Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement

Mr Speaker, I present the Prime Minister’s statement.

💬 SPEAKER: That paper is published under the authority of the House. Copies are available on the Table.

I move, That this House express confidence in the coalition Government and commend its programme for 2019, as set out in the extensive Prime Minister’s statement.

I do hope that all members of this House have had a restorative summer—particularly, Mr Speaker, your good self, as we move into question time tomorrow. I hope you will look favourably upon us as we enter into question time / the game of tennis between the two of us.

I have reflected over summer on three things that remain true to me. No matter how much this Government did in the last year—and it was plenty—there is more to do. There is more to do. Even if there’s a summer break, I didn’t stop thinking about that for a moment. I reflected, secondly, that a teething baby has no timetable or respect for summer. And thirdly, I reflected that every day in this place is a privilege. I reflected on the privilege of serving with our confidence and supply partner, with our coalition partner, and the fact that we reflect the values and ideas of the majority of New Zealanders, and we will demonstrate that in 2019. I have to say that remains true, certainly, as of yesterday, as well.

I want to reflect on the context for which we enter 2019. We have strong fundamentals, and I want to reflect on the traditional measures that are used internationally to reflect the success or otherwise of a Government. Unemployment is at the second-lowest rate in a decade—the second-lowest rate in a decade—and, of course, the lowest in a decade was last quarter. Of course, some will claim that unemployment is currently pretty close to being at about the maximum sustainable level. I don’t for a moment accept that, though. We have a goal as a Government to get it even lower, and that will be our focus.

Our growth rates remain strong at around 3 percent, particularly as you look at the IMF’s predictions of other advanced economies, which are at 2 percent. So, relative to that, we have a lot to be proud of. Inflation is tracking at 1.9 percent. We are, as a Government, running surpluses. We are on track with our management of net Crown debt. Our Budget Responsibility Rules remain absolutely in place, and just for the benefit of the Opposition, who may have missed this: Standard & Poor’s revised their outlook for New Zealand from “stable” to “positive”. Of course, that’s the first time it’s been in that state since September 2011. Now, we might reflect on that, and if you were any other Government—say, for example, the last one—you might look at those fundamentals and say, “That’s enough. Let’s just govern. Let’s just stay exactly where we are.” They might say, “GDP is looking sufficient at its current point.” They might say, “Employment is close to full. Let’s just govern.” But we as a Government have acknowledged that those measures do not tell us enough. They do not tell us the full story.

Take GPD. Even Robert Kennedy, a long time ago, was saying that GDP measures everything—just about everything, except that which is worthwhile in life. If you look even at employment figures, they may capture the work that’s undertaken, but not whether or not it is quality work, whether or not it is secure work, and whether or not people fear the potential of losing their work. Again, those numbers don’t tell us about some of those domestic challenges that we all know exist. They don’t necessarily tell us about the skills shortage that we’ve inherited. From 2011 to 2017, 23,000 students exited the polytech and training sector. At a moment where we have a skills shortage crisis, we have not been training our future workforce, and that has been a travesty and an indictment left behind by the last Government. We have an infrastructure deficit. There has been a lack of investment in health and education, and there has been environmental degradation and inequality. Those fundamentals won’t tell you that story, but those are the long-term challenges.

They also won’t tell you, necessarily, about the international headwinds, and we cannot ignore them. There are trade tensions. There is a slowing in China, and, of course, we’ve already seen the economic downgrading by the Bank of England about the UK’s prospects off the back of Brexit. We are preparing for the future, because strong fundamentals provide you a foundation, but they don’t provide you answers to those long-term challenges that New Zealanders elected us to tackle. That’s why on this side of the House, we won’t just govern; we will lead. Our plan is not just for the next three years; it is for the next 30 years.

Let me step through the fundamentals of that plan. It covers 12 areas, which we put out for the public in September of last year, but now is an opportunity for me to touch base on some of the progress on each, whilst outlining where we will go next. The first priority is around growing and sharing more fairly New Zealand’s prosperity. That goes directly to the heart of the inequality that that last Government failed to fundamentally address in New Zealand.

We dealt with that immediately. We cancelled the last Government’s tax cuts, and we instead put that spending into the Families Package. We’ve already had hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders benefit. This year, we’ll continue to see the roll-out of that package, the winter energy payment will run for longer this year, Best Start payments will be extended, and all in all, by 2021, 384,000 families will be better off.

This year—and I acknowledge our coalition partners, New Zealand First, with this commitment—the minimum wage will increase to $17.70 in April. That means, for over 200,000 workers, they will be better off by roughly $48 a week before tax. That is significant, and it’s exactly what that workforce needs.

We’ve also laid out a plan and a programme of work around welfare and around tax, both of which report this year. We will be engaging in a debate with the public around the next steps we take as a Government, in both of those areas.

We know we also need to address the issue of prosperity. Our economy will not be a success if it follows the last Government’s formula of just trading on housing and allowing immigration to be a growth strategy. That is not a plan. That is what you do when you govern but not when you lead, which is why we have said we want to directly invest in research and development. The R & D tax credit will be coming into force in April, and we know it will make a difference to business development in this nation.

We want to build greater resilience for our exporters. That’s why we’re pursuing the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, that’s why we are pursuing vigorously an EU free-trade agreement (FTA), it’s why we’re amongst three countries in line to be first off the block with the UK in negotiating an FTA, and it’s also why we are pursuing a Trade for All agenda. We want the benefits of trade spread more evenly to a wider range of New Zealanders, and that’s the work that our Minister is leading.

I want to come and reflect on another area of distinct neglect from the last Government: supporting our thriving, sustainable regions. I remember at the last election visiting a small town in the South Island where one of the local elected council members said to me that they had seen a desertion of their main street, they had seen businesses who should have been able to grow in their region leave, and they had seen young people lose opportunities as a result. Now, the Government of old would have just continued on with the plan that they had, which was to do absolutely nothing, invest in roads that weren’t regional—and, in some cases, were ghost roads—but that pretty much amounted to their regional economic development plan. That was it!

The Provincial Growth Fund (PFG), I know, is making a difference, and how do I know? Because local people tell us it is making a difference. The PGF has already invested in 166 projects from around the country. It is investing $700 million, and, attached to that, based on the submissions by the applicants, in their own words, it has the potential to increase jobs by 10,000. I have come to conclude that one of the reasons that the Opposition particularly dislikes the Provincial Growth Fund is because their mayors love it so much. And when I say “their mayors”, I mean their mayors—John Carter, in particular. Of course, when it comes to regional and economic growth and development, the billion-trees programme remains critical, as well as the work that we have to do that is often unexpected. We will continue on with our plan to eradicate M. bovis, and I do hope that we will finally see success as part of that plan.

Our third focus within the economy, of course, has been about governing responsibly, with a broader range of measure of success. The Budget Responsibility Rules will cushion us against uncertainty, and it sets out our expectations so the public can see in a full and transparent way our expectations around economic management.

Contrast that with the Opposition, who I’ve seen have announced in recent times $650 million worth of spending with absolutely no way to fund it, including, I’ve heard, suggestions that they will halve debt—again, absolutely no plan to achieve that. I’ve heard State sector wage promises—again with absolutely no way to fund that. To use a phrase I’ve heard before: show us the money, because at the moment I see absolutely no plan whatsoever.

We’ve also committed, though, that those economic fundamentals are not sufficient for us. We have said this year that we will develop a well-being Budget, and that, yes, that focus on the economy is critical, but we need to add those additional levers. And, again, this is what you do when you lead, not just govern.

The issue of environmental degradation, the changing international environment we exist in, and the international responsibilities we have means that if we are going to act responsibly—not only according to our international obligations but, actually, to the people of New Zealand—we need to transition our economy to a clean, green, carbon-neutral economy. We will progress our climate change bill this year. We will continue to invest in just transitions, and we’ve seen excellent examples already today where the Provincial Growth Fund has been partnering with some of those ideas on clean energy and so on.

We have the Green Investment Finance Ltd, the entity established with the strong support and initiative of Minister James Shaw and the New Zealand Green Party. For all of their leadership on biodiversity, on climate change, on all of the challenges we face with transitioning to a just, sustainable economy, I thank you for your work. We need to plan for the future, not just sign international agreements, and that’s what you do when you lead, not just govern.

We’ve frequently said that those economic measures are not enough, so the agenda for us around well-being is absolutely critical. We’ve talked about creating an environment where everyone who is able is earning, learning, caring, or volunteering. For us, fees free was the way to prepare the workforce for the future. And it’s undeniable when you have stories, as I have, on a frequent basis, of someone who is in their 30s who had never gone into tertiary education and is now studying to be a teacher because of us; of the child of a beneficiary in Kaikohe who said to me, “I’m going to university because of fees free. You have made a difference to us.” But where we need that extra emphasis is vocational training, and the Minister of Education will be saying more on that very soon. Overall, there is $4.2 billion of new funding in education—an extraordinary investment—but just wait for the work that we continue to do on Tomorrow’s Schools, on early learning, and under our employment work for those who are NEETs, through, for instance, Mana in Mahi.

The second area of focus, of course, is in health. The 2018 Budget invested $3.2 billion in operating funding in health. We’ve had a significant number of capital rebuilds. Just to cover a few: Auckland District Health Board, Greenlane Clinical Centre, North Shore Hospital, Counties Manukau, Wellington Children’s Hospital, Whangarei, Buller Hospital. We’ve also had investment in Capital and Coast District Health Board and Bay of Islands. These were all areas that had lacked investment from the health sector. They are things that we are turning around.

But, of course, it matters what is happening for people: 540,000 people have already had cheaper doctors visits, in the order of $20 to $30. But, again, as we’ve said over and over again, mental health needs to be the priority this year, and it will be. It’s within our Budget priorities statement. It’s an area where we’ve had the support of the sector to develop up their expectations, and May will all be about delivery.

All of our well-being measures, though, are absolutely affected by housing.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Haven’t mentioned KiwiBuild yet.

And I will proudly, Dr Smith, mention KiwiBuild, because I put this question to the House: how many affordable homes did the last Government build? Absolutely none—absolutely none—and when this Government was faced with an extraordinary challenge, when we were faced with a housing crisis, the option was to do what the last Government did and do nothing, or the option was to show leadership. We have shown leadership. We have contracted 4,000 houses for building under KiwiBuild. First-home buyers are already in their homes. We will keep building houses. How many State houses did the last Government build? They actually sold them. Not only have we stopped the sale; we have built more than a thousand State houses. I am proud of the leadership this Government is showing on housing, when that last Government wouldn’t even call it what it was, and it was a crisis.

Finally, we’ve said we will focus on children, and that means continuing to progress our targets on child poverty; again, another Budget priority area for us, as is domestic violence for the effect it has on children and their families. We’ve said we want to govern differently. The royal commission into State abuse will continue. The Pike River re-entry work will continue. State sector reforms will continue. Te Arawhiti and our relationship with Māori will continue to be built and grow as we fulfil the obligations that we have signed through successive settlements and that we will look to conclude. We have also placed lifting Māori and Pacific incomes as another priority in this Budget.

On international issues, on our reputation in the world, we stand proud of our independent foreign policy. We will not play politics with our foreign policy, and we have long had a proud tradition in this country of a unified voice in favour of our independence. Well, we stand on the side of no one but the side of New Zealanders and our values. I ask, Mr Bridges: what changed? I ask: what changed?

Finally, to conclude, we have done a lot, but there is a lot more to do. We as a Government had two options: to follow what the last Government did, to take no risks, to defer challenges, and to govern; or to lead, to look for new solutions, to tackle what’s in front of us, not just in the next three years but in the next 30 years. That does mean doing things differently. It does mean taking risks, but if that benefits more New Zealanders, if that reduces inequality, if it gets people housed, and if it gives jobs in the region, those are risks worth taking. I am proud of this Government, and I’m proud of what we’ll do in 2019.

I move, That all the words after “That” be deleted and replaced with “this House has no confidence in the Labour-led Government because in its ambition to be measured on its vague intentions it is proving itself completely incapable of delivering good outcomes for New Zealanders.”

In the last year, we’ve seen over 200 working groups, and we’ve seen a situation where we’ve had vague, virtuous talk from the Prime Minister and not a lot else. But this year it’s OK because it’s the—what did she say?—year of delivery. That’s what she said. So she came back, and on her very first day, out on the deck, doing the work, what did she do? What did she deliver? The scrapping of houses for the KiwiBuild target. Even they’re embarrassed. She didn’t mention KiwiBuild in the speech she made, did she?

So let’s go through it. From 10,000 houses a year, 1,000 in the first, and now they’re not even sure they’re going to do 300 in the first year. But Winston Peters said at Rātana, “No problem at all—we’ll make a thousand.” Well, he’s the only one who’s saying that.

So, Phil Twyford: how many KiwiBuild houses have they built so far? This is not a trick question. I’m not asking about the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, our founding document. How many, Grant Robertson? Forty-seven. There are more problems with KiwiBuild than there are houses, and they didn’t even do that. The market, under us, did.

Like so much of this Government, it was intentions. It was talk of kindness and well-being—KiwiBuild—and not a lot else. This year, we will hear a lot more about KiwiBuild: homes that no one wants, that they can’t afford, and that aren’t even being built.

Then we come to Shane Jones, who’s been splashing cash around New Zealand with his $3 billion fund. Again, I’ve got a pretty simple question for him: how many jobs has he created from his $3 billion? What did they say? Fifty-four—a $3 billion fund and 54 jobs. How many staff roles have they created in Molesworth Street and Bowen Street and Lambton Quay to do deep dives, to talk about the learnings, and to have workshops about his $3 billion fund? How many? One hundred and eighteen. He’s pretending to talk because he knows how embarrassing this is. The provincial champion of New Zealand is more the “Minister for Courtenay Place” than he is the “Minister for Kawerau”—big on announcements, small on substance.

Then we had the Prime Minister’s state of the nation address on Friday. After 200 working groups and after talk of kindness and well-being, I thought, “Surely in that, and surely today, there’d be some sort of delivery, some sort of substance.” Well, what was there? Nothing. No policy, no plan—no nothing. But there was one thing—and we heard it again today. Excuses for the New Zealand economy—that’s what. It’s all offshore’s fault. She’s suddenly discovered global conditions and everything that’s happening overseas, except that’s not true, is it, Grant Robertson?

Oh well, let’s go through it, Mr Robertson. Growth at the end of last year: 0.3 percent—the worst in quite a number of years. Grant Robertson—what did he go on about every single day in this House? Growth per capita. He hasn’t talked about it in about eight months. Why is that, Mr Robertson? It’s going down. It’s shrinking, Mr Robertson.

House sales have stalled, unemployment is up by 10,000, and in terms of NEETs, I say to Willie Jackson, Kelvin Davis, and Shane Jones, there are 26,000 more New Zealanders, young New Zealanders—our people—who are not in employment, training, or education. Job growth under us: 10,000 more people were in jobs every single month for the last two years. What’s it under them?

💬 Hon Members: 600.

Six hundred. It has stalled—and that is before the global downturn. Jacinda Ardern, in her Prime Minister’s statement, had the audacity to say that the economy is performing “above expectations”. I set one challenge for Jacinda Ardern: find me one credible commentator who will say at the start of this year that the economy is performing “above expectations”.

Look in the mirror, Prime Minister, and you will see your anti-growth agenda, your anti-business agenda, staring right back at you. A country can’t re-unionise the workforce, it can’t change all the overseas investment rules to stop foreign investment, it can’t pile on more taxes all the time, and it can’t say no to new oil and gas exploration and expect it is going to be all beer and roses. Talking about well-being in Davos is OK, Prime Minister, but your Government is delivering less of it here in New Zealand. [Interruption] And if Ruth Dyson—

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: That’s not true.

She says it’s not true. Well, I know—and the facts don’t lie—that we are seeing more food parcels than ever before in this country’s history. We are seeing more hardship grants—64,000, I think it is, more hardship grants, Carmel Sepuloni, and we were seeing rent increases of $30 more each and every week last year. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment told us just yesterday that people are paying another $10—that’s $40 more in rent that people are paying. Grant Robertson and Jacinda Ardern say we can’t afford tax indexation so New Zealanders can keep more of their money against those increases in cost.

Let’s go through the things that matter in the Prime Minister’s speech. The economy: getting worse. Housing: getting worse. Transport, Phil Twyford, is getting worse. The Whangarei to Auckland four-laning, Shane Jones, is cancelled. The East-West Link four-laning: cancelled. The Mill Road four-laning: cancelled. The Cambridge to Piarere four-laning: cancelled. The Tauranga Northern Link—by Phil Twyford himself—is cancelled. Mount Messenger to Awakino is stalled because one department is fighting another. The Ōtaki to Levin four-laning is cancelled and instead they’ll get two lanes sometime in the never-never. The Nelson Southern Link is cancelled, and any intention of Christchurch to Ashburton four-laning is cancelled—and absolutely nothing to show for it from this Government. There are no new projects.

💬 Health: getting worse. Deficits in literally every district health board (DHB) around the country are going up. We have had health targets cancelled under this Government for the same reason that they cancelled the KiwiBuild targets: they know they ain’t going to meet them. They know they’re not going to get there. I would say this, Grant Robertson—[Interruption] We’ve already used those lines. I would say this, Grant Robertson: this is from the most open and transparent Government, supposedly, we’ve ever seen, and all targets have been done away with. Don’t take my word for it; that’s what the cancer experts around the country have said about this. They have made it really clear that there are people now dying because without national standards there is nothing to drive those waiting times and those accountabilities. They’re laughing about this. They’re laughing about health targets and what is happening. There was a case over summer where a 37-year-old man was waiting for eight weeks, and so he went private. Under us, in our targets, it was four weeks, and that’s the difference.

💬 Pharmac: a $200 million saving—some would say a cut—that could have been reinvested into life-saving drugs, and that’s not to mention the cochlear implants, and that’s not to mention the $100 million gone from mental health initiatives. There are nine new working groups that will have hui all over the country in relation to that.

In education, Chris Hipkins, how many working groups have we got?

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: 18.

