General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business. Kia ora, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First in defence—[Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can accept some interjection throughout a general debate but it is unreasonable this amount of interjection at the very start. The member can start her speech again.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First in defence of Alfred Ngaro, because somebody has to. It is interesting—it is shocking—to see how Alfred Ngaro has been hung out to dry by his own political party.

No senior member has been placed next to a new Minister to support him in a situation where Mr Ngaro has, unfortunately, a character flaw: he is too honest. Mr Ngaro should be given a vote of thanks by all members of this Parliament and by the people of New Zealand for telling the truth. Mr Ngaro has sat for 6 years in a caucus where there is this behaviour of threatening NGOs; of suggesting that people should not criticise the Government, or “Watch out.”; of suggesting that if people want contracts with this Government, there will be clauses that say you will be gagged. Mr Ngaro saw this on a daily basis for 6 years, and all he did was articulate it, because he is an honest man. But where are his colleagues now? Where are his colleagues now?

Only a few months ago he was one of the “Three Amigos”; now he is on his own. Let us just go through some of the things that Mr Ngaro has already seen. For example, health Minister, Mr Coleman, decided that if you criticised his health policy, you were “a raving leftie”. Conservation Minister Barry calls people who badmouth the Department of Conservation underfunding “nutters”. A contractor who has drilled holes at Pike River has had a gagging order placed inside his contract so that if anybody contacts him with regard to what he is doing on site, particularly the media, he must alert Solid Energy.

The Rt Hon Winston Peters and fellow MPs of mine went to Kaikōura 14 days ago because they had been contacted as elected members of this Parliament by constituents who were concerned about the slowness with regard to the reconstruction there. The New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) then calls up the helicopter company and wants to know who hired the helicopter. What on earth makes NZTA think it has the right to ring up a commercial operation, which has been hired by a private organisation, and ask who paid the bill? It believes it can because that is the sort of practice that this Government allows to happen.

It goes on, though. Last week New Zealand First emailed St John Ambulance to ask about the new crewing proposals that this Government had announced. St John Ambulance came back in an email and said: “What do you want to know for?”. Well, actually, we want to know because we want to know. The Government has announced it, so we are just looking for the finer detail of it. But when it replied to us, it cc’d in the Ministry of Health. It cc’d in the Ministry of Health—

💬 Hon Louise Upston: They’re the ones that are paying for it.

I find it very interesting. The Minister obviously agrees that it is normal practice for this Government, because she is ranting on about it. It is like social providers. Social housing providers have been told that if they get approached by the media, they need to contact the ministry immediately. They are not free to speak—they are not free to speak.

In Northland, 2 years ago, Whangarei MP Shane Reti phoned up a resident and told her: “You’d better stop complaining about your dusty road or nothing will happen.” Unfortunately for him—unfortunately for him—she actually recorded the phone call.

What about the solo mothers who, with Paula Bennett, once they criticised her policy, ended up with their private data all over the internet? What about when the human rights commissioner criticised John Key about increasing spy powers and he threatened to cut their funding? What about Salisbury School when Hekia Parata lost her court case and since then she has been starving it to death? Mr Ngaro merely did what he was taught to do. Mr Ngaro merely articulated what he has seen being done. Mr Ngaro should be supported by his colleagues. It is a shame. It is a shame that you do not stand by your colleagues. But let it be a lesson to all of you backbenchers: make one mistake and your party leaves you alone.

Moving aside now from the hysterical, shrill nonsense peddled by “Winston First” and his motley crew, we need to address some of the substance that occurs across this Government. Budget 2017 has already delivered the Department of Conservation (DOC) its biggest pay day in its 30-year history. This has been a remarkable year for the Department of Conservation. More conservation work is being done in this country now than at any other time in our history and DOC is spending more than ever before on natural history and on recreational work. Predator Free 2050 is gathering momentum. It is about to announce its new chief executive. There is going to be at least one, if not three, landscape-scale predator announcements that will be a game-changer for regional New Zealand within the next few months. These are very important—immeasurably important, actually—gains for New Zealand’s threatened and vulnerable species.

In the past 2 weeks I have announced a $76 million package that will not only allow DOC to provide a much better experience for visitors but also return much more revenue to DOC, which will be reinvested in species protection and biodiversity. One of the initiatives that we will be spending some of that money on is a new computer system, which means that DOC will be able to differentially charge. This means that international visitors to New Zealand will be paying more for staying on our Great Walks and a number of other facilities that the Department of Conservation has control over, and that will return excellent revenue to the department. New Zealanders who pay their rates and their taxes have already made a considerable investment in the Department of Conservation so they will be given a discounted rate. These are all mechanisms that we have put in place to enable predator control and threatened species management to continue at a great level.

