General Debate

I move, That the House take note of miscellaneous business.

If ever there was an example of a Government just six months in but already tired, out of ideas—if they ever had one—and looking like a Government that’s been there for 11½ years, it’s Megan Woods, who just told us that not only do they not have any ideas; they just reheat our ones. I thought using our laws in Parliament was bad enough—the only laws this Government passes are laws from the last National Government. But we’ve had an admission from the last question and answer in this Parliament today that, actually, all this Government’s got are reheated programmes from the last National Government.

This is a Government that is dripping with good intentions. The Ardern-Peters Government—do they mean well? Do they want to do well? Yes, I think they do. But have they got zero plans to take this country forward and make a difference on the difficult issues that we have? Of course they have zero plans.

As I say, Jacinda Ardern, I think, cares, but the team has nothing.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: All Brylcreem and no socks.

So what do they do? Well, they reheat our programmes, and—Mr Peters being part of it—there are reviews, commissions, inquiries, and working groups. Six months—just six months—into this new Government, how many working groups and commissions are there?

💬 Hon Members: How many?

Well, one a month would be six. Six? Twelve? Twenty-four? There have been 45 reviews, commissions, and working groups, and yet no real plans. No homes from the Minister sitting over there—not a single one has been started under his Government. No new transport initiatives, Phil Twyford; no trees from Shane Jones—absolutely no plan and no clarity for this country over the next 2½ years.

I tell you, some people are happy with this Government. If you’re a consultant who writes reports in Wellington, you’re doing really well. If you’re importing paper for the commissions of inquiry, your business is going through the roof, but most New Zealanders know, Ron Mark, that there is zero progress under this Government. There is very little happening. After nine long years in Opposition, Ron Mark got better at sudoku, but he didn’t do the work required. They had four-day weekends. They didn’t do the policy required to make sure they had a Government with initiatives that take New Zealand forward and make a difference.

They have achieved one thing. Ron Mark, Winston Peters, and Jacinda Ardern have achieved one thing in their short six months in Government: they have comprehensively undermined business confidence in this country.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Ha, ha!

If there were one or two issues, Winston Peters—if it was just immigration, if it was just employment law, if it was just the overseas investment changes that you’ve been talking about for so long—I think business could live with that. Business and the jobs they created know that they can take a few changes and keep on moving. They want to work with the Government. That’s what they tell me. They want to be there with the Government, but this week alone this Government has taken a wrecking ball to the New Zealand economy, cavalierly and for political purposes, slicing off a segment of our economy in the oil and gas sector, with no clarity on what’s happening there. And then, today, Shane Jones was recklessly bullying Air New Zealand, a listed company in this country, simply for his own political purposes. If business wasn’t worried, Winston Peters, a week ago, well, I tell you what: they are now. They are now.

It was economic vandalism we have seen this week, for political capital and political purposes, and we won’t make those mistakes in this party. We know that we have to take the time right now to be out there with New Zealanders, listening to what they’re saying, engaging with them all over the length and breadth of this country, and coming out with a positive set of plans for New Zealand in 2020. We’re energised on this side of the House. We know that in 2½ years we can win the next election and make New Zealand a much, much better place.

Poppycock! That was an interesting speech. Looking around the House, looking around opposite, and seeing the faces of the members opposite when Simon Bridges tried to announce that in 2½ years he was hoping to take back the Government benches, there was not a single confident look in the Opposition benches. The only ones looking a bit cocky at that point were Judith Collins and Amy Adams, who think their chance is coming. That is an Opposition in disarray, and a chief rooster who’s going to be a brief rooster, in my view.

We know on this side of the House that we have inherited nine years of neglect. They eventually got the Government books back into surplus during their time. It took them a jolly long time. In fact, they borrowed more on that side of the House than any previous Government in New Zealand history. That is the biggest-borrowing Government in New Zealand history—those people sitting opposite that were a part of that Government.

We now have the opportunity to rebuild our economy. The only way they ever got to surplus was through building social and infrastructure deficits. We now, on this side of the House, form a Government, and we have the backfill to address. We need to make sure that we address those nine years of neglect. We need to make sure we address the housing crisis that built up under their watch. We need to make sure that we address the health system, under huge strain after their nine years of underfunding; an education system that’s been struggling; inadequate transport; joblessness in the regions—the list goes on—and rising crime.

This Government is determined to turn that around, and make sure not just that we’re—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. I’m now going to remind members that speeches during the general debate are not to be read—at all.

