General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. Let us take stock of where things are as we head into the halfway point of the first week of the session, when the Opposition, once again, is absolutely focused on the issues that matter: private dinners, innovations in fund-raising, and even, this afternoon, correct grammar. This Opposition is a million miles from reality, and the people of New Zealand know it.

Meanwhile, on this side of the House we are focused on achieving things for New Zealand, and today we had another example of it, with more growth in employment—84,000 more New Zealanders have got jobs this year than a year ago. It is the largest increase in employment in nearly a decade—nearly a decade—and there was not a word out of the Opposition on that today. Business and consumer confidence is at record highs, manufacturing has been in expansion now for 19 months, welfare reform is working, more people want to move to New Zealand, and fewer Kiwis want to leave. Last month we had a seasonally adjusted net loss to Australia of just 400 people. We heard nothing from the Opposition on that; those members are too wrapped up in their private dinners and their fund-raising events.

New Zealand is doing better on all other economic indicators—economic growth, the balance of payments. The Labour Party’s obsession about the balance of payments—maybe it is some sort of delayed apology for how appallingly it did with the export sector when it was last in Government. Our international liabilities are one of those things that boffin Parker likes to focus on. How much we owe the world is down to just 66 percent of our economy. It was just over 85 percent when Labour finished its handiwork in 2008. The export crisis that we know about—our goods exports have just had their biggest quarter ever. The goods surplus for the last 6 months is over $2 billion. But that does not stop the boffins on the other side trying to reform the economy with their wacky new monetary policy, which they have no idea how it would work. And here we are, 8 days into it, and one David Parker—boffin in charge—cannot tell us at all how it would work and to what extent it would work.

💬 Hon David Parker: You don’t understand.

Apparently, the rest of the world does not understand. It is very complicated. It is a very interesting alchemy of stuff that Mr Parker has concocted, but he cannot answer the question. There is a very simple question—which neither he nor Mr Cunliffe can answer—that is very straightforward. How much would people’s KiwiSaver rates have to go up to avoid a 1 percent increase in interest rates? And if they do not know the answer to that question, it is not a policy; it is a thought bubble. The problem for the Opposition is that it does not know the answer, and the silence is deafening.

The problem with that is that it is another example of a policy where you have to read the fine print. It is like Labour’s trucking policy that does nothing about trucks. It is like its baby bonus that does not provide a baby bonus. And this is the monetary policy that does not actually achieve anything. It does not actually deal with anything like interest rates. The public know that, and the public say—actually, it is not just the public. There is, of course, one late-lamented—again, not mentioned in the House this week—Shane Jones. Ah, he knows it, too. He popped his head up and said that he was leaving, and we all thought: “Wonder why that is.” The reason was that he believed that being an economic development Minister in a Government that is opposed to economic development would be an oxymoron. He is right—it would be—and so, not surprisingly, he started to talk about other jobs. He realised that it would be the worst possible job because Labour and the Greens together are opposed to economic growth.

So here we have it. On this side of the House we are focused on the issues that matter and achieving great things for New Zealanders through the hard work of the Government and New Zealanders. On the other side of the House those members are obsessing about the silly stuff and then coming up with wacky policies that achieve nothing. It is no wonder the country is in favour of this Government. Thank you.

How desperate is that Government? The guy it puts up to deflect and dissemble could come up with only the unemployment rate on a day that it stayed the same—from 6 percent to 6 percent. As the Labour Opposition—why does he not listen to this—has revealed, long-term unemployment under this Government has tripled since National took office. If that is the best it can do in a general debate, it really is in trouble.

Mr Joyce mentioned Labour’s monetary policy. He obviously did not like it. I will tell you why he did not like it: because the Employers and Manufacturers Association did, Federated Farmers did, the Manufacturers and Exporters Association did, the bank economists largely did, former Reserve Bank Governor Don Brash did, and bank board members did. So that is why Steven Joyce did not: because New Zealanders did. They know that it means lower interest rates. They know that it means a better export economy with better jobs and higher wages.

And, ladies and gentlemen, has not the last week just shown the contrast between these two parties? On the Government’s side—politics as usual. On the Labour side—a party of new ideas that wants to put people first. That is what Labour is about: putting New Zealanders first. This Government puts money first. That is the common theme of the sad parade of the last couple of weeks. It put subsidising Rio Tinto ahead of compensating Pike River families. It chose to help Skycity, not to end child poverty. It chose the Cabinet club, Oravida, and Maurice Williamson’s call to the police about a donor. It is privileging wealthy donors and granting special access to Ministers. It is our duty, though it gives us no pleasure—

💬 Hon Members: Ha, ha!

—to point that out to New Zealanders. Well, there is the laugh of the damned. There is the laugh of the damned. They are damned because John Key came to office 5 years ago promising to be a breath of fresh air. I think he was bouncing from cloud to cloud at the time, but that is what he promised. He promised high standards from his Ministers. He did not promise Oravida and draining the swamp. That is what he has got. He did not promise Ministers intervening with the police to help out wealthy donors. He did not promise Ministers taking wholesale donations and then forgetting that they had got them. Those are not the standards New Zealanders expect. That is, sadly, what politics as usual has become, but it is not good enough and it is not what Labour stands for.

