General Debate

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

I think it’s apt to acknowledge the leadership of this country. When we look at the example that our Prime Minister has displayed, not just since 15 March but in her whole time as the Prime Minister, what we are seeing is somebody who leads with care and compassion and is getting the results.

What this Government is doing is focusing on the issues that matter most to New Zealanders. The things that matter most are health, housing, education, mental health. As Minister of Corrections, I’m in the position where I see up close and personal the results of a system, of a Government, over the previous nine years that neglected those very areas that are most meaningful to New Zealanders. I get to see those people in prison who didn’t have the best of educations, who weren’t cared for by the Government, who the mental health system missed out. They missed out on what they needed, and, unfortunately, under the previous Government, despite a declining crime rate, the prison population was skyrocketing, and that was mainly because they simply didn’t believe that there was anything that they could do.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Lock them up—that’s how you get crime down.

We’re focusing on a strong economy and we’re focusing on surpluses. Now, I hear Mr Brownlee is shouting out there “Lock them up—lock them up.” That’s exactly the mentality that proves that the previous Government absolutely didn’t care about New Zealanders. The reality is that when people end up in prison, it’s often because things have gone wrong in their lives in these areas where Governments could have intervened earlier to make sure that New Zealand is a safer, better place.

The Minister of Health, my colleague David Clark—he inherited a mess. He inherited a system that was rundown. The infrastructure was rundown, the system was rundown, health was under-resourced, and now he’s having to patch up the mess that was left over the previous nine years. Then I think of my colleague here, the Hon Chris Hipkins, who also inherited a mess in the education system—a demoralised teaching workforce, under-resourced. Mr Hipkins has now set in place a plan that is going to address the issues that he’s inherited. Teachers were leaving the profession at a great rate of knots. We’re now having to undo that mess that they left behind.

But mental health is one of the big things that we’re really having to address, and I have to acknowledge the work of Jan Logie, the under-secretary. She’s doing fantastic work around family and sexual violence. Now, I was talking to Mike King, New Zealander of the Year, and he’s been doing a lot of work around mental health, and I’ve got to acknowledge the work that he’s done. I said to him, “Mike, just what exactly is the link between family and sexual violence and suicide?” He said to me that it is the number one cause. It wasn’t until this Government came along that we actually started to address the number one cause of youth suicide and mental health issues in our young people. It’s long overdue, and I’d just like to acknowledge again the work of Jan Logie and the fact that this Government is putting an emphasis on these very areas.

So, what else has this Government done? The minimum wage went up on 1 April. It’s now increased to $17.70 an hour. A couple will be $100 better off because of the decisions that this Government has made. So $100—what are people going to spend that $100 on?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Ten thousand more job seekers.

On their bills. They’re going to spend it on food for their families—and I don’t know why Mr Brownlee is opposed to families having a bit more money to spend on food for their family, or for clothes for their children. Mr Brownlee there is calling out. He doesn’t care about the impact that his previous Government’s policies had on families and on young people. So the winter energy payment is something that this Government has come up with. Now, I was talking to a kaumātua up north—this was last year—and I said, “Did you get the first winter energy payment?” And they said, “Yes.” “What did you spend it on?” “Power bills.” That’s the very reason that we have the winter energy payment. Kia ora.

There are so many things that this Government is doing that are making a practical difference to the lives of everyday New Zealanders which they can feel and know that we’re a Government that are doing the things that really matter. Take the well-being of our people, the security of our people, and also ensuring that there are greater opportunities within all our communities.

I just want to focus on the legislation that is about to follow. We will be taking those practical steps—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member won’t, because the member can’t anticipate an order of the day.

We have already had debates in this House about what it will take to make our society safer. Removing semi-automatic guns out of our society will ensure that practical steps will be taken by this Government to realise that aspiration.

I want to come back to the types of initiatives that people can feel and know that we’re making a very practical difference. Just on 1 April, changes to the minimum wage—lifting it to $17.70—will, in many pockets, deliver approximately $48 a week, and that will make a huge difference to address the cost of living issues that on a day-to-day basis, people know that this matters.

We’re also removing secondary tax for those modest- to low-income families who are working two jobs to make ends meet. Removing secondary tax will make a practical difference to their lives. In fact, we understand that it is important to have an economy that is thriving so that everybody can participate in it, and we want it to work for everybody, especially the modest- and low-income people.

That is the difference between what this Government is doing and what the Opposition criticises. We know that by continuing along this pathway, more and more New Zealanders can realise the benefits, but it looks something like this: we understand that as we address those important things, people have to feel that they really know what we stand for. We do stand for families. If we consider the range of changes that have impacted on families: the Best Start payment to help those families with those costs of having children, especially in their early years; the winter energy payment for our old people on fixed incomes—the ability to have a little bit extra during those winter months to pay the power bill will make a difference; ensuring that we have extended paid parental leave for mothers who are anxious about how much time they spend before they go back into the workforce—that will matter; ensuring that we’re increasing the rate of the orphans benefit and the unsupported child’s benefit is something, very early on, we realised needed to be rectified; also the foster care allowance, because, sadly, far too many of our children are in foster care, and those good families that are looking after our children do need support. These are the practical things that make a difference to the lives of people that we represent and that we will continue to represent.

Overall, what does that look like? We’re really keen to ensure that the issues around child poverty are addressed in ways that we can see a material difference in the lifetime well-being of our children, our most vulnerable. That’s why the range of changes in the Working for Families package will, indeed, ensure that approximately 384,000 families on average will get a little bit more in their pocket, and more children will be able to be more secure.