Eighteen working groups, Nikki Kaye. There are strikes literally every other day. It is a sector that is in absolute disarray, thanks to what they’re doing. Well, I tell you, Chris Hipkins, we will back parents and local communities over bureaucracy and centralisation every single day. And all the while, free fees—so there isn’t money for those teachers and there isn’t money for those schools. We will find out, I think, in the next day or two that there isn’t money for polytechs. He’s laughing. Fifty million dollars was wasted from students who stopped turning up under his stupid, wasteful scheme.

In justice, Andrew Little—what have they done? What have they done? Well, I thought we were going to have some sort of nirvana where we didn’t need prisons anymore. Well, I tell Andrew Little, every single day, we will back the victims—that’s where our heart is; not with the criminals. The Government has done nothing.

In terms of the environment, James Shaw, you might have thought that after—what is it?—20 years in opposition, they’d come in and they’d try and do something. And I know, Winston Peters, that they’re not really in Government; I get that. I get that. Let’s not rub that in. A Kermadec sanctuary has been put on ice. What should be the fourth-biggest global sanctuary in the world—where is the Green Party on that?

I haven’t agreed with him often, but Russel—with one “l”—Norman wrote an incredibly good article the other day. What did he say? That the Hon Nathan Guy was a good fisheries Minister, and that bloke over there is not doing anything. Let’s run through the points he’s making. [Interruption] Cameras on fishing vessels have been scrapped, Marama Davidson. I think that’s because she’s too concerned about the “c” word and not concerned enough about the seafood. Look at her; she’s pretending she’s not listening. The situation under the most transparent Government ever is that an independent inquiry into fisheries has been scrapped; there are piffling fines for dumping fish waste instead of real, meaningful penalties; and there are big increases in fishing quotas for the companies. I say to the Green Party: what is the point of that Green Party over there? What are they doing? [Interruption] There’s always good news. [Interruption] Oh, they don’t like that, because at 5 percent he knows Vernon Tava’s coming for him.

But here’s—[Interruption]. Calm down. I’ve got about 10 minutes of material to fit into six minutes—be quiet. Here’s the good news. [Interruption] Calm down. They may be a do-nothing Government, but on this side we’re not going to wait for them. We’re going to get out and we’re going to deliver over the next year. National will lead the serious policy debate in 2019. We have eight policy documents out this year, and the first, James Shaw—unlike yourself—will be on the environment, because we know what matters to New Zealanders and we’ll be delivering it.

We’ll hit the ground running. Actually, I forgot foreign affairs. And I want to come back to that because Winston Peters is laughing. What did the Prime Minister say in her statement? “The Government has demonstrated a new kind of leadership.” That means: let Winston do whatever the heck he wants, even if it means ruining a $29 billion Chinese economic relationship. Look at him; he’s laughing.

We will be prepared with our policy work. A National Government that I lead would, among other things, repeal—[Interruption] Oh, calm down. You can tell they were surprised by that poll. We’d repeal a capital gains tax. We would have no new taxes in our first term, we would repeal needless restrictions around foreign investment, and we would repeal the terrible industrial law changes aimed at re-unionising the workforce. We would reform the Resource Management Act, we would repeal the oil and gas ban, and we would reintroduce health targets, because we actually believe in having measures and accountability. We would introduce Dr Shane Reti’s fine and comprehensive medicinal cannabis regime to New Zealand—actually do the work. We would reinstate charter schools, we would reduce class sizes, and we would ensure there are second languages taught in the classroom. We would repeal the regional fuel tax; we would ensure there were no new petrol taxes in our first term; and, Winston Peters, we would pull out of the United Nations migration pact.

He’s laughing. They weren’t laughing around the Cabinet table. Someone got quite angry, didn’t they, Winston?

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

Winston Peters, the right honourable.

We’d reinstate Better Public Services targets. We would strengthen sanctions to ensure beneficiaries meet reasonable obligations and don’t languish on the dole queue, Mr Davis. And we would have tax indexation to ensure New Zealanders keep on top of their costs and are not going behind. You see, in the last year and this summer, we’ve been working hard, and when the Prime Minister announced nothing in her state of the nation speech, actually, we’ve done the detailed work, we’ve done the costing, and we have an enduring policy on tax.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: You have not.

He says we have not. He didn’t ask a single question. We oppose a capital gains tax. This Government collects more than enough. He talks about a fiscal hole. Since the election, Grant Robertson is stealing $17.7 billion more from New Zealanders. That is $10,000 a household. We know, Winston Peters, that a capital gains tax will be bad for farmers, it will be bad for small-business owners, and it’ll be bad for New Zealanders who are saving a nest egg and just trying to stay up and play by the rules. It is the last thing that we need in the New Zealand economy at this time—and the uncertainty that goes with it.

But the funny thing is we’re not the only people in this Parliament who think that. As someone else in this House said in 2017, on the election trail, “It’s very clear. It’s off the table.” Who was that? The Rt Hon Winston Peters. And he also said, quite rightly, in 2017, of Labour and a capital gains tax, “This is yet more confusion from a party that has had nine years to get its tax story straight.” Well, nothing’s changed except it’s a decade on, Mr Peters, and we still wait for them to get their act together.

In contrast, we’ve got the policies on tax indexation. We understand that New Zealanders deserve to keep more of their hard-earned money. Jacinda Ardern in her speech today, in writing, has made three key points. She says they’re growing the economy. Well, it’s slowing. She said it was all about well-being. Well, actually, for New Zealanders in terms of rent, costs, and hardship grants, it’s getting worse. And she said there’d be new leadership. Well, that’s code for letting the Rt Hon Winston Peters do whatever he wants when it comes to fisheries, when it comes to racing, when it comes to China—you name it. In the year of delivery, where the Government doesn’t have a plan and things are getting worse, we’re not waiting for them. We have a plan and we will deliver it for New Zealanders in 2019 and 2020.

I would normally put the amendment at this stage, and when I have an amendment in the proper form I will put it—possibly after the right honourable gentleman’s speech. I call the Rt Hon Winston Peters.

Mr Speaker, thank you, and happy New Year to you and all members of this Parliament. Now, that last comment from the Speaker—I don’t want to bring him into the debate—but it just about encapsulates what’s going on in the Opposition: can’t even draw and draft a motion to this House properly so it’s acceptable. I mean, why does Mr Bridges pick these special debates to publicly humiliate himself? Why does that happen all the time? And here’s the National Party, right, that evinces a temporary leader—

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Tell us about China.

I will tell about—I’ll tell you about China but not “Choyna”. China, yes, I’m the current expert on China, but “Choyna”—I don’t know anything about that country unless a new rock has jumped up in the Pacific.

Now, back to my point. There he was: no vision, no plan, no answers, just some vacuous marketing announcements to keep the wolves from his own door, and we know that that would be the most nervous, stressed speech that I have seen in a long, long time. And I’ve seen some stressed National Party people, but that one will take the cake, and I’ve never seen anything so addled. He got, for example, up and said they were going to repeal the UN migration pact, which he and his colleagues signed up to.

Yes, and he’s been telling the media that he doesn’t support the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act, which was at the back of the Huawei decision, even though they passed the legislation—he passed it. And then, of course, he got more stressed out and he talked about something. He said it’s not about “free fees”. That’s what he said—that it’s not about “free fees”. You can’t have “free fees”. It’s “fees free”—I’ll say it slowly. Now, that shows you how stressed out he is.

But, you see, here’s the point: this is a man who leads the National Party with no business experience at all—no business experience at all. He doesn’t know what it’s like to run a business, doesn’t know what it is to fill out monthly reports, doesn’t know how to pay wages. He’s got no experience at all, unlike some of us—unlike some of us.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: As a teacher?

He’s got—no, no, no! Sir, I made more money per month than a parliamentary salary for a year. Everybody in the law should know that. Everybody knows that. Oh, yes—unbelievable! More in one month than in a year. Him, all he was doing was sitting behind a warrant that was in the Tauranga office, and he calls himself the prosecutor. No wonder so many people have been free in Tauranga. No wonder they’d want to get out of the Rotorua court and get to Tauranga as fast as possible, because there they’d not see a decent lawyer in the form of Mr Bridges. Unbelievable!

You know he said to the media that he had a leaked report on New Zealand politics around the country. Mr Bridges, that statement wasn’t true was it?

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Which one?

That you had a report about the politics around this country and what was going to happen. I saw him on TV saying that at the National Party caucus, and my statement to Mr Bridges is: “That’s fake news, isn’t it?” It wasn’t true. And then, of course, he says that a screw-up by Air New Zealand is actually a response by the Chinese to some other matter. Air New Zealand says, “We screwed up.” They made it very clear that they may have got the form wrong. They may have even got the country wrong, and they’ve owned up to it. But not him—oh, no, no! He’s got some people up there [Points to press gallery] who don’t know enough about him like I do.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Just making it up.

Just making it up as he goes along.

As for the four-lane highways, Mr Bridges, what money was put in the New Zealand Transport Agency funding budget—and Mr Twyford can confirm this—for the four-lane highway from Whangarei to Warkworth, which he and his colleagues keep talking about? No, no, no! No use talking to Paula now. I want him to talk to me. I’m not the only New Zealander that wants that. What I’d like to know, Mr Bridges, is how much money was set aside for the four-lane highway from Whangarei to Warkworth.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: None.

You’re right: doughnuts—nothing. But if you go up north there’s a big sign saying, “National was building a four-lane highway”, and, if you go on another 100 metres, “and the Labour Government shut it down.”—or words to that effect. There’s a word for that: it’s called a “porky”. It starts with “h” but I can’t say it in this House. But there it is in big, bold print. Mr Bridges, one more time: how many dollars were set aside for the four-lane highway between Warkworth and Whangarei? Unbelievable—I don’t think I’ll bother any more, actually; I’m wasting my time.

Can I say, 2019 begins for the Government amidst serious and ongoing international disruption, with the political turmoil such as Brexit or looming electoral contests—

💬 Simon O’Connor: What about Venezuela?

Well, I’ll get to that, sunshine. Given how disengaged that man is with this Parliament, he can afford to wait all year for the answer. I’ll get to that very shortly; in fact, it’s in the brief somewhere. Whether it’s Brexit, or overseas political contests, or threats of trade wars, or the contest between the US and China, there are significant threats to New Zealand’s continuing prosperity.

As we said before we were sworn in as a Government, these storm clouds cannot be underestimated or ignored, and this year the Government will be focusing, as the Prime Minister has said, on improving New Zealand’s well-being, and at its core will be, across all portfolios, the intention to improve the resilience upon which the concept of wellness rests. That way, it sounds like a vision, and it is—and it is.

Can I just say that boosting the Government and the country’s resilience is a priority because while we are, all of us, tending to our patch, we are none the less exposed to the international climate, and it is a very stormy climate indeed.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: We’ve got another 13 minutes of this.

You’ve got far more than 13 minutes, Mr Brownlee; you’ve got about three or four terms yet to go, to hear this out. Ha, ha! As Rob Muldoon used to say, “I’ll be round long after you’re gone.” I’ll be round long after he’s gone.

Now, it’s our priority to promote stability amidst all the international disruption. New Zealand First will likewise continue its role as a stable partner within the coalition and all of its governing arrangements. Bearing in mind, of course, when you get a leader from the Opposition who raises, of all things, the Kermadecs, you have to have two things on your side to do that. First, you’ve got to be brazenly ignorant of the facts, and you’ve got to be brazenly arrogant. It was the National Party that gave the northern Māori the interest in the Kermadecs against my advice, and then thought, by going to New York without even telling anybody, that they would take it away. We don’t behave in such an irresponsible, illegal way. And I don’t know what Nick Smith’s condition is, but I bet it’s difficult to pronounce—shaking his head and whingeing over there like he always does.

Here are the key facts: we came into Government with the most expensive housing crisis anywhere in the whole wide world. They can laugh, but nowhere around the world was the average income to buy a house required to be, when the house price was put up, 12 times the average income—12 and a half times. Nowhere in the whole world. Of course, they discovered after the election that there was a housing crisis. Before, they had no problem whatsoever. And Nick Smith running around, even announcing housing projects on Māori land when he had no legal authority whatsoever. Now guess what? They’ve made him Māori spokesman on Treaty of Waitangi issues.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: What?

They did—they did. I’ve run into Māori people around the country and they have been deeply disturbed to learn this—that poor Nick’s back.

You know, in Adelaide the other day, houses were being advertised for four bedrooms at $160,000; three bedrooms, $120,000. We can do that, and we will. If anybody thinks we’re not going to build a thousand houses in the time frame we set ourselves—if they even dream that, they can wake and apologise, because we will. We’ll do that and much more. We need to expose the arrogant neoliberal twit-ism that is coming from that side of the House, and we will.

Take our hospitals, for example. You had sewage seeping into Middlemore Hospital under that administration. The cost of roads—the East-West Link was to cost $327 million per kilometre. That was their plan. On the bungled Christchurch rebuild, we had mistake after mistake and fraud after fraud, and it was compounded by even the small amount of money that Mr Brownlee spent—$180,000 of taxpayers’ money—to spy on Kiwis during the bungled rebuild.

As for the regions, the National Party, which for all these decades has been here on the back of the regions, utterly let them wither, prioritising their banker and property developer mates in Auckland. Capital was taken from the regions to pawn to the cities, despite the fact that it is the people out in regional New Zealand that create the greatest wealth in this country. There are provincial members over there—oh, looking somewhere else now.

💬 Hon Member: Not for long.

Yeah, not for long—here because of the regions, and never prepared to raise a mutter nor a murmur to defend them, ever. That’s why they’re so angry, because above all things, they have just heard about the UMR poll. Now, forget about the rubbish Reid Newshub poll—but it’s pointing in the same direction. When you’ve got a spread of 18 percent between the governing parties and those opposing it, it’s hardly a harbinger for great leadership in the National Party. And if you look at it between—

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: What’s your poll? Mr 3 Percent.

Oh, really? Ha, ha! Mr Smith, this is a visual poll. I’m here, and that member’s there, and you will be for a long time—for one long time. I know. [Interruption] Oh no, don’t worry, Paula. Paula, let me give you some sound advice. This is how it happens in the African veldt and in the jungle. They don’t start with the number one person; they start with the weak one. They’ll come for that member first. And I’m sorry about that sort of behaviour. I see it in the jungle—I don’t like it—but I don’t like it in humanity. I’m warning her to find a new job now, look around the place, find something outside of Parliament. But they’ll come first to her, and then they’ll start on—guess who? “Mr 3 Percent”. He’s on five now, and he’s falling—and he’s falling.

Can I say also that across our portfolios, New Zealand First members are doing very, very well. In defence—no argument—for the first time, countries abroad are saying New Zealand is actually pulling its weight. When it comes to foreign affairs, they’re saying, “It’s great to see you back. We don’t need the big divan chair anymore to entertain the foreign affairs minister when he comes. We can cancel that and get back to the ordinary order.”

When it comes to Oranga Tamariki—exciting new policies there. Then across the regions, there is no doubt—despite all the pettifoggery and criticism and carping and downright nastiness from urban members who wouldn’t know how to hold a shovel or a spade—we are out in the provinces rebuilding New Zealand, right across this country. Every member here, right across this country. There is no doubt from my travel around New Zealand that the New Zealand people in the provinces are with us. They are behind us. And he can scoff and laugh, but those polls, sunshine, mean something.

How could they, if their criticism was so strong or right, be so flagging in the polls? If Reid have got you at 41, I can guess you’re at 37 and falling. I’ve seen the face of the National Party before like that. I’ve seen where they fell all the way to 20.93 percent. As for goodbye—you’ve hardly arrived. Sorry, not you, Mr Speaker—you’ve been here a long time—but that member there, he’s one of those members who turns up for five seconds. He’s probably going to be forming an alternative new-right, far-right party. There’s a few over there who have been skiting and planning, and I know they’ve got Michelle Boag and others designing a new party to try and prop them up: the blue-greens. Well, that won’t last five minutes. They didn’t have Gareth Morgan, because he’s got brains and they haven’t. So they’ve got all these problems that they’re building, and then they sit there scoffing and jeering.

Look, I want to tell the backbenchers, the young members over there: what you heard from the Prime Minister today is a vision and an outline of where this country is going to rebuild its wealth, to rebuild its prosperity—in fact, to recapture the glory days when we were number two or three in the world. It’s happened in past generations, but it’s with policies like this that you get there, not some neoliberal claptrap that has failed everywhere that it’s been put in place. Even Donald Trump knows that, and he said so.

Now, back to my point: this year, there are going to be many programmes where we set out to rebuild this country’s economy, this country’s infrastructure, and this country’s social structure, whether it be health and education, whether it be roading, or whether it be KiwiRail and our ports. What’s happening differently now is that New Zealand does have an emerging plan. After only 15 months, the Government is clear as to where we’re going.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: There are 200 more reports to come—200 more working groups to make it up.

Well, I mean, how do you sit here all these years with just bluster and bulldust like that? He’s the most unqualified guy ever to be in foreign affairs, the most unqualified guy to be in the whole House. Where does his background experience in business come from? Mr Brownlee—what business did that member run? Just name one, apart from being a director for five weeks on a backed, under-the-scene, illegal Christchurch casino. And he got found out. Guess who by: yours truly. I exposed him. And the other colleague up there in the gallery, who has just gone—the former National Party president—was his co-director. He must have known I was going to say that because he’s vanished. They were the two directors for five weeks until a guy in prison fingered them to me, and I got rid of them. Remember that, Mr Brownlee? Oh, yes, that’s his experience in business: five weeks in an illegal business. So, Mr Brownlee, don’t go and preach to the rotary clubs or the chambers of commerce; you’ll bore them witless. They all know, like I know, that he knows nothing about business.

Now, back to my point: we are, can I say, in a sea of unrest: trade wars, pressure on the World Trade Organization, unrest with the Venezuelan election, Middle East elections, and elections in Afghanistan, Australia, and, indeed, Canada this year. When you look at that and look at the present coalition Government, we look like stability in an ocean of disruption. We don’t only look like it; we are. That is the difference. And Mr Carter—I don’t know why he’s laughing, because he may as well retire from Parliament now. There’s no future for, as The Timaru Herald said, the worst agriculture Minister the country ever saw. That’s what they said about him—the worst agriculture Minister the country ever saw—and he sits up here preening and laughing as though he’s got something to stand on.

