General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. A past Labour Prime Minister once famously said that we should stop looking at the mischief and start looking at the cause. It was a very simple notion—the idea, long before social investment, that if we wanted to save money for taxpayers, we should invest early in order to save. It is an idea that pre-dates social investment, and it is one that is simply common sense.

In fact, I would argue that both sides of this House have always prescribed to this notion of investing to save, but Labour’s motivation, and the motivation of its leader, Andrew Little, and of past Labour Prime Ministers, has always gone much further than that. For us, it is not a question solely of taxpayers’ money being saved but of saving waste of a different kind—saving the wasted potential of a young person not being in employment, education, or training; the waste and loss of dignity that comes from poverty and the lack of decent wages that would enable you to put food on the table and provide for your own family on your own terms; and the waste of a child’s future from their contracting a preventable illness and being hospitalised as a result. That is what this Government has missed in its social investment approach.

That is what it has missed when it comes to its Better Public Services targets. It ignores the fact that changing a number does not mean that you are changing a life or giving someone back the dignity that they so richly deserve. It also runs the risk—and we have seen this with the Better Public Services targets—of allowing people to simply game the system in order to be able to give a rough tick that the job is done and the goal is being achieved.

I predict here and now that one of the areas we will be seeing gains in will be the targets around serious violent offending. Look, no one is going to argue. Of course we want to see a reduction in serious crime—of course. But if you look at the target the Government has set itself today, it is aiming to reduce serious violent offending by, roughly, 10 percent by 2021. We have no problem with that. It has set itself a baseline, it has looked crudely at a number, and it has used the number of 139,000, which it wants to aim for to get that serious offending down. That seems like a rather arbitrary number, but when you actually compare it with the existing level, which in June 2016 was the number of 129,000, this National Government’s ambitious target to reduce violent offending is higher than the rate that we had in June of 2016. I hardly call that a message of hope for New Zealanders, let alone a message of ambition.

💬 Carmel Sepuloni: Hopeless.

It is absolutely hopeless.

But it is also troubling to see that targets are gone. You will not hear the Government today speak of the fact that rheumatic fever has suddenly gone from the 2012 targets that it set for itself as part of its Better Public Services. Is it “Job done.”? Waitematā, Auckland, Bay of Plenty, MidCentral—all of those district health boards have higher levels of rheumatic fever per 100,000 people than when the Government set the baseline in 2012. All of them—Waitematā, Auckland, Bay of Plenty, MidCentral.

Labour predicted that would happen because this Government continues to look at the mischief and not the cause. It tried to swab away the problem. It tried to identify where kids had strep, gave them antibiotics, and sent the sick child back to a home that was making them sick. The only way you would have addressed rheumatic fever in the long term was to address poor-quality, substandard housing and, ultimately, address the housing crisis. That is what a show of leadership would have done. Not only did the Government not do that; it abandoned its attempt to do it, and it has shoved under the carpet the fact that its rheumatic fever target has gone.

It is about to do the same on preventable hospitalisations. I know a story of a family where the money coming in came via a father who had lost his job. He had a couple of kids living in that household. In the end, their budget was so tight the hot water went off. The kids contracted an infectious skin disease, and they could not get rid of it because the family could not do hot-water washes. If this Government was serious about giving those families their dignity back, it would address the mischief and the cause.

Obviously social investment is working, because now it is Labour’s idea. Ha! So now it is the Labour members who came up with social investment and they are able to look back on it and see it because, for them, it was obviously their idea, and so now they accept that social investment actually is working.

I found it quite ironic for the member to talk about a loss of dignity in a week when Labour tried to put its list-ranking list out, and all it has had is members who had to resign at the last minute—and may I recognise the work of Sue Moroney, who, quite frankly, has probably held the Government to account and stood up for the rights of women more than any other woman in the Labour Party in recent years. She has actually stood up and has done her thing and has run campaigns and has actually had members’ bills pulled out, and has done a strong job.

Labour does not have a single Waikato member on the Labour list in the top 30 or 35. So that is actually what Labour thinks about the Waikato region. I must say, I take my hat off to people like Tim Macindoe and David Bennett, and the Lindsay Tisches of this world—Barbara, I know, is sort of in there as well. It just says that, obviously, they are doing such a fantastic job that Labour is not even bothering to step in there and take them on. But we have people like Sue Moroney who, quite frankly, I think has been treated appallingly by the Labour Party. But that is all right.

I do have a little message for the Labour Party: quite frankly, if you cannot even run a list-ranking process, you cannot run a country. If you cannot even get your list out when you say you are going to, and not have members publicly out there having their 10c’ worth and having to then have their bit, then, quite frankly, I do not think that you are ready, and I do not think the country will think you are ready either.