I’d like to come back to an issue that my colleague Kelvin Davis raised, because, fundamentally, what the signal is is that we’re a Government that’s prepared to tackle some really difficult issues so that people can feel the benefit of where our focus will go. Just last week, I attended the justice law reform hui with Māori, and they are very encouraged by the direction this Government is going in, because they want to partner and be a part of the solution. They know things need to change. They are looking for solutions within their community—

💬 Hon Andrew Little: They had a voice.

They have a voice, when, previously, under the last Government, they had nothing. They are seeing a light at the end of the tunnel and a way in which they can participate, which I believe will lead to lifetime outcomes for those who are most vulnerable in our society.

It all comes back to that. All of this is about how people feel the changes that this Government is making. I would say that because we are continuing along the track that we have been, the 100-day plan, continuing with the types of reforms that build a safer society and care about people and their well-being and ensure greater security in old age, they will feel the difference and know this is a very different Government.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. March 15th this year was the best and the worst side of modern New Zealand. We all know about the terrible atrocity—that hateful crime that we saw—but also that morning we saw the best of New Zealand. I was in Aotea Square in Auckland, where, in 20 years working as an environmentalist, I’ve never felt so optimistic, so hopeful, so energised, so proud of our young New Zealanders who were part of the climate strike, who stood up and showed leadership in action. I’ve never been so optimistic in all my time as an environmentalist.

Yet I was also reminded of the Greta Thunberg quote, who kicked off the climate strike movement globally. She told us, “I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to act as if the house is on fire.” The house—our home, our planet—is on fire. It’s burning. It’s warming. It’s drying. It’s acidifying. It’s flooding. It’s drowning. Frankly, it’s dying as a place for these kids and their future. Yet, today, it was announced by OMV, the Austrian oil and gas giant, that they want to embark on one of the most ambitious, largest oil-drilling programmes in New Zealand’s entire history. Over 11 years, they want to drill up to 10 wells, costing $300 million.

In an age of climate crisis, looking for more oil we can’t afford to burn is like your neighbour’s house being on fire and you don’t give them a hose; you pour petrol on it. In fact, that’s exactly what it’s like. Looking for more oil in an age of climate crisis is like pouring petrol on to the fire, because it’s fossil fuels like oil and gas that are responsible for climate change. People every day are told to switch off the lights, to turn the thermostat down a degree, to eat one less meal of meat, yet it is just a hundred companies like OMV that are responsible for 71 percent of the world’s climate change pollution.

New Zealand’s future isn’t more drilling. It’s not more rigs off our coast, threatening our beaches; it’s more clean energy. Yet National wants more of it. This was the party that was quite happy to give tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer subsidies and tax breaks, that gave away free Crown data, that funded conferences for the oil industry, that hosted lavish junkets for oil executives, that passed under urgency the Anadarko amendment that took away people’s human rights, that spied on people trying to keep fossil fuels in the ground, that literally called the navy out on hapū protesters.

Now, fossil fuel extraction and the question of it is the litmus test of your climate change integrity. Thousands of well-meaning actions by individuals are rendered meaningless if companies like OMV can drill more fossil fuels and release that pollution. The Greens know this, and that’s why we stand against deep-sea oil drilling, more fracking in New Zealand, ending fossil fuel subsidies, and why we’re for clean energy. We want to see solar panels, insulation, and more clean energy.

In my last minute, I want to speak to those climate change strikers. I was so proud as a dad that my two kids were out there joining them, and as a grandfather, I want to be able to look those grandkids in the eye and say that I did something about the greatest crisis of our generation. I want to tell those climate strikers—the tens of thousands of them—that the Green Party is listening to you. I want to tell you that, in Government, the Green Party is acting. We’re going to pass the zero carbon Act. We’ve got a 100 percent renewables target, and we’re acting and we’ve stopped offshore oil exploration permits. We stand with you when it comes to the defining question of keeping fossil fuels underground.

A quote that stayed in my mind at the time of the strikes was from Judith Collins. Do you know what she told the climate change strikers? Their little march won’t achieve anything. But do you know what? People like her said exactly the same thing when women said, “We would like the right to vote.” People like her said the same thing when people said, “We want to be able to marry the person we love, even if they’re the same gender.” It’s people like her who said the same thing when New Zealand dared to stand up to nuclear madness.

They’re wrong. Those people are dinosaurs, and if they’re not going to be part of the solution, then just get out of the way. The only thing we know for sure is that when we do nothing—when we allow more pollution like this, when we allow more fossil fuels and a climate crisis—nothing will change. But when we say yes to saving our home, to saving our planet, we can change the world.

I’m pleased to speak in this general debate. I want to reference what we heard from the deputy leader of the Labour Party, Kelvin Davis—that it’s all about focusing on the issues that matter to New Zealand. Well, after doing 70 meetings across the country, and after discussions on education, I’ll tell Mr Davis what people told me about the issues that matter to this country: it’s the teachers that are on their third strike—the first strike in 24 years, and they haven’t got settlement. The issues that matter to them are workload, and pay, and additional learning support. That’s what they care about. The fact that this Government—and this Prime Minister, frankly—are refusing to deal with the stalemate is very worrying. That matters to teachers and it matters to parents.