What Labour stands for is putting New Zealanders first. We have a positive agenda that is about our children: the idea that every single New Zealand child deserves the best possible start, irrespective of where they are born, irrespective of who their parents are or where they come from, irrespective of the size of their family’s wallet or home. Every child deserves the best start, and that is why the Labour Party has been working so hard to bring in the Best Start package, to end the fact that one in four of our children is growing up in poverty. One in four of our children is growing up in poverty, and that Government is enriching itself and its members and their families, not the most vulnerable children of this land.

Every New Zealand child deserves to grow up in a warm, dry, healthy home. There are 5,000 families in New Zealand on the waiting list for a State home. Is it not sad that the Prime Minister cancelled 500 State houses in his own electorate of Hobsonville? The same Prime Minister tells us how he came from a family that depended on a State house. The difference between the Government and the Opposition is that we do not pull up the ladder. We put all New Zealanders first. We do not mind hard work, but we want every New Zealand child to have the opportunities that we had. Politics as usual or politics for people? It is an easy choice in 2014.

I agree that the past week has been a very interesting week in New Zealand politics—a difficult time for a member of the House. It proves the old adage that nothing in this game lasts for ever. What is here today can be gone tomorrow. It was an emotional week. Of course, I refer to the impending retirement of Rajen Prasad. Attention from the very good work that the Government is doing for this country was diverted by the stunning news that Rajen is on his bike. But I am here to remind the House that life will go on without Dr Prasad. He may no longer be with us after the election, but we will still have the lowest crime rate in 25 years. The OECD, as we know from today, says that we are in very good shape. Some say that we will have the highest economic growth in the developed world this year. We still have the extra $22 million boost for budgeting services, announced by my good friend Paula Bennett this week, and, as Mr Joyce said, an extra 84,000 jobs created in the last year, so we must continue.

As Dr Prasad noted, he has made his contribution to Parliament. His work is done. When earlier this year he asked three questions in question time he equalled the total number of questions he had asked in the previous 5 years. Little, sadly, did we know that this flurry of activity was really a death rattle.

I want to tell the House a most interesting story. Last Sunday I woke up at 6.55 and, as is my wont, lunged for my radio so that I could listen to the news on Radio New Zealand National. After the news, I thought the children’s programmes must have continued, because there was a bizarre interview with a fellow called David Cunliffe. Wallace Chapman, who has replaced Labour lovey Chris Laidlaw on the programme, was asking him a question: “Who in your caucus, Mr Cunliffe, has experience as a manual worker?”. And Mr Cunliffe said there were many. As I look across the House, I cannot see many, but Mr Chapman said: “Who, exactly?”. Oh, Darien. I recognise Darien Fenton. But then Mr Chapman said: “Well, who in particular?”. And Mr Cunliffe said: “Me.” Apparently Mr Cunliffe was a manual worker. Between secondary school and going to university, apparently he was a shearer. I would very much like him to challenge Colin King to a shearing competition. So the bard of Harvard is really a son of the soil.

As a man who works with his hands, Mr Cunliffe will appreciate this week’s announcement of $20 million in the Budget for 6,000 more apprenticeships, which will give eligible apprentices or trainees an opportunity to apply for a $1,000 subsidy towards the costs of tools and off-job course costs, or $2,000 for those in priority trades. So what we have with Mr Cunliffe is a very, very strange person, and Wallace Chapman is not the only person to have identified this. He is always secretive and always darting around the edges of the truth. We have the secret trusts, we have those extraordinary statements about the whaling case, which was a triumph for this country, and he denied that we were there. As Sunday’s radio interview showed, he is so adept at being tricky that when he has no one to deceive, he deceives himself just to keep in practice. He is a very, very odd fish indeed. When he talks about the stark contrasts in the next few months, I will place the house on this fellow Key going head to head with Cunliffe and crushing him.

I have some respect for the Attorney-General, but a week out from the Budget, as we approach an election, I have to say that that was a very lightweight speech. As we head into the election season, a few weeks away from the Budget, you are going to hear less from the Labour Party about the other side and more about the difference that we are going to bring to New Zealanders’ lives. Of course we are still going to be exposing the cronyism that is rife under this Government. I do not have time to go into that any more today, other than to say that it is the responsibility of the Opposition to hold the Government to account for poor practice, in the interests of democracy.

I want to talk about why it is that our revisions to monetary policy struck a chord with New Zealand. It is a topic that is not particularly sexy, but it was well received by New Zealanders because they are now seeing the linkages between what the Labour Party stands for and the lives that they live. They see that our policies are connected to improving their lives in the way and in the areas that they worry about. They know that despite the fact that New Zealand had low general price inflation in the last quarter—zero percent, excluding the increase in tax on cigarettes—house price inflation is out of control, particularly in Auckland, and that is why the Reserve Bank put up interest rates, which, in turn, put up the exchange rate. They know that there has been a 40 percent increase in house prices in Auckland. The average is now $680,000. Homeownership rates are at a 50-year low. That is one of the most important measures of rising inequality under this Government.

New Zealanders know that because interest rates went up because of poor housing policy, it has meant that people have lost their jobs in the forest processing industry, that we export too many raw logs, and that the problems of insecure work and of an unemployment rate still at 6 percent are related to housing policy and monetary policy. They know that the Government hides the lot of ordinary New Zealanders in its averages. It says average wages have gone up, when it knows that 45 percent of New Zealanders did not get any wage increase last year and that, even on average, the average wage rate went up by only 1.6 percent, which is exactly the same as the increase in inflation. They know that we are on to something and that we have got to align the objectives of the Reserve Bank with our export sector.

