Estimates Debate — Social Services and Community Sector (continued)

Members, we come first to the Estimates debate. There are 23 minutes remaining in the debate. When we were last considering the bill, the committee was debating the social services and community sector. The question is that Vote Arts, Culture and Heritage, Vote Building and Housing, Vote Oranga Tamariki, Vote Pacific Peoples, Vote Social Development, Vote Social Housing, Vote Sport and Recreation, and Vote Women stand part of the schedule.

Thank you, Mr Chair. It’s a great privilege to be back here, and I’m going to continue on this theme of education, because what we expressed in the Social Services and Community Committee—

Chlöe Swarbrick: This isn’t the education debate.

—what we expressed in the—let me finish, please—what we expressed in the select committee was that we haven’t thought around the investment in schools around these intensified housing developments. Now, I want to talk about one development in particular in my area, called the Northcote Development. We’ve got some KiwiBuild homes—we’ve got about 400 KiwiBuild homes—going on in this area, but unfortunately there’s no planning for schools around this intensification area. So what we’ve got is that the Government’s made an announcement on Onepoto College in my electorate, which is fantastic news, but unfortunately that investment in itself is not going to be enough for the extra uplift in residents that are coming into the intensification area because of these developments.

So we expressed in the Estimates discussion with the Minister that they need to actually put some pressure on Auckland Council to make sure that this council is taking into account the investment in schooling that is required in these housing developments, and we urge the Minister to make sure that Auckland Council reviews its unitary plan in order to make sure that these housing developments go ahead. So that is, in a nutshell, what we’ve talked about with respect to education. It dovetails quite nicely into our previous debate, where, quite frankly, this Government has failed to achieve in education. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Chair. It’s my pleasure to take a call as we look at the arts, culture, and heritage Estimates for this Budget. Now, they came in with a hiss and a roar, with Jacinda Ardern as Prime Minister and Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage, and we had high expectations that she would channel vast resources into this area. It turns out that the primary investment in this area in the Budget is an extra $25 million for the bureaucrats at the Ministry for Culture and Heritage. So that’s how they see things: a bit more money for the ministry in order to do their work in Wellington, but not much in terms of the broader arts community, which, in many ways, continues to struggle.

The National Party has been a strong, strong defender of arts, culture, and heritage in this country. It was the National Party that brought about many of the great cultural institutions over the decades; I think of the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra and many others. Primarily, I see the role of Government as being about improving the living standards of New Zealanders. That’s why we focus so heavily on the economy and producing jobs and growth for New Zealanders. But an equally important part of what Government is about, in my view, is preserving and enhancing what is special about this country—about New Zealand—that we’re all so lucky to be born into and to share.

People often think of the quality of our environment as something special to be preserved, and indeed it is. I also think the traditions that we have around low corruption and the rule of law and high trust in our society are equally important things that we should preserve. We were talking to that—about the Auditor-General—this morning in our select committee. But also, I think one of those most precious things is the unique cultural and historical and artistic body of work and communities that we’ve built up in this country. In this remote part of the world, we have developed our own artistic traditions, whether it’s in poetry, with James K Baxter, or in the arts—in so many areas: in music and in film. All these areas are something that we should be very proud of, and are proud of. It’s important that we continue to make an investment in the arts and that we see that we get good results from it.

But it is worth pointing out, of course, that many of the areas of the arts are in themselves successful business areas that create real wealth for New Zealand. I had a lot to do with them as Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs in the intellectual property area, dealing with WeCreate, and that organisation is trying to build up New Zealanders’ understanding of the importance of intellectual property and the impact that it has—the way that those groups, whether it’s in film or gaming or design, as well as the many musicians that we have exporting all around the world, are successful in how they’re doing it. What an important part of the economy the creative sector is.

I suppose the only point is that they, like everybody else, are affected by the very great uncertainty that this Government is bringing into the operation of the New Zealand economy. Certainly, there is so much uncertainty around basic tax policy, around industrial relations, and I’m worried about the impact that that will have in the industrial relations setting, particularly in some of the film opportunities coming up for New Zealand. I’m worried about immigration and the sheer difficulty of getting access to workers in so many areas, and I think of the fashion industry at the moment, which is going so well in so many areas but is still struggling to find workers.

What they’ve done in foreign investment is, basically, tell foreigners to clear off and that they’re not welcome. I think of the contribution of some people who have come to New Zealand—I think of Julian Robertson, for example; he came from the US, bought land in New Zealand, and made a massive contribution to the arts in New Zealand, particularly by bequeathing a number of wonderful Picassos to the Auckland Art Gallery. Those sorts of people are being told to shove off—“We don’t want you coming to New Zealand.”—and it’s a very negative message, and one that I think this Government should reconsider because it has large flow-on effects right throughout the community.

Mentioning the Auckland Art Gallery, I would have thought that institution, which is being starved by Mayor Phil Goff and the Auckland Council and is a jewel in the crown of the New Zealand arts community, is something that this Government would do well to support better. Thank you very much.

