General Debate

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

Question time started with no surprises today, with the Leader of the Opposition lobbing over his questions to the Prime Minister—questions that inferred that young people were useless, and probably not meeting their obligations in the welfare system. The Prime Minister responded by smacking it back at him, but what was surprising was that he started to, at the beginning of every question, say under his breath “We care about them. We care about them.”, a level of insincerity that I think the general public are getting quite used to.

It also came as no surprise to see that the National Party’s latest welfare policy announcement was lacking in more areas than one. It was predictable. It was out of touch. There was no evidence base, and, as per usual, they were asserting that they had the silver bullet, despite the fact that they have no understanding of how the welfare system works, let alone the actual benefits. Nor do they understand the people in the welfare system and the complex challenges that they face. It did, however, seem in touch with what we know about the National Party. Their track record with demonising young people and beneficiaries stands. They called them “pretty damn hopeless”, they called them “bottom feeders”, and, more recently, “These people are all getting a free ride.” The irony of their policy, which they have heralded as “welfare that works”, is that it won’t.

Prior to coming into Parliament, I spent much of my career in the education sector. I was a primary school teacher. I was a literacy educator with at-risk youth. I worked with Māori and Pacific students at the University of Auckland. I’ve seen what works and what doesn’t, and what doesn’t are punitive approaches to people already experiencing complex challenges. There’s evidence in that, even when we look at the welfare systems in the UK and the USA. In fact, punitive approaches can actually be counterproductive and, in fact, stop people from being able to get into work.

I liken the punitive approach the National Party seem hell-bent on taking to pushing someone over who is wanting and trying to get up, whilst, at the same time, yelling at them to get up. Let’s make one thing clear: I believe that employment is the best option for young people and that we need early interventions. That’s why, as a Government, we’ve already set up a range of effective initiatives that are leading to record numbers of people moving off benefits and into employment. In the last year, that was 35,000 young people; that compares to the 22,000 under their watch in their last year.

The hard truth is that Chris Luxon doesn’t want to admit that we inherited an employment and training system that the Welfare Expert Advisory Group said had “been badly neglected for years”. It was a world where case management services had been run down to the point that front-line staff were spending significantly less time on front-line, work-focused case management, and that’s what we set about fixing. This included money for 263 more front-line, work-focused staff in 2019, and followed by year-on-year investment thereafter. Despite the pandemic, we never saw the skyrocketing numbers of people on benefit that Treasury had forecast. We are now seeing record exits off benefit into work. As part of our efforts through Apprenticeship Boost, we’ve seen 50,000 people go through; 18,000 people with Flexi-wage; 5,000 people in Mana in Mahi. The results are reflected in our unemployment rate—record low rates of 3.3 percent—and, finally, the closing of that persistent gap between Māori and Pacific and everyone else: 5.5 percent and 5.4 percent respectively.

We have been both relentless and deliberate in our approach and efforts to support Kiwis into employment. Education and training is seen as key for us. What is important for our young people is the pastoral care, the wraparound support, the targeted support for Māori and Pacific and disabled and young people, alongside a shared determination from employers, business, providers, and Government that will put people into meaningful work and keep them in work. Let’s also not forget, a little bit of aroha for our young people goes a long way.

I am really delighted that the Labour Government have chosen today to speak about the National Party policy that we launched on Sunday: Welfare that Works. It tells the House that they’re taking it seriously when they want to have questions in the House and their oral debates about Welfare that Works, because that’s what it’s all about. This is about a very blatant commitment to young New Zealanders across New Zealand: if you have been on a jobseeker benefit for more than a year, for whatever reason, National wants to provide the individual targeted support to support you off welfare and into work.

We’re taking this seriously for several reasons, and one of them is we know—and the Labour Government knows—if a young person goes on to a benefit under the age of 20, on average, they spend 12 years on welfare. So this is a policy that is absolutely about breaking the cycle of welfare dependency, and that’s why we’ve targeted it at the under-25s. We’ve looked at what works best, and what works best is community organisations leading the charge. One of the examples that the Labour Government always talks about is He Poutama Rangatahi. Willie Jackson always crows about it. Guess what! National introduced it in July 2017. I proudly launched it in Northland at a time that it was desperate to support young people into employment. It’s targeted, it’s community orientated, and, with the policy that we announced on Sunday, I just want to put some of the information on the record, because Labour can’t figure out if it won’t work, if it can’t work, if they’re already doing it, or it’s not needed. So, clearly, they’re a bit confused about what our policy is. It is comprehensive, and deliberately so, because this is a real problem that we in New Zealand, we in the National Party under Christopher Luxon’s leadership, want to solve.

So if you think about the number of people who are on the jobseeker benefit, that number has nearly doubled for the number that have been on benefit for 12 months or more—jobseeker benefit— under their watch. At the same time, DairyNZ is doing advertising campaigns to say, “We want young people; we will train them up from scratch.” It’s the same in horticulture, same in retail, same in hospitality, same in manufacturing. Just about any street, there are signs advertising for jobs that young people would be welcomed into with open arms. And so what we see has to happen is individual job coaching for those young people to connect them to the opportunities that exist today. They are there today.