Big business and philanthropists and other partners have also joined forces with DOC to the tune of $100 million in the past 6 years. If we listened to Labour and the Greens—which, of course, we never do; but if we did, if we were foolish enough to do that—then we would be spurning that $100 million because it would somehow be portrayed as being tainted. That is a very, very flawed approach to conservation. So we have, coming up, two more Great Walks and a new network of day walks and short walks.

I have also announced a $21 million funding increase to launch Battle for our Birds, which will be the biggest predator control operation in our history. When you kill the rats and the stoats and the possums and the other mammals that predate on our vulnerable species, you protect their habitats, you protect our biodiversity, and it is entirely significant that all of the landscape control that we have done really addresses that balance of the invaders that kill some 25 million native birds each year. So that $21 million will be well spent. We will continue to use intensive trapping programmes and aerial 1080 operations.

We have also unveiled in the last 2 weeks New Zealand’s Threatened Species Strategy. This is the first time in New Zealand’s history that we have ever pulled together all of our threatened species in one document. It is a discussion document, and I would urge all interested parties to contribute to that by the cut-off date of 31 July. This is an effort to ensure that all of the predator control that is going on in New Zealand should be focused on the species and on the habitats that really need the assistance, so this strategy has been very welcome and has landed well. Two weeks ago I announced a $2.8 million injection into the sea lion threat management, so we are concentrating on our taonga species.

A lot has been happening in other parts of my portfolios as well. Two weeks ago, along with the Hon Simon Bridges, we made a very significant announcement that is going to continue to increase the capacity of our film sector to do a terrific job to attract revenue to New Zealand, to attract big films to be made here, and to make sure that our domestic film-making environment, the people who work on the craft end—the film, the camera, and so forth—will have a true profession. So the $306 million to support the New Zealand screen industry, both globally and domestically, will make a huge difference. The $65.94 million remains available to ensure the domestic component of the grant continues. So since 2014, when the grant came in, it has supported around 50 international productions and has also supported 23 New Zealand productions like Pork Pie, Chasing Great, and so forth.

In terms of the pre-Budget announcements, it would be remiss of me as the Minister for Seniors not to mention the $2 billion pay equity settlement. That is a game-changer for our rest home and community carers and is evidence about how much this Government can and will make long-lasting and noticeable improvements for all New Zealanders, including our vulnerable seniors. Thank you.

After 9 long years of a National-led Government, it is our view that there should be one word that people should be looking for in this Budget, in all of the Budget announcements, and that word is “solutions”. I think people will be tired, as we are, I am sure, of the constant blame game that you hear from this Government any time you raise a significant issue that needs to be addressed, but if there is one thing that you run out of after 9 years of being in Government, it is excuses—it is absolutely excuses. It is time—and we should be seeking it in this Budget—that we see the solutions to the major challenges that we are confronting here in New Zealand, and they are undeniable.

If you are looking for one of them, then you need look no further than the challenges that we obviously have when it comes to the most fundamental of provisions, and that is shelter—a roof over your head—because housing affects everything. It affects the quality of your health and your children’s health. It affects your ability to put food on the table. It affects your stability to keep your kids in education and enrolled at their local school. It affects the stress and tension that your family experiences. It affects everything.

That is why it has been such a focus for us, and yet what did we see in the House today, when we again raised the need for solutions in this area? We had a Prime Minister who could not decide whether he wanted to blame councils, the media, Aucklanders, or the Salvation Army for the issues that we are facing—all of which is inexcusable when you have been in Government for 9 years.

No one has said it would be easy. No one, not even on this side of the House, has ever claimed that resolving the housing crisis would be easy, but we have said that it is an imperative. We have offered up time and time again our new ideas, our fresh look at this problem—ideas like closing tax loopholes, banning foreign overseas speculators from being able to buy in our domestic residential market, moving the brightline test, and fundamentally getting on with the act of building houses at scale, which is something that we have promised to do. That is what a solutions-focused Government would have done.

But that is not the only area we need to look for solutions in in this Budget. I have a major expectation that this Government is going to do something to reduce inequality and the child poverty that we see in this country. I have looked for that in every single Budget. In fact, in one Budget, in 2011, we actually had a Government that stood up and placed cuts on Working for Families that amounted to $448 million. It said that was to pay down debt, and what did we see instead? An increase in Crown debt. What do we hear now? Rhetoric about this next Budget that those members are finally going to do something around fixing Working for Families after they have, time and time again, adjusted abatements and cut and cut and cut away at that provision. It will be insufficient just to reverse some of the damage that has already been done, so I will be looking for real solutions that ease the pressure on families.

I heard Steven Joyce today, though, say that when you look at a Budget, you should not look just at inputs; you should look at outputs—you should not just look at inputs; you should look at outputs.

💬 Chris Hipkins: What about kids?

You know, well, actually, if by “outputs” he means people, then, yes, I am really interested in what we are doing for people. I am interested in what we are doing for kids. I am interested in what we are doing about people’s wages. We have a low-wage economy. We need people’s wages to increase. We need investment in the early years—those fundamental years—of a child’s brain development. If that is what Steven Joyce means by “outputs”, then I am going to be looking at that, too, but I might put a human face to it.

