General Debate

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

Well, over in the Labour Party we are seeing very interesting times, because what do people do when they get a bit depressed and they get a bit unhappy about life? What they do is they turn to comfort food. For me, it’s pies and pizza; for the Labour Party, the comfort food that nourishes them through the hard times, the depressing moments, the hard times at 10 p.m. at night when they’re thinking about the next day and how bad it’s going to be in Opposition and how they can’t make decisions any more for the future—the comfort food of the Labour Party is tax. Particularly the comfort food for the Labour Party is more and new taxes on New Zealanders: capital gains taxes and wealth taxes.

While business confidence is returning to this country and while the official cash rate is coming down and interest rates are coming down and we’re getting those green shoots of change coming through the economy and New Zealanders are starting to think about a better tomorrow and a better 2025, the Labour Party has decided—most particularly their leader for the moment, Chris Hipkins, he’s decided—that now’s a good time to talk more about tax. He goes on Q+A and starts to talk about a capital gains tax and a wealth tax.

The thing about this is he’s got issues in his caucus, because he’s got David Parker sitting there on the back benches, who has no portfolio responsibility for tax whatsoever, but that is not stopping him from freelancing all over the media, most notably Radio New Zealand, to give his reckons on wealth taxes. Here we have David Parker on Radio New Zealand: “I know the critics of it say this will somehow cause capital flight”. Interestingly, his leader, Chris Hipkins, said on Q+A specifically, “One of the challenges is if New Zealand’s one of the only countries in the world doing it, then you run the risk of wealth flight.” David Parker and Chris Hipkins completely disagree on this issue.

For the first time in a long time, I actually agree with Chris Hipkins, because it is true that if New Zealand became one of the only countries in the world to put in place a wealth tax, then we would see a horde of New Zealanders who’ve invested their money and their capital and their energy and time in New Zealand leaving New Zealand. So for the Labour Party, it’s always all about tax. They always want to tax New Zealanders more and retard the progress that New Zealanders are making.

Ultimately, at the moment, we have a debate playing out between the centre-right bloc in the Parliament and the centre-left, and it’s really a choice about if you believe in smaller Government, efficient Government—

Dan Bidois: Pro-growth.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: —and a Government that goes for growth—exactly right, Dan Bidois—to grow the wealth and the prosperity of the country so that we can invest more in effective and efficient public services. Or do you think that the right way to go is more tax, more spending, and more debt? Actually, we’ve got the evidence in from the last six years: we tried the experiment of ever-increasing tax, ever-increasing spending, and ever-increasing debt, and where has it got us? It’s got us into this economic funk that we find ourselves in right now.

Under the last Government, spending went up by 70 percent in six years and debt went through the roof. When we came into Government, debt had hit $100 billion, and we find ourselves in a situation where the Government is having to grapple with tough fiscal decisions because of the wanton mismanagement and reckless fiscal profligacy of the last Government.

This goes right to the choice that New Zealanders are facing and will continue to face into the next two years as we run into the 2026 election. The choice that they will face at that election is between a coalition of parties that believe in smaller Government, believe in more efficient Government, and, most importantly, believe that the right way to deliver better public services for New Zealanders—health and education and all the things that we rely on; law and order—the right way to deliver more spending for those things is not just to shovel money into the Wellington bureaucracy and tax New Zealanders more money in order to pay for it. The right way to do that is to grow the economy.

The Labour Party and the Green Party in particular think that the right way to grow the economy is more taxes. Actually, the last thing New Zealand needs is a wealth tax and a comprehensive capital gains tax. We need more capital. When you don’t want more capital, you tax it. We need more wealth in this country, so the last thing we need is a wealth tax. We will fight the next election on lower taxes versus more and new taxes from the Labour Party.

I’ll start by saying that wasn’t his best work, actually. But never mind; we won’t dwell on that.

Is this drama? Is it comedy? Is it horror? God only knows what genre we have been presented with in the episodes we’ve seen in the last year, but particularly the episodes that we’ve seen in recent weeks and in recent months. But one thing’s for sure, and that is that it is a symbolic, incompetent, and chaotic production that we are seeing run out by that coalition.

I’m going to give a few examples. Recently, we’ve seen the self-appointed executive director of the judiciary—that would be the Hon Shane Jones, a Cabinet Minister—calling a judge a communist. The Attorney-General, Judith Collins, told him off; Jones’ own party leader, Winston Peters, told him off, but Christopher Luxon is yet to do so. In fact, he implicitly supported Jones’ comments when he described them as “merely descriptive”. We now have a Minister tearing up the Cabinet Manual and the only person who is unwilling to chastise him is his groupie, the Prime Minister.

We’ve had Andrew Bayly, who is meant to be the leading actor in this particular episode, trying to do the bare minimum to disrupt the supermarket duopoly that is ripping New Zealanders off at the checkout by supporting the Grocery Commissioner’s plan, but David Seymour, who isn’t even supposed to be featuring in the episode, is once again showing that he values the interests of big companies over everyday Kiwis and says that he and ACT will block any efforts to hold those companies to account.

