General Debate

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

I love me a movie trilogy. The classics are all there: The Godfather parts I, II, and III; the original Star Wars trilogy—you can’t beat it—Back to the Future I, II, and III, a personal favourite. But where the wheels always come off is when they try and squeeze out that fourth part of the franchise, and that’s what we’re seeing from the Opposition benches: Back to the Future Part IV, starring the protagonists: gloomy Christopher Luxon and his sidekick, negative Nicola Willis. Here they are, set—intent—to take us backwards; back to a dystopic future where benefits are cut and frozen; where the winter energy payment is scrapped; where there are cuts to health; where there are cuts to education; where, once again, social housing is gutted and flogged off; where, once again, minimum wages are frozen and workers go backwards. This is the plot line of Back to the Future IV. What we have is central characters that constantly talk down New Zealand. They talk down our economy and they talk down the work of hard-working Kiwis in the process.

In the opening scene of this fourth part of Back to the Future, it starts with gloomy Christopher Luxon jetting off to London, and what does he do there? He goes there and he starts attacking New Zealand businesses. He calls them soft, says that they’re the reason that New Zealand can’t get ahead, and continues to bag New Zealand. From there, this movie, the plot line is set: that we have a constant line of negativity, a world where 60 percent of their social media posts are all negative. Imagine such a dystopic world, if you would.

One thing is very clear: the central theme within the plot that we have here is there are no new ideas and their only policy is to undo all the progress that has been made in the previous episodes of this franchise. This is something more of a horror movie, so I was considering whether this was more the fourth part of the Blade trilogy, given the number of cuts that were going to be there. But it also occurred to me it could be part of the Mission Impossible trilogy, the fourth one, because in this plot line the central protagonists, gloomy Christopher and negative Nicola, seek to spend $400 million over and over and over again. They tell us that it can fund every idea that they don’t have. This is something akin to the magic porridge pot.

Over on this side of the House, instead what we have is a Government that is seeking that third series, that third trilogy—always the best in a trilogy, in my mind—where we have the central character, a Chris Hipkins - led, Labour-led Government that will continue to make progress in New Zealand, continue to invest in New Zealand, continue to undo the damage and deliver for New Zealanders. On this side of the House, the protagonists know that many New Zealanders are doing it tough, but they are doing their best to keep costs down, and the Government is on their side. That, I think, is the episode that New Zealanders will be voting for when it comes to October.

I just want to look in a little detail at some of the policy we’ve had from the National Party in recent times. One was kicking tenants out of their houses as a way to cure homelessness. Their housing spokesperson, Chris Bishop, told us that he’d been advised from organisations working with the homeless that this was a good idea. There has been intensive research to find out which organisation—he won’t tell us. So I’m going to suggest it is the homelessness organisation that is caring for Michael Woodhouse’s homeless man from the last election.

We started with movie themes, so let me just take a song from the King himself “There’s so much trouble in the world.” There are so many challenges facing Kiwis at the moment, and the Government has not lost sight that in challenging times, we need certainty. We need a focus on the things that matter and we need decisive leadership.

In particular, I want to acknowledge the regions and communities affected by the most recent bout of heavy rain and, in particular, the Whangārei region, the local boys’ high school, and to the whānau who have lost their dear loved one. Our sympathy from this House is with you at this sad time.

It’s important for our Government to continue to tackle the issues impacting on the lives and livelihoods of whānau and their communities around the country. On the economy, we remain ambitious for the country to pursue free-trade agreements (FTAs) like that of the EU and UK FTA, which will deliver increased benefits to our exporters, strengthen the resilience of our economy, continue to build the credibility of what we send to market, and sustain jobs for our people here in Aotearoa New Zealand.

In housing, Labour has delivered nearly 12,000 State homes since October 2017. We’ve got a plan to make sure every New Zealander has a warm, dry, safe place to call home, whether they rent or own. The plan we’re implementing is about cutting red tape, funding housing infrastructure to get land built faster, investing in new public and transitional housing, and working intensively with local councils and iwi to make that happen and make it real for their communities. There’s no quick fix to the housing crisis, but we’re pulling every lever we can and we’re starting to see cut-through that will benefit people now, immediately, and ensure a more secure future.

It’s tough for many kaumātua heading into winter right now, and the winter energy payment will make a huge difference. We’re doing our bit to keep costs down, to bring inflation down, and we have a plan to get New Zealand back on course. We understand just how important it is to invest in education—and to continue to lift the minimum wage, which currently sits at $21.20 an hour—with targeted trades training and all apprenticeships are free, with more than 215,000 people upskilled. We continue to take action so more families can get a fairer deal at the supermarket as we ensure kai is more affordable. We’ve introduced the Families Package and the biggest boost to household income in a decade for thousands of whānau who previously were making choices between household bills and kai.

And what do we hear from the other side? What do we hear? Negativity. Christopher Luxon and the National Party are relentlessly—relentlessly—negative. In fact, it’s like a record playing scratchy again and again and again. They’re constantly talking down New Zealand, constantly talking down our economy, constantly talking down our education system, constantly talking down our health system. We need to know that actually they have a plan, but we don’t hear it because all we hear is negativity. It’s just not going to happen.