But, finally, I will also be looking for solutions in the health budget. We have had $1.7 billion cut over time from health. When you have one out of every six New Zealanders suffering in their lifetime from a mental health - related issue, mental health is an area where we need sufficient investment, and there has been under-investment. Labour has fresh ideas and new solutions in this area. We have talked about primary mental health care. We have talked about comprehensive health in our secondary schools. These are ideas that we want to see, and those are solutions I will be looking for in this Budget. But, actually, what I think we need instead is just a change of Government.

I have got great news for the speaker who has just resumed her seat, Jacinda Ardern, because there are loads of solutions that this Government has in place in terms of an area that is very important for Kiwis, and that is safer communities. New Zealand is, of course, the fourth-safest country in the world, but, no, our Government is not satisfied with that; we are aiming to be No. 1, and I want to talk about some of the solutions that our Government has put in place and the results that we are getting.

We believe very clearly that when offenders are in our custody, we should absolutely do our utmost to put them on a different path in life. We owe it to their families, we owe it to their communities, we owe it to taxpayers, and we owe it to their victims. Yesterday the Minister of Police and I announced a number of measures that are focused very much on one of the most significant drivers of crime. Fifty percent of all crime is committed by people under the influence of alcohol or drugs. This is a very targeted solution. It is very specific around looking at those who are out on bail, or offenders who have abstinence conditions, and making sure that by close monitoring and by more significant testing, we are able to identify early exactly what is going on. About 50 of the highest-risk offenders will be fitted with these alcohol detection anklets, which will detect alcohol in their sweat.

It provides a couple of things. Obviously, there is the compliance issue—we want to know that offenders who have conditions and are managed in the community are complying with the conditions that have been imposed by the Parole Board. More importantly, we actually want offenders to be successful in creating that new path in life, and that is the point that the Opposition members have clearly not got their heads around. In terms of rehabilitation, in terms of reintegration, this Government has spent $176 million in the last year alone on rehabilitation and reintegration. That is 13 percent of the Corrections budget.

But what is important is that we on this side of the House do not talk about how much money we are spending, because we focus very clearly on the results. I am going to talk to you about the results. The Minister of Finance clearly talks about outputs—outputs are results. We measure them through the Better Public Services targets. We change the targets when we reach them. We set new targets so that the taxpayers of New Zealand can absolutely see the outputs that we are achieving.

Yes, in terms of inputs, funding is part of that, but what is more important for New Zealanders—for hard-working New Zealanders—is what this Government is doing in terms of solving the very issues that have an impact on their lives, and we are tackling the hard ones. The previous Government was quite happy to leave prisoners inside with very few programmes in terms of supporting their drug and alcohol issues. One example alone: in our term in office, we have delivered drug and alcohol programmes and treatment to 22,000 offenders in the community and 6,500 prisoners. That is up from 230—230.

When we talk about solutions, we are talking about solutions for real problems for real Kiwis—some of the most challenged ones, absolutely, whom we are making a difference for. On this side of the House, we come up with solutions, whether it is getting prisoners qualifications—the big one at the moment is getting offenders into jobs, because we know that jobs provide them with stability and jobs provide them with an income. At the employer breakfasts that I have been hosting around the country, we have employers lining up to take on more offenders, because they know that they are drug- and alcohol-free, that they have got access to literacy and numeracy, that they got qualifications while they were inside, and that they are hungry for the opportunity to prove that they are set on a new path in life.

Over the last 4 years, under the Better Public Services targets, there have been 38,000 fewer victims—38,000 fewer victims. If that is not a result that Kiwis are interested in, I do not know what is. Thirty-eight thousand—that is the figure I am proud of.

This is a National Government that has given up on the big challenges facing New Zealanders. After 9 years in Government, those members are just too tired. They have given up. They shriek, they yell, they patronise, and they bully, but they have given up on the big issues that confront New Zealanders. For all of the facts and figures that they are giving up, they have lost sight of the fact that they are here to govern for people—for people.

Here is a number that I am going to give to the Government today: 702. That is the number of schools in New Zealand that are either already overcrowded or are at risk of becoming overcrowded within the next year or two, because this Government has not kept up with population growth. It has been happy to take the extra tax revenue that comes from population growth, but when it comes to investing in the services that that increasing population needs, it has done nothing. It has not been willing to invest that money. As of today, by the Government’s own definition, there are 214 schools that are overcrowded. That means we have got kids having their classes transferred to libraries, halls, gymnasiums, and even old dental clinics because they have not got the classrooms that they need to keep up with that growth. There are another 488 schools that are at serious risk of becoming overcrowded in the near future.

