General Debate

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

Last weekend was a weekend of contrast. Here in New Zealand, we celebrated as a country, for the first time, Matariki—Mānawatia a Matariki. This was a tremendous occasion, one where it was so much more than a public holiday. It was a celebration of who we are as a nation and who we would like to be as a nation. Its timing was impeccable after a tough couple of years for New Zealanders, and facing, as we are, a cost of living crisis and pressures across the economy, this was an opportunity for New Zealanders to take stock.

I note the words of Sir Pou Temara when he said, “Today is a moment in time. Today we have chosen to thread the principles and values of Matariki into who we are as a people. Yes, let us celebrate our individuality and uniqueness, our diversity and variety, and the wonderful colours and flavours who make us who we are. But let us also come together to rise as one people, one nation, as one cluster to collectively darn another historical stitch into the fabric of our national identity.”

I am immensely proud to be part of a Government that recognises the importance of Te Ao Māori and our national identity in building our nation. For me, this sits alongside the introduction of New Zealand histories into our school curriculum, the fact that we have apologised for and are working on reconciliation around the Dawn Raids, the fact that as a country, we are making sure that we address the needs of people right across New Zealand, and, on Friday, we have—perhaps for the first time in the world—a ministry of disabled people that will open as well. These things matter because they’re about every New Zealander finding their place in this country of Aotearoa New Zealand.

As a Government, it is our job to make sure we look after New Zealanders in the here and now, and support them with the rising costs they see in supermarkets and in petrol prices as the global inflation pressures strike in New Zealand. It is to make sure we support them through COVID-19, and it is to invest in our future so that we have high-wage jobs in a low-carbon economy. We must do all of that, but a Government must also make sure that every person who lives here feels included, feels valued, and feels respected. I know that it is the values that Jacinda Ardern holds as Prime Minister—the values of inclusion, of support, of manaakitanga, of making sure that every single New Zealander finds a place for themselves in our country—and Matariki is a great example of the way that we can do that, and I think New Zealanders have welcomed it.

But the contrast last weekend was the release of the Roe v Wade decision in the United States of America and the distress that that caused for women across the world as fundamental reproductive rights were stripped away after 50 years of what had been thought to be settled and consensus law. It was absolutely no surprise that women and people across Aotearoa New Zealand were concerned and distressed about this, and, again, the Prime Minister spoke for those values.

Five days on, I couldn’t tell you what Christopher Luxon thinks about these issues. I couldn’t tell you what values Christopher Luxon would bring to being the leader of New Zealand. I couldn’t tell you that, because today I don’t know whether the National Party will vote for a member’s bill when it comes to issue of abortion.

What I do know is that Christopher Luxon has decided that fundamental reproductive rights for women are a distraction—that’s what he’s decided. He’s also given a list today of the issues that concern women. So, stand down ladies, Christopher Luxon’s got it covered for you! He knows the issues are for woman; he doesn’t need to hear from anybody else!

Simon O’Connor has had a lot to say this week as well about these issues. I want to quote from something that he said in this House: “one of the things that [annoys me] as a student of philosophy and as a parliamentarian is inconsistency. [If at] any time the public can see inconsistency, they know something wrong is happening.” I couldn’t agree—for once in my life—more with Simon O’Connor.

This is about consistency. On this side of the House, we have a Government that consistently upholds the values of inclusion and of support, and of making sure that every New Zealander can achieve their potential. On the other side of the House, we have a group of people who are committed, once again, to dividing and looking after the most wealthy in our society.

This has been a weekend of celebration for New Zealand with Matariki. We are on a path to celebrating our national identity, and including and supporting every citizen. I’m immensely proud of the Government that has led that.

Crime’s out of control in this wonderful country, and we need to let the police do their job and support them when they do. “Soft on crime” has become a popular catchphrase, but it goes deeper than that. This increase in crime is a result of naive Government ideologies and a massive disconnect between real life and office-dwellers.

We’re told that the way to deal with gangs is to get to know them and ask them what they need. We have a senior Minister saying that it’s better to be shot by a shotgun than a semi-automatic—that’s the success of the gun buyback. The same Minister said recently that he spoke to a policeman a few months ago who told him he feels a lot safer after that gun buy-back. It’s just nonsense. I speak to police every day and they don’t, and neither do good, law-abiding, licensed firearms owners, knowing that their details could be in criminals’ hands if not now, then later, when the proposed firearms register fails.

Youth crime must be addressed before the kids on our street become bling-wearing adult criminals. A few months back, an MP who sits not too far from me said that young people can’t commit crime; they just don’t understand what they’re doing. I realised then that we’re going to head down this path for a little bit longer.

Young people haven’t changed from 10, 20, 50 years ago—they’re all the same. What is different is how we treat them, react to their behaviour. Burying your head in the sand, telling kids that it’s not their fault, and blaming everyone else and everything else is not the answer. Young ram-raiders are saying, “We know the police won’t chase us.” There must be a consequence to these actions, and we can’t continue to excuse violent and criminal behaviour. Young people want boundaries. It shows them that you care about them, that you want them to succeed and to learn. This doesn’t mean just giving them everything they want.