Can I just say, on foreign policy, on racing reform, on the SuperGold card that’s coming shortly, which will go to 690,000 retired New Zealanders—an updated card with many new benefits, all coming this year. I can see the Opposition getting worried now. The Provincial Growth Fund—further expansion. We have got ourselves on course for an exciting 2019.

You know, 15 months ago we rejected a modified status quo in favour of lasting change, and none of my colleagues have ever regretted it. Now we’re doing something for New Zealand’s future, whereas the Opposition wanted us to preserve the impossible past of privilege, elitism, and greater wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people. We made a conscious philosophic decision to do what is right for New Zealanders, and we’re proud of it.

Can I just say, the party’s focus will be on the things that matter socially and industrially. It’s also very clear that they don’t understand over there what the problem is with their behaviour. They carp and argue every day. It puts me in mind of an old Māori saying, using, of course, a very good example when it’s said in English: “Not like the seagull tossing and turning its head at every wave”—no, no—“Like the rocks, steadfast against the surging sea.” That’s the difference between this side over here and that side over there. We do have plans. We do have visions. And guess what? It’s not easy being in a coalition Government, but it’s far better being in a coalition Government than taking your dictates from the big end of New Zealand’s downtown, where your caucus members have no say whatsoever.

It is so much better negotiating in a fair environment than having your policy dictated from the big end of town in Auckland and elsewhere, where you become mere puppets of the system rather than party principle perpetrators. Quite the opposite is happening in this coalition. We are getting on with the job. We know exactly what we’re going to do and where we’re going to do it. We know who the people are who are going to be doing it, and we’ve got this very certain view as well that we’ve got more and more talent on our backbench than their whole front bench all put together. Have a look at them. Who over there is a good speaker? Look, they even know there’s not one, right? Who over there has got a serious business background? No, the ones with the serious business backgrounds are over there—they’re in the backbench, not the front bench. The backbench have got it. Over here, we’ve got things around the right way.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Mr Peters, look to your right.

One last saying, Ms Bennett, who recently discovered that she was a Māori. Ms Bennett, there’s a great saying in Māoridom, and it’s taken place since the 2017 election. Since she discovered, like Simon Upton, that she had a Māori background, their linkage to the Māori people and their intensity knows no bounds. But they discovered they were Māori after they got here. The Māori saying is: “Ka pū te rūhā, ka hao te rangatahi.” You know what it means? It means, “When the old net’s shot full of holes, the new net goes fishing.”

Just before I call the member, I will indicate that I am going to put the amendment now, which is that all words after “that” be deleted and be replaced by the expression used by Mr Bridges at the beginning of his speech.

E Te Māngai o Te Whare, tēnā koe. About a third or a quarter of the way through Simon Bridges’ speech, I thought to myself, “I have never looked forward to a speech by Winston Peters so much.” I want to pick up on where he left off, which is just after the election in 2017.

On election night 2017, I said that New Zealanders have voted for change—for change. On that night, the Opposition parties, the three of us, commanded a majority of votes, and I said it was time for us to work together to create a Government of change that New Zealanders wanted. Four weeks later, as he’s just mentioned, the Deputy Prime Minister said that there had been a choice between a modified status quo and change—change.

This Government—our Government, the first that the Greens have been a part of—was elected on the basis of change, to ensure a good future for all New Zealanders, to confront child poverty, to reverse the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots, and to ensure that people’s wages are actually enough to cover their living costs. We were elected to fix the housing crisis, to make sure that every New Zealander has a roof over their head and a warm, dry home that they can call their own whether they rent or own. We were elected to reverse the epidemic of ill mental health that is sweeping our nation, and to get people with drug problems out of prison and into care.

Our Government—and the Green Party that Marama Davidson and I are proud to lead as part of it—was given a mandate to bring about equality for women, finally, and to stem the tide of domestic and sexual violence against them; to honour Te Tiriti o Waitangi and to create a country where future New Zealanders can understand each other not just in te reo Pākehā but in Te Reo Māori as well. We were elected to clean up our rivers, to give sanctuary to the dolphins and the whales and the fish that live in our oceans and to free them of the deluge of plastic waste that is choking them. This Government was elected to restore our native forests and to save our endangered birds. And this Government—our Government, we—were elected to make climate-change history.

Now, that is the change—that is the change—that we campaigned on, all of us, and that we were elected to bring about. On this side of the House, all of us—all of us—want to be able to look our kids and our grandkids in the eyes and to say that we did our best to create a good future for them. I know that some people are frustrated that things aren’t moving as fast as they could be; I am—I am. But can I just take a moment right now to say that if anyone still thinks that the Green Party could be making more progress on any of those issues if we had gone into partnership with a limping, conservative, fourth-term National Government, whose central policy was the slow erosion of public services, then they are beyond mistaken. There are some other words I could use, but they would be unparliamentary. When you hear the Leader of the Opposition start the year with his exciting new idea about cutting taxes—because you’ve never heard that one from the National Party before!—what he’s telling you is that he wants to cut funding for doctors that keep us healthy, and he wants to cut the funding for midwives that deliver our babies, and he wants to cut funding for the teachers that educate our kids. He’s been going around over the summer saying, “We’re going to build loads more roads”—any road, anywhere, as long as it’s got four lanes; it doesn’t matter where it goes—“and we’re going to pay more teachers, and we’re going to cut debt, and we’re going to cut taxes.” And if Mr Bridges thinks that he is going to ride into Government on the back of that bandwagon, he’s going to need to be towed there by an entire blessing of unicorns.

It’s been widely reported over the summer that National wants to do nothing more than talk about how we fund public services—or, as it’s commonly known, “tax”. Well, let’s indulge them—let’s just indulge them a little bit. Let’s start by talking about Karen. Karen is a renter. She’s got a career, and she earns roughly the median wage. Over the last 10 years, she’s earned about $450,000 and she’s paid, roughly, $70,000 in tax. She budgets well, she can manage the rent, and she can manage the other expenses, but she can’t quite have enough left over to save. And then there’s Paul. Paul also earns the median wage. He’s a bit older than Karen, and Paul got lucky and managed to buy some rental property before house prices really started rocketing—about the time that Karen came into the workforce, about the time that John Key became Prime Minister. On the day that Paul sells that rental property, he makes as much as Karen has in the last 10 years, and he pays zero tax on that income—and remember that Karen has already paid $70,000 on hers. Now, what does Paul do? He uses that as a deposit to buy two more houses. That is the rational thing to do. And what does Karen do? Well, Karen keeps renting because there is no way on God’s green earth that she’s going to be able to scrape together a deposit on $45,000 a year. And that, in a nutshell, is why we have a large and growing wealth gap in this country, and it is undermining our ability to pay for the public services that we all rely on, including Karen—including Paul.

Now, the Green Party has long been calling for that fundamental imbalance to be addressed, and every single expert working group in living memory has agreed with us, but no Government—no Government—has been bold enough to actually do it. But if we are to be the Government of change that New Zealanders wanted and elected, we must be bold. The crises that we face on multiple fronts—the wealth gap, climate change, the housing crisis—we cannot solve without fundamental reform. These crises have been allowed to metastasise because generations of politicians have timidly tinkered rather than actually cut to the core of the problem. And the consequences of that timidity—the consequences of that timidity—are being felt by Karen and by hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders just like her, trapped in “Generation Rent”. So when the commentators pontificate about whether this Government can politically afford to do what no other Government before it has done, I ask, “Can we afford not to?”

Can we afford not to? We were elected on the promise of change. If we want to reduce the wealth gap, if we want to fix the housing crisis and to build a productive high-wage economy, we need to tax income from capital the same way that we tax income from work. The very last question that we should be asking ourselves is: can we be re-elected if we do this? The only question we really ought to be asking ourselves is: do we deserve to be re-elected if we don’t?

I have to say, boldness is needed everywhere, everywhere. The vast majority of New Zealanders were delighted when the Prime Minister and my fellow Green Minister Eugenie Sage announced last year that we were phasing out single-use plastic bags, but New Zealanders also know that plastic bags are just a tiny part of a much larger problem. Enormous islands of plastic waste are spewing into our oceans all over the world. Plastic has been found in the fish that we eat. We need to massively cut down on what we use as well as dispose of it properly.

So this year Minister Sage will be leading the next phase of the “war on waste”, and part of the solution will be to put a proper price on pollution and waste. Now, in its interim report last year, the Tax Working Group pointed out that New Zealand makes less use of pollution pricing than almost any other country in the OECD—almost anyone. So it’s hardly surprising that we have some of the highest waste per capita in the OECD. Just as we don’t have a snowball’s chance in Australia of fixing inequality without taxing income from capital the same way that we tax income from work, neither can we resolve our environmental challenges without putting a proper price on pollution and waste. And Simon Bridges says he wants the National Party to have a strong environmental focus. So I look forward to seeing how he does that—how he cleans up the environment, without making polluters pay. People aren’t stupid—they know when they’re being lied to and they appreciate being told the truth.

Now, I believe we have nothing to lose by being honest with New Zealanders, and the truth is that we can clean up our oceans, and our rivers, and our skies. It will involve changing the way we do things now: we can make the switch from coal and oil to solar and wind, we can have fast and comfortable and convenient electric trains and buses through our cities, and congestion-free roads for our electric cars.

My other fellow Green Minister Julie Anne Genter and our colleague Phil Twyford will this year be making some of the boldest investments in New Zealand’s future transport infrastructure ever. We can replace our ageing freshwater and sewerage pipes with new infrastructure that’s resilient to the effects of climate change and sea-level rise. We can rebuild our hospitals and our schools to make them fit for purpose so that everyone can have a good future. In all these areas, in all of them, in transport, water, schools, and hospitals, just as with the tax system, successive Governments have simply been too timid—too timid—to actually do what needs to be done to solve the problem. They’ve preferred to kick the problem down the road, to lump it on future generations. Well, here we are—here we are.

In the United States, Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez is making headlines, calling for a Green New Deal that offers everyone a good future. I just would like, in all modesty, to point out that the Green Party first called for a Green New Deal for New Zealand, here, 10 years ago in the middle of the global financial crisis. We have a 30-year infrastructure deficit to deal with and we have an urgent need to build a new generation of infrastructure that is resilient to the effects of climate change and sea-level rise. Conveniently, we also have the lowest cost of borrowing in recent history and we have a public expectation that finally there is a Government willing to make the big investments not just for this generation but for future generations as well. We have no excuse not to.

When the House resumed after the formation of Government in 2017, I said, “It is 27 years since the Green Party was [first] founded, with the goal of bringing the principles of ecological wisdom, social responsibility, appropriate decision-making, and non-violence to New Zealand politics to solve the problems that traditional politics could not. It has been a long and a very winding road, but the Green Party has arrived in Government.”

In the 14 months since that formation of Government, our Government, Marama and I, and our Green colleagues—well, we have been busy. Our Government has nearly completed a top-to-tail review of our entire tax and welfare systems, with a view to fundamental reform this year. Our Government has introduced a Families Package that will increase the incomes of 380,000 families by $75 every week—every week—and make it easier to send that child to school camp or to afford extra schoolbooks. Our Government has put 1,900 families into public housing so they have a roof over their head. We’ve made the lives of New Zealanders warmer with Warm Up New Zealand and winter energy payments. We’ve restarted the home insulation scheme. We’ve introduced new standards for rental properties that mean our homes are healthy and not making kids sick. We’ve taken a huge step in launching, just yesterday in Porirua, the pilot of the youth mental health scheme that the Greens campaigned for. Young people in Porirua will no longer have to book an appointment with their GP and form a long queue and then pay around $150 that they don’t have to get critical support that could save their life. That service now comes for free.

We’ve built a whole-of-Government framework for tackling violence against women in the home. We’ve given our native birds a fighting chance, with the largest increase in conservation funding in 16 years. We’ve invested billions in light rail, in buses, in cycling, and in walking to make it easier and safer to get around our cities, and last year our Government said that fossil fuels are not our future. This year, the Green Investment Fund will make the first investments in the low-carbon economy of the future, and also this year, we will pass the zero carbon bill, hopefully with political consensus across the House. Finally, we will have legally binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and a politically neutral climate change commission to help guide us there.

Our Government is busy; we make no apology for it. These few changes that I’ve had time to list won’t, by themselves, result in the truly transformative outcomes that New Zealanders elected this Government to shepherd in. As the Prime Minister said at Waitangi, and again today, we know—we all know—there is so much more to do, but we are just getting warmed up. But to do it—but to do it—for Pete’s sake, we must be bold. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. You know, there was one thing missing from the Prime Minister’s statement today; it was an answer to a simple question—a question that any Prime Minister should be asking, especially one who wants to have a year of delivery—and it’s this: where does prosperity, where does wealth, actually come from? It’s not actually complicated, but it seems that today we must state, and restate, the most basic truths just to keep them alive at all. That prosperity—it comes from combining more investment, better ideas, and more skilful workers to produce products and services that people want to pay more for. That’s it. It’s not complicated, but nowhere in the Prime Minister’s statement did we come close to an articulation of how New Zealanders actually get wealthier and generate the prosperity that she seeks, whether it be to pay for new cancer drugs, whether it be for new roads, or better houses; we didn’t hear where that prosperity comes from.

I predict that instead of having more skilful workers working with more capital, many New Zealanders are going to decide that a better idea is moving to Australia, just as they did last time Labour was over there on the Treasury benches, and that is a great shame. ACT, on the other hand, will continue standing for freedom and opportunity, because those are the values that make us prosperous. But instead, we have heard from this Government an endless array of new initiatives that put sand in the gears of prosperity—new red tape and new regulations.

Let’s just go through a few of the impediments to combining more skilful workers with more investment and better ideas. The minimum wage—we’ve heard that the minimum wage is going to go to $20 by 2021. We in New Zealand already have the highest minimum wage, compared with the average, in the developed world. That should be a clue that if the Government pushes it too much further, there will be job losses, and, indeed, the officials have told the Government that if they increase the minimum wage to $20 by 2021, there will be 11,000 fewer jobs than there would have been otherwise, taking people off the ladder of opportunity, with less freedom to gain the skills in the workplace that would have given them a more prosperous future.

What about fair pay agreements? We’ve got Jim Bolger somehow seeking to sell his socialist soul by cuddling up to the most left-wing Labour Government—whose leader is, effectively, elected by the unions—introducing 1970s-style national awards. They call them fair pay agreements. What is fair about being in a workplace where 10 percent, or fewer, of the people who work there can suddenly engage everybody in a negotiation that means, whether you work hard or not, you end up getting paid the same? How are professions, or industries, defined in 2019? It might’ve been easy in the 70s, when there were tinkers, tailors, soldiers, and sailors, but today we have such a wide range of employment categories, it will be impossible to define industries, and ACT predicts that if the Government does go ahead with its fair pay agreements, the only people who will prosper from it will be those who are employment lawyers.

We heard about the capital gains tax, most recently from James Shaw. Winston Peters didn’t mention it, but we heard about the capital gains tax from James Shaw, and it was a really interesting story about Karen and—I think Peter was the guy’s name. Karen was going to have a better life if there was a capital gains tax—if Peter, who bought a house, had to pay a capital gains tax. Well, the sad thing for Karen is that nowhere in the world—not in London, not in Hong Kong, not in Singapore, not in LA, not in Vancouver, not in Sydney or Melbourne—has a capital gains tax prevented house prices going over 10 times income when supply and demand were mismatched. So the capital gains tax is not actually going to help Karen. But here’s the thing: a capital gains tax is not about helping anybody; it’s about dragging people down. It’s not about helping Karen; it’s about dragging down the other guy.

Here’s another simple truth about a capital gains tax: James Shaw said that the Government should tax income from labour, or work, the same as it taxes capital. Well, this Government has a comprehensive tax on income, a progressive tax on income, and a capital asset is only worth the income that it produces, which is taxed. So I’ve got news for the Government: if they make a capital gain on an asset, well, it should be producing more income, and if it’s producing more income, under the progressive income tax system that they support, it’s going to pay more tax. We are already taxed on any gains made on capital in this country. Only a Government fixated on envy and dragging people down—the opposite of the values that make a country prosperous—would want to tax people again. The madness of it, in a country that has for almost two centuries been desperately short of capital and paid a premium on capital—we have a Government that now wants to put an extra tax on saving and investing. It is madness.

Then we have the welfare reforms. We have a Government that is going to squander years and years of carefully improving the welfare system so that people get off welfare into work. And what are they doing? They’re increasing entitlements, they’re relaxing work tests, and they’re finding, predictably enough, that even at a time of record low formal employment, a time when people up and down this country are screaming out and desperate for workers, we have 300,000 people on a main benefit of working age. That’s 10 percent of adult New Zealanders. It is a scandal, and this Government, through relaxing mutual obligation in welfare, is going to make it worse.

Then we get into the technical stuff. The Commerce Commission has been let loose, with the permission of both main parties in this House, I might add, to go into whole industries—starting with petrol, then it will be supermarkets, then who knows who’s next; whoever’s politically unpopular, I would guess—and demand information from that industry with greater powers than the police, and then decide, I don’t know, “I think that profit is too high or too low. We bureaucrats somehow know how much money a particular industry should be making.” It is an outrage, another bureaucratic impost, and another violation of the very principles that make a country prosperous.

Then we come to the Provincial Growth Fund—we’ve heard lots about that. Now, I would like to call the Provincial Growth Fund pork-barrel politics, but that would be unfair on pigs. I don’t want to insult pigs by comparing them with what Shane Jones is doing, brazenly and blatantly splashing the cash up and down this country with no robust evidence, no public policy case. And, of course, as we’ve heard recently from my very able constituent Paul Goldsmith, in actual fact he’s creating more jobs on Courtenay Place than he’s creating anywhere out in the regions. Well, I think Shane Jones is going to discover that people in the regions are actually able to work it out. They’re going to see through him, and it’s not even going to work politically in the way that he hoped.

Then we have the well-being Budget—the Budget that tells you how you should feel, and manages whether or not you have a sense of national identity. Well, I can tell you that people in the Epsom electorate and people in Auckland—their well-being would be improved if the Government could provide roads that weren’t congested all the time and public transport that actually functioned. They’d be happy if we had a justice system that could rehabilitate people, instead of having a revolving door outside every prison. They’d be happy if we had an education system that didn’t put out one in six people functionally innumerate and illiterate. There’s a whole lot of things the Government could do better before it starts lecturing us on our sense of identity and how we feel.

