Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill

I move, That the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill be now read a third time.

What a fantastic day for New Zealand. We have managed now to come to the third reading of a piece of legislation that will transform the lives of thousands of New Zealand children. At the very outset, I want to pay a special tribute to the officials from the Ministry of Social Development, IRD, Treasury, and other departments who have put this package together for this legislation within a very short time frame.

This was a core part of the 100-day plan of this coalition Government. It was a core part of the 100-day plan of this coalition Government because it will make the lives of children and families in New Zealand better. Yesterday, when we saw the reactions from UNICEF and the Salvation Army, what they said was that $60 a week makes a difference to these families, the Best Start payment makes a difference to these families, and lifting Working for Families makes a difference for these families. On this side of the House, we are incredibly proud of that. Let’s be absolutely clear: 88,000 children out of poverty by 2021, 71,000 children out of poverty next year—and Steven Joyce didn’t quite manage to read all the up-to-date documents. He got some documents that were out of date. When Treasury came to look at the package in full, they said 88,000 children lifted out of poverty, and they said 354,000 families benefiting by an average of $75 per week.

What this bill is about is it’s about making sure that New Zealanders get a fair share in prosperity. When we put out the Budget Policy Statement and the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update yesterday, yes, it showed the books in good shape, yes, it showed the New Zealand economy growing, but what we all know is that that economic growth has not reached many of our citizens. So, faced with a tax cut package that would’ve seen over $400 million go to the top 10 percent of earners each year, parties on this side of the House said, “That’s not fair.”

It’s time to finally start to reduce inequality in this country; to give every single child the best start in life. The New Zealand that I know the parties on this side of the House want is one where your success and your future is determined by your hard work and by the strength of the community around you, not by the size of your parents’ bank balance; a country where every single child, whether they live in town or country, whether they come from means or not, knows that the Government will be there to support them, knows that the Government will be behind them all the way. That’s why we have prioritised an investment in children.

During the debate that we’ve had on this bill, we heard time and time again that money was being taken off people. It was not. It had not got into their pockets—it had not got into their pockets. Yes, we repealed tax cuts, but they had not come into force. So New Zealanders know that in the future, under this Government, they won’t be paying more personal income tax than they have in the past, but that there will be a package that actually sets out to improve the lives of people in New Zealand.

I am incredibly proud of this package. I’m incredibly proud that in our first 100 days this Government has been able to show that we will make the legislation and we will develop and implement the policy that will make a massive difference in the lives of New Zealanders.

I want to thank the New Zealand First Party and the Green Party for their support of this coalition Government. This is a Government that means business. This is a Government that’s going to get on with reducing inequality. This is a Government that is united in giving every single New Zealander a fair go. I am delighted to finally commend this bill to the House.

It’s transformative, all right. It’s transformative in that it makes 1.2 million New Zealanders worse off. That’s the only thing that’s transformative about this bill. This bill is all about Grant Robertson being the “Grant that stole Christmas”. He tries to rock in and say that he’s gifting things to people, but, actually, here we are frozen 11 days out from Christmas—10 days out for everybody else—and 1.2 million New Zealanders know that it’s the “Grant that stole Christmas”.

And you’d think that Grant Robertson could at least say to New Zealanders who are losing their $1,060—he could at least acknowledge that that’s what’s going on. Instead, he stands there like King Canute pretending that that’s not what’s happening. He stands there and says, “Oh, it didn’t happen, it’s not in my talking points.” Well, it happened all right, and he is removing it, and he needs to own up to that. Perhaps then people would respect him, because then he could say, “Well, actually, I know you were going to get this money, but I’ve decided to give it to the university students; I’ve decided to give it to people on high incomes via a baby bonus; I’ve decided to do a winter energy payment because I can’t bring myself to lift tax thresholds and provide money for superannuitants.” But he didn’t say that; all he did was try to pretend that it hadn’t happened—that it hadn’t been put into law.

There are some good things about this package. The good things are those that were put in place by the previous Government: the accommodation supplement changes and the Working for Families changes. The bulk of what this Government achieves in lifting people out of poverty, and children out of poverty, is achieved through the changes that were announced in Budget 2017—which are left in place.