The second part of it is the piece that I think Labour’s conveniently forgotten about or ignored, and that is a comprehensive needs assessment that actually looks at what are the barriers for each young job seeker that’s on the benefit. I do not discriminate between a young person who has a health condition or disability that temporarily means they are unable to work in this two-year period—because that is what the jobseeker criteria is. I refuse to accept that those young people don’t deserve the assistance, support, and targeted effort to support them on a pathway into work. For some of them—and a gentleman that I spoke to three weeks ago who had mental health and anxiety issues, for him, it was about working part-time to begin with. It was about working part-time, it was getting up every day, going to a workplace that actually built his confidence and helped his mental health. Now, I think that’s worth it.

But you can’t do that in a Government agency where someone rang me today and said they waited for an hour and a half on the phone to get someone to assist them, and no one would. National will take a targeted approach, allow community organisations to deliver this through job coaches, needs assessment, individual jobs plan. And, yes, there are incentives available, and obligations when that jobs plan isn’t followed. It’s the young person’s plan—it is the young person’s plan—and we want to give them every single opportunity, where there are jobs everywhere, to make sure we have welfare that works.

What a load of rubbish. What a load of rubbish from the previous Minister of the National Government who headed the Ministry of Social Development and absolutely went after young people constantly. We heard that again on Sunday.

I want to say to the House—I can see there’s a lot happening on the other side, so there’s not a lot of us here today—but I want to say to our people who are here today, let’s never ever forget what this previous useless, useless, useless Opposition who were Government—never forget what they did in their nine years. Absolutely minimal investment in health. We had sewage coming down the walls of Middlemore. Why? Because of this useless, useless Opposition on the other side. And let’s not forget what they did in housing—where we’re building more houses than any Government before—selling off State houses. They’re standing there—I watch these fools and they dare to criticise us? These fools dare to criticise us? People have invested so much over the last five years in health, in housing, and in young people—and in young people. See, we give mana to young people. That’s what Mana in Mahi is all about. I notice the former Minister who stuffed it all up for young people has left. Mana in—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member is not allowed to refer to the absence of a member.

My apologies. My apologies, Mr Speaker.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Hello! Hello, Willie!

💬 SPEAKER: She’s just shifted seats.

Oh, my apologies. My apologies to the former Minister who didn’t do a very good job when she was a Minister.

In terms of Mana in Mahi, it’s about giving mana to people so our young people aren’t sitting on benefits, getting a free ride as the clueless former Minister alleges. In fact, many of our young people are the results of the nasty, vile, ugly policy that the previous Government put in place. Their answer for everything is punishing the vulnerable and the poor while turning a blind eye to their rich, privileged mates. That’s how they operate. Their answer to moving people off benefit into work was—well I tell you what, it wasn’t investing in skills development, nor was it investing in the barriers to work. It was work testing. That was the answer for the former Minister who mucked things up. Well, guess what! Things have changed. A change of Government and a change of attitude.

What a wonderful Minister we have in Minister Carmel Sepuloni, who has followed on and done a wonderful job in Mana in Mahi. I love Mana in Mahi because I gave it the name—I know I shouldn’t be celebrating or showing off, but I can’t help it. It’s been such a wonderful success, and the National Party would have called it “Working for the dole”, because they don’t understand young people. You see, my good friend and Shane Reti’s cousin Shane Jones—when we had young people, Shane Jones talked about kicking them off the couch. The Labour Party and this Government talks about awhi-ing them—embracing them, loving these young people, giving them a second chance, a third chance, a fourth chance; not penalising them as the National Party would do.

You see I’ll give you an example. I won’t tell you his name, I’ll just call him “Rangi”. Well, actually that’s his name, but you don’t know his last name. Anyway, he was one of my young guns on one of these courses. His father was unemployed. His grandfather was unemployed. He mucked up; he didn’t take the work opportunities that the former Minister demands that he takes. Oh no, he didn’t do that because he hadn’t seen role models in his life. So we give him another chance, and we give him a second chance. And guess what! He’s one of our shining examples of Mana in Mahi. That’s what aroha is all about.

They have no aroha—they have no aroha. It’s “Do the job, take the position.” Never mind where you live. Never mind if your father was unemployed. Never mind if your grandfather was unemployed. They have all the bloody answers. It’s a disgrace, their attitude. They are treating this group of people terribly.

Next year, for the first time ever, Millennials and Gen Xers will numerically outnumber Boomers voters by—and there they are attacking our young people. National are playing with demographic fire. They are a disgrace.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Before I call a member, I am going to say to Harete Hipango that she must not take off her mask in order to interject. That really sort of undermines the reasons for having masks on. If people are going to take them off to interject, it means that the stuff we’re trying to stop spraying around gets sprayed.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s absolutely no secret that, through this pandemic and the economic crisis that has ensued and that we experienced beforehand, our young people are some of the hardest hit amongst us. This is because of the missed opportunities that they’ve had throughout the course of the pandemic—missed opportunities in education, in employment, in the connections that they would have had otherwise, and also in terms of the jobs that they tend to hold, in tourism, in hospitality. Those are the sectors that were the hardest hit, and therefore we’ve seen a number of young people affected in a plethora of ways, including their mental health, their employment status, and a whole heap of other things.