In conclusion, we have a Government who believes that prosperity comes from tax and red tape and regulation, a Government that has no regard for the real creation of prosperity and the real creators of prosperity. It is a Government that will soon enough find that when the stardust wears off and the prosperity evaporates, nobody likes them at all. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

He pō, he pō, he ao, he ao, ka tākiri mai te ata, ka korihi te manu, ka pō, ka ao, ka awatea. Kei te whiti mai te rā ki runga i te tau hou o te Paremata. Mr Speaker, tēnā rā koe. Hei tīmatatanga kōrero māku hia ahau te mihi atu ki a tātou katoa ngā mema Paremata i eke ai ki runga i te marae o Waitangi i te wiki kua pahure ake rā. Nā reira huri rauna i te Whare, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou.

[It is night, it is night, it is day, it is day; the dawn breaks and the birds sing. Night becomes day becomes daylight. The sun is shining on the new year of Parliament. Mr Speaker, greetings. As my commencing speech, I wish to acknowledge all those members of Parliament who arrived on to the marae of Waitangi in the week which has just passed. Therefore, all around the House, greetings to you all.]

I just want to begin by acknowledging all the members of Parliament across the House who participated in the celebrations at the Waitangi Treaty Grounds a week ago today. You know, to show that we’re a united country, we parliamentarians needed to actually set an example and lead the way, and we need to do things differently. Guess what? When we did do things differently, and when we went on together as a group and when we backed each other up with our waiata, when we had equal numbers of speakers—when we did things differently, everybody else did things differently, too. So they followed suit, and everybody—everybody—who calls themselves a New Zealander, regardless of where we’re born, was able to celebrate a day that we could all be part of. So dignity, decorum, and respect were what we hoped for at Waitangi 2019. We hoped that was what it would be about, and it was. I couldn’t have been prouder, both as a Ngāpuhi and as a parliamentarian. Again, I just want to say thank you to all the members who contributed to the day.

As the Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti, we wanted to do things differently and we wanted to address the difficult issues, and I guess one of the first difficult issues that we needed to address was, in fact, the way that Waitangi was run and the way things went that day. In fact, it had got so hard that people decided not to turn up. There were discussions about moving the Waitangi celebrations around the country. The reality is that we just needed to actually look at the issue and address it and then make changes, and it certainly worked.

The Prime Minister gave a speech today setting out a great plan of action built around three core themes—that is, the economy, well-being, and leadership. Her speech was a reminder of the scale of change that we needed to bring to Government, and that we brought to Government 15 months ago, in order to place better outcomes for people back at the forefront of our policy. As the Prime Minister has said, there’s no point in having great GDP if people are living homeless. There’s no point in having a really strong economy if people don’t have jobs.

So we came in, after nine years of a Government that took a hands-off approach. This meant our coalition Government was left with an unbalanced economy that was overly reliant on property speculation and immigration, and it simply wasn’t working for far too many Kiwis. There’s no doubt that we inherited a housing crisis, we inherited a health system under huge strain, we inherited an education system that was going backwards, and we inherited inadequate transport, jobless regions, and a rapidly escalating prison population.

Now, as the Minister of Corrections, I want to acknowledge the work that’s being done under our Government for us to finally see a reduction in the prison population. We’re now hovering around about 10,000. In March of last year, the prison population peaked at 10,860. To think that two years ago, we could have reduced the prison population by as much as we have done, safely and without changing any legislation, it would have been thought impossible. But, again, we’re doing things differently, and we’re addressing the hard issues. If things had gone on in the way they were, right now, the prison population would be around about 11,500. Quite frankly, we just didn’t have that number of beds in our system.

Now, the first goal of corrections is to make sure that the public is kept safe. I fail to see how we could have kept New Zealanders safe if we didn’t have enough beds for prisoners in the system. So we’ve done things differently, and we’re making a change. Despite the falling crime rate and despite the reduction in victimisations that we’ve seen over a number of years, that prison population continued to climb. This is just one example of how taking a new approach to a problem has avoided the mistakes of the past. We know that it costs around about $100,000 per prisoner, per year, to stay in prison. In contrast, the bold and comprehensive work programme outlined by the Prime Minister today is focused on delivering for New Zealanders.

We know there’s plenty of work to do, but our Government has a clear plan, and we are just getting on with the job. Whether that means delivering improvements now like increasing the minimum wage—and we’ve heard criticism from the leader of the ACT Party, who was saying that there’s going to be increased unemployment and job losses if we increase the minimum wage. Well, we’ve heard that argument every time the minimum wage has gone up, and we haven’t seen the job losses. It’s just that what they say and what actually is the reality just doesn’t occur as these guys describe it.

We’re addressing pay equity and investing in health and education, and we’re taking on long-term issues of climate change, investing in public transport, and addressing our chronic skills deficit in infrastructure. We are a Government committed to advancing our long-term blueprint for a better New Zealand. As the Prime Minister said, we’re beginning 2019 with an economy that’s performing well, with the second-lowest level of unemployment in a decade, with wages going up, and with support for those who need it through the Families Package. We’ve got solid growth, we’ve got low inflation, and we’re running strong surpluses. There are international headwinds, but our Government’s economic plan and responsible management of the books means we’re in a good position to face them, and I just have to give credit to the Minister of Finance, the Hon Grant Robertson, who’s done such a great job in actually leading us into the strong financial position we are in.

I’m proud of what we’ve achieved so far. We’ve begun raising the living standards, protecting our environment, and upgrading critical transport. We’re rebuilding the hospitals, schools, and public services that all New Zealanders rely on. But the most important measure of our country’s success and our economy’s success is whether it’s delivering real gains for our people.

That’s why our coalition Government’s long-term blueprint for a better New Zealand, as outlined in our plan released last September, is built around three key themes: to build a productive, sustainable economy that works for everyone and that is fit for the 21st century, to improve the well-being of all New Zealanders and their families, and to take a new approach to leadership, focusing on long-term issues. Within those themes, our 12 priorities will drive the Government’s ongoing work programme. These priorities go beyond just having a strong economy, to include ensuring that our children don’t live in poverty, our houses are warm and dry, our regions are supported, and our climate is protected, and ensuring that our relationship between the Crown and Māori grows even stronger.

As the Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti, I want to touch on that last priority of building closer relationships with Māori. Under this Government, we’ve established a new agency to oversee the Government’s work with Māori in a post-settlement era and to support the Government to try to be a better Treaty partner. The Office for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti will support this Government in addressing the difficult issues—and I’ve already outlined just one, which is Waitangi—and in measuring the health of the Māori-Crown relationship. If Waitangi is anything to go by, this relationship is improving. We won’t make the mistakes—and some of them have already been outlined such as the Kermadec situation. I don’t think there are many people in this House who wouldn’t want that big area protected, but there is a way of doing it. Trampling over rights of Māoridom is not the way to establish something like that.

It is not in the best interests of Māori or New Zealanders to fall under the influence of an overseas NGO and make poor decisions that impact on Māori rights. As Michael Joseph Savage said and as the Prime Minister has alluded to, we don’t claim perfection in what we do, but what we do claim is a substantial improvement on what has gone on in the past. That’s what our plan is about, as outlined by the Prime Minister. Our plan is to ensure the well-being of New Zealanders. Our plan is to make sure that we improve the way we engage with Māori. Our plan is to make sure that New Zealanders and their living standards are going to be better not just now and not just over the next three years but well into the future—over the next 20, the next 30 years. That’s going to be the legacy of this, the sixth Labour Government. Kia ora, Mr Speaker.

In the words that I have heard previously and in answer to the previous speaker, Kelvin Davis, I have heard many times from Jacinda Ardern that if you can’t measure it, you won’t know whether it’s successful or not. You have to set targets, you have to measure it, and then you can know whether or not you are having success in those areas. What we are seeing from this Government is great talk and great kōrero, lovely well-being, good intentions, and nice things being said but no actual actions that are being executed in a way that we can see New Zealanders getting ahead.

I have asked myself many times: is there a portfolio that this Government is not stuffing up? I thought for a while, and I thought, “Well, what about statistics?”, because that’s a classic. No. They’re stuffing up that too, because even the census didn’t go well, and, you know, statistics are statistics, as statistics will be, and yet even there we’re seeing actual failure. It’d be funny if it wasn’t funny, and the reason it’s not funny is it’s about things like KiwiBuild. They promised and promised again, and then won’t apologise for making those promises, because the promises were so well intentioned, but they had no way to actually build those houses. They had no way to know whether they were even needed. They had no way to get them to the New Zealanders that needed them the most. In fact, they have built up a false hope that, actually, many New Zealanders are now, very sadly, seeing for the reality it is.

It is sad that there are 11,000 more people on the jobseeker benefit in the last 12 months—11,000 more people. The reason that is sad is we should be asking ourselves where those 11,000 people have come from. So for those aged between 18 and 25 years, we have seen a 10 percent increase in the number on welfare—a 10 percent increase. Have those kids come out of school and gone on to welfare? For there to be 11,000 more people on a jobseeker benefit, have people fallen out of jobs and gone on welfare? We’re certainly seeing fewer jobs available for New Zealanders to take up. It used to be 10,000 when we were in Government; it’s now more like 600 a month—from 10,000 a month, down to, now, 600.

I do want to pick up on what Mr Davis was saying. He said that one of the things that the Prime Minister espouses and that they as a Government say is that you can’t just have a strong economy if people don’t have jobs, and I echo that. You can’t have a strong economy if it doesn’t mean real jobs for real people. We are seeing fewer jobs being created under this Government every single month, and that is having real effects. So while we have the Prime Minister espousing the virtues of a low unemployment rate, what we have are more people on welfare. I don’t think it is just because sanctions have been dropped and there are no longer the same expectations that people are actively looking for work, although I do think that is having an effect and I do think that is part of it. But, equally, there are fewer jobs and fewer expectations on people as to what they will do and how they do it. If we don’t think that that will affect them and their children and their children’s children in the decades to come, then we are being sadly misled.

So a well-being Budget can sound good, and it does. Doesn’t it sound nice? Who doesn’t want to have good well-being? I care that you have good well-being, Agnes Loheni, and I wish you very well for being in this House and I look forward to working for you. But, actually, it’s only going to work if I get alongside of you and I help you and encourage you and see you do well, and that’s what we want to do for New Zealanders. That’s not what we see from this Government. What we see is rhetoric. What we see are good words, but we’re not seeing the actual actions that back it up. In fact, we’re seeing new Zealanders go backwards.

So let’s get to a few of those. When it comes to the numbers on welfare, that’s going up. The numbers needing food parcels have gone up and are in fact the highest that New Zealand has seen. The numbers on the Housing New Zealand wait-list have gone up. The number of people on welfare has gone up. What we have seen is that fuel taxes in New Zealand have gone up. We have seen the cost of food go up because it’s costing more to transport that food around New Zealand, so as a consequence, the dollar, the hard-earned wage, or even welfare, is not going as far as it used to. So they’ve got less money in their pockets because costs are going up.

Rents have gone up and they keep going up, and we are seeing more New Zealanders fall behind and become worse off because of that. Hardship grants, I think I said, are up—that’s a real problem. For the first time, more are needing hardship grants—more than those on welfare who are needing actual help with housing. That’s the first time we’ve seen that—so that’s been reversed. NEETs are up. We know what NEETs are: those are the young people that are not engaged in employment or educational training. That is up 26,000 people in the last three months. The number of NEETs is up 26,000 in the last three months. That is the highest number on record.

This is from a Government that espouses well-being and how much they care and how much they are going to do all of this good stuff. However, what we are seeing is the reality of it. Unemployment is up. There are 10,000 more unemployed people in the last three months. These are real people that are living real lives in this country and are hearing, and have heard, a lot of promises but have not had anything delivered. The Prime Minister herself admitted it when she said to New Zealanders that this will be the year of delivery—because last year certainly wasn’t for them.

As a fellow Kiwi, I actually hope that they do that well, because there are New Zealanders that are failing and whose lives are going backwards. They are suffering and, actually, I think they are in a worse position because they were given some hope. That hope is showing itself to be hollow. It is hollow hope that has been offered to them by a well-intentioned Prime Minister who either doesn’t have the means to actually do it or the team backing her up to deliver that for New Zealanders. So when one goes out there and promises tens of thousands more houses, when one promises people more jobs and better jobs and that their lives will be better, one better be in a position to be able to deliver that to New Zealanders, and that is not what they are seeing.

Another thing I will be concentrating on this year is around drug reform. I have a lot of questions that I think we need to answer before we get to a binding referendum on the legalisation of marijuana next year. In that case, we will need to know what the regime will look like. How are we going to legalise it? Will there be a market? Will the market be commercialised? Will it be big business? Is it just the not-for-profit that could sell it? Can you grow marijuana yourself? How does it fit with smoke-free New Zealand by 2025? What will happen with drug-driving?

Look, I’ve got a fairly neutral position on this one, and I’m not inclined to see people being criminalised or having convictions against them because they are adults that enjoy the odd joint, and I’m certainly in support of medicinal marijuana. But I believe that we have seen overseas jurisdictions enough that the New Zealand public can see what they will actually be voting for in the binding referendum. This is a Government that has an obligation and a responsibility to be showing them all of that. So far, I’ve been hearing that that work isn’t even being done, and I think that’s a shame. It is very typical. I’d even celebrate a working group on it—I’ve got to be honest! I would celebrate a working group on it. We’ve got a little bit of time, so we could put a working group together that actually means we could look at what the question will be, what a regime would be like if we were to legalise marijuana in New Zealand, so that when they go to the polling booth, they know exactly what they’re up for.

Mr Speaker—Mrs Speaker; Madam Speaker, I will go for. It’s nice to see you.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Hello. Happy New Year.

Happy New Year to you too, and it’s good to be here for another year ahead. I hope that the debates are fulsome. I hope we discuss more about New Zealanders and how we deliver for them, as opposed to the personalities and the insults that can be thrown around this House at times. I hope that we look at those that are currently suffering and were given great hope and aspiration and promises from a Government that has done anything but deliver for them. Thank you.

Can I say happy New Year to all the members in the House, even though it’s February, given it’s our first day back in the House. Can I acknowledge the new member, Agnes Loheni. Can I welcome you to this House on behalf of our side and wish you all the very best with your political career.

Can I start by saying how predictable that last speech was. And I love how she ended it by saying that she hoped there would be no personal insults or attacks on others, because I think she might have known where I was going to go following on from her.

Some of us accessed support through the State.

💬 Hon Member: No!

Yes, some of us did. Some of us accessed support through the welfare system. Some of us acknowledge how helpful that was with getting ahead. And we don’t pretend that we did it by ourselves, without the support of the State, or pull it out when it works in our favour. We certainly don’t go and pull up the ladder on other people after we have received those supports. Unfortunately, that’s not the case for all of the members in the House.

I found it really interesting to listen to David Seymour and also the deputy leader of the National Party when they talked about the welfare system. David Seymour said that he is fearful that we are going to squander what he calls “years and years of good work in the welfare sector.” Well, can I just say that that good work is definitely not reflected in a report I released last year which was called What happened to people who left the benefit system, whereby, after the welfare reforms were introduced by the previous Government, of 133,000 people that left the benefit system in 2013, in 2014—under their watch and after their welfare reforms—46 percent were back on benefit within 18 months. So if that’s what you call good work, then I don’t know what David Seymour’s doing here and I don’t know how he’s providing a service to New Zealanders.

We need to rearticulate the fact that 4.3 percent unemployment is the second-best unemployment that we have had in over a decade. The best unemployment rate was last quarter—under us again. So when they talk about unemployment going through the roof, I don’t know what statistics they’re looking at. In fact, I think they’re looking at the ones that existed whilst they were in Government and not the current ones.

I’m really proud of this Government, and I think that this Government has demonstrated a new kind of leadership, proving that it is possible to be responsible stewards of the economy while advancing concepts like compassion and kindness. We’ve made no secret of the fact that one of our key objectives is improving the well-being of New Zealanders and their families. We want every New Zealander to have access to world-class education and healthcare, to live in a home that is healthy and in a community that is safe, and to realise their potential. We will ensure that everyone who is able to is earning, learning, caring, or volunteering.

For too long—particularly under that Government—New Zealanders have not been able to access the services that they deserve. Our welfare system has often been seen as a source of stigma and shame rather than a valuable support that over a million New Zealanders every year interact with or rely on: disabled people, young people, senior citizens, parents, students, and those who are unemployed or not regularly working all use our welfare system. In fact, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) even provides support during natural disasters, as we have seen recently following the devastating fires in the Nelson-Tasman area. Under the previous Government, New Zealanders who accessed support from MSD were shamed and blamed—but not under this Government.

This Government has already achieved so much since coming into office, and I want to say that MSD has been a part of that. During the first 100 days, MSD played a critical role in our fees-free policy, the Child Poverty Reduction Bill, and, of course, our Families Package, which provided extra support for low and middle income families: 1 million people now have access to a winter energy payment, 65,000 children will benefit from Best Start each year, and 136,000 people have had an increase in their accommodation supplement.

As part of our confidence and supply agreement with the Greens, our Government agreed to overhaul the welfare system. As the Minister for Social Development, I am committed to seeing this through to ensure we have a system that is fair, accessible, and maximises the potential of everyone who uses it. This Government wants to make sure that people who come to Work and Income for support are treated with respect and dignity—that they get the support they are eligible for and are able to participate meaningfully in the communities that they live in. As the Prime Minister has outlined, we are committed to improving the well-being of all New Zealanders and their families and, actually, improving our welfare system is an important part of that.

Previously, the deputy leader of the National Party stated that hardship grants have gone up, that the demand on our Housing New Zealand register has increased. Well, let’s not pretend that that demand only came about in the last year. Actually, what’s happened, with respect to the housing register, is that all of a sudden, I think, New Zealanders are feeling a little bit of hope—a little bit of hope that this Government may actually have their best interests at heart and may actually be able to provide them with the types of support that they need, which includes housing, and, unfortunately, because of the cost of housing, in too many instances, it also includes support for things like hardship grants.