Then we’ve had the rather moving feast of how many other people, how many other children, would be lifted out of poverty. We were told yesterday it was 39,000 more; then we were told that’s not till 2021; then we were told it’s 21,000 next year, not 39,000—21,000 next year—and then, in the regulatory impact statement, it says 12,000. Now, apparently, according to Mr Robertson, we got the wrong copy. He’s now been out and strong armed the officials—strong armed the officials—to make it a bigger number, because his number was bigger, and that is in spite of the fact that that was signed out by the IRD, Treasury, and Ministry of Social Development, and, undoubtedly, it was inspected by his office. It was wrong, apparently. It was wrong, and, actually, they were all wrong; he’s right, the 12,000 figure is wrong! Well, it’s not wrong—it’s what is in the disclosure statement in the regulatory impact statement of this bill. I’ll tell you what, this side of the House thinks that his numbers are very squidgy indeed.

So what we haven’t had in this 14-hour debate is any explanation why 1.2 million New Zealanders should miss out on the benefits of their hard work over the last nine years from 1 April next year—why people on the average wage should have to pay $1,060 more in income tax from 1 April than was scheduled for them, and is now the case when this bill passes into law. We’ve had no explanation why the first thing a Government that says it wants to lift wages does is to reduce what workers get from their wages. There’s been no explanation for that, and the Andrew Little that used to be proudly standing up for the workers of New Zealand is quiet or angry, depending on his perspective, when that happens.

It is ridiculous that we should be having more than half of full-time wage-workers on 30c in the dollar marginal tax rates. We need to change that, and Parliament will have to change that, and it’s a regressive step to cancel those changes, which is what the Government has done.

And then there’s the baby bonus. Weirdly, tax cuts are bad because they’re universal and everybody gets them, but it’s right to give $3,120 for wealthy people when they have a child—a baby child. And then you’ve got this big problem with this baby bonus, which are these very high effective marginal tax rates. Again, in the regulatory impact statement—and for all I know, that’s wrong as well, because, after all, Grant gets to edit it once it’s been tabled in the House—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Grant Robertson gets to edit it once it’s been tabled in the House—thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Someone’s listening.

That’s good. And good news for you, Mr Speaker: quite a few more than just you—my mum and dad as well. The $3,120 abatement rate—Treasury has warned of effective marginal tax rates of over 100 percent because of the spaghetti of entitlements that this Government is making worse rather than better.

Now we offered them the idea: why don’t you include this in Working for Families? It would have been straightforward, easy—we even offered them a one- or two-page Supplementary Order Paper that would have done it for them, and they turned us down because it wasn’t their idea. We know how much this lot doesn’t like it when it’s not their idea.

Then we have the winter energy payment—that is truly an embarrassing piece of legislative fluff, to quote my good friend from Northland. It is an embarrassing piece of legislative fluff. It’s a Winter Energy Payment that is neither for winter nor for energy: you don’t have to use it for your power bill and it doesn’t come to you in winter. It’s a hastily designed piece of fluff to cover for the drop in superannuation from when the tax threshold changes were cancelled. It is pointless bureaucracy.

It also short-changes superannuitants, as Nick Smith pointed out. This next year, superannuitants will get only $466 instead of the $680 they would have got under the previous Government. It’s not indexed, so, actually, the real value of it declines every year.

And then there’s the silly last-minute thing about the fact that you have to stay in New Zealand, or you can go on holiday but then you have to get reported by the Customs Service if you go overseas so you get your money cancelled and a big hand comes out of the ATM and grabs your money back—that’s what they’re offering. It’s weird. Again, we offered them a solution. We said, “Don’t do all this rubbish. You’ve got yourself stuck in a hole. Why don’t you actually turn around and just do a one-off increase for superannuation?” It would have been a much simpler approach, but no—again, too proud. They have to persist with the charade of a poorly designed programme.

This is the problem: we have a very proud 36.9 percent party that’s come into Government and is now executing a programme that was not supported by anything like the majority of New Zealanders, in terms of this package. It wasn’t campaigned on by New Zealand First or the Greens—in fact, they voted for the previous Government’s package. That’s what they did, and here we are—we have all these Ministers lining up, members lining up, and saying, “This is supported by the majority of New Zealanders.” Well, I’ll tell you what: it isn’t. It is clearly not supported by the majority of New Zealanders; it is supported by only 36.9 percent, if that, of New Zealanders. It was so messy many of them would not have been able to even make head or tail of it. It is messy, poorly designed, confused, rushed, and that’s the quality of this new Government’s lawmaking. In the last 14 hours, we’ve been able to show what a shonky piece of legislation it is.