We’ve also seen another producer, Winston Peters, who clearly doesn’t respect Nicola Willis, who’s meant to be the director and funder, and her abilities as finance Minister. He didn’t even discuss the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s Budget bid earlier this year with her, instead going right over her head to chat to Christopher Luxon directly. That does not bode well for Nicola Willis’ future Budgets.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: He’s a man.

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Well, he is a man, and perhaps that is the issue: Winston Peters needed to go to a man. He couldn’t go to Nicola Willis herself and so bypassed her to go directly to the Prime Minister.

We have a Government who are rolling things out that were not voted for by New Zealanders. Did we have a debate about Treaty principles in the lead-up to the election? Did we tell the public or ask the public about tobacco legislation and whether or not they wanted to get rid of the smoke-free policy? Did we tell the public that we need to make $1.4 billion worth of cuts to their health system, and that they would suffer when they went to receive the healthcare that they needed as a result of that? I don’t recall that being part of the election campaign by the other side of the House. Kiwis are clearly not getting what they voted for.

This Government are taking us backwards. Instead of credits at the end of the episode, we have a whole lot of political lines that are coming through that describe what this Government are doing. National agreed to a divisive and racist Treaty principles bill when they entered into the pact with the ACT Party. National entertains New Zealand First’s harebrained conspiracy theories, refusing to commit to a routine international agreement with the World Health Organization, with no clear rationale for why that is necessary. National will stop building State houses—stop building State houses—instead relying on community providers. This will undo the six years’ worth of work that Labour undertook. They are taking us backwards, and that’s only in a few of the areas.

I think the important thing to end the speech with is that, actually, this Government’s priorities are in the wrong place. Who in this country thinks that it was appropriate, during a fiscally tight time, to give $2.9 billion worth of tax breaks to landlords? Apart from a few landlords, apart from the property investors and that side of the House, the rest of New Zealand is saying it’s not appropriate. That side of the House is waving the flag, saying, “We gave everyone tax cuts.” Well, New Zealanders are actually saying now that the $20 a week extra that some of them are getting—not all of them; some of them are getting only $2—does not weigh up when you look at everything that New Zealanders have lost. That side of the House is taking New Zealand backwards, and they have their priorities in the wrong place.

E te Māngai o te Whare, tēnā koe. Ko te manu e kai ana i te miro, nōna te ngāhere. Ko te manu e kai ana i te mātauranga, nōna te ao.

[The bird that feeds on the miro berry, the forest is theirs. The bird who feeds on knowledge, the world is theirs.]

One of the things that we saw recently was how Te Tiriti o Waitangi is under attack in Aotearoa, but one of the things within education that came out last week was the subtle and underhanded consultation to remove Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a priority in section 127 of the Education and Training Act. Just for context, currently in section 127 of the Education and Training Act, there are four primary objectives. The consultation means that only one of those will remain, which is around educational achievement, and the part—subsection (1)(d)—on giving effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi will be moved down and deprioritised. It also means that unless the school board deems that giving effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which also includes tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and the teaching of te reo Māori, is in line with and meets the objective of educational outcome—if it doesn’t meet that or if the school does not have the capacity for it, it does not need to consider it. This is of serious concern in the context of Te Tiriti.

The Ministry of Education may say that schools will continue to give effect to it, but, like I said, if the capacity doesn’t meet the primary objective of the school, which is educational achievement and educational achievement alone, it does not need to consider it. That is a downgrade. That is a deprioritisation of what is currently in line in the legislation, and it is a deprioritisation of our obligation to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in our education system.

What does te reo Māori mean? Te reo Māori is a taonga. It should be protected under article 2 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. As someone who speaks multiple languages, and as someone who had to learn English upon coming to New Zealand and who had to understand the references and everything that comes with learning a new language, I thoroughly enjoyed my journey while at the very beginning of my journey of undertaking te reo Māori and learning te reo Māori. Now, the reason for that, as with my background in linguistics, is that when we are looking at any language, let alone an official language—by the way, in any other country, it is compulsory for you to learn the official languages of that country in their schooling system.

When we are learning a new language, it expands our horizons. Language connects. Language builds understanding. It allows us to be able to relate to each other and understand why we do things in the way that we do. It allows us to understand that level of whanaunga and the whakapapa of a particular language and a particular culture. So, for us, by removing and deprioritising it—by taking away those berries—we’re limiting the horizons of our ākonga.

When we are looking at this—and we’re going back to the whakataukī I mentioned at the beginning—and as we are looking forward to expanding our own horizons in Te Wiki o te Reo Māori, we must ensure that Te Tiriti and te reo Māori continue to be at front and centre of our educational system.

Kia mau ki te reo Māori o Aotearoa. Ākona te ao pūpuritia. [Hold fast to the Māori language of Aotearoa. Learn it and secure it.]