On housing, National would make it easier for families living in rental properties to be shown the door. National wants landlords to be able to once again terminate renters’ tenancies without giving a reason, reversing Labour’s policy that balanced the rights of renters and landlords. There are a number of legitimate reasons to end a tenancy and the rights of landlords are protected to terminate a tenancy under a range of justifiable reasons, not willy-nilly as the Opposition would have it. This includes where a tenant has engaged in anti-social or illegal behaviour, or is at least three weeks in rent arrears. That’s pretty fair and it’s protected under the Residential Tenancies Act, and it’s fair for a tenant to know why their tenancy is ending and have the opportunity to dispute it. We know that there are plenty of great landlords offering excellent rental accommodation—come on, National, have a heart for those struggling to find a rental—and we want to ensure that responsible landlords are cared for too.

Every day, we hear nothing from Christopher Luxon except a long string of complaints and twice as long from his deputy, Nicola Willis. In April, more than 60 percent of National’s online posts were negative, attacking others. No solution. Every day in the media and in Parliament, they are relentlessly negative. So we need to ensure that we continue to remain focused on the things that matter, to help whānau make ends meet and to get ahead, and we know that there is more to do. We’re going to get on with tackling the issues that matter to people on a day-to-day basis and give people a greater sense of dignity and security in this difficult time.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Well, Megan Woods is meant to be the Minister of energy. That was about the most low-energy speech I’ve ever seen to lead off the general debate from the Labour Party. Her heart wasn’t in it, and you can see the fire in their eyes going out.

As the weeks go by, you can see the energy dimming. You can see that they are staring at 14 October and wondering what is going to happen, and they know in their heart of hearts that the Government’s time in office is coming to an end. The reason they know that is because they are falling apart. You can see the tension in their eyes and you can feel it in the Chamber.

The Government started this term with 65 votes, and they’re now down to 62. Add on the Greens: they started with 10, and they’re now down to nine because Elizabeth Kerekere has defected.

And what a week Chris Hipkins has had. He got on a plane to London and he probably sat back in his business class seat, turned off his phone, and said, “I might watch a movie and just relax a bit. I’ve got a long way to the King’s coronation.” He would have hopped off that plane at Heathrow, taken the old phone off flight mode, and his phone would have just bounced around the cockpit, because it would’ve gone bzzt-bzzt, bzzt-bzzt. He had the chief whip on the line: “Please call immediately.” He’d have had his chief of staff on the line: “Must talk immediately. Something’s happened.” He’d have Willie Jackson: “Boss, please call. Something’s gone wrong.” He’d have all of his MPs calling.

I’ll tell you who didn’t call. I’ll tell you who there was no missed call from on his phone when he took it off flight mode after landing: no missed call from the Hon Meka Whaitiri to explain to him, as Prime Minister, why she was leaving the Labour Party and defecting—as it turned out, a little bit by accident to the Speaker and to the public—to the Māori Party. We’re still yet to get the call. We’re all actually a bit none the wiser, and they’re yet to have a conversation.

Then we get to the events surrounding the Hon Kiri Allan, who decided that it was acceptable to turn up to a Radio New Zealand private function and make remarks criticising Radio New Zealand. We are yet to know exactly what she said because Radio New Zealand won’t release the transcript of what she said, and we heard that Willie Jackson’s defence of that in the House this afternoon was to say that it was a private function. Well, Ministers are always Ministers, and for the Minister to turn up and say that it’s acceptable to not release that is wrong.

This Government is a shambles. Whether it’s Meka Whaitiri, whether it’s Kiri Allan, whether it’s Elizabeth Kerekere, whether it’s Marama Davidson, the incompetent Minister of homelessness who can’t actually get money out the door to help homelessness—and we’ve all forgotten about the Hon Stuart Nash, who, of course, was thrown out of the Cabinet in disgrace only a few weeks ago.

I think Chris Hipkins is on to his sixth or seventh or eighth Cabinet reshuffle in about the eight weeks he’s been Prime Minister. We’ve now got the Hon Jo Luxton, who’s been pushed up into the ministry. Glen Bennett will soon be a Minister—the guy who’s no longer going to be the MP for New Plymouth. Tangi Utikere is sitting there as the whip. He’s awaiting his turn to enter the ministry.

What is happening is the Government is falling apart, and we’ve made it really clear in National today that the coalition of chaos that would ensue from a Labour - Greens - Māori Party Government will not take the country forward. The Māori Party believe in having a separate Māori Parliament, in having a parallel criminal justice system, and in stopping full and final Treaty settlements. They don’t believe in having one person, one vote. They don’t believe in that basic Kiwi value of equal suffrage—of one person, one vote—and equal citizenship, and today’s Māori Party is not the Māori Party of Tariana Turia and Tā Pita Sharples. They are different. We cannot work with them in Opposition.

So as the Government falls apart, as the Government loses Ministers and MPs, and as the Government descends into chaos, we are making it really clear for New Zealanders the choice. A vote for the Māori Party is a vote for three more years of chaos; it’s a vote for Labour, the Greens, and the Māori Party. Only a strong party vote for National can change this country and get it back on track.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, as I wait for the smattering of claps after that appalling speech—a shocking speech, actually. If that is the future of National Party, I don’t think this side of the House has anything to worry about. No wonder that member lost his seat. What a shocker!

He had five minutes to outline to the country what his party is going to do for New Zealand, and he didn’t give us jack. He didn’t give us one little bit of policy. He can’t dispute that; we all listened to the speech. It is a fact. Not one policy, not one indication of what they want to do for New Zealand. All they did was prove the point that the Hon Megan Woods and the Hon Nanaia Mahuta said in their contributions: that they are utterly negative. All they do is bring people down, and try and drag the reputation of the country down to try and bring the mood of the country down, so that people will think “Maybe it is time for a change.”