So let us contrast that—I am quite happy to—with where this Government is at, what we are achieving, and what we are clearly—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: That’ll be a short speech, won’t it? This will be a short speech if it’s about achievements.

—focused on, Mr Peters. I am really, really happy to put our record up against a failed member’s any day of the week. So let us talk about some of those results. They do not like it—do they, Mrs Tolley—when we talk about the fact that we have the lowest number on welfare that we have had since 1997. No way. And where are they going? That might be that employment rates are up today. Ha, ha! It might be that more are employed and are absolutely doing better in this country because we have set targets, because we have worked hard, but, better than that, because New Zealanders have employed them. Those people have got off benefits on their own merits and on their own hard work. I congratulate them, and I really recognise that.

They also do not like another one in your portfolio, Mrs Tolley. They do not like the fact that there are 57 percent fewer teen mums on benefits at the moment, and we are seeing them actually get ahead. We have got an over 40 percent reduction in the actual number of births to teenagers, and we are seeing more of those young women who are actually having babies early remaining educated and getting ahead—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Actually, I thought that was a personal choice, not a Government’s choice.

—like they never ever have before. Yes, Mr Peters, we are proud of it, and we will stand by those kinds of records any—any—day of the week. Today the Prime Minister has announced new targets and new Better Public Services targets. Six of them are brand new, two of them are being extended, and for two of them we have got more work to do for us to achieve that, and we will stand by that as well. They are around things like reducing long-term welfare dependency and having healthy mums and babies.

I must say that when Minister Coleman first suggested that he wanted to see more pregnant women in that first trimester actually being with a lead maternity carer (LMC), I said to him: why on earth would we need to increase that? I would have thought that in this great country of ours we already had that. I was kind of astounded to hear that that is only at 65 percent. We can get that from 65 percent to 90 percent and it will make a big difference for them to be getting that kind of medical care earlier, establishing that relationship with that LMC, and being able to really get ahead there.

The Safekids and fewer hospitalisations for children for preventable conditions—we have purposefully done it like that. We want to see that crossover between housing, health, social welfare, justice—the whole nine yards, and into accidents as well. So we were purposefully quite clever in how we did that and how we pulled them together.

This is a Government that is clearly focused. This is a Government that has not got “third-term-itis” but is ready to work for New Zealand and New Zealanders by having the Public Service clearly focused on the stuff that matters to New Zealand.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. It is 5 months out from the election and National members are already reaching for the Donald Trump book of the election, the playbook for the election. “The ABCs of Alternative Facts” is in the hot little hands of Steven Joyce. Like Trump, they have decided, against all evidence to the contrary, that the path to prosperity is fossil fuels. That is right, New Zealand: National wants to open up our conservation land to open-cast coal mining again—again.

It wants to open up the beautiful red tussock landscape of the Buller plateau to mining. This is the habitat of the great spotted kiwi, the fernbird, the West Coast gecko, and other rare New Zealand species. National wants to open up the remains of the Denniston Plateau, which has already been stripped and scarred by years of mining. And why does it ask for that? Why does it want that? Well, we are told that it is part of a carefully considered balance between economic and conservation needs. It is the old excuse: a balance. It is a balance where the conservation of our native environment loses every single time. This, even as tourism surges into the lead as our biggest export industry, an industry whose success is based on our clean, green image and “100% Pure” brand. In the face of this, to pretend that coal mining will bring us economic prosperity is to ignore reality. It is one of National’s alternative facts.

Globally the price of coal has plummeted with the rise of natural gas and, certainly, cheap renewable energy. Coal is the dirtiest, most climate-polluting fossil fuel there is. We know that the existing stocks of coal cannot be safely burnt without threatening the stability of our climate. There is literally no point in digging it up anymore. The world is shifting to clean energy. In the US, even the Kentucky Coal Museum has switched to solar power for the museum in order to save money. No one in their right mind is trying to revive the coal industry. No one in their right mind thinks it is worth digging up a kiwi habitat for virtually no economic benefit.

The challenge for Government is to support economic development that regenerates the environment rather than destroying it for short-term gain, which grows industries like tourism instead of threatening them. That is what a good Green Government would do. But unfortunately the National Government has no idea how to do that. Economic development under National is a policy of a scorched earth. We see this in the U-turn on the protection of our native forests, allowing chainsaws back into conservation land. We see this with the proposal to pump pristine glacial water direct from Mount Aspiring National Park on to ships waiting off the West Coast.

But National, in desperation for an election year headline, seems to have forgotten that New Zealanders do not buy into short-term profiteering at the expense of long-term environmental destruction. National seems to have forgotten the 50,000 New Zealanders who marched in Auckland the last time that National tried to mine our conservation land. National has forgotten that the New Zealand people will stand up for the environment. New Zealand people will stand up for the environment, and the Green Party will stand with those New Zealanders.