I know what we’ll hear from the other side. The other side will say that it was us that created this. The reality is that in every point in history, we are handed a different set of circumstances. Under our Government—the National-led Government—we dealt with the global financial recession and we dealt with the Canterbury earthquakes. This Government has billions of dollars of choices, and let’s talk about what they’ve chosen to spend their money on. They’ve chosen to spend their money on good-looking race horses. They’ve chosen to spend their money on $10 million for Westland Milk Products. They’ve chosen to spend their money on their fees-free policy for students instead of dealing with the real issues in our classrooms. There are many additional learning needs and there are real cost of living issues.

Then the other thing I want to talk about is that the reality is you have a certain amount of time in Government. The Minister is halfway through his term, and he is undertaking huge reforms in education—vocational reforms, Tomorrow’s Schools. I’ll tell you what I heard from the people of New Zealand. They said, “Nikki, we want you to support reasonable and pragmatic changes in education.” Actually, they said, “We want to strengthen our education system.” National passionately believes that we need to do this, but what they also said is that if we want to have enduring reform in education, we cannot go at breakneck speed. We cannot know what the cost of this is. We cannot know what the detail of this is. It is totally unreasonable to be merging every polytechnic in the country and to be doing that at breakneck speed. It is totally unreasonable to be transferring all of industry training to polytechnics and to be doing that at breakneck speed.

It is totally unreasonable to be restructuring the jobs of 2,500 boards of trustees in New Zealand, of literally tens of thousands of teachers, at breakneck speed. I am pleased that today the Minister has acknowledged that there are about 6,000 submissions around Tomorrow’s Schools. I am pleased that he has acknowledged that he will extend the deadline on that. Please, Minister, if we want to get enduring education reform, then we need to work together and we cannot go at that breakneck speed.

It is about priority, and the reality is there are choices here in the budget, and we will hold this Government to account for the broken promises that they made, and the high expectations that they raised when they were campaigning. I want to give an example of that. Tomorrow, on the steps of Parliament, regardless of what political parties’ policies are, we are held to account for the promises that we made, and what we heard was around the postgraduate allowances. The Minister said today that regardless of it being in Labour’s manifesto, it will not be delivered until next term. The reality is that a manifesto is about this term. We know there are more than 18 broken promises. [Interruption] Well, what I say to the Minister there is, actually, that that Government has never been transparent and released exactly what the coalition agreement is. So the reality is Chlöe Swarbrick is going to be turning up on the steps of Parliament and arguing for those postgraduate allowances, and the reality is New Zealand First have run the cash.

We are very clear: we need transparency around costings. I’ve got principals and teachers turning up to my meetings saying, “Nikki, not one more dollar spent on officials. We want it spent on front-line education services.” So you will hear from our speakers about priority, Mr Davis. Yes, Kelvin Davis, this is a question of priority. Yes, Kelvin Davis, this is a question about the fact that this Government has been handed opportunities that we didn’t have, and we will hold you to account for what is an ideological, centralised system in both vocational education reforms and Tomorrow’s Schools.

Why does the National Party pick these special debates to humiliate themselves? Why do they think they will get away with it? What we just heard is from a former Minister in the education circles, and she said the National Party—and these words were incredulous—are passionate about this. Unbelievable. She talked about the teaching profession that, apparently, all of a sudden now have discovered her when they hadn’t known her for the last nine years and think that she’s the harbinger of salary rises when, over the last nine years, they failed to deliver what this Government promised in the first year. Those are the facts. We promised in the first year to deliver teachers what they hadn’t got in nine years. So if their salvation lies in one Nikki Kaye, then I kind of think that these teachers need a bit more education, especially when it comes to realpolitik.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Why are they striking?

Can I just say—well, look, Gerry, we’d give you a going-away present but you’ve got to do your part first. I mean, why did Gerry come along to this House for a start—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

Well, Mr Brownlee has long had a use-by date, and some of his colleagues know it. Can I tell you that when I heard the Hon Nikki Kaye talking about the politics, there was one glaring thing missing, and you probably will not be surprised to know that it was missing, because the party over there that poses as the good managers of Government can’t even count. They can’t even do the mathematics. What was the debt of politics that we inherited? Come on, please tell me. What was the debt, pray tell me, ladies and gentlemen—the debt that the present Government inherited where politics were concerned? It was $100 million—just like that. But to think that somebody can go through speech training school and talk about being passionate and hope to get away with it—just unbelievable.

Can I just say, this is the image, of course, they’re portraying from the Opposition benches. I say New Zealand First does not start at shadows, and that’s the reason why, when we listen to half these public polls carried out by some of these flighty people upstairs here, which don’t stack up against the tandem of history, so to speak, we just ignore them. We know those polls for 26 years have been absolute rubbish. What’s my evidence for that, if I’m talking to the press gallery? Well, my evidence for that is me and my colleagues. What on earth are we doing here if your polls are so right? And now the National Party, the wise old guys, know that. They know just to ignore the polls, but one thing they do not ignore is what is being internally told to them in their polls and, dare I say it, in our polls as well. The National Party is in the 30s—the National Party is in the 30s. Despite going out there and screaming about the capital gains tax and every worst nightmare about to befall the country, they’re in the 20s, and when the 20s—this is what’s going to happen now. The Hon Nikki Kaye, can I just say—I happen to know more about politics than she does. And can I just say this: you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to work out they’re not going to come for Mr Bridges first. No, no—they’re going to come for poor Paula. She’s just turned 50.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

She’s doing her best.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

Oh, the Hon Paula Bennett. She’s turned 50. She’s done her best to get ready for the new challenge, and all of a sudden it’s goodnight nurse, because that’s how hyenas and jackals act. They never go for the biggest one. No, no—they go for the weakest one. The second reason is because the other one they’re going for, the “Crusher”, can’t run with a female No. 2 in the party. Just work it out. If you ever get in trouble and you can’t work it out, give me a phone call and I’ll tell you how it goes. This is a business I know something about.

