. After 15 years of tweaking, Mr Young, we have finally come to the conclusion that there is no way of tweaking it beyond monopoly. So we are going to have an agency called NZ Power, which will buy power at fair prices and sell it on to New Zealanders. That will take Kiwi power prices down by 300 bucks a year for the average family—over a month and a half of free power bills—if they vote Labour. Let us be clear. If New Zealanders want power prices to come down, if they want reasonably affordable housing, it is very simple: throw the bums out, and vote Labour.

Kiwis will not have a better life if they cannot earn a decent living. That is why Labour stands for more good high-wage jobs—more good high-wage jobs. We are not ashamed to have labour laws that allow unions to work on behalf of workers. Yes, National, hear us. Unions have a role to play in a modern workplace. We are not going to encourage scab labour. We are not going to sell down labour laws, just like we are not going to sell down personal freedoms and privacy.

💬 Hon Maurice Williamson: I was a member of “Nats for Shearer”, but I’m going with this man now. This man should be leader.

You know, some people cannot ever get over their own personal disappointments. Maurice Williamson is a living testament—a living testament—to the dogged belief in his own self-image. The problem is nobody else has been listening for about 10 years, and they are not listening now.

Before I finish I have to give a couple of minutes to the Hon Nathan Guy, my recent opposite number in the fisheries portfolio. He is going to get even with Tau Henare very soon, because Tau Henare backed that Ngāpuhi special on the foreign charter vessels bill. Let me talk about Nathan Guy’s three great stuff-ups in the fisheries sector. The first is snapper 1. There are 650,000 recreational fishermen or fisherwomen in New Zealand, of which I am a passionate member myself. That is 650,000 voters who will not be voting National because National has had the stroke of genius—the stroke of brilliance—of cutting their snapper bag limit from nine fish a day to just three—nine fish a day, to three. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to know that that is going to go down like a bucket of cold sick.

💬 Carol Beaumont: It has done.

It has done. National members are sweating because their email boxes are filling up with messages from perturbed recreational fisher people, saying: “Leave my snapper alone.” Well, the word is that Mr Guy earlier floated the boat—if you can forgive the pun—of a 10 percent cut in the commercial quota. The phones started ringing hot from National’s big business backers, and he backed off. And now it is all the recreational fishers who are getting it in the neck, and they are not happy. Strike one.

Strike two—we agree with National on trying to get rid of slave fishing. We agree with National about flagging foreign charter fishing boats into New Zealand law. We do not agree with National about doing a one-off sleazy deal for one iwi, which gives them another 4 years to impose slavery on the fishing industry. It is not going to work, and it is not going to stand. No matter what Tau Henare has been up to in the back rooms, I am hopeful that Nathan Guy is going to see sense and withdraw that iwi amendment from the foreign slave fishing bill.

His third great mistake has been the paua fishery. He did not have a decent consultation process before wanting—same story again—to increase the commercial quota and get the recreational and customary take down.

💬 Hon Members: Ooh!

Ooh, what a bad one. What is wrong with this National Party death wish in the fisheries portfolio? I predict that Nathan Guy will not be in that portfolio in a year’s time. I think his record of getting himself donkey deep in commercial interests and shafting recreational and customary interests is going to see him being reshuffled out of that portfolio.

I could go on and on and on and on about the failures of this Government, but you, Mr Deputy Speaker, would not let me, so I am going to round off now and just remind people that if you want Budget surpluses, if you want decent cheap housing, and—

Order! Your time has expired.

It is an honour to speak on the Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill. I would not be doing justice if I did not reply to some of the comments Mr Cunliffe has made. May I first congratulate him on his leadership pitch here this morning, but with two fellow travellers in his camp, that man will not be leader—not in the next week, not in the next month, and likely not this century. But he has some skills, and he has pointed out what a great job this Government is doing. It is a pleasure to talk about real leadership, not the fake leadership that that man just demonstrated. Real leadership comes from the Prime Minister, John Key, by focusing on the things that matter. While members opposite focus on leaks, scaremongering, and leadership spills within the Labour Party, the National Government continues to focus on the economy, on jobs, on opportunities for our people, and on the crisis that has hit this country with the Fonterra milk scare. We are showing leadership in that department.

This Budget legislation confirms what most New Zealanders know. The 50 percent who say in polls that they would vote for National—not the 30 percent who would vote for Labour—want leadership. They want demonstrated, proven, and sound leadership, and John Key demonstrates that every day that he is out in our communities, and every day that he is in this House and in the Beehive leading our country. This legislation confirms that we are on the right track. We are on the right track with economic growth, we are on the right track with more jobs being created, and we are on the right track in terms of the rising wages that are occurring in this country.

Members opposite have asked: “Where are the jobs?”. Well, the jobs are online and in newspapers. I looked at SEEK before I came down to the House this morning. There are 16,255 jobs available on SEEK—12,956 of those are full-time, 1,027 are part-time, and 2,000 are contract jobs. Over 16,000 jobs are out there in our communities, and those are just the advertised jobs. There are thousands of other jobs available, and the issue is that we need to get people skilled and we need to get people motivated to take up those jobs that are on offer in our communities.

We are responsibly managing the Government’s books, and we know that we are going to reach a projected surplus in the next 2 financial years. We are building a more competitive and productive economy—

💬 Carol Beaumont: Tell that to the 146,000 people who are unemployed—146,000 unemployed.

—and trying to create jobs out there, whether it be mining or whether it be convention centres. All I know is that members opposite, including Ms Beaumont, cannot stand the fact that we are creating an environment where jobs are being created. People are taking on jobs, they are feeding and clothing their families, and they are independent from the former Labour Government, which promoted reliance and dependence on that Government.

So what are we doing? What are we doing in terms of housing? When I go around my electorate in Maungakiekie, housing affordability is a real issue. And we know—

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: That’s Carol Beaumont’s electorate.

Carol Beaumont did not get voted in. I love it—I love it! Carol Beaumont is running in Manukau East. The people in Manukau East know it. She is going for selection in Manukau East. She might live in Epsom South, but she is running for Manukau East.

Anyway, we know that 39,000 houses need to be built in the next 3 years. What is this Government doing? We are working with councils. There is a housing accord with Auckland Council, whereby we are going to free up land and special housing areas. That is particularly important because housing affordability is critical to our economic growth. It is critical to the lives of New Zealanders, particularly in my community in Maungakiekie. It critical to those who want to have their own homes. So what are we doing? We are streamlining the Resource Management Act. Amy Adams is reducing red tape around the building of new houses—and this is supported by Nick Smith—by introducing 6-month consenting limits for medium-sized projects. We know that the Hon Maurice Williamson is also doing a fine job in the building sector, bringing together parties who are looking to build houses at lower cost and to build those houses faster through a consenting process that supports economic growth.

We are launching an inquiry into building material costs. We know that the cost of building houses in New Zealand is 30 percent higher than in Australia. So we have asked the question. We are inquiring into it, we are investigating that, and we will bring a review that will make changes to the building industry. We are also reviewing development contributions and compliance costs because we know that red tape and bureaucracy dampens development. I have talked to the developers in South Auckland. I have talked to the developers in Maungakiekie. They are telling me that red tape and bureaucracy is the worst thing that can occur, because it dampens development, dampens economic growth, and dampens jobs.

This Government is about investing in skills to boost the productivity of the construction sector. Onehunga High School, my local high school, has a building and construction school that supports the industry in terms of building more houses faster. We also have trades academies across this nation. I have talked to those young kids. The Prime Minister and I visited Onehunga High School 2 months ago, and after talking to the kids we know that they are aspirational, they want jobs, and they want to participate in our communities. That is why the programmes that National is delivering in this Budget are working, and New Zealanders know it.

The other thing that this Government is doing is creating an economic framework from which jobs and opportunities can be created—an economic framework. We have seen some of the lowest interest rates in New Zealand for a number of years. It is those interest rates that save money for those who are paying mortgages. We have a low inflation rate—the lowest inflation rate. Low inflation and low interest rates mean that when businesses make investment decisions, and when they make decisions in terms of hiring people, they know that they are making those decisions with a greater degree of certainty, confidence, and trust, not just in the Government but in the economy.

Labour members are silent on this. What they are not silent on is their anti-growth policies. They are anti-growth. They belong in the pockets of the faceless men in the unions of this country. Mr Cunliffe, in the speech he has just made, referred to the unions because he is in their pockets. He needs the unions to defeat Shearer in a leadership spill. That is why he mentions the unions in every speech he makes in this House. It is disgusting. Labour members talk about cronyism—well, that is disgusting. So Mr Cunliffe should think seriously about the speeches he makes in this House that refer to the faceless men who support him.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Keep a straight face, Sam.

That is right. We know that economic growth is the highest in 5 years, that it compares well with Australia, and that it is higher than in almost every other developed country—every other developed country. I challenge members opposite to go for a visit to America, to Europe, and to parts of Africa, and they will realise what a great country we live in. They will realise what a good, sound Government we have—one that is promoting growth and opportunities in this country—and they will realise that wages are growing and cost of living increases have been extremely modest in the last few years.