The interesting final point is that this was their one shot. If you look at the fiscal programme that they’ve laid out, it is so tight that they will never get another shot to do this. They already have 28 specific fiscal risks—29 if you count Grant—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Mr Robertson—28 specific fiscal risks that they have. There is no way that they’re going to do another package.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Two strikes.

This was their one shot—this was their one shot, and now they have blown it. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. I’m trying to tidy up the quality of debate in the rules here, and Kris Faafoi is not helping.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. This was their one shot, and they’ve got it wrong. What they’ll be forever known as is the party that delivered us all the “Grant who Stole Christmas” for 1.2 million New Zealanders, and took $1,060 away from average-wage workers. That’s what’s happened in this House tonight.

Mr Speaker, this is a proud day for this Parliament. This is a proud day when we can stand here and say that we have made law that is going to deliver for 384,000 New Zealand families $75 extra a week. This is the kind of thing that makes a difference, and is why many of us come here.

Steven Joyce, in his previous speech, said that we hadn’t given any reason why 1.2 million people were going to miss out; well, all of those people are in the top five deciles. We make no apologies for the fact that what we are doing here in this House tonight is redistributing money to where it is needed—to families—and supporting those families. The fact that I will forgo a tax cut and that will contribute to lifting 88,000 children out of poverty is something I am happy to do—and something that I am proud to be part of a party that has come to this Parliament to make that kind of change. It is my absolute pleasure to be part of a party that supports this and to take a call on it.

I would like to congratulate my colleague the Hon Grant Robertson; our Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, who has led on this as well; and my colleagues Carmel Sepuloni and Stuart Nash, who have worked hard on this legislation. This is the kind of thing that makes a difference. This isn’t tinkering around the edges; this is making people’s lives better, and I am proud of that.

It’s an absolute pleasure to take call in the third reading of the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill. I listened to the contribution from the Minister of Finance, Grant Robertson, and I just wonder what planet that man is on. This isn’t about, as Dr Megan Woods said, delivering to 88,000 children and lifting them out of poverty.

I know we’re only 10 days out from Christmas, but why is the Government passing a package that’s so generous to me? I’m a huge beneficiary out of what’s happening here. We’re wiping the tax cuts that are currently in legislation, ostensibly to make sure there’s enough money for a tertiary package. I’m one of those people with three teenage kids about to start their university studies. So they’re going to be better off—or potentially I’m going to be better off—by $10,000 or $12,000 for each one.

Not only that, then I looked through the legislation and found the winter energy payment there. I don’t need to declare a conflict of interest I’m sure, but I’m eligible for the $700 winter energy payment. I tell those members on the other side that I very much doubt that I’ll spend that to lower my energy bill, and I certainly assure members on the other side that I won’t be one of those that opt out. If this Government is stupid enough to pass a package that they say is delivered to people in poverty and they spray around taxpayers’ money as liberally as this and I’m a beneficiary, give me one reason why I should opt out of that generosity.

I do accept, in my first reading speech, that there was one other bonus that might have been available—the baby bonus. I’m not sure I’ll make it. I’m not sure I’ll make it, so that might be a saving to the Government.

I said earlier to my learned colleague the Hon Chris Finlayson that urgency is a wonderful team building exercise for the Opposition. I want to acknowledge the team that we’ve had here, who have—[Interruption] Well, Kieran McAnulty interrupts again. That’s all he’s done throughout the last 14 hours. I don’t think he’s taken a call, apart to ask for one closure, and I think that was lost because he got it wrong. I have never seen a Government, through a period of urgency, so demoralised—so demoralised—as this Opposition has presented hundreds and hundreds of amendments. They’ve all been voted down—not even considered by the Government for their merit in tidying up some very messy legislation.

So what we’ve seen over the last 14 hours is a shambolic process, but it’s a continuation of 44 days of shambolic Government—shambolic Government. There are many, many useful amendments that we offered in good faith to the Government. [Interruption] Kris Faafoi interjects again. I don’t think he’s taken a call in the last 14 hours. He’s very vocal now, as we get towards the end of urgency. Those amendments could have been very, very useful, but they were all rejected with arrogance.

I have been around this place for a while. In my opinion, arrogance normally comes after about three terms of Government. What we’re seeing here is arrogance after about three weeks of Government. So God help New Zealand voters as we move towards the next election.

