Appropriation (2015/16 Estimates) Bill

Members, we now come to the votes in the Māori, Other Populations and Cultural Sector—volume B.5, volume 8. The question is that Vote Arts, Culture and Heritage, Vote Internal Affairs, Vote Māori Development, Vote Pacific Peoples, Vote Sport and Recreation, Vote Statistics, Vote Treaty Negotiations, and Vote Women stand part of the schedules.

Kai te Kaiwhakahaere, tēnā koe, ā, huri noa i te Whare e mihi atu ana ki a koutou katoa. The Māori Affairs Committee considered the estimates for Vote Māori Development and for Vote Treaty Negotiations. On Vote Māori Development we heard from the Minister for Māori Development and Te Puni Kōkiri, and we received advice from the Office of the Auditor-General.

I want to briefly cover the key findings of our report. We questioned the Minister and the ministry about Whānau Ora, particularly on the implementation of funding transfers from Te Puni Kōkiri to commissioning agents. The Minister explained the clear lines of accountability that are in place to ensure this money is spent in the way that it is intended. The commissioning agencies have expectations written into their contracts, and these will be monitored and refined in the future.

We discussed also the inclusion of non-Māori in Whānau Ora. We consider this to be important as Whānau Ora represents a Māori approach to dealing with whānau, but it is a programme for all New Zealanders. We questioned the Minister about Māori Television. The Minister assured us of the continuing independence of Māori Television and the rigorous protocols he is putting in place to prevent any appearance of improper influence.

The appropriations for Vote Māori Development have been increased by 12.56 percent for the 2015-16 year, from $221 million to $249 million. As well as the usual operational funding that is needed to keep Te Puni Kōkiri operating and providing policy advice to the Government, there are many great initiatives that Te Puni Kōkiri is leading that will continue to grow Māori capability, support our most vulnerable whānau, and grow the Māori economy. There is $16 million to fund Māori potential through community investment programmes and the rangatiratanga grants as well, and $4 million is going to specific Māori potential programmes such as the Māori Wardens Association and the Māori Women’s Development Fund.

We know that one of the biggest issues for our most vulnerable people is housing, so $7 million is going to provide practical assistance to Māori housing projects and another $7 million is going to Māori housing development. One million dollars will be spent on strengthening and promoting tourism, which is a cause very close to my heart. Over $82 million will be going towards the promotion of the Māori language and culture. That $82 million will fund organisations that are actively promoting Te Reo Māori, such as Te Māngai Pāho, Māori Television, and Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori. One of those great initiatives organised by Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori happened last week. Of course, I am talking about Māori Language Week.

Moving on to Vote Treaty Negotiations, we heard from the Minister for Treaty Negotiations and from the Office of Treaty Settlements. The great work that this Government is doing in the Treaty negotiations area is very, very well-known. The Minister told us that 85 of the settlements are now completed, and there will be further agreements in principle and deeds of settlement in the next year. The estimates for 2015-16 put aside a multi-year appropriation of $1,400 million to cover the costs of those settlements and put $88 million towards the operational costs of continuing the settlement process.

One thing that we were particularly interested in when the Minister appeared before our committee was the post settlements commitments unit. The Government has made over 7,000 commitments to iwi through Treaty settlements. As we come closer to having settlements signed with all willing and able iwi, the role of the Office of Treaty Settlements will diminish, but the role of the post settlements commitments unit will grow. It is good to hear that the Minister is planning for this transition.

The 2015-16 estimates represent a good balance of funding to grow the Māori economy, support our most vulnerable whānau, and strengthen Te Reo Māori. I wish Te Puni Kōkiri, the Office of Treaty Settlements, and the other organisations that will be putting these goals into action all the best for the year ahead, and we look forward to seeing the results that they have achieved when they report to the Māori Affairs Committee next year. Kia ora.

It gives me great pleasure to speak to Vote Māori Development. The chair of our committee has aptly summarised the report. However, if one was to look in further detail at the issues confronted by the Māori Affairs Committee, and, indeed, throughout the country in relation to the most important factors affecting Māori development, then we would simply hinge this particular discussion around the framework that the Government has used to address Māori development.

In He Kai Kei Aku Ringa—The Crown-Māori Economic Growth Partnership there are six goals. Those goals in part align to what one might expect Te Puni Kōkiri to be doing. However, we question only the significant areas that the vote affected. I raise the issue of He Kai Kei Aku Ringa because goal one of this is probably one of the most fundamental elements of what is going to help propel Māori development, and that is the education of our people, our kids—lifting skills in training. I was somewhat disturbed by the lack of contribution by the Minister for Māori Development, certainly in the estimates debate, about how he saw the contribution of Te Puni Kōkiri going forward in this period towards lifting Māori participation and education, especially in the early childhood area. I raise this also because one of the most topical debates right now is around the reorganisation and restructuring of kōhanga reo, which is a significant contributor to the positive advancement of our children on a Māori-medium language pathway into education. The Minister was absent in terms of his contribution in this space before the select committee.