My colleague Mr Young referred to the low inflation rate—0.7 percent in the last year. So we know that this Government is on the right track. We know that we are promoting growth and opportunities. But we also know that we are a Government that has compassion. We are a Government that is insulating 46,000 more homes for low-income families, with a $100 million investment in this Budget. We know that we are a Government that is increasing budget advisory services—one of the biggest issues in my electorate office—by 17 percent, which equates to over $10.5 million.

We know that this is a compassionate Government. It is providing over $190 million over 4 years for welfare reforms. Why? Because we are work testing people in order to get them back into work. What are we doing also? We are providing $46.8 million for extra income-related rent subsidies, which will open up the community housing sector to provide for those families that are most in need. So this Government is delivering warmer, drier homes, and it is delivering subsidised homes for those most in need in our society.

I summarise by saying that this Government, with this Budget, is delivering on the issues that matter to all New Zealanders. We are a compassionate Government. We have got sound, prudential, conservative policies that are delivering for New Zealanders right across this country. Thank you.

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The next call is a 5-minute call.

There are times when I listen to speeches in this House and I do, indeed, feel as though I am living on another planet. I have just heard the member for Maungakiekie, and I do believe he is living on “Planet Key”, that same planet that has no toilets and has nobody who needs to clean the toilets. His is a different world, indeed, from the world I live in and the world that many people I speak to live in.

I want to speak today about inequality and how it has been grown by this Government, and the agenda it has to benefit the wealthy of this country. I want to point to the latest NBR New Zealand Rich List announced a couple of weeks ago, which saw an increase of $3.5 billion in total minimum net worth in 2012 amongst the rich listers in this country. Their combined value is now worth $47.9 billion. I think it is also worth noting that there are no individual women in that top 10. We are being fed this message from this Government and previous Governments that, well, these people at the top, they have earned this and they have contributed so much to New Zealand that they are worth this money.

I would like to point them to some UK research quoted in the book Inequality: A New Zealand Crisis, by Max Rashbrooke. It looks at different returns on investment from different areas of work. It says that British researchers have found that highly paid investment bankers, by engaging in predatory lending and contributing to financial crises, have actually destroyed £7 of wider social economic and environmental value for every £1 they have created. That is a net loss from some of the wealthiest people in Western economies, who have sucked out £7 worth of value from that wider economy for every £1 they have contributed. That is in contrast to, say, very low-paid staff workers in childcare centres, who nurture the future generations. They add. For every £1 they are given, they contribute between £7 and £9.50 in value.

Those are the values that this Government is perpetuating—this misplaced emphasis and value on the people who are actually sucking wealth from our shared collective contribution. They are sucking out that wealth and channelling it to themselves. That is who is being valued by this Government in New Zealand. It is really important to note that this is not just a foreign problem; this is an issue in this country. Currently, the top 5 percent of the population in New Zealand own over 50 percent of New Zealand’s net worth—50 percent. The top 5 percent in New Zealand—5 percent—own half of the net worth in this country. I do not believe that that is justifiable. I do not believe that anybody has worked hard enough that 5 percent should own 50 percent. The bottom 50 percent of New Zealanders own—let us see, take a guess—5 percent of our shared wealth, and 20 percent of children in this country are living in inequality and poverty.

It does not have to be this way. The policies of this Government create this inequality, and it does not serve any of us because we all lose out from inequality. It shows up in higher crimes rates, it shows up in a lack of recycling, and it shows up in teen pregnancy rates. It shows up in a huge range of social measures that we all lose out from. If we would only take some sensible initiatives like introducing a capital gains tax, increasing the bargaining powers of workers to be able to get more of a fair claim of that wealth, changing our monetary policy, and investing in regional economic initiatives, then maybe we could actually have a society where everyone had a fair share, recognising that it was a collective wealth to begin with.

I want to first congratulate the new member for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti and welcome her to the House, to what is a robust debating chamber. I do hope that the new member enjoys her time in Parliament. I did sit and enjoy the member’s maiden statement last evening. It was a good speech. It was a Labour speech, and it called very strongly for quality jobs for that member’s electorate, and I could not disagree with that. In fact, I could not agree more with that call for quality jobs, so I am a little surprised that the call for quality jobs by that member in her maiden statement is not really supported by the actions of the Labour Party.

My colleague Sam Lotu-Iiga very helpfully passed on some information that I am very interested in. He was able to tell me that on Stuff’s work website this morning there were 16,255 jobs offered for all of New Zealand. Of those, there were 12,956 full-time jobs on offer on that website. Those are just the advertised ones, obviously. There are many other jobs out there for those people, and there are a number of people who cannot work or choose not to work full-time. There are well over 1,000 part-time jobs on offer, well over 2,000 contracting jobs on offer, and 128 casual jobs on offer. Go to the website, have a look, go down, have an interview, and see how you go. I know that that member was encouraging people in her electorate to have a go and to find work.

I was also a little dismayed with that speech and the lack of support by the Labour Party for the sentiments expressed in that member’s speech. Moana Mackey, for example, who I know assisted the member in her campaign efforts around the Gisborne area, has been unrelentingly—unrelentingly—against any further oil and gas exploration on the North Island’s East Coast. The member Moana Mackey spares no occasion to oppose oil and gas exploration, which makes me wonder how many jobs for New Zealanders are involved in oil and gas exploration on the East Coast of New Zealand. How many economic opportunities arise—

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Quality jobs.

—quality jobs, as my colleague mentions. They are quality jobs, well-paying jobs, jobs that have a future, jobs that have a training pathway, and jobs that will provide security for families.

Why is it, then, that on the one hand one member of the Labour Party is calling for quality jobs in her new electorate, but on the other hand the rest of the Labour Party is actively—actively—campaigning against those very quality jobs? They are jobs, yes, but they are also careers. Why is it that on the one hand Labour decries the lack of job opportunities when, clearly, there are jobs out there, but on the other hand the rest of the caucus, not just one member but the rest of the caucus, is actively—and I could bring some speeches to the House. In fact, I might do that and table them at a later date—perhaps this afternoon. They are actively campaigning against the very thing that will underpin the economic—

💬 Carol Beaumont: How about regional economic development?

They do not like it—they do not like it. Labour members do not like this Government pointing out the obvious. In fact, Labour does not like any policies that are going to promote jobs and are going to promote growth in the New Zealand economy.

Let us just go through a few of those policies that Labour will oppose. Of course, Labour plans, if it gets into Government, which seems less and less likely, as it is sitting on 29 percent—it is bad to be back in the 20s. But in the event—[Interruption] Well, yes. But in the event that it ever did take a junior partnership with the Greens to form—to deform—a coalition Government from hell, the first thing they would do would be to dramatically increase the effect of the emissions trading scheme. Of course, they would do that on our trade-exposed businesses. We work in a global economy, but Labour, yes, it plans to lead the world in the emissions trading scheme and absolutely hobble all our trade-exposed economies, including our manufacturing, and including our agricultural industries. So that is the first thing it will do. It will also impose additional costs on New Zealand households. The impact of its changes to the emissions trading scheme would have something to the effect of an increase of around $500 per annum to the New Zealand household. How does that sit with the new member? How does that policy go with her?

Labour plans to introduce a capital gains tax on all productive businesses. What kind of impact is that going to have on productive business? Well, I will tell you what impact it is going to have. It is going to suppress investment, so I would call that a very anti-growth policy.

Labour, together with the Greens, intends on abandoning sensible monetary policy. They want to intervene, they want to interfere, and they want to print money because they think that is the answer—deep thinkers over on that side of the House. Of course, what impact will that have? It will force down the value of the New Zealand dollar for a while and completely destroy any credibility that the New Zealand economy has in the international market place.

Labour and the Greens—or the Greens and Labour, I should now say, because the polls are really shifting the balance across the other side—would propose to nationalise the power industry. Well, what a bright idea that one was. That would have the immediate impact of destroying any competition within the power industry—that competition that is now just coming in. It is being very effective. You can see that with the reforms that the Hon Gerry Brownlee has brought in. We now have an electricity market that is working far better than anything the previous Labour Government could achieve in its last 9 years. It would absolutely destroy and discourage any investment in the New Zealand electricity industry. Innovation? Do not bother. Investment? Why would you bother when there is a single electricity purchaser who is going to wipe out any incentives for any kind of innovation in the New Zealand electricity industry? What is going to happen? I will tell you what is going to happen. The price of electricity is going to rise. It is another anti-growth, anti-competitive, dog-whistle policy, ill-considered, not thought through, and destined to fail. And guess what? My constituents in Waitaki can see right through it.

Labour and the Greens want to borrow more money. They want to borrow more money. They want to indebt future generations of New Zealanders so that they can buy nice stuff now. That is what Labour wants to do. It wants to go back to that borrow, hope, and spend policy that it was so effective at in the 2000s. Labour wants to go back there again. Well, I can tell you that New Zealanders are wiser than that. They have chosen a Government that has got sound economic growth policies.

