General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. This afternoon yet again we have had another couple of revealing glimpses of the true state of the New Zealand Labour Party. There are two particular points this afternoon—firstly, during question time and, I have to say, the incredibly lazy, incredibly deluded performance of the Opposition leader, who turned up and wasted three-quarters of his side’s questions on a lazy attack on the Prime Minister, which was of absolutely no substance. There was absolutely no preparation. It had absolutely no point. And, on top of that, he was well and truly spanked by the Prime Minister. It is not as if this was the first time. The Opposition leader persists in coming down here with his airs and graces and pretending that he knows stuff, and absolutely is as shallow as a puddle.

Speaking of shallow puddles, the second glimpse we got of the New Zealand Labour Party this afternoon was its incredibly shallow political attack on the Programme for International Student Assessment results. Actually, it is quite revealing if you have a look at it, because Labour’s first move actually happened yesterday when it broke an international, 34-country embargo to score a shallow political procedural stunt in this House before the results were released. That has to be the most juvenile approach to what is a serious subject for New Zealand. Then, having made the juvenile attack, which was completely over the heads of most New Zealanders, it proceeded to attack the Government for the results. Well, let me tell you one thing. These results, if we want to be political about it, were nurtured and created by the previous Labour Government.

Some maths lessons for the Opposition: 15-year-olds last year were 5-year-olds in 2002 and they were 3-year-olds in 2000. They spent their entire preschool and primary school years in Labour’s utopian school system. People in glass houses should not be throwing stones. Mr Hipkins worked then for the uber-Minister of Education, one T Mallard—he of the “The world is lying.” sort of accusation—and the deal is that they were the Labour Government’s results. We can all accept that the numbers have declined, and that means, frankly, that we are all responsible as a country. And because of the time it takes for education results to appear, everybody in this House has to have a look at themselves because this decline is not new. It has been around for a while. So even now, the maths decline—what were the numbers in 2009? Thirteen. They have declined since then. But what were they in 2000? We were at four 2000, so we declined then. So if the criticism is of the National Government now, then what about that period? It is adolescent of Mr Hipkins, I have to say, to blame the current Government. Let us accept that there has been a decline.

So what new, innovative things are parties proposing to actually achieve with this stuff? Well, partnership schools—a National Party initiative. Network for Learning—a National Party initiative. Participation targets in early childhood education—a National Party initiative. The Youth Guarantee—a highly successful National Party initiative. National Certificate of Educational Achievement level 2 targets, performance-linked funding in tertiary education, and national standards in primary schools—we need more of this innovation, not less. You cannot manage what you cannot measure, and the Labour Party and the Green Party in this House today using measures to criticise the Government for having measures was ironic. That is what they were doing. They were saying that the Programme for International Student Assessment measures are the things that we should have to criticise the Government for measuring national standards. If that is not hypocrisy, what is?

The sad part about it is that the Labour Party and the Green Party have no solution except to wind everything back. That is the trouble for the Labour Party, and that is the other thing we have noticed today: the lazy, inept attack on national standards and the fact that it has done absolutely no work on policy in this area except to say that it would roll it back. That says that the Labour Party is lazy. The Labour Party, after 5 years in Opposition, is still arrogant, because it still believes that it does not need any new policies to get itself re-elected. I have one suggestion for those members. When they go away in the break, for goodness’ sake, do some work, because your laziness is showing.

I hope my voice holds out for this debate. This is not a bad Government. It is not a mediocre Government. This is an awful Government. It is such a woeful Government that it is difficult to know where to start and where to stop. Well, a good place to start is today. During question time today, our leader, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, brought into the daylight just the latest in a long line of failures. We have exposed just how unethically the Government has acted over the defunct Learning Media. We have revealed how the Government changed the contract rules that are sending Learning Media into bankruptcy, yet it is advancing capital to the company to repay Westpac, a foreign-owned bank creditor, in full. Never mind the rest. Never mind the others who will be left out of pocket—elderly investors who own the building that Learning Media resided in.

The list of this Government’s failures is a long one. The recent revelations about falling education standards are deeply alarming to all those who have school-age children. I certainly can recall my three children growing up in a period when we prided ourselves on our education system, and that continued right through, with my last child leaving college in only the last year or so. I can recall when the school system was good and was continuing to provide for our young ones. Under this Government we have the cuts, the changes, the move to the likes of charter schools, and the funding of $36 million to the likes of private schools, to the detriment of State schools. It all goes on and on. This Government has a woeful track record in terms of education.

The country has had its best terms of trade in 40 years, but that is not something that this Government can take credit for. It is because of our agriculture. It is because of our dairy. It is because of our forestry, our meat, our seafood, and all our other manufactured exports.

The housing market is in crisis. The plight of first-home buyers is absolutely dire, with Kiwis—good Kiwis—dreaming of homeownership and young ones sick to see what is happening. Just last week I attended an auction in my own suburb of Campbells Bay on the North Shore, and was aghast to see a small piece of land, less than 500 square metres, sell for over $1 million—for a bare piece of dirt. And do you know where the buyers were from? They were not good, honest, everyday, working Kiwis. All the Kiwis got knocked out at around the $800,000 mark and it was sold to people from abroad. We do not even know whether those people from abroad had New Zealand residency.

💬 Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: That’s racist.