So they’re going to go for poor Paula and then it’ll be all on for young and old, and they’re going to go for someone whose business and commercial background just does not bear investigation. These people know it. Mind you, if you’re Mr Brownlee and you used to be running an illegal casino for five weeks, you kind of think anything is legal. But it won’t wash, Mr Brownlee, and we intend to make it very, very clear.

In terms of what we do here, New Zealand First, of course, is the voice of common sense and practicality. We’ve ensured an equitable balance between the employers of this country and the workforce of this country. We’ve provided enormous stimulus out in the provinces and the regions where so much of our wealth is created, and we’ve restored, dare I say, integrity on the global stage both diplomatically and strategically. Now countries listen to us. Now we go and talk to all of Islam and they salute us. What did they do? They left there to pass a motion that United Nations supported unanimously. Guess why? Because our diplomatic interventions are successful.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to have a slot in the general debate here today, and I want to primarily turn my attention to the tumultuous reforms of vocational education. I want to cover a couple of topics. I want to cover the disrespectfully short consultation period, implications for Māori. I want to cover job losses and the damning Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) report from yesterday.

Let’s start with the consultation period. No one is happy with a six-plus-one-week consultation period—absolutely no one. The Minister tells us that there are some who are pleased, that actually they want to speed up the consultation, but when I ask him in written questions, “Who are these people? Can he identify them, even organisations?”, he declines. He declines because they don’t exist. It’s a fiction in his mind. There are no people who are pleased with the six-week consultation period. I think it needs some explanation that the Minister declined the Victoria University name change and is on record with one of the reasons being that the four-week consultation period was too short. Really? One institution, and four weeks is too short? Sixteen institutes of technology and polytechnics, 11 industry training organisations (ITOs)—that’s 27. That’s 27 institutions, and six weeks is OK? How does that work? How do we explain that? It’s disrespectful.

Māori at a recent hui at Hopuhopu, a hui led by Des Rātima NZOM, confirmed that this is a disgracefully short consultation period, that in no shape or form is it consistent with Treaty of Waitangi protocols for consultation. What they did was—the hui and, indeed, other constituents around the country—they looked for their Māori representatives to express their concerns to Minister Hipkins. They asked for their elected representatives to express their concerns—their concerns for the short consultation period, their concerns for Māori and Pasifika training, and their concerns that industry training is not broken. The polytechnic sector may have some work to do, and, indeed, there could be some stuff that’s done around the industry training sector, but, fundamentally, industry training is not broken. It’s being thrown at the polytech sector as the fix and the band-aid.

We know that the Minister is disparaging to the industry training organisations, because we know from a meeting with Skills Active Aotearoa last week, a medium-sized ITO, that the Minister said to them, “I took something from the polytechs and so I had to give them something back, so I gave them the ITOs.” What did you take from the polytechs, Minister, and how comfortable are you horse-trading apprentices across the sector? I am very uncomfortable with that.

Anyway, the constituents—they all asked in the sector. They asked their Māori representatives in Government, their Labour Māori representatives, to express their concern to the Minister, and what do we get in written questions? Did Māori Labour MPs stand up for Māori in these reforms? No, they did not. The roll call of shame that Minister Hipkins answered to me in written questions included Kelvin Davis, included Willie Jackson, included Jenny Salesa, and the whole Labour Māori caucus. Not one of them, as Minister Hipkins wrote to me, expressed their concerns. Why was that? How could they fail to carry their elected representatives’ mandate to the Minister and at least express their concerns? They weren’t asking for money. This wasn’t a contentious Treaty settlement. It was just “Can you please convey our concerns?” All I can surmise is that we know the Labour Māori caucus is already afraid of Grant Robertson. We know that from the last Budget. Now they’re afraid of Chris Hipkins—afraid of Chris Hipkins, afraid of everyone. That’s what we’re seeing from the Labour Māori caucus—afraid—and I have concerns for them.

I have concerns for the sector. I’m concerned for the loss of our rural ambulances. St John—I didn’t make this up—wrote in as a submission saying, “We’re funded in what’s called an indirect group, called Direct Funding Scheme, direct to the Industry Training Fund, one of three, and we have every reason to think that our funding will disappear and we will not be able to provide emergency rural ambulance services.”

I’m concerned for job losses. In February, I came out saying there would be a thousand job losses in these reforms, and I stand by that statement. On Newshub Nation on Sunday, the Minister said there could be significant job losses. He’s danced around the word “significant”; I’ll stand by a thousand and keep on going. I’m concerned that tomorrow, as my colleague Nikki Kaye has said, the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations will appear with a campaign promise which will not be delivered around postgraduate student allowances. I’m also concerned for what the OAG wrote in their damning report yesterday, that the reforms, as they’re detailed, will not generate financial improvement—a key reason to do the reforms—and that the time frame is absolutely impossible. Slow this down, Minister. We want to work with you. We’re happy to work with you. You cannot deliver this by 1 January. Take it to the campaign trail, slow it down—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member’s time has expired.