So what are this Government’s economic growth policies? Unlike Labour, which does not, frankly, know what it stands for or where it wants to go—or, in fact, who its leader should be; it still has that little problem looming over it, it is very confused about that—this Government is absolutely united. We know what we need to do. We need to build a more competitive economy. We need to build a productive economy that gives New Zealand businesses the tools that they need to grow and invest and, by the way, create more jobs and hire more staff.

The reality for New Zealand is that we are a very small nation at the bottom of the world. We are an exporting nation—we always will be—based on agriculture, and National is supporting businesses. Our intention is to support businesses so that they can have an impact on the world stage, and so that they can compete internationally for trade coming to New Zealand. Our Minister of Trade, Tim Groser, has been extremely effective in opening up new markets to New Zealand business. The results are beginning to show, and this country is absolutely on the right track. We have got a very strong level of confidence in the New Zealand economy. Our economy is in good shape. Thank you.

The next call, by my list, is a Green call, and it is a 5-minute call. You are seeking the call, Mr Hague?

Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would love to seek it. Thank you very much. By my reckoning it was another two calls away.

I have recently had a series of questions for written answer directed to all Cabinet Ministers, asking them what meetings they have held with the organisation Crosby/Textor, which we know, of course, is an organisation that in the UK has had a very close relationship with the UK Government, lots of contact with UK Ministers, and which also has been representing the tobacco industry. So it certainly seems a relevant question to ask here. I have not got all of the answers back yet, but some of them have been of the form: “I have not met with Crosby/Textor.”, and good on those Ministers. There are other Ministers who have responded: “I have not met Crosby/Textor in my ministerial capacity.” Of course, that is technically a sound answer, but it does beg the question, does it not, of what capacity they may have met Crosby/Textor in. Indeed, one suspects that they may have met Crosby/Textor in their capacity as members of a political party that is desperate to retain power at any cost.

I am interested, of course, in analysing the advice Crosby/Textor may have given on the basis of this Government’s actions. It seems like a simple plan. One part of the plan is to demonise and penalise those members of our society whom the Government believes its voters do not like. That is why we have seen the beneficiary bashing. That is why we have seen the rhetoric against workers and against unions. That is why we have seen the ongoing rhetoric about being tough on crime. That is actually where this Government comes from. It believes that its voters do not like those things and so that is what it talks about.

Another strand of the strategy has got to be a bunch of measures aimed at advantaging National’s mates. That is why we have seen the weakening of worker protections, the lowering of wages, and the weakening of environmental protections. That is all about driving down the costs of business at the expense of our environment, and at the expense of labour, which, of course, is working people. That is why we have seen tax cuts for the rich. That is why we have seen some of the appalling cronyism in this last term of Government. One thinks, for example, of the appointment of Susan Devoy as Race Relations Commissioner, without ostensibly having any qualifications whatsoever for that role. That is why we have seen this gross abuse of proper process around the Skycity convention centre deal. That is why we have seen the appointment of Ian Fletcher—the Prime Minister’s childhood friend, a person who was not even shortlisted for the role—as the head of the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB). That sort of cronyism is another part of this Government’s plan.

Speaking of the GCSB, we are in this House at the moment debating the Government Communications Security Bureau and Related Legislation Amendment Bill, a bill that, amongst other things, greatly expands the role of the GCSB into economic areas, and that is a chilling intrusion into the rights of New Zealanders. On all of the other issues, besides the ones that are about demonising National’s opponents and advantaging its mates—areas like the economy, health, and education—National approaches those on the basis of political ideology.

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Look, I will just pause you here because I am working off a list that has another Green call further on. I am not sure whether this is the one you assumed—whether it is a 5-minute or a 10-minute call. Do you have another Green speaker?

Yes, we do—10 minutes.

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Right, then yours is a 5-minute call.

How long do I have?

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: 1 minute.

Thank you very much. So all other issues are approached purely from the point of political ideology and that is not in the interests of New Zealanders. Where has all the rhetoric gone about rebalancing the economy? Where is the rhetoric now about the underclass in New Zealand? We do not hear that any more. We ask ourselves the question, who is this Government actually for? The answer is that this Government is for its mates. This is not a Government for New Zealanders. It is not a Government intended to advantage this country now or in the long term. Thank you.

Are we going to have another call? Wake up, Mr Auchinvole.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: I had understood—my apologies—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): The member has not called yet. Would he like to call.

My hesitation was because I understood—I am sorry—that there was to be a further Green speaker, but in that absence, I am more than happy to fill that gap.

I recall attending a presentation by a Governor of the Reserve Bank in Greymouth—I think it was in about 2003—and the governor spoke of economic challenges. I remember that he was asked to describe or quantify what a challenge was, exactly, and he responded that it was any economic activity or event that impacted on the normal state of the economy. He was then asked, in true West Coast interrogative style, to describe what the normal state of an economy is or was. His response was that the economy was in a normal state when all of the elements were typically in balance. He was then asked if that ever occurred or was it a mythical concept, or was it a bit like the typical summer we all remember as occurring during our childhood that never occurs nowadays. He thought for a while and then agreed that it was, in fact, like the typical summer that we all remember, for an economy to be in a normal state.

Well, what a series of challenging economic events this Government has had to deal with. New Zealand businesses, families, and individuals have all faced the effects—the buffeting effects—of the global financial crisis, the devastating Christchurch earthquake, and continuing global uncertainty. Each of those things on their own would have had an enormous impact on the economy. Any of these things individually could have had a calamitous result when one considers the fragile and failing state of the economy this Government was given, handed, to manage as Labour left the Treasury benches.

It would have been easy and understandable if New Zealand had spiralled downwards like other economies through the developed world did. There was, however, a further event that occurred during the same period that was to have a major impact on how the economy behaved, and that was the election of a National-led Government under the prime ministership of the Rt Hon John Key, with the Hon Bill English as the Minister of Finance and a very strong and professional, committed grouping of Cabinet Ministers.

History has continued to play out since that event, from the Prime Minister’s commitment to look after everybody and create a brighter future for New Zealand, to embarking on a programme to build momentum in the economy. Budget 2013 is a momentum-building Budget. The Budget confirms that New Zealand is on the right track, with forecasts of economic growth, an increase in jobs, rising wages, and a return to surplus by 2014-15. There is a firm commitment to having a Government focus on four main priorities: responsibly managing the Government’s books, building a more competitive and productive economy, delivering better public services, and rebuilding Christchurch. National is building towards having a stronger, more stable economy that can weather global economic storms and deliver opportunities, higher incomes, and more jobs for New Zealanders. Budget 2013 continues our work to build a brighter future for Kiwi families.

I think everyone realises, because the wonderful thing about Parliament is that we all come from different parts of the country, that the challenges have spread through the country at a different rate, with different periods of effect, and at different times have affected different regions. On the West Coast and in Tasman, the area that I live in, the ripples of the Christchurch earthquake were not restricted to that fair city. Indeed, I think it would be fair to say that they were felt throughout the South Island and, indeed, into the North Island, as well. But our second-largest city in the country is, in fact, a tertiary centre for the whole of the South Island, and its recovery is crucial to all families who live and earn a living in the south, and we are very, very cognisant of that.

The work that has been done—and I had the privilege of chairing the committee that set up the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, or reported to the Government on the establishment of that authority, and from then on the energy that has poured into Christchurch has been fantastic. We very much are in step with the people who are living out their family lives in that city as it changes and continues to change.

The Coast economy held up very well, with very high household incomes, prior to the economic storm gripping the mining industry and then the dairying sector suffering its first drought on record. The closure of a major employer in Westport, although not unexpected—and put off for a further 2 years—has come eventually at a cruel time for the families concerned. The trick, however, while one is weathering the difficult times, is to recognise that the right hands are on the tiller in Government. Things are improving and will continue to do so.

Let us look at some of those focus points that we are talking about. There are additional measures to build a more competitive and productive economy. ACC levy cuts will leave another $300 million in the economy for businesses and households in 2014-15, increasing to around $1 billion next year. In the West Coast - Tasman, although we do have an extremely large employer in the form of Talley’s and in the form of the major coalminers, most of our businesses are small and most are family businesses. ACC cuts will be something that really will make a difference.

We have allocated $1.5 billion of proceeds from the successful Mighty River Power share offer to Christchurch hospitals, irrigation infrastructure, upgrading schools, and the KiwiRail Turnaround Plan. Although I am not trying to be selfish about these things, other South Islanders will recognise the significance of those events to people who live down there. The railway is a very important part of our lives. Christchurch Hospital is, as I have already said, a tertiary centre for the rest of the South Island, irrigation infrastructure will increase opportunities for more productive farming throughout Canterbury, and I think the schools upgrade will probably be of greater benefit to Christchurch than to anywhere else.

💬 Dr Megan Woods: Really? Thanks for reminding us of that.