We will fight to protect conservation land, the land that we treasure, against this lazy, short-term thinking that the National Government suffers from. Coal mining is the past. The Green Party is the future. Thank you.

It is an honour to take a call this afternoon in the general debate. I have often said in this House when I have taken calls that the measure by which any Government should be held to account is not the size of the cheque it can write. If that was the measure, you would judge Governments very differently. The measure that we hold ourselves to is: are we making a difference for New Zealanders? That is the only measure that this side of the House came to this Parliament to address. How much money you can throw around does not indicate whether you are helping the country. The services that you deliver and the outcomes you are getting are what matters.

That is why this Government, very early in our term, back in 2008, said: “Actually, we will hold ourselves to account. We are going to be very clear with New Zealand about what we think the Public Service can achieve, and we are going to set very clear standards—not strategies, not plans, not consultative documents, not shiny brochures, not pledge cards, but real, measurable targets—about the things that New Zealanders care about.” We have said to the country that this is what we are going to expect of ourselves, this is what we will expect of the Public Service, and this is what the country can measure us against in the time that we have been in Government. I want to take a moment to congratulate and reflect on the success of both of our education Ministers, both Anne Tolley and, more recently of course, Hekia Parata, whom I do want to pay tribute to in this House as one of the most diligent, hard-working, passionate, and successful education Ministers.

Did you know that as a result of the work we have done in education, we now have 7,000 students every year achieving NCEA who would not have previously achieved it? That is 7,000 young New Zealanders every year who now have a chance to get on and build a career based on self-reliance. We are not purveyors of long-term dependence and misery. We want to build futures, and giving 7,000 more New Zealanders an education every year is doing exactly that.

In the health space, there are 50,000 more elective surgeries every year under this Government. That is 50,000 Kiwis every year getting new hips, knees, and joints replaced thanks to the work of this Government, and all of this while we have turned around the books of the Government from an $18 billion deficit to, now, a $1.8 billion surplus. In terms of immunisations, if you look at the young people of New Zealand, we now have 93 percent of 8-month-old babies being fully immunised. What is really exciting is for a long time it was always kind of assumed that Māori and Pasifika rates would be far below the New Zealand European rates. No longer—actually, the rates of immunisation of Māori and Pacific babies are at the same levels that they are for Pākehā New Zealanders, at 93 percent. That is an all-time high in New Zealand.

We have put 1,125 more police staff into New Zealand towns, into rural New Zealand, into regional New Zealand, and across New Zealand. They are going to be rolling out over the next 4 years, so that 95 percent of us will live within 25 kilometres of a 24/7 police presence. You heard the Deputy Prime Minister today talk about the work we have been doing with the Ministry for Vulnerable Children and the Ministry of Social Development. We now have 57 percent fewer teenage mums on benefit. We are not saying that teenage mums cannot do a great job, but we know it is much easier for them if they can have those children later in life. To give them the chance to get their education and to go ahead is a significant achievement. We heard also that the percentage of New Zealanders as a proportion of our population now on benefit is, Ms Tolley, I understand the lowest since 1997. That is incredible work of this Government.

Now, having achieved so many of those targets, we have said: “OK, we are going to refresh them.”, because we want to do more. The targets we have now set out are once more saying that as a Government we will absolutely manage the books carefully. We will absolutely respect every single dollar we take out of the pockets of hard-working New Zealanders, and we will spend them as if they were our own, focused only on the difference we can make for New Zealanders, because changing lives is what it is about.

That is what this Government is focused on, and that is why today we have announced a $321 million package of investing earlier, investing better, to make even more difference in the lives of those New Zealanders who do have complex, hard-to-reach needs, who so often are not getting the sorts of outcomes we want for them. There are not many of them—it is a very small group—but we want them to succeed, and we are a Government that will spend money to make a difference. That is what social investment is about. That is what you are seeing in the social investment budget, and there is a lot more of it to come.

Those words, “social investment”, they sound so good, and social investment could be so good, but not so much under that Government. The problem with that Government is it is about reducing liabilities. In fact, it refers to people as potential liabilities. It is about short-term cost-saving rather than investing in people. There will be repercussions, including cost repercussions, down the track because of the short-term vision of that Government. Its social investment approach is a farce. We hear from the Minister regularly that benefit numbers are reducing. Well, actually, the job-seeker support numbers recently were up. And she cannot tell us that the majority of those people are going on to employment—that is the problem. All that the Government is focused on, with its Better Public Services target, is reducing long-term welfare dependency, rather than the outcomes for those actual families.

I want to refer to some of the Prime Minister’s pre-Budget comments today on social investment. Mr Bill English has said “We are supporting businesses and investment that will deliver more jobs and higher wages for New Zealand families.”, but the reality is that the cost of living is on the rise, and more and more people are struggling to make ends meet. That Minister for Social Development cannot say that is not the case, when we have seen an increase of 74,000 in the number of people accessing hardship grants, with most of those hardship grants being for food and educational costs. The Minister cannot say that the cost of living is not rising and that people are not struggling to make ends meet when we see a $20 million increase in the amount of money being accessed in terms of emergency accommodation. The Government has got a problem. Its social investment is not working.

