General Debate

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

Since becoming the Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence, I have had the privilege of going around communities, hearing and listening to what some people have had to say in this area. I think it’s really important that we bring awareness to this very important week, which is Rape Awareness Week, because many people become victims of serious sexual violence or rape in this country, and the more we talk about this issue, the more we can actually deal with it and learn where the gaps are and how we can help people when they do become victim to these heinous crimes.

The Ministry of Justice estimates that 23 percent—nearly a quarter of New Zealanders—will experience sexual assault in their lifetime, with 26 percent of women and 11 percent of men experiencing this before the age of 15. We need to acknowledge this and we need to realise that we have a problem in this country, and we need to be talking more openly about this and allowing people to heal. In order to do that, we need to have open, honest conversations. As a nation, we need to stop making excuses and excusing this behaviour. It is really, really never OK to harm somebody or hurt somebody in this country. So we must do better, not only to encourage and support victims who want to seek justice but to ensure that justice is actually delivered.

I’m proud to work alongside a Government who has made this one of their priorities: lowering the amount of victims of sexual assault and family harm in this country over the next few years. We want to see a reduction in the number of people impacted by serious offending, including sexual assault, to 20,000 fewer by 2029. We also want to make sure that we are focusing on the victims: the people who are actually affected by these kinds of crimes—serious crimes that take years and years to sometimes get over, if they even are able to get over this.

This is why we are bringing in policies like three strikes, in order to make sure that if you are victimising someone and you are a perpetrator of serious sexual violence or rape, that you will be locked behind bars. But not only that, we’re making sure that rehabilitation is a focus in our corrections system, so that if you are behind bars and you do commit these serious crimes, you have the support to turn your life around so that when you come back out, we’re no longer revictimising people again. I’m really proud to work alongside this Government in these areas to make sure that we have less victims in our communities.

I actually was humbled in the last few days, speaking to some women who have been the victims of rape, and hearing how that has harmed them and hurt them, and how it has affected the way they look at the world, how it has affected the way they parent, how it’s affected the way that they behave around their family and friends, and how they are really struggling to heal. I was humbled to be a part of the conversations. What I would like to say is victims of these crimes don’t necessarily want to be treated like victims. They don’t want to be seen as what has happened to them. They want to be a person, not to be seen as what a perpetrator has done to them.

We need to stand up and thank every single community organisation and every person out there who is standing beside victims of rape or sexual violence to help them put their lives back together. We need to thank all those people who are there at moments where if maybe they weren’t there, we could have worse results for these victims. We need to make sure we are wrapping around and watching and looking in our community, and if we see something, say something.

We as a society need to say enough is enough and we’re not going to tolerate this anymore. This is a problem that is not just a Government problem to solve; it’s society’s issue to solve. It’s not OK to put your hands on somebody and to hurt somebody or to even have any form of sexual contact with somebody without their consent, ever. When somebody says no, it means no. And we need to take the shame away from victims. There’s no shame when something happens to you. The only person who should be blamed for that is the person who harmed you.

Some have likened being in Opposition to being lost at sea without a safe harbour. Well, Carmel Sepuloni in the Labour Party has found one: a lucky, special place known as Treasure Island. She’s washed ashore off a rickety old listing ship formerly known as the good ship Labour. One would be forgiven for asking what is going on. Carmel Sepuloni has been invited on to Treasure Island. Willie Jackson, of all people, has been invited to speak at the Oxford Union. It’s a real problem for Chris Hipkins, as he struggles to get an invite to his own caucus meetings these days.

Now, I have never seen Treasure Island, but I did a bit of Wikipedia-ing, I am told that contestants are split into competing tribes, taking part in various challenges. Now, the Labour Party is well known for its tribes. Back in the 1980s, we had the “Fish and Chip Brigade”. In the 2010s, we had the “ABC Club”—“anyone but Cunliffe”. And this venerable tradition continues. These days, we have the “Piketty Pirates”—David Parker’s crew of merry men following the edicts of Thomas Piketty: David Parker, Arena Williams, Phil Twyford, Helen White: the “Piketty Pirates”. They’re off there, inside the Labour Party, fomenting happy mischief, trying to get a wealth tax or a capital gains tax and/or all of the above. They’re loving it, and they’re working away with Michael Wood on the policy council—I’ll come back to Michael Wood later on. That’s faction number one.

And then we’ve got the “Hapless Hipkins” faction. That’s sort of the other people left right out, who are backing the current leader of the Labour Party. And then, of course, we’ve got the people who are considering walking the plank. They’re just considering leaving. They’re considering abandoning ship. Megan Woods, off to be the next Mayor of Christchurch, I’m told. Adrian Rurawhe, he’s considering it. Greg O’Connor and Jenny Salesa—people who are considering abandoning the good ship Labour.

Of course, there’s one thing we can all agree on and that all of the Labour Party agrees: when the tribal council meets, also known as the caucus meeting, there’s one person who’s never invited, and that’s Ginny Andersen.