Secondly, the committee spent some time investigating the issues around Whānau Ora and, more particularly, with regard to the Office of the Auditor-General’s report. Whānau Ora commissioning agencies have had $43 million transferred to them in this vote. The questions of the select committee were quite simple: was the Minister satisfied under phase one that enough had been done to evaluate Whānau Ora as an initiative, in order to make that substantial decision to transfer the funding obligation to these Whānau Ora commissioning agencies?

The Auditor-General’s report helped with the questions at select committee level. We were concerned about a number of areas. Firstly, it is very difficult to define what Whānau Ora is. So if it is difficult to define what it is, how can you evaluate the outcomes? People who are well versed in this particular area will point to a whānau outcomes framework and a shared outcomes model. But the question is quite simple: did Te Puni Kōkiri have confidence that the phase one evaluation gave it sufficient confidence to be able to make the transfer to the Whānau Ora commissioning agencies? When I asked the chief executive of Te Puni Kōkiri whether it raised any risks with this decision, the chief executive nodded her head and said: “Yes, risks were raised with the Minister.” We will come back to that particular point.

The second point is that in the Office of the Auditor-General’s report one of the insights that the Auditor-General observed—noting that there were innovations in this particular model—was that shifting the funding framework model currently adopted and used by the Ministry of Social Development, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Education from individual to collective outcomes was going to be a significant challenge. In fact, Te Puni Kōkiri recognised that as well. It remains an issue for the Government to confront. If the aspirations of Whānau Ora as an initiative are to work towards shared outcomes, whānau-based outcomes, then that would require those other ministries to change their funding framework model. That was highlighted in the report.

The other aspect was the success of the Whānau Integration, Innovation and Engagement Fund (WIIE) plans that were in the phase one stage of the model. Those members who have travelled throughout the country and have visited with various of these Whānau Ora providers will have heard numerous bits of feedback about how successful this particular part of the Whānau Ora initiative has been because it allowed whānau themselves to identify some of the outcomes they were seeking at a very small level. So being able to coordinate services and collaborations around whānau in order to address the issues in the WIIE plans became fertile ground for learning about how to improve service delivery. Interestingly enough, in the phase one evaluation and the transfer to forward funding in these estimates the WIIE initiative was actually not picked up. It was only the navigator component of the Whānau Ora funding.

In so far as that is concerned, here is a question that remains for the Minister to respond to: in respect of those Whānau Ora providers that were successful in phase one but have not been funded in phase two, can the Minister explain why that has occurred and whether he is satisfied that the network of services, especially in rural areas, can be achieved despite the inequity of funding towards navigators in this space? The Minister for Māori Development is, I think, putting his mind to this particular challenge, because he knows, like we know, that the Whānau Ora commissioning agencies have not addressed this issue and that there are significant gaps, especially in rural areas, about how Whānau Ora providers can significantly meet the obligations of their whānau when they are not getting the same flow-through of funding through the navigator fund.

I will come to the issue of Treaty settlements. I agree that the post settlements commitments unit provides ample opportunity to assess the positive implementation of a number of Treaty settlements throughout the country. Notably, just last week the Freshwater Iwi Leaders Group announced a high-level memorandum of understanding with Local Government New Zealand, which I think foreshadows just how beneficial some of the mechanisms within Treaty settlements will be at a local government level and that they will have a positive impact in their area. However, can I say is this: it is probably salient at the front end of the discussions, if co-governance and co-management with local government is going to work, that local government is included in some of those particular discussions. Given that we have some hefty issues around water, around representation, around procurement of services at the local government level, and also around the funding for utilities infrastructure, if there were a front-end participation role for Local Government New Zealand in that space, then co-investment strategies with iwi could be a really new opportunity to help support regional development.

I know that the Minister is aware of all these issues. I am looking forward to the Māori Affairs Committee monitoring further the role of the post settlements commitments unit to ensure that an even-handed application of the mechanisms within Treaty settlements, in so far as local government is concerned, can happen in the way that it is intended to.

The last part of my contribution is in the space of housing. There was some $7 million appropriated to the Māori housing development initiative and $4 million to the rural and Māori housing component of the role that Te Puni Kōkiri currently undertakes. It seems to me that at a local government level there is still an uneven response to the way in which papakāinga development can continue. Also, the whole resource consenting and planning process can make better provision for this. I know this because I submitted to the Hauraki District Council on its papakāinga development plan, as well as on the Waikato District Council development plan. There are exemplars throughout the country, but it is not even-handed. Here is a really easy space for the Minister for Māori Development to send a signal to councils that best practice is actually the real opportunity if we want to ensure that Māori can build on their own lands to be able to provide housing at a low cost, and to be able to meet some of the real challenges of homeownership amongst the Māori population. Again, the Minister was silent on that.