Madam Speaker—ah, Mr Speaker, I should say. [Mr Speaker holding baby]

💬 Hon Tim Macindoe: A little bit of both.

I won’t make any comment on that. But I do want to say to all members of this House that I won’t be here next week, so I want to take this opportunity of acknowledging the tremendous effort that’s been put into this debate by my colleagues. I want to wish them the very, very best for Christmas. They deserve a break. They’ve worked extremely hard.

To the Government members, I also take this opportunity of wishing you a very merry Christmas. Have a good break. But over that break, just think about—

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Here it comes.

I’m not going to leave it there. Chris Hipkins wants me to leave it there. But I’ve got an important message, particularly for the Leader of the House: Government’s not about student politics, Mr Hipkins. This stuff gets serious. The voters of New Zealand deserve a Government that’s truly got to focus on the issues. As the Government members reflect over the Christmas break on what a shambles it’s been in the last 44 days—what a shambles this urgency process has been with them—I want them to reflect on the fact that it won’t be too long before this House needs to sit again and tidy up many of the inaccuracies and foolhardiness and stupidity that’s been written into legislation tonight, as we pass the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill.

As I said to the House earlier, I don’t consider myself a person that should have benefited by the benefits that are given in this bill, but if the Government really thinks that I’m in desperate financial circumstances and wants to extend its largesse and generosity to me, well, I’d be silly not to take it, and I intend to. So I say to those members, as they reflect over the Christmas break, just remember that with the perks comes responsibility.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Thank you very much. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to add our voice in support of the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill. This is probably the first major statement to show New Zealand that this Government is a Government of change, which is what the majority of New Zealand voters voted for.

This is a Government that has decided that we will support our seniors, through a winter energy package—and many other families as well. This is a Government that has decided that, as many members of the Opposition’s parents experienced through the universal family benefit, we will start to move our country back to a place where, rather than introduce at least 15 more taxes on the New Zealand public—which is what the previous Government did over their term, while they, with one hand, said that they were putting more money into the pockets of New Zealanders. Remember the phrase “fiscally neutral”? Does anybody remember the phrase “fiscally neutral”? When they gave with a tax cut with one hand, they raised 15 other taxes with the other. One of them was the paper boy tax. Anybody remember that?

So, just to put things in a little bit of perspective, I am delighted to stand to say that the turn that needed to take place in New Zealand, to show that a Government will support our citizens more fully, more appropriately, in a way that all New Zealanders can see has benefit specifically, more logically for our children, then we will stand and support it. We have worked collegially with the Labour Party and with the Green Party.

Talk about team building. I can see why the Opposition has had to be team building. They filibustered all the way through, with some of the most bizarre arguments, like “it’s not cold in spring” or “it’s not cold in autumn”, or something like that, and showing an amazing amount of ignorance, which they shared around themselves by not knowing the 28-day rule, which has been in place for something like 25 to 30 years, with regard to superannuation. I mean, they’ve had to be team building, because it’s the first time, probably, they’ve actually had to do work without a whole lot of support staff behind them to prep up. So no wonder it’s team building, and I hope it works for them as they go forward.

But I want to close by reading a comment from the Children’s Commissioner. He says, “We welcome the Families Package announced today and we hope it will make a big difference to the lives of many New Zealand children … These are really positive steps, many of which echo recommendations … by the Expert Advisory Group on child poverty in 2012.” The expert advisory group was formed and asked to do that work by a National Government, who then didn’t put in place the recommendations their own expert advisory group asked them to do. It took this Government to have the courage to actually put in those recommendations.

He continues by saying, “Raising family incomes, enabling warmer homes, and providing additional assistance for the first year of a child’s life (targeted thereafter), will do a great deal to improve outcomes for our children. Income is fundamental to better outcomes for families. … We are excited to see this commitment by Government, along with the continued contribution by the philanthropic sector, NGOs and the whole community, … ensuring all children have the opportunity to develop and thrive in … New Zealand.”

I think the word “excited” is a good one to highlight, because that’s one of the words that most NGOs and charities have used since 26 October. The other word that is being used a lot throughout New Zealand right now is “hopeful”.

💬 Kiritapu Allan: Hopeful.