We hear Steven Joyce coming in here and trying to minimise, trying to dissect down to the littlest thing, and trying to reject the idea that we have actually got some pretty comprehensive policies that work across the economy to reduce interest rates, to get our interest rates down to lower levels, which are always higher than the rest of the world, and which jack up our exchange rate and mean that we have not covered the cost of our imports in interest for 40 years. They know that those changes are complex but important. They know that it is better to save a bit more money than to pay it on interest. They know that the Australians have done that and that is why the Australians sustain higher income rates and lower interest rates. That is why they like universal KiwiSaver.

New Zealanders know that there are lots of other tools that the Reserve Bank has got, like macro-prudential tools, that it could use differently. They know that a capital gains tax, to tax speculators, not the family home, would take the heat out of the price of houses, and would therefore have less lead from the Reserve Bank to jack up interest rates. They know that we should restrict foreign buyers buying existing homes. They can build a new one; they cannot just buy an existing one, because that pushes up prices to the detriment of New Zealanders and their children. They know that the same thing is happening with farmland.

The Labour Party is determined—it is determined—to bring our interest rates back to international norms. We have got a once in a lifetime opportunity, as we transition to compulsory or universal KiwiSaver, to get saving rates up and interest rates down, to get people into their first home by helping them save for a deposit, and to help people in our productive sector, because our exchange rate will not be overvalued beyond its fundamentals. What was the Government’s response? Bill English said that it is bad that the exchange rate is too high, but it is bad if it settles at realistic levels. He said there is nothing new in this, but no one has done it before.

On this side of the House we are determined to bring forward policies that will help people have secure work, better-paid jobs, lower interest rates, more export earnings, and better lives.

That speech made by David Parker really shows the problems that the Labour Party has. David Parker is a very nice, pleasant, naïve fellow, trying to explain where Labour is at with economic policy. Frankly, none of that makes sense to the person in the street. The fact is that it was a whole lot of garbage. In economic terms David Parker is like the bloke at the rugby club who still showers in his underpants. That is where he is at. He is totally naïve and out of touch. He has got this policy thing that he is calling the “big tool”. The problem is that no one out there in the real world can understand what the heck he is talking about. It is all academic mumbo-jumbo. It is no wonder that David Parker is not an electorate MP, because, quite frankly, he has no connection with real people, just like David Cunliffe, his leader, who makes out that he has been a guy who has sheared sheep and done all this sort of stuff.

💬 Hon Chris Tremain: He was a war hero.

Yeah, his grandad was a war hero or whatever. Well, that was not true. In actual fact, David Cunliffe hides out in his Herne Bay mansion pretending to be the New Lynn blue-collar man, and it just does not work.

I will tell you something very interesting. I do not know whether you listened to Radio New Zealand National this morning, but Guyon Espiner asked Grant Robertson whether he thought that his leader should reveal the details of his secret trust. I will tell you what: Grant Robertson would not back up David Cunliffe. He would not back him up. Grant Robertson was one of the 68 percent of people in the Labour caucus who did not want David Cunliffe as leader.

The problem they have is that the Labour Party leadership is now for sale. And who have they sold it to? They have sold the leadership to the unions. Basically, 70 percent of unions voted for David Cunliffe. Now the Labour Party has to deliver on what the unions want. That is a real problem because what the unions actually want is not what New Zealand wants. So these people, as Steven Joyce has said, have been caught up in all sorts of distractions all week.

Meanwhile, National is delivering for New Zealanders. There is fantastic economic growth. There is 3 to 4 percent growth in GDP predicted over the coming year. There were 68,000 jobs created over the past year. The balance of payments is extremely healthy. Terms of trade are the best they have been for a long, long time. David Cunliffe was going on about interest rates, but do you know what they were under Labour in 2008? For a first mortgage they were 11 percent. That party was crippling the average Kiwi. So those guys do not have the record to stand on.

David Parker was also talking about overseas investment and how he is going to do this and that and that New Zealand is not for sale. Well, David Parker—their finance spokesman—personally signed off much, much more land in his 5 years doing the job than we have in our entire time in Government. So these guys talk one game in Opposition but they are totally different in Government. We are just focusing on getting on with the job. We are focused on health, education, the economy, and law and order—the things that matter to New Zealanders.

Tony Ryall today announced $6.2 million for cochlea implants so that kids can hear. That makes a real difference. Paula Bennett announced that there was $10 million for sexual violence counselling services in the Budget. It is so important. The Christchurch announcement was about paying $3,000 to get beneficiaries off their backsides and down to Christchurch to work, develop a career, and add something to the economy. We are tackling real problems.

Those guys over there are just making it up. We have not heard any policy from Labour apart from the “big tool”. But do you know how bad it has got over there? It has got so bad that Labour has had to promote Trevor Mallard to be its economic development spokesman. Labour has now had to put Trevor—who is finished, whom the New Zealand public hate—at No. 15 because the only guy there with any economic clue, Shane Jones, has actually said: “I’m out of here. I’m not going to be part of any Labour-Green setup.” What did he say? He said that Labour and the Greens together will not be promoting economic development. Shane Jones knows which way it is going. Shane Jones knows that it makes sense to come and work for the Government of New Zealand, because we focus on what Kiwis care about. And when it comes to the election, people are going to put all the rubbish—

💬 Dr David Clark: Oravida.