The member across the House is agreeing with everything I say, which is nice to see. But, yes, it is good that we will have those opportunities for development in the South Island. Gosh, they deserve it.

Meridian will be the next company prepared for a partial share sale to New Zealand investors later this year. Let us hope that we do not see the sorts of spoiler tactics that we saw last time, which almost—almost—sort of reached the stage of being malicious, I think, in the Kiwi mind. They almost reached the stage of being malicious. So that money will then be available for vital infrastructure, without further increasing our debt.

Legislation to improve housing affordability has been frequently spoken of here. There is a memorandum of understanding with the Reserve Bank Governor confirming a range of measures, if needed, to protect the economy from periods of excesses and growth in credit and housing prices, reduce reliance on unstable sources of funding, and require banks and other financial institutions to better manage their own risks.

It is significant that I began by speaking about the Reserve Bank Governor and, coming to the end of the speech, that I am ending with the same thing, because it is about the stability of New Zealand’s economy. This Budget does a lot to help it. There was talk this morning on the radio about what would happen if there was a change of Government. I would just like to close with a comment from my Labour neighbours, whom I have a lot of fun with, especially in the duck-shooting season and that sort of thing. We were having a chat one day, and they said: “Oh, well, if the court case works, you could be without one of your MPs, and that would mean that you would lose your majority. What are you going to do then?”. I said: “Well, I guess what would happen then is there could easily be an election, and then you guys could get in and you could form a Government with the Green Party.” Their response was immediate, spontaneous, and honest. They said: “To hell with that.” I said: “But they’re your guys.” They said: “We’re not ready, and we don’t want to be with them.” This is the voter. I can only conclude by putting it the way they put it to me: “We need a strong Government. We need a firm Government. We might not like you very much, as National, but that’s what you are giving us.” And that is what we will continue to get. Thank you.

It is my pleasure to rise after my fellow southern MP Chris Auchinvole and perhaps address what Budget 2013 meant for us in the South Island and, more broadly, what Budget 2013 meant for New Zealanders. It was a Budget of no vision. It was a Budget that laid out a series of contracts. That is the way in which these people choose to govern. Members opposite are nodding their heads, like this is a good thing. This is the way this Government has chosen to govern: a willing seller and a willing buyer. It is as simple as that for the Government. We have seen it in the creation of charter schools. We have seen it in the fact that we have sold out the education of our young people to a willing seller and a willing buyer. We have seen it in the dodgy deal around Skycity. What we have is a Government that is not about government for the people and for all people; it is about government for its mates and finding the best deal on the table.

What we have been told by members opposite is that Budget 2013 was a momentum-building Budget, and that it was all part of this brighter future. Well, this is something that we fail to see. Budget 2013 was a continuation of letting ordinary New Zealanders down. It was a Budget by a Government that has lost touch with people who are struggling to make ends meet, to meet the needs of their families, and to even get a job. The Government is more interested in looking after its mates than your mates. It has sold off our assets, it has given tax cuts to the most wealthy, and it has grown the gap between rich and poor. This is not something anyone can be proud of. [Interruption]

I think the barracking across the House was asking for me to tell you about what Labour would have done. Well, I am more than happy to give you some kind of sketch of what Labour’s vision for New Zealand is. Labour will do something to address the fact that people in this country cannot afford a roof over their heads. Labour will take real action. It will not have just rhetoric. It will be a Government that is hands-on, and it will lead the building of 100,000 houses in this country over 10 years. We are not content to sit idly by and wait for the magic contract to land on the table, while ordinary New Zealanders are shut out of the housing market. This is something that any Government has a moral obligation to do something about. A Labour Government will step up. A Labour Government will be a hands-on Government that will do something about this.

Labour will finally do something to lower ordinary New Zealanders’ power bills. In my electorate I know there are homes that people simply should not be living in. There are homes that have 90 percent humidity overnight and a temperature of nine degrees. This is not a level of heat that I am willing for my constituents to live in. This is not healthy. This is not something that any New Zealander should be willing to tolerate in their country. The member who spoke before me, Chris Auchinvole, talked about what Budget 2013 meant for South Islanders. Well, for South Islanders struggling through yet another cold South Island winter, trying to pay their power bills, there was absolutely nothing—zero, zilch—in there to address the very real problem of people not being able to pay their power bills.

We will, under Labour, have a Government that will be committed to creating high-wage jobs. We will have a Government that is committed to skills training, that is really committed to the tertiary education sector, and that will do everything in its power to match workforce requirements with the kinds of skills training we need in this country. What we will not have under a Labour-led Government is a Government like we have now, which is ripping tertiary education out of our regional centres. We have had tertiary education provision taken away from a whole list of regions. Canterbury, Gisborne, Hawke’s Bay, Nelson, Marlborough, the West Coast, Otago, Taranaki, Waikato, and Wellington are all regions that now have less tertiary education provision in those regions after this Government came to power. These are also regions that have high levels of unemployment.

You would think that offering some kind of training at level 1 and 2 foundation provisions would be a priority for this Government, but, no, it is not. It has done a competitive tender to the private sector through private training establishments, and it has shifted the money to urban centres. Once again, this is a Government that is leaving the regions of New Zealand to flounder, with absolutely no commitment to them.

Labour will also be a Government that will be committed to giving all kids a great start in life. We cannot sit idly by while the Minister for Social Development comes to this House, question time after question time, and gives funny answers about whether or not she is measuring poverty, and meanwhile more and more children in this country are born into a life of poverty and their lives are a challenge. We will extend paid parental leave. We will make sure that kids have a great start in life. We will have a real and meaningful focus on early childhood education. We will ensure that every school is world class, and we will have the proper supports in place for parents.

One of the things that have been listed by members opposite, when they rattle off the four priorities of this Government and where Budget 2013 is putting its money, is the recovery of Christchurch. Being the member of Parliament for Wigram I cannot help but address some of this. I would like to see some real action. I would encourage the Government to give some real action to addressing the housing crisis in Christchurch. The Minister will not call it a crisis. He calls it a challenge. Frankly, I do not care if he calls it Harry. I want him to do something about it. I have my constituents living in garages, I have my constituents living in cars, and I have my constituents living in overcrowded houses. This is a Government that thinks the market is going to fix an absolute crisis in housing in a city where it is simply failing.

Members opposite need to wake up to the fact that there is market failure. It is absolutely negligent of them to sit back and wait for some magic market fix that is not coming. Meanwhile, people are not living in any kind of accommodation that I would call acceptable, from what I have seen in the course of being a member of Parliament over the last 18 months.

We need to see the problems around the Earthquake Commission addressed. People have simply been waiting for far too long. There are problems. We need to find real solutions. People cannot live with the messy situations that their lives are in for much longer. People deserve some certainty in their lives, and to have a start where they can rebuild. That is what Christchurch people want. Then to hear the member talk about the investment in Christchurch schools, the alleged $1 billion investment. This is not $1 billion worth of new money. Half of that money is money that would have been coming to Christchurch anyway. So let us actually have some honesty in this discussion. It is money that was in the 5-year plan, so it would have been there, with or without the reorganisation plan.

What we have is a Government that has run roughshod over community after community in Christchurch. We have communities that escaped the earthquake that this Government has come in and destroyed by closing those schools. What we now need to do is get behind those schools. We need to get behind those communities. We need to make sure that actually what we are doing is building community, and that we are not leaving them to flounder. I can tell you, the scars run deep throughout the city because of the schools’ reorganisation. Phillipstown—the member opposite might like to ponder on—is currently before the courts, seeing whether it can stop the Government’s closure of its school. It is a school that is in Christchurch Central. A community is no longer going to have the option to send their children to be educated at the school in their community. It is simply not good enough that this is what this Government has chosen to do. This is not about rebuilding communities.

I actually think we need to see some real action from the Government on many aspects of the recovery of Christchurch. We all accept that things are going to take time, that there has been a huge disaster in Christchurch, and a mammoth effort is required, but the fact that people do not have proper houses to live in is not something that I can sit idly by and say nothing about. We have to see some action on housing. What we need throughout this country, as well as in Christchurch, is a Government that is prepared to be hands-on, that is prepared to show some leadership, and that has a vision. That will be a Labour-led Government, and it will be after the next general election. Thank you.

Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker. Kai a koe e hoa, e Mita, nui atu te mihi ki a koe mō tō haerenga mai i roto i te Whare o te Raiona. Nō reira, nau mai, haere mai. Ngā mihi, ngā mihi, ngā mihi ki a koe.

[Greetings to you, Mr Assistant Speaker. To you, colleague Mita, an overwhelming tribute to you for coming into the House of the Lion. So welcome, welcome. Acknowledgments, greetings, and salutations to you.]

I want to talk first about the farmer-hater whom I heard in the House this morning, David Cunliffe—that man who so wants to be the leader of the Labour Party. You know, he railed against the rich in his speech. He railed against the rich, and told us how he loves the poor. But he does not want to live in New Lynn. He does not want to live with the poor people in New Lynn. He would rather live in Westmere—[Interruption] Oh, I am sorry; it is Herne Bay.