Now, I’ve also discovered that in this most recent season of Treasure Island, they did a special thing, the first time in the game’s history. This is real. They introduced a thing on this this year’s season called “The Captain’s Coup”, in which the day’s winning team gets to pick a member from the losing team to go up against their captain. Now, I can see why Carmel jumped at the chance. What better form of professional development could there be for a senior Labour Party MP than spending weeks deserted on an island while everyone around you is trying to bring you down and participate in a captain’s coup.

Kieran McAnulty’s been there biding his time slowly and quietly, which is why he’s asked only two oral questions in the last six months. Now, Michael Wood would have been there, ready and waiting, but the current captain, Chris Hipkins, got there first, eliminating him from the island. What a savvy thing to do, because we shouldn’t rule out a comeback for Mr Michael Wood. He’s been elected to the illustrious body of the Labour Party policy council. Chris Hipkins, the policy council has spoken. Extinguish your torch and leave the island.

Now, there could be an intruder that gets flown into the island. This often happens in these reality TV shows. Craig Rennie was running around on the weekend, waving signs, fresh from his job of being the impartial academic commentator, fresh from Grant Robertson’s office. Fresh from that task, he’s running around. Maybe he wants to take on the captain as well.

Now, I’ve also discovered that in season three—and we’re yet to find out if the next season will have this, but in season three, two contestants were handcuffed together for 24 hours. David Parker from the Piketty team would have wanted that as an option last year when Chris Hipkins tried to lump a wealth tax on New Zealanders. It is anyone’s guess as to how this season’s going to go.

But the one thing we know is that the Labour Party, the good ship Labour, is in dire straits, and that’s why people voted for a good ship led by a great captain—Christopher Luxon—to take New Zealand through these troubled, broiling seas of the future.

That side of the House this week have expressed an obsession with reality TV and I can see why that side of the House—coalition party, a bit of a three-way, awkward Married at First Sight kind of combination going on there. It’s a bit of a game of Survivor, who’s going to last the distance, how long are they going to last, who’s going to be kicked off next. That programme Traitors, very similar to that side of the House. But I have to refer to Monday’s post-Cabinet stand-up with Mark Mitchell and Luxon. It was awkward to watch. It was a bit scary. It reminded me of that programme Naked and Afraid. If that side of the House were in a reality TV programme, I guarantee you the ratings would plummet. Oh, hang on a second, they’ve already experienced that.

Anyway, moving away from reality TV to the reality for New Zealanders. Today, I’m here to speak about the reality for New Zealanders. I’ve been on the phone recently to many of our social services; I’ve been on the phone to the umbrella organisations that watch out for them, and they are really concerned with what they’re seeing. The Government’s been ignorant to the fact that their policy changes and what happens at the front line is going to have an impact on the social services, and we’re already starting to see it. What I’m hearing from social services is they’ve got more people going to them for food parcels because they’re being declined hardship assistance when they go into Ministry of Social Development offices. It’s like history on repeat from the last time that National was in power.

We’ve heard from our financial services across the country, our very reliable and trusted budgeting services, that they are going to lose funding at a time when the financial stresses and pressures on Kiwis are only going up. And what does that mean? That means that we’re going to see many of our centres, I think, including Dunedin and some others, across the country, who are going to lose those services and who will no longer be able to provide access to that support to their people who are experiencing increased interest rates, cost of living hikes, their incomes are not keeping up with the cost of living, and they’re struggling to pay for food. And then here we have a Government who is cutting support to social services. They have always done what they’ve done with limited resourcing but I’m proud of the fact that I was in a Government who responded to the need at the time. We came in when financial capability services had not received any baseline increase under the previous National Government for nine years. We increased their baseline funding. We responded to their need when they experienced heightened demand because of COVID and because of cost of living increases. That side of the House needs to be responsive to our social services as well.

I’m really concerned because as New Zealanders continue to do it tough, as front-line services are diluted even more because of the funding that’s been taken away from them to give as tax breaks to landlords and to tax cuts, then the pressure goes on our social services and yet we haven’t heard anything from that side of the House to say that they’re going to provide any level of reprieve for those social services to be able to respond to that need or demand. They are worried. As I said, I have been speaking to them particularly over the course of the last week. they are seeing more New Zealanders walk through the door; they have limited resourcing. They have put their case to the Minister, to their local MPs, and to any relevant Minister. What they tell me is that they are not being listened to.

It’s important that the country knows that the cuts to the public sector are going to have a wider impact than just backroom functions in our Government agencies. It will affect our front-line resourcing and ability to respond to New Zealanders, but the flow-on effects go on to impact those trusted, reliable social services in our local communities, and it’s the New Zealanders who need that support most that are going to find themselves in a situation where that support is no longer there. It comes down to choices, and that side of the House have chosen tax cuts and tax breaks for landlords over our most vulnerable people and making sure that the support is there for them. That is the choice that they have made and we do not support that choice.