Well, the question is: a change to what? A change to a party that’s platform is simply to roll back what this Government is doing—

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Absolutely.

—to roll back the support for workers, to roll back—and Mr Mark Mitchell, who hasn’t done a successful point of order in the five years that I’ve been in Parliament, says, “absolutely”, confirming the point that I’m making: that they do not stand for workers. They do not stand for small businesses. They do not stand for rural communities. Everything that this Government has done for the betterment of this country, Mr Mark Mitchell has confirmed—on behalf of his party—that they will roll it back.

There are workers in this country—minimum wage workers—who are $250 a week better off because of this Government. Every single time we brought in a measure to look after workers, they voted against it. There are sole parents in this country who are nearly $200 better off a week, and they voted against it. They voted against the winter energy payment, which elderly people in this country are fully dependent on to keep them warm in the winter, and they have ruled out confirming it to the country. So make no mistake, the ACT Party are going to get rid of it. Any future Government that involves the ACT Party is going to get rid of the winter energy payment, and the National Party have refused to commit to it. So every person that is dependent on the pension in this country will know that a vote for National or ACT will mean a reduction in what they receive. It is only a matter of a couple of weeks after that—

💬 Andrew Bayly: They will get a tax cut.

They are saying that you will get a tax cut. Yeah, 100 bucks a week—sorry, 100 bucks a year. A hundred dollars a year: $2 a week—$2 a week. Andrew Bayly paints himself as the saviour to senior citizens. Just because he is one, doesn’t mean he’s their saviour. Two dollars a week will mean nothing, and it is certainly nothing compared to what this Government has done for our most vulnerable people in this country.

Instead, they want to scaremonger. They want to start division in this country by talking about “one person, one vote”. Well, I have got one question. Their leader owns property in Auckland and Wellington, and at the last local body elections got more than one vote. How is that one person, one vote? Do they care about it? No. Do they want to scaremonger because it involves Māori? Absolutely.

So let’s just roll into what it is that they’re actually trying to talk about, and the affordable water reforms is a perfect example. For 4½ years, they have scaremongered, they have whinged, and they have moaned. They have said it’s asset theft. They have said all sorts of stuff. They finally come up with a policy, and what is it? The status quo.

Four years of whingeing and they come up with the status quo, completely ignoring the fact that this country needs to find $185 billion. Completely ignoring the fact that councils have said they can’t do it by themselves, and completely ignoring the fact that there is clear evidence to show that unless we reform this fundamentally, ratepayers, especially those in small rural councils, will face bills that they cannot afford. But have you noticed one thing? They are not talking about that because they know they can’t win that argument. In fact, they know they have lost. Every single time I’ve asked them to produce their numbers, they’ve gone quiet.

What do they talk about? Racial division, and scaremongering about Māori, and scaremongering and redefining what commitments the Crown made in Te Tiriti o Waitangi; ignoring the truth. Just because something is inconvenient doesn’t mean it isn’t true. That’s what they want to talk about, because they know deep down that what New Zealanders care about are bills that they can afford and keeping rates down, and they can’t compete. Nothing they’ve said adds up, because they won’t produce their numbers for one simple reason: they don’t have them, or they don’t add up. How’s that being up front to New Zealand?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let me start by acknowledging the whānau of the young boy who lost his life in the floods yesterday. I think every parent expects that when they say goodbye to their children in the morning when they go to school that they will see them again later that evening chatting about their day at school. So I just cannot imagine the loss that that boy’s family must be feeling right now. I know that the thoughts of everybody in this House are with them, their family, their community, and their school as well. Of course, I do also want to acknowledge the front-line services who have responded yet again and put their own lives on the line yet again, in response to this latest event.

I have to say that sitting in the chair for the last 15 minutes, listening to this debate, I find it utterly dispiriting. I want to pick up on something that Mr McAnulty just said about the speech that Chris Bishop gave before him, which is that not only did Chris Bishop spend his entire five minutes trashing the Government, and not talking about what vision the National Party has, he didn’t even acknowledge the fact that we are facing yet another state of emergency in our largest city, or the fact that we have just lost our 16th life to extreme weather events during the course of this year alone. The idea that New Zealanders are interested in this Punch and Judy show and are more interested in the game of politics than they are in what’s happened to their flood-damaged properties or to the lives of their children or to the stress that our front-line responders are under—I’m actually appalled at the myopia and the desperation to win and to be in Government merely for the sake of it, without any positive vision or any acknowledgment of what it is that people in this country are facing—it absolutely appals me. It is why I am so committed, I have to say, to ensuring that we are able to continue in this Government after October of this year, because the idea that we have a Government who is only interested in being in Government for the sake of being in Government absolutely disgusts me.

As I said, this is the third state of emergency that we have faced this year—that our largest city has faced this year. The mental toll that is being extracted upon people in Tāmaki-makau-rau Auckland, Tai Tokerau, Tairāwhiti, Hawke’s Bay, and so on is extraordinary. We have known for years and years that one of the consequences of a changing climate is that those extreme weather events that we’ve always had become more frequent and more severe. What that means is that we haven’t yet finished recovering from the last one when the next one hits, and that has been amply demonstrated once again this week. So I do want to acknowledge the stress and the strain that people who have already lost their properties or been displaced or lost family members must be feeling right now.