I love it when we see the Labour Party members get on their hind legs and yell out: “We are against mining. We don’t want to see any oil exploration or any mining in our electorates.” Do you know what? That same day they go to the airport and wave goodbye to their sons and daughters and their nieces and nephews who are going to Australia so that they can go and get mining jobs. For goodness’ sake! Those members think that that is the way to prosperity.

If you were to listen to the speeches we have heard this morning, and it is undoubted that we do not listen to them—or many people, anyway—this country is in dire straits. This country is falling over. So why do we have 3 percent growth? Why are we projected to have growth in the next few years of 2 to 3 percent? If that was the case, if our country was a basket case, we would be going backwards economically. All those members can do is say to foreign investors—and, mark my words, it is not the investment of me and my mates in New Zealand; it is actually the foreign investment—

💬 Hon Member: All your rich crony mates.

—all my rich mates out in Te Atatū North—it is the foreign investors. It is the investment money that comes from overseas that makes us the country we are. Labour’s big policy announcement—and I know that it resounds well with the general public, and that goes for any country—is to say that the housing problem is all foreigners. It is due to foreign investment. It is due to the foreigner buying a house in New Zealand as an investment. I have not once heard any Labour MP talk about greenfields and brownfields. I have not heard one Labour MP talk about freeing up land so we can build houses, so people can have what you and I had, which is the opportunity to purchase your first home. Once you have got your first home, the world is your oyster.

Labour members talk about Skycity. Listen, we in Auckland and in New Zealand get a free—listen up—a free convention centre. It is a world-class convention centre, with thousands of jobs not only in the building of that place but also in the running of that place. The downstream jobs that come out of that are enormous—are enormous. For what? For a couple of hundred extra pokie machines. I tell you what. When the pokie machine number is all tallied up, it is still less than it was 10 or so years ago. So what is the big deal?

The Government Communications Security Bureau—I see in the papers for the last week there have been some warnings from the United States of America over some terrorist attacks that might happen. I wonder where and I wonder how it got that information. It did not just think about it. It got an intelligence-gathering machine. That is how you protect your nation. The hysteria that is being thrown around by the Labour Party and the Green Party about mass surveillance—it is not going to happen. Here is the reason why. No agency has the capability of mass surveillance. Not one of the organisations in New Zealand has that capability.

I want to talk about national standards, just for a moment. When national standards were proposed by the Hon Hekia Parata, everybody fell off their horses. They said, basically, that the sun was not going to come up in the morning and the sky was going to fall in. Well, lo and behold, because of national standards, people are succeeding—people are succeeding. Have a look in the Dominion Post from yesterday, at the front page.

💬 Kris Faafoi: It has nothing to do with it.

Oh, it has got nothing to do with standards. It has got nothing to do with national standards, says Kris Faafoi from Mana, who does not really know where McDonald’s is. I have got to tell him this.

💬 Kris Faafoi: Do you know where it is?

Oh, yes, I know where every McDonald’s is and, I tell you what, I even know where the 24-hour ones are. It is like this. If you set standards and you keep standards up, then our kids will succeed. There are more people now in training—training for proper jobs, quality jobs—than ever before. Gone are the days when you could just go off on your own and get the Government to pay for a basket weaving course that was never going to get you anything, or a hair braiding exercise down at the local polytech. No, that is not a good spend. That is not a good spend of taxpayers’ money.

💬 Andrew Little: Oh, not again.

Oh, here he is—here he is. He is the working-class hero, Andrew Little, just waiting—waiting in the wings—to be able to get that top job. He has always coveted that top job. He was like that in the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union, but he wanted to move up, so he joined the Labour Party and now he is after David’s job. Now he is after David’s job, but I am not sure which David.

💬 Kris Faafoi: How many parties? Three parties?

Three, mate.

💬 Kris Faafoi: Three?

Three and proud of it—and proud of it. It is something you could not do—well, not you, Mr Assistant Speaker. But I tell you what, we also heard the figure this morning about power price rises. Under a Labour Government, there was a 72 percent increase in power prices. Under this Government, and we have been in for only one and a half terms, it is 16 percent—16 percent. So if Labour members want to quibble and argue about what has been going on—you hear from David Cunliffe, that man who lives in Herne Bay and represents the poor people of another electorate. He just loves it, does he not? What was that, David? No, sorry, you cannot speak. He talked about the razor wire and the secure, gated communities—

💬 Hon Anne Tolley: It’s like Herne Bay.

Yes, and he knows this from sitting on his deck in Herne Bay. I have heard that you are not supposed to go down that road, and people are representing their electorates, but the thing is that when you rail against the rich and you rail against the people on the Forbes rich list, and then you have the gumption to get up and say: “I support the poor. All our policies are about poor people.” and you do not want to even live in that electorate, you do not want to even live with the people whom you supposedly represent—and I know what Labour members are going to say. They will have a go at the Prime Minister. But let me just finish on this note—let me just finish on this note. When you wave goodbye to your sons and daughters and your nieces and nephews, but you will not allow them to get a job in that industry in your own country, that word starts with an “h”, and I will let you work out what that word is.

Kia ora, Mr Assistant Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. I understand that Parliamentary Service is currently investigating the future of the Parliament TV broadcast. I mean, one idea is that we could have a worm or some sort of vote ticker. I think you would have seen that go backwards very, very fast after that contribution from the member Tau Henare. I think what the public of New Zealand heard there was a whole bunch of partisan politics, petty point-scoring, and personal attacks. I do not think the Kiwis want to hear that when we are talking about the economy. They want to hear about ideas and a vision. They want to have a sense that we are going forward, not this petty, personal politics of the member. I think it has lost him a whole bunch of votes. So there is one idea to kick off this debate this morning.

I rise to speak on the Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill and the second reading of the Imprest Supply (Second for 2013/14) Bill. Obviously, it is a tremendously important debate to our country and to our Parliament. We are talking about the nature of the Budget, a significant tool that the Government and the country use as part of our economic future. Right now, you can read in all the papers and you can see in the international media the economic challenges New Zealand faces today. When you look at the issue of contaminated whey products and other dairy-based products, and the $13 billion worth of our dairy exports around the world, we have got to be paying attention. Obviously, we need to be doing the basics first, which is protecting the health and safety of, and providing good information to, New Zealand and domestic consumers. But I think it does put in stark relief the risks to brand New Zealand, to “100% Pure New Zealand”, which, obviously, the Chinese media has very strongly critiqued, and, of course, the economic dependency that New Zealand has on this one industry. In this debate I want to touch on some of those broad-based economic issues facing us that you can see consistently through the Fonterra dairy dependency we have in New Zealand.

In this debate I want to touch on three things. The first is the Green Party’s vision for our economy, our plan for the New Zealand economy, which is to deliver a smart Green economy, lift our kids out of poverty, and clean up our waterways and our environments. We can have all three of those things. Secondly, I want to touch on the range of Green Party contributions, to show the broad brush of positive contributions the Greens have brought to this particular debate, and to look at two areas that I am passionate about, which are seeing cleaner, smarter, cheaper energy for New Zealanders and a thriving information and communications technology sector.

It is pretty good to be standing here this week after that 5 percent rise for the Green Party in the poll we saw over the weekend. It is pretty good to be standing here, because we are an optimistic party. We are a positive party. We are not playing those petty, partisan, point-scoring political games. We are getting on with proposing plans. We are out there proposing plans that are resonating with New Zealanders. We are offering them trust, which I think is in some decline, when you look at the Government benches. We are offering real solutions. We are not playing games. This is important. This is the future of New Zealanders. It is about jobs. It is about the quality of life. It is about the standard of living. It is about whether Kiwi kids have shoes and jackets to go to school in. It is about whether you can actually swim in a waterway. If you look at the latest data, you just cannot have that iconic Kiwi experience of being able to go for a swim in a New Zealand stream or creek in many of our rivers and streams, and that is wrong. It goes against our core Kiwi values. So it is important that we address these issues.

We have got some significant structural economic challenges facing our country. It is more than just the surplus, which is how the Government has been putting this economic debate. What we have seen is a decline in economic competitiveness relative to other nations. We have seen growing debt and growing numbers of Kiwis out of work. Over the last 60 years we have seen New Zealand steadily decline down those OECD rankings. And we are not seeing the solutions. We are running as fast as we can just to keep up and to stay where we are, but still we keep slipping backwards. We work some of the longest hours in the OECD, yet we are still slipping backwards vis-à-vis other countries. Sure, you can point to Australia, as the Government benches are doing, but there the Australian Government has actually woken up to the fact that the mining boom is over. The plan to have just an extracted commodity - based economy supplying China is not a winner for Australia, and that is why it is trying to diversify away from it.