Hopeful. Young people—young people are hopeful, finally, after nine years. Our older citizens are hopeful, finally, after nine years. Our families are hopeful, finally, after nine years. Our student body is hopeful, because now they see a Government with empathy. They see a Government that hasn’t decided that the dollar is king; they see a Government that knows that it’s people that make up a country, it’s people that the Government must support, and that is what this Government will do.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. We have a Minister in Grant Robertson who talks a lot about the future of work, and I guess the message that’s been given out after summarising this piece of legislation and the last day and a bit is that you work and the Government will take it off you.

And we’re talking about people who are on the average wage. We’re not talking about people who are in that highest category. And we’ve heard a lot of debate, and I, you know, respect the fact that the Rt Hon David Carter’s stood up in the last few hours and talked about the packages that you’re delivering to him—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order!

—that the Government is delivering to him. And the whole thing is about you’re taking it off people who are on the average wage. You’re taking it off people with less, and the Government is giving it to people with more.

I have seen a lot of amendments go up in the last 24 hours or so, and some of those amendments had merit.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Some of them. Ha, ha!

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Not all of them.

A lot of them did, and I didn’t expect the Government to pick up all of those amendments. There was merit in all of them, but some of those amendments I would’ve expected the Government—if they were a Government who put in this piece of legislation that they were going to provide targeted social assistance.

Now, I saw an amendment go up from Andrew Falloon, and I thought I saw some light in the eyes of the Minister of Finance when he said to our member Andrew Falloon that he was having some sympathy for the message. That amendment was around just an extra four weeks for families who had lost babies. And I didn’t think it would’ve taken even a calculator to work out what that would’ve cost. You could’ve added that up in quite a short time, and I’m really quite disappointed that the pride that Megan Woods talked about—she talked about the Government being so proud. Well, actually, sometimes pride gets in the way.

And if I have anything to say that I’m most disappointed about, it was that that amendment could’ve been quite easily picked up. I wouldn’t have cared if you’d changed the name of it. You could’ve called it your own. You did that with the Trans-Pacific Partnership—you put a different label on it. Surely the Government could’ve done that to support some of the vulnerable parents at a time in their life when they most need it. So I’m really disappointed about that one.

So summarising the week—$1,060. We’ve had the debate about whether it’s being repealed. We talked last night, and I know Mr Hipkins was a little bit interested in some of the research that’s been done, but it’s not hard to look up “repeal” in the dictionary. It’s about revoke. The Government can no longer deny that they’re taking money off the average wage earners who need it in this country, who get up, they work hard, they go to work every day. But I’ve actually not only seen the “Grant that’s Stolen Christmas”, I’ve also seen some meanness in not accepting, in particular, one amendment today from this Government. And I’m very disappointed, and I hope that, Minister Robertson, you might see it in your heart to, at some point in the future, at least look at that amendment.

There are some very good ideas in some of the other ones. I know that the Hon Louise Upston worked very hard around measuring and managing and, if you don’t measure and manage this, you are not going to get 88,000 children out of poverty. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Tēnā koe, Heeni. [Mr Speaker holding baby] It’s beautiful to see a baby in the Chair as we go into this debate, and passing legislation that is—

💬 Hon Dr Megan Woods: Your microphone.

Microphone? Oh. [Adjusts microphone] Thanks. Ha, ha! I couldn’t work out the sign language.

It is really fitting to see a baby in the Chair as we go into this final debate on the Families Package, which is—

💬 Hon Members: Two babies.

—ha, ha! And the Speaker; yeah, it’s late—in this legislation that will lift 88,000 children out of poverty and 384,000 families getting an average of over $70 extra a week. This is what it’s about: that baby right there and all of those other babies around the country living in households that are cold because they don’t have enough money to put the heater on through winter, that don’t have enough kai for mum to be able to look after herself while she is caring for baby, where the future that that family is looking forward to has been informed by the poverty that’s come before.

This is a day where we say, “We are changing that story for our country.”—that we are putting our children first. And this day hasn’t come out of nowhere. This has been a result of conversations happening in our community from amazing groups like Child Poverty Action Group and Tick for Kids, which is a massive coalition of organisations and individuals, who’ve been asking, I think, 15 years, for this House to put children first.

So as we go in almost to the holiday period and look forward into the next three years, I am proud to stand here and to say that children are at the centre of this new Government. And I do want to say that, for the Greens, we don’t see this as the end of the conversation—that this isn’t the end of what we are going to do for children. We recognise the outstanding issues in terms of the in-work tax credit, in terms of benefit levels for those families as their children get older—that they aren’t sufficient yet. We recognise that there is still entrenched inequality in our tax system, and we would lower the tax rate at the bottom and raise it at the top. But we also know that we need to be able to support people in and out of paid work, as we have so much churn in our workplace. These are issues that this Government is committed to engaging with. They’re not going to be solved in 43 days. We’ve had a blimmin good start—my pretty language: blimmin good start—in 43 days at putting children first, and those larger issues, we are going to grapple with.