Mr Speaker, I’d happily give you these notes, because they do not contain full sentences. This Government is going to turn around those nine years of neglect, and be absolutely clear that we’re going to build an economy that works for all New Zealanders. We’re not just going to achieve surpluses; we are going to build an economy that works for all New Zealanders. We are going to rebuild housing. We are going to get KiwiBuild under way by 1 July. We’re going to start rebuilding Dunedin Hospital, a project that was delayed time and time and time again. When I asked Tony Ryall in 2014 when that hospital rebuild was going to start, he said decisions were going to be taken by the end of the year—in 2014. This Government is finally getting on with the Dunedin Hospital rebuild, and the citizens are happy about it.

We’re going to make learning more affordable. This Government has introduced free tertiary education. That is a landmark decision. This Government has made the biggest change in redistribution of incomes, through the Families Package, since 1991. That is going to mean tens of thousands of children are brought out of poverty. This is a Government that is already delivering for New Zealanders, after so many years of neglect. We’ve got the provincial growth fund, and I think we’re going to hear a whole lot more about that. A billion dollars a year—a billion dollars—is going to make a significant difference in those neglected regions. As I’ve travelled round the country in my prior role as regional economic development spokesperson, I’ve heard from those regions. They were feeling the squeeze under the former Government, and now this Government has a plan to do something about that: to invest in the regions, invest in jobs, invest in incomes, and invest in the livelihoods and infrastructure needed in our regions so desperately.

Of course, all of these things will take time. We will not fix every problem built up after nine years in one Budget, and I think New Zealanders understand that. We can’t fix nine years of neglect in one Budget, but we are already making significant progress with the KiwiBuild project, with the paid parental leave, with the increase in police that we’re looking toward, with the Superannuation Fund contributions restarting, with the State house builds, and so on. This is a Government that is already delivering despite those years of neglect.

And what have we got on the other side of the House now? We’ve got National MPs publicly fighting—publicly fighting. We have Todd Muller attacking Simon Bridges’ transport plan. I look across the House for Mr Muller, and these days I have to look a long way back—a long way back. He’s not a happy man in this Government.

We have Amy Adams humiliating the leader—humiliating the leader—over the value capture proposal. She knows her time will come. She’s confident she’ll win the next round of the leadership. I can see her there. She looks happy hearing it. She knows she’s in next time, when the leadership change happens. She’s the next one off the block.

Judith Collins, though, already thinks she is there. She’s undermining him too. She is the real public face of National now: Judith Collins. She’s sniping at Simon Bridges, though, for his under-investment in local roads.

Well, this is a debate and this is the time when I would, in general, reply to the previous speaker, but, to change a paraphrase, he lost me at “Hello”. It was, to say, ineffective and, yeah, “a bit pitiful” is an understatement. I suppose my message to the Government today is that words really matter—words really matter. Your actions after those words really matter. Saying one thing and actually meaning them—say what you mean, mean what you say, and, Mr Speaker, that is the message, through you, that I put to this Labour - New Zealand First Government.

I want to just go through a couple of—I mean, there were, of course, the 100,000 houses. We’re told that “Absolutely, 100,000 affordable houses.”, and I want to put the quote that “Your intention is reality.” is what the Prime Minister said. Of course, that intention is now a bit harder, now they’re in Government—

💬 Hon Phil Twyford: Where are your houses, Paula? Where are your houses in nine years?

—we don’t actually see that happening. We’re lucky if they’ll actually get there. In fact, the Minister of Housing and Urban Development is shouting out at me—it’s Phil Twyford, for anyone that’s interested—and he’s the one that’s recently reannounced developments that National had already got going.

“We’ll plant a billion trees. We will plant a billion trees.”—and now, of course, they’re backtracking from it. “Child poverty is most important but, however, we now have no money in the Budget.”

But, more importantly, the Prime Minister said that—and I directly quote—“The victims of the Roast Busters deserved better from the Government.” I heard direct quotes from then justice spokesperson in Opposition, Andrew Little, and he said, “If victims aren’t coming forward because of fears around giving statements or evidence, then let’s hear from Ms Collins”—who was the Minister then—“about how she will address that.” We had direct quotes from the now Government that, when in Opposition, said—and I quote—“The public deserves some answers and victims deserve to know the justice system is there to support and protect them.” Yet members of their own party have been in, frankly, a sickening and callous decision to avoid any scrutiny by trying to deal with serious allegations of sexual assault by internalising complaints and not directly sending them to police. And that, in my opinion and in the opinion of this side, is that words mattered when they were in Opposition but no action was taken when it was in their very own backyard under very serious allegations.