No, it is not racist. It is what is happening, Mr Coleman, all over Auckland at the present time. New Zealand First stands for putting in place that you must be a New Zealand resident and you must be domiciled here in this country to purchase here. You cannot sit back in some foreign country—whether it be in Europe, whether it be in the United States, whether it be in Asia—and buy land from under the noses of good, hard-working Kiwis.

Immigration is out of control. It is a total shambles, with young New Zealanders having to contend with tens of thousands of immigrants in a very weak market for jobs. For the people of Christchurch, they must endure a stumbling, bumbling recovery of their city. The Government has taken a bit of a bath this last weekend in Christchurch East, where people are still in dire straits. The Government has plans to rejuvenate the central business district, pull down perfectly good public libraries, and pull down perfectly good other buildings so that it can build its convention centre down in Christchurch while people in the eastern suburbs are still suffering.

Let us remember some of the many other fiascos this Government has brought about—the likes of South Canterbury Finance. It was allowed a blowout of $800 million and 6 months went by while the Government turned a blind eye as more investments were being made in South Canterbury Finance. The Government gave $30 million to Rio Tinto without making sure there was an assurance of job security for the future for the people of Southland. The Government was responsible for the absolute abomination that is Novopay, and it allowed that hideous situation to continue where teachers in this country are still suffering from disruption to their pay cycles. The Government gave Warner Bros $67 million for a movie that grossed over $1 billion worldwide, when a loan would have seen the taxpayers’ advance secured.

I want to address the reforms, the way we are working with young people, and the difference that we are making in their lives. We have heard a lot of rubbish from the Opposition today about how we have seen the demise of young people, how dreadfully they are all doing, and how it is everyone’s fault, of course, except theirs—and mainly ours. Well, I want to stand up here today and say that I actually think young people are thriving and doing incredibly well. They have an awesome future, and the ones whom I meet, if our hands are in theirs, I think we are going to be pretty much all right. There are some things we can do better, and you have already heard from previous speakers from this side of the House on where that attention is going, where the resources are at, and how we are targeting more to those who need it most. I stand here, certainly, myself, and I am proud of the fact that we get the right information on the right people so that we are able to make sure the right resources are getting to them.

If ever there is an example of where that is happening the most, it would have to be in youth services within our welfare reforms, particularly for those young people aged 16, 17, and 18. Let us cut to the facts of what we did not know before but we do know now. Of those aged 30 to 39 years old who are currently on a benefit, 60 percent went on as a teenager—of those currently aged 30 to 39 who are on a benefit, 60 percent went on as a teenager. Of young beneficiaries, 43 percent will still be on a benefit 15 years later. Of disengaged 16 and 17-year-olds, 90 percent will go on an adult benefit at age 18 or 19 unless we intervene differently.

So, of course, that is exactly what we did. We went out there. We contracted. We got all that new money in the Budget of 2012. We then implemented our youth services and we see substantial differences for these young people. Of those who were not in education, employment, or training—so those who were “neets”—we now have 59 percent enrolled in education, another 17 percent in training, and another 4 percent in work-based learning. That is outstanding. We have 1,300 who are on the new youth payment, which are those 16 and 17-year-olds. Of those 1,300, 71 percent are in education—71 percent. I can tell you that that number was pretty much zero before these reforms came in. But—and it will not surprise many in this House—the ones who really get me going the most, and who, I think, are making the biggest difference, are those teen parents. Of teen parents aged 16, 17, and 18 years old, we have got 1,400 who are on a young parent payment. Of them, 70 percent are in education, 13 percent are in training, 48 percent have done a budgeting course, and 44 percent have done a parenting course.

But there is a reason I got into politics and I have been reminded of it this week. I get to indulge myself in the general debate, which is a pleasure we do not often get in this House. I am thrilled to say that I had a young woman who wrote to me and said: “Because I was now single with no income, I had to apply for a solo benefit. I went to Youth Service to sign up for the youth benefit. I had absolutely no levels from school as I had dropped out so young at 14. Basically, I had nothing to offer my girl. When I met the Youth Service officer, they made me go into education, and told me I wouldn’t get a benefit unless I was enrolled in some type of course.”

She then goes on further. She says: “They were all absolutely welcoming to me, and absolutely loving and caring. I had to break the habit of staying home all day long to actually get up early and do something with myself for the day. After the first term was over and the second term started, I was still not attending regularly, so my teacher spoke to me and told me I had to attend at least part time if I wanted to keep getting paid my youth service benefit. That was when my life practically changed. I didn’t want to struggle with a baby so I carried on at TPU, the teen parent unit. The second term at TPU was the best time I had in a long time. I finally felt like I belonged somewhere. School was always hard for me to attend, but now I am achieving.”

I had another one who wrote to me and said: “Before I started at the TPU and was made to go, I only had level 1 Achieved. I didn’t actually realise I had any NCEA credits. But now since the teen parent’s coming to an end, with only 6 weeks left, I have level 1, 2, and 3, and only need 11 more credits to complete university entrance.” I have another young woman here who told me that the reality for her was: “I have gained level 2 while I have been here, and am 10 credits away from completing level 3. I have also put credits towards university entrance. The TPU and the girls here have motivated me so much to make a better change for myself.”

That is why we come into Parliament—to change these girls’ lives, to see them get educational achievement, and to see them grow into who we know they can be. This side of the House backs them.