Oh, that is David Clark for Dunedin North. He is the guy who says that he will ban Google from New Zealand. What an idiot. That is the standard we have got. He is another “shower in his underpants” bloke—the vicar from Dunedin who thinks he can help run the economy. I tell you what: those people are in trouble big time. We are delivering in health and education. We have the lowest crime rate in 25 years. Kids are achieving at school, and the Polynesian community is achieving. I can tell you what. Labour members can say what they like, but the public know which side their bread is buttered on.

Yesterday the United States released its national climate assessment report. Its main message is that climate change is not a distant threat but a clear and present danger. To quote the report: “Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly into the present. Americans are noticing changes all around them. Summers are longer and hotter, and periods of extreme heat last longer than any … American has ever experienced. Winters are generally shorter and warmer. Rain comes in heavier downpours, though in many regions there are longer dry spells in between.” This follows the latest UN Fifth Assessment Report, which advances the same conclusions at the global level. “The debate over climate evidence is over.”, to quote one of the lead authors of the US report. Except that there never really was a debate over climate change—or at least there should never have been.

Climate science is not a matter of subjective political judgment. It involves natural processes where the scientific method applies, with hypotheses and evidence self-correcting to a higher level of confidence. The scientists sounded the alarm in 1988. The international community formally identified the danger in 1992. It launched its first response strategy in 1997. Then, in 2005, the then Opposition leader, John Key, advised the world that he was sceptical of global warming. Coming to power in 2008 he began weakening New Zealand’s response strategy, assisted by a cohort of troglodytes determined to undermine any purposeful climate policy.

New Zealanders would be able to report similar experiences with climate change as those of the Americans—recent storms and floods, droughts and fires, and sea level rise that is already occurring. But there is no report. The Government has no interest. Last sitting week an eminent group presented a petition to Parliament urging the Government to undertake a risk assessment of New Zealand. Not one National MP was on hand to receive the petition. The petitioners, above all, appealed for a cross-party accord on climate change. An hour later I highlighted the petition in general debate. Not one National MP acknowledged the petition.

Judith Collins spoke about the economy, law and order, health, and welfare, just as Jonathan Coleman has just now—pretty much everything that matters to ordinary Kiwis, as she put it, with exquisite ignorance of the petition that had just been tabled. The ever-prescient David Bennett contented himself with the humble view that the Green Party represents a vision that has gone. It represents, he said, a vision of the past. Ian McKelvie enthused that it was another great day for provincial New Zealand because it was raining everywhere, except, he cried, the lower Rangitīkei. Significant rain, he warned, again, with unwitting irony, will be needed very soon. And he was kind enough to explain why “For those who do not understand this …”, tupping will not be as productive with less rain.

What has to occur to bring this ideologically blind Government to its senses? During the last dismantlement of the emissions trading scheme in this House I accused John Key and Tim Groser of the moral crime of ecocide. I make that charge again today because these leaders are wilfully maintaining a response strategy that condemns New Zealanders to a future that undermines our economy, including agriculture.

Last weekend the UN Secretary-General said this: “The planet is sending us clearly a message that nature is now sick. We must listen. That is why I am saying to world leaders: ‘Don’t be on the losing side of history. Change is in the air. Solutions exist. The race is on. It’s time to lead.’ ” John Key and Tim Groser are, in fact, leading on the losing side. New Zealand’s net emissions are projected to triple between 1990 and 2030. The rate of increase is higher than global emission projections. Global projections are expected to breach the 2 degree threshold and land us in danger territory—somewhere between 2.6 and 4.5 degrees. But if the world emitted at the rate New Zealand is projected to, the global temperature would rise by 5 to 7 degrees—truly catastrophic. This is how New Zealand, under John Key, is doing its fair share. The man should be ashamed of himself and his Government.

I have a really good feeling about the Budget. I have got a good feeling about the Budget because it is absolutely focused on the things that matter most to New Zealanders and their families. It is about opportunity, it is about economic well-being, and it is about providing a good quality of life for everyone.

Firstly, and so importantly, we are moving back into surplus. It is not a huge surplus but we are on the way to ongoing surpluses and the opportunity to strengthen our economy by paying down debt so that we can keep our interest rates down, as low as possible, and put something aside for the next rainy day. It is so good to see our economy growing. Now we have to lock down that growth so that everyone—our families, our households, and our businesses—can benefit. Yes, we have all worked pretty long and pretty hard and pretty smart to get here, and we have managed to survive really tough global economic times and survive them well, but now we have to manage that economic growth equally as intelligently so that we can continue to benefit into the future. We want more jobs and we want better incomes, and the only way to get those is by sticking to our very successful economic management plan and focusing on our Business Growth Agenda.