We saw in recent weeks that allegations were made around Russell McVeagh and things that may or may not have been happening in their workforce, and we had Government Ministers who were pretty keen and pretty quick to wade into that, and to have opinions, actually, on how they handled it. In fact, we had direct quotes that criticised them in appointing their own reviewer. So Andrew Little, as the Minister of Justice, said he criticised them for appointing their own reviewer, not referring it to the police, and he also levelled comments at the Law Society for its inaction after eventually learning of the allegations. However, the very next week we saw the Prime Minister’s own party actually appoint their own reviewer—not refer something in to the police until such pressure came on them publicly to do so.

As I say, words matter; your actions matter when it comes to matters of this. I think that the Labour - New Zealand First Government has been found wanting in what has happened in the last few weeks and should be ashamed of how they have treated these young people, of their lack of action afterwards, and that they want to get on with it. We hear a lot from this Prime Minister about how vulnerable children are the main focus, but when it came to children being made vulnerable under their very own watch, it was only when they were found out publicly that we have now seen something happen, and something happen for those very vulnerable children that, quite frankly, deserved more from a Government.

That was a speech that that member is going to regret giving, and it won’t be before very long when she’ll discover that. But let me just say, what we saw today was a party that’s in the middle of a leadership spill, or in the aftermath of it, and they have gone from indifference to actually plain weakness.

As Simon Bridges was speaking today, I looked at that backbench, and I didn’t see anybody getting ready to clap, and they didn’t clap when he finished. That was his first opening outing and he fell over at the first hurdle. What did he say? Look, this man is all gel and no socks. He gets up and he starts making statements about, for example, Ron Mark. Well, let me tell you about Mr Mark. We did do a review—that’s true—when it came to defence procurement. The first thing we found was that there was a frigate upgrade blowout of $148 million. That’s just one review. He’s complaining about reviews. Guess why? The reviews are finding culpable, hopeless, useless, incompetent parties. That’s what they’re finding. They don’t want a review, because these reviews all have one place to go: back to the previous Government and their incompetence.

I want to say, though, that they represent most definitely the seven deadly sins. After Bill English, you’ve got the caucus malcontents and they’re showing awful sloth—just angry, embittered, like somehow, “We’re entitled to power. Whether we can win or not doesn’t matter; we’re just entitled because we’re born to rule.” Unfortunately, when you argue that you’re born to rule, you usually exhibit some class, and I’ve never seen a party with less class than the current National Party. I tell you, it’s evidence that money doesn’t make you somebody of status in society—it’s living proof.

The second great sin, of course, is pride, and, boy, that pride’s going before a fall, or a number of falls, because Mr English will be around—I’m sorry, Mr Bridges. Apart from mangling the English language every time he gets to his feet and announcing dates I’ve never heard of—I’ve never heard of “Mo-arch”, you know, for the third month of the year, and all these sorts of pronunciations. What was the National Party thinking of? When I saw today—I see only two people smiling, or one in particular. And I won’t say who it is, because I’m a nice person.

And then there’s lust. Lust is an arrogant and haughty beast and far from subtle, and subtlety is a word they don’t know. It is plain crude, their drive and desire and lust for power. As you know, the old saying goes that “Resentment kills a fool, and envy slays the simple”, and is the National Party evidence of that deadly sin? Most definitely.

But to carry on, we’ve got two politicians talking about the use of helicopters. You know, the only people who used helicopters in Auckland were the previous Minister of Defence and the previous Prime Minister but one. All were on a helicopter going to golf matches, if you please. The very idea that he would raise it! “Yes, but it’s OK, because we’re National and we’re born to rule. We’ve got a sense of entitlement.” You look at their spending as Ministers compared with mine, for example. It’s a disgrace. I’m spending about a third of what they spent. No, no, they’re entitled to it—unbelievable.

Now, you’ve also got the sin of sloth. They say the lazy are always waiting to do something—the lazy are always waiting to do something. That accounts for the rest of the National Party caucus—listless and rudderless and breaking down to, probably, five teams. Why, on some days, they even make Mr Seymour look good, and that’s really a condemnation. At least he’s trying to do something.