E Te Māngai o Te Whare, tēnā koe. Ngā mema o Te Whare nei, tēnā tātou katoa. This Government is demonstrating a new kind of leadership: a leadership that is both a very good manager of the economy but also showing the values of care, compassion, and empathy. I’m really proud to be associated with a Government that is a good manager of this economy, as well as ensuring that we are delivering outcomes for all in New Zealand.

There are two topics I want to talk about in this year of delivery. One is housing, and one is the opportunity to expand our trade, including indigenous people’s trade. The question is, “What have we been doing here on this side of the House?” Well, let me share what this Government’s done around housing. We’ve stopped the sale of State houses—we have stopped the sale. We have invested $100 million into ending homelessness. We’re making rentals fairer, and have announced 6,400 new public housing spaces across the motu. This side of the House is committed to having warm, dry, affordable homes for every Kiwi.

But we also know that for some of our communities, Māori particularly, that is a dream yet to be realised. So I stand and celebrate the Hon Nanaia Mahuta’s work in the papakāinga space. Papakāinga is a policy started under a Labour Government—$20 million to ensure that we are utilising underutilised Māori whenua to build houses for Māori. Let’s share some of the success stories in this Government in the years that we have taken control. I want to acknowledge the whānau of Tākou Bay from Whangaroa, Northland, who received a $2.3 million investment to ensure that we’ve got affordable homes in the Far North. I want to congratulate the Rapihana Hawaikirangi Ahu Whenua Trust, in my own electorate, for the new papakāinga development through an investment by Te Puni Kōkiri for $995,000. I want to acknowledge the Lemuel whānau of the small town of Raupunga, just south of Wairoa, who received $1.2 million from this Government to build on papakāinga.

You see, this Government is committed to ensuring that we are utilising Māori land where it is, and working in partnership with whānau, hapū, and iwi. That’s what this side’s doing to address the housing crisis we inherited from that side of the House. But I want to touch on the economic growth opportunity to regions through acknowledging Māori iwi ownership of $50 billion in assets: fishing, forestry, and farming. There is huge potential in the regions, and just the other day—I want to acknowledge Ngāti Kahungunu Iwi Inc. for buying out Hawke’s Bay Seafood, now known as Takitimu Seafoods, to go alongside their deep-water fishing vessel which processes fish out at sea. But now we have onshore fish processing. With King Tūheitia there to open it and every iwi around the motu, it is real that iwi want to partner with the Crown to explore more economic opportunities in the region.

Therefore, the trade opportunities—because at that opening, we also had the Pacific people there. We have a shared whakapapa to Asia, to China, to Taiwan, because our people say we came from those parts of the world and we journeyed across the Pacific into South America and right through the Pacific. There are relationships already happening that iwi are leading with nations like the United Arab Emirates, because they believe that there is an opportunity here, leveraging off the assets, creating those relationships based on whakapapa relations to bring economic benefit for their own here in Aotearoa New Zealand.

It’s an exciting time to be Māori right now, with this coalition Government. They want to work with us. As I travel up and down the country, there’s a sense of excitement that at least this Government is prepared to listen, that this side of the House is prepared to act as an enabler, to open the doors so that we can realise the economic potential that iwi can play and are playing in partnership with local government in regions. So I commend and I support this Government’s programme. Kia ora.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. An exciting time to be Māori in New Zealand, is it? Well, tell those people that are in the Māori education sector that it’s an exciting time to be in New Zealand. Tell the Māori educationalists that had their Aspire Scholarships taken away from their rangatahi, so they couldn’t attend high schools that the whānau couldn’t afford. Tell them whether or not they feel excited about being a Māori in New Zealand today. Talk to the partnership schools, the kura hourua—are they excited to be in New Zealand today as Māori? I don’t think so. That’s why there’s a Waitangi claim that’s gone forward. Pūhoro science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programme, the academy programme—ask the students that go to the Pūhoro STEM Academy at Massey University whether they feel fortunate to be Māori in New Zealand today, because I can say, confidently, that they do not feel happy and lucky to be a Māori in New Zealand today.

This Government has turned its back on Pūhoro, a STEM programme that has helped a number of Māori students get through science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programmes within their schools. Their actual academic results were higher than the normal average results that came through NCEA last year, and we expect to see more of that happening this year. So do those students feel lucky? I don’t think so.

Let’s look at the Māori and Pacific trade training and the changes that are going on with vocational education in this country right now. Will they feel lucky? From where I stand, from what I’ve heard, they don’t feel lucky at all. They’ve actually called the Minister to have a meeting with them so they can voice their concerns, like every other educationalist, about the Tomorrow’s Schools, vocational education, NCEA reviews—all the other reviews within the education sector that are going on. People are concerned. They are concerned about the future of their rangatahi and where their rangatahi are going to end up.

The vocational education review around the 16 polytechs going into one—the industry training organisations (ITOs) have been closed down. I worked in an ITO. I worked in the seafood ITO, actually, and there we engaged directly with the employers. It was on-the-job workforce training. Is that going to be afforded to the students of the future? One polytech, the engagement of—I’m sorry, not the engagement but, I suppose, we call it a little Pac-Man - type environment where one polytech is expected to take over all the ITOs. I don’t think many of those people are going to feel lucky to be Māori in New Zealand.

