Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill

Members, when we were debating the first reading of the Education (Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools) Amendment Bill, Tim Macindoe was speaking and has 30 seconds remaining if he so wishes.

What a generous allocation. When I was speaking on this matter in the last Parliament I made the point that no one in this House wants to see children going to school hungry, but the problem with this bill is that it is a blunt instrument, which is estimated to cost about $100 million, and it will not fix the problem.

What we are doing as a Government is looking after the most vulnerable in our community and I am very proud of the measures that we have been taking. I am also very grateful to those private sector companies such as Fonterra and Sanitarium that have been working with our Government—

I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. His time has expired. I call Metiria Turei—5 minutes in reply.

Let me first thank Hone Harawira and the Māori Party for drafting this bill and for bringing it to the House, after having the good luck to have it drawn out of the ballot. Hone Harawira has been a fierce and passionate advocate for our kids, and this bill was one example of that work, and I want to thank him for allowing me to take it over after the last election. I note that he nominated the Māori Affairs Committee to receive this bill, should it pass its first reading—we remain ever hopeful.

Secondly, I want to acknowledge the extensive coalition of NGOs that are supporting this bill. There is a coalition of 30-odd organisations, including Unicef, Plunket, and a whole range that have been working very hard to increase public awareness of the extent of hunger in our schools and also working with National to do their best to encourage National to support the bill’s referral to the select committee. The groups have understood the need to have a parliamentary conversation about feeding kids in schools, because they work with the consequences of hunger in children every day. Can I also thank all the members of this House who have spoken in support of the bill during the first reading, and all of those parties that will be supporting it tonight. It is very much appreciated.

I do remain deeply disappointed in National for not supporting the bill’s referral to the select committee. It would cause the National Party no harm to support this bill at its first reading. In fact, it would do National only good to support the community, who wants to have this conversation. It is not just the Greens or other parties in the Opposition; the community wants to have a conversation about the extent of hunger in our kids in schools and what we should do about it. We have asked National repeatedly to commit only to the first reading, so that parliamentarians can hear from schools, from communities, from families, and from teachers about the scale of the problem and what the options are for solutions.

I have said over and over that we are not wedded to any particular solution, and that we are open to changes to the bill and even to withdrawal of the bill should there be either a conversation or a Budget bid to feed kids in schools. We put a letter to Bill English just a few weeks ago, suggesting that we would withdraw the bill if we could get some certainty about that, and we have heard nothing back.

There are no downsides for National in supporting this bill at its first reading. It would show the community that it is listening to the evidence the community has, and it would show that it is capable of putting aside ideology, in favour of kids who are hungry. There is a real problem. A few years ago KidsCan said that 9 percent of the kids at schools it worked with were hungry at breakfast and at lunchtime, and last year it said it was 15 percent. The problem has now grown to 23 percent. It is getting worse. So the measures we have in place are not helping.

When the first reading of this bill began in the House last year, Hone Harawira said: “I know the bill is not perfect. I hear the kōrero about feeding the kids being a parent’s responsibility, but the truth is that a lot of people have been so poor for so long that they struggle to make the right choices, and often end up making the wrong ones, and all the while our kids go hungry.” He said further: “I have heard a lot about increasing employment opportunities, upgrading housing, improving access to health care, and developing better educational pathways. All of that is necessary and good, but it takes a long time to happen, and all the while our kids go hungry.”

That is the fundamental point—kids are going hungry; thousands and thousands of them. This House this afternoon has the power to change that. By voting for the bill we declare that children are the most important priority; our most important constituency. By voting for this bill we declare that we will put aside our political enmities and focus on the needs of kids. By voting for this bill we declare that the whole point of our being in this debating chamber is to make life for our children better. Not a single one of us in our own communities would stand in front of a hungry child and refuse to give them food—not a single one of us would do that. Why would we do that when there are 20 children, or 40 children, or when there are 59 of us standing in front of those kids? Not one of us individually would say no to a hungry child. Why would we say no collectively? It makes no sense.

So many times I have heard National argue that hungry children are being failed by someone else—parents or teachers. Tonight hungry children are being failed by 59 National MPs.