General Debate

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

This past couple of weeks, we’ve seen the reaction around the world to the Prime Minister’s video where she has gone through the achievements of this Government. Now, the Prime Minister had just over two minutes to do that. I have five minutes today, so I am not even going to attempt to get near that list because the Prime Minister took three minutes, and we all know that there were many things on that list that she could not fit in.

On this side of the House, we know that we are addressing the long-term issues that are facing this country—the nine years of neglect that were left to this Government to clean up. We are making a great start on that and, today, we saw that more than ever with the release of the household labour force survey that showed that the wages of New Zealanders, the average hourly earnings of New Zealanders, are up by $86 a week since this Government came into office. That is money in the pockets of New Zealanders who are finally getting to share in the benefits of growth.

When the Prime Minister’s video goes around the world, people hear that 284,000 families are $75 a week better off. They hear about the Best Start payment. They hear about the winter energy payment. They hear about the extension of paid parental leave, of child poverty being reduced, and of nurses in schools. These are the achievements of a Government that cares, that is focused on the big, long-term issues. New Zealanders know it won’t all be solved overnight, but, finally, there is a Government that is taking a positive attitude to our future, that is firmly looking forward for future generations.

Our work has had an unlikely supporter who, in an unusual moment of clarity on Radio Hauraki on Friday last week, said—when Mr Bridges was asked by the host there about what had been happening—“Talking about the Government, you know, they’ve achieved a lot in the last couple of years.” So, finally, Mr Bridges sees it. Finally, he gets it, because, normally, it’s negative National.

Christopher Luxon has arrived in Botany, or “Grabaseat”, as we now call it, and he’s a much more positive character than what we normally see over there. He was very keen to let us know that he wasn’t parachuted in. He actually just walked on to the plane and found there was no pilot. That’s what happened when he got there. The only person he found was Judith Collins gently pushing people towards the emergency exit.

But other than that, there was absolutely no one in charge, and Mr Bridges should always remember “Your exit may be behind you.” That’s naughty, Mr Speaker. But to be honest, the National Party is a little bit like an airline meal: way too much packaging, not enough substance, a little bit salty, and made up of small bits that don’t really go together. So when Christopher Luxon arrives, he is going to discover that the airline that he’s arrived in isn’t exactly Air New Zealand, a modern airline. He’s going to discover it’s a bit like Pan Am or some kind of airline of the 1970s: focused on ignoring climate change and focused on rehashing tired old beneficiary-bashing kinds of policies.

The difference between the two sides of this House could not be clearer at the moment: a Government on this side of the House this week passing legislation to help New Zealanders deal with climate change, a Government that’s improving the wages of New Zealanders, that’s focused on the future of work, and a desperate, divided Opposition on the other side of the House. That is what we are seeing.

Simon Bridges has taken to saying that he’s “being Susie-ed”. Well, actually, he’s “being Simon-ed”. What’s happened there? The dictionary definition of “being Simon-ed” is to have self-inflicted wounds caused by incoherent yet relentless negativity. That is the dictionary definition of “being Simon-ed”, and week after week, day after day, members opposite and members on this side of the House have to be put through the Leader of the Opposition “being Simon-ed”, while the reality is there’s now a new person on the block. Mr Luxon’s flown in, and Mark Mitchell and all of those people on the other side of the House—who Simon Bridges said are in a queue to change the leader, I heard on the radio this morning—have now got a competitor.

We’re going to enjoy watching the spectacle on this side of the House while we get on with solving the problems left to us by nine years of neglect and ensuring that every New Zealander gets to enjoy economic growth. The wages are up. There’s more people getting into work. This is a country in good shape, and I’m proud of our Jacinda Ardern - led Government.

We’ve heard that speaker, Grant Robertson, crow about the Prime Minister’s video about the two years of delivery. Well, let’s just do a bit of fact-checking. Actually, no, the New Zealand Herald have done that. Let us talk about the bits that they don’t want you to hear.

They don’t want to hear 22,000 extra people on the jobseeker benefit—on the dole. Rents are up $50 a week. The number of hardship grants is higher than it’s ever been before because more and more Kiwis are doing it tough. In the three months to September, benefit advances—in most cases, people have to pay them back—were over 200,000 in a three-month period. The number of young people is, tragically, up 25 percent since they took office—that’s young people on the dole. Electricity and gas hardship payments are up 5,000 on the year despite supposedly having a winter energy payment. The number on the social housing register is over 13,000 people, and they’re waiting far longer than they’ve ever waited before. The one that is tragic, though, is the number of children in benefit-dependent homes has increased by over 4,000 in just three months.

So those are not the figures and the facts that the Prime Minister will be crowing about. She wants to hide those figures because this is the truth of how hard some of our Kiwis are doing it under the Labour, New Zealand First, and Greens Government.

Instead, on this side of the House, we’ve been doing the work. We’re looking for solutions that actually break the cycle of benefit dependency and support individuals and families getting into work. The previous National Government raised benefits in 2016, for the first time in over 30 years. All this Government’s done is to actually lift the cost of living. So we know on this side that, when people are in need, what we need to do is provide them with the ability to get back up on their own two feet and to give them a hand up, and we do believe that Kiwis should always and must always have a safety net in their times of need.