That’s why, as a Government, we’ve taken the approach, as Minister Sepuloni spoke about earlier, to ensure that we have a suite of measures that will work for various young people, given the various situations that they’re in and the fact that we have to take an approach that is equitable. That is what is lacking on the other side of this House. Equity—understanding that not every young person starts at the same point in life, that we’re not all born with a silver spoon, and that if you are going through hardships in life and you—like Minister Jackson said—perhaps come from a circumstance where you don’t even know what a role model looks like, what a sense of purpose is, that you awhi them, that you look at what the barriers are that they face, and you address those barriers. That’s the approach that we take on this side of the House.

As Minister for Youth, I’ve been out there talking to young people who’ve faced various circumstances that are difficult, and the youth sector organisations, youth workers, who have supported them over years. We know that what we need to do is address those barriers and not just to be punitive and hit them on the head with sanctions, as the other side wants to do. We don’t view people receiving a benefit as hopeless; we don’t view them as bottom feeders, as members on the other side have said; and we certainly don’t view their circumstances as being a free ride.

Sadly, what we’ve seen over the weekend in terms of the announcement from the National Party shows that they are incredibly out of touch with what young people need. What they’re doing in terms of their language—it speaks much more to dog-whistle politics than actually addressing the problems at hand, and it does a disservice to our young people in what is an incredibly tough economic time as well. Largely, by and large, rangatahi I’ve spoken to are ambitious. They want to develop skills and contribute to the economy and to our society, and, on this side of the House, we commend that and we want to continue to back them. And that’s exactly what we’re doing.

We’re doing that through Mana in Mahi, as Minister Jackson has talked about as well. That is one part of the Government’s suite of employment programmes. That has surpassed 5,000 participants recently; 75 percent of participants who had been on a benefit for two years or more haven’t gone back on to a benefit. Because, again, what we’re trying to do on this side is not just kick people off benefits but actually get people into meaningful work that pays decent wages as well. Sixty-four percent of those who’ve been part of Mana in Mahi are under the age of 24 years. The Apprenticeship Boost—we’ve seen a 55 percent increase in the number of apprentices since the start of the pandemic. Over the past two years, more than 190,000 people have benefited from our Government’s investment in trades training, including apprenticeships—one of the first things that was cut by the other side when they were in Government during the global financial crisis, as well.

We’re removing barriers, as I mentioned. Through Budget 2022, an estimated 64,000 people will be able to access driver licensing programmes. We know that is a key requirement for up to 70 percent of jobs. In my portfolio, we’ve seen a 40 percent increase in support to Ministry of Youth Development funded youth services. These are services where many who don’t have a role model in their lives, who may not have a sense of purpose, actually get that wraparound support that we know they need to succeed later in life, whether that’s reconnecting with education, getting a job, or getting into training. We’re seeing that that works through Budget 2022. That will be extended to about 7,000 additional young people to avail of as well.

In the end, our Government has delivered record low unemployment—one of the lowest rates in the OECD; lower than most of the countries we compare ourselves to—and we are seeing a much larger number of people, including young people, getting off the benefit and into work. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a real pleasure to stand today to talk about what’s happening in employment at the moment. As an employer in my private life but also as a member of the Labour Party, I really want to just stand here and acknowledge the fact that 5,000 people have entered into Mana in Mahi, which really exceeds what we set as a target for this Government.

I want to just talk a little bit about Mana in Mahi - Strength in Work that the Minister Willie Jackson talked to us about. I wanted to remind this House about what Mana in Mahi actually offers out there to not only the employer but also to the young person—or people—needing to work, and how we actually work in partnership across community to support people into work.

I think it’s really important to do that because it’s not just about throwing a thousand bucks at someone and going, “Mate, stay in your job for a year.” So this is actually the programme that we’re providing: it’s a work-to-learn programme, it’s formal skills into apprenticeship, and it’s a payment for pre-employment training they might need. There’s a wage subsidy offset into that investment, into their training and development, and we can also help pay their fees.

We find out what’s going on, we identify it, and we look for further ways that we can help the employer keep that person in employment. It’s so important to keep them in that employment. It’s a partnership alongside the employer, because we know and we recognise that it’s not just about throwing someone at a job and expecting them to stay in that job.

So the new employer has some abilities to access support as well because, certainly, while people are getting more and more used to working, they perhaps have a cost to that business. We have to really acknowledge our employers who have come on board, and stepped up and supported our young people, and our working people, and our older people into work.

So they can get some support—in our apprenticeship programme, up to $16,000, which was $1,000 a month for the first year, and then $500 for the second year. Now, it is changing from 1 August—the first year is $500 and the second year is $500. This is genuinely a way that we keep and help people stay in employment: the employer gets the support, the employee gets the training; they train as they learn. And that is why we have record low unemployment in this country.