My last point: both Te Ture Whenua Maori Act reform and Te Reo Māori bills have been an absolute shambles. The Minister has had to delay and defer the report back of the bill for Te Ture Whenua Māori because he knows that it does not meet the needs of those Māori landowners to be able to move their land into a productive space. My colleague Meka Whaitiri is championing that particular issue for our team. In the Te Reo Māori space, the poor old Minister is having to do a bit of backwash to save face for the previous Minister, who made an absolute kibosh of the issue. He introduced the Māori Language (Te Reo Māori) Bill into the House at the eleventh hour, and with, I think, very little robust consideration around the proposals there. We have had to revamp that. It is going back to Cabinet for further consideration. Poor old Minister Flavell has made a wee mess of it—

I want to take a call on Vote Treaty Negotiations and thank the previous speaker, Nanaia Mahuta, for her helpful comments on the post settlements commitments unit. She raised some very interesting issues. I agree with her that early engagement, particularly with local government, provides opportunities and also enables issues to be clarified at an early stage, and that is exactly what I want to do on the harbours negotiations that are coming up. I also want to pay tribute to the Office of Treaty Settlements for its excellent work over the past 12 months. It is a very dedicated bunch of people, and I am very proud to work with them. Some of them also act as Treaty negotiators. So, for example, the deeds of settlement for Ngāti Hauā and Heretaunga Tamatea were negotiated in-house, and that is my plan with Ngāpuhi as well.

But I do want to say something about the money expended on external Treaty negotiators because of what I think was a vulgar, crude, and intemperate attack on them by the Rt Hon Mr Peters earlier in the day, when he said that the fees were colossal and, somewhat bizarrely, said that I was giving jobs to my mates. I am very fond of both Paul Swain and Rick Barker, but I do not know that they would want to be called my mates. Unlike that honourable member, I do have great respect for them.

I asked Mr Swain some years ago whether he would like to work with me on the Ngati Porou matter, and he did such a very good job that I asked him whether he would work on some others. So in recent times Paul Swain has negotiated the Taranaki settlement, which will, hopefully, be signed in September; Mana Ahuriri; Ngāti Hineuru, which we are going to debate for the first time tomorrow; and Maungaharuru-Tangitū. Mr Swain is an excellent negotiator and, if anything, I do not think he charges enough. I have huge respect for him.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: We’ll tell him that.

Well, you tell him, but do not tell him too loudly. The second person that Mr Peters insulted was Mr Barker. I approached him after he left Parliament in 2011 and asked whether he would like to do a few negotiations for me, and he is doing a great job—for example, Te Ātiawa, and Ngāruahine, which we are debating for the first time tomorrow. So I am very happy to say that these external negotiators are very good value for money, are providing excellent service, and are achieving results.

I say to New Zealand First members that their tendency to personalise things and attack the individual, as they have done with my Treaty negotiators, is something I resent and something I think is quite simply disgusting. As I said this afternoon to a journalist, Mr Peters is nothing more than the Donald Trump of New Zealand politics, who wants nothing more than a cheap headline. These people are good people, and I am very proud of the work they are doing, regardless of party and regardless of background.

Another person that the right honourable member attacked this afternoon was John Wood. John Wood, who is the chancellor of Canterbury University and has been doing an excellent job there, was twice our ambassador in Washington and is an outstanding public servant who has negotiated two extremely difficult Treaty negotiations and done phenomenally well. I refer to his negotiation with Tūhoe and his landmark negotiation in respect of the Whanganui River.

These are the sorts of people I have had working with me over the years, regardless of party and regardless of background. They are dedicated to achieving just and durable settlements for the benefit of New Zealand, and if the New Zealand First speaker Pita Paraone—who obviously wants to stand up next for his penny’s worth—has any decency, he will apologise to those people because his leader’s statements were unfair and were simply disgusting.

The final point I want to make is in relation to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act reform, because I do think that the Hon Nanaia Mahuta was a little unfair on that issue. This is the first comprehensive rewrite of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act for well over a generation. The 1993 Act was never really fit for purpose, and so what we are seeking to do is take a fresh look at it. There has been an exposure draft put out to enable proper discussion. There are lots of issues, and we make no apologies for the fact that there is a lot of work to be done there, polishing the jewel so that everyone benefits from the reform.

Tēnā koe, Mr Chairman.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Tēnā koe. I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member—you can go for dinner. Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break.

Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Tēnā koe te Whare. Kia ora mai tātou, tēnā tātou katoa. Members, before the dinner break we were debating Vote Arts, Culture and Heritage, Vote Internal Affairs, Vote Māori Development, Vote Pacific Peoples, Vote Sport and Recreation, Vote Statistics, Vote Treaty Negotiations, and Vote Women, and matua Pita Paraone had the call. All but 4 seconds of it was cast in the pre-dinner break, but he has 4 minutes and 56 seconds remaining should he wish to avail himself of the opportunity.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Can I ask for the 4 seconds to be added on to my—

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): No. I am sorry there is no discount.

—lot because I had difficulty understanding from your predecessor his pronunciation of my name and I took time to correct him.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Well, I hope that you have not had that problem with me. You have 4 minutes and 56 seconds remaining.

Tēnā koe, Mr Chairman. Reluctantly I will have to accept that. Before the dinner break, the speaker before me, Chris Finlayson, had a bit of a hissy fit at the comments that my leader had made. Quite clearly he took them out of context, because reverting to diversions and straw men in some vain attempt to avert attention from cross-expenditure items to individual Treaty settlement negotiations simply will not do. What Mr Peters was referring to—and he did not name any names other than to say that two of the negotiators had received in excess of $1 million during the period of their tenure as negotiators. That was the only comment that he made. If people want to know the details of what each negotiator got, I am quite prepared to table that, but that is public knowledge so I do not need to do that.

I want to focus particularly on the area of Whānau Ora. That was some discussion during the review of the Māori affairs portfolio. Right from the outset New Zealand First has had some doubts about the programme and how that fund has been used. I want to say that in the 2015-16 Budget $50 million was added to the Whānau Ora programme. The question that I am asking this Committee, and perhaps the Minister in the chair, the Hon Paula Bennett, may be able to give me some answer, is that in terms of receiving that $50 million for this programme, no evidence and no application was actually made for the funds. If I was an operator in another ministry, I would certainly be asking: “Why is it that if I want extra money for my ministry, I have to put up a case for it, and, yet, for Māori development they get that extra money without any evidence as to justifying the need for that extra money?”.

The other thing that came out during the review, when asked of the officials what the major task was in order for Whānau Ora to progress onwards, was the answer that they needed to inform the public as to what Whānau Ora was all about. We found that quite surprising, given that this programme has been around for some time, and here we have officials having to tell us that the public are not quite sure of what Whānau Ora is all about. I just want to have it on record that this is, I think, pandering to the wishes of a particular political party, rather than looking at the issues and whether or not Whānau Ora is a programme that justifies extra funding without a proper case being put to have that extra money.

I also want to say that in advancing Whānau Ora, I note that the Ministry of Health has put together some comparisons in terms of some of the programmes that the health ministry is responsible for. I need to say that Whānau Ora providers compare very well with general providers, so in some respects that is a good point for Whānau Ora to carry on. But, at the end of the day, what our concern is from New Zealand First is whether or not the funding that has been allocated to that programme is properly administered. As we in this Committee all know, if funds are not properly administered, then the whole programme falters. We certainly do not want to see that under our watch.

In terms of the Treaty settlements, I just want to make the comment that although a number of settlements have been made—

I stand to speak to these votes, which are wide ranging at the moment on internal affairs, Māori development, Pacific peoples, sports and recreation, statistics, Treaty negotiations, women, and arts, culture and heritage. I do stand up, though, right now and just say that one sees the changes we have made in Vote Māori Affairs, turning it into Vote Māori Development, and the actual progress that is being made in regional development with the Business Growth Agenda and having the Minister of Māori Development working alongside that.

I actually stand and take umbrage with the last speech, where someone said that there is no evidence to support funding for Whānau Ora. Well, how about the evidence of Māori being disproportionately in our jails? How about the evidence of Māori disproportionately doing poorly in our education systems? How about our health sector, where they have more health needs that are not identified? How about our education sector, where Māori are not doing as well? If one stood up and wanted evidence, I would simply say that what has been done in the past is simply not good enough for that population and what their needs are.

We do have to be brave and work differently with Māori, and alongside them, with them being stewards of what is best as far as their social and economic development goes. So as part of this National-led Government I do stand beside our coalition partners, with the Māori Party and with the Minister of Māori Development, and see that, actually, Whānau Ora is working. As always with a new initiative, if you like, that is out there in the communities and working differently, and it needs to be worked alongside to see the level of support and expertise.

But even today—if we are being negative—I read in the paper that the nurses who are working in Whānau Ora are being paid less than those who are in other areas. Quite frankly, that is where we say that they are not sitting there wasting money; they are actually in their communities and in those homes working alongside people to help them reach their aspirations and their goals. Unlike other members, I get alongside those people in their communities and get alongside those Whānau Ora navigators. I hear the challenges that they have and I certainly hear how hard the work is, and we acknowledge that. So we will be putting more money in, and quite proudly, to stand across those who are disadvantaged and more vulnerable and who actually need more support, and in a different way than has been done in the past.