We recognise that the accommodation supplement is necessary now, but it is also a structural problem that is feeding money into the property owners who already have a lot and is driving up rents. We do want to engage with that as a problem and find a solution, and this Government is going to do that because we are putting children and families first.

As we go into this holiday period, I do just want to remind and bring in the focus of the experience of children that has been given to us from kids over the years talking about that impact of poverty. I assume that many people in this House, when they think about holidays, have kind of romantic images of maybe what it was like for them. And I’ll speak for myself, for me, when I had school holidays. It was time at the beach, it was time camping, it was time roaming with friends and coming back for barbecues, and a Christmas holiday with a full table on the day and eating too much and waiting to open the presents.

It’s a time that I think many of us assume kids are going into right now. But the truth is that children in this country right now, whose families are in poverty, are worse off now than when they’re at school, because when they go to school there’s charity, that they’re having to be reliant on, that will give them breakfast and give them lunch. The holidays are a time of hunger, and they’re a time where there is no Christmas dinner, there are no trips away, there are no ice creams at the beach, they’re lucky even to have the money to be able to get to the beach if they live too far away, and they can’t even necessarily be sure to be able to hang out with their friends, because their friends might also be in the same situation and they are too embarrassed to bring people home, because there’s no food in the fridge and there’s nothing to play with.

That is a shame on all of us, and that is what this legislation starts to fix. It’s not going to fix it for these holidays. The last Government’s tax cuts wouldn’t have either. But we are making that commitment that we are hearing those children’s experiences and their voices and we are committing to doing better, because all of those children deserve that idealistic holiday of running wild on the beach or in the park or on the streets. That matters in terms of building a life; not just existing. So the Green Party is proud to support this legislation to put our children first.

Now that I see the baby is awake, I’m reluctant to be loud and I’m reluctant to be long in my speech. [Mr Speaker holding baby]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Good.

But I look across the other side and I see Mr Joyce, his head hung over. He looks tired. He looks ragged. He looks rundown. I see the chief whip. He’s just trying to put on a brave face, but they’re rundown. The new member Lawrence Yule—he’s trying to put on a brave face. I was expecting this supposedly strong and big Opposition to fight tooth and nail to defend their record for the past nine years. It’s not even midnight. We were expecting them to debate this until midnight tomorrow.

What a sour bunch of I don’t know. Why should anyone believe a single word that—[Interruption] Shh!—the baby. Why should anyone believe a single word of what they have argued for? Why should anybody believe their feigned caring for families with babies? Nobody believes that, not when you consider the nine years that they’ve been in Government—nine long years.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! Order! I am going to ask the member now to address the bill.

That’s why this bill is critical. It is crucial. For nine years, they’ve allowed the gap of inequality to grow—for nine years. That’s why this bill is so important for families with children. That’s why this bill is so important for working families, working families that have been standing in long lines—long lines—for food parcels to subsidise their low wages that this Government allowed for nine years.

We’ve seen people homeless—that’s why we’re raising the accommodation supplement. This lot, despite homelessness spilling out on the streets, in cars, in garages, and in public toilets, still denied there was a crisis.

💬 Hon Member: Now you’re filibustering.

💬 Hon Member: You’re filibustering.

Shh, you guys! Watch the baby, OK, and listen. Listen up—this is important. For nine long years—nine years—they did nothing as elderly people died in the cold, damp houses during the winter time. That’s why the energy payment is important.

Nobody believes a darn word they’ve said to try and pretend they care about that baby that Mr Speaker is holding. They don’t. They don’t care one iota. They don’t care about the elderly. They don’t care about mums with young children. They don’t care about families with teenagers. They don’t care about people who have struggled, year in, year out, under their Government—struggled while their mates made it good. Because the tax cuts that they introduced—that concentrated wealth in a small minority of this country.

I’m proud to support this package. I want to acknowledge the leadership of Jacinda Ardern, our Prime Minister. I acknowledge Grant Robertson, the Minister of Finance, who’s had the gusto to make this happen. I also want to acknowledge these things happen because of New Zealand First and the Green Party here.