Aucklanders are rejoicing: a 26 percent increase in water rates has been averted. Congratulations to local government Minister Simeon Brown, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, and Mayor of Auckland Wayne Brown, and of course the 20 Auckland councillors who unanimously supported our Local Water Done Well plan. Balance sheet separation has been achieved, council ownership and council control have been retained, and now much, much more water infrastructure can be delivered. Auckland households will not be hit with huge water rate increases any more, and that’s thanks to this Government. And the good news is: for the other 77 councils in New Zealand, Local Water Done Well is coming to a town near you.

Aucklanders are rejoicing. Roads of national significance are back and Auckland has got a lot to celebrate. We are building the long overdue north-west alternative highway, aka the Kumeu bypass, the East-West Link, Mill Road—Mill Road! And what’s more, this Government will construct the north-west rapid transit corridor, aka the dedicated busway, up the north-west motorway, State Highway 16. Great for Upper Harbour. Great projects that are being progressed by our Government, not by the last Government. They did nothing. In fact, they vindictively cancelled the likes of Mill Road. Aucklanders are rejoicing that as of 1 July there will be no Auckland regional fuel tax, a saving of 11.5c per litre for Auckland motorists. What’s more, only half of what’s collected since 2018 has been spent, with most spent on speed bumps, red-light cameras, and cycleways.

Aucklanders are rejoicing: failed light rail is dead and buried. Despite them wasting $228 million on consultants after years of trying, the only thing Labour delivered on was a string of media releases. Not one inch of track despite the promises. And yet Aucklanders were promised—get this!—a 13-kilometre tunnel from Wynyard Quarter to Mount Roskill and then stretching above ground to the airport. Never doable, never achieved, never got off the ground. It made building 100,000 KiwiBuild houses look even doable. So the cost all up of $29 billion was averted with that light rail fail and they spent, of course, $30 million on the Kiwi Bacon building that was now not needed.

Aucklanders are rejoicing that Labour’s $785 million cycle bridge across Auckland Harbour bridge is not getting off the ground. It was chucked in, but, of course, not before $51 million was spent on consultants, designs, and engineer fees. And, of course, Aucklanders do not forget the $45 billion promise that Chris Hipkins made on the waterfront in Auckland in August last year for their additional harbour crossing and the spaghetti jungle that would be dropped on the North Shore, and that included trams up Glenfield Road. This is pie-in-the-sky stuff and, thankfully, we’ve got a new Government that’s now focused on what Aucklanders really want.

Finally, Aucklanders are rejoicing because tax relief is coming. Tax relief is coming and it’s targeted. It’s targeted to a big voter base in Auckland, our low to middle income earners. They deserve some respite after this cost of living crisis that Labour have driven up after six long years of recklessness come the economy.

Thank you for your support, Aucklanders. Thank you. Over 40 percent of Aucklanders voted for the National Party in October—over 40 percent. Auckland was a stronghold for the National Party. In fact, 57 percent of Aucklanders voted for one of the three coalition parties. We won’t let you down, Auckland. We’re backing Auckland. Auckland’s going to be back as the commercial capital of this country. We’re going to drive Auckland into prosperity. It’s Auckland all the way.

I’d like to acknowledge the speaker from across the House earlier—we are listening. Since taking on my role as Associate Health Minister, I have been listening. I have been listening to the consumers, to the industry groups, and to practitioners, and they have demonstrated that there is absolutely no level of comfort or satisfaction with the Therapeutic Products Act (TPA). So, today, we have announced that the Therapeutic Products Act will be repealed. This repeal will clear a pathway for a modern, risk-proportionate regulatory regime for medicines and medical devices. Separately, we will develop a modernised regime for natural health products.

This was legislation where, of the 16,500 submissions, 95 percent opposed what was being introduced. It was clear and broadly accepted that the 1981 Medicines Act had long since passed its suitability, and, for 30 years, this issue has been kicked around and discussed without a solution. Unfortunately, the solution that was implemented missed the mark completely. After extensive consultation, we are now talking to the industry and we are, at this point, going to fix it. The legislation strayed from the foundational requirement, which was to provide New Zealanders safe, timely access to medicine critical to improving health outcomes. We need cost-effective access to the right products. At the same time, we must have the ability to utilise and benefit from the advancements in technology and scientific progress that will improve the health of Kiwis.

The reality is that the TPA was not the answer. We were yet again heading down a path of over-regulation, overcomplexity, and over-costings. This is the clear message from the sector who have the knowledge and expertise on what is needed. In addition, the sector were eager to work to improve access to medicine but felt they were being ignored. By repealing this legislation, we can now clear the path for a system, legislation, and supporting resource to improve access to medicine.