So our social services discussion document focuses on giving Kiwis targeted and tailored solutions that will help make the biggest difference in their lives, and, yes, we want to measure that success through targets, because, actually, we know that’s what makes the biggest difference. That’s what channels the efforts of the thousands of Government department employees who are tasked with improving the lives of New Zealanders, and targets support them working together to achieve that. So targets—for example, reducing the number of children who live in benefit-dependent homes, because we know 60 percent of the children living in material hardship live in benefit-dependent homes. This side makes absolutely zero apologies for focusing on those kids and their needs. So that’s why we are reintroducing the social investment approach, because that is about changing lives: making sure there are fewer children in benefit-dependent homes and making sure that gang members and their associates cannot access welfare if they are already deriving illegal incomes.

We’ll partner with community housing providers and continue to support Housing First, which, of course, has been incredibly successful in supporting those who are homeless. But we’re also committing to increasing post-natal care so that every mum for every birth gets at least a three-day stay in a facility of their choosing, because this side of the House knows and supports the evidence that says the first thousand days of a child’s life set the direction and the path for the rest of their lives.

We also want to make sure that parents can take paid parental leave at the same time—thanks to my colleague the Hon Amy Adams—we also want to make sure that superannuation is no less than 66 percent of the average wage, and we want to also provide a nationwide action plan to help communities with parenting support and resources, because there’s not a week that goes by when Kiwis don’t say the thing that would make a difference for them is parenting. We know on this side of the House it’s not kind or caring to pile on extra taxes and costs on Kiwis, and that’s exactly what Labour, New Zealand First, and the Greens are doing.

More and more Kiwis are struggling to put food on the table and a roof over their house. We’ll fix it.

That was the most miserable contribution from the Opposition I’ve heard in a very long time in this House, and not even a single show of support from her colleagues on the other side of the House. Imagine if that member Louise Upston’s dream and vision came true where she represented her party in that contribution when she said “Let’s just take all beneficiaries off the benefit.” Imagine how wonderful the statistics would be for the National Government to report back to the nation if the solution was “Well, let’s just take the benefit away.” How can she possibly talk about helping solo mums or families when their vision is to make it harder and more difficult for families who need the help at that time in their lives to get ahead and make a difference?

Actually, this brings to mind a wonderful contrast between this Government and that former Government on that side of the House. The previous contributor spoke about gangs. Let me explore that in just a little bit of detail.

Let’s explore gangs, because for nine years the National Government—what did they do, Mr Mark Mitchell? They underfunded the police force and forced the police to shut down their stations across the country. They underfunded schools, they underfunded teachers, they did everything they could to take people off the benefit, and, quite frankly—we know now, from our experience—they neglected the provinces.

On those days that they cut those figures in the Budget—on those days—they saved the country a dollar. But today we see the effect of those 1980s bean counter decisions, where they say they’re saving a dollar in the Budget but actually they’re doing it at the cost of human lives, and they’re doing it at the cost of today’s taxpayer, who’s having to fix these issues now so that we can get rid of gang members—so that we can get rid of that scourge on our society.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: You’ve got more. You’ve got more gang members.

And I’ll tell you what, Mr Mitchell. We’re investing forward to do that. Think of a society which this Government is working towards: economic growth for all New Zealanders, where we will be and are investing in our provinces—for example, in the Hawke’s Bay, where the gang problem is growing almost exponentially. Why is that? It is because that party over there neglected it for nine years and we’re having to invest in it now. The Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) is doing that, for example, and I’m incredibly proud of the work that the PGF is doing.

Minister Jackson and Te Ara Mahi programme and the work that’s being done there: there’s so much work going on in a forward investment mentality where we are saying, “How do we give these people a hand up? How do we make work and self-pride the option for our young Māori in particular? How do we make that the vision for our youth rather than gangs?” They had no choice under the previous Government and it’s absolutely farcical that we be attacked for doing the good work that we are on this side of the House.

On a lighter note, I just have to give credit—as I, unfortunately, often do with the finance Minister’s contribution—about Mr Luxon and the airplane metaphors that he used. My contribution and observation aren’t as eloquent as that except to say it’s not so much Luxon himself; it’s the observation and the furore that was created in the media. Here’s the new leadership. Here’s the vision, the future of National, and he’s not even a member of Parliament yet. What that, unfortunately, says to the New Zealand public is: “Where are the options now? Where’s the leadership now?”

I tell you what, when I was in Opposition, we didn’t really notice the lack of depth there when you had the Rt Hon Sir John Key and his kitchen cabinet, because that was a tight, skilled crew—I have to give them credit—and that’s what you saw out in the public.

💬 Hon Members: All gone.

All gone—it’s all gone. It’s all gone. So we have Mr Simon Bridges with a queue—a queue—of his fellow party caucus members getting closer and closer to his back, getting closer and closer to his back, and I think they might be all shuffling Luxon forward as they get closer to 2023.