Under this Government’s watch, we’re not going to put people off from coming forward for support. In fact, they are legally eligible for that support, and we are going to make sure that we uphold our commitment to those New Zealanders who need it, whilst at the same time engaging in that very important building programme and doing things like building the State houses that New Zealanders need. And I’m proud of the fact that we’re part of a Government, in that first year, who have already built 1,200 to 1,300 new State houses. We stopped the sell-off and we started to replenish the stock.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: All put in place under us. All put in place under us.

That member who’s yelling out should be ashamed of herself because she was part of the creation of this housing crisis and did nothing to address the issues that New Zealanders were facing.

And so, yes, New Zealanders are feeling hopeful, and, yes, we are seeing more New Zealanders come out of the cars and the garages that they were staying in—under the previous Government’s watch—to actually seek out real housing support, and where we can, we will do.

Over the next year we are going to be rolling out changes—as we have for the past year—to our Work and Income offices. I do want to say that common sense, as I said, has finally prevailed. We recognise as a Government that it is of no use to New Zealanders if we kick them while they’re down. In fact, it doesn’t help them get ahead at all. It is much better when we put a hand out and help them up, and that is what this Government is about.

As part of overhauling the welfare system we have an expert advisory group that will be reporting back to us at the end of the month. And I have to say it’s really important to note that, yes, this is about reforming our welfare system, but it’s also about how we provide the best support we can to New Zealanders needing support for getting into work and getting into upskilling and training. As has already been mentioned today in the House, under that side there was very little investment in upskilling and training, and, in fact, we saw the demise of our polytechnics occur because of them, and now it’s time to reinvest in those spaces. We need New Zealanders to have the skills to fill the places with regards to work that will exist moving forward, and we’re focused on doing that.

Again I want to refer back to what was said today about beneficiaries and the number of people that are out of work. I think all too often what is forgotten or overlooked is that 50 percent of those that are on main benefits actually identify with having a health condition, a disability, a mental health issue, or an injury of some sort, and yet that side would still proceed to stigmatise that group of New Zealanders. Very little was done under the previous Government to actually support that group of people to get into employment. This Government isn’t about pushing people off into jobs just for the sake of getting them off benefit. We are about ensuring that they get into sustainable, meaningful employment to ensure that not only is life better off for them—

Order! Order! I apologise to the honourable member. Your time has expired.

Madam Assistant Speaker, thank you very much, and I’m very happy to rise and take my first call for 2019 and can I say happy New Year to you and to all members of the House. We’re looking forward to being joined by Agnes Loheni on this side of the House. She’s a wonderful person and she will make a fine MP, and we’re very much looking forward to her maiden statement.

The Prime Minister has dubbed this—somewhat ironically and in a way that I’m sure she will come to regret—the year of delivery. And what a wonderful way of pointing out how absolutely little this Government has done so far. It’s been the year of working groups and the year of thinking about policy that they didn’t spend any time working on in Opposition and now, apparently, it will be the year of delivery. But the only things that this Government has delivered are backward steps. The only things we’ve seen from the Prime Minister take us backward. So let’s have a look at them.

The very day after the Prime Minister announced the year of delivery, what did she announce? A massive backdown on KiwiBuild. That’s going backwards. All the promises—you know, if this was in the commercial world that would be a Fair Trading Act breach, wouldn’t it? “Elect us and you’ll get 10,000 new houses a year, maybe 1,000 the first year, maybe 300—actually let’s just not measure.” That’s a great step forward, Prime Minister. We’ve seen more strikes. How about that for taking us backwards; taking us backwards to the 1970s? This week alone, junior doctors and midwives—just in the health sector.

And speaking of the health sector, cancer wait times have gone backwards: under the National Government, four weeks’ maximum; under this Government, no targets, no accountability, people waiting eight weeks or more for cancer treatment. This is a Government that promised to be about kindness. Well, tell that to the people on the cancer waiting list who are being told that this Government no longer cares enough to measure and report on cancer waiting times.

The economy is slowing down. There is no question. The economy is getting worse under this Government and this Prime Minister has gone in record time from “Everything’s wonderful.” to “Don’t blame us. It’s not our fault.” In the speed of light she’s gone from one to the other as we are seeing the slowest economic growth in the last quarter in five years. We’re seeing 10,000 more people over the last quarter in unemployment, and that new jobs rate that Simon Bridges talked about earlier is a minuscule, a pitiful, 600 jobs a month created over the last quarter under this Government. That is an appalling backward step. That’s what’s being delivered by this Government.

The other area in which this Government is delivering a massive step backward is in the cost of living for New Zealanders. You go out there—and I’m sure members have over the summer been out talking to people—and the one thing you hear is that it’s getting harder and harder for those hardworking families in the middle of New Zealand who work hard, who do the right thing, who pay their taxes, to get ahead.

And just this week we’ve had another jump in average rents across New Zealand: now $40 a week more under this Government, thanks to their reforms—and remember this was the Government that said it was all about helping tenants. Well, how did tenants get helped if they pay $40 more a week in rent? And the Government was told. They had advice from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, they had advice from Treasury, they had advice from those actually in the sector that this would happen, but they knew better. Remember that? They knew better; it wouldn’t happen. It has happened. They need to get their head out of the sand, start listening, and start doing things that actually advance New Zealanders.

In the state of the nation speech, the Prime Minister talked about three planks of her economic plan. “Oh good,” I thought, “finally, we are seeing an economic plan.” What is it? The first one was an aggressive trade agreement. Well, how’s that working for them? The week after the Prime Minister gets back from Europe we see the EU threatening our preferred lamb and butter access. The week after she’s back we see the skids go on one of the most important issues for our exporters. And now we’re seeing exactly how much damage the Winston Peters wrecking ball has done to our relationship with China. This is our biggest trading partner. This is not about some race-based, jingoism, dog-whistle, out-on-the-stumps politics. These are the jobs of New Zealanders and that Government is putting it at risk by not caring enough to make sure we maintain a healthy, respectful relationship with our major trading partner. That’s why the Prime Minister can’t get them to pick up the phone. That’s why the Prime Minister is not going to China.

The second big part of the Prime Minister’s economic plan is tax: “We’re going to make the tax system fairer.” Fantastic. Somebody tell me how taxing small businesses, how taxing farmers, how making our capital markets less attractive, and how making foreign investors not want to come to New Zealand is going to be a good thing for the New Zealanders. I can tell you it’s not. It is a massive step backwards and it doesn’t matter how often the Government says the word “fairness”, taxing New Zealanders more, taxing small business, taxing farmers, and taxing retirement savings is bad for New Zealanders, and they’re not going to thank this Government for it.

And then, the third part of her economic plan—so two strikes so far, if you’re keeping track at home. The third plank: skills. Well, again, how’s that working for you, Jacinda Ardern? There were 10,000 more people in the unemployment lines over the last quarter; 26,000 more young people not in education, work, or training. The last Minister who spoke said she wanted to see every young person—well, so far, Carmel Sepuloni, it’s a fail. Under this Government, that number has gone up by 26,000. So I’m not going to sit here and have that Government tell us how much they care when they’re taking the people who need their help the most backwards. The costs are getting harder. There are fewer jobs. There are more people in the unemployment queues.

And you want to talk about housing. Well, KiwiBuild is a massive fail, but here’s one thing the House might not know. I remember Phil Twyford in the election campaign saying that no one would be sleeping rough under his Government. Well, let me tell you some figures he might not have heard in respect of emergency housing special needs grants. The month that the National Government left office, they were running at $2.2 million for that month; about 1,000 people—$2.2 million. Do you want to know what they were in November of last year—the most up-to-date number? It was $6.4 million and double the number of people.

Under this Government more than twice as many people are needing emergency housing assistance and they’re spending three times as much money because of their incompetence, their failure to deliver, their failure to have anything other than big words, hollow promises, and utter falsehoods to the people of New Zealand. That’s what kindness and well-being means under this Government: more people who can’t get houses, more people on the dole queue, more people getting hardship grants. That’s the reality of this well-being Government. We’ve got to get past the platitudes, the big words, and the global media photo opportunities and start having some accountability. There is zero accountability from this Government.

Look very carefully at the Prime Minister’s words in her statement today. She’s now talking about being measured on long-term changes in New Zealand. Do you want to know what “long-term changes” is code for? It’s code for zero accountability.

She doesn’t want to be measured on anything that happens in this term of Government, because she knows the measurements are all bad. She wants to talk about pie-in-the-sky, long-term accountabilities. Well, I can tell you that New Zealanders deserve more. They don’t deserve a Government that is so incompetent, so wasteful, and so lazy that they’re now taking $17.7 billion more tax from New Zealanders over the next four years.

💬 Matt King: How much?

They’re taking $17.7 billion, and that’s before the capital gains tax. But that’s not enough for Grant Robertson. He wants a capital gains tax as well, so he can come after you. Well, I say to that Government: stop wasting other people’s money. Stop spending it. Stop wasting it.

Shane Jones’ $3 billion slush fund is poorly planned: zero jobs, zero impact, $50 million on students who haven’t even turned up to do their courses, $2.8 billion on an utterly failed first-year tertiary fees policy, and let’s not even start on a failed KiwiBuild programme. If this Government stopped wasting, New Zealanders could keep more of what they earn. 2019 will see people realise that Labour means fewer jobs, higher costs, and Labour taking more out of their pockets. National, in 2019, is about jobs, opportunities, communities making decisions—not bureaucrats in Wellington—and more money in the pockets of hard-working New Zealanders. And every day in this House, we’re not going to stand here and face empty words and promises from a Government that is taking New Zealand backwards.

In recent months, highlighted again today, the hollow men and women of the National Party—and they are disproportionately men in that old-fashioned party on the other side—have been exposed for their shallowness. For years and years, they’ve run on a rhetoric that the then Opposition parties—Labour, New Zealand First, the Greens—couldn’t be trusted because we were tax and spend parties and we were going to break the bank. Neither of those attacks were pressed home in any meaningful way today by the Hon Simon Bridges, because they are no longer credible attacks. And absent those attacks, which were never credible but were run for years, the National Party is left bereft of ideas—bereft of ideas.

When they’re left with nothing but empty rhetoric, like Simon Bridges promising tax cuts while at the same time he’s undermined by Nikki Kaye as she burnishes her own credentials traipsing around the country calling for more education spending and for further pay increases for taxes and the current industrial dispute that they lament, why is it that they are incredible in their old attacks: “tax and spend” and “they’ll break the bank.”?

It is because facts tell otherwise. We have a Budget surplus under this Government. Net Government debt is now under 20 percent of GDP. People shouldn’t be surprised by that: the last Government, of which I was part, reduced net debt, including the super fund, to zero.

💬 Hon Member: Then what happened?

Oh, well, then what happened was that the National Party changed the measure so that they could ignore their abandoning contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, and they increased debt by about $60 billion to around 25 percent of GDP. This Government has reduced debt already to under 20 percent of GDP. We’re running a Budget surplus while investing in important services in health and education, which was so run down. Inflation is under control. Unemployment is low—one of the lowest rates it’s been for over a decade, and growth is strong.

Now, the other side, they toss off and they say, “Oh, they make excuses about the rest of the world.” So I thought I would just tell Amy Adams about what growth rates are in the rest of the world. In Europe, the average is less than 2 percent; in the UK, they’ve obviously got a few problems at the moment and some uncertainties; Japan is around 1 percent; in the USA, the growth projected this year is 2.3 percent, next year, 2 percent, in 2021, 1.8 percent; and in Australia, it’s under 3 percent. Advanced economies overall are at 2.2 percent. What about New Zealand? Better: close to 3 percent in the forecast period; our growth prospects are strong. China is growing strongly, but slowing.

The challenges of Government are never finished. It’s always easy under the National Party; they just manage things down. They take the good things that are done by prior Governments, they nickel and dime, they run down health and education services, they run up debt, they flog off assets, and in the end they leave big societal problems, like increasing inequality, a health service that’s struggling, education underfunded, and the economy really languishing.

Long-term solutions are what New Zealand needs—and I’m going to turn particularly to the part of the speech that the Prime Minister made about growing and sharing New Zealand’s economic prosperity more fairly. Long-term solutions are needed. Now, I haven’t got time to cover everything, so I’m not going to cover the social challenges that my colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni raised and which were spoken to by the Prime Minister earlier; I’m going to talk a little bit about our volume-to-value journey.

I heard Amy Adams there—she is so out of touch. She is an example of why the National Party aren’t just drifting down in the polls; they are plunging backwards in the polls because they are not listening to New Zealanders who know that she is wrong when she said that there had been no changes in economic management under this Government. We’ve introduced the research and development tax credit. We campaigned on it to be at 12.5 percent. What are we delivering? Fifteen percent R & D tax credit across the economy, a billion dollars of a tax break for businesses that invest in innovation over the next four years—a billion dollars to stimulate the development of the new points of comparative advantage that we need to increase the value of our exports to the rest of the world and to prosper in the world in this volume-to-value journey.

What else are we doing? Well, the regions in New Zealand—in fairness to the National Party, they haven’t just been ignored by them; it’s actually been many decades since there has been adequate attention paid to the growth prospects of the regions. Since the neo-liberal takeover of New Zealand in the 1980s, there’s been very little regional development. Jim Anderton did a bit, under the last Labour Government, particularly in the forestry area, but, other than that, there’s been virtually none, and there was certainly none under the last Government.

The Provincial Growth Fund, under the stewardship of the Hon Shane Jones, is making an enormous difference: $1 billion per annum spent in the regions. In some areas, it’s infrastructure. Gisborne said that their pressing need was roading expenditure so that they could get their goods to port in order to grow their exports and for their jobs to thrive in those export industries. In other areas, it’s the development of businesses that just need a bit more capital so that they can reach those overseas markets and employ more people. In addition to that, we’ve got the green growth fund, because we’re trying to achieve environmental growth within environmental limits, and the green growth fund encourages that, as does the Provincial Growth Fund.

It is true that there are rising trade tensions in the world. It’s not true that the Labour Party or the Labour Party in coalition with other parties in Government is the cause of them. The World Trade Organization (WTO) is under threat. We’re trying to help fix it. There is rising protectionism on a bilateral basis, and protectionist barriers are being erected in countries at an alarming rate, greater than we have seen for many decades. Now, what are we going to do about that? We’ve got to try and protect the WTO, but you need insurance against that because we don’t control that outcome, even though we influence it. So we’ve got a very strong bilateral programme and plurilateral programme. Obviously, the biggest news in the last year was finalising the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (CPTTPA). The prior Government had done some work on that, and we thank them for that.

💬 Andrew Falloon: Oh! Some work? You protested against it.

Well, a lot of work—a lot of work. It was actually started by the prior Labour Government under Phil Goff, but the last National Government, after a decade in office, couldn’t land it. We did. We don’t take all of the credit, but we take a little bit. It is so galling for them on the other side to have to admit that the Labour Government landed the New Zealand - China Free Trade Agreement and CPTPPA. We’re taking responsibility for the China upgrade, for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, and for the European Union agreement that the National Government couldn’t even get started. We hope to finish that on good terms.

In the last minute and a half, I want to switch to the environment. There are real environmental problems in the world. If New Zealand cannot overcome these problems, no one in the world can, and if New Zealand can’t or doesn’t, the world won’t. That is a very bleak alternative for our children and their children. We can do much better in New Zealand across climate and water. They’re the only two things I’ve got time to talk to today. Climate is being led by the Hon James Shaw. We are bringing forward a zero carbon bill this year. We are establishing the climate commission so that we can try and depoliticise the path towards net zero in 2050, when that target is set in legislation. There is great upside for New Zealand. Imagine not having that enormous oil bill, that big cheque that we send to Saudi Arabia and other parts of the world every year. Wouldn’t it be great if we were running ourselves on our own renewable energy sources, including in the electrification of industrial heat and transport and the development of a hydrogen economy. Great work is being done by the energy Minister, the Hon Dr Megan Woods, on hydrogen. We’ve signed an agreement with Japan. We’ve got the commencement of commercial activity by New Zealand, and international players are interested in our green hydrogen and the greening of our energy system. We will get wealthier as well as cleaner.

On water, the last Government oversaw the continuing decline in the quality of waters in our rivers. They spiked the national policy statement of Judge Sheppard. We are going to do better. Every river in New Zealand should be clean enough to swim in in summer without getting crook.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First with a good-news message for those people in the Opposition over there, a good-news message to the people of New Zealand, and a big, warm greeting to everyone, because despite the speech from the Leader of the Opposition earlier today, it’s actually good to be back. It’s good to see you all. Let’s get on with the work, shall we, because I’m looking forward to it, and this gives us an opportunity to outline what that looks like.

But I tell you what—and I do hate to be negative after that, but it was incredibly frustrating listening to the Hon Simon Bridges, who seemed to wallow and revel in the post-truth facts he was kind of spewing out at every opportunity in his contribution. I can only pick on one, because I want to move on to the bulk of my speech, but one example was his apparent—apparent—vehement opposition to a capital gains tax. And I say “apparent” because in the last year they were in Government, the National Party introduced legislation to the House which was a capital gains tax. Despite the fact that they tried at all times never to say the words “capital gains tax”, it was a capital gains tax and it was the National Party that introduced it to the House, and it was the bright-line legislation. So that’s just one example I picked up from the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution this afternoon.

Can I give my, I don’t know, condolences to the leader. His contribution didn’t start well. I’m not sure he knew what he was doing when he moved the motion to rebut the Prime Minister’s contribution. But here we go; he kind of got there. But what I want to suggest to the members opposite and the Leader of the Opposition is that as painful as it was to watch National operate under their “do nothing” mindset when they were in Government—“do nothing, do not disturb or do anything unless we’re picked on”—it might be a good way to run the Opposition. Let me make a few points about what it was that this Government, this coalition Government that I’m proud to be a part of, is having to pick up the pieces from.

Our regions are neglected. There was some mention from previous speakers about how long-term this neglect has been, this kind of post - neo-liberal movement back in the mid-1980s, but let’s be clear about this. The support base of the National Party is supposed to be from the regions—and I’m going to touch on that later on—but no MP over there, when they were in Government, stood up and decried the lack of effort, the lack of motivation, the “do nothing” contribution from the National Government.

In education we’re seeing skills shortages now because there was no money spent in tertiary education. I was part of that for a long time. I saw first-hand just how difficult it was for not only the staff but the students, having to cope with that supposed refinement of our tertiary education sector.