There is absolutely no doubt that despite the odd positive anecdotal story from a Minister—we could probably count them on our hands—this is absolutely a Government in decline. It is difficult for me to narrow down for a 5-minute speech the various ways in which we can see that this is a Government in decline. Probably the biggest demonstration of that, the best example I could come up with, is that in order to return to Budget surplus, this is a Government that could do nothing else but sell all our stuff—sell all our stuff.

The first thing that the Government could do, the best option it came up with when it wanted to make sure we got out of the red, was to sell our assets. That is absolutely a relevant issue for us to continue to debate today. This is a Government that is arrogant enough to absolutely ignore the views of New Zealanders. It has dismissed, from the beginning, poll after poll that has demonstrated that it was a completely unpopular policy, to the point that the Prime Minister has arrogantly claimed time and time again that simply by voting for National, everyone said they were happy with assets being sold. That is absolutely untrue. More people voted for parties that did not agree with asset sales than for those that did.

So the message that needs to go out clearly in the midst of this referendum is that this is a Prime Minister who will interpret every vote that is not cast as simply someone saying that they love his work. So everyone must exercise their democratic right if they would rather not have the Prime Minister skew their view. We will continue to do our job by ensuring that this Government listens to the voices of New Zealanders who time and time again have expressed their anger over these asset sales.

But I would also ask that people cast their vote on behalf of those who are unable to have their say—those who are not eligible to cast a vote but who are the generation from whom we continue to strip everything away. They are a generation that is suffering in the wake of a Government in decline. They are the No Generation. We have heard every other label for a generation that is possible: Generation Y, the Millennials, and the C Generation. This is the No Generation: no house, no free education, and potentially no superannuation, given the way this Government has no plan to ensure that their future retirement is secure. This is a group of young people who are suffering because this is a Government that has absolutely lacked vision for what it is that they will need in the future.

There are 78,000 members of this No Generation who are currently not in employment, not in education, and not in training. They are the next cohort of 15-year-olds who will be measured by the Programme for International Student Assessment report, and they are failing. We had Anne Tolley say: “It is their fault”. We had Hekia Parata say: “It is not my fault”. We had Steven Joyce say: “It is everyone’s fault”. At the end of the day, Labour has not been in Government for 5 years. The buck has to stop somewhere—the buck has to stop somewhere. These young people have been walking through a school gate to a school where teachers have been stripped of professional development, have had every change under the sun bearing down on them, and have been attacked by this Government. And these young people themselves have experienced deprivation that has negatively impacted upon them.

There are 270,000 children growing up in poverty in this country. Ms Bennett may stand up here and tell us about all the teenagers who are doing well. I agree that there are some who are doing phenomenally well, who are wonderful young people, and we should be proud of every single one of them. But there is a cohort that is not doing well, and we cannot ignore that fact. The Youth’12 survey told us that 29 percent of young women in our high schools are self-harming—29 percent—and 21 percent have seriously considered suicide in the past year. It is no wonder that in this OECD report we come 39th in terms of students’ happiness at school.

That side of the House may dismiss that as not being a measure that is included in something like national standards, but an unhappy young person does not succeed. A young person who is depressed does not succeed. One in five of our students in our schools is experiencing mental health issues. One in five students is also being cyber-bullied—all of these things are connected. This is a generation that is suffering under the weight of a Government in decline.

Today we have been discussing education in some detail, and it is a critical topic. It is a topic that is fundamental to the success of our country. What we have seen overnight from the Programme for International Student Assessment, out of the OECD, is that the decline in our educational standards that began in 2000 is continuing. That is a matter that I know is of concern to the entire House, because if our people are not coming through schools with the skills that they need to build a future for themselves, we all need to be worried about that.

This is not a simple issue. It is an issue that requires a multi-pronged approach to its solution. That is something that this Government recognised from the day that it took office, and it has been delivering real changes to the way that we educate our children to turn that round. Every single time that this Government has had a plan to do something tangible about that, Labour has opposed it. Labour has opposed it because it is far more interested in protecting its union mates than it is worried about the children.

This is the Government that brought in national standards. We want to know whether our children are succeeding. We need to know this in primary school, not once they get to high school, and then think: “Gosh, why are we not getting there?”. In fact, the children that this Programme for International Student Assessment surveyed went through those critical primary school years under the Labour system of education. Now we have national standards that will help us to identify and address those shortcomings considerably more.

We are investing a huge amount in the quality of our teachers because we know that the one thing that will make a difference, more than anything else, is high-quality teachers. We want to support that. But it is also about providing the resources to our schools to raise educational standards and to make sure that every child in every school has access to the resources that they would have in the best schools. A big part of that is through digital enablement.

I want to commend my colleague the Hon Nikki Kaye, who is leading a programme of work through the Network for Learning. This programme is taking advantage of the ultra-fast broadband that National is rolling out to schools, because we know that that sort of digital connectivity is absolutely critical in preparing children for the modern world. The ultra-fast broadband has so far been rolled out to more than 1,900 schools. By 2016 every school in this country will have access to ultra-fast broadband and will have access to the Network for Learning. That means that every child in every school, from the smallest to the largest, will be able to access the best resources offered in the best schools in the world. Is that not interesting?

The Labour Opposition has done everything it can for 5 years to derail ultra-fast broadband. It voted against it. It tried to block it. It complained that it was all happening too fast; it complained that it was all happening too slow. We are now seeing the Opposition getting behind a campaign to try once more to derail it. Why is it doing that? It is doing that for its own selfish, political, short-focused, short-sighted, self-serving gains. That is the only reason it is doing it.