That was a speech from the official deputy leader of New Zealand First, but the true deputy leader of New Zealand First is the “Tāne Māhuta of the North”. That’s right—that’s Shane Jones. When he stands up, he’s making a declaration. There’s a crack happening inside the coalition Government. No longer do they talk about the coalition Government. But what does he say? He says this: “I am a New Zealand First member of Parliament. I speak for New Zealand First.” And what does Iain Lees-Galloway say? He says, “I have no ministerial responsibility for Mr Jones.” What does the Prime Minister say? “I do not agree with his statements.” Why? Because, for all of the brand of this wellbeing Government, there are no cute and cuddlies any more that will try and mend this brokenness. There is a crack, there is a shift that’s happening, there’s an ideological change that’s happening, and it’s happening right on the other side. You’ll see it.

They talk about the Mana in Mahi programme 2018. When it first started off, 150 people is what they said would benefit from this programme. They realised they needed to ramp it up. They put another 4,000 there—that’s what they said in 2018. But what they don’t talk about is the drop-out rate at 32 percent. That’s right—those who’ve dropped out of that programme, who unsuccessfully even completed the programme. It’s not the success they talk about. But here’s the bit that nobody else there in “Voterland” knows about, because on the New Zealand First side what they wanted to talk about is, basically, pay for the dole—that’s right—or work for the dole, that those who are on the dole would work for it. Under the Mana in Mahi programme, if you look clearly in the detail, they’ve extended the criteria so that those who are on the dole will have to work as well. It’s this sneaking in of New Zealand First; that’s what it is.

This Wellbeing Budget that this Government’s talked about is a sham. It’s not happening. How do we know that? I go back to the State of the Nation Report that was written by the Salvation Army and here’s what they said: “This is [this Government’s] attempt to mark out a different pathway for New Zealand”—one that in most quarters is talking about the Wellbeing Budget. But here’s the part that I think is critically important that we look at to judge this Government by. One of the big problems with the wellbeing focus is understanding and agreeing on what we mean by wellbeing. As you get into the idea, it can quickly become vague and complex. As a big idea to arrange public policy around, it is at a risk of losing public appeal because of this vagueness and of this complexity. Those are the true words.

You can talk about being warm and cuddly; you could talk about wellbeing, but how do you wrap it around the policies of Government and of ministries? So, therefore, what’s the telling of the tale? Well, the telling of the tale are the results that would come out of there. Already, this Government and this Prime Minister have talked about poverty and the reduction of poverty for children, and yet already, under the child poverty indicators, seven of the nine indicators have shown an increase of those children who are actually in poverty.

In fact, the percentage of children in households with incomes under 50 percent of median after housing costs, in June of 2018, the increase was 27,000—that’s 2.3 percent—and yet under National, it was consistently dropping along the way. The percentage of children in households with income under 50 percent of median income after housing costs, again, in June of 2018, was an increase of another 7,000 children. Seven of those indicators show this: that you can be wellbeing and you can be well-intentioned, but if you don’t know how to wrap it around the policies, you don’t have the evidence to make it work—the results show it’s just not working.

So let’s talk about the hardship grants that are over there, and I’m sure that the Hon Carmel Sepuloni will get up and she’ll debate these, but you can’t debate the facts. You can’t debate the facts. Let’s look at the hardship assistance grants. September 2019, in that quarter: 573,588 grants for special needs grants; more than double of that in 2014—double of that in 2014. It’s an increase of 47.3 percent. When we look at emergency housing, this is the bit that’s got to really hurt them, because already KiwiBuild has failed. They’ve not been able to put anything in place. Again, being well-intentioned and wellbeing does not mean you have the evidence or know how to change this. In other words, there’s a lack of competence. Why? In emergency housing alone, in 2018, there were 14,000 grants that were granted, at a cost of $16 million. In 2019, there were 29,266 grants, at $41 million—an increase of 161 percent.

I have to say, you can be wellbeing and well-intentioned, but what it goes to show is there’s a crack in the coalition. There’s an inability to have confidence to be able to deliver the things that matter most to New Zealanders and to Kiwis.

That member said I’d probably get up and debate the points that he made, and I probably will because this is the general debate and that’s what we do in a general debate. We heard from the member that just spoke about alleged cracks in the coalition. I do need to remind that member that he was the one thinking of splitting off and starting his own party, so we do have to ask: which party is Alfred Ngaro with this week? We have also heard rumours that already badges are in the making saying “Luxon 2023”, but who knows? It could be Alfred Ngaro and Christopher Luxon in their own party. So let’s think about that before we talk about cracks on this side of the House. We are a very, very happy coalition Government, can I say, who have a very happy confidence and supply partner as well.

There have been lots of assertions made from the other side of the House, not just in the general debate but actually during question time also. It is really important that we take the time to put numbers into perspective, as was spoken about by our Minister of Finance and our Prime Minister today: 4.2 percent is the unemployment rate—4.2 percent.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: It’s gone up.