In addition to medicines and medical devices, we are also committed to a proportional and relevant system for natural health products to provide New Zealanders the alternative solutions that suit their needs. The legislation captured the sector in an over-regulated turmoil—they are lost. This legislation would have created barriers to the essential products that people prefer. We are repealing the TPA, and will look at two options and interventions that will not only create clarity for the future but look at options for urgent relief to the sector.

Natural Health Products New Zealand estimates current outdated regulation is costing our country half a billion dollars in foregone export revenue. We will fix this. The repeal now is important to provide surety, but it does not leave New Zealand unregulated. This legislation was not to come into effect until 2026, which gives Government and industry time to implement sound regulation. I would note also that the work recognises that the last Government had not funded for all the change and regulation needed to put the TPA into effect—for example, creating the new regulatory regime.

Importantly, we are not starting again. I have met, over recent weeks, with the key stakeholders. We are talking, we have learnt, and we are moving forward. We will build on submissions that have been made and provide a new opportunity for further reconnection with the sector. At our heart, we are committed to improving health outcomes through legislation that provides safe and timely access to medicines, medical devices, and natural health products. The first step forward required is the repeal of the Therapeutic Products Act, and I look forward to continuing to work with the sector for the benefit of Kiwi health.

Mr Speaker, firstly can I thank you very much for your support of my trip to the Oxford Union. It would have been very hard without your support, so I thank you very much.

SPEAKER: Yeah, well, look, you have soft days, don’t you? You know.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Yeah, well, that’s right, that’s right. And it would’ve been very hard at the back of the plane. So thanks very much, Mr Speaker. Not sure about your humour though, Mr Speaker. When you saw the invite and you talked about from Lange to Jackson, it doesn’t sort of quite work out for you. So you thought there was a bit of a gap there and I will—

SPEAKER: I’m quite sure you’ll make the international media.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: I will agree that it’ll certainly be hard to fill that gap. But as you know, Mr Speaker, the British museums are not very British, and I’ll of course be running a very strong line in terms of the indigenous argument, given British museums hold and have indigenous artefacts, and particularly Māori artefacts, that have been taken over the years.

But I have been thinking, over the last couple of days, given this Government’s performance, that it will probably be appropriate for me to go off the moot a little bit because I think it will be such an ideal opportunity, I think, to be able to slam the Government on the international stage. I know that probably doesn’t go down too well. I mean, I’m meant to be going to the Oxford Union and speaking on the moot, but, I mean, what an opportunity. How often do you get an international audience and you’re able to actually expose our Government? I’m really looking forward to it. I know some of the Opposition may think it’s a little bit treacherous, but they should know all about that, given the Prime Minister, when he was the Leader of the Opposition, slammed the Government when he was over in England. Treacherous behaviour, I thought. So the Prime Minister should support me, given his behaviour. It was unprecedented, really.

So I look forward to telling the Oxford Union about some of the worst things that are happening here. First of all, I’d like to tell the Oxford Union that we’ve got the most unpopular Prime Minister in the history of Prime Ministers. No one has polled as low as this Prime Minister in recent weeks after an election. I’d like to tell the Oxford Union also that they’ve got some of the worst—and anti-Māori, anti-worker, anti-disabled, and anti-renter—policies in the history of New Zealand politics. I don’t have time to roll them all out, but three of them stand out for me.

The peeling back of the smoke-free legislation, that is world-leading legislation. It’s been lauded in London, it’s been lauded in France, it’s been lauded everywhere, and this Government took the opportunity to get rid of that smoke-free legislation guaranteeing that thousands—thousands—more people will die.

As well as that, the next disgraceful action that I can pick out in terms of my top three is this fast-track legislation. What a disgraceful piece of legislation. A legislation that excludes our people, Māori. We saw them out there today, didn’t we, tuahine—Marama? We saw them out there today—the riri, the anger, from Ngāti Toa. What a disgraceful piece of legislation that keeps out communities, that keeps out iwi, that reduces this just to three Ministers. A disgraceful, disgraceful piece of legislation. And now we have to trust these three Ministers. It’s shocking.

And the other area: the disability area. We went to a disability centre last week and we saw, firsthand—firsthand—the anger from workers there who now will be given no respite, no rest, nothing, because of this nasty, selfish Government.

So I understand the emotion. I understand my tuahine over there when she talks about, “This is a Government exterminating Māori.” I don’t agree with those exact words, but our people feel it—our people feel it—because there’s an attack on the reo, there’s an attack on the Treaty, there’s an attack on tikanga. So, of course, my tuahine, maybe I wouldn’t describe it that way, but, you know, it feels like extermination for Māori. And I feel like I should probably be telling them about this at the Oxford Union. I’m thinking I should do that, but then I think I may go back to the moot just for the tikanga, and that would probably be the right thing to do. Kia ora anō tātou.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I truly, genuinely believe and hope that everyone here in this House upholds the vision and the right for people to live with peace, with security, with dignity of life, here and around the world. Today, I really wanted to send aroha and all eyes on Rafah. What is happening in the south of Gaza at this time, we can surely agree that this is not how we want our world to proceed—surely, we can agree on that.