Do you know who benefits from this? Do you know who would benefit from derailing the build of ultra-fast broadband? I can tell you who it is not benefiting. It is not the consumers; it is the retailers. So if we insist on a lower price for the wholesalers, as Labour wants to happen—follow the money. Follow the money. I will tell you who benefits: the large corporates like Vodafone, which benefits from the extra money. That is what Labour is supporting. That is what it wants to see happen.

I will tell you what will happen now. The consumers will not see anything at all, I predict. If they do, it will be a tiny fraction of any drop. Do you know why? Because now we are going to be embroiled in years and years of litigation while the retailers fight very hard to keep those profits. If anybody in this House is naive enough to think that this is about consumers, they are dreaming. This fight is about making the retailers keep the extra money. It is the big corporate retailers that we are seeing Labour get in behind. The retailers are now coming out and saying: “Oh, well, we don’t think we will be able to pass any of it on. Sorry about that. Oops!”. Well, that is exactly what we have been saying.

I would suggest to the opponents in this House who are trying so hard to derail ultra-fast broadband—who are trying so hard to stop New Zealand schools, New Zealand families, getting access to world-leading education and world-leading health services—that the economic benefits alone of ultra-fast broadband are massive. It is creating so many jobs around New Zealand. It has been independently modelled to add about $33 billion worth of economic benefits. Labour and the Greens are once more saying: “Let’s just block it. Let’s stop it. Let’s say no. We are more interested in ourselves and our own point-scoring than in the people of New Zealand.” We are not going to let that happen.

This Government is failing. This is a shambolic Government that is a disgrace to democracy. I received an email today, and so did most MPs, saying: “Please remember those who died for democracy, died for the freedom to vote, died so that people could be heard. Please do not dismiss the result of any referendum as though it is a pain in your side or with remarks akin to ‘It won’t change anything.’, because it is a slap in the face to all those who have served and currently serve in the armed forces; those who have committed their lives to the protection of our rights.” That is from a third-generation armed forces member. All those people whom we acknowledge on Anzac Day would be rolling over in their graves if they knew what is going on in this country today.

Thirty pieces of silver, $30 million to Rio Tinto, and 30 percent of the population, at best, support asset sales—what is the common thread there? Well, it is, in one word, “treachery”—treachery. I went to Wikipedia—as we all do today, of course; to the font of all wisdom—to ask what the definition of “treason” is. It said: “citizen’s actions to … seriously injure …” the nation. I put it to you that that is exactly what this National Government is carrying out by ignoring the views of New Zealanders. It is treachery that is seriously undermining our ability to move forward as a country.

This Government is failing in many areas. Today we heard about education. The balance of payments deficit—oh, terms of trade are good; the balance of payments deficit is disastrous. Well, I look at a couple of areas of the economy, and at primary industries in particular.

Let us look at forestry. There are record export earnings in forestry—well, so we are told. There are certainly record log exports. So what we have seen is a record to $4.3 billion, which I think is about the fourth-biggest export from this country. The majority of it is now going out in logs. It is $120 for a tonne of logs and $400 for a tonne of timber. The National Government is exporting jobs from this country every single day from the forestry industry. And do you know what we are left with? We are left with an industry under huge commercial pressure—financial pressure—to the point where it is killing people in the forests on a regular basis because of the financial pressure put on contracting firms to rip down those logs and get rid of them as quickly as possible. That is the failure of the National Government in the forestry industry.

Let us look at meat—the once-proud meat industry. National is the party that champions the rights of farmers. What is happening in the meat industry? Farmers are leaving to go dairying. Even in the area of dairying we are seeing unhidden environmental and financial costs. Let us go back to meat—the wonderful progress—because the National Government has committed half a million dollars to the Red Meat Sector Strategy, and then committed $350 million of taxpayer and farmer money through the Primary Growth Partnership to grow the red meat industry. And do you know what the latest innovation is? It is to take the carcasses, cut them into six pieces, and send them to China for further value-added processing. This National Government is a disgrace to the agricultural sector. The farmers and the meatworkers who have worked hard to build value in the meat industry have seen it destroyed in 1 single year.

Look at manufacturing. National has failed in manufacturing. At best, it has been flat—exports of manufactured products—mainly off the back of the primary sector because of the dairy industry.

Take away the dairy sector influence, and in every measure of our economy, this National Government has failed. It is, indeed, carrying out treacherous acts of selling our assets and failing to build up any additional value in this economy. This Government is a disgrace.

Well, I am astonished, as is everybody who has just heard that last speech by the Hon Damien O’Connor. It was not a speech; it was a rant. It was a rant. There were some parts of it that were so funny, it was not true. Did I hear it right? People are going out of farming into dairying.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: Out of meat farming.

Oh, out of meat farming into dairying, as if suddenly farming is coming to a complete halt. Is that a future Minister of agriculture? I do not think so—I do not think so. I was shocked and I was also aghast when that member suggested that the Government has killed people in forestry. That is an appalling thing to say, and that member should be deeply, deeply ashamed. He plays fast and loose with personal tragedies, and I have seen it from him before. I did not accept it then and I do not now.

We are engaged in the general debate. Unlike the previous speaker, I intend to talk about the place I live in, and that is the West Coast and Tasman. It is one of those splendid areas where people are worth their weight in gold. It is one of those areas that is a truly revenue-generating area, and what a wonderful place it is.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: And they tossed the member out.