I also want to touch on Vote Women and, certainly, where that is at and what we are doing. We should be incredibly proud in this country that 64 percent of our university graduates are women—are female. When we actually look at the statistics of how they are going, how they are in education, and how the education system is delivering for them, we can see the difference. I want to stand here and acknowledge the significant reduction in the number of women on benefits. Sole parents who are on benefit have gone down by literally tens of thousands. That is women and their children actually being independent and having a better go at life than they would have had on the lifetime of welfare that they have led in the past.

I want to acknowledge the huge reduction in the number of teen pregnancies. I say “teen pregnancies” on purpose, because it is not just births to teens; we have also seen a mass reduction in the abortion rate in this country as well. So unwanted pregnancies to our teens have dropped by over 40 percent in the last few years, and that is giving those girls opportunities. Hey, I am the biggest proponent of babies and more of them, and a teen mum can be incredibly successful in life, but equally we want them to have opportunities. There is plenty of evidence that says the best opportunity that you can give to a young woman is for her to be educated and for her to be in a stable home, in a warm environment, and to have some work experience behind her before she starts a family. So I am backing them in that. So I want them to have babies, and I want them to have fantastic families and be full of aspiration, but if we can actually back them to be planning that so that suits them and their home, then that is certainly something that I stand proudly by.

You can see the significance of the difference that that will make for them in their lives while they are still teens, but, more important, for when they do go on to be mums in the families that they raise. I do not think we acknowledge that enough, in this country—the kind of family planning that is now going on, the differences it has made in our health system for those girls. But, more significantly, I think the educational achievements that they are able to get to—

Kia ora, Mr Chair. I am pleased to speak in this estimates debate. I would like to stick with the Māori development sector, which is spearheaded by Te Puni Kōkiri. Te Puni Kōkiri, as we know, means in Māori “a group of people moving forward”. If you could think of Te Matatini—think of our kapa haka teams—and the precision and the power with which they move, that is really what we should envisage from Te Puni Kōkiri.

Alas, it is very much not that. Te Puni Kōkiri in 2015 is in a shambles. It is in disarray because there is a lack of leadership from the Minister over his ministry. It is evidenced because we had the chief executive and her senior team come to the Māori Affairs Committee earlier in the year. There has been a never-ending restructure happening within Te Puni Kōkiri during the current chief executive officer’s tenure. When we asked the question as to when this restructuring will be completed and when it will have its executive team in place, the chief executive said: “Oh, by the end of this year.” By the end of this year, to get an executive team in place? Prior to that, the restructuring had taken 2 years already.

What we have is really inept leadership. It goes further than that, because we know, we understand, that there is a breakdown in the relationship between this Minister and the chief executive. It is widely known around town that there is a dysfunctional relationship there, so much so that this Minister is now going directly to staff and interfering. He has gone rogue in terms of trying to get his projects done.

We have very real concerns about Te Puni Kōkiri. There is no great group moving forward. This is a shambles. It is evidenced by asking what the Minister has actually produced. We have rising unemployment in this country. We have plummeting dairy prices. There is a great deal of concern out there. Families are on the cusp of poverty. This is a very real concern. So what has this Minister and his ministry come up with? Well, the first piece of legislation that we have waited for, which has come through to this House, is a Māori Purposes Bill that updates a private whānau trust in the Gisborne area from last century. It updates it for the 1993 Te Ture Whenua Maori Act, which is going to be amended next year. That is the priority that this Minister has set in terms of his legislative programme. That is absolutely appalling.

We have also seen the debacle around the Māori Language (Te Reo Māori) Bill. Mr Chair, I will not bring you into this debate, but members of our select committee are well aware that we have been very charitable, I would say, to this Minister. We know that there were deep problems with the bill that was sent to us at the Māori Affairs Committee. We have been very accommodating of this Minister, to give him every opportunity to try to resurrect the bill and address some of the deep flaws that are contained therein. We are not through the woods yet. It rests on our select committee to complete the job, and hopefully we can get there and come up with a workable piece of legislation. But as it stands, again it is a failure by this Minister and a lack of leadership. He should just have scrapped it and started again, right from the start, which is what all of Māoridom was talking about and telling him to do.

Can I go on to Whānau Ora. The Minister who just resumed her seat, the Hon Paula Bennett, said that Whānau Ora is working. Well, I would hope that Whānau Ora is working, because in the first 4 years of Whānau Ora there was $137.6 million spent on it, a third of which, over $40 million, was spent on administration and research and evaluation—$40 million. So I would really hope that Whānau Ora is working, because that is an incredible amount of money, which the Auditor-General actually pointed out should have been going directly to whānau in need, which is what the kaupapa of Whānau Ora is all about.