Countries such as New Zealand, with our relative privilege and with our expertise and experience, have a lot to offer in pushing for peace through justice, an end to the killing, ensuring that humanitarian aid reaches through to the 1 million people who are displaced. Surely, our New Zealand Government would like to send a really clear message that the Israeli Defence Forces completely ignored the broad warnings—including from its own mates; including from its own buddies—that any insurgence into Rafah would dive the already abhorrent humanitarian situation into the deepest depths. People just have not got access to water, to medical supplies, to shelter, to dignity.

What is happening now, and what had already been happening for at least 100 days to this point, but also for the many decades of context of oppression before October, is something I would think we should all be deeply uncomfortable with and deeply disturbed by, waking up this morning to the news in New Zealand about what is happening in Rafah, and wanting to make sure, once again, that our Government is doing absolutely everything that it possibly can.

So far, surely, we’ve had enough. We’re up to almost 35,000 Palestinians killed in the Gaza Strip since 7 October. Of those killed, 70 percent are reported to be women and children, but let me be clear: the loss of any civilian is a loss of humanity for us all—any civilian. But 70 percent women and children—that is not defence; that is offence, and it is offensive. And 78,000 further Palestinians are reportedly injured, and we can’t even begin to imagine the thousands and thousands more who are going to continue to bear the brunt and impacts of what Israel is doing to Gaza and, right this second, to Rafah.

So there are things that we should and must do. We must send a clear message to urgently increase funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency to free up the only last crossings for humanitarian aid left: Kerem Shalom and Rafah. There is no other way to get aid in to people who need it.

There is nowhere left to go. The Israeli Defence Forces sought to evacuate people and to move people into so-called safety, and there is nowhere left to go that is safe. There is the last European Hospital being bombed to oblivion and any of the so-called camps and sites that were supposed to be put aside are not safe. Even if we think they are, there is no way for people to access goods and aid. This Government should use all diplomatic channels to push for a ceasefire, including through our role as part of the multilateral force and observers on the ground as part of upholding that—

Mark Cameron: Release the hostages as well.

Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON: —peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, and support the internationally backed, just negotiations for a peaceful resolution of the broader conflict.

I’ve been hearing here “release the hostages.” Of course—of course. Israel has not accepted a ceasefire deal mediated by Egypt and Qatar, which Hamas had agreed to—let us be very clear about that. Let us also be clear about the tens of thousands of people held in Israeli jails over decades, including children, with no judicial process. So let us not ever invisibil-ise what is happening. Ceasefire now. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

As I rise today, I would like to acknowledge New Zealand Sign Language Week. This is always a week that I personally reflect on my childhood. My older brother, Jeremy, he’s intellectually disabled and he’s never been able to talk. But, as children, my mother was so determined for him to be able to communicate that she taught us certain signs. I can’t confess that I remember the signs very well now, but it enabled us to communicate with our brother in those early years when he was still trying to understand oral language.

Sign language was not an official language in New Zealand at that time, but it is now and I stand here today to celebrate New Zealand Sign Language as an official language in New Zealand. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge our Deaf community and reaffirm our Government’s commitment to creating a more inclusive environment for everyone.

Speaking of communication and education and the power it has to create equality, I recently had the privilege of visiting some of our Tukituki schools in my electorate to see structured literacy in action in the classroom. At Havelock North Primary School, they have been leading the way in Hawke’s Bay in structured literacy across the school from year 0 to year 6. Teachers and parents I spoke to there say it makes a real difference. I could see in the classroom the children’s faces light up as they sounded out the words and repeated the sounds of the words. Rather than just memorising the words, they were learning the basic sounds—and it works.

Structured literacy is about getting the foundations right so children can read and write by using sounds and phonics to read out and understand words. It provides the essential building blocks of literacy. Seeing it in action with my six-year-old and nine-year-old, I’m a massive advocate for structured literacy and I’m pleased to see our Government rolling it out across all schools. I believe it empowers children to become confident readers, setting them on a pathway to positive success. Our National-led Government is laser-focused on education and lifting performance in our classrooms.

The other area that our Government is laser-focused on is reducing red tape through changes like the fast-track bill, which is a key part of our plan to rebuild the economy—because we are focused on building things, and that includes building roads. I’m so pleased that Hawke’s Bay’s four-lane expressway is on the roads of national significance and is a priority for our Government. This will drive productivity and efficiency.

Water storage is another area which drives productivity and is especially relevant in Hawke’s Bay. I’ve been receiving a lot of concerning feedback to my electorate as our Hawke’s Bay Regional Council moves to halve water allocations across the Heretaunga Plains. Water is the lifeblood of our economy, our agriculture sector, our industries, and our livelihoods. Our Government’s commitment to water storage—not only large-scale but small-scale dams on farms—is vital for the future growth of our country.