The Government is now frantically playing catch-up. Yet we know that of the hundreds of millions of dollars that it has announced in terms of spending in the last 3 or 4 years, only a fraction of that has actually been spent, because the Government is constantly trying to catch up and it is not doing a very good job of it. That is why parents know that the learning conditions that their kids are facing simply are not good enough. Parents in early childhood education know just how much the Government has run down the early childhood education sector, because although participation is up—and that is a great thing—the funding on a per-child basis has gone backwards, not only in real terms, but in nominal terms as well.

Early childhood services are not getting the money they need to deliver quality education for kids. So if they were to catch up for the 9 years of National Government, they would be looking at hundreds of millions of dollars, if not a billion dollars or more, of back-funding to make up for the fact that the Government has not increased early childhood education funding, to keep up with the growing population and increasing costs. As for schools, the Government froze school operations grants last year, which meant that increasing salaries for school support staff had to be absorbed by cutting things somewhere else or by cutting the school support staff themselves, and that is not good enough. The Government, of course, has frozen student support for tertiary students for years and, in fact, in many cases, it has reduced the level of support available.

This generation of students leaving tertiary education now will be the most indebted ever in New Zealand’s history, and that is not good enough. And even within the debt, the Government is not willing to acknowledge the increase in cost. The amount that students can borrow for their living costs has not changed, I think, in the entire time the National Party has been in Government, and the result of that is now people cannot even borrow enough money to pay the rent on their flats let alone eat, and that is the track record of the current National Government. But it is not just education; we have seen woeful neglect in mental health and we are suffering the consequences as a society for that, and the Government has got nothing to say on that. It has simply given up.

When it comes to the challenge of homeownership, the Government has a lot of smoke and mirrors, it has got a lot of puffery, but it is not actually delivering results. Homeownership rates are the lowest—the lowest—that they have been in several generations. That is a whole generation of New Zealanders now completely shut out of the housing market. Something like 85 percent of the people who are renting today will never save enough for a deposit to buy their own home. That is the legacy of this National Government. It has robbed from the future by refusing to pay into the Superannuation Fund, kicking the can down the road and saying that the future retirement of New Zealanders is something for a future Government to worry about. This Government has completely washed its hands of it.

And while we are talking about washing things, one thing it has not washed, or has not cleaned up, is our rivers. It is quite happy to admit that New Zealand rivers are unswimmable. The birthright of New Zealanders to go down to their local swimming hole for a swim in the summer has been taken away increasingly in recent years, and this Government does not care about that. It seems to think that is good enough. I do not think that is good enough. I think it is time we have a Government that focused on the future. Remember the brighter future the National Party promised? It never arrived for New Zealanders. I think it is time we had a Government that is genuinely aspirational for New Zealanders, and that is what New Zealanders will get if they vote for a change of Government and vote for a Labour Government in September this year.

I would like to take this opportunity to update the House on the regeneration of Canterbury, because it is a really bright future for our province and our city. We have made real progress, and it illustrates how important active support and resource from Government is in times of disaster. This is a $40 billion recovery and this is important for not just the people of Christchurch and Canterbury but the people of the South Island and New Zealand.

After the earthquakes there were numerous doomsday predictions, many from that side of the House. They said: “Everybody’s going to leave Christchurch. The city’s going to stagnate economically, and the well-being of Cantabrians will be dire.” And that is right, it has been a very long, hard road, but we have got there. There are challenges in front of us. But recent data—and it is important to have good data—is showing that Canterbury is well and truly on its own two feet.

We were told that people would leave Canterbury in droves. And there was an immediate exodus, but between 2010 and 2016 the population of Canterbury has increased by 5.7 percent; about 32,000 people have come to our area to enjoy our greater, brighter future.

We were told that businesses would close and jobs would be lost, but the number of businesses has increased and hundreds of jobs have been created in the last 6 years. We have got down to a level of just over 2 percent unemployment, and even today the unemployment rate is at 4 percent, compared with a national average of 4.9 percent. Our economy has grown. It has grown above the national average. It has grown 13.7 percent since the earthquakes. The average wages have increased. Before the earthquakes in 2010 the average wage was $726 a week; it is now $935 a week. Lots of young people have had an opportunity to be trained and get into jobs of their choice.

We were told there would be nowhere for people to live—and that was tough immediately after the earthquake—but we have built thousands of new houses and thousands have been repaired. We have managed to open up land and to build houses of good quality quickly. What that has meant is that Christchurch now has very good quality and well-priced houses. The average price for a house in Christchurch is $496,000, and the average weekly rental price is going down. It has dropped for the last 2 years, and it is now $386 a week.

We were also really concerned about the well-being of Christchurch people, but the Canterbury community has really come together. We have supported each other street by street, and we have also managed to develop the Community in Mind Strategy, which has brought all the service providers together and they have done a really good job.