Tēna kotou kātoatoa ‘ī teia Whare ‘ē te au mēma Pāramani, tēna kotou kātoatoa.

[Greetings to all members of Parliament in this House, greetings to you all.]

I couldn’t find my notes but I happened to be able to remember that Cook Islands greeting celebrating our Cook Islands Language Week.

The situation of housing was left in a right mess by the previous National Government. That was not OK—that was not OK—and it harmed people, it harmed families, it harmed children, it harmed our kaumātua and pakeke. It is going to be harmful for a long time for many people—that that was left in a mess—and that is not OK. I am proud that, on this side of the Chamber, we can at least even say the words “housing crisis”, because if you do not admit upfront and meet head-on what the actual problem is, then you will not be committed to solving the issues at hand. Certainly, we need big-picture housing reform.

I am going to be outlining why I am pleased with the positive steps that have been taken by Minister Phil Twyford in the Vote Estimates already, just in this time—in this short time—that we have been a part of this MMP Government. Just yesterday in my office—what I’d like to do is give the story of those real people who have been harmed by this housing crisis, and then go through the parts of the housing Vote budget that I am really pleased about—I had a young mum and her young child on my couch, here on the Parliament precinct. She has written about the challenges of just finding a home—that’s all she wants; it’s pretty simple, but it’s pretty fundamental. Just wanting to find a home for her and her young child. Just wanting to do what pretty much every parent wants to do: provide their whānau with—being able to put their roots down in a community, be able to establish connections and relationships in that community and become part of it and contribute to it. She has been facing discrimination as a single, young, Māori mum. She has been having to face unaffordable homes to rent that are in a pretty shoddy condition too.

This is not even anywhere near the extreme end of what is happening for people, for New Zealanders. Discrimination, lack of affordable housing in good condition—it has an impact on people’s everyday lives. So I was pleased, of course, and not too surprised to see the Minister Phil Twyford confirm that we will be restoring the strong public housing sector that the previous Government neglected, and that played a major role in shoving us down the road in the situation of housing. I was pleased and not surprised to see that Housing New Zealand will be taking a lead in building warm, dry homes, because our homes are also making people sick, every year, sending children to hospital for illnesses that are caused and directly related to poor housing in this country in 2018. It harmed people and is still harming people. I was pleased to see a massive bump for the Housing First approach, which has been shown to be effective in ending homelessness. And I will be even prouder when we can continue to make sure, given that Māori and Pasifika are way over-represented in homelessness, that those Housing First providers will maintain an appropriate response for the very people who are disproportionately represented on our streets and in poor housing conditions.

I wanted to use this time to give a massive shout-out to the very community providers, all through the country, who have been stepping up to fill the gaps of the neglect from the National Government, who have been taking up the problems that should have been solved here, at this level. They’ve been stepping up to do that, those community providers, including iwi. I would love to ensure that we see continual support and funding. Thank you.

Kia orana e Te Vaa Tuatua. Thank you, Mr Chair. I stand to speak to this Estimates debate in the social services and community sector this afternoon. My focus today will be on the area of disability issues. The Minister appeared before the Social Services and Community Committee last month—the month before, actually, on 20 June—and we covered off a wide range of votes on that day, including disability issues. Over the last few years, New Zealand has made huge and very important progress, internationally and nationally, in the way that we manage, treat, and think about our disabled people, and how disabled people actually live in this country.

We are a country that’s been at the forefront of some of the changes in relation to disability issues. For example, we were instrumental in passing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Now, it would be remiss of me if I did not pay tribute to the former Minister, the Hon Nicky Wagner, for her innovation in this area and her absolute passion for wanting the very best for people with disabilities to enrich their lives in whatever way they could—initiatives like Enabling Good Lives, where more choice and control was given back to those who knew exactly what services and support they needed so they could go out and purchase the services that they wanted. During the Estimates hearing, we actually heard the Minister say that she recognised that this programme does provide huge opportunities for disabled people.

There was also the initiative that was enacted for the new design of the high-level parts of the disability sector and system. Alongside the Minister, her team worked very closely on it for several months. Another major success came with Project 300, and I recall this project and the enthusiasm with which it was debated here and talked about. It had a goal of achieving 300 workplace positions for people with disabilities. Well, that programme was so successful that 584 disabled employees were matched with employers. That project led to another rollout in the Bay of Plenty called EmployAbility, and it helped those employers build strong teams and stronger communities by assisting those people with health conditions and disabilities into employment in that area. This is now a nationwide programme, and it is rolled out to individual communities and is tailor-made for them.

Now, there is a great role model for us to look up to in this field, and the person’s name there is Robert Martin. I’ve mentioned Robert in this House before, and I think he’s a living example of what can happen when a person with disabilities is given support and opportunity. Robert sits as a member of the United Nations, and he represents New Zealand in Geneva, and I think that’s an outstanding achievement. So it’s heartening to see in the Estimates that support for Robert to continue working in his role at the United Nations is funded in these Estimates.