Canterbury and the Christchurch rebuild are a key focus of this Government, and a significant amount of the new Budget money is targeted at supporting our community—firstly, supporting our very resilient but by now pretty tired and stressed families. The Minister for Social Development, Paula Bennett, has announced $13.5 million in operational funding over the next 4 years to continue the Earthquake Support Coordination Service. It is a great service. It includes counselling and the Canterbury 0800 support phone line. I know of dozens of people who have benefited from the free counselling, and hundreds, maybe thousands, who have got support on that phone line. This money will provide ongoing earthquake coordination to support 5,000 households and about 250 new people every month to go through counselling services. It is estimated that the 0800 number will handle nearly 13,000 calls in the next year. International research tells us that the third year after a major disaster is often the worst. It is very stressful for our families, so we really need and appreciate this support.

I am always very pleased to see the $20 million allocated for 6,000 new apprenticeships and the incentives for beneficiaries to come to Christchurch to take up pre-arranged jobs. I am really pleased because in the past adjournment I have had several businesses talking to me about desperately needing more workers. I have spoken to construction companies that have thanked us for the apprenticeship reboot scheme, and they say that it has been a real breakthrough for them and has increased the number of apprenticeships that they can take up, and that is great for our young people.

💬 Carol Beaumont: Where are they going to live, Nicky?

Also, to the interest of Carol Beaumont, who questioned earlier, I recently visited the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology women’s trade training course and I met a fabulous group of women—about 60 of them—who are working hard and just itching to get out and work on that rebuild. Although we are getting through the repairs, we are only about 10 percent through the construction phase, so there is plenty of work for them once they have graduated.

Other businesses that I visited are also very short of staff. I met one that was short of 40 full-time semi-skilled workers. It wants to continue to expand and this is what is stopping it. It pays well, it is family friendly, and it is flexible, but it still cannot get enough employees. There was also a smaller company that was short of only a couple of workers, but for that size of company it is crucial if they want to continue to grow.

There is work in Christchurch—all types of work—and I welcome people who are keen to come to our city and add to the rebuild and our city’s prosperity.

I think it is pertinent when we come to a Budget to ask a really simple question. It is a question that I think we should ask every Government when it is in office, and it is whom the Government is here for. When judging a Government on a question like that, actions will always speak louder than words or the rhetoric that we have had from that side of the House this afternoon. Let us look at the Government’s action. Let us look at its record since it first came into Government.

It may brush over this, but one of the first things that it did was reorder our tax system so that tax cuts—significant ones—meant that 40 percent of what it redistributed went to the top 10 percent of New Zealanders. When this Government claims that it is moving back into surplus, we need to keep in context that it is borrowing up to $10 million worth of interest a day in order to pay for tax cuts like that, which went to people who just did not need them. That was the trade-off that the Government was willing to make. At the same time, it cut things like the training incentive allowance. It scrapped adult and community education. It has poured $40 million into private schooling and established charter schools. Whom is that Government here for? Actions speak louder than words.

It is not just about policies; it is about the way the Government acts when it comes to individuals who are in positions of wealth or power. We have seen some examples in recent weeks of this Government’s attitude towards certain New Zealanders. We have seen it with Judith Collins. We have seen it with Maurice Williamson. In fact, we have seen it from almost all of the Government members with their exclusive Cabinet clubs, because what the Prime Minister did not acknowledge today when he tried to bandy around that these were just simply innocuous forms of fund-raising is that the people who belong to these clubs are not told they are part of a fund-raiser; they are told they are part of a club. They are told they are part of a club. A Government should never be elected to serve for the exclusivity of the few or for the members of a club.

For the Labour Party, our driving force has always been very, very simple. Our ethos has been simple. It has always been very clear. We have always been here because we believe in serving on behalf of people. It is always what we have been about and we are proud of that. I do not care if the National Party members want to mock us for having a value set. I am proud of it—ever since Kirk was in this House and he simply articulated it as all that people need is something to do, somewhere to live, someone to love, and something to hope for. If you want to distil down what we fight for every single day on this side of the House, it is exactly that.

I have had from that side of the House questions over some of the policy ideas we have raised. I am happy to outline all of them. Starting in January was Best Start. Best Start is a $600 million investment in children, acknowledging that if we want to move forward as a nation, the best thing we can do is invest in the early years of those children by giving their parents choices, by ensuring that they have access to early childhood education, and by increasing support for parents who need it most. That is what that package was about and that is something we are really proud of.

Secondly, what about housing? That simple issue of somewhere to live is not a simple issue in New Zealand any more. It is increasingly unaffordable for families, and particularly families with newborns are moving more and more often. That impacts on children’s education. That is why we have boldly said we will build 100,000 houses. We will introduce a capital gains tax. We will introduce monetary policy that is focused on families, interest rates, and employment. That is why we have boldly said we do not care if we are having to be world leaders in monetary policy if it means doing things on behalf of people and putting people first in a market economy.

We have always been proud of our history. We are proud of our ideas because they are positive. They are about focusing on what matters most. It is not about a club. It will always be about people.

Next Thursday our Minister of Finance, the Hon Bill English, will be presenting his sixth Budget, and, like our newly minted Minister, Nicky Wagner—congratulations—I have a good feeling about this Budget. Already we have seen some good initiatives coming through, and that is only the start of what is to come.

For my part, I would like to concentrate in this call on what this John Key National-led Government is doing for senior citizens in New Zealand, the people who are very vulnerable at the last stages of their lives. This year, for example, we are going to invest more than $1.55 billion in aged care. This is an increase of over 60 percent under Labour—$1.55 billion. So we are spending more on respite care, carer support, day programmes for older people, and a lot of other initiatives that really will make a difference to the quality of life of our seniors.