We understand that it is not just one kind of programme. We understand that Mana in Mahi and He Poutama Rangatahi and the apprenticeship programmes—these are consistent programmes that work really well, and for a series of people. Like my colleague Priyanca Radhakrishnan said, we talk about a number of ways.

In the time that I have left, I just want to acknowledge a real pleasure that I had on Friday: opening a centre in Katikati community—a He Poutama Rangatahi community centre. It was based for employment. An incredible three years have gone into this programme to get it to where it was. Three years, that community working alongside iwi, working alongside the community, the schools, and young people, to identify what the needs were for those young people in their community. It was a real pleasure to cut the ribbon—well, metaphorically cut the ribbon, I should say—with the Mayor of the Western Bay of Plenty, and for the two of us to stand alongside there in partnership alongside that Katikati community to actually welcome the community into the space that would support those young people. This is a three-year project, it is $2 million; it is designed specifically for the needs of the young people in Katikati, based absolutely on what they have told the community services they need. It is absolutely full of support and the ability for those young people to hear and to be heard. And I appreciated that.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, three speakers, now, in a row were forced to attack us and defend their own failing policies in the social welfare space, because, I can tell you what, having 34,000 additional young people on a benefit since 2017 is a failed policy. Twice as many of them being on a benefit for longer than a year is a failed policy, so speaker after speaker they’re putting up today to defend their failed policies.

When we’ve got employers out there who are crying out for workers, they’re forced to defend their failed policies. Talking about employment troubles and employers not being able to find staff, let’s take a look at the ANZ quarterly economic outlook, because it is grim reading. What they’ve said in that is that, basically, they thought that we’d returned to net positive migration this year, but they’ve had to downgrade that to mid-2023. That means there are going to be persistent skills shortages in our economy right through next year. We’re in trouble right through 2023. It’s going to drive up inflation. It’s going to reduce productivity.

But why are we having this? We just need to look at recent history and we need to think about what drives migrants to come here. After the border reopening announcement back in late February, on 3 March, the previous Minister of Immigration, Minister Faafoi, stood up at Business New Zealand and he said, “I’m going to have a new policy. We’re going to take the critical worker visa; we’re going to relax the conditions on that. All you have to do is earn 1.5 times the median wage, and his words were: “This will bring in 20,000 workers.”

That’s what this Government promised back in March until when the policy closed, which was on 31 July: 20,000 workers. How many workers does this House think that policy attracted in the six months that it was open? Out of 20,000, the number of people who arrived didn’t even meet 5 percent: 975 people. But let’s be generous: how many were approved? Well, that was only 1,400. But let’s be even more generous: how many even applied for a visa? Eighteen hundred out of a promised 20,000.

How did this Government get this so wrong? It is because they don’t understand what drives migrants. There was no pathway to residence for those people. They restricted them from getting the 2021 Resident Visa, and this Government kept the skilled migrant category—the old points system—closed. They closed it in March; it’s still closed today, it’s been closed all year. That’s why those 20,000 people didn’t arrive. They didn’t want to sell their house, move across the world, and take their kids out of school to come to a foreign country when they didn’t know what their future was. They didn’t have certainty, and this Government and these immigration Ministers don’t understand that.

They want to know about their future here, and why this is so really, really important is because history is repeating itself. This epic failure—this 20,000-worker failure—matters, because we’re seeing it happen again. The first month of the accredited employer work visa, their new flagship work visa, 152 people applied in the first month, even were approved. Immigration New Zealand expected 3,500 every month—we got 152. So, much like the 50,000 that they promised, the 42,000 are not going to eventuate either, because there’s no pathway to residence. Unless you’re one of the 45 jobs on the green list or unless you earn $115,000, there is no pathway to residence for you. So if you are a physiotherapist, if you are an engineering manager, if you are an IT worker, if you’re a healthcare assistant, or if you’re a truck driver, there’s no pathway to residence and you’re very unlikely to come here.

The kicker is not only did those 152 people only apply for that visa—here’s the kicker—66 of them, almost half, were already here. So we’re not attracting new migrants to New Zealand, and this is how they’re going to jimmy the figures. They’re going to go, “Look how many people apply.” Now, that is not practical. The key is how many people offshore applied. They can tell you all day long that there were nine nurses that applied. How many of them were offshore? We haven’t got the question back yet, but I can guarantee you that most of those nurses would have already been here in New Zealand, just switching jobs and having to apply for this new visa.

This is another failed policy because they don’t understand what drives migrants. They should have continued to open up the skilled migrant category in August, like they said they would. But, buried in a press release a couple of weeks ago from Minister Wood, he’s quietly benched the skilled migrant category, which means there will be no pathway to residence for all these people for the foreseeable future, which means we will not see the level of migrants that we need to drive our economy, to increase productivity, and to reduce the cost of living. What we saw with the 20,000 failed policy will happen again with the accredited employer work visa—mark my words.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. The thing that annoys me this afternoon, as I’m sitting here listening to the debates from the other side, is that the National Party Opposition have absolutely got everybody in the weeds talking about beneficiary bashing. It’s the same old diatribe that they roll out every time they start feeling good about themselves and they start seeing a lift in the polls: they go for the default. And they need a new default, you see, because the last one about being tough on crime? They have to revise that—there’s stuff going on at the moment.