Yes, it’s up from 3.9 percent. However, the three lowest unemployment rates that we’ve had in the last 11 years have been under this Government, not that Government. In fact, it was 4.7 percent when we came into power and now it is 4.2 percent. So we’re very proud of that.

We hear a lot from the other side of the House about beneficiary numbers, and I do need to make the point that currently it sits just under 300,000. I think two years consecutively it was up over 350,000 under the previous Government. So they do need to reflect a little bit on their time whilst in Government, and make sure that we are being transparent and honest with the public, with respect to the numbers. We really are focused on making sure that we provide opportunities for New Zealanders who enter the welfare system to get the upskilling and training that they need to take up the jobs that are actually available and are going to be available moving forward. That is why we have put that investment into Mana in Mahi and other programmes targeted towards those who come through the welfare system.

We’ve heard a lot from the other side of the House and its tired, it’s old, its déjà vu. It shows that National have no new ideas and they still want to continue to run with policies that don’t work. We’ve heard a lot about their social policies, and for every reason I’ve just mentioned we won’t dwell too much on that. But what I will say is it’s really interesting that in their narrative, they like to talk about this very small proportion of New Zealanders who are on benefits and who are in gangs—and it is a very small proportion—rather than focus on the 52 percent of New Zealanders who are on benefits and who have health conditions or disabilities, or who are caring for people with health conditions and disabilities. Now, you would think that anyone who had an effective social policy would want to focus on the majority of New Zealanders in the welfare system, most of whom want to work but need a little bit of support to get into work and need a little bit of support from a Government to break down the barriers to getting into employment. But did we hear anything about that particular group—the majority of New Zealanders that are in the welfare system—in the social policies that were announced by the Opposition? No.

Now, why would that be? Why would that be? You know, I hate to be cynical—I really do hate to be cynical—but I do have to think, you know, that rather than come up with any effective social policy, they would take the political opportunity to put the boot in again and continue stigmatising people on the benefit because it works in their favour to try and draw the worst out of New Zealanders, with respect to judgment and stigma in the way they might think about people in the welfare system. Now, that would be cynical of me to think that, but I can’t help but head down that pathway.

Anyway, I’m really proud of the track that we are on as a Government and the fact that we are changing the narrative about people in the welfare system, that we aren’t like the previous Government, who thought that young people were pretty damned hopeless. In fact, we think they have a lot of potential and deserve the very best of support that they can get from any Government, and that’s what we’re focused on doing.

So, with respect to the social development portfolio, it isn’t just about me. It’s about all the good work our Minister of Education is doing, it’s about the massive investment that we put into mental health, it’s about the massive investment we put into public housing. We are all focused on the most vulnerable New Zealanders on this side of the House.

What an extraordinary contribution from that member, the supposed Minister for Social Development, who, in the last five seconds of her speech, started to turn to her portfolio, ran out of ideas with three seconds to go, and decided to talk about the education portfolio. It’s an exact example of a Government that has absolutely nothing to do. In fact, she talked about being cynical about the discussion document that National put out, but I actually think she’s probably more jealous. There are more ideas and suggestions in that document than anything we’ve seen from this Government, and then, to add absolute insult to injury, if we go back in the Hansard, the Minister’s talking about how proud and happy she is.

How can she be proud with more people on the unemployment benefit? More young people looking for work? How is she proud of the almost 14,000 New Zealand households looking for a State house? How on earth can anyone be proud? After that cackling contribution, it’s funny how, as I point this out, the other side has gone quiet, because you cannot be proud of those statistics.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: I’m falling asleep.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! It would be inappropriate for members to do that in the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. How they can be proud of those figures, I don’t know.

I want to particularly focus on the social housing area. It’s one of my three portfolios. What’s been really striking in social housing is just the stark numbers. The last quarterly report has come out: just under 14,000 Kiwi households are now waiting for a State house. When we left Government, that was just shy of 6,000. I’ve said many times in this House that it was not something to be proud of, but from 6,000 to, now, almost 14,000 families waiting, it is getting absolutely worse under this Government.

The Government makes a big claim about all the houses they’re building. One has to make two observations about that. A good number of those houses being built are the ones started and consented by National. Secondly, if all these amazing houses have been built, why is it that things are increasing so badly? In just the last year, we’ve seen almost a 50 percent increase. It’s almost doubled in itself in a year, of people waiting for State houses, and about 90 percent of that number—90 percent of those 14,000 houses—are priority A. These are people in absolute, dire need.

We on this side want to find solutions, and if you read the discussion document and the contributions I’ve made, for me, it’s fundamentally important that we engage into the public sector and in particular the community housing providers. Why I put that out there is because the other side of the House—the Government—was obsessed with the opportunities to do it themselves. The bungled, failed mess of KiwiBuild—an absolute disaster. An array of legislation they’ve put through which has absolutely cooled the market and undermined those who provide private rentals, again contributing to the problem that we have, and an array of rhetoric which has achieved nothing—absolutely nothing. A Prime Minister who came out a couple of years ago, talking a big game that “There’ll be no more homelessness in New Zealand. No one will have to be in cars.” In fact, even in her very limited contribution in the House today, she talked about not wanting kids with torchlights in cars. Well, we all aspire to that, but for all her talk, it’s got worse.