Bill English said “We’ve cut [some] taxes …”, and now our public services, I just want to say, are really struggling with the rising demand. We see it in our own electorates. I just want to use one example. A family contacted me the other day. Their family member passed away. It took 15 hours to get a doctor to that house to make the assessment, and that body had to stay in that house for that whole time. What is that about? That is the strain that our health system is under, thanks to that Government’s failed social investment approach. We have Bill English today also saying “Over 50,000 fewer people are now on … benefit than in 2011.” But, as I said, we see through the quarterly benefit statistics that actually less than 50 percent of those people going off benefit are actually going into employment. So how better off are those families? They are not at all. That is not social investment.

We also heard from Mr Bill English that “One particular focus of the Government’s work on Social Investment is ensuring all New Zealand children have a good start to life.” Yet under this Government there are more children living in poverty. In fact, that Government still does not want to measure the problem properly, so how can we possibly actually address it? It talks about social investment, and yet we have a Prime Minister who talks about young people in a derogatory way, referring to the young people in this country as “pretty damned hopeless”. So how can we have an effective social investment approach when it is underpinned by attitudes like we have from the Prime Minister, who thinks that, rather than training up New Zealanders, rather than training our young people and supporting them into getting into sustainable and meaningful employment, we should actually make the immigration system more permissive to make up for the fact that he says many of our young people are “pretty damned hopeless”.

We still have 90,000 young people who are not in employment or education. How successful has the Government’s social investment approach been when we still have 90,000 young people who are not in employment or education? Despite some of the criticism, despite some of the valuable critique of what it is trying to do, that Government continues to ignore that advice. We had the Privacy Commissioner come out and criticise the data-sharing approach that that Government wants to take as part of its social investment approach, saying that it was not necessary, it was dangerous, and it would deter people from accessing support. I hear today that that Minister is going to ignore that advice and soldier on regardless. The Government does have “three-term-itis”. It is arrogant, and it needs to be voted out.

It is a pleasure to stand in the House today, especially on a day on which the Prime Minister has announced a significant investment of $321 million into social investment in this year’s Budget. I have to say, it is a bit of a laugh to hear people trying to, on the one hand, claim that social investment was actually their idea and, on the other hand, show that they have absolutely no concept of what social investment is about. Social investment is about using good analysis for a long-term investment in people—done early in their lives—so that you can improve the lives of New Zealanders. That is what this Government is all about.

If you want to have an example of that, then have a look at the very good figures that are out today showing that more and more New Zealanders are actually taking part in the workplace. If you look at those who are reliant on a benefit long term in our communities—and there are far too many of them and they are leading very, very difficult lives—about three-quarters of those people actually went on to a benefit before the age of 20. That is why the social investment model shows that you just have to work. The highest priority is to work, to stop young people going on to a benefit.

When the welfare reforms were put into place by my colleague Paula Bennett, a young person going on to a benefit could expect to be on a benefit for up to 17 years. Through the hard work that we have been doing as a Government in social investment we have brought that liability back to 14 years. Yes, the liability is there for the taxpayer—that is an accounting term—but the greatest liability is for those young people, because without a life that is independent and where they can make choices and have the opportunity to succeed, their lives are wasted for themselves and for their community.

That is why we announced today that we are maintaining Better Public Services (BPS) result 1, which is to reduce that long-term welfare dependence. We are still focused on reducing the numbers, but we are more focused on reducing the long-term liability, because that represents the wasted lives of too many great New Zealanders with great potential, who just need a chance. We know, again from good data analysis, that a child who is born into a home that is long-term dependent on a benefit is much more likely to go on to depend on a benefit themselves.

That is why it is so exciting that since 2011 we have seen 60,000 fewer children living in benefit-dependent homes—60,000 children do not have to live in a home that is dependent on a benefit. That means that their lives are considerably influenced by the fact that their parents are working independently of the taxpayer and that they have many more opportunities in their lives. I want to pay tribute to the Work and Income staff members, who have worked so hard with individual people and their families to make sure that this happens. I also have responsibility for BPS result 4, but during a question in the House we covered the changes to that.

I want to take the last minute and a bit that I have to talk about the great people in my electorate who have responded to the urgent needs in Edgecumbe following the breaking of the dam and the floodwaters—in fact, the tsunami of floodwaters—that raced through the township of Edgecumbe. Fifteen-hundred people, mainly local but from all around New Zealand, came to help those people in Edgecumbe. They donned protective clothing, they put masks on, and they worked to strip houses of all their furniture—all their whiteware went out on to the footpaths. It stunk. It was hot—because the Bay of Plenty has a fantastic climate, it was hot. Sewage had mixed with all the silt and had washed through the houses.