So they have to go for the second one on the list, which is that they’re tough on beneficiaries. So what do they do? They roll out the same old lines about beneficiaries and start the witch hunt around the country towards those people that need a little bit of extra Government support. And do you know what? Sometimes, people do need a little bit of Government support. Sometimes, they need to come to the Government and say, “I haven’t got a job. I need some extra support.” So that’s what we’ve gone and done, and we’re doing it, and they have no idea that the policy they’re putting up is actually already in motion.

Labour has always been about work—it’s in the name; it’s in the name! Labour has always been about work, but not just work—meaningful work that makes a difference to a person’s life so that it’s not just a part-time job doing something that they absolutely don’t want to do. It’s about finding meaning in life, and that’s what they’ve gone and done. That’s what we’ve got out there: we’ve got a bunch of people who’ve said, “I need a bit of extra support. I need some meaningful employment. I don’t want it to be short term, but also I want to be paid meaningfully as well.” And there’s some people out there who say, “You know, they should take the first job that’s coming to them.” But, actually, the cost of living is going up for everybody, including beneficiaries that really need some support. So every time that we’ve gone and hiked up the minimum wage in New Zealand, the Opposition have voted against it. They don’t like that. They think that it should still be back at the $15.25 that it was when we came in in 2017.

What we’ve gone and done is we’ve lifted up the pay rates, we’ve stood alongside these people who find themselves needing Government support, and we’ve put in place a suite of packages. You’ve heard them from different members that have stood up from our side this afternoon. We’ve talked about the Mana in Mahi programme, and it is a great programme. We’ve surpassed the target that we’ve set for ourselves, and it was the Opposition that always says that Labour hates targets—“They don’t like targets.” Well, here’s something: we don’t mind a target or two, and we exceeded ours. So give us a clap for actually doing that. But, no, they won’t, because they’ll just want to rubbish it. They think that it’s a rubbish policy. I say it’s not. I say it’s gone and put 5,000 job seekers into employment.

If you want to talk about another programme, back in the Bay of Plenty, we’ve actually amplified our work in driver licensing, and I think that’s incredibly important to remember. I remember going to the launch of the Howard League’s programme in the Eastern Bay of Plenty, and it was there that Mike Williams got up and he talked about a few numbers. He talked about 15 being the number of Māori in this country, in a percentage. He talked about 53, which was the number of Māori that are in our prisons around the country, and then he talks about 65, which is the percentage of Maōri who have ended up in the prison system because of a driver licensing infringement. We’ve done lots of things to be able to turn around the plight of those people needing extra support, whether it’s through Mana in Mahi, He Poutama Rangatahi, which the Opposition crow about but it was us that started it—well, it was us that gave effect to it and gave it a budget as well, and rolled it out successfully around the country. So Mana in Mahi, He Poutama Rangatahi, and driver licensing.

I got to talk to some third-year nursing students from Rotorua the other day. I went in and spoke to them. They’re running for the light at the end of the tunnel. They’ve had a big couple of years. But you know what we talked about? How successful fees-free education was for them to be able to reduce the barrier to get into the Bachelor of Nursing degree.

So you know what? Despite all the rubbishing that’s coming from the other side of the House, we just need to take a bit of stock and remember that there have been a lot of programmes that this Government has rolled out. They don’t want to know that it’s been successful, but to those people who are listening around the country, they have been successful. What we’ve done over on this side of the House is we have progressed the situation. They would have us regress back into the place that we were in when we picked up the shambles of a mess that this country was in, in 2017.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Today, I want to offer the Green Party’s support publicly to our professional firefighters, acknowledge they’re in mediation today with Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ), and we hope that their bargaining gets resolved in that mediation so that they do not get forced into having to strike this Friday, because our firefighters matter to us. They matter in terms of their safety and their wellbeing in their jobs. I really call on members of the public who may be watching this to stand up and show your support for the firefighters, because they need us all behind them at the moment.

I’ve been going around some of the stations over the last few weeks, along with my colleagues. We’ve visited, I think, firefighters from 12 different stations across the country. It’s been really disturbing, to be honest, the consistency of the concerns that they’re raising—but the examples are different in every single place, just showing a depth and extent of the problem that I’ve found, personally, quite mind-boggling. It’s clear to me that even if—through this mediation and bargaining—everything gets resolved, the problem is not going to be resolved. I do want to put that clearly on the record in the House, of the need for there to be a review of Fire and Emergency New Zealand. Because what they’re telling us is that there is a fundamental disconnect between the front-line fire workers, who are going out and putting their bodies and their minds on the line every day to keep our communities safe, and the head office.