Yesterday, we heard that the cause of all of this—from the ACT Party—is drains; that, actually, the problem here is drains. I have to say that that is kind of like victim blaming drains rather than actually looking at the cause of the storms that are overloading the drains in the first place. It is absolutely true that our drains and our stormwater systems aren’t up to it—that’s because they’ve been under-invested in over the course of the last four decades and beyond. They do need upgrading, and the Government has been working for five years on a plan to ensure that there is investment in upgrading our stormwater systems, and the ACT Party and the National Party have spent five years opposing that plan. So to say that the problem here is the drains, and then to say they’re opposed to the solution to that is as absurd to everybody out there, as I hope it is to people here today.

The other thing that the ACT Party want to do is they want to dismantle the very framework that this House agreed on to deal with the cause of climate change in the first place, and to restart the oil and gas industry, at a time when we know that we cannot burn 80 percent of our known reserves if we are to have any hope at all around the world of keeping global warming to under 1.5 degrees.

So I have to say that I am appalled at the state of this debate and I would urge the members of this House to focus on the issues and the challenges that New Zealanders are facing right now—first and foremost in Auckland right now with the challenges from yet another extreme weather event from climate change. Nā reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

Noa’ia, Mr Speaker, acknowledging Rotuman Language Week this week. Like the last speaker, I do also want to acknowledge the family and friends of the year 11 Whangārei boy. I’m the mother of a year 11 child, and I can’t imagine the pain that they’re going through.

I’d also then like to start with going back to question time, and the amount of positive things I heard about that this Government is doing. Some of them include Warmer Kiwi Homes—we heard this from Hon Megan Woods. More insulation, having warmer homes, does some double duty and that’s what I want to talk about today: the double duty that this Government is doing. So that is that people get a warmer home and they get lower electricity fees, and we have fewer hospital costs and visits as a result.

We heard about the Green Investment Fund and the double duty that that can do. We heard about the Māori housing initiatives and amount that’s coming in there, and we heard from Minister Nanaia Mahuta about the free-trade agreement with the UK and its early entry into force. We heard about the indigenous chapter; the first of its kind in one of these agreements. Then we heard about the increase in diversity of police—I think there were some others that I missed as well, but that is a lot of good things that this Government is doing.

This is my first general debate now since becoming part of the Government formally as a Minister. And I want to congratulate Jo Luxton today being sworn in, and she will be a fantastic customs Minister. One of my portfolios is oceans and fisheries, and I was able to speak in this House last week at both question time but also in the annual review debate about some of the work that’s going on in that portfolio. That includes the Fisheries Industry Transformation Plan—that’s a draft plan for fisheries for the 1.45 billion wild caught fish industry that New Zealand has. The consultation is out to 11 June—my plug in there—and what we’re wanting to do with this industry is do more and better with the fish that we catch; not intending to catch more fish.

Then also in this portfolio there’s the aquaculture strategy. This is an ambitious programme to develop low-carbon protein. We’re wanting to get that industry to $3 billion of export money—not immediately, of course—and there’s a lot of work going in there into looking at open ocean farming and other work that we can do.

I also have delegations into waste and environment, where of course we’ve got the Waste Minimisation Fund and Plastics Innovation Fund with a focus on diverting waste. Again, we’re talking about double duty. A decrease in waste leads to a decrease in emissions. This is true from two main ways. One is, of course, if we’ve got organic waste that’s creating biogenic methane and that’s a problem in terms of climate emissions. But also, if we can recycle things like aluminium, using recycled aluminium uses 90 percent less energy than making new aluminium. So that’s a huge energy saving.

There’s a lot of work to do in this portfolio for a low-emissions and circular economy, but it’s something I’m very excited about. Of course, we’re doing a lot on climate change. I’m very proud that this Government has done that first emissions reduction plan. We have the hypothecated fund from the emissions trading scheme with the CERF—the Climate Emergency Response Fund—and there are many, many initiatives in that, including the Clean Car Discount. This programme has doubled the number of EVs—electric vehicles—coming into New Zealand in just the one year and saved 1.4 billion litres of petrol, and all the emissions that go with that.

I want to note, of course, that the ACT Party doesn’t want us to do anything on climate emissions.

💬 Simon Court: Yes we do.

Well, the focus from the leader is on adaptation, which is important as well. We have to do both.

Also looking towards the future, I want to note that, of course, we have the FIFA Women’s World Cup coming up. Dunedin is the only host city in the South Island, and you can see games from teams from the Philippines, Switzerland—Switzerland will be hosted by Dunedin—the Netherlands, Portugal, Japan, Costa Rica, Argentina, South Africa, Vietnam, and, of course, our very own New Zealand team. This is obviously in July; if you are in Dunedin, then you can come to the brilliant stadium which has a roof. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I too would just like to acknowledge the tragic death of the young boy up in Whangārei. I acknowledge all of the people involved in the rescue and recovery of him, and acknowledge that the whole community up there will be hurting, and encourage us and remind us all that we should be respecting his parents and family. There will be lots of speculation and people wanting to comment, but we should be led by them.