It is an important debate because we are talking about real issues, like the structural health of our economy and the future of New Zealanders. We have got real solutions to those challenges. When you look at the sectors we should be supporting, we want to see a thriving information and communications technology sector. We believe that we have got a huge opportunity in clean energy. That is what the experts say. When you look around the world, net international capital investment outstripped all the investment in fossil fuels and nuclear generation. For electricity generation, it went into renewables—things like hydro, solar, and wind. This is where we have got a niche. It is a $23 billion opportunity, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers. It is about exporting clean energy and exporting information and communications technology. It is about being a niche in cleantech. This is where we should be looking. It is what the late Professor Paul Callaghan was talking about. New Zealand needs to focus on its strengths and its niches.

Instead, what we see is this extracted commodities - based vision from the Government, which is all about digging more holes for coal and mining, which fewer and fewer people are investing in and wanting to buy internationally, and trying to cram more cows on to our paddocks, with all the risks we have seen so starkly this week. While we are talking about addressing some of these challenges, we need to be looking at that massive current account deficit, but we also have to be addressing the environmental deficit, which has been growing more and more under the National Government, and we need to be approaching the social deficit. What I heard from Jan Logie was that the top 5 percent of New Zealanders own 50 percent of the wealth in our country. We are not seeing ordinary Kiwis getting ahead. National is not working for ordinary New Zealanders.

When you look across all the Green contributions in this debate, I think you have seen a very strong argument, a positive argument, from the Green Party. Dr Russel Norman talked about his plan to structurally balance the economy through things like a comprehensive tax on capital gains, excluding the family home; broadening the legislative mandate of the Reserve Bank to try to keep that Kiwi dollar under control, supporting Kiwi exporters in the productive economy; and then you see the capital market reform, including supporting Kiwibank. You see some good contributions there. Kevin Hague talked about health and how we should be planning for the future, not just for the short-term plan that Mr Ryall has. Catherine Delahunty talked about the priorities that the Government has got wrong in education, and its wasting those precious education dollars on ideologically driven policy. Metiria Turei talked about child poverty and the Greens’ package of solutions, from the in-work tax credit through to better housing for Kiwi kids currently growing up in poverty. We know there are more than 200,000 of them. Ken Graham talked about the Greens’ plan for global sustainability. We saw Eugenie Sage talking about the Greens’ plan for “100% Pure New Zealand”, actually paying lip-service, not making it this marketing slogan that is being drawn in the international media and being called “a festering sore” by the State-run Chinese media. It is about that Kiwi value of being able to go for a swim in your stream or river.

Dave Clendon talked about the Greens’ prioritisation of spending in the justice system. Holly Walker talked about the Greens’ solutions for housing in terms of building more State houses, in terms of supporting Kiwis into ownership, and, thirdly, about making sure those rental properties across the country—and I have seen many of these cold, damp, unhealthy rental properties—are healthy and are safe. What we need is a minimum standard for our rental houses. Steffan Browning talked about the biosecurity risks facing our agricultural sector. I talked about our vision for cleaner, cheaper, smarter energy in New Zealand. Julie Anne Genter talked about the Greens’ plan to dig some holes. The Government always says that the Greens are against digging holes, as if digging holes is a bad thing. Actually, there are a few holes we would like to dig. One of them is in central Auckland down in the central business district. We want to build a central business district rail loop to transform the Auckland public transport network, to empower the Auckland central business district, and to transform our biggest city’s economy. We have canvassed a range of positive solutions.

In terms of information and communications technology, we had massive growth there, but the Government is not taking advantage of the potential. It is delaying things like the copyright review, which would empower and drive economic development. It is doing things like making rules for Chorus. All New Zealanders will be paying for the subsidies on its copper-based prices. We need a second internet cable because although there is some good investment from the Government in ultra-fast broadband, what we risk is having an ultra-fast intranet. We need to have more international connections so that Kiwis can work in New Zealand. Under National, what we see is that the main export of New Zealand is skilled Kiwis. What we need to do is have a richer New Zealand with a positive plan going forward and with kids out of poverty. We need a safer, cleaner New Zealand where entrepreneurs and Kiwis want to come back to New Zealand, where Kiwis can do their work in smart, high-tech niches, as Professor Callaghan was urging us to do, where Kiwis want to move back to New Zealand but can still participate in the global economy and the global culture. This is the Greens’ plan for the economy. It is a smarter economy that focuses on our strengths. It is a cleaner economy so we can have quality of life for New Zealanders and that valuable “100% Pure New Zealand” brand.

Ultimately, we are not playing those partisan politics games that you have heard in this debate from the other parties. What we are doing is putting forward a positive vision, and when you look at the polls, it is resonating with New Zealanders. Thank you. Kia ora.

I am very pleased to speak on this third reading of the Appropriation (2013/14 Estimates) Bill because this Budget confirms that New Zealand is in much better shape economically than most of the countries that we compare ourselves with overseas. Our economy is growing at 3 percent. Our economy is growing faster than that of the US, faster than Canada’s, and much faster than Japan’s. In contrast to the economies of the UK and Europe, which are shrinking, our economy is going ballistic. That is because we are absolutely focused.

This Government is absolutely focused on getting our economy right back on track. I would like to thank the Hon Bill English for his solid, Southland determination and discipline and for getting us through the worst of the global financial crisis in the best way possible. It has been tough and we have all had to tighten our belts, but we are building a stronger, more stable, and more resilient economy that will serve us well in the future. Our goal is to help businesses create more and better-paid jobs. We are doing everything we can to educate, train, and upskill our young people and we are focusing on developing the areas of the economy that produce the best return. Those areas are higher-value exports, in-demand specialist services, and building on our strengths to produce new products, new technologies, and new businesses that will deliver those highly paid jobs for New Zealanders.

But to be able to create productive jobs that pay well, our basic economic infrastructure has to be efficient and effective. This Government has four strands for delivering a productive framework. The first strand is responsibly managing the Government’s books. That means using money wisely and keeping down debt, and I have to say that thanks to Bill English, we are doing that pretty well.

The second strand is to build a more competitive and productive economy so New Zealanders can earn their prosperity on a global market. That work is being led by the Hon Steven Joyce and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. The ministry’s purpose is to grow New Zealand for all and to increase the well-being and the opportunities for all New Zealanders so that they can contribute to the economy and so that they can be part of our productivity.

The third strand is delivering better public services. We are doing that by delivering more services for fewer dollars, and we are having pretty good successes in this area. We are having successes in areas like procurement. By buying in bulk, we are getting better prices. We are cutting overhead costs. We have managed to save $110 million a year on office rentals. We are getting great productivity by utilising online technology to deliver services cheaper and better. Kiwis have really taken to doing business online. They like the convenience. They like the fact that they can do something from their offices or their homes. This year 35 percent of passports were renewed online through the internet, 18 percent of companies filed their GST returns online—

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: How many jobs did that create?

—and 93 percent of personal tax returns were made online. The Hon Clayton Cosgrove asks how many jobs were created by that. Well, actually, every single time you cut the cost of doing business, you have investment into more jobs. People have more productivity, and businesses can increase and grow. But the runaway success of this online work is actually SmartGate at airports. Believe it or not, since 2009, 6 million people have used SmartGate. That is over 50,000 a week. Now we are able to introduce that for US and UK passports as well. It is so much better. It is so much sooner and more convenient.

Finally, the last and most important priority to me is the rebuild of Christchurch. That is all about supporting people to get their homes fixed, to get their communities restored, and to rebuild our city—to rebuild the city of Christchurch and the small towns right throughout Canterbury. It is really important, as the second-largest city in the country, that we get back on our feet and back to being the entrance and the port of the South Island so we can continue to earn our living by exporting products to the world and by welcoming tourists to our city and also to all the other areas that they visit when they come through our city.

So these are the Government’s first four priorities—the four important legs of our economic framework. That framework underpins the opportunities, the health, and the well-being of all New Zealanders. They may sound irrelevant, but they have a key effect on every one of us. As New Zealanders we are interested in happy and healthy families, safe communities, jobs, and a decent education for our kids and opportunities for their futures. For that, we need economic stability.

Right now every family is better off because we have got the lowest mortgage rates for 45 years and because wages are growing faster than inflation, so household costs are down whether you pay your mortgage directly or whether your landlord pays his mortgage. Because we have managed the economy well, we can pay for public services. We can keep our communities safe. We can fully fund the police and corrections so they can do a great job, and they are. Crime is now at its lowest rate for 32 years, and in the last year alone the crime rate has dropped by 11 percent. More important, it has dropped in the tough areas. Violent crime has dropped by 7 percent, and youth crime has dropped by 18 percent.

Because we are managing the economy well, we can invest in education and training. We are investing more for our little ones, getting them into preschool education to get them a good start. We are investing more for national standards so that no schoolchild will fall through the cracks—so that every child will have a really good basic education and the opportunity to build on that to develop job skills and for further education. We all know that National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2 is about the minimum you need to be able to survive in our complex society and to be able to contribute. The latest results show that the number of young people getting NCEA level 2 is the highest ever. It has increased from 67.5 percent to 77.5 percent since 2008, which is a 10 percent increase. That has got to be a real bonus. We all want our young people to enjoy school, to embrace education, and to develop their skills so they can make the very best of every opportunity.