It was really unpleasant work, but Ngāti Awa—I want to pay tribute to them because they led this army of volunteers. It makes me proud to live in a community of people who not only opened their homes to people who were evacuated but who then rolled up their sleeves and got to work in the community to clear out those homes, and they are continuing to support those people in Edgecumbe who have lost their homes. Thank you to all of them.

Leadership and impact in the 21st century—what does that look like? We have a US President acting like an “Apprentice” in his own country. We have Britain withdrawing from the European Union without, it appears, fully understanding the impact. We have a North Korean leader playing with his arsenal of missiles. We have conflicts in Syria, Sudan, and Iraq, to name but a few. The world needs stability. It needs understanding, it needs compassion, and, above all, it needs peace. What does leadership look like in Aotearoa New Zealand in 2017? We have a growing gap between the haves and the have-nots, resulting in increasing levels of poverty and homelessness. We have more and more Kiwis becoming renters in their own country. We have elderly Kiwis getting denied operations after waiting months and months on the waiting list. Aotearoa New Zealand needs stability, needs understanding, and, above all, needs compassion.

Today the Government announced its Better Public Services targets. In my years in the public service, setting the benchmark from the time you are in Government to the time you are voted out is really important. It is a way of measuring your success when you are on the treasury benches. I have been in this House, and I have heard Ministers on that side of the House say we cannot develop targets when showing that we are reducing child poverty. I have heard that. I have heard it said that it is too difficult, and that there are too many complexities around reducing the child poverty levels that this country is bearing.

So I say to the Government, across the benches there, that we need to have targets that comprehensively say they are reducing child poverty and poverty in the whānau. We must have targets that say we are going to build more homes to address the homelessness that we have got in this country, and the renters in our own country. We should have targets that say that we are going to invest in our district health boards so we can address the many who need the operations, be they old or young. Yet what we heard today is, again, tinkering on the sides from this Government. It continues to tinker and not address the hardships that many Kiwis in this country are dealing with.

I want to turn to the comments that the Minister made around the devastation in Edgecumbe. I too want to acknowledge Ngāti Awa, particularly the people of Ruaihona Marae in Te Teko. Like many of my colleagues here in the Labour Party, we visited Edgecumbe and got down with the volunteers. I want to say, Minister Flavell, that they are passionate about remaining in this space. Ngāti Awa are really clear that they want to remain in the relief part, because they have some ideas around housing. They have some ideas around better public services for the many displaced families of Edgecumbe. So I want to encourage the Minister to meet with those people in Ruaihona, the marae there, in Te Teko. I also want to join with the Minister’s comments about acknowledging the Ngāti Awa Volunteer Army, which was very instrumental.

I turn back to my opening point about leadership. There is no leadership under this Government. There has been no sense of reality, and no understanding—certainly no compassion—over the course of this year, and under the current Prime Minister, Bill English.

What I want to offer is Labour’s commitment to caring, under Andrew Little, to ensuring that we have a better, stable Government in New Zealand Aotearoa, and to ensuring that we have policies that meet the needs of, understand, and are compassionate to the many Kiwis who are suffering around this country. In September, the people will make that decision: which Government is going to produce the policies that show that there is a Government that cares? That is Labour, and that is what will happen in September this year.

There is a saying in rugby that when Canterbury rugby does well, the All Blacks do well. So it is great to see the Crusaders at the top of the Super Rugby table, ahead of the Lions visit over the next couple of months. It bodes well for an All Blacks success.

I would just like to take a pause and thank the Hon Gerry Brownlee for all the work he has done in Canterbury. One of his last strokes of the pen was to instruct a scoping of a new rugby stadium for Canterbury. Cantabrians are stoic rugby supporters. If you were to look at the Super Rugby history, you would see we are the best rugby region in the world. It is quite right we should have an international rugby stadium that will be the jewel in the crown of the Christchurch rebuild. So I am looking forward to getting an international rugby stadium. We will stop losing All Blacks games to Wellington and Dunedin, so Cantabrians and South Islanders can go out, celebrate an All Blacks win in the heart of Christchurch City, and spend a lot of their hard-earned money in the local bars and restaurants, dancing the night away for an All Blacks victory.

The Hon Gerry Brownlee has provided great leadership in what has been very much a difficult time over the last few years, as earthquake recovery Minister and the former regenerating Greater Christchurch Minister, albeit with the support of his fellow Cabinet Ministers, the former Prime Minister John Key, and our Prime Minister now, Bill English. I must acknowledge the parties across the House that have stood behind and stood up for Greater Christchurch as it rebuilds.