And then there’s the gluttony—namely, National’s vanquished in their hunger for power. Mr Bridges should watch out for his wounded bulls and mares, because they are seriously wounded. If you look to the left and the right, Mr Bridges, you will sit there and you will see a very prophetic sight of somebody’s appetite, and it is more than one person. We on this side of the House have a lesson for members opposite over there: there is enough in this world for everyone’s need, but not enough for everyone’s greed—the further sin. Mark my words: during this term, the members opposite are about to learn the difference.

One last piece of advice: “O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come, beware the member for Papakura—it’s soon her time as National’s mum.” Now, sir, that’s free; you can sell it online, if you like. I’m sure it’ll get something. It’s very good poetry. But, basically, what you’ve got here is a party that’s in between possibly the next three leaders, and they’ll put them up one after the other. But here’s the real point: not one of them could rate at 1 percent in the polls. Not even 1 percent or even a half percent. In fact, no one ever suggested they would be a leader until they, immodestly, said they wanted to be one.

Well, we’ve heard a lot about old sayings from the member who’s just resumed his seat, Winston Peters.

💬 Hon Member: From the old member.

No, I’m not going to attack his age, because age can be a very good thing until you don’t have it. But I will say that there’s a saying that I think is actually made for that member, and that is that “Clothes maketh the man”, because apart from that, there’s nothing much else. But they’re very good clothes, though—very good clothes.

We could say the same thing about the current Government, except we’d have to say “Reviews maketh the Government”. We’ve had 45 reviews so far. I think that’s about as many sitting days of Parliament that we’ve had for this Government. I think it’s one review a day. They’ve had nine years—nine long years, they’d say in Opposition—well, what were they doing? We do know they were stabbing each other in the back and actually not getting on with their jobs.

Let’s see where we are now. We’ve been in this new Government for five months. We’ve got no new homes under KiwiBuild, we’ve got some plans to rehash some of the houses consented under National, we’ve got no trees that have been planted, we’ve got no roads built, we’ve got no roads even approved, we’ve got no trains approved, and we’ve got the oil and gas sector in disarray, with the Prime Minister saying the most ridiculous, virtue-signalling nonsense that she tends to say in front of the Greenpeace people, who she made the Foreign Minister actually wait for while she got to do a sign and have a photo. That’s had to be corrected by the Rt Hon Winston Peters. Then she’s got the economic vandalism of actually going through and having companies like Air New Zealand being attacked by my dear old friend Shane Jones, who has today been responsible for making a big company like Air New Zealand be actually seen like a victim of a bully-boy Minister who thinks it’s OK to call for the resignation of the chief executive of Air New Zealand and also the chairman of the board, and, by the way, the whole board—“Well, why not?”, he would say.

We have the transport strikes—today, another strike. Seven transport strikes in five months, and there were none in nine years of National, for the trains and for the ships.

💬 Hon Phil Twyford: What about the ports? What about the ports? Ports of Auckland?

We’ve got seven—seven. Seven of them, and it’s the same union every single time. While Phil Twyford wants to talk about unions, let me just say this to him: MUNZ union. The MUNZ union, the Maritime Union of New Zealand, that sees itself as having some form of very close relationship with the current Labour Government, having had the Prime Minister go to visit them straight after the election to be congratulated. The MUNZ union’s up in arms that oil and gas is now at risk. They know what’s happening in the Pegasus Basin. They know there’s enough natural gas there to keep New Zealand not only going but actually to have a huge export industry for massive wealth for this country, and they know it’s their members who get the jobs. They’ve been on the phone to Jacinda Ardern, so although Winston Peters would like to claim credit for it, it’s actually the head of the MUNZ union that stopped that sort of behaviour from Jacinda Ardern, and she knows where her funding for her party comes from.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

So what we have got is a Government in total disarray.

I’m really disappointed in Jacinda Ardern, and I’m going to touch on this, because it goes right to the heart of why she does not understand middle New Zealand. Your 16-year-old kids get indecently assaulted at a Labour Party function or any other function—you want to know. Do you know why you want to know? Because motherhood and fatherhood are not just jobs; they’re your life. You’re not there for eight hours a day; you’re there 24/7, and no parent wants to know that their kid has been put at risk, abused, and then sent home being told, “Don’t worry, we’re not going to tell your mum and dad.”, as though they’ve done anything wrong.