I could go on to Treaty settlements. I am looking forward to progressing the first readings of some settlement legislation that is coming through the House tomorrow. That is a positive piece of work that we are doing as a select committee. We are not all negative. We do actually work cohesively together to progress that very important work. Thank you.

I will start by just saying that I agree with the Minister on two issues—one is that Whānau Ora is working, and we know that from all of the stories. Even the Auditor-General set out some really clear stories of how the approach, which is long term, wraparound and about the whānau as a whole, is making appreciable, major differences to how whānau are operating and to their wellness. There are issues with other parts of Whānau Ora—the evaluation, how the money is being spent, and the administration—but the concept itself is working. The worst thing that we can do is attack it, such that we lose the advantage of the great outcomes from this rethinking about how we deal with whānau as a whole.

Also, I would agree with Minister Paula Bennett about education being such an important part of a young woman’s way out of poverty. I would urge her to reconsider then the benefit that both she and I received as young women on our own with small babies, from what was then a very full training incentive allowance grant, which allowed us to have more resources to pursue our educational dreams. In my case, it was law school. Under the current situation with the training incentive allowance, women are simply not in the same position that I was in 20 years ago to be able to access that level of education because resources are so tight. I am absolutely, 100 percent supportive of investing in the education of young women in order to improve their life outcomes. I wish that we could do more. I think that we could do more if it were a genuine priority.

What I want to address tonight, in just a few minutes, is Vote Māori Development, particularly with regard to housing. The Māori Affairs Committee asked about housing when the Minister came before it, because we know that housing is such a major issue for Māori, and the Minister agreed with that. The Minister agreed that Te Puni Kōkiri was preparing to take on more responsibility in leading housing initiatives for Māori. He assured us that the ministry would be making all possible efforts because housing is so closely tied to poverty. I agree with this. We need to make sure that we have secure housing, both rental housing and also homeownership for Māori, and that that is a core way of making sure that whānau are secure and healthy in their own homes, so that they can then pursue their dreams for themselves and their kids. But we have to be aware of the facts. We now have the lowest Māori homeownership rate in this country in decades—decades and decades—because of an erosion of support, with a particular focus on the needs of Māori whānau when it comes to housing. According to the 2013 census, only 28 percent of Māori own a home now. That is half of the Pākehā rate—the Pākehā rate is around 57 percent. It is at the lowest end. It should not be getting any worse, but, in fact, it is eroding over time. The number of Māori in homeownership is declining.

When we asked the Minister about homeownership, he also recognised these critical issues. He said there was more money for Te Puni Kōkiri to help whānau towards homeownership, but there were no firm plans by Te Puni Kōkiri for any house-purchasing initiatives, it says here in the report. But, in fact, there are some significant programmes, and I just want to mention two of them, which are the Kāinga Whenua programme for infrastructure grants, and also the individual loans that are available. The Kāinga Whenua programme has enormous potential. It enables whānau to build homes on, or to move homes to, collectively owned Māori land. So it is a way of our using land that we may not be able to put into productive use for housing in rural areas, where it is so essentially needed—and good quality, properly insulated housing; housing that has good heating and that is safe for whānau to live in. We need more of that, but at this time of highest need, we are seeing these funds—these programmes—just not being promoted in such a way that whānau are accessing them.

In the years between July 2011 and August 2014 there were only 10 individual Kāinga Whenua loans—10 in those 4 years. There was only one in the previous year. Only three of those 10 have been this year—three individual loans to whānau looking to build on Māori land. It is not enough. There have been Māori organisations getting involved with the social housing fund and with the Kāinga Whenua infrastructure grants, but they are still too few.

I am very privileged to stand up on behalf of New Zealand First for our estimates debate on the Māori, other populations, and cultural sector. I am going to talk specifically about the internal affairs section.

Before I get started I just want to bring everyone’s attention back to just before we went on our dinner break. There are a number of fine men and women in this Chamber, and one whom I consider to be one of those fine gentlemen is Chris Finlayson. So I was as perplexed as many other people in the Chamber when he was completely off-base and off-tangent in some of his remarks when he was referring to the Rt Hon Winston Peters. It got me thinking that perhaps the problem was that he was just a little bit “hangry”—a little bit hungry and angry prior to dinner—and so I have brought him along a Snickers bar, which we could perhaps put in a little wee glass box out the back and break it in case of emergency, so that next time he gets angry in the Chamber he can go out the back and relax himself. I hope he returns well rested and ready to fight.

Specifically, what I would like to talk about this evening is the Fire Service. Yet again we see another review in the Fire Service. This is the 17th review in the Fire Service in the last 21 years—17; this is the 17th review. It begs the question: what is going on? When I trawl through the Budget that was released this year there is not a single, solitary cent, not a dollar, being put forward for our Fire Service, and yet the Government is sitting down and spending more money, yet again, to review the system. It is not fit for purpose, it does not work, and there is no funding allocated to allow this very crucial organisation, which supplies so much for our communities, to move forward.