I want to address the sanctimonious speech that the leader of the Green Party made in the House, lecturing the rest of us when they’ve got their own issues, which I think they should be focused on and dealing with. Today, in question time, when a member of the Opposition raised a very important question to the Government around public safety, the co-leader of the Green Party decided to mock that to a point, Mr Speaker, that you felt she had to leave the House.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member should not bring the Speaker or any of my rulings into this debate.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. What the co-leaders of the Green Party should be doing is, quite simply, this: they should be standing up and addressing this Parliament and explaining what they’re doing around domestic violence—one of the portfolios they hold. What are they doing around homelessness—one of the portfolios they hold? There is nothing being done. From the policing perspective, domestic violence is going through the roof. It’s one of those issues that continues to increase.

💬 Jan Logie: You supported Te Aorerekura. You supported the work.

Sorry, Jan Logie—support what? Of course, Jan Logie is saying we support the work. When she was the Minister, of course we supported the work—of course we did. We want to see a reduction. We want to see a reduction in domestic violence. The point being this, Jan Logie, your co-leader that now has the portfolio has done nothing, and we see domestic violence rising. Do you know what the numbers are? Go and have a look at the numbers, Jan Logie; you’ll be embarrassed and you’ll be ashamed, and you should be talking to your co-leader and telling her to front up to this House. Instead of us getting sanctimonious lectures, they should be fronting up and explaining to the House why they’re failing.

In terms of the policing portfolio, this is this Government’s priority: when they came to have to appoint their fourth police Minister—the fourth police Minister since I’ve had the portfolio—Prime Minister “Chippy” Hipkins sat around the Cabinet table and he asked for volunteers. This is what happened: all his senior Ministers, at the top of the table, suddenly were looking at their papers! They had other things to keep themselves busy. Give credit to Ginny Andersen, one of the newest Cabinet Ministers there, down the end of the table, who put her hand up and said, “I’ll have a go.” Chris Hipkins said, “Great. We’re going to appoint Ginny Andersen, my newest Cabinet Minister, with very little experience, to the police portfolio.”—in a time when we’re experiencing the worst lawlessness we’ve seen as a country. Then he rushes down to speak to the press gallery, but he didn’t actually think that through very well, because he got down there and he said, “I’ve just appointed Ginny Andersen as our police Minister. She’s got lots of good police experience.”

But, of course, the gallery started probing that. They said to him, “What is that experience?” And he had to stop—and we’ve seen this happen before—“Well, I wasn’t expecting that question. I don’t have a pre-formulated answer.” He came down to the House to speak to our press gallery to tell them he’d just appointed a new police Minister that had police experience and he had no idea what that was. That shows just how much thought, or how much attention, was given to the appointment—an appointment that, I think, is very important when we’re facing a 33 percent increase in violence crime, a 41 percent increase in victimisations, and an over 500 percent increase in ram raids. They’re dealing with a 60 percent increase in mental health. They are stretched—that thin blue line is stretched. And I’ll tell you one thing: they get tired and fatigued with hearing politicians getting up in the House and talking about 1,800 new police. They do not feel that they’ve got reinforcements on that thin blue line at all.

So I take umbrage to a Green Party leader coming in here and lecturing us about what we’re focused on and what we want to do, when we are laser focused behind Christopher Luxon and holding this Government to account. They are fast becoming a shambles. They are a chaotic coalition, whether it be Labour, whether it be almost being bowled over by Meka Whaitiri running so fast the other way, or whether it be the Green Party with their own members calling each other cry-babies, and a member leaving.

By the way, Mr Kieran McAnulty, who decides to stand up and have a go at Chris Bishop—who delivered an outstanding speech and actually got a clap from his own colleagues in acknowledgment—when he finished his speech there wasn’t one clap. Everyone was looking down.

💬 Andrew Bayly: No teamwork over there.

Absolutely. We are focused on holding this Government to account. We’ll continue to roll out our policies, and we’ll fight hard—

Order! The member’s time has expired.

This year, it feels like every speech I give in this Parliament is timed alongside a severe weather event in my electorate of Nelson. We’re seeing a massive increase in the number of heavy rain events and storms in Nelson. Over the weekend, we had weather warnings for Nelson and Tasman, with a handful of households being evacuated and damage to our critical infrastructure. Yesterday, we had more heavy rain, and, last night, people in the suburb of Atawhai reported creeks that were rising, and rising rapidly. Late last night, our teams from Fire and Emergency, police, and council were out clearing culverts and checking properties to ensure people were safe in their homes. My thanks to our local civil defence teams and Tasman Mayor Tim King for their proactive communication with me last night so that I could pass on important safety messages to concerned residents. Can I also acknowledge the family and schoolmates of the young boy lost in Whangārei yesterday—arohanui.

People across the country and in my electorate of Nelson are feeling anxious. People are worried that there are more rain events on the way. People who are feeling concerned or anxious and would like to speak to someone, please, I urge you to text or phone 1737 at any time of the day or night to speak to someone. There is nothing to be embarrassed about for reaching out for help.

What we are seeing across New Zealand is climate change in action. Climate change is real and it is happening now. I am proud that this Labour Government is putting in place real policy and making real change, with support from the Green Party, to drive down our emissions. We are making real change in improvements to our country’s transport emissions, thanks to the work of our Government and transport Minister Michael Wood.