One example is that we have developed a new clinical assessment tool for aged care providers. This ensures that each resident in residential care will get up to two nationally consistent clinical assessment tests twice a year, or more if their health suffers. That is the kind of thing that really is important because older people’s health does change quite dramatically and quite suddenly, so that is an important initiative, as is, in this space, a national minimum standard, which will mean the same level of care is going to be expected from providers across New Zealand. Again, this is a very important initiative, and we have tightened up on a lot of the regulations around residential care. Across the board, across this country, in every electorate, and in every home, you can relax in the knowledge that New Zealand seniors are going to be better looked after.

Elder abuse, in my opinion, has been a shameful secret for far too long, and this John Key National-led Government is very committed to confronting elder abuse. We are actively encouraging police to work more closely with partner organisations such as Age Concern, which already does a very good job, but there is not enough sharing of information. There are too many silos around this kind of thing, so we are breaking those down. We want to improve the responses to elder abuse.

The new Crimes Amendment Act, for example, which came into effect in 2012, makes it an offence, with a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, to not take reasonable steps to protect a child or a vulnerable adult. We are focusing on older New Zealanders’ health and well-being. In my own North Shore electorate I have seen plenty of examples of that. We have invested in the past few years more than $200 million in new facilities and new services. Gone are the dark days under Labour’s incompetent Minister of Health Annette King, when we saw long waiting lists, people going to Australia for cancer treatment, and just horrific situations—terrible situations. But under the Hon Tony Ryall that has all changed.

In North Shore Hospital, for example, we have just put in a state-of-the-art elective surgery centre. We have a new emergency department and a new cardiology centre. Last week I opened up a $3.5 million community dialysis centre. This is the sort of thing that makes an enormous difference to people’s lives, and it is complemented by the dialysis centre on the North Shore Hospital site, which the Minister of Health, Tony Ryall, opened a couple of years ago. So there has been a lot of spending—some $200 million on that one example of one hospital—but it does not stop there.

There are indeed a lot of things happening in terms of superannuation. In just over 5 years of a National Government the married rate of superannuation has gone up by $183.88 a fortnight and the single living alone payment has increased by $125.10 a fortnight. That equates to a 25 percent increase since April 2008. We stick with a plan. We make one, we stick with it, and we stick with our promises. Our Prime Minister, John Key, has undertaken to the people of New Zealand that we will maintain the married rate of superannuation at 66 percent of the average wage, and under our watch the age of eligibility will remain at 65.

The SuperGold card started out with very, very humble beginnings, and now we see that there are more than 10,000 outlets in New Zealand that are involved in SuperGold. Businesses range from pharmacies and dentists to transport and utility services.

💬 Denis O’Rourke: It’s not a National Government achievement. That’s a New Zealand First achievement.

So from extremely humble beginnings we have managed to crank it up. It is also now across Australia as well, so New Zealand seniors can go across to Australia and receive a range of commercial discounts that are the same as those that Australian seniors receive. So since 2010 our Government has not just mithered on about it and sort of suggested it and then left well alone, as one of the members who was heckling before was indicating—he was trying to claim the credit for it. We have invested $68.6 million in the SuperGold card scheme, and next week in the Budget we will see even more exciting initiatives that will mean a brighter future for New Zealanders. Thank you.

National Party members have just spent the last half an hour or so trying to convince New Zealanders that they are interested in the issues that matter to them. Well, tonight in the House they are going to get a chance to vote for an issue that matters to New Zealanders. They can choose to vote to extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks. So the question is whether they will. Will they put their money where their mouth is and deal with that issue, or will they do what they have been doing for weeks now and filibuster to try to delay the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill from having its vote in Parliament tonight? I think that is the sort of issue that New Zealanders are going to judge this Government on.

National Party members would have us believe that they want to do things that are relevant to people, but we are going to see whether that is true when they debate tonight. Are they going to spend a lot of time talking about the Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill, a tiny little bill that really does not impact anybody at all, or are they going to let the House get on and vote for extending paid parental leave to 26 weeks? The Government has a problem. It has got a problem. This bill defeats the Government. The only thing that stands between families and 26 weeks’ paid parental leave is the Government, because the majority of members in this Parliament will vote for that. I thank all of those parties that really are dealing with the issues that matter to people, because if families can get 26 weeks’ paid parental leave with their newborn babies, then that will make a huge difference to people’s lives. If we can get the bonding and attachment right, which we know now from all the research and evidence is so important for helping children develop well, then we will have a much better future in this country. The only thing that stands between now and that future is the Government. So we will get to see tonight whether those members are going to do that. They have gone very quiet.

Government members say that they are going to deal with the issues that matter to people. Well, what I want to know is which people. Are they the people who are in the Cabinet club? Are those the people they are talking about? I believe they are. Someone sent me a tweet today that I think said it all. They said: “Sue, do you know what a ‘Cabinet club’ handshake looks like? Of course you don’t, because it’s done in very deep pockets, and you don’t get to see it.” That Cabinet club handshake is done in very deep pockets and with people who have the money to buy influence. That has been the theme of the last week.