Education is the key, and kids who can’t read will get into trouble. Seventy percent of prison inmates are functionally illiterate, but, instead of reading, with blind ideology we’re going to make teachers prioritise a dodgy history curriculum.

Young people know when a teacher genuinely cares about them. It’s a teacher who tells them off, and makes them finish their work and use their manners. Kids actually want that.

It’s easy to blame parents, but I’m a bit more sympathetic. Despite what those who often don’t have kids say, parents’ rights have been eroded and their responsibilities taken off them, like with breakfast in schools. Who loves their kids the most: the parent who gives their child everything they want, protects them from situations that aren’t nice, and doesn’t impose boundaries, or the parent who gives their kids the tools and resilience to navigate through life’s ups and downs, and tells them off when they do silly stuff? There is a happy medium, but, currently, we’re on a dangerous end of the spectrum. Values have to be taught, and there must be consequences. Any suggestion that “Oh well, it’s just a young person and it doesn’t really matter.” is just stupid.

New Zealand has a world-leading youth aid system. I worked for a number of years as a youth aid officer not too long ago. Back then, the relationship with other Government agencies was fantastic. The family group conference process was very successful. In some areas, this system is still working well, producing great results. In other areas, it’s broken and needs to be fixed.

Two years ago, a woman approached me at a restaurant. After introducing herself through tears, she thanked me for saving her daughter’s life. Now in her 20s, her daughter went through the family group conference process and the mandatory follow-up to get accountability. The then 15-year-old, who had started to self-harm, was made to take responsibility for her actions. This intervention was enough to turn her life around. Fourteen years later, she’s happy, owns a house, and has a responsible job in the hospitality industry. It really isn’t rocket science, but it requires sensible policies. Police resources must be put in the right places.

Police are at the sharp end of all antisocial behaviour, and they must be supported. Unfortunately, despite the millions of dollars and promises, they don’t feel they are. We’ve got to challenge the constant rhetoric we hear from too many irresponsible members in this House when they allege systemic racism in the New Zealand Police. It is divisive and not true. The recent statement made in this House to the media that more police on the street means more dead Māori should have been condemned by the police Minister, but not a word. It’s little wonder police don’t feel supported. It’s because they’re not.

New Zealand police are the best in the world. They do a job few here would want to do, see things few here will ever see, and get into situations that most of the armchair experts here will never experience. The ACT Party will always support police and the rights of victims.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. A little later on this week, I will have the absolute honour and privilege of being at the launch of the new ministry whaikaha, the Ministry for Disabled People.

First, I want to mihi to my colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni for all the massive work that she has done in putting this together. I was speaking to the governance group who are supporting the establishment unit in bringing the ministry together, made up of members of the disability community, made up of tangata whaikaha Māori and officials. They were telling me about how important this particular piece of work is. It is 40 years in the making, and it will come to fruition on 1 July—enormously proud and excited to be part of that.

We have worked with disabled communities and disabled people since coming into Government when we put the commitment into our manifesto around accessibility legislation. I know that previous members of this House the Hon Ruth Dyson and current members of this House Angie Warren-Clark and Gaurav Sharma have supported the parliamentary champions for accessibility legislation. I also want to make a shout-out to Greg O’Connor, who was instrumental in that work. That was our commitment to them to ensure that we get a bill in the House that deals with the issue of ensuring accessibility for disabled people, not just in housing, not just in education but in justice, in transport, and in all the areas of their life where they currently find barriers to be able to live their best lives. I’m enormously proud of that work.

That is in stark contrast to what we are hearing from the other parties in this House who are saying things like—and I want to quote from a press release by the ACT Party. They would scrap demographic ministries. Most of these ministries replicate work that should already be done in policy ministries or the Ministry for Culture and Heritage. I just want to suggest to the ACT Party that any disabled person hearing those words or reading those words would feel completely marginalised, and we are talking about over a million people who identify as being part of our disabled persons community and their families and whānau.

It’s extraordinary to me that not only the ACT Party are saying that but Mr Luxon, the day after that on his 1News interview, said, “I think that’s a very good point in there. I think we have over the period of this Government built up a huge amount of bureaucracy.” Again, I point to the fact that any disabled person who is hearing those comments would think how little the National Party and ACT Party think of them and their aspirations.

Talking to the governance group a little earlier this week, I want to use their words to this House about the importance of this ministry. They feel they have been nurtured. They feel that they are able to grow, that this ministry will have heart and meaning. They say it will have a strong foundation. They commend this Government for the long strides it is taking into supporting disabled people and tangata whaikaha Māori. They talk about the train. And in that conversation, I did say to them: “I don’t think this is a train, because trains have carriages that can be picked off, much like the ACT Party and National Party would do with this particular ministry.” I have said that, for me, it is about the double-hulled canoe; it is about the waka, where you can have different views but you travel together in the same direction.

They talked about a shared vision. They talked about control and choice, and that, for me, says it all—that our tangata whaikaha Māori, our disabled people, will have control and choice; not only that, they will have voice. They will have voice to be able to speak directly to Government on the issues that impact them the most.