That’s showing up in a range of ways: the fact that new trainings have been cancelled which has led to people working extraordinarily long hours—which I would argue is a health and safety issue in itself—that, also, around equipment, and let me run through some of this. Some of the firefighters told me that, over the last 15 years, they could only remember one equipment roll-out that has gone well: their radios. So they spoke about wet weather gear that had pockets too small to take their radios; of new trucks that were ordered in that have had to be significantly altered to be functional—going around the Basin Reserve and the brakes actually coming on because the truck wasn’t designed to be able to go at that speed around corners. That was such a poor decision. Helmets that don’t match other gear, so couldn’t be worn with other gear; boots that are causing injuries, and podiatrists have said should not be worn for extended periods or for climbing stairs; millions being wasted on clothing that was not fit for purpose or appropriate for them; and that there’s an evident failure to update the fleet. In every station, I saw trucks that are 20 to 30 years old. Now, I’m very proud of my 1996 Corolla that I still drive, but I don’t expect our firefighters to be saving our lives and putting themselves on the line in equipment that old and dodgy, and my Corolla seems more reliable than most of their fire trucks.

The fact that we don’t even have aerial appliances in some of our cities—we’re hearing from the head office that they’re saying, “Oh, well, actually sprinkler systems mean that it’s not so important these days.” But, actually, most people die in fires from smoke inhalation. Sprinklers are the interaction between the fire and creating the smoke which is what will kill people. It can take five minutes, in all of their gear, per floor, to get up. So people’s lives are—what I heard, clearly—being put at risk because of the decision making that’s happening in the head office. They’ve had hazmat responsibilities in the legislation since 2017, but they’ve only just started working on that as a plan. There’s been performance notices put in place in terms of health and safety around asbestos because there isn’t a policy, and, actually, FENZ took no action as a result of that project information memorandum, which is illegal. They are just not listening. Our firefighters are going out there and they’re not getting the mental health support that they need. They haven’t had adequate training for turning up to, now, the suicides and the drownings and the cardiac arrests. They’ve had basic first aid training on top of their fire service training. It’s inadequate and it’s wrong and it needs review.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. We’ve heard a lot this afternoon—quite rightly, too—about some of the fantastic achievements and what this Government has done in building a well-trained workforce that’s going to take us into a bright future. Mana in Mahi, the Apprenticeship Boost, Mayors Taskforce for Jobs, He Poutama Rangatahi—a suite of initiatives that means our response to building our workforce has been nimble, innovative, successful, and will be sustained. Why? Because these projects are collaborative—innately collaborative—and they’re evidence informed. And they’ve been focused on our workers—our young people; all workers—but also their employers, and their mana, and that is the critical bit. We’ve heard all the stunning numbers: low unemployment and all the rest. But, actually, I just want to bring us down to some of the real stories, because there’s the powerful bit that reminds us that what we are doing is working and it’s worth pursuing.

So I just want to talk about one of our local plumbers—Shane Gardiner, and his wife, Julie—and Joshua Hopkins, who’s their young apprentice. When you talk to Joshua, the mana that he exudes—his pride in his work is really, really obvious. He is excited about his future and so is his boss. The interesting thing is, his boss didn’t just get support to pay his wages—which reduced, you know, the risk and the investment that was required—but they noticed, they recognised that they both needed him to be safe and productive. So he got to, when he first started out, do a digger course—Wheels, Tracks and Rollers; I want to go there—and also working at heights. And what that meant is that both Josh and Shane were really quickly able to recognise and utilise his productivity, and his mana was enhanced because of that.

It isn’t just high-vis vests. I just need to acknowledge there are hairdressers out there who have done it tough in the last couple of years; really tough. We’ve got hairdressers who have not only been able to take on apprentices because of the additional support but expand their premises. If you even need a haircut in Te Awamutu, Kirsty Butler has got room for you because she’s been able to take on another apprentice.

Also, the opportunities you see when you speak to people who are supporting especially our young people with collaborative initiatives—I’ve just been down to Feats Pae Tawhiti and their forestry foundation skills course. These young people—they put more than 50 through—I’ve met them, the last cohort just as they were about to graduate, and their excitement about going out and finding a job in forestry was wonderful. But it was more than just preparing them to use a chainsaw safely. There was tikanga and Te Ao Māori that was brought into it; mātauranga Māori that really helped to wrap around and lift these young people—the way they stood in support of each other as they gave their pepeha, as they tautoko each other with their waiata and their haka. Their mana was enhanced and makes them more productive and better workers, but also their ability to stand up and grab the world and the future is obvious, because of that wraparound. It isn’t just about throwing cash at them; it is about supporting them and bringing all of the expertise to wrap around them. It’s really, really powerful stuff to watch.

I guess just the third thing about the suite of initiatives that we support in this Government is how innovative you see local communities being able to be. We’re really proud in Taranaki to have really committed to Predator Free 2050, and we have got apprentices who are learning how to be Kiwi handlers and Kiwi rangers. So we’ve got Leighwae at the East Taranaki Environment Trust, and we’ve got the Taranaki Kiwi Trust who’ve got Maia. And these young people who, in combination with the Western Institute of Technology, the local polytech—here they come up again; they’re rock stars today—and the way that they are able to help us build this booming conservation industry. So I’m really proud to acknowledge the huge support that has gone on across the country to build a workforce that is going to take us into the future.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. What a poor showing from the members on the other side. They are just displaying their bigotry of low expectations in this country. We even had a member of Parliament from the Labour Party get up and say that part-time work is not meaningful work. Well, I just think it is absolutely appalling and shameful that they have that low expectation of people in this country. I tell you, Mr Speaker, getting young people into work has to be one of the top priorities.