Say again?

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: And they tossed the member out.

Not particularly. I do not think that was—

💬 Hon Christopher Finlayson: Who won the party vote?

Well, who won the party vote? We have consistently won the party vote since I have been standing. I held the seat, and, indeed, there was a change. But stand by, Mr Mallard, for the seat to be returned to National, and National will be back on the Treasury benches. Nothing is more certain than that.

Tasman and the West Coast supports dairying, fishing, mining, horticulture, forestry, and tourism. Think of that. Think of those aspects. I will say it again: dairying, fishing, mining, horticulture, forestry, and tourism. They are basic, real industries in New Zealand. It is an area that has frequently been ravaged by Labour—ravaged and savaged and neglected, just as that member neglected to mention it during his 5 minutes of ghastly ranting. But, especially, that area was ravaged by the cruel policies of the Hon Trevor Mallard when he was the Minister of Education, and the school doors slammed as he walked through the West Coast—slammed. Indeed, he was vilified—vilified.

We have had a very busy month down there. We have had Tony Ryall in Tasman, opening the Golden Bay Integrated Family Health Centre. Just compare that with what Labour ever did in health in West Coast - Tasman. It was zilch—absolutely zilch. You will not be hearing much from Labour about health in the next election. The Hon Tony Ryall has dedicated $60 million to the Grey Base Hospital rebuild. What a legacy—what a legacy. It was a pleasure to host Maggie Barry in the electorate for a weekend during the last month. Her easy and natural speaking style was greatly appreciated by all who heard her. She is an inspiration to all. The Hon Chris Tremain, the Associate Minister of Tourism, joined an Olympic gold medallist cyclist to open the West Coast Wilderness Trail in Kūmara a couple of weekends ago. It was a classic example of small community recovery through a splendid policy of development—a policy of the Prime Minister’s, in fact.

We had Simon Bridges, who came down to open the Amethyst Hydro Scheme electricity generation point. It was possible because National allows line companies to go into generation. An extremely good day was held there, after which we took him to visit a goldmine—a true, working goldmine—as the Minister of Energy and Resources. It was an insightful day.

Picture if you will—picture if you will—the sort of description I have given for West Coast - Tasman. Picture that under a Labour-Green mixture, with perhaps New Zealand First hanging around on the fringes. Would we have the development? Would we have the revenue earnings? Or would the Coast consistently be closed? I think it would be closed. I think, and the people of the West Coast think—and let us remember that they did come down and they did have a Forest and Bird meeting. It did not generate much enthusiasm for anybody—no. It was sad. It was sad, and it will be a sad day if we have a Labour-Green Government down on the West Coast. Thank you.

It is a pleasure to follow the Shakespearean tones of the National MP Chris Auchinvole. He painted a very evocative picture of a post-apocalyptic world where the West Coast is closed. However, the boom and bust cycles that are attached to the industry that he was describing—the mining industry—is one of the reasons for those apocalyptic moments in the history of areas like the West Coast and Waihī.

However, I am not going to talk about that; I am going to talk about the education system, which has been the theme this afternoon, and whether it is working. Even before the Programme for International Student Assessment survey, one might worry when you get people who are aspiring to be leaders of political parties in Parliament who are not sure whether man landed on the moon or are not sure whether chemtrails are real or not. It does make us wonder whether the education system is not working, or whether those are just the ramblings of an individual who has lost touch with reality for some other reasons. However, it is very important—

💬 Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: So do you think chemtrails are real?

The Green position on chemtrails is that many people have too much time on their hands for conspiracy theories.

💬 Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: No, do you believe in them or not?

I absolutely do not believe in chemtrails.

In the urgent debate that we just held on education, however, the Minister of Education told the Opposition that we should stop being binary and we should have a constructive educational conversation. Then she yelled at the Opposition to grow up. Unfortunately for the Minister, this is a failed educational method for inspiring dialogue, let alone change. Just agreeing with the Minister is not dialogue. Being yelled at does not work.

I do agree with the Minister that we need to strengthen the teaching profession and we need to support all children in Aotearoa to get the best, but what the Programme for International Student Assessment survey tells us is that the bad educational policies of the last 5 years in particular have entrenched disadvantage. We need to really look at that survey, but it is not the be-all and end-all. What it is telling us this time, in the chapter on economic disadvantage and educational equity issues, is that our country is decreasing when everyone else is increasing. Our country is failing when everyone else is succeeding.

It is no good to just keep trotting out these programmes for success without looking at the context that we are operating in. The education system does not exist in a vacuum. It is very much part of the economic situation of our country, which right now is bedevilled with a number of Government policies that are not working. Education is just one of them. There is also the asset sales debacle, and I would urge everybody out there to vote to make sure that the Government gets the message about that very, very clearly—that we do not want to sell our assets. Also there is the debacle over Skycity, youth rates, the gutting of the Resource Management Act, and even one of the most mean-spirited things, which is the cup of tea. No one is allowed a cup of tea at work. They do not have the right to a break. That one, to me, is one of the most mean-spirited, pathetic, and ghastly things that you would possibly imagine you could say to people in the workplace who do not have a lot of power. After spending the night with the cleaners in this very, very hot building, boy, did we want a cup of tea.