Because we have managed the economy well, we are also delivering better health services. More babies are being immunised, and we know how important that is. More elderly people are getting operations for hips and cataracts, and cancer treatment is now being delivered exclusively in New Zealand. There is no need to send Kiwis overseas. We are truly delivering better, sooner, and more convenient health care. Thank you.

That is a very wise choice, Mr Assistant Speaker, I am sure. I have such a commanding presence in the House, Mr Cosgrove, so I was the obvious choice. I want to focus a little bit on my electorate and the region of Northland, and what this Government has been doing in that area. I am very pleased that this conversation will be heard by another Northlander, Shane Jones. That will be welcomed. Northland is an area that is blessed with potential and dogged with underperformance. As a new MP—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Especially from the MP.

Opening an office in Whangarei, Mr Peters, does not make the New Zealand First Party suddenly become a massive presence in the lives of Northlanders. That is about all show and no do, Mr Peters. I will welcome that member at any time to come up north and lock horns with me about what we are doing versus what that member is saying about Northland. That member has got a lot to say, but he does not do much at all—he does not do much at all. Just visiting the whānau back there in Whananaki does not make the difference. However, I will refocus.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: How many roads have you done? How many roads are tarsealed? Come on.

If the member took time to actually drive around the electorate he seems to now have such a love and affinity for, he might know. Get up there and have a look—get up there and have a look. It is not just about having a coffee in your office. I will come back to my point. Mr Peters will, I am sure, enjoy my invitation to come and experience what Northland is actually about, versus what he can see from the windows in his office.

What I did as a new member of Parliament was to say: “What is the economic picture of Northland?”, and we put together whole-of-region economic summits, two in the middle of last year, and asked 14 of the economic sectors of our economy to tell us what the enablers and constrainers were—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: And then what happened? Nothing.

Listen up, Mr Peters. Listen up. The member might learn something about what is happening in Northland at the moment. So what we did was we asked what the enablers and constrainers of the Northland economy are, and what will help bring the potential to realisation. What we found was that across those 14 sectors, 89 percent of the enablers and constrainers fell into nine very clear core themes. They were led off by infrastructure, followed by local government, the Resource Management Act, the perception of Northland in the hearts and minds of New Zealanders, the Māori economy, the opportunities and the challenges around minerals, the energy supply, and the high-tech economy that Northland has to offer and is obviously waiting to unleash.

So the purpose of the economic summits was to put together an action plan as to how we could develop—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: No.

Listen up, Mr Peters. Listen up. There is plenty to learn. The idea was to ensure that we had a whole-of-region economic plan that, ultimately, could be driven across sectors so that there was cohesion in how we actually realised that potential. The Northland Economic Advisory Group was born from that. It works with Northland Inc. in terms of a delivery mechanism to help work up—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: And what’s happened?

—the potential from that. Well, if the member listens, I will inform him. Some 12 months on—he is leaning forward; he is waiting with bated breath for this—I will give some headlines as to what has happened. In terms of the infrastructure, let us focus on that. Mid-next year we will be kicking off the fast-tracking of the Pūhoi to Wellsford road of national significance, a road that might not have started until 2017, possibly 2021.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: That’s good for Dargaville!

We will be kicking that off—well, it is actually good for Dargaville. If the member took the time to go and talk to some of his friends—the one or two that he has—over there, what he would actually find is that the most significant and important component that they see to unlocking the potential of the Kaipara is actually the road of national significance. Those Matakohe bridges—do not worry, because I have got a plan for those as well—will be aligned. They will be aligned.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Oh, really?

Yes, absolutely. There is going to be plenty of work going on there. That member will talk about it; I am doing something about it. In terms of the, ah—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Oh, you’ve forgot your place.

No, no. I am coming to it; I am just repeating what the member does so often—he stumbles and stammers. When we look at the work that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and the Minister of Transport is doing here, we are also looking at how to get better synergies across our regional roading networks. There is some very good legislation that I know the member Winston Peters will be keeping a very keen eye on. The review of KiwiRail—I am very confident that Northland’s potential, the potential of Marsden Point and that port, and the significance of rail infrastructure alongside road infrastructure, means that we are going to get home on that.

Local government reform—Northland has been dogged by challenges in local government. This Government passed legislation last year to ensure that regions like Northland can reform their local government structure. There is a process in place now for that to occur, something that I am sure the Kaipara District Council will welcome with open ears, given the travesty that has occurred there. When we look at the Resource Management Act, we see that it is a major impediment to business development and the agricultural sector. That is being completely reformed by Amy Adams, who I think is doing an absolutely stunning job as Minister for the Environment there, cutting red tape, simplifying consenting, and getting rid of the vexatious stonewalling that we see so often. That has been welcomed with absolute open arms. That will be transformational in its nature.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why is John Carter coming back?

Well, I do not know. Ask him.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well, it’s your party.

Because he realises that Northland has got so much to offer. Now he is coming back to enjoy it. That is why.

No longer will people like Winston Peters use Northland as the poverty whipping boy, as the welfare whipping boy, and as the poster boy for all that is wrong in New Zealand, because this member and this Government is doing something about Northland. We look at the labour force. We look at what is going on in the labour force. We have reformed welfare. There are 90-day trial periods, the youth start-up wage, and the reforming of the Employment Relations Authority. We are increasing the Youth Guarantee and expanding the trades academies. I could go on, but I am a disciplined member and will follow the instructions of my whip.

I welcome the opportunity for Winston Peters to come and see what Northland is actually about. This Government is delivering for Northland and it is delivering for New Zealand.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We all know that the House is the master of its own destiny, so I move that that member be given a further 10 minutes to try to explain what he was saying in the last 10 minutes, because it made no sense at all.

Well, the House is the master of its own destiny, but the problem is, of course, that the member cannot ask for leave for someone else.

Mr Peters touched on a very important point. He identified a salient point in respect of the far north. We now know why John Carter is coming back after a very, very swift tenure as an ambassador to the Cook Islands. It is because he is shocked and outraged at the lack of representation by that member over there, Mike Sabin. Every member who has got up in this House, including that one, has been challenged by the Opposition to provide some simple numbers. Those simple numbers are the numbers of jobs created.

💬 Mike Sabin: Who got elected in 2011?

He can barrack at me and have a go, but it does not cover up the fact that he was asked, and I challenge him now. I say to that member now that I will yield to him if he gets up and gives us the number of jobs that his Government has created in Northland. We know that Northland has the highest unemployment of any area in the country. We know, and I will give that member some numbers: a 30 percent increase in Māori unemployment under his Government. He talked about pathways and strategies and task forces and priorities. All that the average Kiwi wants to know, whether they be in Northland or Southland or Otago or the central North Island, Mr Sabin, is where the jobs are. They were promised, in this Budget and others, a brighter future. They were told that things would get better. Māori were told that there would be job opportunities for them. They have been let down, and a 30 percent increase in Northland unemployment for Māori is an indictment on that member. No wonder John Carter is coming home, I say. No wonder he is coming home.

In Northland, Sanford Ltd closed the oyster factory under this regime. I say this: if you ask any Kiwi around the country what they want from their Government, they simply want something simple. They want a fair go—they want a fair go. They want a job. Why do they want a job? Because it provides some income and some dignity and some pride on the table. That pride leads to what this crowd talks about but does not create. That job, that income, leads to something called economic and social opportunity—a chance for mum and dad to get up on the ladder, a chance for the first-home buyer who is in a job to try to get a house. That is what a job is about. That is what an income is about—opportunity. This crew over here crow about that. They say they have a legacy of creating economic opportunity, but that legacy is not matched by any fact, whether it be in that member’s electorate in the far north or anywhere else around the country.

People want a fair go in respect of asset sales. They do not want them sold. People want a fair go in terms of housing. Young people cannot get up on the ladder. What do we say? We say we are going to build 100,000 affordable homes over 10 years. What is National’s plan? No one knows. We say that we are going to put Kiwis—to quote Mr English, but we will deliver on it—in terms of housing, ahead of the queue and we will stop the foreign speculators coming.

We say that we will train young people. We have a policy for the unemployment benefit to train young people and apprentices. Nicky Wagner talks about Christchurch. Well, the great man Gerry Brownlee came to the Finance and Expenditure Committee today. What did he tell us? That 25 foreign workers are being imported into Christchurch every day. That is 9,125 per year, and it is 1/16th of the unemployment rate of 142,000. We said to Gerry Brownlee this morning in public session: “Hang on a minute. Shouldn’t you consider the overall costs of things, not just the price of a product or getting it the cheapest? Shouldn’t you also consider the transfer costs? When you are doing it cheap and you are importing it, the people who are not being employed because you are not training them are on the dole, and that is a cost.” But oh no; this crowd do not look at things holistically.

People deserve a fair go, and they want a fair go in respect of their power bills. John Key says: “Kiwis are not paying too much for power.” That is what he says. Simon Bridges, as Minister of Energy and Resources, said it as well. Well, no one believes these guys.