In my electorate of Waimakariri we are going well. The Minister has recently signed off our future use red zone plan, where the red zones and parts of Kaiapoi will go on to be regeneration zones, which will be great assets for the whole of Waimakariri. I know that my colleague Richard Prosser is looking forward to those regeneration zones, which are going to improve the well-being of all those residents in Waimakariri.

It is not only the regeneration zones. We have got 12 schools opening new classrooms this year. We have got a new hospital. We have got Canterbury District Health Board opening up new after-hours health services, because we are the third - fastest-growing electorate in the country, and now the third-biggest district by population in the South Island—just recently took over from Invercargill. So Waimakariri is going gangbusters, and anyone who has driven round the “Waimak” recently will notice the $400 million investment into roading in the Waimakariri. Many of my residents are very frustrated with the congestion on the commute into Christchurch City. So this Government—the Government of infrastructure—is investing $400 million into Waimakariri. The Western Belfast Bypass will open at Christmas time, and the Christchurch Northern Corridor will open in 2 years’ time as well.

I just want to also speak about the pre-Budget 2017 announcement today of $321 million into social investment initiatives. Social investment, we know, is not all about just spending more money. We know that—look at the State of the Nation Report from 2008, Labour’s last year in Government. The Salvation Army said that for all Labour’s increased expenditure, it did not increase social progress by 1 percent. So we know it is not just about increasing funding; it is about a health economics term “allocative efficiency”. The average person on the street knows that it is the best bang for their buck, and it is about how you cut the pie up and spend it in a way that will get the most out of it. That is what social investment is about.

So I welcome the announcement of $321 million. Specifically, $61 million of that is going into helping young people with behavioural issues and supporting Family Start, which is a great service that goes into families with mental health issues, families with addiction issues, and families where there is domestic violence. That targeted funding will make a great difference in many young people’s lives in New Zealand. What we know is that when the economy does well, the whole of New Zealand does well. The well-being improves and our environment improves, and that is what this Government is delivering: a strong economy. Thank you.

If the Canterbury Crusaders played like that member, Matt Doocey, they would be in the third division. According to John Key, Bill English, and Nick Smith, Pike River is a death trap. Dr Smith’s claim of 100,000 cubic metres of methane is—if you will excuse the mixed metaphor—a smokescreen. They must think Kiwis are stupid. If there is no oxygen, there is no fire, as that smouldering robot demonstrated.

In the long history of mining and mine disasters in New Zealand, only two bodies have never been recovered since 1879, until Pike River—of which Justice Mahon would have said, prophetically, “I am forced, reluctantly, to say that I listened to an orchestrated litany of lies.” Tony Forster, New Zealand’s former Chief Inspector of Mines, had never seen the footage, and he said it evaporates all the mythology about the mine’s condition. Seeing people calmly working away destroys the lies of it being a death trap. We know that 1.6 kilometres is in good condition. That is no surprise—it is made from hard rock with a tensile strength of some 20,000 p.s.i. If the families’ experts are right on the mine’s condition, why would they be wrong on recovery plans or a template that has been successfully used all around the world?

None of this makes sense unless we are witnessing a serious cover-up. Just why would Mr English not allow the family to watch footage from a high-definition camera dropped down a pre-drilled pilot shaft, and then say in the House that he cannot recall them asking? Just today—this was a meeting in January. What is there to hide? The police have been back-pedalling on the footage, while the Prime Minister said the families had seen it. They claim they have not. The royal commission cannot recall seeing it either; nor can QC Hampton remember seeing it. The fact remains that the mine’s rescue staff were not, Mr English, 2 metres into the mine but hundreds of metres inside the mine.

The Government keeps changing its story by the hour. Dr Smith, a flannel-eared varsity skellum if ever I saw one, said this: “It’s always been public knowledge that men were working in the drift near the entrance.” How do you think the seal was built? Those activities go down 200 to 300 metres. I knew men had worked in the first 100 metres putting the robot down, but last year, in November, this is what Dr Smith said: “There is 100,000 cubic metres of methane in this mine. The levels are basically 98 percent. The expert advice is uncontested that there are heat sources in that mine capable of triggering an explosion if any oxygen were to get in the mine.” That is what he said—right? So we had men in there waiting for a disaster. Is that true, Mr Smith? He cannot have it both ways. This is an orchestrated you-know-what. This stinks, and it is not of methane.

Earlier this year, there were reports of a Driftrunner used to transport mine staff in the vicinity of the rockfall at the Pike River Mine, indicating that contractors at Pike River Mine and others knew that the Driftrunner was there but were unable to say so publicly because of gagging orders placed on them by Solid Energy. We looked into this, and in recent days received alarming new information that confirmed these reports. The information that has emerged should have the whole country and every journalist worth their salt asking questions of the Government.