The message from this package is that everybody has a responsibility in raising children. Everybody has a responsibility in caring about the support that parents ought to receive in raising children. That’s a collective responsibility. These buggers, this lot here, haven’t cared one iota for it.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! Order! No, no. No, no. The member will withdraw and apologise.

I withdraw and apologise. I want to wish that baby and you, Mr Speaker, a merry Christmas.

I am absolutely happy to speak on the third reading of the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill. We know that Labour always is at the forefront of change. Fifty-two years ago, on 1 April 1939, under the leadership of the late then Prime Minister Michael Joseph Savage, the first Labour Government’s Social Security Act of 1938 came into force. It came into force because the then Labour Government listened with our heart and enacted action in legislation. The then Labour Government listened—they listened.

Fast track that to now—fast track that to now. After nine years of a National Government, we find children are hungry, the elderly are cold, and they are doing it tough. So how did we get here? How did we get to a point where a roof over our children’s heads and food in their bellies became a luxury? Well, it didn’t happen overnight. Nine years it took us to get here. This does not happen overnight. The working poor is something new that we now hear about. Thank goodness—thank goodness—that the Labour values are enduring, that the Labour coalition Government are listening with their heart and putting these ideas into legislation, because we have heard the pleas from the families, from the children, and from the elderly that they are hungry, that they are cold, and that they need help.

Today, one of my favourite four-letter words starts with F. It drives through my blood. It is called “fair”. Is it fair that we spent the whole day today hearing the other side moaning about “Oh, why isn’t there a summer payment? Oh, doesn’t winter start in May? Oh, why don’t we wait for this? Oh, is it fair that I receive it?” Is it fair that we had a whole day—a whole day—of listening to some fancy words? Is it fair? No.

Last night—[Interruption] OK, I’m coming to an end. Last night, I attended the graduation of Vaka Tautua, in financial management, with the Pacific EFKS church in Westmere, Auckland. Women: 51 percent of the population are women. Women live longer than men. When we look at pay inequality, which the Minister for Women talked about, the brown women are at the bottom. I’m telling you this: with this Labour-led Government bill, the women will not only be warm; they will outlive you men, but we will be warm in winter.

Mr Speaker, I’m coming to my point because I know—I’m coming to my point. This bill is transformational for families. I like to call this bill the “Bill of Love”—the “Bill of Love”. Labour is caring for New Zealanders by taking action—taking action—and legislating it; not just fancy words.

I wish everybody a merry Christmas and a happy New Year, and I commend this bill to the House. Malo.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s with great pride and humility that I rise as, I think, the last speaker for this bill and the last speaker in this urgency motion. I’d like to begin by noting what a strong and cohesive Government has been able to achieve in this period of time.

I would like to congratulate the Ministers that worked together on bringing this package together—particularly the Minister of Finance, Grant Robertson; Carmel Sepuloni; Stuart Nash; our great Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern; and Tracey Martin from New Zealand First, who worked cohesively together to pull this package together and to shepherd it through the House over the last—just over—24 hours. We were expecting it to take longer. I’d like to acknowledge the contributions of the Green Party and the work that they have also put in to making this a reality. It is a very good day for New Zealand families as we pass this into law—lifting 88,000 New Zealand children out of poverty, instead of giving $440 million to the top 10 percent of income earners. We make no apology on this side of the House for providing universal entitlement to public services and to family support.

I say to the members opposite, I look forward to campaigning against them in the next election, when they pledge to remove universalism. Are they going to do it with superannuation? Are they going to do it with education and with healthcare? If they’re that opposed to universalism, let’s have that debate at the next election, because I know that this side of the House will come out even more triumphant than we did in the last election campaign.

Mr Speaker, finally, I’d like to acknowledge you, the Deputy Speaker, Anne Tolley, and the two Assistant Speakers, Poto Williams and Adrian Rurawhe, for your presiding over these proceedings, and, particularly, the members who presided over the committee stage of this debate, who did so with enormous humility and dignity and patience.

I have to say—I’ll leave the Opposition with this one final thought. I’ve enjoyed many urgencies during the nine years that I was in Opposition—it’s much more fun to be on this side of the House—and I have to say that through that I learnt that it is possible to be passionate and it’s possible to give the Government a run for its money whilst still preserving the dignity of the House. Over the next few years, I hope that all of the members on the other side will reflect on that.