Let me just go through some of these statistics. We have got 17,000 career firefighters around New Zealand currently. We have got 8,300 urban volunteers giving up their time, risking their lives, in helping out in those communities, and another 3,500 rural volunteers. At the moment we have an absolute state of disrepair in a number of the buildings that are actually housing our Fire Service equipment. We have got 79 career stations, 360 volunteer stations, and 187 rural fire forces, and the buildings they are operating out of are barely fit for service. I mean, we are seriously putting our Fire Service people in some perilous situations if this Government does not come up with a better funding model.

Let us talk about that funding model, because what we are currently hearing from the Minister of Internal Affairs—the “Minister of Reviews” is what we should be retitling him—is an idea that we are going to put search and rescue and the urban search and rescue into the Fire Service. Well, that does make sense. Accolades are to be given where credit is due, and credit is due there. However, the silos in which this Government places all of our emergency service providers are not fit for purpose. We have got the likes of Surf Life Saving New Zealand providing safety, education, and saving lives, and which is also doing the job of search and rescue, and working hard and volunteering its time, efforts, and energies on the beaches around New Zealand—77 surf clubs around the country. Then, of course, you have got Coastguard, which does another fantastic job of rescuing people at sea—search and rescue, looking for them—and yet there is very little correlation, or an organisation that can be put under a single heading that enables it to be funded as a whole and to be taken seriously as an emergency service provider.

When we look at whether it is a fit for purpose issue and what the Fire Service actually provides with its urban search and rescue and with its search and rescue around the country—it puts out fires. Who do we call when the rain comes down and the floods come in, Mr Muller? That is right—your local fire brigade. The number of times it has been out there on the streets, pumping water, clearing out people’s houses—when your cat gets stuck in a tree, who do you call? The local fire brigade, Mr Muller—that is correct.

And, of course, as we go on, the Fire Service is the first port of call when we have an issue relating to emergency service providers. Who do we call when there is a car accident? Who comes along and issues and administers first aid? It is the Fire Service. Yet we have got these silo situations where the Government is putting these organisations into various blocs and underfunding them and there is complete and utter under-investment within this service.

Let me just bring your attention—I am speaking quite quickly because 5 minutes goes so fast when you are in the Chamber—to an Official Information Act request. It was the Minister’s briefing, so it was officially released. It says: “There is an under-investment in rural fire reduction and readiness, and the changing service scope is making it difficult for the commission to adapt to new demands.” We need to be fit for purpose; we need to be up and ready for the 21st century. I doubt that this review is actually going to do much with regard to what the Government is going to do to put funding into this absolutely vital—

I am pleased to stand to take this 5-minute call on the Māori development area of this theme. But before I do that I just want to make a few comments about a previous speaker. It does sadden me, and kind of makes me really angry, that people can stand in this Chamber on the Opposition benches and have a go at our outstanding Minister for Māori Development. The great work that he has been doing—

💬 Sue Moroney: It’s called accountability.

—listen, listen—he has taken on the challenges, and he is coping very well with the work that he is doing.

I want to support Te Puni Kōkiri and the restructure there. This is a senior executive manager who knows what she is doing. She is doing a marvellous job there, and I do take umbrage at the fact that people can stand in this Chamber and have a crack at her after the good work that she is doing. The work that she does is not easy—it is not easy when you are restructuring a ministry as complex as Te Puni Kōkiri—but I believe that the work that she is doing is going to be of great value to Te Puni Kōkiri in the future.

My next kōrero is about Whānau Ora. I worked in Whānau Ora and I helped in its development on the ground—on the ground. I have seen the whānau, I have talked with the whānau, and I have interviewed the whānau that Whānau Ora has helped. When Whānau Ora first came about, yes, it was a new concept, but many Opposition members thought it should just start off like it had been going for many, many years. It takes time for good things to mature, and Whānau Ora is one of those programmes that will take time. It is developing the goods. You just need to talk to some of the whānau whom it has helped over the 4 to 5 years that it has been operating.

We talked a little bit, I also heard, in the Committee about homeownership and Māori homeownership. The Minister for Māori Development has done the most amazing thing, which has never been done by any Government before but which has been done in coalition with the National Government, and that is being able to build houses on Māori land. In the past that was never able to be done. They are able to actually access loans to do that. I am very proud of what he has done.

When we start to look at other areas within the Māori development portfolio under Vote Māori Development, we can look at Healthy Families New Zealand. This is a project that Jonathan Coleman launched in the East Cape just recently, in April. It is the Healthy Families East Cape project, which belongs to the lead provider Te Whare Hauora o Te Aitanga a Hauiti. They established—hello—a Whānau Ora collective called the Horouta Whanaunga Collective, a collective that comprises 17 providers and nine iwi groups. It is a collective that has come together to address health issues at a local level. At the end of the day, where we are the most effective is with helping our own, working with our own, and coming up with the decisions and the outcomes at a local level.