Our Hawke’s Bay farmers had been villainised for the past six years with red tape and regulation. When I was a kid growing up on the farm, Dad would get the digger out and build a pond, store water in the summer, and use it in the winter because this makes total sense. But on that side of the House, they’ve got bureaucracy far too involved in farming, with clipboards, paperwork, and officials—which has stagnated growth. We need to get the wheels moving again.

But, as I conclude today, I’d like to pay a special tribute to all the incredible women who have shaped our lives. This week, I was proud to receive this white camellia brooch as the symbol of women’s suffrage in New Zealand—and officially the 194th female member of our New Zealand Parliament. I wear this brooch with pride as we have come a long way in New Zealand to having stronger female representation in this House. I’m proud that my daughters are growing up in a country where it is normal to see their mums in public office.

As Mother’s Day approaches this Sunday, I’d like to wish all the mums out there a happy Mother’s Day. As one mother to another: let us honour the immeasurable contributions, not just today but every day.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. We’ve just heard from the Minister for Energy earlier today, and he provided an update on the very concerning position New Zealand finds itself in. So my contribution today is indeed about energy. Energy comes in many forms. Some examples are the obvious likes of petrol, diesel, natural gas, LPG, methanol, oil, coal—all of these ones particularly are made from decomposing plants and animals from thousands of years ago, and otherwise known as fossil fuels.

We also now have hydrogen available and being generated in New Zealand. I recently went to the opening of one of New Zealand’s first hydrogen-fuelling stations at Wiri, in Auckland. This is one of three stations now open and servicing the “golden triangle”—that being between Auckland, Hamilton, and Tauranga. This hydrogen is not derived from fossil fuels, but cleverly uses water, electricity, and the air we breathe, and produces it right there on site. Although there aren’t a lot of hydrogen vehicles on the roads here in New Zealand today, orders are now being placed by some large fleet owners.

The other obvious energy form that affects our daily lives at home and at work is electricity. Electricity is generated by using other primary energy sources that ultimately turn a rotor within a stator, and via a process called electromagnetic induction—voila!—electricity is produced. You couldn’t tell I’m an electrician. Some of the primary energy sources we use in New Zealand are hydro, wind, geothermal, gas, and coal. The one variant to these is solar, which uses photovoltaic process generating from the sun’s energy.

There are, basically, two classes of electricity generation plants—those that provide base load and those that provide peak load. The peaker power stations are critical when extra electricity is required during very high-demand periods. These plants need to generate electricity very quickly to be effective in doing their job. Hydro stations can actually achieve this, but sometimes we don’t have enough water in our lakes, so hydro has its shortcomings.

The other peaker generation of plants we have in New Zealand are gas-driven. These are, basically, large jet engines, just like we have on aeroplanes. They can turn on very, very quickly, within minutes, and these plants are reliable if we have gas to supply them.

There is another alternative to keep our electricity supply secure, and that is grid-scale batteries. These store electricity that is excess supply to our demand, and then poke that electricity back into the grid when we need it. If we are to create a grid-scale battery storage of some kind in an efficient and effective manner, that would also help our electricity security. Peaker plants and batteries supply electricity when our lakes are short of water, when the sun is not shining, when the wind is not blowing, and they are essential to the quality electricity supply at a national level.

We, as a country, are transitioning our electricity to renewable generation. This is a mammoth task, considering the growing demand that is happening annually. All of the thermal heat required by industry is transitioning away from fossil fuels. Natural gas appliances in our houses are moving to electricity. More electric vehicles are coming on our roads. The list goes on. It is predicted that we need to generate twice the amount of renewable electricity we produce today to meet the 2050 demand forecast. Just think about that—that’s a lot of electricity. And you’d like to think that we can make this transition with very few disruptions to our supply, hence the importance of peaker plants and/or, hopefully, batteries in the forthcoming future.

Realistically and logically, gas is an essential fuel at this time. You’ve seen the forecast. We are looking at huge amounts of coal being imported from overseas. Just to remind everybody, coal is twice as bad emissions-wise than gas. Yet we have gas here in New Zealand, and if we could only work together and provide the needed confidence back to the exploration industry. Energy is too important to be politicised. The country needs a quality energy strategy that has strong cross-party support. We need to remove the flip-flop out of our policy vocabulary. We need a consenting process to get this infrastructure built efficiently and effectively—aka fast track. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you to the member David MacLeod for looking across the aisle, because indeed we do need an energy strategy that will help us decarbonise and that will endure through Governments, to the end of this Government in 2026 and to the future Government, which will truly deliver climate justice. I listened carefully to the Minister for Energy’s explanation of why we must continue to burn gas, and we know he loves gas, but what I also heard was a lot of gas and a poverty of imagination, because what is evident now is that this Government is intent on driving us backwards.