It has got so much worse under this Labour Government. In fact, the number of people in motels is now over 3,000. It’s got hugely, hugely—with 3,000 families in motels. Phil Twyford, one of the former Ministers of Housing, promised that no one—no one—would have to be in motels. In fact, two winters ago, the Government also promised that no one—no one—would be homeless this winter. The funny thing is and the tragic thing is that more people are homeless. More people are waiting for a State house. More people are waiting in cars.

💬 Marja Lubeck: It’s not very funny. It’s not funny, Simon.

It’s got worse. All that happens—and someone says, “It’s not funny.” That’s the whole point, having been making light humour of this. It’s Labour’s new interjector, trying to remind her colleagues that she’s there. The thing is that we’ve got—I suppose that wasn’t actually humorous. That was probably just—anyway, that’s not the point. The point is it isn’t funny, and that’s why we have put this discussion document together. I welcome New Zealand’s contributions. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a real honour to be talking in this general debate. Look, I’ve been inspired over the last week or so attending school prize-givings. I have most of the secondary schools in Wellington City in the Rongotai electorate.

💬 Matt Doocey: Did you get any awards? What’d you win?

I did. I got lots of awards, and those awards were saying how well the coalition Government was going. That’s the award. That’s the award I got—the overwhelming and just overt “Congratulations, what a great job you’re doing.” These are schools that I would say weren’t traditional Labour schools, but can I say there’s no shame—there’s no shame—in them coming up. Mums, dads, caregivers, the senior students, the principals—everyone’s on the waka saying what a wonderful job this coalition Government is doing.

When I look over the last two years—because it has been that—people had literally been crying out for change, and the big changes that this Government has taken on have been well wanted. Look, can I say, when they talked to me, they said, “We want a Government who starts tackling the long-term challenges we face.” That’s things like we’ve just heard: the housing crisis—we called it a crisis because we weren’t ashamed of that; they denied it on that side of the House; child poverty—that’s right, child poverty; and climate change. I’ll come back to that in a minute, because I know that the Prime Minister and the whole Government, the coalition—we are not too afraid. We are not too cynical to avoid tackling the big, long-term issues facing New Zealand. We’re looking ahead 30 years, not three, and, astoundingly—well, not really—people are saying, “Yay! That’s what we want. We want a plan for Aotearoa New Zealand.”—the long game that unpicks years of denial or entrenchment. That’s what that side of the House was doing for their nine years in Government.

But this Government is delivering a landmark action on climate change this week. I’m really proud of that. The biggest challenge facing our international community and New Zealand. We’ve young—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Move on. We have that legislation coming up soon. It’s not to be discussed now.

Sure—fine. So we know that that is coming. Happy to move on, because I’ll talk about my favourite subject, and that’s housing, because we are tackling the long-term challenges in housing. That’s on the agenda too, but can I say we are undertaking the biggest public housing and social housing building programme. I know when I look around the Rongotai electorate, there are lots of examples where houses were boarded up, houses were pulled down. This Government is rebuilding those and putting housing back on there.

So I’m a little bit miffed when I hear things from the previous speaker, Simon O’Connor, that talked about how nothing was happening, because what was really going on on that side of the House was they were preparing to undertake the biggest asset sale ever. They keep talking about this community housing sector. They keep talking about this market, these other people who are going to suddenly save us, build all these houses and resolve the housing crisis—which in their language wasn’t a crisis. But what struck me was I remember clearly that even the head of the Salvation Army was miffed himself when he said, “Well, I didn’t know that we were going to buy all these social housing units off the then Government.” He had no idea. No one knew. They had no housing Minister on that side of the House, no one knew what was going on, but we did because we knew that they were going to undertake the biggest asset sell-off ever. We saw it. We saw tinkering with all sorts of State-owned assets. That’s what was going on.

We are undertaking the biggest rebuild programme. I know when I visit Fife Lane in Miramar, the site of the first State house, and not only there but at the prize-giving at my old school at St Patrick’s, people were saying that it was good to see those empty blocks of land with housing being built on them. That’s a direct result of this Government. That’s a result of a housing Minister and a housing team of Ministers who have come together saying “We must do this quickly.”, and that’s what we’re doing. That’s an example of some of the long-term change being rectified in our mere two years.

Can I say, I got this in the mail myself. [Holds up campaign flyer]—“Making progress on what matters”—this was brought to two of the three prize-givings I went to. Isn’t it great when people bring along the material that we sent out and say “You’re doing a great job.”?

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It is refreshing to hear someone from that side of the House actually talk about the policy they’re delivering, because it seems to be that, in the general debate, the Government benches seem to spend most of their time criticising the Opposition, and maybe that is, as has been suggested, a little bit of jealousy over there.

I want to focus my contribution today on this wonderful new discussion document that has been launched this week. We are calling this our social services discussion document, and it goes to demonstrate that, while we have been in Opposition, we have not been sitting on the couch with our feet on the desk. We have actually been working. We have been talking to the people who are affected by social policy, from our social housing providers, our NGOs, our community service groups, Government departments, and volunteers. They have all helped us get this document to where it is today.