So when I look at Māori health, I see that over 50 percent of Māori are now enrolled in these low-cost, accessible primary health organisations. I was there at the start of all of that time when primary health organisations were being developed, and at one stage we thought that Māori were going to miss out on that. But low-cost Māori primary health organisations came about, and so we have 350,000 Māori enrolled in them, paying up to $18 for a GP visit, which is great for Māori whānau, as is the new announcement on 1 July of free GP visits for under-13s. That has never been done in the history of this Parliament, and it was the National-led Government that pulled all of that together.

Education, as I have said many times, is freedom. It is freedom to make choices, and the tertiary education area for trades academies is one area that Māori have shone in. I want to talk just a little bit about the Ngāi Tahu He Toki ki te Rika. That is pre-trades training that was developed post-earthquake in 2011, and it has over 800 students enrolled in it. Just recently, in April, the Prime Minister was hosted by Ngāi Tahu, where he launched He Toki ki te Mahi Apprenticeship Training Trust programme, and that has 10 to 15 apprentice carpenters. This is great news for Māori. It is great news for iwi because of the steps, the benchmark, and the power that iwi can have within the tertiary sector.

I am very proud to stand here and speak on Vote Māori Development. I am a Māori; I support all Māori things—it does not matter what colour the politics are. I support Māori achieving, and everybody in this Chamber should be looking at that and at every which way we can help. Kia ora.

It is a pleasure to rise and take this call in this debate with such wide-ranging topics. As we have heard, they include Vote Arts, Culture and Heritage, Vote Internal Affairs, Vote Māori Development, Vote Pacific Peoples, Vote Sport and Recreation, and Vote Women. I think it is really important, and it is a pleasure to say, as the lead National member for the Government Administration Committee—as I acknowledge Nuk Korako, the lead National member for the Māori Affairs Committee—that these disciplines require attention. They do encompass a richness that is New Zealand, and it is wonderful to rise and speak about it.

I am actually going to focus on sport and recreation, and change tack here. I will talk about some of the wonderful things that sport and recreation does. Of course, sport is in our blood as New Zealanders, and we usually use sport to signal our prowess on the world stage, but it is more than that. Sport and being active means having a healthy lifestyle, and it is through Sport New Zealand that $7 million is taken from Vote Health and put into Kiwisport, which is a fantastic programme. It recognises the importance of getting children involved in sports. It designs games for little people. It educates them about the needs of health, and sport as part of that. Obviously, sport helps them with their cooperation and teamwork, builds their self-esteem, and adds to an all-round healthy lifestyle. So I want to acknowledge that that is a great programme that Sport New Zealand is involved in, and certainly it adds to the healthy lifestyle that we need in New Zealand to tackle some of those problems that we see in our community.

I had the pleasure on 7 July of actually stepping in for the Hon Dr Coleman and launching the Healthy Families New Zealand initiative in Invercargill. That is an initiative that is based on the Victorian model that has seen significant improvements in health and it creates a platform for getting people involved in an active lifestyle. Invercargill was one of the 10 communities that were selected. It was selected on a range of different factors, but mainly because, unfortunately, in Invercargill there is a prevalence of some diseases that can be prevented through having a healthy lifestyle.

💬 Hon Member: It’s cold.

It is not just cold, but sport plays a really big part in Invercargill. So it is important to get that initiative going and to start auditing the community and looking at the wins that we can create by getting people involved in sport and understanding the drivers of what creates a healthy lifestyle, along with eating plans and just getting people active.

That involves stakeholders coming together, all within the health field, and they audit, basically, the community and look at the different health organisations that are out there. The sporting organisations come together and they look at what they are doing already so that they can look for easy wins to educate those people who are at risk of different diseases that can be prevented, like diabetes. They come together and look at establishing programmes.

One of those programmes is through Volleyball Southland. It was my pleasure to meet some of the people who play volleyball through Sport Southland. It has community teams, school teams, ethnic teams, and teams through the Southern Institute of Technology. Again, it is a great way to meet people, to engage in your community, to make friends, and to build self-esteem, but, obviously, it is also about getting active and learning about being healthy. So through that initiative, we are encouraging families to live healthy lives, and obviously Sport New Zealand is part of that.

I want to touch on Vote Women, and one of the wonderful initiatives that is the brainchild of the Hon Louise Upston. That is the research into family violence and violence against Māori women. I had the pleasure of going—

Vote Arts, Culture and Heritage, Vote Internal Affairs, Vote Māori Development, Vote Pacific Peoples, Vote Sport and Recreation, Vote Statistics, Vote Treaty Negotiations, and Vote Women agreed to.

Primary Sector