We will change the lives of nearly 1.5 million New Zealanders by the introduction of this ministry. But, more than that, we will work with them to ensure that their aspirations are not only met but they are enhanced, that they have the ability to determine their own lives, that the inclusive development they talk about is realised, that we are brave and bold alongside our disabled community, that we are transformational and aspirational, not just for them but for ourselves. It is an absolute privilege to be able to do that.

I want to mihi to the Office for Disability Issues, who will be folded into the new ministry, for the work that they have done advocating for this community for so long. I commend this new ministry to our House.

💬 SPEAKER: The Hon Dr—no, sorry. The ordinary Dr Shane Reti.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: OK.

💬 SPEAKER: There’s no withdrawal of the honourable nature of the member.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. We now know why more than 36,000 people are waiting more than four months to see a specialist. We now know why emergency department (ED) wait times have increased, with some people waiting more than 32 hours. We now know why we have a health workforce shortage—4,000 nurses, 1,500 GPs, and 1,500 specialists.

Because Andrew Little ignored the cry for help a year ago when a district health board (DHB) chief executive wrote, on behalf of every DHB, pleading for help, a letter with dire warnings and actions that were needed immediately to “avert a health crisis”. A year later, the chickens have come home to roost.

Let’s see if Andrew Little takes a general debate call this afternoon, 48 hours out from significant health reforms, which would be the convention with such a big structural change. Let’s see if that happens, and if he wants to defend what I’ll lay down on the table today. The Minister is trying to say he only found out about this letter a month ago. I do not believe that, and I want to challenge that on at least two points.

First of all, if the Minister didn’t know about the letter, he should have known about the letter. This letter was on behalf of every single chief executive in the DHB sector—that is, the most senior executive group in our hospitals—and they deserved his attention.

Secondly, very senior people in the Minister’s own ministry also received the letter—the ministry he is supposed to have oversight for. It was also sent to the acting Deputy Director-General of Health Workforce New Zealand on 28 July last year. It’s a very senior person, the Deputy Director-General, inside the Ministry of Health.

I contend that Andrew Little should have been aware, or was aware, of this letter from DHBs a year ago and he did nothing. The Minister was warned a year ago and did nothing. His track record in this sort of modus operandi is well known. I’m inclined to remember ICU beds—warned about it, did nothing, and the dire consequence that came from doing nothing around ICU beds, and particularly building new ICU beds, particularly in Auckland.

The letter sent by 20 DHBs a year ago had multiple warnings. First, the health system is buckling, with some sites in code red. Directly from the letter: “You will be aware that our hospitals are also experiencing very high levels of occupancy at present, and some sites are even in code red, where they are deemed to be at extreme levels. This is obviously an unsustainable situation and places even more pressure on our existing workforce. We are very concerned about this situation and for the potential for further deterioration if there are no changes to assist with at least securing the existing workforce from 20 DHBs.”

Secondly, the letter also says, “We are also experiencing increased presentations in emergency departments.” They even sent graphs of what the occupancy rate looks like inside the EDs, showing the increasing trend towards what they call “extreme occupancy” across emergency departments a year ago, and here we are today with emergency department times increasing.

Point three, what the letter also says: “In order to respond to surge, the system will have to redirect workforce from areas like planned care.” That’s code for 36,000 people waiting more than four months to see a specialist. What’s really poignant is their last summary of that: “This will have long-term impacts on the health and wellbeing of New Zealanders.”

Point four, and here’s the immigration bit—here is what 20 DHBs were urgently asking for, which resonates with what my colleague Erica Stanford has been talking about for a long time, in which we have a petition up at the moment. This is the summary to the letter: “Therefore, DHBs seek your immediate attention to (1) ensure our current overseas-trained staff can have a direct and prompt path to residency.” That’s not two years for registered nurses; that’s a direct and prompt path to residency. “And (2) that overseas health professionals are facilitated to enter New Zealand as required to avert a crisis in the health sector.”

Clearly that has failed. This was a warning a year ago that the Minister had and he did nothing. There’s now no money for ED nurses; no money for ED docs. Because what we also know is that instead of building the health workforce, the ministry has employed up to 1,000 new consultants—not even in the past year; just in the past 10 months is what the written parliamentary question shows. No money for ED nurses, no money for ED doctors, but plenty for up to 1,000 consultants.

It’s interesting looking at the list of consultants: corporate services, 78; data and digital, 728; the DG’s Office, 40; Health Workforce New Zealand, 10. I think that kind of sums it up right there. Just 10 in this bloated, excessive list of consultants. I rest my case.

When I stood in this House to make my maiden speech, I said that I signed up to this job to make progress in my communities, and today I stood on those front steps with some of my colleagues to say to a group of young people from Albany Senior High School that “our kopapa is your kopapa” as they presented a petition to this House to urge our Government to fund gender-neutral bathrooms. They did that because they believe in this Government and that we understand the vision and aspirations of our future generation. That’s what I stand for and I encourage others to stand up for the voice of our young people.