While we have been addressing issues that matter, like extending paid parental leave, the Prime Minister has been spending his time trying to defend all of his colleagues and all of his Ministers from being donkey deep and dealing with people who have the money to buy influence. So—[Interruption]

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member, but I just remind members that when we are having a debate, people may interject on the speaker, but they cannot interject on each other if they do not have the floor. It is very discourteous.

Thank you. I have obviously touched a nerve there. What is the theme here? Judith Collins was working with Oravida, with people who have the money to buy influence. Maurice Williamson went and phoned the police to defend somebody who has the money to buy influence. Then we find out that they are all doing it—all of the Ministers are involved in these Cabinet clubs.

I would like to know from the members opposite—could the next person who gets up and speaks for the Government please tell us all of the electorates where these Cabinet clubs operate. Where are the electorates where these Cabinet clubs operate? Well, maybe in 5 minutes you are not going to have time to list them all. Maybe it is going to be quicker to name the electorates where there are no Cabinet clubs in operation, because I think this is happening up and down the country. In every electorate, I am guessing, there are going to be these people who belong to these exclusive clubs. They pay money to belong to these exclusive clubs for one reason and one reason alone, and that is to buy influence with Ministers in the National Government. I want the members opposite to name any of the electorates held by their MPs that do not have a Cabinet club. I think that will—well, Tau says he has not got one. There is one member who is going to be honest about it.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! The member’s full name.

Oh, Tau Henare—the Hon Tau Henare says he has not got a Cabinet club, but he is on his way out anyway. I want to know from each one of those members opposite which one of them has a Cabinet club, who is in that Cabinet club, and what influence people are buying when they join up to the Cabinet club. I think that those are the issues that we need to hear about before we see the Government’s Budget.

Kia ora mai anō tātou katoa. Way back on 14 September 1972 a petition with more than 30,000 signatures was presented to Parliament, spearheaded by the Te Reo Māori Society and Ngā Tamatoa, calling for Te Reo Māori to be taught in schools. That petition led directly to the creation of Te Tau o te Reo Māori—which later became Te Wiki o Te Reo Māori—and to Māori being included in the school curriculum. That love for the language also led to the establishment of the world-leading initiative to teach Māori to preschool children that is the kōhanga reo movement. From kōhanga we got kura kaupapa, and from kura we got wharekura, and eventually we saw the establishment of Te Wānanga o Raukawa, Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, and Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi.

In fact, the 1980s was a big time for Te Reo Māori. The Māori language claim was lodged with the Waitangi Tribunal in 1985 by Huirangi Waikerepuru and Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i Te Reo Māori, which sought official recognition for Te Reo Māori in places as diverse as the courts, Government departments, local authorities, and even Parliament itself, and for the Reo to be made compulsory in schools, a claim widely supported by all corners of the Māori world. The tribunal ruled that the Crown had failed to protect the Māori language and recommended that Te Reo Māori be legally recognised as an official language, that a statutory body be established to foster the use of Te Reo Māori, and that a broadcasting policy be formulated to help promote the language. In 1987 the Māori Language Act was passed, making Māori an official language, and Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori was established to promote the use of Te Reo Māori as a living language.

Those initiatives were further enhanced by another claim led by Huirangi Waikerepuru and Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i Te Reo Māori, stating that the Māori Language Act had failed to address radio and television broadcasting, and a claim from Sir Graham Latimer and the New Zealand Māori Council calling on the Crown to recognise Māori interests in the radio spectrum. The Crown opposed both claims, and Māori were forced to take their case to the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and ultimately to the Privy Council, where they won support for an amendment to the Broadcasting Act in 1993 to establish Te Māngai Pāho to fund Māori language television and radio programmes under the Minister at the time, the Hon Maurice Williamson. Today we have 21 Māori radio stations around the country, and Māori Television finally went to air on 28 March 2004. But in case anyone thinks that things are all OK with the Reo now, please note that just 2 years ago the Waitangi Tribunal ruled that the Government had breached the Treaty of Waitangi by systemically failing to fund and support the kōhanga reo Māori language strategy, that the Government should apologise for its failings, and that it should appoint an independent adviser to oversee an urgent programme to overhaul policy, increase participation, improve quality, increase funding, and provide the support necessary for the upgrade and maintenance of kōhanga facilities.

That is just a snapshot of the last 40 years of the struggle that Māori have been through to get Te Reo Māori recognised and to get resources committed to keeping it alive. In all of that, it is worth noting that the struggle was led by those who cared for the Reo, those who had a deep and abiding love for the Reo, and that they often did so at great personal cost to themselves and their families. Many of those early pioneers either could not even speak Te Reo or were themselves just taking their first tentative steps along the pathway of Māori language revitalisation. They were often castigated by older, more conservative native Māori language speakers for daring to lead the charge for the Reo. But their passion and their commitment and their refusal to take a backward step marked them out as true champions for the language.

And that is the reason Mana opposes the Government’s plan to take the language away from those who care for it and to give it to those who would corporatise it. The plan, led by the Māori Party, is to scrap Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori and Te Māngai Pāho and to put the language into the hands of corporate iwi leaders. We oppose its plan because the grim reality is that iwi leaders at that level are simply not capable of managing such a taonga. They were not there when the people needed them to lead the fight for the Reo. Their corporate statements speak glowingly of the importance of the Reo but their financial statements suggest that they have other priorities.