Then we’ve got the Tomorrow’s Schools review—Tomorrow’s Schools. A lot of the people I’ve been talking to within the Māori education sector are saying to me that it’s backward. It is backward. It is going to send Māori education back to the boondocks. There is nothing in there for Māori education. Twenty education hubs are going to look after or manage all of these schools, made up of Government officials that have no idea what is required within a kura kaupapa Māori, rumaki reo, or kōhanga reo. It is a damnation on this country to see the education of Māori go through this terrible—well, I suppose it’s a crash-down of the current education system as we know it.

Employment of principals: that is a big concern for our kura kaupapa. They do not want their principals to be engaged by an education hub full of Government officials. They want to be able to have their tino rangatiratanga as part and parcel of looking after their schools.

There are so many things this Government is doing to ruin Māori, to ruin Māori education, and so many times the Māori members on the opposite side, on the Government benches, have had opportunity after opportunity to have their say, and they have kept silent. The Māori people of New Zealand are saying, “Where are they? Where are those Māori Ministers? Why aren’t they standing up for us in this education sector?” That is because they’re in hiding. They are taking what is given to them and saying, “Oh, thank you, thank you,”—cap in hand—“we thank you, we thank you.” But they haven’t thought about the reverberations that are going to be happening within the Māori education sector.

It is shameful. It is a damnation on our education system. I am proud to back Nicky Wagner as our spokesperson for education. I’m proud to stand here as a spokesperson for Māori education, and I say to everybody—

Order! Order! The member’s time has expired.

I’m bitterly disappointed. You know, you don’t get many general debate opportunities with a caucus our size. It might come along every three months, and normally when you get the chance, you get the opportunity to sit down here, to listen to what the National Party have to say—because, by golly, there’s always some low fruits to pick. But when morale is that low and they’re not offering anything up, I am blowed if I know where I’m going to get my energy from, because when you come after a speech like that, there’s one clear message: they’re starting to panic. They are starting to panic. Morale is so low, because for the first time in my life I have something in common with the National Party: we’re both in the 30s—we are both in the 30s. I have seen their internal polling. The National Party leaks more than my ute, and it doesn’t have a back door. The National Party, for the first time since the election, are in the 30s, and we all know what that means. That means, with Easter coming up, even though we’re in autumn, it’s going to be barbecue season once again.

We know that the National Party is starting to panic because they realise that their leader, despite going all the way around the country and having “come and meet Simon Bridges” meetings, he’s gone backwards. He started at 12, he went to 10, he went to nine, he went to eight, and now he’s at five. That’s after people got to know him. I reckon he should go overseas, go over to Hawaii, follow John Key’s lead—it seemed to work for him.

But what we’ve found is that the Opposition, the National Party, are so much looking inwards that they are treating New Zealanders like fools. They think they’re dumb. They think that if they stand up and criticise this Government’s programmes, New Zealanders won’t realise that what they’re saying is actually the opposite of what they were saying when they were in Government. I’m sure my colleagues and even the other members on the other side of the House will remember that at the last election, the National Party promised a thousand dollars a year in tax cuts for them and us, at the highest end of the rates, and even after the last election, after they lost, they were still going on about it. We should have brought in a tax cut, they said. We should have cut taxes for the top end, because we all know what they believe in, and that, of course, is the trickle-down.

Now, today we’ve got Nikki Kaye standing up and saying, “If we”—as in them—“were in Government, we’d pay the teachers more.” You can’t have it both ways. That’s what I would put to them. On the one hand, they want to reduce taxes; on the other hand, they’re going around telling teachers that they would pay more. This is despite the fact that the offer that is on the table now from this coalition Government—from Labour, New Zealand First, and the Green Party—is three times higher than all of the offers combined under the National Party Government over the last nine years. What a joke. They think New Zealanders are dumb.

Well, we know that New Zealanders are not dumb, because after nine years, they’d had enough of that party and now they’re starting to see their true colours, and that is why they’re in the 30s. That is why many of the members over that side of the House are starting to take calls and yell out, because they know their days are numbered. They know their opportunity to speak in this House is limited, so “We may as well get up and speak about as much as we possibly can.”

Another area where they say one thing when they’re in Government and another when they’re in Opposition is the minimum wage. Every single year, the National Party in Government trumpeted the fact that they were increasing the minimum wage. Now what do they say? That it’s a bad idea. They’re saying that increasing the minimum wage is a bad idea. Why? Because it was our idea. That is the guts of it—they’re playing politics.

They are neglecting the fact that this is supposedly the party of the regions, but we know, here over this side, with New Zealand First, the Greens, and Labour, that there is only one side of this House that’s looking after the regions, and I’ll tell you why. It’s because in areas like those where I live in Masterton—in a small, rural economy, where the vast majority of businesses are dependent on people’s ability to spend—when real wages in real terms go down like we saw, and when workers’ share of productivity does not keep up with the cost of living, it’s actually the small businesses that depend on people’s capacity to spend money that suffer. And these are the businesses that that side of the House is supposed to look after. Well, I for one know for a fact that New Zealanders are sick of hearing about their rubbish—hearing about their internal issues and hearing about the nonsense that the National Party are talking about—and they know that this side of the House is actually delivering for everyone in this country.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and it’s a pleasure to take a call in this general debate. I’d just like to reflect on Kieran McAnulty. He seemed to have a lot to talk about on the polls and polling numbers. Well, I’d like to just remind him that it’s not once that he’s lost the seat of Wairarapa; it’s twice that he’s lost the seat of Wairarapa, and guess what? Next year, it’ll be three times he’s lost the seat of Wairarapa. So if you want to give a lecture about polls, why don’t you go back to the Wairarapa—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

—and have a chat to them. Sorry, Mr Speaker.