I’m incredibly proud to be the chair of Labour’s rainbow caucus, and the work that we’ve done since we’ve been in Government to enable those voices, for the mahi to be done, and for the action to be taken. In fact, the first time I met that group of young people was when they were lobbying me and telling me the reasons why they believed we needed to ban conversion practices in this country. They’ve seen internationally the impacts that it had on young people—the impact on their mental health—and they wanted us to do something about it. And there we were. We all stood up together—well, most of us stood up together—to ban conversion practices, and that’s why I’m proud to be the chair of Labour’s rainbow caucus alongside many of our partners in this House.

We’ve made progressive change for our rainbow communities, and it doesn’t stop there. Today is another example. In the Budget this year, we have boosted funding for gender—affirming care and training for our health sector to be more responsive to the needs of transgender New Zealanders, because in this House every New Zealander counts. We’ve also introduced a rights-based approach to healthcare for intersex tamariki and young people, empowering them and their parents with better information to make informed decisions about their care, and preventing unnecessary medical interventions from occurring. This side of the House responds to those issues well. We understand that every child in this country has the right to feel included. Whether it be in this House, whether it be in their schools, or whether it be in their community centres, they have a right to be included, and under this Government we are getting those things done.

But solid delivery doesn’t stop there. In fact, I’ve been really proud to be a member of Parliament on the North Shore where we’ve been able to get work done on housing, transport, and infrastructure. Aucklanders are facing a 7 percent increase in water rates. That side of the House wants to do nothing. This side of the House wants to get on with the job of supporting Aucklanders to be able to pay, to live within the costs of our city. That’s solid delivery, and I want to speak particularly to the progressive gains that we’ve seen with our children and our whānau. I have a whole list.

Ten thousand local people benefited from the boost to the benefits in Budget 2021 and the further increase delivered on 1 April this year. That’s North Shore people. Over 50 percent of workers in Tāmaki-makau-rau, Auckland, were kept in work through COVID lockdowns, and we see unemployment at low levels now. There are free lunches in schools, and that really counts. I heard the member across the House talk about breakfasts. Well, we’ve got school lunches in our schools. The winter energy payment is helping low-income families across this country with their winter energy bills—helping to keep them warm this winter. And last but not least, and a favourite of mine, we’ve been working on our crime and safety challenges in our community. We’ve put back funding to reverse National’s truancy services that they cut, and we did it in this Budget, this year, to ensure that our young people are engaged in their learning and are in their schools and not choosing alternative negative pathways.

I am proud that under this Government we are standing for inclusion. I am proud that we’re getting things done, but most of all I’m proud of our progress.

E te Māngai, tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. Mr Speaker, what if I told you that around half a century ago we directly imported laws from the United States of America that sought to criminalise people and what they put into their bodies? What if I told you that despite all of the “Just say no” moralising, people continued to do that thing that this Parliament had tried to ban and that that attempt at that ban caused even more harm?

Most of us in this House recognise that banning abortion doesn’t stop abortions; it stops safe abortions. We saw politicians—or, at least, most of us—come across this House in this Parliament condemning the actions of the US Supreme Court in overturning the precedent of Roe v Wade, overnight making abortion illegal in around half of American states. We lamented the danger that this creates. Well, referring to the comments that Minister Robertson quoted from National Party MP Simon O’Connor about the want for some logical consistency, let’s have it, because we continue to have American-style laws on our books with similar logic that we know will create more harm. I am of course talking about our drug laws. I am talking about the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. It might surprise Christopher Luxon, Simeon Brown, Simon O’Connor, and the rest of the National Party that we currently have a totally liberalised, completely unregulated, full-on, free market for illegal drugs in this country.

The National Party’s stance on drugs, I might say, is perhaps the most coherent economic policy. This morning, Christopher Luxon told Tova O’Brien that he would need more evidence before he made up his mind on whether the National Party would support greater resourcing for drug-checking or decriminalising drugs for an evidence-based approach. I’ve come to learn that, like with abortion, there is literally no evidence that the National Party MPs could be confronted with that would change their faith in criminal prohibition—not the Law Commission’s 2011 report; not He Ara Oranga, the mental health and addiction inquiry; not Turuki! Turuki!, the Safe and Effective Justice review; not even Victoria University of Wellington’s research on drug-checking that shows that when the majority of people are confronted with evidence that the substance that they thought they were consuming is not what they thought it was, they will not consume that substance.

The reality is that this is exactly the same line that we’ve heard from the National Party for a really long time now, because it was exactly the same line that former National Prime Minister the Hon Bill English took when confronted with a growing death toll as a result of the synthetics crisis, when he said that this was just a matter of personal responsibility. Faith is a powerful thing, because having spent five years in this place trying to talk about drug law reform and engage in the debate, I can tell you for a fact that the reason that this country spends four times as much money on criminal enforcement than on drug harm reduction is because this House does not really care about the evidence. The reason that the police continue to spend the better part of a million dollars on cannabis choppers every single year, despite their own internal evidence-based policing unit telling them that it has no discernible impact on supply, and, in fact, we know from Ministry of Health data that cannabis consumption has gone up, is because we do not care for the evidence.