It gives me great pleasure to rise this afternoon, as the Minister of Conservation, on the back of a successful Conservation Week 2024. Toitū te taiao.

Over the past year, I’ve had the great and humble pleasure of attending various parts of the majestic and iconic conservation estate throughout Aotearoa New Zealand. For example, I went down to Piopiotahi, or Milford Sound, where the humble, hard-working MP beside me, Joseph Mooney, resides. To see some of these places that we are absolutely responsible for—to look after, to take care of, and to ensure their sustainability into the future. I’ve met and engaged with a number of iwi and hapū stakeholders, community organisations, environmental organisations, like the Environmental Defence Society, led by Gary Taylor, and others who are all working together under the korowai of conservation.

Most recently, I managed to visit The Capital Kiwi Project: some people who are working very hard to preserve and enhance the kiwi and other populations out on the north and west of hills of Wellington out towards Mākara. They’re doing some really phenomenal mahi to look after kiwi out there. This ambitious little community conservation project was dreamt up, and is still being undertaken and driven, by the local community. It was heart-warming to see the recent Instagram post about one little kiwi who ran out in front of a mountain biker and then secured over 370,000 views and likes on Instagram.

This year’s Conservation Week held the theme “take action for nature”, and this Government is doing exactly that—toitū te taiao. Just before, I was sitting next to the humble and hard-working MP for Coromandel, Scott Simpson, and, earlier this year, had the great opportunity to go down to Te Whanganui-a-Hei to see the access issues that are currently confronting Mautohe, also known as Cathedral Cove—one of those majestic places across the conservation estate. After Cyclone Gabrielle in February of last year, the access route to Cathedral Cove had actually been closed off because whole parts of that access route had been washed away. We went there in January to see what was going on, and we’ve taken action, taken a decision, and decided we’re going to reinstate that access and ensure, supported by the international visitor levy, that we actually get something done—an outcome. I look forward to the Christmas bromance with Scott Simpson and his whānau walking down with my whānau to that beach at Cathedral Cove to Te Whanganui-a-Hei.

I’m excited to announce and outline the clear priorities of Te Papa Atawhai, the Department of Conservation (DOC), to protect our exquisite and majestic taonga. You might be aware that Te Papa Atawhai manages around 30 percent of the entire whenua of Aotearoa. That’s over 8 million hectares. That faces some serious and significant challenges, like weather. The floods of 2020 caused about $12 million of damage; ditto Cyclone Dovi in 2022; and then, of course, Cyclone Gabrielle with an estimated $90 million of impact and damage to the conservation portfolio.

We have some pretty clear priorities within planet DOC, and protecting Aotearoa New Zealand’s natural environments and historic and herstoric and cultural heritage is important. Number one: target investment into high conservation outcomes. Our mahi will identify and strengthen protection of high-value conservation areas to deliver the best outcomes for biodiversity and recreation. You might not be surprised that a lot of the high conservation area throughout Aotearoa New Zealand is actually on private land. Those people working on QEII trust lands—farmers all over the show—that are trying to do their little bit to preserve and enhance biodiversity across the country.

Number two: make more money through the conservation estate. What a great idea, because most of the revenue for the conservation responsibilities comes from the Crown and, ultimately, the taxpayer, and a very small amount of money comes from concessions and users of huts and tracks and the fees that they pay to use those huts. We’re really committed to strengthening the efforts of conservation to generate new revenue and improve outcomes.

Number three: strengthen relationships with the whānau, iwi, and hapū throughout the country. There’s a great example coming with Maunga Taranaki, with that mahi up in Taranaki to vest that into its own legal personality. We’ll work closely with these iwi and hapū to ensure there’s strong conservation outcomes.

Number four: fix concession processes. Right now, nearly 25 percent of all concession applications have been received over one year ago, and that simply isn’t good enough. We can do better than this. By pruning regulation, by growing revenue, and by nurturing the things that matter most, we’re securing the future for biodiversity and for the conservation estate that all New Zealanders, Māori, iwi, hapū—all New Zealanders—can enjoy. Kia ora tātou.

Kia orana, Mr Speaker. Look, last week was recess week, and during recess weeks we get a chance to spend some time, if we’re fortunate, in our electorate, and I was able to do that in the great electorate of Palmerston North. I want to acknowledge one person in Palmy, because I was able to visit Aileen Kars last week with her friends Jan and Ken and the good folk at Olive Tree, because Aileen is turning 111 tomorrow. She is the oldest person in New Zealand, and the Department of Internal Affairs have confirmed that for us. So, Aileen, I wish you all the best for tomorrow in turning 111 years old.

Last week, also, the Government released its funding around its transport plan, the National Land Transport Programme—all about roads. Look, roads are important, but this is a Government that clearly has put all of its eggs in the one basket. You do not have to be a Sherlock to find that there’s a little bit of an issue in this Government’s funding plan, a little bit that will grow day by day. It is a funding gap, a hole of $6 billion—$6 billion. Now, during the campaign, the now Government was put under the test about their plan. It is all coming to fruition because this is a plan that has a funding hole. It will see this Government have to take money from schools, from hospitals, and who knows whatever else in order to plug that hole that they are so keen to have in favour of roads. Last week—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Tolls.