There are some commitments that we’re making in this document about our direction of travel for social services. There are some proposals that we’re seeking feedback on, but there are also some questions, and we’re expecting some very honest answers from the people who contribute back in their feedback, because we do want to hear their responses. We, as we’ve heard today, do believe that the Kiwis in this country do deserve a safety net, but at the same time, we have to remember that to have social welfare at all relies on the hard work of New Zealanders who get up, who go to work, and who pay their taxes. We also know and recognise that the very best form of welfare is the family. So, in helping families, we recognise that we are helping all Kiwis, and we’re helping them to live better lives.

At the heart of our thinking in this document is our social investment approach. That means investing early and breaking those cycles of dependency but also making sure that we grow the best population that we possibly can. We’ve used science, we’ve used data and facts, to support our direction of travel, and we know that the very best interventions are the earliest ones. So I’m very pleased to have contributed to the document, and my contribution was investing heavily in the first thousand days of a child’s life from conception. We know that not all mums and dads are prepared for life with a new baby and becoming parents, and not everyone has the support of a fully functioning family behind them to support them. So we’re proposing a whole new range of ways that we can support people to become great parents. We’re going to introduce our former target of having 90 percent of pregnant women registered with a lead carer in their first trimester—a target that was removed by the current Government when they removed the Better Public Services targets because, I guess, if you don’t measure it, then you can’t be held to account. We’re not afraid to be held to account. We want to grow healthy babies and we want to help pregnant mums understand how their lifestyle and their diet impacts on their growing baby, and that is a very big first step.

Already announced by the Hon Louise Upston is a three-day stay, helping new mums to get the care and support they need if they so wish. For those that don’t wish to stay for three days, we are ring-fencing that funding so that DHBs cannot spend it elsewhere, and that means that if mums choose to go home early, then those that need a bit more support and need a few more days can actually use those credited days. The paid parental leave of 26 weeks—we’re also proposing in this document that parents can split that and share it so that they can spend that time at home together with their new baby if they so wish.

I believe that investing in the first thousand days of a child’s life is the best investment that we can make as a country. We’ve used specialist information and specialists to help guide us in this development because we know that those who are nurtured survive the best. We are looking for solutions that break the cycles of poverty and tackle the root causes, and not just looking to the symptoms. Thank you, sir.

It’s a pleasure to stand and take a call in this general debate. It’s a great week to be in Parliament. We have inherited a mess, and the people of New Zealand finally know it. Too many issues have been ignored, and we’ve been paying the price. We’ve been paying the price for nine long years.

One of the most interesting things that we’ve been hearing this week—and even though the members have all been getting up and speaking about this big policy that they have, what the community has been hearing is that they are at it again—is that they’re bashing the beneficiaries again. We’ve heard from the Hon Simon Bridges this week, talking about taking benefits off people who are not going to immunise their children. Hey, I’ve been a single parent. I defy that man to come to us and tell us that people who are not on benefits are not immunising their kids. This is just a perfect example of saying “Hey, you know what? We can get you because you’re vulnerable.”

The other part of that as well is I heard—now, I love this saying—“Mr Grabaseat” is also talking about Working for Families members being penalised as well. What we know is that there are a whole group of people who choose not to immunise their children. Let’s look at those people and try and encourage them to do so. Let’s not punish their children for their decisions.

But, actually, today I want to talk about something that’s very close to my heart. This has been a great week to be in the House, to talk about our nuclear-free moment of this decade and about the 170,000 people who marched around climate change. I want to talk about this because this is one of those periods of time when we will look back, on this side of the House, and absolutely be proud to say that we were there—we were there and we were doing it.

I attended the climate change marches, and I got asked directly what do I do—what do I do as a person to help save the world from climate change? Well, I do the KeepCups and the reusable drink bottles and the metal straws and the Bee’s Wraps and the compost and worm farming, and I’ve just recently switched to a slow-fashion challenge, which means that I won’t be buying anything new for the next year. I look at the state of the seas and I look at the way that the environment is happening at the moment, and I think about the sea level rise impacting us soon and our water table will shift and we will have massive infrastructure issues, and I think about the acidification of our oceans and soil erosion. I think about these things and I worry—I worry—and I heard many, many people, when we talked around the zero carbon bill, talk about their worry and their anxiety.

So I thought that I would do something—probably not as well as our fabulous leader, Jacinda Ardern. But I thought that I would do a list of the things that we, on this side of the House, are doing to support the environment. So I’m going to give it a go—and I’ve only got a minute but I’ll give it a crack.

OK, we’ve banned new offshore oil and gas permits; we’ve protected indigenous fish; we’re overhauling New Zealand’s Resource Management Act, as it’s unacceptable for this cornerstone law to be underperforming in a country that values protection in environment; we’ve toiled for months and listened to hundreds of people talk about the zero carbon bill; we’ve brought in reform legislation about the emissions trading scheme; we’ve banned single-use plastic bags; we’ve made it easier for New Zealanders to choose active transport and choose cleaner cars with a “feebate” scheme for low-emissions vehicles; we’re building a National New Energy Development Centre in Taranaki; we’re building a 100-megawatt wind farm; we’ve established an interim climate change committee; we have given the most funding to the Department of Conservation since 2002—I’ve got so much, but I couldn’t do it. Jacinda did it so much better.