Despite the evidence that we have inherited these drug laws directly from the United States and they continue to deliver worse and worse outcomes, both National and, unfortunately, I must say to this point, largely the Labour Party continue to be invested in the same myths that were peddled by former President of the United States Richard Nixon. Drugs exist, like abortions and all of the things that the National Party caucus would prefer did not. These things exist regardless of our moral high-horsing. They exist regardless of our opinions. They just exist, and we have to deal with that reality, because we’ve got 50 years of evidence that shows that our laws make drug harm worse, and with powdered fentanyl now on our streets, a drug that has killed tens of thousands of Americans as a result of the same laws that we have here, maybe it’s time that we decided to give evidence a go, because, at some point in all of our lives, we have to decide to confront the reality of the world that we live in. It’s process known as growing up, and when it comes to drug law, unfortunately it doesn’t feel as though this House to this point has done all too much of that. It’s time for this place to grow up.

Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. All politics is local, so let me speak to the ways that we are protecting our progressive gains that the Government has made since it took office in 2017 for the local people of South Auckland and those in my electorate of Manurewa. May I first start with an acknowledgment of the incredible celebration of Matariki. For South Aucklanders, this was a special moment, because it represented not only a day which is unique to New Zealanders, not only a day which brings us closer together, whether we are Māori, whether we are Pākehā, whether we are tauiwi to this country. It also represented a time in which we could celebrate those things which have been going on in South Auckland for so long, at our marae and within our Pacific communities, in the recognition of Matariki or Matali’i, and those brilliant traditions that mark this time of reflection and rebirth in the new year. It was really special for South Aucklanders to be able to share that with the rest of our country.

Now, let me first turn to health and environment, because at a local level in South Auckland, these two things are very closely connected. In the last Budget, the Government announced a million-dollar project for the clean-up of the Puhinui Creek. It’s an important one to me as a local MP because I see the stream as an emblem for our community’s experience with the health system. When you have a health system which is funded through our traditional models of funding, with limited funding that is not prioritised by need, you end up with a system like the Puhinui Creek, where in leafy green suburbs like Totara Heights, the stream runs through unimpeded. It is clean. It is beautiful. Children enjoy it. Neighbours appreciate it, and it raises house prices. Then in areas like Rata Vine, it is a breeder of rats the size of cats. It is a catchment for local trollies being dumped. It is a place where teenagers go to smoke marijuana. It is not a nice place. And because that funding has been limited in scope and has not looked at the whole system of the stream, investment hasn’t been able to clean it up, because there are areas of dire under-investment. That is the situation for South Auckland and our health system.

I am pleased that parts of that health system reform are coming into effect within days, and I’m proud of a Government that is investing in a health system which is going to serve not only South Aucklanders, who desperately need the end of the postcode lottery, but our Māori and Pacific populations who have been desperately under-served by those traditional models of health in the same way that the Puhinui Creek in our areas has not been something we could enjoy. We need a system that works for all New Zealanders, and that’s what this Government is building.

Budget 2022 delivers more for medicines and treatments. It delivers dental grants for low-income eligible families, tripled from $300 to $1,000. There are 48 more ambulances on our streets and 248 more paramedics allowed for in this Budget. Many of those will come from South Auckland through our Auckland University of Technology paramedicine programme, and I’m proud that we’re responding to the need in our communities for that service.

The ability of the new health system to take a bird’s-eye view of our public health needs is also going to be critical for the people of Manurewa. I acknowledge the Green member Chlöe Swarbrick for her advocacy for a public health system which deals with things like alcohol and drugs. I hear from people on the doorsteps in Manurewa that there are too many bottle stores on every suburban corner and that we need evidence-based health responses to curbing alcohol harms, which is what the investment in this new public health system allows. Why do we need that? Why do the people of Manurewa need that? Because Manurewa’s population is disproportionately affected by alcohol harm, especially Māori women like me who suffer more adverse effects as a result of other people’s drinking than anyone else.

These investments also allow us to build upon the Government’s work in 2019 to move towards a health-based approach to other addictive substances. I’m proud of this Government’s commitment to a continued focus on harm prevention. Just in the last week, the Green member mentioned that we’re seeing fentanyl—a powdered drug that has caused tens of thousands of deaths overseas—enter New Zealand and sold as cocaine. I want to take this opportunity to thank the first responders who were carrying naloxone and were able to prevent deaths of the people who consumed it. We need a health system that is built so that it can respond to new threats like these. That is why we are investing in a public health system which can do that, and I’m proud to stand with a Government that is making those investments.

I am proud that since coming into Government in 2017, we’ve worked hard to tackle some of those long-term challenges facing people in South Auckland, like under-investment in our health system and in our local environment. I’m proud of the progress we’ve made on those big issues, but I know there’s more to do, and that’s why we committed to building on our progress and protecting the gains we’ve already made. Tēnā tātou.

There is no doubt in my mind that today was the first day in which the future Labour leader aspirants began to show their colours. We know the old saying, “When the cat’s away, the mouse will play.” Well, the mice were out today, very much in that mode.