The latest survey tells us that 82 percent of Canterbury families believe that their quality of life is good or very good. These figures are important, because they are showing that we are making really good progress, and, on the whole, Greater Canterbury is regenerating and it is a great place to live, work, and play. Having good data allows us to find the solutions—the solutions that seem to be so elusive to the Opposition—for the issues that affect us most. The negative predictions about Canterbury have not come true. Christchurch is a real city of opportunity. Young people are flocking here. New businesses are opening every day. One of my priorities as a new Minister is to continue to drive these positive trends and to support the well-being of Cantabrians by continuing to progress this regeneration as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

The overall picture is big and complex, and I am releasing regular snapshots of information so everybody will be able to see what is happening in our city. It will be accurate. It will be transparent, and we will all be able to track the regeneration process. I want to ensure that Christchurch is a great city in a great province. It is the gateway to the South Island. It is important to the South Island people and all New Zealanders. Kia ora.

Parenting is the most important job in the world. It is the most important job in the world. As a mother who has raised a child to adulthood, I can tell you that, for me, it is the most rewarding job I have ever done. But some days it felt like the hardest job, especially in those times when I just did not have enough money to stretch. I had to choose between food and rent or food and power. There was just not enough to go around. Anyone who has been in that position, and there are thousands—thousands of parents, mothers and fathers—who have been in that position, knows the stress of worrying about how they are going to make ends meet, worrying about whether they can afford to feed their kids that week. We all know that that stress is immense for those families. So I was very pleased earlier this week to announce the “Budget for all mothers” as part of our plan to make sure—

💬 Hon Member: The “mother of all Budgets”.

—the “Budget for all mothers”—to make sure that families do have enough of what they need to do a great job of being parents to their kids. All families need is a little bit more time and a little bit more money. The Greens’ “Budget for all mothers” delivers both to all families in this country, and we are very proud of that.

To make sure that all babies have the support and the care that they need when they are born, we will make sure that anyone who is not entitled to paid parental leave—and many are—will have access to the parental tax credit of $220 a week for the first 10 weeks after they bring their baby home. And the people who miss out at the moment are people who are on benefits—they may be working, but they are on benefits—people who are students, and people who are on ACC. The people who miss out now are the ones who have the least money at the time when they need it the most. The Green Party is going to fix that.

We are going to make sure that newborn babies and their parents have access to a wahakura, baby pod—every single one of them. Not all of them will take it up, but every single family will have access to a wahakura or a baby pod, a safe sleeping device with the things that the baby needs for the first 3 months of their life. We know that these safe sleeping devices will save babies’ lives. We know that communities who are weaving the wahakura and producing the baby pods want to contribute to the well-being of all newborn babies in this country, and that this is a way that they can do that, to show how much we as a society value every baby who is born in this country.

Every parent I know has to struggle to balance their work commitments with taking care of their children, so we will make sure that every worker gets a minimum of 10 days’ sick leave that they can use both for themselves when they are sick and also for domestic leave when they need to take care of their children when their children are sick. I will tell you, we talked to a lot of families about this policy before we announced it, just to check that it made sense, and this provision of making more sick leave available to those families was the one where they just went: “Oh my God, yes please. That would make such a difference.” They need that time to make sure that they can get their kids to a doctor if they need to, or so that they can stay home and take care of their children when their children are sick so that those children get well and can continue on with their education.

We know that families need a little bit more time and a little bit more money to be able to do the great job that they want to do. This is what social investment actually looks like—helping families at the time that they need the most help, so that they are never driven into abject poverty, like National’s “mother of all Budgets” did in the 1990s. The Greens’ “Budget for all mothers” will help to make sure that not a single family in this country is driven into poverty, and that is what voters get to choose in September of this year, when they get change the Government from one that will drive families into poverty to one that will make sure families never have to suffer it. Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak and participate in this general debate, Mr Speaker. First of all, I would like to start my contribution by paying tribute to those affected by yesterday’s bombing in Manchester: 22 victims who went to the event to enjoy it, but never came back home. That shows we are living in a very vulnerable situation, and I would like to pay tribute to our police and intelligence people and New Zealand’s defence forces, who make sure that we live in a very secure atmosphere in New Zealand.

On this note, I would also like to acknowledge the work done by the employees of Corrections, who are ensuring that the inmates who are there get the right opportunities to ensure that they get proper training and also get the opportunity to help themselves be extricated from alcohol and drug situations. That is because, as the Minister of Corrections, the Hon Louise Upston, mentioned, employers are looking for such employees, who are drug-free and alcohol-free, and can work. These inmates have got opportunities to prove themselves—to prove that they can work when they complete their sentences.

I am looking forward to tomorrow, when the Hon Steven Joyce will deliver his first Budget. That will be the ninth Budget by the National-led Government. These Budgets have been working for the brighter future of New Zealand: improving public services, investing in infrastructure for the needs of our growing economy, and sharing the benefits of the economy by working to reduce debt, to shore up our resilience to any further shocks. As the Hon Nicky Wagner mentioned, the earthquakes in Christchurch and Kaikōura and the recent floods in Edgecumbe show that we are at the mercy of mother Nature. Any incident can happen at any time, so we have to be prepared to face such situations.