It is a pleasure—

Order! The member’s time has expired.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to take part in today’s general debate. I’m sorry that I interrupted that list.

We are about seven weeks out from Christmas, but clearly, and sadly, many New Zealand families are not going to be having much Christmas cheer this time round. We’ve heard already today and this week, through Ministry of Social Development data, that food grants have doubled. What an indication that is. That is quite a significant indication that things are on the decline for New Zealand families. These are the same families that have faced rents going up and fuel going up. The price of electricity has gone up as well.

The other quite sad fact under this Government—and it has been noted here already by my colleagues—is that number around the jobseeker benefit. I know members on the other side of the House have stood there and tried to point their finger at us and say that we are bashing beneficiaries, that we’re stigmatising, but, actually, this works in the Government’s favour, because actually victimhood is your currency. [Interruption] Yeah, that’s right. Growing greater dependency of New Zealand—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

Oh, yeah, it’s hurting, but more people, more New Zealanders, are on benefits. You love it. You’re creating victims and you love it. I’ll say it again—[Interruption] Oh, I’ll say it again: under this Government, victimhood is your currency.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

So, for anyone under 25 who is not working, what an indictment. This Government should be going flat tack to get young people into jobs, and you’ve just quoted Mana in Mahi I don’t know how many times. If Mana in Mahi was working, that number of young people on benefits would not be going up. So that’s not working.

It is about jobs, because they are opportunities. It’s about a path, a pathway to a prosperous life. It’s about a pathway where you can learn resilience and learn some life skills and personal responsibility, and it’s building character, giving them some purpose to get on to a better path for themselves and for their families. For the Labour Government to put out a two-minute video listing so-called achievements that anyone else would call creative accounting—I’ll list off some things for you. I’ve got a list as well.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Not me, not me—repeatedly.

I’ve got a list for the members—not for you, Mr Speaker. So here’s a list—yeah, here we go. Oh hang on, first off: KiwiBuild—how about that. KiwiBuild did nothing and couldn’t meet the targets.

Broke the no new taxes promise; instead, introduced seven new taxes. Broke the 1,800 new police promise. Gang members up—gang members up 26 percent. Petrol prices have gone up. Rent has gone up. State housing wait-lists are through the roof—so you can’t deliver on housing. Oh hang on, I’ve got some more: triple the number of people are living in motels; increased young people on the benefit, at a five-year high; no new roads—that’s right; no new roads—failed to attract any new students in your fees-fee policy. Oh, and delivered an oil and gas ban that will actually increase emissions, and also delivered record low business confidence.

So let’s pick up on that last one. What makes it worse—the situation I’ve listed off—is that our economy is stalling. We’ve had economist Cameron Bagrie saying that businesses do not trust this Government. They are actually really nervous. So, with all indicators saying that we should be roaring, our economy is not roaring. Businesses are nervous. They’re not going to put their hands in their pockets to invest, and that is clearly because they don’t trust this Government. They trust this Government to actually tax them more, to interfere more in their businesses, and to destroy relationships between business owners and employees. That’s what businesses know under a Labour Government. That’s why they’re not confident, they’re not going to spend, and our economy is going to continue to stall.

Kia ora. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou, kia ora. This morning, I was out at Epuni School in Lower Hutt talking about energy and the environment. I love talking to students about those issues, because they get it, right? They understand the environment is the heart of our future. They know it’s important. They know we need to do things differently.

I was at the school with the Minister of Education because that school was a particular leader. They’ve changed out their lightbulbs to efficient LEDs. They’ve saved now 80 percent on their lighting bill and are now spending that money on the kids. I was there with Chris Hipkins because under the confidence and supply agreement, we are launching a new energy efficient schools package. This new $16 million injection is going to see LED lightbulbs rolled out across 500 schools in New Zealand in a new contestable fund to support energy efficiency, and solar schools replacing coal-fired boilers. It’s a really good policy because what it means is the schools are actually saving money on their power bills and they get to spend that money on their kids—you know, on teacher-aides and on musical equipment, sports equipment, and books. It’s great, and because of this we’re going to be reducing pollution and power bills for decades and decades and decades.

I’ve visited lots of schools across New Zealand to find out what the exciting, innovative stuff they’re doing with energy is—I think of Blueskin Bay School in Otago, I think of Trident High School in Whakatāne—but what I love talking about to kids is the science of where this solar power comes from, because 150 million kilometres away, at the centre of the sun, hydrogen atoms are fused into helium under nuclear fusion and this releases energetic gamma rays. Now, what happens is it takes 10,000 to 170,000 years for that sunlight—that photon—to finally reach the surface. It then travels at the speed of light—8.3 minutes—and if it hits a solar panel, free, cheap, clean electricity is produced. It’s an amazing thing.