If you have a look at the question sheet today, which is question time, the great theatre piece for Parliament, Grant Robertson had two questions, Kiri Allan had two questions, there was a cursory question for Kelvin Davis, and of course Chris Hipkins got one question as well, as did Stuart Nash. All of those names are sort of in the mix. But, of course, coming through the middle were three questions today to Michael Wood, long believed by many to be the future leader of the Labour Party. I think what is sad is that they all kind of missed the mark. When Mr Robertson was asked to talk about the economy and to justify the billion dollars that’s been expended on people over the last four years being put into motels instead of houses, he came up with the suggestion that no Government has built more houses in New Zealand’s history than the current Government. Well, they had to do that, because their plan was to build 100,000 houses in 10 years; they’ve built only 1,300 under that programme. The rest were Kāinga Ora doing what it always does. And the nonsensical suggestion that National sold off the State housing stock was, of course, once again trotted out as some kind of mantra. Those houses never disappeared—they never disappeared. They’re still there, still part of the national housing stock. Then they’re, of course, dismissing the fact that Kāinga Ora, in the last couple of years, has managed to demolish more houses than they’ve actually been able to build.

So where on earth this is all supposed to take us, who knows, but what it means is that that a billion dollars spent on motel bills for housing people who would otherwise have nowhere to go could have built 1,000 million-dollar houses. It could have built 2,000 $500,000 houses. So it is an enormous expense, massively disproportionate to the cost of proper housing. But, of course, they couldn’t guarantee their housing at the moment, because of the building supply shortages. And wouldn’t one have thought that a Government that is making so much noise about how much they’re doing in the space of solving New Zealand’s housing crisis might have looked at that building supply issue? What I can say is that I was very proud to welcome Knauf plasterboard into New Zealand in 2013, trying to get the start of some competition in this country. I think the Commerce Commission has been incredibly weak, and that successive Ministers have allowed that weakness, particularly in the last few years, because the great empire that produces most of the wallboard in this country managed to see that company off, managed to put them in a position where they had to shut down after just a short few years operating in New Zealand. When cartels work like that, we should have recourse to law, which we have, to break them up, but there has been no action taken, and successive Ministers have had their eye off the ball.

We’ve got the extraordinary situation of 25,000 people—five times the number that were there in 2017—waiting for a State house. There has to be a question asked: what’s caused that massive number to rise over that period of time? Around about 5,000 a year. And, of course, they say, “Oh, well, if the Government prior to 2017 had done more, it wouldn’t have happened.” This has happened on their watch, nothing to do with the prior five years, and so is the entire situation that we face at the moment. Look at the rise in rental costs—huge rises, $50 alone on the average rental in the last 12 months. These are things that contribute to the massive cost of living, and it is unacceptable that the Government runs off and says, “Oh, it’s COVID-19.”, “Well, it’s the war in Ukraine.”, “It’s supply chains.”, “It’s everything else; it’s nothing to do with us.” Well, I think one of the interesting things today is that the standout debutante Mr Wood said that they are building a programme of transport infrastructure that will serve New Zealand for decades ahead. The sad thing is that the smart money would be on the fact that it will be decades ahead before their plan ever sees the light of day.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Ngā mihi o Matariki, te tau hou Māori. Mānawatia a Matariki. I’m really delighted to take the call. My voice is sounding a little bit deep today. That’s probably because, unfortunately, I missed most of the celebrations for Matariki due to a cold over the break, so I stayed at home and did what I was required to do. But I did feel a tremendous sense of pride, and a tremendous excitement to see all of the things that were happening around the country. I got up early and watched the service that occurred at Te Papa—just amazing. What a time to be in this country. What a time for us to come together as a people. I’m not going to yell and shout across to the House about how wrong, and different, and all of those things—this is a time for us to celebrate, in the depths of winter, that we finally have a celebration that is uniquely ours.

I thought long and hard about what I was going to say today, and I thought about the wishing star—Hiwa-i-te-rangi. I thought about the wishing star and what would be my wish for this House and for our nation going forward at this time. I thought about what an interesting juxtaposition we had over the weekend, and unfortunately, because I was sick, I watched a little bit too much TV about Roe v Wade. So I watched that and while, on the one hand, I was feeling tremendously proud of our nationhood and how we’ve moved forward, I also, as a woman, felt the mamae of my sisters across the world. It was an interesting decision, and one we had had flagged and we did know was coming, but I took comfort from my Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, and her words. We knew exactly where our Prime Minister stood, and I think her words bear repeating. She said, “Here in New Zealand we recently legislated to decriminalise abortion and treat it as a health rather than a criminal issue. That change was grounded in the fundamental belief that it is a woman’s right to choose. People are absolutely entitled to have deeply held convictions on this issue. But these personal beliefs should never rob another from making their own decision.”

I have held the hand of a number of women who I’ve supported as they have made the very difficult decision. None of us here in this House is pro-abortion—none. We are pro-choice or we are pro-life. And I want to make it very, very clear that, for those of us here who stood and voted “yes” to take abortion out of the Crimes Act, under the leadership of Andrew Little, who’s sitting here beside me today—when we made that choice—it was a hard-felt decision for all of us, and not one of us took that decision lightly. But we took the choice and the decision that this was a health procedure—the only and last health procedure left in the Crimes Act—a health procedure which then enables us, each and every one of us, to make the choices alongside our family. And none of us should judge that.