We have a huge problem with youth suicide. We have a huge problem with kids getting into drugs and alcohol. The one thing we expect from anyone in charge of our children is some responsibility. They’re in the place of the parent. For goodness’ sake! Start to act like it, instead of covering up for Andrew Kirton and the rest of the Labour Party. It’s an utter disgrace.

I have to admire that member’s gall.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: But you always do.

She comes to this House—that’s pretty much all I admire. She comes to this House and accuses this side of the House of economic vandalism, and then she talks about leadership battles within Labour. That is gall to be admired from any distance.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: Irony.

And irony. I have watched many leadership battles within my own party, and, I tell you what, it is bliss watching it in the National Party, and it’s nowhere near over yet. I think the Hon Judith Collins knows that, the Hon Amy Adams certainly knows that, and Jami-Lee Ross is absolutely sure of where he’s going in the future. Simon Bridges’ time is limited. And couldn’t you tell that? Couldn’t we tell that from the response to his speech leading off the general debate today? Not a single bit of support from the back bench—not a single bit of support.

Then following his contribution was Paula Bennett. The fact that Paula Bennett is still the deputy leader of the National Party comes as a huge surprise, particularly to her colleagues. I’ve heard them say the only reason she survived was because Judith Collins was the opposition. But that isn’t a very high bar for the deputy leader who was, just a couple of weeks before being confirmed, being publicly criticised by her own colleagues. So don’t come into the House and lecture this side of the House on leadership battles when the National Party’s leadership battles are so obvious and are dividing them.

The other comment that I thought had gall to be admired from Judith Collins was talking about economic vandalism. That’s coming from a Minister as part of a Government that borrowed more money than any Government in the history of our country. The National Government borrowed more money than any other Government in the history of our country. They stopped contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, so we lost money that would otherwise have been invested in our future, and they didn’t pay the bills and then crowed about having a surplus. It’s actually not hard to get a small surplus if you don’t pay the bills. If the bills of Government are not paid, then a surplus can be created, but that is cheating on New Zealanders and, worse than that, it’s cheating on the future of our young people.

I am really proud to be part of this Government: this Government made up of Labour, New Zealand First, and Green Party members, all with different particular policies and identities but a shared set of values that says the future of New Zealand is worth investing in. I’m proud to be part of a Government that is doing that investment. We’ve seen investment in housing, in health, in public transport, in road safety, and in joblessness in our regions. It’s heartbreaking going to some provincial towns and seeing the destruction that was caused by nine years of neglect by the National Party—young people with no hope except moving to a city, no hope in their own town. That is wrong, and I’m so pleased to see our Ministers working together to address those.

Of course, as a result of that joblessness in our provincial centres, of the lack of hope of young people for a place in the future for them, we have seen rising crime. We’re investing in State houses and they will be warm and dry. We have put the bar up on our rental properties so they will be warm and dry as well. We have people, children and elderly people particularly, going to hospital with diseases because they live in a cold, damp house. How can that be right in a country like ours?

There are many things that I’ve been proud of in the last few months as we’ve kicked off this Government, but I do think that restarting the contribution to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund is one which will see us better off in the future—not for our generation but for younger ones—and we should really, really support that. Of course, there is our Families Package, which will see so many thousands of families getting on average $75 extra a week. That’s a really huge boost to those families. They deserve it, and they deserve a better future with our Government.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was reflecting on the question of: what is the job of a politician; what is the job of a Government? I’d put it to you that it is to confront the challenges of today, so that the people of New Zealand can have a better tomorrow.

It was interesting to listen to Simon Bridges, the National Party leader, tell the House that the Labour Party and their associates are so devoid of ideas that they’ve had to steal his ideas in place of their own. I know how Simon Bridges feels, because if you look at the legacy of the Key-English Government, what are those improvements to New Zealand that have created a legacy that are now under threat, which the National Party declares itself ready to defend? Well, one of them is the 90-day trial: the idea that a person who is young, who has few skills, who employers aren’t willing to take a chance on, can get into the job market and start growing for themselves the skills they require to have a prosperous life.

Another idea was three strikes: the idea that the worst offenders, those who are violent and sexual offenders, who show that they cannot in any way be rehabilitated, and who do it not once, not twice, but three times, should go away for the maximum possible sentence—the simple idea that we put the worst offenders away the longest, so that New Zealanders can be safe in their homes and in the street.