Meanwhile, the other lot can’t make their mind up about whether they’re driving their car forwards or reversing it. National’s on-again, off-again relationship with the Clean Car Discount took another turn for the worse recently as they abandoned electric vehicle incentives and signalled they would increase New Zealand’s emissions by 3.4 million tonnes. It’s like they can’t figure out whether to put their foot on the accelerator or the brake. They’re stuck bunny-hopping along the road like a learner driver in the 1990s. They cannot be trusted to make the hard decisions to make progress on reducing emissions. All the evidence shows that National cannot be trusted to take any action on climate change. Their climate policy might as well be denial. They have not announced a single policy designed to reduce transport emissions, and they continue to try and weasel their way out of any meaningful climate action. It’s time for them to front up and tell New Zealanders what they would do to cut emissions, or just admit their policy chest is as empty as their promises.

We’ve heard today again in the general debate, and we know that Christopher Luxon and National are so negative and keen to talk down New Zealand, like he did in the UK last week, and they’re struggling to accept that the Government’s clean car programme is an overwhelming success, exceeding expectations by 240 percent in the first emissions budget period. The Clean Car Discount is specifically designed to change behaviour by providing a discount on electric, hybrid, and low-emissions vehicles funded from a fee on higher-emitting ones. Over 100,000 Kiwis have benefited from this support to transition to cleaner, cheaper vehicles. It has doubled the number of electric vehicles coming into New Zealand in one year, and it’s exceeding emissions reduction forecasts in saving New Zealanders from buying 1.4 billion litres of petrol. That is real change in action on climate change.

Labour will continue to back Kiwis to choose low-emission vehicles and alternatives. Our Clean Car Discount scheme has been a success, with the highest number of electric vehicles on New Zealand roads ever, and later this year in Nelson, unlike my colleague Tangi Utikere’s claims, Nelson will have the highest number of electric vehicles in the regions in New Zealand. I’m proud that this Labour Government is putting its foot on the accelerator to drive down New Zealand’s transport emissions so that we can secure and protect our environment and the climate in New Zealand for future generations. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

New Zealand is in the middle of a cost of living crisis. There are mums and dads I’ve seen in my local supermarket taking things out of the trolley and putting them back on the shelf because as they fill the trolley they realise that they’ve blown the family food budget for the week. I’ve got a family member who works in a tyre shop. He tells me “Dad, you wouldn’t believe the number of people that come into the shop putting their tyres on buy now, pay later; even people driving nice cars who look like they’ve got decent jobs.” People are having to make choices about how they spend their money. That’s what Kiwis do when their budgets are crimped.

When we think about farmers who are making good money selling stuff overseas but whose input costs, whether it’s diesel or fertiliser or labour or red tape—the regulatory cost of having to apply for consents just to plant crops, which is another imposition this Labour Government has put on the productive sector, that’s all adding to the cost of living.

Now, incomes in New Zealand rose by around 6.4 percent last year, but inflation by 7.2 percent. Kiwis are going backwards. They feel it in the pocket. What causes inflation? More money being spread around the economy but not enough goods and services being produced for people to use and consume. And the Government has a role in that. Government spending increased from $87 billion to $139 billion in the last six years. That’s an increase of over $60 billion—60 percent in six years. But inflation only went up 20 percent. All that extra Government spending is adding to inflation.

Where did it go? Well, the Government’s spending another $200 per person per week, on your behalf, taken from Kiwis’ tax, money from their wages, and from business profits. Think about the bike bridge; nothing got built, but $50 million was spent on designing, consulting, and testing the waters. Auckland light rail: they’ve spent $100 million putting a business case together, drawing lines on a map, and maybe another $100 million before they’ll finish that business case. Nothing is likely to get built this decade, if ever. Let’s Get Wellington Moving: well, they managed to deliver a pedestrian crossing for $4 million that’s slowing down traffic.

Now, Labour and the Greens have both boasted in the House this afternoon about how they’re using the money from the emissions trading scheme to fund their pet green projects, whether it’s subsidising people to buy Teslas—$80,000 cars—through the Climate Emergency Response Fund. I’m not quite sure what kind of emergency that’s designed to respond to. Or the Green Investment Fund, which James Shaw boasted he’s put another $300 million into—of money that’s been collected from the emissions trading scheme—to fund things like replacing boilers in businesses that could afford to do it themselves or subsidising New Zealand Post, a State-owned company, so they could buy electric scooters and electric vehicles for their staff to truck around in while their competitors, who deliver packages faster and more efficiently than New Zealand Post, have to go and raise their own money just to buy new trucks and vans. They don’t get the benefit of this slush fund.

Now, Labour’s policies have pushed up the cost of everything: fuel, electricity, cars and utes, interest rates. They are feeding inflation. And when you look at the emissions trading scheme and the money raised from that as one example, over a billion dollars a year raised that could—could—go back into Kiwis’ pockets instead of going on to these pet green projects.

What would ACT do instead? Well, with about a billion dollars a year or more, we would issue a carbon tax refund to Kiwis. So because they’ve paid for their emissions, we think we should reward them for having done the right thing. We’d give them back about $250 per person per year, maybe $750 per household, so they could make choices about what they spend their household budget on, whether it’s on energy or whether it’s on buying a new heat pump or actually saving up for a set of tyres. That’s the difference between ACT and this current Labour - Green Government. We would let Kiwis keep more of what they earn and we’d let them make choices about how they spend their own money.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. As a member of the Labour Party and the Labour Government, I’m always proud to stand in this House and to talk and be open and honest and lean into the challenges that we do face. Because we face challenges as a nation, we face challenges as a global community, and we know that there are things that we need to address and we must address. I’m glad to be part of a party and a Government that’s willing to lean in—not lean out, but lean in—and address those hard issues. Someone once said that being negative only makes the journey more difficult. You may be given a cactus, but you don’t have to sit on the cactus. I think I’ll leave that where it is for now and maybe allude to it a bit later on.