Following questions by New Zealand First, it was confirmed to us that a drilling contractor at Pike River Mine has been paid nearly $5,000 each and every month for the last 3 years to have two drills sitting idly at Pike River Mine. That is the contractor we are after. Why? Why would the Government pay that amount of money for equipment not being used? Why also has the contractor got a contract with a specific clause gagging them from speaking to the media, and requiring them to tell Solid Energy’s media director if the media ever contacts them? Why has the Government refused the families’ request to see what has gone on down there? If the Government has got nothing to hide, if there is no cover-up here, then they would immediately have released the contractor from his gagging clause, allowed him to speak to the media, and allowed the families to have a camera put down the bore holes into the slimline shaft.

If the Government does not allow this to happen, then this is the conclusion: there is a rotten cover-up going on, and it will go on and on. But I tell you, from our experience, that sooner or later this Government is going to cave in on this matter. We know that there are people out there with the information, and sooner or later it is going to come out. The result is going to see a whole lot of these backbenchers gone in September.

We heard about leadership and its impact from one of the members from Labour. I have a very interesting incident to share, and this incident will tell the whole story of the leadership competition that is going on between the leader and the deputy leader of the Labour Party. It was a Sunday—from my memory, it was 26 March 2017. As always, I was listening to an Indian radio station in my car, and Jacinda Ardern came on for an interview. I kept listening, the interview finished, I kept listening to the same radio station, and then, in just a few minutes—yes, in just a few minutes—none other than Andrew Little called, and said on air that he was trying to get through to that radio station for a very long time to be interviewed. It tells us who is calling the shots in the Labour Party. It was really interesting to see those dynamics play out on air when he said that. The deputy leader of the party was on air being interviewed, and the leader was dialling that number again and again—again and again—to get on air to get that interview.

On this side, I have to say that I am very proud to be part of this tremendously wonderful Government under the leadership of Bill English. This Government is so good because we understand the needs, desires, and aspirations of all New Zealanders. We also understand the complexities of these various aspirations. We know the aspirations of a student are very, very different from a home-stay mum, just like they are very different for a new migrant versus somebody who is born here; just like they are very different for someone who is walking into their first job versus somebody who is retired. My background is very different from my colleagues on this side, yes, but there is one thing common amongst us, and that is that we are very proud to be part of this tremendously wonderful National Government under the leadership of Bill English.

Look at our economy—our economy continues to grow and diversify. Children are staying in school for longer and attaining better qualifications. The Better Public Services target shows, whether it is early childhood education or 18-year-olds achieving NCEA level 2 or level 4, that we are making great progress. I want to acknowledge the former Minister of Education Hekia Parata for her work, and I also want to acknowledge our new Minister of Education, Nikki Kaye. Today the Prime Minister announced $321 million for social investment through Minister Amy Adams’ portfolio. So we are making great progress in some very difficult areas, and this is because of our approach towards public services. Just this morning we saw unemployment numbers—it is at 4.9 percent, which is down from 5.2 percent in the previous quarter. Again, this is very good news under this National Government. We are investing heavily in various sectors that matter to New Zealanders.

Just last week, on Thursday, I held a public meeting to introduce the new ministry for children, that is the Ministry for Vulnerable Children, Oranga Tamariki, and I was really happy to see that the audience endorsed the work that this National Government is doing to get better outcomes for children. I am also very happy to see that we have increased the minimum wage every year since coming into Government in 2008. Again, this year we increased the minimum wage by 50c from 1 April, and the starting wage is still 80 percent of the minimum adult wage, which is good news for low-income families. Again, we know the projection, because of the progress that we are seeing under this National Government for the annual average wage, is that it will be $66,000 by 2021. I am really proud of the progress that we are making under this National Government for various families and businesses.

I am also very happy to see that the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland Transport have gone ahead and announced a mass transit plan in Auckland, and Dominion Road, which goes through Mt Roskill, is the preferred route. These are the kinds of projects I want to see as a National list MP based in Mt Roskill, because these kinds of projects also create numerous local jobs, and there is a huge amount of residential construction activity going on as well, despite the opposition from the Labour Party. When people are happy, the Labour and Green members are not happy, but we can see that there is an extraordinary level of work that is going on under this National Government, and we will continue to be ambitious for New Zealand. Thank you.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare otirā, tēnā tātou katoa. I want to start by speaking about Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill. We started the debate on the Committee stage yesterday, and I want to talk about this document I am holding—430 pages of amendments that have been tabled by the Minister, without any consultation whatsoever and no scrutiny by the select committee. In my opinion it is constitutionally unprincipled to have that many changes to a bill in this House at that stage. It should be referred back to the select committee.

I want to acknowledge my colleague Meka Whaitiri for her work on this bill and for bringing to light a number of these issues throughout the country. I think the Māori Party members should be ashamed of themselves. They should be ashamed of themselves for going out amongst the people and telling one story and doing something else in this Whare. It is wrong.