We have been hearing a lot from the Opposition members today around Cabinet clubs and their great concern about what might somewhat transparently be happening in the Government over here. Well, I have been fascinated, as they have talked about money and influence and access, to think about what is the world’s largest Cabinet club. Ladies and gentlemen, the largest Cabinet club of money and influence and access is the unions—the unions that behold that crowd opposite every day. Do you know what makes it worse? Do you know what makes it even worse? The constitution and structure of the New Zealand Labour Party allow the unions—the unions of New Zealand—to decide who the Labour Party leader is, and, God forbid, who could be a Labour Prime Minister. That is buying access.

Do you know what makes it even worse? Even worse is that the unions are taking the money from the pockets of hard-working New Zealanders, particularly in the Civil Service. I remember it well. They take money from hard-working Kiwis, push it on to their union hacks, and then pass it on to the hacks who sit on the other side of this House. [Interruption]

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! I am very reluctant to interrupt a member who is in a 5-minute speaking slot, so I am going to allow him to start again. I am going to allow him to start again because I have two members who do not have the floor who continue to interject on each other. It is totally out of order. The member can start again.

I will not continue on this line of vitriol per se, but I think the reminder is there: if the party opposite wants to talk about money and it wants to talk about access and it wants to talk about influence, then it must begin and end with a conversation about the Labour Party and the role of the unions. I go back to that other point that it is money taken from hard-working, ordinary Kiwis, channelled through the system. Once again, you see it in the constitution of the Labour Party, which gives effective majority control to the unions to decide the leadership. That is just shocking.

I am looking forward to this Government’s sixth Budget. The fine electorate of Tāmaki is looking forward—

💬 Maggie Barry: Magnificent.

—the magnificent electorate of Tāmaki, thank you to the member.

💬 Maggie Barry: Almost as good as the North Shore beaches.

Almost as good as the North Shore. And why are we looking forward to it? Because we are a positive party looking for a brighter future. We know that we sit on great news, like 3 percent growth. Some economists are forecasting even higher. We know that over 1,500 people a week are coming off welfare. Unlike the other side, who are a lot of sort of theoreticians, those of us who have worked on the front line—in fact, within the likes of Work and Income—know that for those 1,500 individuals, going into work changes their lives. This Government is committed to that. To the Labour Party that is just a number and something to be heckled at, but, again, for the real, hard-working, experienced people on this side of the House it makes a difference. There were 84,000 more jobs added to the economy in the last 12 months. Unemployment is at 6 percent and it is forecast to go even lower. Contrast that with the OECD rate of 7.6 percent. We are on our way to surplus. This National Government promised it, and we will deliver it.

What about the other side, though? What about the other side? They are completely distracted, never focused on the issues that matter. All we heard was rambling rhetoric. I think there was a promise of unicorns, fluffy bunnies, and rainbows in there somewhere. In fact, when Opposition members even come to try to do a policy, it really is sort of being akin to a theomachist in an apothecary. Most people will not know what that means, and that is a good analogy because no one understands what Labour’s policies mean.

💬 Maggie Barry: Or care less.

Or care less. Well, actually, I quite like the word “apothecary”.

💬 Dr Cam Calder: What policies?

What policies? It is a shocker. What we do know is that there would be higher taxes from Labour and the Greens and more taxes through their emission trading scheme. Have no illusion, New Zealand, things like the emission trading scheme, capital gains taxes, and changes to KiwiSaver are costs to you. They want to nationalise the electricity system. I heard the other day that I think the Greens in particular now are against milk products and logs. What are we left with in this country? They really also want to spend like troopers. Well, we are a prudent Government. We are a prudent Government. We have capped it, effectively, at up to $1 billion of new spending because we know that that is the prudent and right thing to do. The majority of Kiwis understand this, and that is why the Labour Party and its union mates are polling under 30 percent—

💬 Maggie Barry: And down—going down.

—and continuing to go down. That is why a certain Mr Jones jumped.

But what about the wins? We are seeing some prefigurations—[Interruption] Or he was pushed, as my honourable colleague notes. We are looking at some really serious positive wins for Kiwis at the moment, like $6.3 million over 4 years for bilateral cochlear implants. As someone who has worked with them—

💬 Dr Cam Calder: How much, sorry?

$6.3 million. As someone who has worked in the health system, what a difference that makes. I would like to suggest, though we probably cannot find the money, that we probably need some implants for the Opposition members so they can truly hear the wants of New Zealanders. We heard from Paula Bennett that there is $10.4 million in new operating funding to support sexual violence services. That is absolutely critical, absolutely important. As someone who has worked in the community for years—and I think, particularly, of working as a chaplain at Mt Eden prison—and seen the abuse and the violence that happen to our most vulnerable, it is critical to get in early to make a real difference.

As I turn towards the end, because I am conscious of time, I want to turn to Tāmaki. There are many, many local wins that this Government has delivered to the people of Tāmaki—

💬 Dr Cam Calder: And continuing to deliver.

—and it will continue to do so, like $3 million to the St Thomas School for new buildings, and ultra-fast broadband to our schools. We have the Tāmaki Transformation Programme, an agreement between the Government and the council, working with the Auckland chamber of commerce, around a Career Start programme. The Career Start programme is a cooperation of the Tāmaki Transformation Programme, the Government, and the council to help young people into jobs. There is new housing in Glen Innes and Panmure and the electrification of rail.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.