Then there’s border protection. Almost every other month, the very livelihood of this country was put at risk because of supposed cost savings from the National Party. Just about every other month there was some kind of infringement across our border, compromising the very lifeblood of our nation, and it was unbelievable: “Nothing to see here; let’s not do anything about it.”

In terms of homelessness and the lack of homes, they go on about the struggle to build homes, and it’s real and it’s tough, but we are getting on with it. We are building homes because we need to. They took them away. They demolished them. They refused to add to the pool. And here we are, still trying to deal with this housing crisis.

My next point is about the mental health crisis and the suicide rates in New Zealand. Their solution there was actually to take away money in nearly all parts of the medical services, not only directly through our health services but through our volunteer organisations and non-governmental organisations.

Next is roading and infrastructure, and their imaginary four-laning of just about every part of the country. It’s just unbelievable how they speak to New Zealanders about how this Government on this side of the House isn’t four-laning this or that road or this or that part of the country, because when we looked at the books and all the promises that were supposedly made, we saw that not a bean, not a cent, was allocated to those roading projects. It’s just unbelievable.

I turn to police and crime, and, unfortunately, the expansion of the drug market in New Zealand. Crime in New Zealand went up. The drug problem has increased in New Zealand, and I’m proud to be a Government member and a New Zealand First MP who said we’ve got to stop this. We’ve got to increase our police force. We’ve got to put resource there to stop the harm and stop the crime, and let’s try and create better, safer communities for New Zealand.

Another issue is our prison population. What was the solution to the ever bulging bubble of prisoners in New Zealand? I know—the National Party will spend over a billion dollars on a new prison and then spend at least $100 million more each year maintaining that. It’s just unbelievable.

For me, in the area of foreign affairs and trade—I’ve travelled the world and had the privilege of representing New Zealand in my role, and what I have seen from our team in foreign affairs and trade around the country is a rejuvenation of energy, a pride, an increase in not only resource but commitment to this country, and, actually, that has tangible benefits. What did they say? They said we’re going to increase our free-trade agreements by some percentage. Actually, what we need is more people on the ground eyeballing our trading partners, helping our businesses engage, and making it easier to do business overseas, and that’s what I’ve been seeing over the last year.

Geez, I’ve written about six pages of notes and I’ve just got off the first page. So I think it’s best to touch on, perhaps, the economy, because Mr Bridges—and, I’m sure, others in the Opposition—tried to talk it down. But as Mr Parker pointed out in his contribution, when you look at the rest of the developed world, New Zealand’s economy is growing faster and stronger—

💬 Hon Member: 0.3 percent.

—compared to the rest of the developed world. Yeah, 3 percent. Thank you. So it’s good news for New Zealand and the New Zealand economy, the regions, and the people in them. But this is about more than GDP and the growth numbers. The conversation and policy now, and the future direction of this Government, is about the well-being of New Zealanders. It isn’t an arbitrary number of GDP—it’s great to have economic growth, but how do we share that? How do people in New Zealand equally or rightly share in that growth—growth that’s from something other than rampant immigration growing the population in Auckland and property speculation supposedly making New Zealanders wealthier?

That’s not what we’re trying to do here. In fact, the latest statistics—despite the post-truth claims of the National Party over there with regard to the signing of the UN resolution—are that we’ve actually had a decrease in immigration, and forecasts are that it will continue to do so because, quite rightly, as has been pointed out numerous times, we have the right to make those decisions on behalf of New Zealanders when it is in our best interests to look after New Zealanders. Whether they’ve been here a day or whether they were born here, it’s our job to look after New Zealanders.

So with the political turmoil around the world, which others have touched on—I won’t go into detail there, because I see I’ve only got 40 seconds left. I want to point out that, as the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister have said, GDP in New Zealand is stable. It’s not only stable but growing at world-leading rates. We are carefully managing the books in terms of any potential future world shocks, and that balancing and that surplus is an important stabiliser for New Zealand as we move forward, but it’s there. It’s there, and we’re ready and we’re able, and I congratulate the finance Minister at the end of my contribution. Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker.

Well, wasn’t that a lovely contribution? I was thrilled to hear from Fletcher Tabuteau, the member who has just resumed his seat, that there is going to be an increase in trade of “some percentage”. Well! And he is one of the better members on the other side. I thought “some percentage” was pretty good, really. I also heard that, apparently, we are growing as an economy at an enormous rate of 0.3 percent in the last quarter. That does not seem like that’s an enormous rate of growth, and, apparently, it’s the highest in the developed world. I guess someone’s going to have to tell the United States that they are not in the developed world, because, clearly, they’re not if we are the highest in the developed world.

This man is actually one of the cleverest members of the Government, and I think we’ve had an excellent contribution from him, as opposed to the Prime Minister. Now, unlike many people, I have read the entire Prime Minister’s statement today. I have marked it with all sorts of little weeny things in there, and I was looking for something in here that would tell us how she intends to grow the New Zealand economy. I was not able to find much at all, really. I saw something in there that said there was going to be an upgraded free-trade agreement with China, but I’ve just got this feeling it’s not going quite as well as she might have thought, given that this was supposed to be the year of tourism between New Zealand and China and that that’s all being cancelled—and, by the way, not by New Zealand. So I think there’s possibly not much in there about it.

I heard some of the interjections from the Government side of Parliament. They were shouting out today to my colleagues, “Show us the money.”, because, apparently, they all watched a lot of movies during the holiday break. Well, I say this to them, show me the houses—show me the houses. I’ve heard that Prime Minister and that Government giving all sorts of excuses for KiwiBuild and Mr Phil Twyford. There are a lot of excuses, I guess, for Mr Phil Twyford. One of the things that has been said by that Prime Minister and that Government is that they’ve only had KiwiBuild for six months. What tosh. What rubbish.

💬 Hon Willie Jackson: It’s true.

We have—I can prove it. Money was being spent, announced, and delivered straight after the election in December 2017. They’ve had it operating now for 15 months. They’ve now got, apparently, 47 houses in 15 months. There was $2 billion in last year’s Budget—$2 billion. All the interim targets are gone, but, apparently, we’re all supposed to believe that there are going to be 100,000 houses built through KiwiBuild in 10 years, as though Phil Twyford’s got a hope in Hades of ever being the Minister of Housing and Urban Development in 10 years. I can tell you this: there’s no hope at all of that Government being here in 10 years.

But, in the meantime, what has happened in the private sector? The private sector has just got on. In the 15 months where Phil Twyford has been able to buy off developers 47 houses—just bear that in mind; 47 entire houses—the private sector has built a whopping 35,200 houses. It has built 35,200 houses, versus only 47 sold houses. Which is the failure? Which is the failure?

I’ve heard from the Government about what a failure the private sector has been in building houses. No, I don’t think they’re the failure; I think the Government is the failure.

When they look at why it takes so long and so much expense to build a house in New Zealand, what have they done about the Resource Management Act and planning? Nothing—not a sausage. Nothing. Zip—nothing. And why? It’s because they can’t agree with each other.

Well, I think we on our side are going to have to deal with all this, so that’s why we have got work going on right now on wholesale reform of the Resource Management Act, planning rules, provisions, policies, practices, and the Building Act. We are taking this time in Opposition—hopefully, only a short 18 months—to make sure that we have the work done, because the Government can’t do it.

In fact, what we have heard from Phil Twyford is “Well, it’s too hard to get houses built, so we’re going to have an urban development authority. That will take out all the problems when it comes to getting consents for Government-type buildings.” So my question there to the Government is: if it’s so hard for a Government to get anything done, then how come it’s OK for the private developers to have to go through that cost—because they’re the ones who are building the houses for ordinary mum and dad Kiwis to live in. Those are the people who know how to get stuff done, unlike the current Government.

I have also heard today from the Prime Minister all about our international obligations. I didn’t hear much about our obligations to New Zealanders. I heard an awful lot about how we need to strut along the world stage and we have to sign up to things like United Nations migration treaties. Why? When we questioned this from Opposition, the answer was, I thought, quite a cynical answer from the Government. It was that, apparently, “It’s not binding, so we’ll just sign it.” Well, what does that say about our international obligations?

What we know is this: this Government, with the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern as the Prime Minister and the Rt Hon Winston Peters, together—people will remember this—have signed us up to a migration pact that gives over sovereignty for so much of our immigration to the United Nations. And when we’ve questioned it, they’ve said, “Oh yeah, but it’s not binding.” So why sign it if it’s not binding? If it’s just the vibe, as Dennis Denuto from that excellent movie The Castle would say—it’s just the vibe—well, what it’s all about is trotting off overseas, showing everybody that, you know, you just want to be part of the in-crowd.

Well, in this particular case, how about New Zealand? How many New Zealanders got to vote on that? None. Will this even come back to Parliament? Probably not, but if it does, New Zealand First are going to vote for it. They’re going to vote for it. The Greens are going to vote for it. Labour are going to vote for it. We’re not voting for it. You’re out on your own, Government, when you start doing things like that.

I want to talk also about rail. I want to talk about rail because, apparently, it’s really important at the moment, particularly something called light rail—which I would call a trolley—going up Dominion Road. That was talked about by the Prime Minister in her speech, and you’d have to say, where does it go to? Well, I have made public statements asking how come we’re paying all these billions of dollars of fuel taxes that the rest of us are paying. Diesel, road-user charges, and fuel taxes—why are we paying for this? And you might say, “Well, because it’s good to get people from the Auckland CBD to the airport.” Except it’s not going to the airport; it’s going to Māngere. People might tell me that the airport is in Māngere. Well, it’s actually right on the side of Māngere. It’s not where this trolley, train, or whatever you want to call it, is going. It’s actually going to Māngere—and it’s in the Prime Minister’s statement. It’s not going to the airport.

That’s why her side should read her statement, and maybe she should. It’s telling us that, really, the plan is to stick people on a bus to then go from the Māngere town centre—

💬 Hon David Bennett: Go away!

—through to the airport. Well, it is true, David Bennett. It is true. That is exactly it.

💬 Hon David Bennett: That’s as good as the Hamilton train.

It will be just like the Hamilton train. Remember them campaigning on the Hamilton train? Whatever did happen to that, Mr Strange? Whatever happened to that? He’s a nice chap, too. He’s a nice, very pleasant person. He’s always laughing, because he has to.

We heard today some statements about what Labour were going to do. In housing, let me tell you what they’re doing. They’re buying Vietnamese flat-packs to put into New Plymouth. That’s how they’re going to solve housing—Vietnamese flat-packs. They can’t even get Chinese flat-packs—Vietnamese flat-packs.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: No. Well, China won’t sell them to them.

China probably won’t sell it to them. So no wonder Phil Twyford says that consenting’s all a bit of a drag, really—imagine trying to get that one through.

This Government doesn’t know what it’s doing. It doesn’t get stuff done. It is a Government that has spent 15 months of wasted money and time fluffing around with KiwiBuild—getting 47 houses that they’ve had to buy off developers because they can’t build a thing themselves. Hey, it’s only $2 billion of other people’s money! That’s what this Government has done—almost nothing.

E Te Māngai o Te Whare, ka tīmata ahau ki roto i Te Reo Māori. Tuatahi māku ka takatū tōtika atu ki roto i te puna o mahara. Ko ngā maharatanga ki ngā aituā maha ki roto i te raumati kua pahure ake nei. Ā, ka tīmata ake ki roto i a au ki tōku tupuna ki a Hone Bristow kua ngaro atu. Ki tōku pāpā, ki a Te Kopa Tīpene kua ngaro atu. Ki tōku tuakana ki a Alby Shortland kua ngaro atu ki roto i ngā wiki tata ake nei. Rātou katoa ki a rātou, ka kī tēnei, otirā te Whare, koutou o te pō, haere, haere, haere. Ka whakahokia mai ngā rārangi kōrero ki a tātou te hunga ora e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Me ngā whakaaro nui ki te hunga ki roto o Te Tau Ihu o te Waka. Te wāhi i patu kinohia ai e te ahi ki roto i te wiki kua pahure ake nei.

[Madam Assistant Speaker, I will start in the Māori language. Firstly, I will commence by delving into the wellspring of memories; the memories of those who have passed in the summer just passed. I will start amidst my own with my ancestor Hone Bristow who has passed away. To my elder, Te Kopa Tīpene, who has passed, and to my kinsman Alby Shortland, who passed in the recent weeks; may they rest with each other, and I say, and indeed the House says, to those of the underworld, farewell, farewell, farewell.]

After acknowledging those who have passed on over the summer and, of course, acknowledging the hardship faced by the people of the Nelson-Tasman area with what’s happening down there, I want to express to them that our thoughts are with them. Madam Assistant Speaker, can I say to you, and to one and all in the House, a happy New Year.

After another successful Waitangi Day—and it pains the Opposition to hear that: “after another successful Waitangi Day”—the names that were being shared on the marae to describe our Prime Minister were: Pirimia o te Aroha—Prime Minister of Love; Pirimia o te Rangimārie—Prime Minister of Peace; Pirimia o te Ngākau nui ki te Tangata—Prime Minister who has a big heart for the people.

If there’s one lesson that’s clearly been lost on the National Party, it’s that politics in this country is headed in a different direction. For politics in Aotearoa New Zealand now, the demands of our people are that we mahi tahi—we work together—and that we cut out cheap political shots and we focus on the matters that are important to our people. Some of those matters have been well-traversed by my colleagues, and I want to share a couple with the House in my contribution today.

I want to start with Whānau Ora. Much of the work that’s been done by the Government over the past year has been well described by the Prime Minister in her contribution. She also talked about the challenges that are in front of us as a Government and the need for us to do more, after what has already been a busy 12 months. She’s right, and after we’ve looked at all of the problems with the social systems, the social inequities in this country, I can say this: Whānau Ora is the way forward, where we as communities, where we as businesses, and where we as a Government put families at the centre of all decision making. We make sure that we look after them.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Why did you cut it, then?

We have not cut Whānau Ora. Let me explain to that side of the House exactly how Whānau Ora was set up.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Well, we know; we set it up.

Listen up—listen up: Whānau Ora was set up by the National Party simply for commissioning agencies to commission for outcomes. We haven’t cut it; in fact, that contract is still going. However, what we have found in the review that I established last year—and the findings will be made public very, very shortly—is that it could be done better. It could be done better, where we cut out the middlemen, where we make sure that the money and the resources go to where they’re needed: right to the whānau, whānau who make up communities, whānau who make up hapū, and whānau who make up iwi. There is not one proof of evidence that the National Party can produce that says we have cut Whānau Ora or we are cutting Whānau Ora. In fact, I challenge them: if there is, table it in the House. Let this House debate it. Let the public see what it is. I can guarantee that there isn’t one.

However, there is a positive future for Whānau Ora—there is a positive future for Whānau Ora. Off the back of the mental health inquiry, we know—we know—that simply dealing with an individual isn’t going to be enough to make sure that their mental well-being and the well-being of their wider family is indeed on the up and up. What we do know is that if we put the resources in the right place, if we make sure that they have a safety net of whānau and an environment that will help them, their mental well-being can only increase. So I am positive that Whānau Ora—off the back of much of the work that the Government has done in the past 12 months—is the answer. I really believe that.

What I also took heart from in the contributions today was, of course, the discussion around the environment. In the last term of Parliament, when I sat on that side of the House, we heard the Government talk about their plans for the future protection of our environment here in Aotearoa New Zealand. The only problem was that plan was on ice for 30 years. They kicked the can down the road on eradicating pests from our forests and from our natural environment—they kicked it down the road to some year when, I know for a fact, most of the members on that side of the House will no longer be in the Whare, will no longer be in Parliament. What we have done—and I’m proud of this Government in our work with the Green Party and, of course, with New Zealand First—is to make sure that what we all know is the rivers are polluted.

Over the summer, I challenged my colleagues to a bombing competition. There aren’t many rivers in this country that you can actually swim in, and we can all agree on that. So why is there such a challenge and a problem with us all focusing on making sure that rivers in this country are swimmable and making sure that water quality and the environment are actually healthy? That should be an important focus for this entire House, but, sadly, the National Party kicked it down the road, and I am proud that this Government has picked it up to make sure that not only are we focused on making sure that our environment is clean but also that the way we conduct ourselves is actually in line with making sure our environment is healthy and sustainable. I mean, the last Government was too scared to ban single-use plastic bags—scared. The Māori word for that is “mataku”—mataku. They didn’t do it; we did it. This side of the House did it—the Labour Party, the Green Party, and New Zealand First. We did it; they did not.

One of the other lessons that the other side of the House didn’t learn was clearly, by the way they treat other people, that you need friends in Parliament—you need friends. You need friends to be able to govern, you need friends to be able to push forward the causes that our people care about, and I am proud of the leadership of our Prime Minister in the way that she is able to work collaboratively for the collective good. With New Zealand First, with the Green Party, it’s clear we are the Government that clearly has the mandate of the people, and I am proud of that—I am proud of that. I also want to speak in the final two minutes that I have about some other kaupapa that are specific to Māori and, indeed, young people.

Can I commend my colleague the Hon Willie Jackson. Mana in Mahi is a fantastic kaupapa, and when the announcements were rolled out up in Te Tai Tokerau over the past week, it was clear that in communities where it’s needed the most—like Kaikohe, Moerewa, Kawakawa, dare I say it in the Kaipara—they could see the value of Mana in Mahi and, in fact, could even identify that their own young people wanted to be able to benefit from such an important programme and such an important kaupapa. We know—and it’s been said many times over—that the way we look after our young people will be how our country will be into the future. And I commend the Hon Willie Jackson for the vision and the focus he has in making sure that our young people have the opportunities through Mana in Mahi to contribute not only to our economy but also to their well-being.

Can I just say, in conclusion, my grandfather, the late Sir James Henare, was right when he said: “Kua tawhiti kē tō haerenga mai, ki te kore e haere tonu, he nui rawa ō koutou mahi ki te kore e mahi nui tonu.”, which means, “We have come too far not to go further, and we have done too much not to do more.” And I’m really excited that the 12-month plan set in motion by our Prime Minister and the Government of New Zealand is one that will reach the aspirations that our people aspire to and, most importantly, will make sure that this kōrero rings true across Aotearoa.