There are so many progressive things, and I have this huge list of the things that we as a Government are doing, and I feel like I’ve talked only about something that affects us across the world, but I need to say this, I need to talk about this decision, because I feel fundamentally this brings into question—I have known this decision for 49 years of my 51 years, and I am so very afraid, and that is why I am so delighted that I sit in a Labour Government that is progressive, that stands up for the person—the little person, the women, those who do not have a voice—and we stand alongside them. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. If there’s one thing that the past week has shown us, it is that settled law can be overthrown. This week, we have seen Roe v Wade, which had been settled law for 49 years—49 years—overthrown by the Supreme Court in the United States of America. It was overthrown by judges who swore under oath that they regarded it as settled law.

So when I hear the leader of the National Party, a man who, let us not forget, told us that abortion, in his view, is tantamount to murder, a statement that renders a quarter of all women in Aotearoa who have had an abortion as tantamount to being murderers, and when Mr Luxon tells us that he considers that the abortion law reforms passed in 2020, two short years ago—not 49 years ago; two short years ago—is settled, I am not reassured. I am not reassured that our gains are secure.

I am not reassured, not when 13 of the 32 current National caucus members voted No to that abortion law reform in 2020, and not when nine of the current National caucus voted against even establishing a safe area around abortion providers, which is set to protect people seeking abortion care from harassment, intimidation, and threats. Nine of the National Party caucus voted against that legislation this year.

When almost all of the recent leaders of the National Party, with the exception of the Hon Judith Collins, who is sitting opposite—Mr Luxon, Dr Reti, Mr Bridges, Mr Muller, Mr English, and Mr Key voted or would have voted No to the abortion law reform that this Government shepherded through in 2020, please, let us realise that this is who they are. They are telling us very clearly where they stand and what they want to achieve.

Tell me again that I should not worry my little head around women and pregnant people retaining the fundamental rights to determine what happens to their own bodies, because my head, like most women’s heads, is actually capable of holding more than one concern in it at a time. I am concerned because I know that any National Party member can put a member’s bill in the tin, and if it is drawn from the biscuit tin, it will be put before the House when, I remind you, a third voted No to abortion law reform.

I am concerned too, because I know that legislation is not the only way to remove or reduce rights. Gains made can be easily lost. Reducing access to abortion does not reduce the number of abortions; it reduces the number of safe abortions. Roe v Wade being overturned will result in women, girls, and pregnant people dying, and that is not what I or anyone in Labour’s caucus would describe as a good day.

A good day was one that saw this progressive Government elected into the 53rd Parliament, and the 52nd, in coalition with the Green Party, a Government whose values of inclusion and support are seen in the legislation and policies and processes that we have enacted: abortion law reform, the safe areas amendment bill being passed, expanding bereavement leave to include stillbirths and miscarriages—thanks to our member of Parliament Ginny Andersen—free period products in schools, banning conversion therapy, funding rainbow health, creating the Māori Health Authority, consolidating 20 DHBs into Health New Zealand on Friday, and the first, beautiful Matariki holiday, the first indigenous, truly New Zealand public holiday. That is what I call a good day.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I take this opportunity to speak on the appalling situation that’s unfolding for our vocational education sector, under the growing dominance of the Te Pūkenga monolith, created by Minister Hipkins to somehow magically fix the issues of the sector.

Don’t get me wrong, there were some issues: a small number of polytechnics not operating in a business-like manner; some too small to be viable on their own; a funding system not meeting needs; unhelpful competition between industry training organisations and industry training providers; and, most significantly, a multitude of different ways that funding had been stripped out of the polytech sector over successive years—base grants, degree top-ups, funding of clinical placements, adult and community education funding. The list goes on and on to amount to tens of millions of dollars taken out of the polytech sector until one day Minister Hipkins disingenuously said, “This sector is broken. I know how to fix it. I’ll amalgamate them all, cause enormous anxiety and disarray, even though I have done no modelling on how this will fix the problems, and the feedback from the consultation says, overwhelmingly, it will not.”

So let me list where the Minister has gone wrong. Firstly, the Minister took a $48 million net deficit problem in the sector pre-amalgamation and turned it into a $110 million net deficit forecast for the sector this year. And to achieve that outstandingly bad result, the Minister used $200 million of public money on consultants and transition costs to make the problem one and a half times worse. Now, be very sure to understand that that money wasn’t spent on students or staff or industries or communities but on consultants and head office.

Secondly, the Minister has caused such anxiety and uncertainty in this sector that the most experienced and high-performing managers have left the sector and, in at least some of the polytechnics, if not all, staff turnover has doubled.

Thirdly, we now hear there could be around 600 jobs lost from the actual polytechnics to address the financial problem, and to make room for the 450 Te Pūkenga head office non-teaching staff, that will take $100 million a year to run, in an entity that the Minister assured us would not be just adding another layer of bureaucracy to the system. Mind you, the Minister also assured us that the best from each polytechnic would be taken and used by Te Pūkenga, so I’m struggling to understand, with marketing departments and 16 polytechnics, why Te Pūkenga had to use an external marketing consultant.