We sit here and see that those members totally mask over the absolute failure of this Government. There are 34,000 more young people on welfare—a 50 percent increase on their watch. They talk about all the great programmes they say are happening out there, but the outcomes are getting worse and we’re seeing this across the Public Service as we speak—more and more money is being spent but the Government’s outcomes are going backwards. It’s an “A” for aspiration but it’s an absolute “E” for execution and an “F” for fail, because that’s actually what’s happening and it’s our young people who are being failed by this Government’s policies.

It’s not just in social development; it’s in transport policy too. We’ve seen a 60 percent in the number of staff at the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). There are three times as many communications officers. With the potholes on our roads, I would have thought they’d be hiring people to fill the potholes, but they’ve got twice as many people with the title “manager”. That’s not the way to fix unemployment in this country—simply making managers and comms staff—but it seems to be under this Government’s policies.

Then we’ve got the ideology, which is seeping in everywhere, and particularly in the transport space. We’re seeing ideology take over from actually helping New Zealanders get where they need to go, get around our roads safely and efficiently, and have high productivity transport links in New Zealand. We’ve seen the cancellation of State highways up and down this country. We’ve seen the Government’s absolute ideological commitment to light rail, meaning that nothing else is happening, and you have to wonder what those thousands of additional bureaucrats are actually doing under this Government’s watch.

But it gets worse. We now know what they’ve actually been doing. They’ve been coming up with this policy called Reshaping Streets, and the Minister of Transport in his press release said, “People live, shop, and meet with friends and whānau on our streets”. Well, last time I looked, streets were for travelling to and from where you want to get to, not for having hui with friends and whānau. Last time I had a meeting, it certainly wasn’t on the white lines in the middle of the road; it was somewhere else. People don’t live on the street—well, actually they do. There are four times as many people under this Government living on our streets. What an absolute shame. Is that the ambition of this Government’s policies? Is it to make those streets so that more homeless people—whose numbers have ballooned under this Government—can live on our streets?

It’s not just that statement; it’s the ideology underneath it. It’s about taking away the opportunity for people to be able to have their say in how their streets are managed, so that the local territorial authorities and transport authorities can carve up their streets without consultation, put planter boxes in, and limit access to people’s streets and neighbourhoods, and all in the name of putting in a two-year pilot without any consultation—which could put in a cycleway, a bus lane, speed bumps, close the street down, or limit it to just cars that have some type of emission standard or not. This is the ideology that is seeping into our transport policy and it needs to be called out, because ultimately our roads are for getting around; they are not a plaything or a toy for the Minister of Transport to play with, with planter boxes and other ideological implements that he wants to do.

It’s not just this policy; we’ve also seen the on-again off-again, wanting to reallocate lanes, not just on neighbourhoods and streets across our community but the harbour bridge in Auckland, where it’s the on-again off-again cycle lane. It was on again, and then in October last year—no, it’s off again. “We’re definitely not doing a cycle bridge across there.” Then it’s on again—“We’re going to do some events.”—and then it’s off again because it’s going to cost $700,000. Then it’s on again because a letter was sent from some lawyers to the NZTA board. The Government needs to get its transport priorities right about making sure New Zealanders can get where they need to go, and stop using transport policy for its ideological purposes.

E te Māngai o te Whare, tēnā koe. I want to start my contribution by saying that when we were getting reports of the National Party conference over the weekend, I was worried about what issue they were going to come out and make big announcements about. Was it going to be tough on crime? Was it going to be racism? What was it that I was going to have to be responding to and defending for my community? All of them would have hurt, but this one hurt me the most because it’s about our taitamariki; it’s about our rangatahi. Our young people are our future, and here we have the Opposition coming out and talking about punitive approaches to our rangatahi and our taitamariki.

So when I heard our Minister for employment wrap up her contribution in today’s debate, I was a bit emotional. She concluded with the words “a little bit of aroha goes a long way”, and it speaks volumes. If you listen to her contribution and that of every other speaker from this side, this afternoon, it speaks volumes to the difference of opinion that we have about our taitamariki, about our rangatahi, about the policies that we believe need to be in place to support them, to support our future. And so I want to acknowledge our Minister for employment, because she is working so hard in this area, providing a range of opportunities for our rangatahi to ensure that they have hope, that they have aspiration, and that they have the support that they need to overcome whatever barriers may exist for them to be able to be in sustainable employment. I can see firsthand, in my electorate in Northland, the difference that this suite of measures that our Government have had in place and introduced over the last five years is making for our rangatahi.