TANGI UTIKERE: Well, I’m pleased, actually, Mr McAnulty, that you’ve talked about tolls, because last week this Government also announced that they were going out to talk to the community about putting a toll on a very special road that connects Mr McAnulty’s electorate and my area as well, Te Ahu a Turanga Manawatū Gorge replacement. It is a 11.5 kilometre stretch of road. It will be delivered next year on time and on budget thanks to the provision of the former Labour Government ensuring that we paid for it; we were committed to it, we built it, it’s going to serve the communities of the Manawatū and the Tararua district so well. This Government is now suggesting that a toll of $4.30 or $8.60 be placed over a 24-hour period. That is absolutely uncalled for. It is outrageous, it is a disgrace, and I tell you what, it is a kick in the guts for the people of the Tararua district and the Manawatū region.

If we think about that as a connector, it is going to add additional costs on to those hard-working folk. For someone that uses that to get to and from work on a weekly basis each day, that is going to add a minimum of an extra $21.50 per week for those vehicles that utilise that. Let’s actually remember the fact that for those senior citizens, how much did they get from this Government: $2.25. Well, if a senior citizen is going to jump in their car and use that, they are going to be far worse off under this Government, let alone for the fact that we have paid for it. Do you know, I’m hearing, and I’m sure Mr McAnulty is hearing, the same from constituents, who are saying, “Our taxes have already paid for that stretch of road.” This Government now is wanting to whack additional costs on local folk because their plan does not add up. It is an absolute disgrace.

It is no surprise when this is a Government that is lumping additional cost when it comes to driver’s licences, lumping additional cost when it comes to an extra $50 for motor vehicle registrations, lumping additional cost when it comes to the excise duty going up 12c, 6c, and then 4c in the years to come. This is an absolute disgrace, let alone the costs that that will bring to councils who may actually be responsible for some of the alternative routes. When we’re looking at the Saddle Road, which is a piece of road that is currently actually maintained by Waka Kotahi, it is likely that if a toll is applied, that cost will fall to local councils. This is another kick in the guts for those folks who are doing it tough right now. It is not the residents of the Tararua district and the Manawatū region’s fault that this Government cannot add up and their numbers simply don’t match. It is absolutely shameful.

There is an opportunity for folk to provide some feedback, and I know that we will be encouraging them to do so because this Government, sadly, needs to get the message loud and clear that this is a stretch of road that has already been paid for by taxes. It was planned and delivered by the Labour Government, and now they’re coming late to the party to say, “You know what, we’re going to whack some additional costs on fine folk who are just wanting to do their honest best.” This is a Government that is heading in the wrong direction. It is taking everyone backwards. We expect better.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise to participate in the general debate. I want to talk about the fantastic trip that I just had with the Prime Minister—the Prime Minister’s mission to Malaysia and South Korea last week, which was hectic: two days in Malaysia and two days in South Korea. I want to start by acknowledging the Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon, for leading yet another very successful mission overseas. I have to say, his relentless energy is always a sight to behold and it really set the tone for the business delegation and myself and my companion on the mission—the Hon Nicola Grigg. But it was because he was so relentless and so full of energy, we could not actually stop work. We literally went from really early in the morning to really, really late at night. Parliament seems like a bit of a holiday, actually, so I’m feeling really good to come back home.

I also want to say that New Zealand’s relationship with both Malaysia and South Korea has always been strong, spanning trade, security, and people-to-people connections. But, with any relationship, there’s always room to grow, and that is what the mission was all about—to boost trade, drive investment, and, ultimately, rebuild our economy with the relationships that we actually have with those countries.

As Minister for Economic Development, with responsibility for New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, I’m relentlessly focused on the Government’s goal of doubling the value of exports within 10 years. Achieving this requires not only opening new markets but actually looking after the relationships that we already have, to actually grow it. It was fantastic to see some of these concrete steps taken on the mission to do exactly that. The highlight for me was seeing a range of New Zealand companies signing deals with partners in these markets to grow their global reach and contribute to New Zealand’s economy. There were so many deals that were actually signed—I think it was like 10 deals in Malaysia and eight in Korea—spanning industries such as food and beverage, technology, education, health, tourism, and the energy sector, which was really wonderful to see. There’s truly no limit to the range of industries that Kiwi innovators can make an impact on overseas.

I have to tell you a funny story. While in Malaysia, Minister Grigg and I had the honour of opening a fertility clinic in Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia. What a joy that was to actually see the juxtaposition of a very conservative Muslim community opening up a fertility clinic in the middle of a mall. We had two New Zealand Ministers going to actually open it. To actually see that New Zealand’s technology and culture was influencing another culture, and we were crossing not only geographical but cultural borders as well—that was wonderful to see.