But what we constantly seem to be hearing in this House, what we constantly seem to be hearing as I listen to politicians, is going on and on, being negative. Christopher Luxon and the National Party—so often, they have things to say. When I’m in New Plymouth and in my electorate, there are challenges that we face and we talk about so often, but it’s around how do we find solutions. Because I don’t see the vision. I don’t see the plan for our future. I’m grateful to be part of a Government that sees a plan and has a plan.

When we come to housing—and we’ve had conversations about that this afternoon in this debate—I don’t want to be putting the fear into our renters. I don’t want to be, as winter approaches, making renters feel that they may have to move on or that we can just throw them out at our will. I want to ensure that we have good tenancy policies, we have good, warm, dry homes, because everybody—everybody—deserves a place to call home.

I was doing the numbers recently, looking at our social housing build in New Plymouth and in Taranaki. Can I just say that between 2010 and 2017, before this Government came into being, two—two—houses were built through Housing New Zealand or Kāinga Ora in New Plymouth. Only two. Between 2018 and 2022, that number went up to 15. I’m really grateful that our Minister of Housing has had conversations with myself, with members of our community, and I’m really excited. There are already 45 units being built in New Plymouth as we speak. We’ve got another 100 on the go that are planned for, being consented as we speak, so, by the middle of this year, we’ll potentially have more than 140 houses being built in New Plymouth—140; remember, two between 2010 and 2017—because everybody deserves a place to call home.

I just want to allude and come to—because Port Taranaki was, I believe, the last port to export live animals, and before I was elected, this was something that I was challenged on by members of our community. How could we, as a community that is so much a rural community who supports our farmers, be actually doing this to our animals? I was really surprised to watch Newshub several weeks ago, and the spokesperson for animal welfare, Nicola Grigg, announced that she was going to bring live animal exports back, and made this amazing statement that it’s just like: “It’ll be a farm on water. That’s fine. It’ll be lovely—a farm on water.” I believe that we need to ensure the best practice we have for our animal welfare.

For us here in the Labour Party and for us as a Government, we’re doing our best to ensure that we protect not only our animals and the care of our animals but also our reputation around the world, because we need to make sure that we pivot and ensure that we have ourselves in a position that is competitive as we come into the 2030s, into the 2040s, and into the 2050s. People are demanding—people are demanding—that when it comes to the way crops are grown, when it comes to the way that animals are bred and cared for, that the standards have changed. The standards have changed. I want to make sure that we protect our animal welfare, we protect our reputation around the world, that we are the breadbasket of the world that conserves but also has high-value, quality food that is sold to the world that not only supports those around the world but supports us as a nation.

I am glad to be part of a Government that has a vision, that is looking forward. I know, as I said at the start, we have a lot of work to do, and there are challenges that face us every single day, but I am so grateful and so excited to be serving in a Government that is making sure that we are ready for the challenges that face us, and we are finding solutions. Being negative only makes the journey more difficult. You may be given a cactus, but you don’t have to sit on it.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to talk about cyclone recovery. The cyclone-hit communities of New Zealand want to talk about cyclone recovery and they want the Government to talk about cyclone recovery. But they’d much prefer for the Government to actually do something about cyclone recovery, because the Government can do almost anything but it has chosen so far to do almost nothing.

And when I say the Government can do almost anything, I refer to the fact that in this House, the Labour Government, with the support of the National Party on the bill itself, and including as to process, supported legislation that would give very broad-ranging powers to the Government to change all kinds of primary legislation—all kinds of laws to sweep aside the red tape, to reduce the bureaucracy, to allow solutions to be made for cyclone-hit areas of this country. And as at last night, when I last checked the relevant website, there had been no such Orders in Council produced by the Government all these weeks later.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Not any?

That’s right, the Hon Louise Upston. I confirm for you today: none whatsoever. So it’s the lack of action, but it’s also the lack of clarity; it’s the lack of transparency.

There have been instances of Government support announced, and that’s been welcome—quite rightly so—from the community right up until the point in which it becomes clear that, actually, the delivery of that which has been announced hasn’t been forthcoming. There’s been a lack of criteria, a lack of clarity about who it is within the communities, for example, of Hawke’s Bay and surrounding regions—Gisborne likewise, and other areas will have been the same—with chambers of commerce given money by central government, asked to distribute it, but without any kind of clarity about where it should go. And the sad thing is that has caused angst locally. It’s put those chambers of commerce in a difficult position, to be passing to their members and non-members alike amounts that they deem to be appropriate on the vaguest of criteria. Naturally, there is resentment, naturally there are shortfalls, and naturally people are asking for answers. They’re asking for support, not just in the announcement but actually in the delivery and in the certain delivery at that.

The mental wellbeing of those in cyclone-hit communities is deteriorating. I don’t wish to make this a partisan political point, and, so far, we have been very supportive as an Opposition on measures that the Government has taken in good faith to improve the wellbeing and the lives of people in cyclone-hit areas. But we cannot ignore the fact that communities on the ground, whether that’s individual households or businesses, are so badly affected and now, with more than 11 weeks having passed with so little certainty, so little to hang their hat on, so little on which to make decisions for their future going forward, they are feeling severe mental strain. The cracks are showing, and it is desperately urgent that these people receive the support that they deserve from the Government that they have supported through their payment of taxes in good faith all these years. They deserve that help now. It is now time for the Government to step up and give that.