However, going back to the survey, if the Minister is serious about listening to it, then she needs to adopt a Green programme of positive solutions, such as a living wage for the parents—there is a thought. If the survey tells us that socio-economic disadvantage is critical, one of the ways we help children to get socio-economic advantage is to pay their parents enough money to be able to provide them with the necessaries of life. Then all the programmes about food in schools, and all the charitable good works that in the end do not empower people but are necessary for survival at the moment, will not be needed because people will be earning a living wage. Another brilliant idea would be to extend the family in-work tax credit to all families so that everybody would have enough to feed those children. There is an idea.

We really need to be serious about addressing what the survey has identified. As I said earlier, the survey is not the endgame for education, and some of the countries that have been ranked really high—the Asian countries—have authoritarian models that are not the best models for our educational success. They do not result in innovation, critical thinking, and creativity, which are needed in the world today, as opposed to the world of yesterday. Those countries, although ranking highly in the survey, are starting to acknowledge that models such as the creative, broad curriculum that New Zealand was once famous for are the kinds of models that we need.

I think that one of the most vital messages of the survey is early childhood education, and that is where we are missing out. We have cut the 100 percent registration requirement, and what we are doing to Pacific heritage languages, through the Education and Science Committee, is a disgrace. It is the opposite of the survey, and it is very disappointing.

About 18 months ago I started to take a much closer interest in education. It was not an area I had been involved in before and it was not an area that I had taken a huge amount of interest in. But 18 months ago my wife and I had a child, and once you have a child you start to take a much closer look at the education system. I have to say that after looking at the policies that the Hon Anne Tolley and the Hon Hekia Parata have been putting in place for the children of New Zealand, I have great confidence in the education system that my son will be going through. He has started in early childhood education, and in a few years’ time he will be entering school.

We have discussed quite a bit today the Programme for International Student Assessment results, and it is fair to say that New Zealand has seen some decline in those results. But I have to say I have been absolutely appalled by some of the comments levelled from the Opposition at the National Government’s national standards policy. Let us just remember that in 2012 the children who were assessed under the Programme for International Student Assessment system were 15. They did not go through an education system with national standards in place. It is actually the people who were involved in that system who are saying that a national standards - type system in their early years would have helped those children.

💬 Jacinda Ardern: When we were coming seventh, they didn’t go through it either.

Opposition members can yell and scream at us across the House, as they have been doing all day, but the bottom line is that the children assessed under the Programme for International Student Assessment system, which has seen the results for this country drop, were the kids who came under an earlier system through primary school, under Labour Government policies. In fact, in 2000, when we were doing very well as a country, those children had benefited from 9 years of a National Government and its education policies.

But the important thing is that we are working to increase the level of achievement for all New Zealand kids. I am proud that in our country we have just doubled the budget for the early childhood education system—doubled the budget for those children. We have got the national standards system, the exact system that the Programme for International Student Assessment people are saying will help those children. It will give them more opportunities to succeed, and to be able to read and write when they get to high school. We have also seen the upgrades in the digital literacy area. That huge investment will mean that those kids are going through a schooling system that is working in the 21st century. We have also seen the Teachers Council being reformed, and Hekia Parata’s work in that area will help those children in the long run by helping to improve the quality of teaching in New Zealand.

I also want to counter some of the arguments that Jacinda Ardern was making. I quite like Jacinda, actually. We sat in the Television New Zealand green room most Thursday mornings for a while. She is relatively normal, as Labour MPs go. But for her to say that this Government is in decline is absolutely wrong. I want to give her some figures. This country is experiencing 2.5 percent growth at the moment. It is one of the fastest growth rates in the OECD. Tell the people who own businesses in the greater east Tāmaki industrial area in my electorate that we are not doing better as a country. They will absolutely disagree with you. Tell those employers that the 90-day trial, which has led to 13,000 extra people being employed, is a bad thing. They will tell you that it is an opportunity for them to take on new people and give them an opportunity. Go and talk to the principals and the teachers in schools like Baverstock Oaks School in my electorate and tell them that the policies in the education area that we are putting in place are bad for children. They will absolutely disagree with you, as well.

Talk to the people who commute from Botany to the city and tell them that the investment we are putting into Auckland transport is not good. Tell them that the Auckland-Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative, the City Rail Link, and the Waterview Connection are going to be bad for Auckland transport. They will absolutely disagree with you, as well. They will tell you that the improvements we are making are going to be hugely beneficial for New Zealanders. Go and talk to the people who want to purchase homes in the Flat Bush area who will be able to access more affordable housing in the long run through the special housing areas, which are going to lead to more housing supply in Auckland. Tell them that increasing the housing supply is bad for them. They will absolutely disagree with Labour on that too. Tell the people who are developing houses that the policies around development contributions and around local government are bad for them. They will disagree with Labour on that too.

This Government has a wide range of programmes and a wide range of policies that are doing a lot for the New Zealand economy and that are doing a lot for New Zealanders. We are doing well as a country. This Government is far from being in decline. This Government is just getting up and going.

💬 Kris Faafoi: Ha, ha!

New Zealanders know that. That is why Kris Faafoi is laughing. He knows that Labour has got nothing that can counter it.

I was very interested in the comments that the member Jami-Lee Ross made just before he resumed his seat. He said that we should get out of here and talk to the principals. I will recommend some principals. I recommend that that member comes to Christchurch. He should talk to the principal, the staff, and the parents at Phillipstown School. He should talk to the principal, the staff, and the parents at Branston Intermediate School. He should talk to the principal, the staff, and the parents in the communities that have been wracked with division—not by the quakes, not by the bureaucracy, but by Minister Hekia Parata, who rode roughshod over democracy and fair process in an already vulnerable and damaged community and told us where our communities were going to be in the future. At the heart of every community is the local school, and many of our communities no longer have them.