I have to say, the mission was a fantastic success, but we can’t just rest on our laurels thinking, “Oh, New Zealand has such a wonderful reputation and everybody loves us.” It actually takes work and it takes hustle. As the Prime Minister always tells us, we have a great marketing strategy, but we actually need a better sales strategy. We need to sell New Zealand products, New Zealand goods and services. Our goal to double our exports in 10 years is deliberately ambitious, but it’s only going to be delivered if we actually work together and work harder and actually deliver for New Zealanders.

The trade with Korea is an example. The free-trade agreement that was signed 10 years ago, effectively, has delivered double the value. That is a huge success. I think this particular trade mission last week, like others, will play a significant role in actually growing that relationship. One of the business delegates who participated in the mission sent me a text when she landed in New Zealand. She said, “I’m back home in Godzone, and I’m still buzzing from this fantastic, super trade mission.”

I just want to close by paying tribute to the passing of several great New Zealanders. Yesterday, we paid tribute to Kiingi Tuheitia. I would also like to pay tribute to Sir Harold Marshall, long-time Mount Albert community champion and respected international architect, who left us at the end of August. Thank you for your annual efforts at Anzac Day and in championing Mount Albert. Also, New Zealand Business Hall of Famer and co-founder of Ryman Healthcare Kevin Hickman ONZM.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise today with a message to many in our society who have felt or still feel isolated or forgotten as a result of policies responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. New Zealand First is excited about our commitment to an independent inquiry into COVID-19, which will be delivered as phase 2 of Labour’s royal commission of inquiry into COVID-19, lessons learnt. Now, this wasn’t our first choice; our leader, Mr Peters, detailed as such. We preferred to stop the current royal commission and replace it with an inquiry with broader terms of reference and commissioners that weren’t compromised by their involvement in the previous Government’s administration. However, phase 2 represents a genuine opportunity for forgotten New Zealanders to tell their story and it will fulfil what we as a party campaigned on.

There is a sigh of relief, because finally we have time frames, details, and a clear line of sight for what has been a long road for many New Zealanders—New Zealanders who have felt shunned, ignored, gaslit, coerced, isolated, and forgotten; New Zealanders being unable to participate in an inquiry where they can truly tell their stories. Now, with expanded terms of reference, those stories can include vaccine mandates, vaccine efficacy and safety, the reporting and monitoring of adverse reactions to vaccines, and vaccine approvals and procurement. New Zealand First knows that there are stories out there, because we have spent the time to listen to them.

We all have our personal experiences to draw on during these years—I certainly have mine now. This House must understand that there are still many Kiwis out there who are still hurting. We have walked with them, sat with them, and we are working to support their needs in this House. We first listened when the Rt Hon Winston Peters walked amongst the Parliament protesters on the lawn of this very House in February 2022. We heard the stories and concerns of many New Zealanders as we packed public meetings across the country. We started in Warkworth, Pakuranga, Hamilton, Tauranga, Whanganui, Lower Hutt, Nelson, Christchurch, Dunedin, and Invercargill. All across the country, we filled town halls to the brim and we listened to these people, until July 2023 when in Whangārei our party outlined our commitment to an independent COVID inquiry based on what we heard from those forgotten New Zealanders.

We fought hard—[Interruption] We fought hard during this election and we secured it in our coalition agreement in November 2023—a massive milestone. We fought hard during the election. We debated this topic in the House and, surprisingly, in my contribution, I was continuously heckled by the other side, just as I am now. And then, once my contribution was completed, the member opposite decided to give half of her contribution to speak to mine.

Members opposite may not have wanted to hear what New Zealand First have to say, just like now. However, the public did and our debate was subsequently well received. The gaslighting continues—gaslighting, it’s so 2021. We’re over it. New Zealanders are still concerned and we continue to listen, accepting a petition about the inquiry terms of reference and an open letter about the vaccine. New Zealand First have met with many who have been adversely affected by these vaccines and we will continue to listen to them and their heartbreaking stories of how their lives have changed, and this is what we will continue to do.

Phase 2 of the inquiry will begin very shortly with hearings as early as November. We have an independent royal commission with new commissioners, as promised. We have wide-ranging terms of reference, as promised. The inquiry will take a year, as promised. And finally, a report will be delivered in early 2026, and with this report, be it a lesson for future parliamentarians. New Zealand First, we are here to listen and to support the forgotten New Zealanders who are still suffering today. Their story must be told and this House must listen. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Just before I call the next speaker, general debates are a good time to make speeches; we discourage reading. It’s a good time to start and speak from the heart, so I didn’t want to interrupt—just for future speakers.

Now, back to the issues that New Zealanders are really concerned about and the issues that the Government campaigned on at the election time: the cost of living.