Now, contrast that with the previous vision, which is: let’s dig up the muck and dig coal—something that took 300 million years, these primordial swamps and plants, to finally dig up as an energy source. We still have 230 schools in New Zealand burning coal for energy that we need to replace. Coal is so old-fashioned. It’s 300 million years old, but other parties still support it.

I think, for me, this is the energy choice we face as a country: fossil fuels or renewables; more dirty old coal, or do we embrace clean, cheap energy; dig up the prehistoric muck, or use the power of the wind and the waves and the sun; subsidise oil companies to look for more oil we can’t afford to drill, or halt offshore oil permits; power companies’ super profits while people shiver at home in energy poverty, or helping people with an energy hardship; cold, damp, unhealthy, and uninsulated homes, or insulating homes and bringing in rental standards. These are the choices we face, and I believe in a cleaner, cheaper, smarter energy future. The kids know it. The economists know it. Even the Marsden oil refinery knows it, and today they announced the country’s largest ever solar farm is going to be built at Marsden.

Now, today, 11,000 scientists from 153 nations made a statement in the journal BioScience. They said—and I quote—“We declare unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency. To secure a sustainable future, we must change how we live. This will entail major transformations in the way our global society functions and interacts with natural ecosystems.”

This Government is building the foundations and the supports for a low-carbon country, but we need to go further. We need to listen to the children and the scientists, and say “No new coal mines, no new oil rigs off our beaches, no new fracking wells. We’re in a climate emergency—no new fossil fuels for generations ever again.”

We can’t keep cramming more cows on paddocks and more tourists in Fiordland. We’re already seeing the impacts on our environment. We need a clean, just transition to grow those new jobs. We need to see solar panels on our schools, on our State houses, on our KiwiBuilds, on our marae, on our hospitals, on our prisons, and on our universities. To decarbonise our industry and our transport networks, New Zealand needs to do in 15 years what has taken us 100 years to get to this point and build a new, modern electricity grid, and then do it cheaper and cleaner than before. This is going to take hands-on Government leadership, and our communities need to be empowered to produce their own energy.

Now, thinking about those kids at Epuni School, there’s a famous saying which people will know, which is that some people say that children should be seen and not heard. Well, I’ve seen those children on the streets—the tens of thousands of them—with the climate strikes, and in the Green Party, we will listen.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to mark the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, founder of the Sikh religion. The Sikh religion was founded in 1469. It is the fifth-largest religion in the world, and the youngest. Today, we have about 27 million followers all over the globe. Guru Nanak Dev Ji’s teachings were simple: be kind, work hard, do good, and treat everyone equally, no matter what their religion, caste, skin colour, or gender.

In medieval India, women had to face very significant hardship and discrimination due to their gender. They were treated as slaves. At times, they were also sold into child marriage, condemned to miserable widowhood if they escaped suttee immolation, and were regarded unfit for religious instruction. But Guru Nanak Dev Ji had the rare courage to stand up to clear the divide and discriminatory behaviour to equate women and men.

So kyon mandaa aakhiaijit jameh raajaanm. Guru Ji said, “Why call them inferior when they gave birth to all human beings, including the kings?” It fills me with great pride that our beloved country, New Zealand, gave the right to women to vote first in the world.

There are three main tenets of Sikhism which Guru Nanak Dev Ji gave to us, and Sikhism is based on: Naam Japu, which is meditating on God’s name with the purpose to eliminate evil, greed, attachment, anger, and lust, for our personality; Kirit Karo refers to earning an honest, pure, and dedicated living by exercising one’s skill, ability, and talent; Wand Chakou, share what you have and to consume together as a community—this could be wealth, food, or anything that we are able to share.

I will not dwell further on biological details of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Rather, I will share the learnings of Guru Nanak Dev Ji that remain as relevant today as they were when he first manifested them. The first words Guru Nanak Dev Ji uttered after his enlightenment were: “Ik-Onkar Sat Naam Karta Purakh Nirbhau Nirvair Akaal Murat Ajuni Saibhan Gur Prasaadh.” The concept of God is reflected in the prologue of Guru Granth Sahib, which in English could be described: one universe, creator God, the name is the truth, creator being personified, no fear, no hatred, an image of undying, beyond birth and self-existent. Guru Nanak Dev Ji further said that God is universal; he does not belong to any race or any nation. Why search for God outside, when he is within all of us? The eight words, along with the ninth, “Gur Prasaadh”, are the blessings of true teacher from the essence of Sikhism.

Anyone who understands and follows these founding hymns of Sikhism in their very basic forms will not be able to, or cannot, discriminate against anyone on this earth.

I would like to reiterate that what the Hon Shane Jones is trying to do is the opposite of the message of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, and I think that he needs to understand that Indians have gained their mana by the hard work of our ancestors as well as with the education we have gained. Also, we have got the Prime Minister, who is advocating against racism and hate speech, whereas we have a Cabinet Minister who is doing the opposite of that and making derogatory remarks against the Indian community. I think that that is totally—

Order! The member’s time has expired.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.