💬 Mike Sabin: 72 percent.

Is Mr Sabin prepared to go up to his people, Māori and others, in Northland and stand on the stump and say to them: “You lucky individuals—you should be grateful because you are not paying too much for your power.”?

💬 Mike Sabin: Under Labour it was 72 percent.

Oh no—he has plenty of guts in the House here, but he will not go out to Kaikohe and other places and make that claim on the stump. We say we have a power plan. We will bring those power prices down.

We have talked about wages. We have talked about training. We say we will give people a fair go with housing. We will introduce incentives to move investment across from the obsession we have about housing speculation and into proper business investment. So we have a plan. Over there we have strategies, task forces—all sorts of things. Remember the financial centre of excellence? That was going to be the big hit. It did not happen. Remember the “road to nowhere”, the cycleway? That did not create any jobs. So we have a concrete and practical plan over here.

I just come back to every member, as they crawl their way into the Chamber, and to the Minister for Social Development, and ask them this: show me the jobs in the regions that this Government has created. Mr Sabin could not tell us. Ms Wagner could not tell us. They bring into Christchurch 25 brothers and sisters from overseas—good souls, none the less—as we have 70,000 to 80,000 young people on the dole, and they refuse to train them. They think if you throw a few coins at the polytechs—which are doing an admirable job—that that is training.

These geniuses were so stupid. They had an earthquake in Christchurch—a tragedy—that is a massive economic opportunity, an opportunity to train the 30,000 to 40,000 young people in trade training that we so desperately need, instead of bringing in 25 of our brothers and sisters per day from overseas. I ask them whether that is a good strategy. Who is selling out whom? Where are the job creation opportunities for young people?

I come back to this. Kiwis at their essence are not greedy people. They just want a fair go. A job gives an income. An income gives dignity and pride. An income allows you to go home as parents and look your kids in the eye, as you paid for the bread you put on their table. It also gives an economic opportunity. You might—might—be able to put a little bit aside. You might be able to become a little bit entrepreneurial. You might be able to say to the wife or the husband or the partner: “We are going to plan, and we are going to try to save for a first home.” But it does not help when the Government that was voted in undercuts those Kiwis and those basic Kiwi values and aspirations every time they try to have a crack, every time they want to get a job, every time they are looking for a training opportunity. Because, yes, there are some people who slip and slide around the economy; we understand that. But I say this, because I believe in this country: 99 percent of Kiwis who are in that lost and lonely category would do anything to get out of it, and are—to quote the National Party pamphlets—“ambitious for New Zealand.”

Well, if this is all National has got—a 30 percent increase in Māori unemployment in Northland—and if that is ambitious, I am speechless. If that is the ambition that these people have—[Interruption] Oh no; you do not get that lucky with me, mate. You do not get that lucky. I challenge any of these speakers—the member for Taranaki, Mr Young, and others—to stand up and tell us just simply what Kiwis want to know. That is, how many jobs have these people created? How many practical training opportunities have these people created? Not slogans, not task forces, not pathways, not action plans—those are meaningless to people, absolutely meaningless.

They talk about fiscal restraint—they talk about fiscal restraint. Well, I remind the Minister of Finance, as he is on the phone to upstairs, trying to work out who is leaking the next set of figures, that 9 years of surplus is the legacy of the Labour Government. Nine years of surplus—not waste; surplus. I recall being attacked by that man because the National Party accused the then Labour Government of being too mean because we would not spend it. I say this: zero Crown debt, zero Crown debt, zero Crown debt.

I invite these members to go back to the regions, with the two-speed economy we have. Regional New Zealand is withering on the vine, thanks to them, i.e., Northland—withering on the vine. They will not tell us their unemployment plans. They will not come up and have anything practical, but they are good with words and they are good with spin. I say they are out of touch. This Budget is out of touch. The 142,000 people who languish on the dole queue every day, thanks to this crew, are the legacy of this Budget and the legacy of 5 long years—5 long years—of this country being in the wilderness and rudderless, with an inward-looking Government that is more concerned with its own scandalous behaviour, propped up by two rotten piles, Mr Dunne and Mr Banks. This Government needs to get real. It needs to provide some real opportunities for Kiwis.

It is a pleasure to bring the Budget debate for 2013 to an end. It is a Budget that has been welcomed by the public, but the debate about it in here has been particularly shallow, as I think was indicated by the last speaker, Clayton Cosgrove, who was reiterating the best ideas that Labour had in 1994. Labour members are still talking about the same stuff. If there is a sense of unreality, it is in the public’s understanding that Opposition members have not really moved from 1994 and the dynamics of that time. They are still talking to a world that is quite different from the one we are in.

I just want to acknowledge today the resilience and the pragmatism of so many New Zealanders who are dealing with difficult circumstances with a positive attitude. They are trying to resolve their own problems, rather than expecting everyone else to resolve them for them. We find in discussions with all sorts of groups across our community, whether it is churches or Māori or iwi or social sector groups, a strong sense of willingness to get to the nitty-gritty, to resolve problems rather than hang on to them and repeat them for political benefit, and, increasingly, a sense of optimism that we are starting to achieve some things.

Just one stray fact that came across this morning is that youth offending has dropped by about 30 percent, faster than the crime rate is dropping. I would be the last to claim that that is because of a specific Government programme. What it is because of is a commitment across a broad range of community initiatives, supported by Government, with action that makes a difference and a focus on the real issues. That is what is adding up to a difference. All that is going on in an economy that has clawed its way out of recession and is starting to show some optimism.

There are some imbalances at the heart of this Budget. At the heart of this Budget is a strong focus on housing—

💬 Hon Phil Goff: 6.4 percent unemployment again.

—both affordable housing and social housing. I would like to point out to the member that this Budget included the most significant changes in State housing in 70 years, with the broad support of the housing sector. We all realise that we can do a better job of assisting those who have serious housing needs, as well as running a more efficient property portfolio run by the Government, and, more important, affordable housing.

The Government has taken a pretty straightforward view, based on sound research. The thing that cuts a lot of Kiwis out of the housing market is restrictive planning laws that stop the supply of new houses. There are a whole lot of other things that have some influence on the housing market, but this Budget is decisively focused on the biggest single influence. In the absence of action taken by this Government in that respect, it is quite likely that interest rates would be rising sooner, faster, and in a way that would cost every household in New Zealand more. Interest rates probably are going to rise at some stage, but the actions we are taking are pushing that back and putting less pressure into the housing market.

The debate, I think, was characterised on the Opposition’s side by its shallowness. The problem for the Opposition is partly that it is still stuck in a period some almost 20 years ago now, but partly that it is just not doing the work to refresh the centre-left’s intellectual way of looking at the policy world. It is just not happening. What the Opposition has relied on is that the politics will fall in its lap. The nasty Tories will slash and burn. They will cut services. The public will hate it and therefore vote Labour. That has not happened.

In fact, the striking feature of this Budget is that of all the developed countries, we are one of the quicker ones to get back to surplus, at the same time as increasing public services and improving the public’s perception of public services, and that has been an achievement of the National-led Government and its support parties. What has become clear is that the thing that saves the Government money is a better-performing Public Service. What works for the community works for the Government’s books. When we educate a child properly in their first 12 years in the system, we do not have to do it again. We save money. If we sort out the alcohol and drug problem of a prisoner in prison, they are less likely to reoffend, and if they do not, we save $90,000 per year. One of the more satisfying results of the policy of this Government has been the fact that prisoner numbers are now flat-lining and, in my view, will start to decrease, reflecting the same kind of trend as youth offending.

The Opposition got lazy and it has been caught out. In this Budget we have addressed the issue that worries middle New Zealand the most, and that is the housing market, both for the wider macroeconomic risks—if it goes up too fast and then collapses—but also because of the pressure on the back pockets of New Zealand families trying to get ahead. I think we have now finally persuaded the public that you can get back to surplus, you can have responsible fiscal management, at the same time as doing a better job for those in the wider community who are the most vulnerable and most in need of support.

Finally, can I thank our support parties. Putting Budgets together when you are a small support party is not easy, but we have found strong pressure from each of our support parties—the Māori Party, the ACT Party, and United Future—to get what they believe is good for their constituents and New Zealand, but at the same time there has been a willingness to resolve those tensions into a coherent plan. They deserve a great deal of credit for that, and that is not always noticed.

We are very proud of this Budget, but, of course, we are only as good as the next one. We are only as good as the next one, and the next Budget has to be about not just getting to surplus but delivering real benefits and improved public services—some real ambition there—and also allowing all those New Zealanders and their businesses and organisations to grow this economy. We know one thing: the answer to a better-growing economy is not the one we are hearing from the other side of the House, which is more regulations and more tax. Everyone else knows that that is not the answer. What is the answer is more innovation, more risk taking, more savings, more exports—more of the things that New Zealanders have shown they can do so well at, even in the difficult circumstances of the last 4 or 5 years.