Last week, an important report that all parliamentarians should read was introduced. It’s from the Grocery Commissioner and it’s his first Annual Grocery Report. This follows legislation introduced in 2023 by Labour to create a new set of powers for the Commerce Commission and the new Grocery Commissioner to monitor and give reporting annually about the state of our grocery sector. This is something National vociferously opposed at the time, but then on the election campaign started talking about because they know it matters to ordinary New Zealanders. The people who put us in this place, the people who vote for us as parliamentarians to have their backs, want this Government focused on the supermarket sector.

Have a thought for Minister Bayly, who was today denied the ability to debate with me this important question which he is championing. As the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, he knows that consumers want him to be tough on the supermarkets, but he is in the most corporate-friendly Cabinet this country has ever seen. In fact, he’s not in it—in it is the Minister for Regulation, who today announced himself as the “White Knight” for the supermarket, and he will find himself among friends: “Big Supermarket Seymour” alongside “Big Airlines Luxon” and “Big Tobacco Chris Bishop”.

There will be friends in that Cabinet for those opinions which say that the Grocery Commissioner should not have the power to issue useful reports like this one, which most Kiwis will read and they will say, “Well, isn’t it reasonable that retail margins of major supermarket brands increasing is something that the Government should be concerned about? And isn’t it reasonable that Cabinet should be worried about sustained high levels of profitability and market share in our sector which make it uncompetitive and ultimately lead to higher costs for consumers at the checkout? Shouldn’t that be something that the Government should be looking at?”

Many in that Cabinet will be reading this report and saying, “Gosh, hasn’t the supermarket done well to entrench their market power such that almost no new entrants can compete with them?”—that the small guys in the supermarket and grocery sector who compete with them, like the mums and dads who own the vegetable shops around the country, cannot compete with the supermarket duopoly, which has entrenched its market power in a way which only the Government can stand up for consumers in. The only way we will have proper competition in this sector is if that commerce Minister, Minister Bayly, is able to enact some of the reforms that he has said he wants to seek for the Commerce Commission. He should support the entry of a third competitor where possible. He has said to me on our occasions in select committee and in answers to my parliamentary questions—many of which are overdue, Madam Speaker—that he is interested in seeing a third entrant in the market sector.

We’ve got to wonder if the solution that he’s proposing there will only have effect in the years to come—perhaps five years to come, perhaps 10. Once that third entrant gets enough of a market share in a distribution network around the country, then shouldn’t he be more interested in these simple, effective regulatory measures that there is a mounting body of evidence for in this report that we have seen from the Grocery Commissioner—shouldn’t he be implementing some of those? But we have a problem here, in that the Minister for Regulation, David Seymour, came out publicly and criticised another Minister of the Government when he voted against that creation of the Grocery Commissioner in 2023 under Labour. Then he has recently said that he’s “unimpressed” with this first report card from the Grocery Commissioner and feared that there would be regulation introduced which would be more outlandish measures which wouldn’t have effect.

Well, if he’s also pinning his hopes on a third entrant into the supermarket sector, there are also measures that his Ministry for Regulation could be undertaking to make it easier for a third entrant, but those will not have an effect soon. Those will not have an effect on the consumers that have voted for him, the ordinary people in his electorate who are paying hundreds of dollars more at the checkout at the supermarket each month because of the way that our supermarket duopoly works in New Zealand. Those are people who want to see more action from not only the National Ministers in Cabinet but also from David Seymour, who represents them.

There is a mounting body of evidence that this Parliament cannot continue to ignore about the need for regulation in the grocery sector in New Zealand. For decades, Kiwi consumers have been paying out more than our counterparts overseas—say, in Europe, with a flourishing supermarket sector with five major players who all compete on different things, not only price but range—and we deserve that now.

I rise in this general debate today to talk about our Government’s actions to restore law and order, crack down on the gangs, and create safer communities. As the MP for Tukituki and a mother of four young children, I want to see safer communities for our children to be growing up in.

It’s not OK for gangs to be committing violent crime across our communities. It’s not OK for gangs to be intimidating our communities. And it’s not OK for gangs to be peddling meth and devastation across our communities. In Hawke’s Bay, we have one of the highest rates of gang membership in New Zealand. In the recent police meth testing water results at the weekend, we saw Hawke’s Bay overtake Northland as the top spot. Not a top title for our region. This rise in meth and drugs is fuelled by the gangs. That is why this side of the House and our Government is cracking down on the gangs.

Hawke’s Bay, Hastings, is home to the Mongrel Mob, and the gang presence in Hawke’s Bay has increased hugely in the past six years under the previous Labour Government. In fact, the former Labour Prime Minister gave $2.7 million to the Mongrel Mob. What a great idea that was to get on top of meth addiction! In fact, the results of that investment we have seen a 33 percent increase in violent crime, a 51 percent increase in gang membership—what a crazy idea. More pedalling of meth, more crime, and more devastation across our communities. That soft-on-crime approach on that side of the House has meant more youth crime, gang crime, and violent crime running rife across our region. But our Government is saying, “Enough is enough.” It’s time to crack down on the gangs and keep our communities safe.