Only 25.2 percent of disabled people are currently participating in the labour force, compared to 72.6 percent. There are 1.1 million people in this country that have some form of disability; so it is not an insignificant number of people, and every one of them deserves a fair go. Now, we know that there’s already a lot of support and advocacy that is done for people with disabilities, but it’s important that we do continue to innovate and invest, because there is absolutely no downside if we do so.

So it was with huge disappointment that we see in the Estimates that this Government, a Government that thinks it owns the franchise on compassion, that talks a big game—but then, talk is cheap—in actual fact, decreased the funding for disability assistance. The tragedy of that is that there is no signal in the Estimates for any new initiatives over the next four years, and so the question has to be: for the last nine years, what on earth have they been doing? The answer is, obviously, nothing. What’s worse is that for each of the next four years, the amount of the investment going into disability assistance is lower every year than it was under a National-led Government. Now, it’s an insult to the sector and another example of where real compassion sits.

The memo’s clearly gone around on the other side. As we come into this final part of the debate on the Estimates, when we’re talking about housing, the memo went around to the other side: don’t talk about the houses. Don’t talk about housing. Whatever you do, don’t mention housing. And why might that be? Why might it be that they’re so reluctant to talk about housing? Well, could it be that, after nine years of National, there were 6,000 fewer State houses? That could have something to do with it—1,500 fewer public houses under National, and record homelessness.

So when it comes to talking about compassion—which we just heard about from one of the members speaking opposite, Maureen Pugh—how is it compassionate for a Government, after nine years, to preside over and be proud of a legacy that saw record homelessness in New Zealand? That will be one of the most symbolic parts of the last National Government’s legacy to New Zealand. When they write the history of that National-led Government, housing—the lack of housing, the growing level of homelessness, the lack of affordable housing—will be one of the most defining legacies of that previous National Government. It is no wonder they don’t want to talk about it.

So what are we doing about it? Fair question: 6,400 new State houses over the next four years. In four years, we will build more State houses than the last National Government sold off in nine, because we know that we need more State and social houses. We will over-deliver on the promise that we made to New Zealanders around building more State houses. That is something to be proud of.

We’re discussing Vote Social Development under this particular part of the Estimates debate, and it’s important to remember that one of our first moves as a Government was to provide a huge boost to the families in New Zealand that needed extra money the most. The winter energy payment will provide huge support and relief to some of the New Zealanders who now live on the lowest incomes, because we know that they need the help. We think that’s a much better spend than the untargeted tax cuts that were being proposed by the previous Government. But one that I am particularly proud of—and it’s covered in the Vote Social Development Estimates—is the Best Start tax credit, introduced by this Government to ensure that families with newborn babies get extra support in that critical first year of a child’s life. That is something that we are incredibly proud of on this side of the House—a big boost to Working for Families to ensure that work pays.

The National Party, over the last few weeks, have been doing what they like to do, which is to beat up on beneficiaries, have a good crack at beneficiaries. When the polls start going down, have a good whack at beneficiaries—we’ve seen that in the last few weeks as their polling continues to slip. But how about this: how about instead of constantly beating up on beneficiaries, the National Party applied their thinking, put a bit of thinking into it, and thought about how you actually make work pay. How is it that we can support people to get into work, to get into meaningful work, and make sure that they’re not worse off when they get into work? That’s what we’re doing on this side of the House, and the big boost that we have put into place for Working for Families helps to deliver on that. The extra support for the accommodation supplement helps to deliver on that. We want to make sure that New Zealanders are well supported in making the decision to get into the labour market, to get into jobs, and to contribute to the New Zealand economy.

On the other side, all they want to do is beat up on beneficiaries—sell all the State houses, beat up on the beneficiaries, lock people up when things go wrong. They have no positive vision for the future, after nine years—after nine years. This Government has done more in nine months to provide extra support to the most vulnerable New Zealanders than that Government managed in nine years. They were focused on creating more vulnerable New Zealanders; we are focused on providing the support where we know that it is needed. So it’s not surprising they don’t want to talk about their legacy in housing, because it will define their Government. It was disgraceful, and it will define their Government. Fewer social houses, less affordable housing—that’s not going to be the legacy of this Government. We’re going to turn that around.

There’s about one minute left in this debate. I call Jan Logie.

Thank you, Mr Chair. I wanted to talk about two things—I’m not sure if I’ll manage it in a minute—welfare and domestic violence; two things close to my heart. So I’ll start with domestic violence. We heard a lot from the Opposition recently about how much they did in Government. They just neglected to mention a few things they did that weren’t so great and that they failed to do in addressing family violence, and a really, really critical thing was they neglected to fund our women’s refuges—

💬 Matt Doocey: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I’d like to seek leave of the committee that Jan Logie be given a 5-minute call.

I’m sorry but the Business Committee decision, along with Appendix A of the Standing Orders, means that cannot happen.

💬 JAN LOGIE: I’d like to thank the member for the spirit of that, though. They didn’t fund our women’s refuges. For nine years, there was no increase to their core funding. They actually cut staff at a time when there was increased demand and more reporting—terrible.

I apologise to the member for interrupting her, but members, the time for this debate has now expired.