Kia ōrite te noho a te Māori me te Pākehā ki runga i tēnei whenua. Kāti e Te Māngai o te Whare, tēnā koe, tēnā tātou.

[This statement rings true across New Zealand: that Māori and Pākehā should live in equality on this land. Well, then, Madam Assistant Speaker, greetings to you and to all.]

When the Prime Minister stood somewhere in New Zealand and announced that this would be the year of delivery, few New Zealanders would have thought the Prime Minister’s definition of delivery was, in her very next breath, to drop all targets around KiwiBuild except that there will be 100,000 houses—and I’m sure she whispered, “We hope”—and then the very next day to also drop all health targets as well.

So if delivery means not being held to account, not being accountable, and actually not doing the things you’ve said that you will, then I think there will be many, many more Kiwis who are concerned by this. It’s easy for a Prime Minister to stand up and make great headlines, but for the people who voted for Labour in the last election because they believed in this KiwiBuild dream, who are now told there won’t be any houses for them any time soon—but even if there are a few, we’re not going to count them and tell you about them—well, actually, they will be disillusioned because the Government is not delivering upon their promises. Simon Bridges, our leader, went through a very, very long list of all of the things they have been promising and talking about that just aren’t quite working out.

You know, we hear about the Provincial Growth Fund and all of the jobs it’s going to create—actually, they’ve done one job a day and after 54 days decided to sit down and have a rest, sit on the couch, because it’s created 54 jobs only, at a cost of more than $400 million a job. When we have a closer look at where these suggested jobs that the Minister has been talking about are to come from, well, they’re just not going to arrive. They’re just not going to arrive, because not only is it wishful thinking but you just need to dig into some of the advice Treasury is giving around the Provincial Growth Fund before you realise just how very much trouble it is in.

It’s very, very easy for a Government to spend taxpayers’ money—very difficult for a taxpayer to work hard and to earn it—but here’s the thing that the Government is going to find: you can’t spend that billion dollars twice. They owe it to hard-working New Zealanders to spend it well, and that’s not happening anywhere at all at this moment. A slush fund—well, it’s one heck of a slush fund, but I guess that’s the price the Prime Minister was willing to pay to become Prime Minister.

You know, when it comes to these things, we need to look outward. We’re a small country that must trade with the rest of the world. We must trade with the rest of the world. We produce too much to be able to consume here, and our economy demands that we are outward-looking and that we are putting our best foot forward.

The Prime Minister in her speech mentioned giving up a bipartisan approach to an independent foreign policy, and I take absolute issue with that. The Prime Minister’s memory is not as short as she is suggesting to New Zealanders it is. Where was their independence through the whole discussion and negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), when they were out holding up their signs against the best interests of New Zealand? And lo and behold, as soon as the election was over, they adopted the work that had been done. They said it was so very, very different. Well, I’m yet to meet anybody, apart from the odd troll on Willie Jackson’s Facebook page—and you know it’s not him writing, because the spelling’s correct—that actually believes that they went in there and after a moment they changed it all and it’s a different agreement.

What about the deployment of our troops to Iraq, when they came out and said they were against it on that side of the Government, and to a man and to woman they were opposed to it? They didn’t back our forces. Where was the bipartisanship then? Well, I say to the Prime Minister, the definition of bipartisanship in an independent foreign policy is not “just go along with anything that the Government says and does”. The reason for that is our foreign policy and our trade policy are too important just to leave it up to a whole lot of people that don’t like to travel and are becoming amateurs in their approach to our relationship with important countries around the world.

I want to just give a few examples of the things that are going on with some of our partners around the world in countries we’re close to, and the Prime Minister’s involvement. Of course, she’s just been overseas to the United Kingdom. We heard that, when there, she signed a deal with the UK—negotiated on the spot and signed a deal that, the week before, Australia had signed. Now, it’s very important, in as far as Brexit’s concerned, that what the Prime Minister signed said there will be recognition of standards for our exports from New Zealand to the UK in the case of Brexit. But we didn’t hear a single thing from her about market access, nothing about tariff rates, nothing about quotas going into the UK, nothing about, actually, what type of access she is demanding for our exporters in the UK market in a post-Brexit trade negotiation. What we heard were soothing words about something that was going to happen anyway. I guarantee, as with much of the TPP, that the agreement she signed is exactly the same, word for word, as the one Australia signed the week earlier. Not so much going on, and the important issues to New Zealanders were not dealt with.

She then went on to the European Union, the EU, and announced that there would be a deal of high quality that would make us feel better—comprehensive and progressive—in 12 months. Well, I hope she’s correct, but what we didn’t hear from her is one word about market access and what the Government would demand and how they would stand up for New Zealand exporters in the EU market to make sure that we are treated fairly. A deal with the European Union will only be of value to New Zealand if this Government and the Prime Minister can deliver the same that Canada got, which is virtually open access for agricultural products to that market.

The moment that she returned to New Zealand, the European Parliament passed a resolution saying that New Zealand will lose its preferential access for butter and lamb that we’ve relied upon for 45 years—taken away the moment she left. We didn’t hear from her anything at all when she was there about the special tariff rate quotas, about lamb, about butter—nothing at all—but it sounded good when she was there.

As for our so-called very good friends the US, the Government should do everything they can to make sure we keep a positive relationship. It is important to us. It’s a big trading nation. But the challenge that we’ve got is that when TPP came in at the end of last year, and this Government stood up proudly to claim the work of the last National Government—this is the agreement they protested against—and I called, on behalf of the National Party, for the Government to do everything they could to get a trade deal with the US or bring them back to TPP, the duty Minister at the time, Andrew Little, angrily scoffed and said, “We need to realise how small we are and be a bit realistic. It’s all a little bit too hard.” Well, that type of thinking would never have got the original TPP. It certainly would not have got the revised TPP. But the one thing this Government has delivered with the US is higher punitive tariff rates upon our steel and aluminium exports to the US. The trade Minister said, “Well, we don’t export them very much.”, but it didn’t happen to Australia.

Then we come to the important relationship that we have with China. The Prime Minister has been trying to get there for the whole of last year. She is the first elected Prime Minister not to visit China in the first 12 months of her Government since before Robert Muldoon, and when the media asked her last year why it was that she wasn’t going, she said, “Scheduling issues are a bit busy around Christmas.” Well, two things, Prime Minister: the Chinese don’t celebrate Christmas, and I would call it scheduling issues too if I couldn’t get a visa. What we’ve heard this week is that over the last two years, the New Zealand Government—both Governments—and the tourism sector have been planning for the China-New Zealand Year of Tourism. Just last year, the tourism Minister, Kelvin Davis, was proudly saying how much it would do to enhance the relationship. Secretly, a few weeks ago, they took his announcement down from the website—that the Chinese would come to New Zealand to open that year on the 20th of this month. And now we find out it’s because China are not able to find a Minister to send here.

This is a $30 billion relationship we have with China. It’s one of our most important trading relationships. It’s as important as any other relationship we have anywhere else in the world, and this Government is not working hard to fix it, to maintain it, and to make sure it works for us. Mark my words: if the Prime Minister doesn’t get there, as her office has been telling the media, in the first quarter of this year—the first quarter of this year—it will be a very strong signal that is being sent about how little attention they pay to that relationship, and the failure of this tourism meeting, and all the other things we’re starting to see, will not only be laid at the feet of the Government but at the feet of the Prime Minister. Words are very easy, and, as the Deputy Prime Minister said, “Words are important.” The words we need to hear are their commitment to international affairs to make sure that we’re putting our best foot forward and that they will deliver for Kiwi exporters.

I want to commence my remarks today by echoing something that the Hon Paula Bennett said earlier today when she said, “It’s great people love her.” The difference is, when we say on this side of the House, “It’s great that people love her”, we’re talking about the captain of our ship, the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern. On this side of the House, we are exceptionally proud of the work of our Prime Minister and of the statement that she has tabled today, which sets out a clear vision and a clear plan for building a better, more prosperous and inclusive New Zealand for every person.

Why is it that there is such huge and building support for our Prime Minister and her style of leadership? I think it’s because she’s a leader who is caring, but it’s also because she is a leader of significant substance. She is focused on leading a coalition Government that will build a stronger, inclusive economy that deals with the issue of well-being so that our economic growth is actually felt by the people in our communities and makes their life better. She is a leader who, if she is on the international stage, if she is representing the Government at the most grassroots levels in our community, makes Kiwis feel proud. It was only one week ago that I was at the Chinese New Year celebrations, hosted by the Auckland Chinese Community Centre in Auckland. There was an incredible reception for our Prime Minister when she appeared at that event, and the overwhelming feeling that I got from that is that people want to be with her because they know that she is there with them and she is there working for their best interests and for the well-being of them and their families.

But, of course, when Paula Bennett said those words, “It’s great people love her”, she wasn’t speaking about her leader. She was speaking about Judith Collins. I think it is instructive that she couldn’t bring herself to say those words about her own leader. I think it’s because, over the last six to nine months or so, the leadership of the National Party has been completely rudderless. We have leapt from bizarre, Breitbart-style conspiracy theories about the UN migration pact to fearmongering around sensible reform of our cannabis laws, and, from the Leader of the Opposition, just anger—so, so, much anger every time that he speaks. In my view, this stems from the failure of the Opposition to get over the fact that, 18 months ago or so, the people of New Zealand chose a different direction for this country, and they simply cannot let go of that old-style National Party arrogance and the belief that they have a divine right to govern. Well, they don’t. The people of New Zealand choose who will govern, and they chose a different direction.

I don’t actually particularly blame Mr Bridges for these difficulties. In fact, I think I feel sorry for him. He is simply a symbol of the incoherence of his party in the post-Key era. That previous Government was one that for nine years coasted along on the charisma of that man, on his skill with the selfies and the talkback radio, pumping economic growth up through heightened immigration and a house-price boom. They got through and, as the Prime Minister said, did and delivered very little in those nine years. So in the vacuum that has appeared in the post-Key era, we don’t actually have anything coming from the Opposition—virtually nothing positive and forward-looking in terms of the ideas that they present.

I thought it was incredibly instructive that there was, basically, one thing that Mr Bridges got passionate about in his speech—one thing—and that was tarmacking as many acres of New Zealand as he possibly could with four-lane highways. Was there any ambition or any word about lifting kids out of poverty? Was there any ambition or any word about getting our young people into sustainable employment and building up their hopes for the future? Was there any word about tackling the challenge of climate change? There was virtually nothing, but, boy, was that man excited about building four-lane highways. That was about the beginning and the end of the vision from Mr Simon Bridges, the Leader of the Opposition.

I was sitting in my office late last night listening to the greatest rock band in history, Pink Floyd, and their timeless track from The Dark Side Of The Moon, “Time”, and some words came on in the penultimate verse of that beautiful melody that I thought might apply to Mr Bridges as he surveys the landscape at the moment:

Hanging on in quiet desperation

is the English way

The time is gone

The song is over

Thought I’d something more to say

But the good news is that this Government has a lot to say about our plans for the year ahead and, I hope, for many years ahead, in fact. This is a Government which is focused on building an economy that doesn’t just work for the few but for the many. It’s true that in this country we have had around about 10 years of solid economic growth. That is a good thing, and some credit goes to some of the management of the previous Government for that. But what is the point of that economic growth if we have people who don’t have houses, if we have kids living in poverty, and if we have rivers and streams so full of cow manure that people get sick from wading within them? That is what makes this Government different. We have a focus on the well-being of our people, our families, and our communities that goes beyond the narrow, dry, dusty accounting standards that the previous Government held itself to account for. This is a Government that believes that well-being actually matters, that we have to work harder and go deeper and think more carefully about the decisions we make if we want to make sure that all of our kids, all of our tamariki, have hope for the future and can live good lives, if we want to make sure that we have strong families, and if we want to make sure that that growth actually benefits the people that all of us in this House serve. The Government, over the last year, has made an incredibly strong start in this area.

It was instructive, as the Prime Minister pointed out, that one of the first things that this Government did on coming into office was to cancel the tax cuts put in place by the previous Government that would’ve most benefited people, like the members of this Chamber, on high incomes. Instead, we replaced that with a Families Package, the overwhelming benefit of which goes to the low and middle income families of our country, where the needs are felt most keenly. I was so proud that as part of that package, we implemented the winter energy payment, because I cannot believe that anyone would accept that the older people of our country, our respected seniors, should have to sit and shiver through the winter because they’re afraid of turning on the heater because they can’t afford the bills. Well, this Government did something about that. We said that was more important than tax cuts going to members of this Chamber.

I’m proud that on the well-being front, this is a Government which is actively supportive of the living wage, because it’s our view—it’s the view of the Labour Party, the party that was founded by the working people of New Zealand; I know it’s also the view of our coalition partners, New Zealand First, and our support partners, the Greens—that every working New Zealander who gives their labour, who goes to work, who contributes to the productive economy in New Zealand, should be paid enough to live a dignified life on. There’s a lot of talk from the other side of the House about the importance of work and wanting to crack down on bludgers, and all of this sort of stuff. Well, if we value work so much, then why don’t we pay people enough to live on?

So I’m exceptionally proud that in the Budget last year, this Government actually said that we’re going to pay our core State servants the living wage. Because of that direction—because of the movement and the work done by people in the trade unions, in the churches, and in the community groups who pay the living wage—it is a movement that I think is unstoppable, and with this Government in power, more and more people are going to be paid enough to live a dignified life on.

A bit more of a word on well-being from a portfolio perspective. I’m very proud to work alongside our Minister for Ethnic Communities, the Hon Jenny Salesa, who is doing exceptional work in this area to make sure that New Zealand’s ethnic communities—over 600,000 people in our country—are included in our country and are supported to contribute to making this a better country for everyone. I’m very proud to serve as her Parliamentary Under-Secretary, and one of the privileges of that role is that I get to see what is happening on the ground. I get to visit the gurdwaras in Auckland, where the people in those communities are coming together to feed people on low incomes and to feed the homeless people of our city because they see the need there. I’m proud to see the work of organisations like Gandhi Nivas, a community organisation that is doing incredible work to make sure that we get alongside the men who are the perpetrators of family violence and we surround them with the support they need and bring them to a place of well-being so that they can change their ways.

What I’m coming to with this is that there’s sometimes a critique of well-being from the other side of the House that it’s somehow a woolly, academic concept that comes from the 12th floor of Treasury, or something like that. Well-being is understood at the grassroots in our communities. Our communities instinctively get it because it’s the glue that makes our communities work, and the difference between this Government and the previous one is that we understand that, and we’re going to get aside our communities and we’re going to fund them and support them to deliver that well-being. Our focus is not simply going to be on cutting taxes and hoping that the market takes care of it. We’re going to be a Government that says that well-being matters, and we’re going to work with communities to deliver it.

I’m exceptionally proud of the statement that our Prime Minister tabled this morning. It speaks to her qualities as a leader, it speaks to the vision of this Government and the three parties that make it up, and it speaks to our belief that the people of New Zealand deserve a Government that supports and enhances their well-being. It’s going to be a busy year, and I look forward to it. Thank you.

I’m pleased to speak in this debate, but, firstly, can I acknowledge the speech by Michael Wood. Isn’t it telling that half of his speech was dedicated to bagging the Leader of the Opposition, rather than talking about what’s actually in the Prime Minister’s speech? And why was that? The reason for that is that actions speak louder than words, and it is incredibly telling that in Jacinda Ardern’s state of the nation speech, what is she saying? “This is going to be the year of delivery.” Well, newsflash to Labour: you have been in Government for 15 months. It’s not OK to wake up almost halfway through your term and not accept that you will be held accountable for what you have or have not delivered.

I want to address what Michael Wood has just said about well-being. I’ll tell you what well-being looks like. Well-being looks like answering to the person whose rent has gone up by $40 a week, and to the family who is paying $20 extra a week for fuel—they know what well-being is. They know that that extra hour or that extra hour or two that they are not going to be with their families is because they’re having to pay higher fuel taxes. The exporter who is deeply worried about the relationship with China—this stuff matters. So we don’t want to get a lecture on this side about what well-being means when the Government is doing a range of things that actually really hurt families, and a classic example of that that was mentioned in the latter half of that member’s speech was the tax cuts. He constantly said, “We cancelled the tax cuts that would give to a few.” Well, what we know on this side of the House is that three-quarters of families were worse off as a result of those tax cuts.

So look, I thought that I would dedicate a little bit of my speech to talk about what the Government is actually delivering. I’ll tell you what the Government is actually delivering, and I call this “Let’s not do this, but let’s review this”. So what we have are more than 200 working groups. That is at least $190 million. That really, really matters. We know that the Government wasn’t experienced. We know that they didn’t have a policy plan. But we have a Government that is absolutely strangled in reviews at the moment, and that affects the delivery of policy for New Zealanders.

We also know that they have played a blame game in terms of National. Every second statement is a crisis. Every second statement references National’s record in Government. We know that they’re trying to erase the Canterbury earthquakes and the global financial crisis. Look, again, we are 15 months in, and I don’t believe that that is going to cut it this year. The Government actually needs to start delivering in a range of areas.

But the reality is—what people are saying to us—is that in all of their flagship areas, they are failing. They came into Government with huge aspirations around housing—of building 100,000 houses in 10 years—and I want to acknowledge Judith Collins in this. She has completely demolished Phil Twyford in demonstrating that it is not KiwiBuild; it is “KiwiFlop”. Now, do we all want to do better in terms of housing? Absolutely. But it is unacceptable to not take responsibility for the fact that instead of a thousand houses in terms of the target, I think we’re in a couple of hundred territory. But there is no way that the Labour Government are going to meet their targets in terms of housing. So we have a situation where not only is the Government strangled with reviews and still blaming National but a key flagship policy which they went out there and absolutely sold to a whole lot of young people is failing.

There is another area that we know that they are failing in, and that is, again, the huge promises to the regions—a $3 billion Provincial Growth Fund. How is it—how could it possibly be—that, as the Leader of the Opposition has said, Shane Jones has become the “Minister for Wellington” and we have a situation where you have 54 jobs and to every job we have two bureaucrats? There will be regions that will hold this Government to account in terms of that $3 billion in promises. Again, we hear a lot about well-being, but the reality is that if your economy is failing and you have an additional 10,000 people in unemployment, then how is their well-being going if they are now on the dole? The reality is we are hearing complete—and, again, I have to be a bit careful in the House and I can only use certain words—spin from this Government in terms of the economy.