The problem is we’re in the 21st century, not midway through the 20th century, and we’ve got all the tools and knowledge to decarbonise our energy system; we simply lack the political will. Modelling by Mason and co. shows that a generation mix comprising 49 percent hydro, 23 percent wind, 13 percent geothermal, 14 percent pumped hydro, and 1 percent biomass fuel generation on an installed capacity basis—that’s a capacity market—is capable of ensuring security of supply, even through the dry years. That’s a really simple, simple solution. I didn’t receive any responses to the questions I posed earlier, but we know that there’s a much more intelligent way of doing things.

The work to ensure climate justice for all requires us to link the cost of living, energy hardship, and Cyclone Gabrielle recovery. It requires an understanding of how we can use data, digitalisation, and the internet of things to fully electrify our economy. This Government talks big about the energy transition, but is instead turning back the clock to a fossil-dependent future, which leaves no future for our youth. It’s really impossible to marry the Government’s rhetoric on meeting our climate targets and their actions to pursue oil and gas through a fast-track power grab and species extinction. This is not a future we want, and I’ve got to say, if we think about how we can manage this energy transition, the cheapest power is the power we don’t use.

That’s where we’ve got to come back to the Energy Hardship Expert Panel’s expert report late last year. Their report provided to the Government—which I hope members opposite will all read—has several recommendations. One of them is to strengthen leadership and accountability—so that’s energy wellbeing legislation; Government coordination across agencies—and establishing an energy hardship expert advisory group to monitor progress on reducing energy hardship and on insulating our homes and on ensuring that we do better.

The second recommendation is to improve the health of the home. So that’s to strengthen healthy homes standards, expand tenancy support, improve housing build standards—so improve the building code. It’s not to build to the minimum standard, which is the worst house you’re legally able to build, but to build zero-carbon housing, or use an existing healthy homes assessment tool that everyone uses.

A third recommendation is to expand energy access and choice. So that’s things like social hedges for social retailers, very much like the Toast Electric model here in Wellington, which survives on the smell of an olive oil rag because it actually doesn’t have the security of long-term hedges. But those social retailers enable everyone to remain connected, and that will enable bulk deals for social housing. So we could review and monitor pre-pay tariffs, fees, and disconnections, and prioritise energy hardship as an emergency issue. We also need to improve access to energy-efficient appliances.

There’s so much more we can do. We need to fix the market. We need to enrich data and information. We’ve, unfortunately, seen this Government stepping back on the Clean Car Discount—

The member’s time has expired. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. One of my favourite parts of this role—and, I’m sure, most people in this House’s favourite parts of this role—is actually going out and visiting our schools and our early childhood centres, seeing the wonderful young people that we have in this country, but also our wonderful education workforce and how amazing those teachers are. I know, often, people say to me, “I couldn’t do that job”, and I just know how difficult it is. It is a really, really tough job.

Lately, I’ve been really concerned as I’ve been going around schools—and, just in the last week, I’ve been in both Dunedin and Auckland schools, talking with principals and talking with teachers. One of my biggest concerns is that they feel unsure where things are going. They say, “We hear things in the media, but we’re not really certain when those announcements are hitting us, because nobody tells us what’s going on. We learn about initiatives in the media.” Take, for example, the Minister of Education talking on The AM Show on Friday, when she let it be known that she was cutting reading recovery—thousands of jobs gone overnight; people heard about it in the media. On Monday, they got official confirmation of that. That’s a really odd way to consult with the sector—that we would actually go through the media to tell them that their job is on the line and then consult with them three days later. I’ve never heard about that happening within education before, but that’s the sort of way that things happen at the moment—that this Government is not consulting with schools or with educators about what is most important to them.

Then, we hear that that there will be no cuts to the front line. Schools are already seeing those cuts impacting upon them. The cuts that have been announced in education are already making an impact on them. When this Government says they are not going to cut the front line, they really are cutting at the front line. Take, for example, when the ministry said, “We are no longer going to have student assessment function practitioners.” Well, if that’s not front line, I don’t know what is, particularly when it says on a ministry website, “Student assessment function practitioners are based within region as front-line staff to support schools and kura.” So they’re going against what’s on the ministry’s website—what already has been identified as front-line staff. Maybe this Government doesn’t understand what “front line” means in education.

Something else that schools have been saying to me over the last few months is “We’re confused about what the priorities are. What is the subtext of what that means?” Last week, we heard about education priorities that this Government and the Minister announced. There were six priorities. What do they mean? A prescribed content-heavy syllabus for core compulsory subjects—think the 1990s. The Minister talks about the 1990s as though it’s the nirvana of education. Well, I can tell you that there were a high number of young people in the 1990s for whom the curriculum completely failed, absolutely failed. In those classrooms, we did not have the diversity that exists now, and it seems that those young people who come from diverse backgrounds are being totally ignored by this Government.

There is minimal, if any, focus on schools. There is a focus on singular, silver bullet initiatives such as structured literacy and teacher-led standard mathematics modules. Now, don’t get me wrong, I love structured literacy. I love the results of the structured literacy that our Government introduced under the better structured literacy in the junior years—after we introduced that. I’m always really interested in how the other side of the House has so many arguments about that, but go back and read the history of what happened there and you will see that it was us that introduced that programme, and even your own Minister says that. So you’re arguing with your own Minister if you want to argue that point.