Yesterday, we saw the release of the report by Boston Consulting Group in relation to horticulture in the Hawke’s Bay. I emphasise it’s in that region alone—obviously hugely significant for that region, a major part of their regional economy, but with effects that will be felt for “New Zealand Inc.” as well as very broadly in those communities. Not just the growers themselves, of course, but the workers, the suppliers, all the local economy that’s intricately connected with the successful operation of those businesses. And that’s, of course, before you start talking about the horticulture affected in other areas of New Zealand, be it Gisborne, Coromandel, Northland, and so on—Auckland, too, including my own electorate of Kaipara ki Mahurangi.

Without the decision-making certainty about whether land will be commercially viable, whether it can be used for certain purposes, not only are the weeks and months of inaction costing the ability to clear the land but, actually, for planting decisions now that will bear fruit quite literally in a year’s time or a bit under a year. These decisions are time critical. These decisions must be made by Government. They must rule in or out certain areas as soon as possible so that the people on the ground can do what they need to do in order to make the planting decisions, to actually get on and do it, because otherwise we are staring down the barrel of, for example, in horticulture within the Hawke’s Bay region, $3.5 billion between 2024 and 2030. So we need these decisions to be made.

The lack of representation through ministerial leads in the area with the demise, in a ministerial sense, of Stuart Nash and Meka Whaitiri isn’t helping. National Party candidates and members are advocating the Government needs to get on and make these decisions.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. For the benefit of the member that just resumed his seat, Chris Penk, who said that this Government has done nothing for the cyclone recovery, I just need to point out—

💬 Chris Penk: Almost nothing.

TĀMATI COFFEY: Oh, almost nothing. Here we go. If almost nothing means an initial $250 million for Waka Kotahi and local councils to assess and fix the roads, that must be almost nothing. If it’s $74 million for affected farmers and growers to clean up and re-establish their businesses, almost nothing; $75 million for businesses with immediate costs and clean ups to be distributed by local delivery partners for affected regions, almost nothing; $5 million into mayoral relief funds up and down the coast; $65 million in civil defence payments and more. The member leaves, but, actually, we’ve done a lot, and I hope that he’s gone and heard that.

It has been a really tough time for those people up on the coast, and we do need to focus on those issues. But, unfortunately, when we look around the Chamber, there’s a whole lot going on. I want to start my contribution with what the Hon Dr Megan Woods started with at the start of her contribution. She talked about a few films, she framed it up, talked about Star Wars and Back to the Future. I want to talk about Frozen. That’s right, it’s a classic. And if you haven’t seen it, you need to see the movie. It really is awesome. Boy meets princess, falls in love, has a dance, he turns out to be a psychopath but that’s a whole different story. In amongst the winter wonderland that is Frozen, you have talking reindeer, singing snowmen, but a line in a song which is a classic, and that line is: “The cold never bothered me anyway.” What a song, what a line: “The cold never bothered me anyway.” What a lie as well.

Actually, the cold hurts. The cold makes you sick. The cold can send you to hospital. The cold can be very, very harmful for the health of Kiwi families up and down Aotearoa, which is why I’m super perplexed by the fact that the National Party have got a policy in place which is all about ensuring that landlords can get rid of their tenants without a brass razoo of a reason. No-reason evictions; just, “You know what, if I’m feeling like it, I’m just gonna kick you out.” And they don’t have to give a reason. Kick them out on to those cold streets over the course of the winter, that is detrimental to the health of Kiwi families, which is why we on this side of the House stand united against that policy: making sure that landlords don’t have the ability to be able to kick out Kiwi families into the streets for no apparent reason. It really does baffle me.

It’s part of the reason I’m so proud that on this side of the House we’ve done so much—so much—to be able to support those people who are inevitably renters. And we’ve seen so many of them, especially in Māori families—so many families haven’t got the privilege of homeownership, so they have to rent; that’s what they have to do. And a policy which enables landlords to be able to kick those renters out on to the street without a reason absolutely dazes me.

On this side of the House, we’ve been focused in our term in Parliament on building State homes, so that we can get people off the streets that have found themselves homeless, for whatever reason, into safe, warm accommodation. We’ve changed the conditions, the regulations, around houses to make sure that they’re warm and they’re safe for families to be able to live in. We have an unprecedented house-building programme going on all around the country, and I know it because in my city, in Rotorua, we are seeing the houses going up, and we are seeing people moving out of motels and into those safe, warm, dry houses. And what we’ve done is we’ve also purposely strengthened the position of renters in our communities. And making sure that, actually, landlords don’t have the ability to be able to kick out tenants for no apparent reason, because it’s the right thing to do. The fact that the Opposition think that that’s a good idea means that they’re thinking, I don’t know, maybe with their financial backers in their back pocket. We know that, you know, there’s a lot of people—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member cannot make that kind of accusation in this House. He will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

TĀMATI COFFEY: I withdraw and apologise. What I’m trying to say here is that it absolutely baffles me that the Opposition have come to this House and brought this terrible policy which is going to see thousands of Kiwi families up and down the country potentially evicted for no apparent reason. It’s not right, it’s not fair, and on this side of the House—the Labour Party—we stand united against that very, very dumb policy.

Order! The member’s time has expired. The time for this debate has expired also.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.