I’d like to take a moment to talk a little bit about some of the reforms that this Government is putting through and to get back to some of the real issues which actually matter for New Zealanders. One of those issues is the issue of education. We’ve heard from our education spokesperson, Nikki Kaye, and our tertiary education spokesperson, Shane Reti, on the ideological reforms that this Government is pushing through in regards to our education policy.

I would like to put to the House that this Parliament has seen, I think, the most ideological Minister of Education in New Zealand’s history. Just last year, we saw national standards being scrapped and partnership schools being scrapped. We saw the fees-free scheme being put in place, which resulted in no increase in student numbers, and we saw 18 to 20 reviews being announced. This year, we now see some of those reviews coming forward and being worked through, and what we again see is more ideology coming through in the Government’s position.

We’re starting to see the outcomes of these reviews. I’d like to talk briefly about the vocational education review and the Tomorrow’s Schools review. Both of them have got common themes—that is, centralisation of core services to the Government. You just need to look at the review of vocational education. We’re seeing all 16 institutes of technology and polytechnics (ITPs) and all industry training organisations (ITOs) being wound into one.

In terms of our schools, we’re seeing our boards of trustees losing many of their legal mandates and being relegated to simply having an advisory role in regards to what they do and the function that they do in their schools. What we’re seeing here is a Minister of Education who is going out around the country and telling the thousands and thousands of board of trustees members that the work that they do is not valued. We’re seeing a Minister going out and talking to our ITPs and ITOs and saying, “The work that you’re doing is not valued.” “I think we can do it better if we just simply centralise it.”, is what the Minister of Education is saying. “Let’s centralise, let’s centralise, let’s centralise.”—that’s simply what the Minister of Education is saying.

When it comes to his consultation, I think it’s important for this House to note the extreme rush with which he is pushing these proposals through. The reform of vocational education was two reviews being merged together at the end of last year, and then, with the announcement being made early this year, it was only six weeks for the sector to be able to come to grips with the changes that were being proposed and to be able to come up with their response to that. The review of Tomorrow’s Schools had only three months for the whole, entire compulsory education sector to be able to understand what this means and to then be able to provide its feedback. I would like to acknowledge the work that Nikki Kaye and Shane Reti have done in getting out around the country and talking to thousands of people, to hundreds of school principals, and to our ITP sector, and our ITOs and to actually be able to be on the ground and understand what will actually work and what won’t.

I think that the Minister of Education needs to take serious note of what the Office of the Auditor-General said when he said about the review of vocational education that “there is not enough detail to assess whether the significant structural changes will improve financial sustainability and governance of the … sector.”

This is something which every single ITP up and down the country—the ITOs are saying that you can’t just announce changes which restructure the entire sector without actually doing the homework and doing the analysis before you put the announcement out there. What the Minister has put out there is reckless. It is putting out proposals which have not been thought through, have not had the thought and the detailed policy work done, and this is what we see from across this Government: a whole lot of reviews and a whole lot of announcements, but no real detailed policy work in terms of their position. That is not what New Zealanders expect, and we look forward to going to the vote next election and putting that to the New Zealand public. Thank you.

Before I start rubbishing everything that Simeon Brown, the previous speaker, said, can I just congratulate him on becoming a new father recently. It’s a big thing for a member of Parliament to take on while you’re sitting, so the very best wishes to you and for fatherhood.

I would like to talk numbers. I know they don’t want to talk numbers over there. There are some numbers over there that they don’t like, and there are some numbers probably being done over there that they don’t like, either. But I would like to talk about some numbers that are important to our Government and what we have achieved in our 18 months in Government.

The first numbers I want to talk about are $17.70, 200,000, and $48 a week, because they are the numbers that will matter to those who are on the lowest incomes in New Zealand. On 1 April, the minimum wage went to $17.70. That affects 200,000 New Zealanders, and that will see, for a single person, their pay before tax go up nearly $50 a week. Now, they are numbers, but the difference that that will make to some of our lowest-earning New Zealanders is huge. It will mean that the ability to put some food on the table will be easier for those families. It will mean the ability to pay bills like power is easier for those families. It will mean that if rents are harder to deal with, then they will be able to deal with those issues, as well. Some might be able to save for the first time. As a member of this Government who has even more aspirations to lift the minimum wage, I am extremely proud of those numbers.

The second number I would like to speak about is $130 per month, because that’s what people who are eligible for the winter energy payment are benefiting from as a result of this Government—$130 a month, with the express purpose from the Government to ensure that those families are safe and warm in their houses. For far too long, we have heard stories of the elderly and of beneficiaries who have made the choice not to turn on heaters because they can’t afford to do that. Their families have gone cold. Their houses have become damp as a result, their families get sick as a result, and the ability for those families who are on low incomes and for superannuitants to be able to not worry about that cost and to know that the Government is backing them to make sure that they have the simple thing of keeping warm is also something that I am extremely proud of.

Can I give a hat tip to my Green colleague who is also from Mana—Jan Logie—because her bill for greater support for the victims of domestic violence means another number coming up, which is that workers will now be eligible for 10 days’ domestic violence leave that wasn’t there before. I think that is one of the most humane things that this House has done in the last 18 months—to ensure that those people who are victims of domestic violence can have that time to make sure that they can look after themselves if they have had an episode of domestic violence. So can I take my hat off to Jan Logie for progressing that piece of legislation through.