But there is no such thing as a silver bullet in education; there are professionals that we need to support. It’s those professionals, as our educators, that we need to ensure have the skills to be able to determine the best way to teach for those young people that sit in front of them. Everything else that these priorities relate to are things such as compulsory standardised testing with a portfolio assessment or exam at year 6. That didn’t work out last time with national standards; it won’t work this time. Thank you.

I think this whole House knows what didn’t work out last time and, hopefully, we won’t be trying that for another 21 years.

Hon Jan Tinetti: National Standards. Yes, we hope you don’t either. Don’t do it.

TIM COSTLEY: I love it, and I listened during question time as that member interjected yesterday as well with these big gotcha moments as our fantastic Minister of Education spoke of our commitment to structured literacy. And it’s as if this is some kind of gotcha moment—this big conspiracy that we would introduce this thing that has decades of evidence behind it.

There is no doubt now about how the brain works, about how students learn. This is a fundamental skill that too many Kiwi kids have been missing out on for too long. And we experimented with other things, we tried the no leadership from the Minister thing—that didn’t work. We’ve gone to something that does work, and I am so proud to be working with someone like Erica Stanford, the Minister of Education. I am so proud of this structured literacy announcement. About the only thing that made sense from that last contribution was that she was confused—and she is. She certainly is confused about who brought in structured literacy.

Last week, I was visiting Nayland school. I got to have a chat with the kids. Do you know what they told me? This was a random selection. In fact, the principal said, “I just asked the teachers to all send a few kids over.” He didn’t know who was turning up. I asked them all, “What’s your teacher like? Do they give you too much homework?” I said, “What do you love about school? Why do you want to get up in the morning and come to school?” And all but two of the kids, genuinely, the thing they said was “We love reading. We love reading and learning to read and write.” I thought, this is what we need in New Zealand. This is what we want.

As I met and I spoke with the principal afterwards, I said, “What’s the difference here?” He said, “Four years ago”—and, to be fair, it was just before he started—“a couple of the teachers really took the lead and moved to structured literacy.” And he said, “It was a couple of years of hard work as we made that transition”, but he would never have it any other way. Māori achievement is on par with Pākehā. This is what structured literacy does.

This is not something that we should be debating—trying to rewrite history. They did that once and it wasn’t that popular then either, to be fair. This is the way forward. And I’ve read the comments from teachers around the country: they love it—they love it. Parents love it. I love it. My oldest daughter had her first year of primary school in the UK when I was studying there and learnt systematic synthetic phonics—structured literacy. And the difference between that and what we have in New Zealand was vast and it literally makes a difference to a kid’s upbringing and to their future trajectory. I am so proud that we are bringing that in in New Zealand. And I’m not going to sit there and listen to that criticism of a fantastic Minister of Education.

Now, actually, what I wanted to talk about today was not that, but how could I sit by when we need to set that record straight? I have to just briefly, for these last two minutes, talk about the Kāpiti Expressway. In fact, only a month ago—[Interruption] Well, it’s a great road, built by the last National Government. And I have to acknowledge the work that Steven Joyce and Nathan Guy did to make sure that we had that—opposed by Labour. They didn’t want any expressway. Certainly, the Greens and a particular member, in particular, were not particularly keen on new expressways.

So we built that and funded it, and we’re going to build the road up to Levin. But as I was driving down in Hamilton with Ryan Hamilton, the local MP—they love him up there. Literally, he is true to form; when he turned the car on, AC/DC started playing. We were driving down the expressway at 110 kilometres per hour, and I asked the question that so many have asked me: why can we not have 110 kilometres an hour on the Kāpiti Expressway? It is world class, it is built to be safe at higher speeds, but we’ve got the wrong speed limit on it. So I would encourage anyone who’s listening to this—and I see a significant proportion of members from my electorate in the galleries—and I would encourage every single one of them to sign my petition. Go ahead to my social media, you’ll find it. There’s a link in the bio, there’s a link on the page. Sign the petition. I’m going to submit all the names together in bulk—there are thousands—to support 110 kilometres per hour, because we can absolutely do that. It’s safe, it is built for it.

And some people say, “Oh, but we can’t go from 110 kilometres an hour to suddenly being at 80.” You kind of actually can. We do 100 to 50 all the time and it works out fine. But don’t worry, because at each end of the 110 kilometre per hour section between Raumati and Ōtaki, we will have at least 1.6 kilometres of road—nice, safe, National Party - built road—at 100 kilometres per hour, so there won’t be any transition. No one has died on this expressway. It is world class. It is safe. We need to change the speed limit. I need support on the petition, and I would encourage everyone that can to sign the petition. It’ll be even easier if you learnt through structured literacy.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.