I know what the principals, the staff, and the parents at those schools and in those communities are saying. They are saying that John Key is arrogant, he has disappointed them, he has lost touch, and he is going to lose his job. They get excited at the thought of a change of Government. I have not heard that level of excitement for a long time. It certainly was not obvious going into the 2011 election, but I know it is going to be obvious going into the 2014 election.

The look on John Key’s face at question time says it all. It is not fun for him any more. He has lost the fun out of the game that he has been playing with our communities. He said to some communities in my electorate: “Oh, well, if they do not like the offer that the Government is making”—these are people who have lost their land to red zoning introduced by Gerry Brownlee—“we can say: ‘It’s been fun.’ and just walk away.” Well, that is what the public of New Zealand are doing to John Key and his Government. They are saying: “We don’t think it is fun with you any more and we are walking away.”

If you look at the issue of asset sales, Tony Ryall, Steven Joyce, and John Key continue to say that they have a mandate for asset sales, and they know that that is wrong. They know by the opinion polls. They know by the polling within their own party that National Party members do not support asset sales, but their ideology and their need to get some money in the bank so that they can fritter it around next year to try to buy votes drives their asset sale programme. This is not because they want a sensible restoring of our budget and not because they care about long-term investment in New Zealand; they just want some quick wins. Well, they are not going to get them. The public are saying: “We don’t like asset sales. It’s being driven by a Government that is out of touch.”

If you look at the tragedy of the families who lost their loved ones in the Pike River mine explosion, they were expecting some financial support from the Government. They were expecting a lot of things because Ministers, including the Prime Minister, went down there and promised a lot and have delivered little. On the issue of the Government Communications Security Bureau New Zealanders are outraged that the Prime Minister thinks so little of our security agencies spying on New Zealanders. He seems to think it is not a problem. Well, actually, privacy and the integrity of individual rights are very important parts of democracy. Again, the Prime Minister is out of touch. He just brushes it off.

He is looking for—well, not looking for; searching for—a future coalition partner. He is getting into a bit of bother with his current ones. John Banks does not seem to be reliable long term. He has confirmed it today. He is off at the next election. Peter Dunne does not seem to be in favour. The Prime Minister is very lukewarm in his assurances of confidence in whether he leaked the Kitteridge report or not. The Māori Party is crumbling as we watch it. We have seen its problems over the last little while. So now we have got the Prime Minister courting Colin Craig. He is a present that just keeps on giving, is he not? We have got early Christmas presents, and I am sure that we are going to have him as the gift that keeps on giving right throughout next year.

💬 Kris Faafoi: Does he believe in Santa?

I do not know whether he believes in Santa Claus or not.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: And clouds of chemtrails.

He does believe in chemtrails. I can see him as the Minister of Science and Innovation in a future coalition arrangement. Chemtrails will be banned under a Conservative Party - National Party confidence and supply agreement. He is not sure, not able to confirm, whether man has walked on the moon. He has got a wide range of interests and experience. I think that the other members of the National Party will be very wary of him.

What the public said in Christchurch East was what the rest of the country is saying: this Government is arrogant, it is out of touch, and it is time it packed its bags.

Well, that was all rather jejune really. A little bit boring.

💬 Hon Shane Jones: Turgid?

Yes. You have to look it up, actually. It is a quality of a good education, and most of my life has actually been under a National education. As a great fan of sesquipedalianism, I am very happy to be here today.

There is one word that I am not allowed to use today. So I want instead to use the word “irony” or the word “duplicity”. Thank goodness there is not an international ranking of Opposition parties that makes sense, because that lot across there would be in a lot of trouble. Consider the logic that we have heard today. Consider the rhetoric and the logic that we have heard today. The Opposition is incredibly happy to compare us with international standards, but is not willing to allow national standards.

Let us just sit with that again.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: Say that again?

Those members have been sitting with the Programme for International Student Assessment things today, Chris. They have been saying: “Oh, look at all these Programme for International Student Assessment standards. We are going to use them to try to clobber the Government.” Yet, of course, then they are against national standards. There seems to be a certain irony here. Today National is pleased to know how New Zealand is doing compared with the rest of the world, but Labour seems to be talking a lot about that today, too. Where we differ—

💬 Hon Shane Jones: Which planet? Uranus?

Oh, terrible! Here is a man who is attempting to be scientific by knowing about the planets. He probably still thinks that there are nine planets in the solar system.

Anyway, where we differ on this whole standards issue is that we believe that New Zealand parents should have the same access to the knowledge about how their children are doing as everyone else. But here we have heard again from Labour, from the Greens, and from New Zealand First: “Oh, we are very happy to accept international standards and understand where New Zealand stands there, but, parents, you should not know about how your children are doing. That would be terrible.” In fact, Chris Hipkins, whom I have got a lot of time for, basically was saying that the next Labour Government—whenever that might happen, God forbid—would scrap national standards. But it does not seem entirely committed to that.

Labour tells us that it would like a scheme to track student progress against the national curriculum.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: Oh!