We have focused a lot this afternoon on how proud we are about Mana in Mahi, that we have exceeded our target of 4,000. We have now more than 5,000 who have benefited from what was a pilot programme. That pilot is showing us, proving to us, providing us with the results that that type of investment and support is working. But I want to also mention He Poutama Rangatahi, because in Te Tai Tokerau, we have had over 14 programmes supported through He Poutama Rangatahi that have benefited close to 800 taitamariki in Te Tai Tokerau. It has helped them to get re-engaged in education, in employment, and in training. We also have Pae Aronui, which is a Te Puni Kōkiri Māori employment programme—again, close to another 800 rangatahi benefiting from this suite of measures that we have introduced—

💬 Hon Carmel Sepuloni: That’s right—sweet!

—“sweet” of measures, to support people into sustainable, meaningful employment.

I want to talk about just a couple of projects in Northland which have come within these schemes. One recently: they said, not by design, but they became the supreme winner in the recent Northland Regional Council Environmental Awards. They were recipients of Jobs for Nature funding, programmes like He Poutama Rangatahi. I want to mihi to the Kaikohe-based Te Kotahitanga e Mahi Kaha Trust, who have worked with rangatahi to give them opportunities to train and to develop more skills to have meaningful employment, and, in the process of that, they are restoring the waterways in and around Kaikohe. So the environment is also benefiting from these initiatives.

I remember being with the former Minister of Conservation, Minister Kiritapu Allan, when she announced over $20 million worth of projects for Jobs for Nature in Northland. That was in 2021. Another tool, another measure in our suite of measures that we have to help our rangatahi, to help our people. We know that this is contributing to record low unemployment. We are now down to 5.5 percent unemployment for Māori. As the co-chair of the Māori caucus, that is something that I am so proud of. So I want to mihi to our Minister for employment, to our former Minister for employment as well, Willie Jackson, who saw that it was right to name it Mana in Mahi. Kia ora.

As a civil engineer, I’m really interested in how to solve the problem of three waters—ageing water infrastructure, and how we connect pipes to land so that people can build houses and communities. Now, the Government has emphasised disease outbreak—E. coli in Havelock North. That was primarily a regulatory failing. It was public health agencies and a regional council that failed to protect the water source that resulted in people getting sick and, tragically, some dying. But that problem’s largely solved. The Government has established Taumata Arowai, a water regulator. In fact, the chief executive, Bill Bayfield, told Mike Hosking on Newstalk ZB that he had all the tools he needed in his tool box to make sure that councils delivered safe drinking water.

Then we come to the environmental problem. We’ve all seen images of sewage pipes breaking in the Wellington CBD; Auckland beaches with “no swim” signs. Communities deserve to know, when they go down to the beach for a swim, to have a picnic, or let the dog play, and that they shouldn’t have to worry about the quality of the water.

That brings us to the real problem to solve: water infrastructure funding and financing. How do we secure the funding and financing to close the infrastructure gap and to make sure that we can service land for housing growth, to deliver those affordable homes that communities need? Instead of addressing this problem at a local level, what the Government has proposed is absolutely ludicrous. It’s a race-based, co-governance model that forces all councils to join, even though the Government promised, once, it was voluntary, having already taken a decision at Cabinet that it would be compulsory. That is how you lose the trust of the electorate, lose the trust of the community. It’s a risky and doomed to fail experiment.

These new water corporations give effect to a Treaty principle expressed as Te Mana o Te Wai, which says that, believe it or not, the health of the water is more important than the health of the people or the communities and the economy that that water serves.

Legal action is currently under way to determine whether the so-called ownership model—that deceptive concept proposed by this Government, which says that councils continue to own the assets even though they lose all control over them—a court is being asked to decide whether this is a fallacy or whether we should be expected to take on this new concept of ownership where you don’t get to control it. It’s like a car thief telling you, “Look, I’ve got your car, but you still own it.” Yeah, right! Communities and private suppliers value their assets, and they do not appreciate Government coming along and telling them that they’re being taken off them.

The three waters upgrades over the next 30 years could be the largest and riskiest, costliest programme of investment ever undertaken by central and local government, so you’d think they would have put a tried and tested governance model in place. Instead, it’s that race-based, co-governance model that we’ve heard again and again that this Government wants to apply to every policy. At the same time that the Government imposes this untried and risky governance model, they’ve loaded up these new water entities with debt, while calling it a better-off funding package for councils. Better off for whom? Not taxpayers, not ratepayers, and certainly not water users.

ACT says New Zealanders deserve to be heard, and ACT has listened. That’s why ACT would repeal the three waters legislation and we would return these assets to local community ownership. We would also ask councils to enter into voluntary shared services agreements to get the benefit of scale when it comes to procurement, design, and delivery. ACT would allow councils, the regions, and local and central government to establish long-term, 30-year partnerships to prioritise the infrastructure, based on where the regions say it’s needed—not centralised bureaucracies. We would allow for public-private partnerships to draw in that extra funding needed. KiwiSaver, iwi organisations, and ACC all want to participate. We’d expand the exemption from domestic supplies so that up to 30 water users could be free of these regulations. ACT’s plan would deliver the funding, the infrastructure, but without the division and the distrust.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.