We know that we have had a situation where business confidence is tanking. I’m the member for Auckland Central. It’s not OK for the Prime Minister to make statements that aren’t true. Business confidence has dropped, investor confidence is at a two-year low, unemployment is up by 10,000, and we have a situation where people have additional taxes like fuel taxes, and it’s not OK in terms of the PM making economic claims that more families will benefit from the Government’s Families Package when you have a situation where three-quarters are, in fact, worse off. It’s not OK for the Prime Minister to make statements like, “Wages are rising faster than the cost of living.” when the reality is the labour cost index grew at 1.9 percent in the last 12 months—exactly the same rate as inflation.

This is a Government of spin. They have woken up nearly halfway through their term, their major flagship policies are failing, and the only thing that they can do is either bag the Opposition and still play the blame game or literally try and spin their way out of it.

Let’s go through the rest of their flagship policies. When it comes to education, we have a situation here where we’ve got 18 reviews in education. We’ve had huge ideology. We’ve seen Chris Hipkins literally spend the first year of his time in office dismantling everything that National did, from national standards—gone—to partnership schools, which actually—[Interruption]—for those members that are making comments, helped a whole lot of vulnerable young people. Communities of online learning—scrapped. Cohort entry—again, changed. Now we have these Tomorrow’s Schools proposals, and, again, National has said that we are happy to work on things where they make sense in terms of education. But what we’re not happy to do is centralise our system and put a whole lot of power away from parents and into the hands of bureaucrats.

Again, we’re seeing a bit of a pattern here—Shane Reti will be talking about this tomorrow—but this idea of a typical nanny State Labour Government trying to centralise and take power away from communities is certainly a hallmark of education. Again, we have this inexperienced Government that has major policies flailing. We have them basically reverting to spin. On this side of the House what we are trying to do is make sure that we get around New Zealand. We’re going to be delivering eight discussion documents in terms of policy. We believe that, ultimately, if that side of the House is not going to do this, then we’re going to have to, actually. It’s going to be National that is going to have to do this for New Zealand because we have a situation where Labour are literally trying to spin their way through Government. We also have a situation where they are one of the most lack-of-transparency Governments that we have had. Again, I would call this, “Let’s hide this.” We saw this with two Ministers going down last year. But when all of us get our Official Information Act requests we will see that they are the least transparent Government that we have ever had.

Again, on this side of the House, we’re not going to take any lectures around well-being, because we know there are a range of New Zealanders that are struggling. What well-being means to them is their fuel prices being lower. It means their rent not being as high. It means that they don’t have additional taxes, whether it’s tourism taxes or capital gains taxes. It actually means funding education rather than putting money into officials or into bureaucracy. The reality is that this is a Labour Government that has reverted to type, has only just woken up, and is still working on its policy. I don’t think that New Zealanders are going to see that as good enough, particularly in a situation where the economy is tanking and where we have major issues around business confidence, unemployment, investor confidence, and now, obviously, this situation in terms of China.

Again, we don’t want to be negative. We are out there on the ground, working on policy, and ensuring that we have the best ideas possible to win next year. But I would argue that what we on this side of the House need is for this Government to finally do something. Let’s do something, Labour, because people are struggling and it’s not good enough to spin your way out of major failure in terms of policy.

I understand this is a split call—five minutes.

Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. It’s a pleasure to stand and take a call today in this debate on the Prime Minister’s statement. I’d like to wish everyone a happy New Year. It’s good to be back here in the House; although, it didn’t feel like that at 6 o’clock this morning when I realised that I would have to be getting up and coming in. But, anyway, I want to talk about change.

The Hon James Shaw talked about change earlier on and that New Zealanders voted for change. At the last election, they voted for change very clearly. They’d had enough of the status quo. Yes, they had, Mr Simpson. You might shake your head, but I’m standing on this side of the House and, quite clearly, this is the side that is in Government and that the public of New Zealand voted for.

Now, I’ve been sitting here listening to things and I want to talk about the change side of things. Some people don’t like change, right? But the reason that we are actually all here is that we ourselves—and that includes the people sitting opposite—wanted to make a change. We want to make things better; we just have different ideas about how to get there or what that might look like. But what we knew on this side of the House when this Government was sworn in was that the status quo was not an option. Things had to change. Our people—our mums, dads, brothers, sisters, and our elderly—were living in or close to poverty. We had families who couldn’t afford to send their children to school in the correct uniforms and with all the books and things that they need. We had elderly people choosing not to turn on their heaters in the winter because they simply couldn’t afford the power bill. We had a new working poor, where we had two-income families barely able to make ends meet. State houses were being sold off. Kiwis were becoming less and less able to buy their own home. That dream of owning our own homes was slipping away.

💬 Chris Penk: How’s it looking now?

That’s a really good question. Actually, we are rebuilding our homes. I’ve heard lots of criticism from the Opposition around KiwiBuild. The Hon Nikki Kaye called it “KiwiFlop”. Well, I tell you, you say that to those people who are living in those KiwiBuild homes that have been built, that they have shifted into, and that they could afford to buy and live in, which they wouldn’t have been able to under the previous Government, because how many homes did the previous Government build? What was it? Oh, that’s right: zero.

They chose to sell off State homes. They chose to let them sit and rot away and do nothing about it. Well, we won’t do that. This is a Government of change. This is a Government that is doing things differently. When I say “differently”, I mean “better”—far better. We are bringing kindness and compassion back to the forefront as well as ensuring that we have a strong, well-performing economy. We are running surpluses. We’ve got the lowest unemployment we’ve seen in many, many years. Over the past year, we’ve achieved great things with our children and families being at the centre of the things that we make and at the heart of our programmes. We are fixing our hospitals and our schools. We’ve got the winter energy payment. There have been elderly people who have said to me that that is one of the best things they’ve ever had available to them, so they can turn their heaters on in the winter and not worry about it.

We have lifted 350,000 families’ incomes throughout New Zealand with our Families Package, and I am so proud of that. I am proud that our families are not having to live in poverty and that they are not having to choose whether they should pay the power or whether they should buy food and they are not having to make those really difficult decisions. What I really like, though, is that with the rise in the minimum wage the necessities of life are no longer going to be “nice-to-haves”, because necessities should not be “nice-to-haves”. That’s not fair. We are raising the minimum wage this year to $17.70 an hour. As the Hon Kelvin Davis mentioned before, people have said—or there’s the rhetoric going around saying—“Oh, jobs will be lost.” etc., etc. That is unproven and has been every single time the minimum wage has increased. In May, we are going to see a well-being Budget introduced—a world first, and I congratulate Minister Robertson on that. I am so proud of the work that this Government is doing, and we are only just beginning.

I call Marja Lubeck—five minutes.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. I echo all the sentiments of my colleague Jo Luxton there. I am absolutely proud and it’s a real privilege to be able to take a call in this debate on the Prime Minister’s statement today. We heard the Prime Minister outline the work that we have been doing and the very ambitious programme that we have in place to build a stronger and fairer country for all New Zealanders. There are many, many things to be proud of in this programme. We are also very proud of the new kind of leadership that we are seeing in this Government. It’s a new kind of leadership. It’s also a fiscally responsible leadership. This Government is running responsible surpluses, but at the same time we are meeting those big challenges by investing in them.

One of the previous speakers—I think it was the Hon Judith Collins—made an odd comment during her contribution. She questioned this side of the House when we asked the Opposition, rightfully, to show us the money. I think it’s odd to draw attention to the fact that they, obviously, are unable to show us the money. I did read it in yesterday’s New Zealand Herald article. It said, “National won’t … say if [they plan] to create an independent body to cost political parties’ policies before an election.” Now, of course, National cannot support this legislation, because it would mean transparency. It would mean they have to tell us how they are going to fulfil all their promises and all of their policies. How could they feasibly pay for something when they are going to pay everybody more and when they are going to build four-lane highways all over the country but, at the same time, give tax cuts? So it doesn’t make sense at all.

Now, I talked about this Government’s ambitious programme because it’s a far more positive and uplifting story to talk about. My colleague Jo mentioned the lowest unemployment rate in a decade. We are creating a record number of jobs, but, as the Prime Minister already told us, it is not about the numbers. It’s about the quality and it’s about the wage level of these jobs. We have seen years and years of erosion of employment rights.

Now, the Hon Nikki Kaye mentioned that actions speak louder than words, and, yes, we saw under the actions from the National Government nine years of a decreasing share of the economy going to working people. At the moment, what we’re seeing is that less than 40 percent of our economic growth is actually going to working people. Under the previous National Government, they cut the pay and working conditions of hard-working Kiwi people. National, by doing so, has exactly shown what their view is of hard-working Kiwis. They have undermined and they have put us in a race to the bottom, but what we have done—this coalition Government—is we have stopped that race to the bottom. We have changed that employment legislation. We are giving New Zealand and its families who have been locked in this low-wage economy an opportunity to get ahead. We are doing the mahi to tackle the issues, and our legislation will ensure that New Zealand will grow and prosperity is divided more evenly.

Many New Zealanders—as my colleague Jo Luxton mentioned before me—can’t make ends meet. They’re doing it tough. So one of the very first things we did was we rolled out the Families Package, making improvements and lifting the income of over 350,000 families. Now we know from feedback that this is making a massive difference to the lives of so many people. After nine years of neglect, it is about time that we made a change, and we’re getting on and making a difference.

We announced in December that the minimum wage is going up from 1 April to $17.70 an hour. Again, this is benefiting about 209,000 workers and their families, and that puts us on the way to increasing the minimum wage to $20 an hour by April 2021. This will mean that hard-working Kiwis on the lowest incomes will share in the growth, rather than what the previous Government has done—leaving them behind.

A common theme that we’ve heard from low-wage workers is that they’re worried about being able to pay the bills, pay the basic cost of schooling, buy vegetables, and buy fruit for their families, and they’re having to choose between paying the rent or maybe paying bills or paying for groceries for their family. So this Government is making life better for working people. The Hon Peeni Henare mentioned the beautiful Mana in Mahi programme. I too commend Minister Willie Jackson, because this is really looking at the people that have been left behind by the previous National Government. It’s looking at the 18- to 24-year-olds, giving them a future, and giving them an opportunity to gain an apprenticeship and a useful qualification to set them on the road to a future.

So our Prime Minister has said it already: we are very proud of the work that we have been doing. There is so much more to do, but guess what? We are doing just that.

Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. I acknowledge you and wish you a happy New Year, and also to all our colleagues that are here as well.

During the Christmas break, once I’d hung up the suit and put the shaver away, I was given the deferred maintenance list by my wife. She said, “This is six years old.” So there were things to be done, and in particular she wanted the trees to be cut down at the back and the hedges to be trimmed. And I thought, “Oh, but they look nice and leafy. They look healthy.” She said, “Yeah, but they’ve grown tall. You just need to do that and you’ll understand why.” So out came the chainsaw and the hedge trimmer. As I was cutting away, what actually happened was it exposed that there were vines that were growing that were actually killing the hedges as well—there was rubbish that had sort of gathered in there. I suppose the analogy that I give for that is that once you cut away from all the leafy stuff and you get down to the substance, you then tell the tale of actually what’s happening in that situation.

So we had all this wonderful rhetoric from a Government in its first term telling us about the wonderful things that it would be doing: be caring and kind, be tolerant, grow the economy, and make a difference. But the truth is, one year on, that once you’ve cut down and trimmed down to look for the substance, the substance isn’t there.

So let’s go to that. It’s an interesting thing that the Prime Minister herself in her speech, in her first paragraph, would admit that, actually, we’re not doing as good as we thought we were. In her first paragraph, she says this: “There remains much to [be done].” In other words, why would you say that unless you knew that, yes, you’d made promises, and the reality is that you couldn’t quite keep the promises that you’d made, as well. And here’s the tale of the story and the tale inside of that because, when we think about all of the things—and as I’ve gone through the speech like many of our colleagues here; we’ve read through—what we hear a lot of is consulting, working groups, advisory groups that are coming through, and we’ve heard a lot about that. But I went a little bit further. I decided to actually pull out the list of these different working groups, just so that we had an idea about the work that they were doing.

To the listeners that are out there in the public, you’ll know—or you may not know—that there are actually now 233 working groups, at an average cost of about $1.9 million. It’s contested on the other side, but they need to know that this information came from Government officials themselves through an Official Information Act request. So we didn’t fabricate that number. It’s actually officials themselves from the Government who’ve given us an average. So on average it’s around about $290 million—I just want to state that—for 233 working groups. Well, hey, they’re working groups; maybe they’re trying to do a good thing.

So let’s have a look at some of these working groups. There’s a Government review to look at how to control the prison population. Well, Mr Kelvin Davis will know that that’s important. That’s what he’s trying to do. That’s his mahi; that’s his work. There are Government reviews about six contracts for new charter schools. I know, and also too my good colleague over here knows, that the fact is that those charter schools struggled. Why? Because they wanted to retain the principle of trust that they had originally under the National-led Government, but they had that as well.

But here are the ones that start to get a little bit testy, and maybe out there in the public they may question: “Was there a need for it?” Let’s take this one: the review into how Australia and New Zealand can work together digitally. Work together digitally—I’m not so sure about how important that is to the economy, but that’s another thing. There are freedom camping working groups out there, and a Whānau Ora review panel. We know there has already been a review. At a cost of just under a million dollars, we had another working group.

There is a concern out there in the public, because a Government that is now here governing, that had nine years to prepare, has not prepared. They don’t have a plan. In spite of standing up and saying they “will lead, not just govern.”—and those were the words from the Prime Minister—we are not seeing that in this situation.

So what’s the concern out there in the public? The concern is that, yes, there sounds like there’s compassion, but is there competency? Is there competency in this current Government to be able to do what it says? In the Prime Minister’s speech, she said, “We will keep working to modernise transport services in Auckland, by progressing rail from Māngere to the inner city, to give our largest city a world-class, environmentally friendly transport network.”

Just yesterday, out there in the public, in the New Zealand Herald and on Stuff, there were questions in regards to that very project happening. I want to quote this from Chris Darby, who’s a current Auckland City councillor and the chair of the transport committee in Auckland Council. And what they are saying is this: “Yes we’ve had the meetings. Yes we’ve had the consultancy, and we like that active style of participating. The difficulty is there has been nothing of substance”—and I quote his words—“to bring other councillors in on this project.”

The public are now saying these words: “We’ve seen all the stardust. We’ve seen all the promises. We’ve seen all the convenience of saying, ‘We are compassionate and we are caring.’ ” But what they are saying is this: “Where is the competency and, more importantly, where is the substance to make a difference?” For all the talk around transport and what they would they do to improve that, again, those who traditionally would be supporters of this Labour-led Government are now saying this: “Due to the transformative nature of the project, it is vital that ministers and elected members [of] Auckland Council have [a] meaningful and regular engagement, as it is local communities that will be directly affected, both positively and negatively.” The concern now is the impact it will have on our local communities. So you can make the promise, but if you can’t deliver, then you shouldn’t be making that commitment to our constituents and even to our communities.

I see the Hon Willie Jackson over there, and he’s probably proud of the Mana in Mahi programme that’s been initiated. Here, the Prime Minister talked about innovative programmes. It’s a programme, and it talked about the whole aspect of the apprenticeship schemes to increase the number of those going into the different trades. As a tradie myself, I think it’s a great thing. But, you see, that’s not innovative and that’s not new because, under a National-led Government, we increased the reboot scheme, and that allowed for both the employer and also the apprentice to have an allocation of funds for their tools and also for their training. They use the word “innovative” when there is nothing new inside of that as well.

The Prime Minister got up and talked about innovation and things that were new in regards to the Pacific. And so I thought, hey, that’s great, and, being previously the Minister for Pacific Peoples, I wanted to see something new. Where was that innovation? The only innovation that they have included is to increase the funding to a programme that we had initiated. It’s called the PESS scheme—the Pasifika Education Support Scheme.

There is no innovation. There is nothing new. In other words, it continues to reinforce the point that there is a lack of substance and there is a lack of competency from this current Government to deliver in the areas that it has promised to the people.

There are a number of things, and let’s talk about the housing issue. I know that people on the other side, and members and others, asked what the National-led Government had done. Well, I’ll tell you what it did in the nine years. We inherited in 2008 stock that was run down, and there was a lack of respect for the people that were living in those homes. I know; I was part of a community in Glen Innes in Auckland, which had the largest State housing stock in the whole of New Zealand—around 2,500 homes. And what we did as a National Government was to ensure that they were fit for purpose, they were warm, they were drier. On average, around $300 million was spent in regards to that scheme. People have said that we were selling off our State houses out to the public. That’s not true at all, because under a National-led Government we were again putting power in the hands of the people. We started up community housing providers who took over the allocation and the administration and organisation of those homes.

You see, the thing that I’ve become concerned about is that the party that declares itself the people’s party and talks about power to the people is removing that very power from the people. The Hon Nikki Kaye got up and talked about education, and I’ve been on boards of trustees for almost 20 years through the schooling years of my children. The great thing about Tomorrow’s Schools is that it put power in the hands of the people and around boards of trustees. In other words, they were able to participate with the decisions and the direction of a school through its charter. And now we are having this, where under a Labour Government they are now removing that. Why? They’ve shared their concerns that there was a lack of governance. I was part of the Ministry of Education, which was improving governance for those parents who put their hands up to be participating on those boards. We saw the increase in confidence. What we are now seeing is the fact that under this Government, the power for people to participate is being removed, and that’s got to be a concern.

So I hope that the message that goes out to our communities is that the underlying issue of concern being raised is that there is a lack of competence but, more importantly, there is a lack of substance to the plans and to the vision, supposedly, for this country. I hope the fact is that we will continue to hold them to account on all the issues of concern that are being raised. We’ve seen it time and time again. There is nothing new. There is no innovation. There are no new ideas. Instead, it is constantly, through the advice of the public, about trying to give them the idea to govern and to lead this country. If you are going to lead, then make the right decisions. Make sure you give the power back to the people because that’s true governance, that’s true leadership, that’s true democracy for this country of Aotearoa New Zealand.

I move, That this debate be now adjourned.