One of the speakers from the Labour side said he cannot see what the Government is doing, but I can tell him that I have been visiting a number of workplaces, as well as construction sites, and I have been told that right now in Auckland we have got more than 60 tower cranes working in the construction industry. In comparison, in New York there are only 45, and there are 34 in London. That shows that the construction industry is at full boom in Auckland, and the highest investment is going into that area. It is not only that the Government is building infrastructure; houses are being built. Commercial establishments are being built. That shows the economy is doing very well.

I was also told that if you miss out on concrete delivery in Wellington, you have to wait for 1 week to get the next appointment. Similarly, if you miss out in Auckland, you have to wait for 3 weeks before you can get concrete for your construction site. These are the things that are really showing that this Government is working to ensure we have got infrastructure.

Chris Hipkins mentioned that schools are overcrowded. I can tell him that recently I went to the opening of Koru School in Māngere, which was rebuilt with a new facility. The kids in the school are so happy to see the new facility that they are very enthusiastic for when they are going to enter those classes. We have invested millions of dollars in Auckland alone to ensure that we have got facilities so that the kids, our future, can have the best education in days to come.

If we talk about the law and order and justice sector, the Government has announced that we will be spending more than half a billion dollars in the next 4 years, which will enhance the safety of people in their homes and in the community. We are making sure that all these things happen, and that will be under the strong leadership of the Rt Hon Bill English and his team. Tomorrow’s Budget will show that again. Thank you.

We have heard some fine words from that member, Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi, and the Minister of Corrections, but what I would like to do is sort of put it in perspective. The way I will do that is by just putting the facts out there, because what I think we have got on 23 September is quite a big choice in society: whether we want a benevolent and compassionate society with solutions and ideas and innovative ways to move forward, or a divisive and rather punitive Government, which we have here, when it comes to the treating of the most vulnerable.

Let me give you a couple of statistics, if I may. It was the chief executive officer (CEO) of Corrections who told us this at the Law and Order Committee: 20,000 New Zealanders every year enter a jail—20,000 Kiwis. Of those, 14,000 are there for 6 months or longer. What he also told us was that 62 percent of prisoners who walk through a prison door—walk through the jail gate—have a mental health or addiction issue. What he also told us was that Corrections tests only 7,000 a year. So it tests only 35 percent of all prisoners who walk through the gates, and yet there are 8,680 who are there for 6 months or longer.

I said to the CEO, the man in charge of the operations of Corrections: “Mr Smith, are you at least putting in place—is Corrections at least putting in place—the programmes and processes to give these prisoners a chance to at least be productive citizens when they come out of jail?”. Do you know what he said? He said: “I don’t think we’re that ambitious.” He said: “I don’t think we’re that ambitious.” This is an admission that what we are doing with 20,000 New Zealanders a year is locking them up, leaving them in there—often, they come out a little bit angrier, a little bit madder, or a little bit badder, and we wonder why we have got recidivism rates going through the roof.

Then we hear from the Minister that we have got 16 new alcohol counsellors in prisons. Now, that is good news, but it is only a start—16 new counsellors, to cope with 8,680 prisoners with a mental health and/or addiction problem. It is not even scratching the surface. What this Government has announced is over a billion dollars on a new prison. Between 2005 and 2015 the Corrections budget has gone from $526 million a year to nearly $1.5 billion a year. That is a billion-dollar-a-year increase over 10 years on Corrections. The question that I would like to ask is: do we want to live in a society that actually locks people up and throws away the key, or do we want to live in a society where we at least deal with the issues that are facing our communities?

I think that if we had spent the billion dollars we are about to spend on a jail, and the extra billion dollars a year we are paying to Corrections—if we spend that money on education, on mental health and our health services, on community policing, and on housing, we would not need the prisons. We would not need these prisons, because we would be dealing with those who are most vulnerable in our communities before they get to prison. That is why I say that a Labour-led Government actually has solutions apart from “let’s lock ’em up and throw away the key.” Spending another $1.3 billion on a jail when we should be spending $1.3 billion on houses, on mental health, on police, on education—that is what I think New Zealanders want for a Government.

We had the Minister of Corrections also say that victimisations had dropped. I do not know where she got that statistic from, because in the last full year, between 2015 and 2016, victimisations had increased by—the exact figure—11,568. That is how much they had increased by. Assaults were up by 3,308, sexual assaults were up by 214, robberies were up by 18 percent, and there are burglaries up to $75,000 a year. Let me talk about meth, and I quote the Police: “New Zealand’s vulnerability as a destination for methamphetamine shipments appears to be increasing.”, “The number of children found in clandestine labs or assessments has increased each year since 2012”. But, worse: “Despite the increase in seizures, therefore the removal of methamphetamine from the market, there appears to be no visible impact on the availability of methamphetamine.” Unless we start investing in the processes and the resources to drive this out of our communities, it is going to remain. We need a benevolent Government, a compassionate Government; not a punitive one.