Another idea that the National Party is determined to defend in the legacy of the Key-English Government is charter schools: the simple idea that there are people in every community who have kids who are disengaged from State education, who have ideas about how to set up schools that will engage them so that those kids can gain skills that turn into qualifications that turn into further education and jobs, careers, self-esteem, and, ultimately, the ability to feel good about themselves.

Three simple ideas, and the only three that are a legacy of the Key-English Government that the National Party has committed to fighting for—except maybe some tax cuts that never happened—since going into Opposition. And what do those three policies all have in common? All of them are policies that were advanced in the last Government by ACT. Had there not been an ACT Party in the last coalition Government, I’d put it to the House that the Key-English Government would have no legacy to defend at all.

But that’s enough beating up on them, because, unfortunately, this Government—Phil Twyford’s and Jacinda Ardern’s Government—are worse. Let me pay a compliment to our new Prime Minister. She’s good. Oh God, she is good at selling her policy. She is our first truly professional Prime Minister who has worked on herself and her communication and her presentation for at least a decade. The problem that she’s got is that the job of a politician is not to be a celebrity and it’s not just to sell; it’s to actually make people’s lives better. And all we’re seeing from this Government is poor quality spending. We’re seeing, for example, fees-free tertiary education. Well, that’s great for the kids who are already going to tertiary institutions, because the policy’s not going to bring any more in. What about the kids who don’t make it at all? They’re being denied an opportunity to get a tertiary education already, and now they’re going to pay taxes for the rest of their lives to subsidise those who do. That’s not making people’s lives better; that is simple cynical electoral politics.

What about the provincial growth fund? The idea that people all over the world, and especially in New Zealand, have somehow missed investment opportunities in provisional New Zealand that Shane Jones is going to detect—that’s not going to make New Zealand a better place with opportunity for all. It’s going to waste a huge amount of taxpayers’ money and we’re going to be all the poorer for it.

Our job is to make New Zealanders’ lives better with greater opportunity and I’m proud to say that in the last Government, the ACT Party was essential to any of that happening. I look forward to ACT coming back in a future Government where we can continue that work, where this Government is absolutely failing.

Mr Speaker, thank you. This is the first opportunity I have had to stand in the general debate and I love the fact that I actually don’t have to use notes. Strangely enough, I’d actually just like to agree with the member from ACT—what we do in Parliament is important and what we need to do is actually think about people, and what we as parliamentarians do in this House has impact. So please, David Seymour, do not use the term “beat up”—we don’t like to beat up people in this country.

I am going to speak a little bit about the actual effects of some of the policies that the National Party’s domestic violence work has impacted on the community. I’m going to talk about this because, actually, I’m not one of those people that is going to stand here and point and put down people. I’m actually going to tell you about some of the impacts that your policies over the last nine years have done—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

Sorry, sir. Like I say, I’m new at this—the policies of the National Party have actually done.

So nine years without an increase in the current refuge that I worked in, Tauranga Women’s Refuge. Nine years, four times the increase of clients—the work continued to come. In fact, I nearly make more—I nearly make more—money as an MP than the refuge I worked for was funded. That was to work with 176,000 people in my community. That says to me that when we look at people and what is important and representing this Parliament, we actually need to consider what the people on the ground are suffering. So 176,000 was the population in my community we worked for. Let me tell you what the Government funded our organisation: $21.25 an hour, per hour, across 24/7, across 365 days a year. So when I hear that we need to work with business more and we need to do these things to increase our confidence across the world, I actually say to you—sorry, sir—I say to the Opposition, we need to actually focus on people. Business is not as important as the people, and the people who work in business are actually the people who suffer from the things that have been underfunded in this country.

One of the things that I think is important to raise is—member Paula Bennett spoke about economic vandalism. If we are to talk about economic vandalism, we actually need to focus on what that means. Economic vandalism is actually failing to support our people in this country. It’s about our people living in cars, and we hear this all the time, but let me tell you—let me tell you all—some of us here on this side of the House have seen the impacts of what has happened to those people who were denied the fact that they needed a warm, dry house.

Let me tell you what it is like as a refuge manager to throw someone out on the street because they were safe in the community but they didn’t have a home to go to, and I needed to evict them from the safe house in order to get them access so they could get a week in a hotel. Now that tells me there is something wrong with what has happened in this world. There is something wrong with the policies that have been created to ignore those in poverty.

We are lifting 380,000 families out of poverty over time. We are working with children, we are working cross-party where possible to support our families, our community; kindness is back in the House. Thank you.

Debate interrupted.