Also another hat tip to my colleague the Hon Dr Megan Woods, who I think is gallivanting around Europe on behalf of the Government at the moment, because, also on 1 April, the R & D tax credits that she has introduced, a $1 billion investment from this Government, have come in to force to ensure there is innovation and to ensure that those businesses who do want to invest more in innovation, grow their businesses, and therefore grow the economy, have access to more support.

Can I also give a hat tip to my colleague the Hon Stuart Nash, because his work in and around a taxation bill now means that New Zealanders have more options in terms of contributions for their KiwiSaver. So the numbers we’re talking here now are that they can have contribution rates of 6 and 10 per cent as opposed to the limited amount of rates that they had before that. Those numbers, I think, and that ability to invest more and have more options in your KiwiSaver, I think, is a good thing. On 1 April too, superannuitants and veterans had their contributions go up by 2.6 percent, and I think, again, that is another example of this Government and the numbers backing up the compassionate way we are making sure that the most vulnerable in our community are looked after.

I’m extremely proud of those things that happened on 1 April. It’s ensuring that those New Zealanders who are cold and have been cold and have taken that choice to not turn the heater on can now do a simple thing of turn the heater on because they’ve got enough money to pay their electricity bills. That means those people who are on the lowest of wages now can have a little bit more in their pay packets to make sure they can pay the rent, they can get more food on the table, they can simply pay the power bill to support their families. For businesses who want to innovate, they are going to have more support from this Government through the likes of the R & D tax credit.

On 1 April, a lot of those things came into force, and on this side of the House we have been delivering and we will continue to deliver for Kiwis. Again, in health, housing, and education, whether it’s keeping people warm, whether it’s giving them enough money to buy food and pay the rent, we’re extremely proud of those efforts, and you can expect more about hard work and delivery of results for New Zealand over the next 18 months.

Well, what an exercise in contrast this general debate has been. On that side of the House, we have Winston Peters talking about numbers, making spurious attacks on people and their personalities. We have Kieran McAnulty being a little rat for his party, and on this side of the House—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I think that’s out of order and the member will withdraw and apologise.

I withdraw and apologise. I withdraw and apologise and I rephrase in a way that is far more parliamentary. We have Kieran McAnulty—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! No, the member withdraws and apologises—it’s unconditional, and she doesn’t tell us she’s going to say the same thing again.

Mr Speaker, I certainly will not say the same thing again. The people of the Wairarapa—

💬 SPEAKER: And the member will not comment on my rulings. The member actually knows a bit about this place.

The people of the Wairarapa did not elect Kieran McAnulty to talk about the Opposition. They elected him to deliver on the promises he made on the campaign trail. [Interruption] I’m sorry, I misspeak again. This is becoming a habit. They did not necessarily do that.

But Government is not about what you promise. It is actually not about your good intentions. It is about—finally, in the end—what is delivered. It is about results. Here, in this Government, we have promises of the world in education, and we have the reality of the third teachers’ strike being scheduled. We have the reality of the massive disruption and uncertainty up and down the country as around $15 million worth of reviews are conducted. We have the Tomorrow’s Schools review, we have the NCEA review, we have the early learning strategic review, we have the cross- Government child well-being strategy review, we have the review of the institutes of technology and polytechnics sector, we have the review of the risk index funding—the list goes on, but those are not what people wanted the Government to be focused on. They simply believed that the Government would do what it promised.

So I’ve gone and I’ve looked at the manifesto and I’ve looked at the pledges, and here they are. I suggest that members opposite go and refamiliarise themselves with this, the education manifesto that Labour put out before the election, and that they refamiliarise themselves with the pledge that so many of them signed—the NZEI pledge for early childhood education. In that pledge, what Minister Hipkins and others said they would do is that they would fund 100 percent qualified teachers. They said that it would be there right from the start, it would be there from 1 July—it even made it into Grant Robertson’s fiscal plan. Was it there in their first Budget? No, it was not.

Let me make it clear for this House that the expectation of the early childhood sector in this Budget is that that promise will be delivered on, and that the promise to reduce teacher-child ratios and group sizes will be delivered on, and that the promise to increase funding for early childhood education will be delivered on, but so far, that has not been the case. Instead, we have had on-going quality issues and we have had on-going challenges.

What was also in the manifesto, which I pointed out to you, was all sorts of things that Labour rallied against. They rallied against relentless change to legislation and regulation “distracting attention from what really matters”. They rallied against “bureaucratic accountability requirements” and they said that creativity and innovation were being hampered by Government red tape and compliance. Yet there was no mention of a review of Tomorrow’s Schools. That was not in the manifesto. That was not flagged to anyone, and it is the reason why the people that we have spoken to, that Nikki Kaye has spent hours upon hours talking to, say that they are afraid, because no one flagged that this review was coming. They fear a loss of responsiveness to local communities. They fear bureaucratic paralysis. They fear that there will be a destruction of meaningful parental involvement. They fear another layer in the middle creating buck-passing. They fear that children will be forced to attend a local school.

What we have here is a party that promised many things, that is not delivering on them, and instead is bringing in a whole range of changes that no one wants, because actually what people want is pretty simple. They want teachers who are teaching well and who are happy. They want, Mr Hipkins, for you to drop the ideology, to get the basics right, and to put children and parents at the centre of what you do. You said you would do things—do them before you waste your time on additional reviews.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.