Order! Sorry, the member’s time has expired.

What exciting times we live in. We have got a country that is growing at 3 percent, and do you know what, the Reserve Bank projected that it is going to continue to grow at 3 percent for each of the next 4 years. We have got 130,000 jobs created last year. Again, Treasury projects that we are going to have 150,000 new jobs coming on stream over the next few years. We have got low inflation, we have got real wage growth—2.1 percent last year—and we have got a much more diversified economy. It is nice, and you have all heard us talking about the growth in the tourism sector, the ICT sector, wine—they just keep going on, and that is the good thing about the New Zealand economy and the hard-working business people and their employees. And we have got another large surplus, building on that $1.8 billion surplus last year.

So what does this all mean? Well, what it means for everyone is increased job security—well, for most; except for us here in Parliament. Second, there are more opportunities for graduates coming out of our tertiary institutes and, also, for the 50,000 people going through the apprenticeship schemes in New Zealand. There is more money in the pockets of families, and there is more available for spending on things like policing, infrastructure, health, and education.

💬 Brett Hudson: Great country.

That is what makes it a great country, as I have just heard from my colleague here. That is why people want to come and live here. That is why New Zealanders want to return to this country.

Now, today I want to focus on just a couple of areas. First of all: policing. I want to go back to that great announcement that the Hon Paula Bennett made: $503 million to be spent over the next 4 years to get 880 new sworn officers in place, plus an additional 245 people who will focus on solving crime, like forensic scientists—the right sorts of people who are going to help reduce our crime rate even more.

💬 Secondly: infrastructure. We just heard the recent announcement of $11 billion more on infrastructure. Can I ask, do you know what we expect now to spend over the next 4 years? It is $23 billion worth of new infrastructure spend—$23 billion—roughly about $5 billion a year. And what is that going to be spent on? Roads, rail, hospitals, schools—the list goes on. Just in my electorate, I am really happy that we are going to see the completion of the triple-lane motorway down to Papakura and the start of the rail electrification from Papakura to Pukekohe. We are going to see safety improvements on State Highway 22 between Drury and Pukekohe. These are examples of where things are happening, and I am hoping for more. I have got new schools. Ormiston Junior College just opened at the beginning of this year. We have doubled the expansion round Ormiston Primary School, and virtually every school I have been through in my electorate—and I have got 38 of them—has had some upgrade to some extent, whether it is a new classroom or whatever.

💬 Now: health. Dr Coleman made that recent announcement of the extra $59 million to go into the ambulance services, and I think that is a great thing. It is about the double-crewing of our ambulances as they do their great work. Only just on Monday night, I was meeting my Franklin team—I know they do a great job—and they said to me that that announcement is fantastic because in places like Waiuku they will now be having the ambulances that are based there double-crewed with professional staff. I think that is great.

💬 Conservation: as I asked that indefatigable Minister, Hon Maggie Barry, earlier in question time—and she is sitting right in front of me—what an outstanding achievement, in terms of getting that extra $76 million to build on the Department of Conservation’s tourism and also the Great Walks. I think those are great things. That is what tourists come to New Zealand for, and here is some real money going into it. I cannot believe that she continues to get so much money for conservation—all the money that is going to go into the Battle for our Birds and the War on Weeds; all those sorts of things. I am lucky enough to have the kōkako in my Hunua Ranges. They are great, and these are the types of things that support them.

Last of all, the really exciting thing is that we have got even more to come tomorrow with the Budget, and I am really looking forward to it.

I want to say a word or two today about tolerance, a rapidly declining commodity in today’s world. But, before I begin, can I pay my tribute to those who lost family, loved ones, and friends in the horrific attack in Manchester yesterday. I hope that the British authorities are able to bring to justice those responsible quickly and swiftly before there can be further attacks. Inevitably, in a situation like this, there is a period of recriminations. That is where the issue of tolerance for diversity becomes important. This is an unacceptable act by unacceptable people—do not damn a whole race or a whole creed on the basis of the activities of a few.

We have overtones of that same extremism occurring in New Zealand when it comes to the debate about immigration. If you believe some people, immigration in New Zealand is depriving New Zealanders of jobs, preventing them from buying houses, tearing up our way of life, and destroying all that is good in this country. In fact, immigration is adding to our diversity, adding to our richness, and creating opportunities that we never had before. According to the Reserve Bank, New Zealand is going through one of the longest growth periods of the last 50 years. We are seeing employment growing 2 to 2.5 percent per annum, unemployment is falling, and house prices, after their huge surge, are stabilising and falling quite sharply—and in Auckland more sharply than anywhere else. So for all those who want to play the immigration or the race card for political advantage and cite those dire facts that they do, they are doing the Trumpist work of false news, of alternative information, etc.