Chris says: “We think that”—another Chris, the Mr Hipkins one—“parents deserve quality information about how their kids are doing.” But I am not sure exactly what that means when you look at what we have already got with national standards. Maybe Labour, the Greens, and others want some sort of holistic, feel-good assessment in which juggling, basket weaving, and tree hugging are ranked alongside secondary concerns like reading, writing, and arithmetic. It is very depressing that the major aim of this Labour Party is to deny parents and the Government straightforward information on how their children and their schools are doing. That has been the irony of the debate throughout today—this huge desire to use the international standards of Programme for International Student Assessment to attack the national standards.

💬 Hon Shane Jones: What about astrology?

Oh no! You do not want to do astrology. It is astronomy.

💬 Hon Shane Jones: That’s what your coalition partner’s into—astrology.

Oh no, no! That is your group down here, actually. You want to go and look at some of the Hansard debates from the Greens in particular, with their sort of Gaia worship and other things.

💬 Hon Christopher Finlayson: Have you ever met Catherine Delahunty?

Absolutely—indeed. I think my colleague Minister Finlayson points it out very well.

In fact that is one of the other ironies today. We have all this talk of science from the Opposition, saying that it is all about democracy. Well, it is only democracy to the Opposition if it gets its way.

💬 Tim Macindoe: “Do it our way.”

Absolutely. We saw what happened with the Greens when one of their party members dared to challenge the leadership. Was he allowed a democratic manner? Definitely not.

💬 Tim Macindoe: That was democratic, wasn’t it?

Absolutely. Democracy. Absolutely perfect.

And science—oh, they are all about science. Well, let us talk about the science of genetic engineering. Let us talk about the science of genetic modification. Let us talk about the science around drug use. But, oh no! The Greens and Labour are not so much interested in that. They are very, very selective.

We are a Government committed to education. I see that firsthand in my own electorate of Tāmaki. Almost 89 percent of young people in Tāmaki have achieved National Certificate of Educational Achievement level 2. They are achieving over the target that this Government has set. They are achieving not only because of what the Government is driving but because we have excellent teachers. I think that amongst all the debate today is an element of thanks that is required still to our teachers who do an enormous effort, going around and visiting the various principals and teachers of my schools—secondary and primary. They do an amazing job for our kids. I think most of them—teachers in Auckland and New Zealand—are not afraid to have some standards and have some tests. If we want to help our children, we need to know how they are operating. Thank you very much.

I rise as the proud member of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, a lively, innovative, and extremely enormous electorate on the East Coast of the North Island. It extends from Te Kaha in the north to Wainuiōmata in the south, which is by car an 11-hour drive. The people of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti are not seeing any benefit from this Government’s economic strategy.

💬 Darien Fenton: What strategy?

That is right—what strategy? When I first came into this House, one of my first questions was to the Minister for Economic Development, Mr Steven Joyce. I asked what was his Government was doing to grow the number of jobs in Ikaroa-Rāwhiti. His reply? I paraphrase here. He said that it was growing jobs in three areas. The first was oil exploration, just like in Taranaki; the second was the Ruataniwha Dam; and the third—wait for it—was a cycle track. A cycle track, people. That is it, folks. That is the economic plan for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, Hawke’s Bay, and Gisborne. I can tell you that there is no one that I know who has a job from any of those think-big projects of this Government, and I can guarantee you that neither will they see one.

Clearly this Government is out of touch. It is out of touch with Ikaroa-Rāwhiti. It is out of touch with the regions throughout New Zealand.

Ikaroa-Rāwhiti is home to many iwi: Ngati Porou, Te Aitangi-a-Māhaki, Rongowhakaata, Ngai Tāmanuhiri, Ngāti Kahungunu, Rangitāne, and Te Ātiawa. Some 13 territory authorities are nurtured traditionally by a primary base economy of farming, fishing, forestry, horticulture, and viticulture. We are manaaki people—hospitable. We are aroha ki te tangata—caring people—who believe that in time of need the manaaki and the aroha will be returned. The people of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti are not seeing the manaakitanga or aroha from this Government. Instead, the people of Ikaroa-Rāwhiti are being ignored and neglected by this Government.

No amount of spin and no amount of make-believe from that side of the House will remove the struggle many of our whānau are experiencing in terms of getting real jobs, training opportunities, apprenticeships for our rangatahi, warm and affordable housing, and access to quality health care. But do not listen to me, let us look at the statistics. There are job losses. Cedenco Foods, Gisborne, 2009: 129 job losses. Ovation meatworks, Waipukurau, June 2011: 304 job losses. Godfrey Hirst woollen mill, Dannevirke, this year: between 50 to 80 job losses. New Zealand Post, Pētone: 70 job losses this year. Clyde Lumber, Wairoa: 25 losses in April this year. The impact of those job losses in those small communities is still being felt today, and where is the Government? Where is the Government, to provide some safety and some safety nets for those whānau? It is asleep at the wheel. It is asleep at the wheel and is neglecting these communities throughout Ikaroa-Rāwhiti.

Let us turn to youth unemployment, something that I am very passionate about. According to the household labour force statistics in September 2013, since National came into office, the overall number of unemployed 20 to 24-year-olds has increased by 12,800 to 29,000. That is disgraceful. Since National came into office, the number of 15 to 24-year-olds not in education, employment, or training has increased by 5,000 to a total of 72,000 people.

You can ask what Labour will do when it comes into Government in 2014. Labour believes in economic gain for all, and in a fair and just society where people can live, and in dignity and protection for all. Kia ora tātou.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.