Fourthly, the introduction of a new unified funding system without a technical system to deploy it will, from next year, give the Minister a whole lot more control to play favourites in the sector, with large contestable components of funding. At the same time, it will reduce the funding of those pesky private providers, which socialists so desperately despise, and will reduce the funding for distance delivery of education, the very mode of delivery which enables flexibility for students and employers and financial viability for campuses with small classes. Who would have imagined, in these times of COVID, a disincentive to use technology enabling flexibility?

Fifthly, allowing Te Pūkenga to establish an operating model with seven long silos ascending from grassroots up into the centre of the great controlling monolith—none of this nonsense of entities working together at a community level or making decisions in the region, but layer after layer after layer of non-teaching bodies in that great centre of Te Pūkenga.

And, now, Minister Hipkins, we wait with bated breath to see what will come of the regional skills leadership groups’ regional plans, which will probably duplicate the work of economic development agencies and actually tell us what any person walking down the street could tell us: we have skill shortages in most industries. But I’m sure they’ll recommend rationalisation and more direction from the centre.

If a business had done what Minister Hipkins has done, they would be out of business, and owing creditors millions. But, actually, he would never have been given that amount of money to fulfil an ideological dream without a sound business plan in the private sector, and therein lies the problem: it is so easy for this Government to waste other people’s money on ideological vanity projects.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker, thank you very much. I want to begin my contribution by saying these words: Te hā o Hine-ahu-o [The dignity of women]. I thought the contributions made by the Hon Poto Williams, Angie Warren-Clark, Arena Williams, and Sarah Pallett speak for themselves. And I want to endorse their words from this side of the House and say: ka nui tēnā, tāne mā. Men, ka nui tēnā. [Men, that’s enough, that’s enough.] Tukuna ko ngā wāhine ki mua [Allow the women to come forward] and I support them wholeheartedly.

We heard today about a particular matter that was raised by Dr Reti with respect to the health sector. I would like to take him and the members on that side of the House on another journey, one that over decades has already pointed out to the current health system that the inequities were going to continue to compound and grow if we did not make systemic, fundamental change to our health sector. It was clear in Wai 2575, in the evidence that was produced to the Waitangi Tribunal, that if we did not make fundamental change to the health sector that the issues that plague Māori communities, Pacific communities, communities that have been underserved by our health sector will continue to grow and grow into the future.

The statistics have been very clear—very clear. In fact, the DHB system has been in place all of my life. And we have seen health statistics for Māori continue to fail our people. That’s why the report from the Waitangi Tribunal, the review that took place into the health and disability sector, was very clear. Tinkering around the edges would not work, so a fundamental change needed to happen. And I’m proud that on this side of the House, with respect to the health sector, we have made that fundamental change. It’s been one heck of a journey. And can I acknowledge the Hon Andrew Little for his leadership in this work to make sure that we not only continue to push on and forge on with these health and disability reforms but also to continue to bring largely the community at large on this particular journey.

Myself and my colleagues, led by the Hon Andrew Little, have been right around the country, and the optimism for changing the health sector is palpable. We can speak towards making sure that the Māori health sector continues to get more support to make sure it serves Māori communities. We made it clear that what we needed to do was have a stronger input on locality plans for our regions to make sure that they can drive the health needs that they deserve and, most importantly, ones that they design. We made it clear that we needed to invest in infrastructure. In the Budget just gone, we have already announced that we will build a new hospital in Whangārei. I can tell you, as a descendant from Te Tai Tokerau, Māori across Te Tai Tokerau call the Whangārei hospital “the departure lounge”. That’s because they did not get the care and service that they deserve. They did not go into a facility that they deserved. On this side of the House, the Government acknowledges it, recognises it, and, most importantly, has set out to rectify it.

I’m proud of the work that we’re doing to make sure that the health sector will grow according to the growth of New Zealand. This Friday, Mānawatia a Matariki gives us an opportunity on 1 July to launch Health New Zealand and the Māori Health Authority. This will recast health for our people into the future. If I think about our tamariki and mokopuna, I’m proud that we’ve done the groundwork to make sure that they get a health system they deserve.

The health reforms continue to not only address the inequities that are in our system; they remove the postcode lotteries that have impacted upon our country. Just recently, at the rural health meeting—actually hosted here in Parliament by myself and colleagues—it was interesting to note that they all agreed that it was a postcode lottery and that they were underserved. And we made it clear through the legislation and the health reform work that this progressive Government is making sure that they will be saved into the future.

I’m proud of the work that we’re doing, whether it’s histories in schools, whether it’s Matariki and an opportunity for this country to come together under one sky and the kaupapa looking forward to the future. I’m proud that we are going to continue to do this work, whether it be in housing—we’ve heard good kōrero here and good kaupapa presented by the Minister of Transport and also the newly minted Minister of Justice. I’m proud of the work that we’re doing, the leadership that we have, and what we’re doing for this country. I can’t speak more proudly on this side of the House, and can only look to the other side with disappointment.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: The time for this debate has expired.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.

I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Canterbury Regional Council (Ngāi Tahu Representation) Bill.