This country was built on immigration. This country prides itself on its diversity. The fact is that we do accommodate a mix of cultures and a mix of people, and, as a consequence, become stronger as the people who live in these particular islands. It takes events like those in Britain to remind us of the dangers that we face in today’s environment, but also to warn us against overreaction, stigmatisation, and extremism as the reply to those horrific activities.

What underpins all of this debate in New Zealand—the bile, the prejudice, and the bigotry we see uttered by some—is that it is not about the facts, it is about what they see as short-term advantages, milking fear for political purpose. It is unacceptable in this country, and, when New Zealanders have a chance later this year to express their preferences, I strongly urge them to deny the bigots, the racists, and the peddlers of false truths the representation that they seek. They will tear this country apart. You cannot set person against person, culture against culture, and ethnicity against ethnicity and expect to have a strong and vibrant nation as a result.

We will grow as a consequence of the migration that has occurred over the last years—the influx of skills, the demand that those skills have created, and the fact that our children and our children’s children are going to become a much more cosmopolitan mix of cultures—which will mean New Zealanders will be able to play an even greater part in the world than they do today. Putting up the wall around our borders and trying to stigmatise those who are different as the cause of our problems are remarkably short-sighted, vindictive, and vile acts, and I do not think that a tolerant society should have any truck with the extremism, the bigotry, the intolerance, and the ignorance that lie behind those sorts of sentiments. They are unacceptable in this country, and I believe very strongly that New Zealanders ought to reject these absolutely negative, critical, irresponsible bigots there are amongst us.

Following on from Mr Dunne’s contribution, and endorsing every word the man says, I would like to—you are going to hear me saying a few repetitive words: “excessive and expensive”. I am going to say that a couple of times, and I am also going to use the word “credibility” a number of times through the next few minutes.

Excessive and expensive are descriptive words of the Opposition’s policies. It should, whenever it recommends a policy, run it past an “excessive expensive” test. Mr Robertson suggested to us this afternoon that there is plenty of Labour Party policy. But he has not run it past the “excessive” and the “expensive” test. If he had done so, he would find that he would reject half of the policies. It would help that side of the House gain credibility—something that we have on this side. We have oodles of credibility because our policies are practical, reasonable, and affordable, in contrast to the excessive and expensive policies of the Opposition. And it wonders why it polls at 20 percent. It is because of the excessive and expensive policies.

I am just going to give a couple of examples. Reflecting on Mr Dunne’s contribution just earlier, let us talk about immigration: the immigration policy enunciated by Mr Little just a few weeks ago, saying on Duncan Garner’s show that he wanted to cut immigration by 50,000 people—50,000 people. It was all there in colour, black and white—50,000 people. That is just an excessive and expensive policy, shooting from the hip. Excessive—how, really, is Mr Little going to do that? Is he going to put up a wall to stop Kiwis coming home? Is he going to kill off the international student market, which is a multibillion-dollar industry? Is he going to stop students coming in from various countries on a working visa, filling gaps in our peak tourism seasons? We, of course, have a reciprocal relationship with other countries—is he going to stop that from happening? Is he going to stop IT workers, engineers, or project managers from coming into New Zealand? They are the people whom we need to fill the gap to ensure that our economy continues to grow and continues to have opportunities for New Zealanders.

So what is the answer? I tell you what; he has been listening to Mr Twyford. He is going to stop people with Chinese-sounding names from coming into New Zealand because he has got to do something to get 50,000 fewer people into New Zealand—an excessive and an expensive policy. I do not know how the other members of the Opposition let him get away with it, because it does not make sense.

I am going to talk very quickly around a housing policy. These guys are going to build 100,000 houses, apparently—100,000 houses. Contrast that with the practical, reasonable, and affordable policy enunciated by Minister Adams just a few days ago, where 8,000 existing properties owned by Housing New Zealand will be turned into 34,000 houses. Mr Twyford wants to build 100,000. That is excessive and expensive. That is a $50 billion project. Remembering that Mr Twyford hates speculators and property investors—he keeps talking about them and talking about what a poor job they do and what rip-off merchants they are, yet he wants to be the largest one. He wants to be the largest property investor and the largest speculator in the country, because he is going to have to go to the private sector to buy the land that he needs to build his 100,000 houses. The effect of that will be higher prices in Auckland and across the country for properties—counter-productive, excessive, and expensive.

I want to talk very quickly around the free tertiary education policy enunciated by the Labour Party—again. That would mean that my parents could line up and get a free tertiary education on, I do not know, the history of tiddlywinks, funded by the taxpayer—excessive and expensive on that side; practical, reasonable, and affordable on this.

Sorry, the member’s time has expired.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.