I thought that this message was quite loud and clear, so it was really disappointing recently to see footage of our Hawke’s Bay Regional Council dancing and celebrating with patched Mongrel Mob members in the council chambers. Wearing gang patches in the council chambers is illegal; it is against the law. Wearing gang patches in schools and in public buildings is illegal—it is against the law—but our regional council thought it was OK. In fact, they danced alongside the patched Mongrel Mob gang members. In fact, they actually then decided it was a really good idea to go and post that footage of them dancing with the gang members in council chambers all over social media—not a good read of the room at the moment. Not only did they break the law and enable these gang members, who believe they are above the law, to break the law.

This was just quite unbelievable, to be honest. Our Minister acknowledged that and said, “We need to see our councils focusing on the things that matter.” Seeing council members dancing with gang members in council chambers, acting against the law, is really, really disappointing. Our Prime Minister recently sent a very loud message to councils across the country to make sure that we get back to basics, to make sure that we focus on the things that truly matter in our communities. From a council point of view, that is fixing roads, it’s making sure our local assets are well maintained, it’s focusing on flood protection, it’s focusing on the infrastructure that is going to get us ahead—that is going to get our communities flourishing. This is what Hawke’s Bay needs at the moment. This is what New Zealand needs at the moment: focus on the basics, focus on the things that truly matter, and get our country back on track.

Thank you. Today, I asked for an urgent debate in my capacity as the manufacturing and small business portfolio holder in Labour, and it was on the Winstone Pulp company. Now, there are two businesses down there: one is a timber-processing plant, and the other is a pulp-making plant. People in the area around Ruapehu, several little towns—Raetihi, Ohakune—are living and working in that mill, and have for a very long time. All the work that comes from the mill—230 jobs—also generates work well beyond it. I asked for that urgent debate, and it was declined because it was ruled that this was not within the scope of a Minister’s responsibility. Respectfully, I disagree. I take a very different view.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think the member had just better be careful. Mr Speaker has actually made a ruling. I’m happy for you to say it was declined, but we won’t perhaps make judgment on Speakers’ rulings, thank you.

HELEN WHITE: I’m absolutely respectful of the Speaker’s right to make such a ruling; let me make that very clear. But what I need to make clear is my position, in the Labour Party, in terms of what I think a Minister should take responsibility for.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: That’s fine.

HELEN WHITE: What I think we have to do when we’re in Government is stand up for people. We need to see the systems errors and the mismanagement that is there, and we need to try and step in and assist people in systemic ways. Here we have a little community that utterly relies upon the work that is available from the mill. And it’s a proud community. I went up to a hui about the potential closure of these mills, and here was this community that was proud. It was bouncy. It was full of optimism. All its little businesses relied on that mill, and it was hoping that the Government would take a role in resolving matters up there that meant that they prioritised the people of those towns, and also the growth of our productivity in an area so important: timber. It’s so important that we start to add value to our raw products.

What our Government had done was we had prioritised that. We had prioritised it, and we had created a plan. We had a plan, which was called an “industry transformation plan”, and we prioritised this one: advanced manufacturing. We did that in collaboration with businesses and with unions and with workers and with many stakeholders. We created that plan, which was to push our manufacturing into another era. Some of what we needed to do was things like circular economies. They are actually all about the need for an industry like that to transform and think differently so that it becomes environmentally sound, so that it moves into the future. Some of that work had been done, and do you know what the Minister did in this circumstance? They cancelled the plan. This Government and this Minister cancelled the industry transformation plan. No work progressed. Labour put real money into the sector. It knew that it was really important we create new products out of timber. There was a structural timber project that was created: $57 million went into that. This is an area that I can be proud to say that Labour stood up for people in.

Now, I want to talk about the impact on people in that town. I rang Liz Brooker, who created the hui the other day. She told me that her partner, who’s a builder, has just lost a job. It was a renovation job in that town. It was going to be $80,000. That won’t be going ahead. What a lot of the workers are going to do is go to Australia, if they can. Many of them might not be able to, because they’re older or they’ve got houses and mortgages in the area. Who knows what will happen to them. It will be devastating. But the young ones? They’ll be off. They’ll be going to Australia. Manufacturing in a town like this has such an important role. It is so important to community cohesiveness. It is different from the challenges that are being faced at the moment by manufacturers in Auckland, because it is a small town. We must support people first. Our manufacturing plans must be ones that respond to the needs of our people throughout the country. So, although I represent Mt Albert, I stand by the workers in this area.

Thank you to my friends for coming today. This will be hard for me. It’s about rural mental health.

You all know why I came to this building. It was for the farmers, that somehow we could all celebrate rural New Zealand, that I might shed some light on what it meant to be a farmer, for farming folk. To share the hows and whys of rural New Zealand, in the hope that some may choose to hear, that some may choose to help; to bring perhaps an authentic voice, to keep it bloody real in this building. That is why I came to this House, that is why joined this party, because I believe in rural New Zealand, that we might share periodically in the way of life of farming folk.