I do not know how that party’s members can sit by a National-led Government that has brought in Better Public Services targets like trying to achieve a 20 percent reduction in the time to house priority clients on the social housing register. Going by that Government’s record, all it has to do is what it has done with water quality—change the way that it measures priority clients, and, boom, a 20 percent reduction. That is what it is going to do. I think that is wrong.

These Better Public Services targets need to be a lot more real for our people, to help those ones who are the 90,000 young people who are not in education, not in employment, and not in training. At the September election, the Māori electorates are not going to be decided by iwi leaders. They are not going to be decided how the Māori Party would have us believe—by high profile leaders in our community. No—they are going to be decided by the whānau of the 90,000 tamariki, rangatahi, who are not in training, not in employment, and not in education. They are going to be decided by our whānau who are living in overcrowded conditions, in garages, and sometimes three families to one house.

This election is going to be decided by whānau who cannot afford rental properties, let alone to buy a house. It is going to be decided by our whānau who are living in poor-quality housing. We need to do a lot better for these families, and on this side of the House we have got the leadership team to be able to do it, in Andrew Little and Jacinda Ardern. We have got the people and the policies to be able to implement and address the issues that are important to our whānau. That is what the whānau are looking for, and that is what we are going to deliver in the next Labour-led Government.

The Government has brought amendments to Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill into this House without any consultation that is good enough for such a substantial bill. This is fundamental to the Treaty of Waitangi, and I challenge the Māori Party to take those changes back to the people, so that the people can have their say. Like I said, it is the people who are going to decide the result of the next election. I will be talking directly to the constituency, like my colleagues in the Māori electorates. We have decided on a pathway to make sure that our people have a real choice. We are not going to be playing any games around lists or anything like that. What we are going to be doing is talking directly to our people in the language that they understand.

I do not believe any of the people on the other side of the House who are barracking have any idea what the Māori world view looks like for us. I look forward to 23 September, when the people will decide—change, or more of the same.

This Government is delivering on its commitment to Better Public Services. It is one of National’s priorities. We are doing extremely well at reaching our targets with the support of our Public Service sector. I pay tribute to that sector. But we are not sitting on our laurels—no, we are not. We are setting six new targets that will continue to make a positive difference in people’s lives and ensure that our public services are even more productive and efficient.

These new targets are focused on the tough issues, but we are up for it: maternity care for women; reduced hospitalisations for under-12s; continuing to improve numeracy and literacy; crime reduction; housing; and to have 80 percent of the 20 most common transactions completed online.

We have set targets in areas that are challenging to Governments not just here in New Zealand, but all over the world—areas such as welfare dependency, crime, quality healthcare, and educational achievement. We know that more young people are getting educational qualifications to improve their employment prospects than ever before. I recently had the pleasure of congratulating Motueka High School. It has achieved an outstanding result by getting a 10 percentage point improvement in NCEA results with our priority students. I congratulate that school and I am grateful that this Government had the vision to support teachers and students to reach those priority students.

These new targets that have been set come with a performance measure, so that the ministries that are responsible for them will report against those targets. But none of them can be achieved by one agency working alone. We need these agencies to work together. I am in awe, as I work my way around West Coast - Tasman, of the NGO sector, which has found practical ways of working together and providing services, and, yes, sharing information. They are the heroes in my communities, and they are making a huge difference to families and individuals.

The targets that this Government has set are meant to be ambitious and they are meant to challenge our public services, and they are certainly meant to ensure that improving the lives of New Zealanders is at the core of everything we do. The latest report on Better Public Services targets, which was released last month, shows that although there is still plenty to do, these targets are making a real difference to Kiwi families. We know that, but self-praise is no recommendation.

International independent reviews done recently have a view about how we are doing. In November last year the Human Freedom Index was released. Of 159 countries, New Zealand ranked third. In March of this year the World Happiness Report was published by the United Nations. Of 155 countries surveyed, New Zealand ranked eighth. In November last year the Legatum Institute released its 2016 world prosperity index. Out of 149 countries that were surveyed, New Zealand ranked in first place—out of 149 countries.

One of the quotes that is credited to that report is that free markets, free people, and the world’s strongest society ensure that New Zealand takes the top spot in the prosperity index. It also goes on to note that we have been ranked first in the index for 6 of the past 10 years, and since 2012 this is credited to a concerted effort by policy makers. Those policy makers referred to by the Legatum Institute are the members of this capable, forward-thinking, and caring National-led Government. We will continue to improve the lives of Kiwis.

The six new targets that we have set are ambitious. We know they are challenging. We are backing people in New Zealand. We are backing our children and breaking the cycle of benefit dependency. We have faith in the people of this country to be independent of State support. I think we look forward to a bright future, under a National-led Government.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.