It is in this parliamentary journey that I and Andrew Hoggard and others—God knows—try and share the thoughts of rural people and what it means to be a farmer. The detractors scoff; I hear them. I don’t listen and nor do I believe.

Yesterday was World Suicide Prevention Day; hard for some, bloody hard for me. I buried my boy and he is gone. I stand here to address this House, to address all of you, a shadow of the man that boy would have become—a shadow. But I am here because I must. I am a father to a lost son, a parent to a lost child, but I turn up every day in this House because I believe in rural New Zealand. I believe in this man [Gestures toward the Hon David Seymour] and I believe in my team. But I remain here.

My boy was a contractor, a farmer, an everyday good Kiwi bloke. He is no more. Perhaps another, I might save. I might save someone else. I might be able to help rural people preserve their way of life. There’s a novel idea, and I don’t just mean in passing, giving them a passing ear; actually listen to these people. Politicians need to stop and actually listen to rural folk.

Can we actually change the laws that affect their lives? Yes, we can. We don’t need any more vacuous sermons on what we should be doing in rural New Zealand. We need people that actually listen to us, and this side of the Housewe’re invested in that. Will policy changes actually help these people or hinder them? I ask everyone here.

Farming is a hell of a thing and so many people choose not to do it because of that. The scourge of suicide took my boy. It must not take any more children; your children, my children, our children, our people. Actually think of the people we affect when we make laws in this place. Weeks, months, thousands, tens of thousands of dollars lost on a crop failed by a farmer that worked his guts out to put it in. Gone just like that. Or the pangs of hunger and persistent droughts. We invest tirelessly for better outcomes and our crops fail. Splintered or skin cracked from weeks to months in an endless winter. This is the life of a farmer. I know this well, but do our politicians listen? Absolutely, on this side of the House, we certainly do.

No more red tape. The nightmare of convolution and nebulous “I will do this; I won’t do that.” We are listening to rural New Zealand. I get it, this side of the House gets it, and this Government and this party certainly understands that. For our farmers, I say one thing: congratulations, for you feed a nation.

A contractor, a farmer, a good Kiwi bloke is lost—my boy is gone. His suicide was one thing; it could have been many things, but I will say this to this House: in this god-awful mess that is my life, I am in this House every day because I absolutely believe in rural people. I absolutely believe in this man and the team behind me. I believe in what we are doing and, most importantly, I believe rural New Zealand is worth listening to. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mark.

I must acknowledge my colleague the member Mark Cameron. My heart goes out to him and I thank him for his courage.

I’m pleased to be able to speak in this general debate, and my statement this afternoon takes advantage of this time to thank the many very amazing people who help make the electorate of New Lynn the vibrant living space that it has become and that it continues to evolve into. The New Lynn electorate is comprised of a portion of Avondale, New Lynn, Blockhouse Bay, Green Bay, Titirangi, Waiatarua, down to Karikari and Pīhā. Amazing people who have been helping us and others, their neighbours and communities, through the challenges of cyclone recovery, youth crime, the high cost of living, difficulties in housing, and the challenges of educating our children.

I take this opportunity to express not just my heartfelt thanks but the thanks of the community, the people in the community, to everyone who serves and give themselves in service to others. I start with the police. I’m thankful for the police’s increased presence in New Lynn, supported by the policing precincts of Avondale, Henderson, and Central Auckland, and also a very competent community patrol. I praise the quick response and apprehension of the suspected offenders in the Blockhouse Bay stabbing, and the assault on the bus driver driving through Avondale just the other day.

I also thank the many school principals and teachers in the many schools that are in New Lynn for giving themselves to their work, for their support of structured literacy—the numeracy and literacy programme and policies of this Government. Some of them have been doing this over time, and now they put their attention even more to it. Also, these principals and teachers have collaborated with the police and with Auckland Transport to provide a presence in the transport hub in New Lynn so that they could be seen and be very visible to the student population that go through the transport hub and to avoid any misbehaviour.

I thank also the justices of the peace in New Lynn—there are many, but special thanks to the very active ones who spend hours on-roster, dealing with many people who need their guidance and their services.

Then there must be mention to the community groups of Blockhouse Bay, Titirangi, Waiatarua, Karikari, and Pīhā who have provided their own help to their own neighbours, their communities, even if they themselves need help navigating through the cyclone recovery process.

Then there are the business clubs in Blockhouse Bay, Titirangi, and New Lynn, who operate small businesses and stick to it and look for better days.

Finally, wearing the second hat of being the first member of Parliament of Filipino descent, I thank the Filipino community for their contribution to New Zealand society: their work ethic; their dedication and genuine concern for others, especially in the medical space; their ability to stick to community spirit; and their dedication to faith and family. They are an inspiration to many and an inspiration to me, and I just wanted to mention and thank everyone for all they do. Thank you.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.