General Debate

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

It’s 121 days since this Government came to office, and what a mess we are having to clean up, left behind by the last crowd on the other side. We have an economy which is in a challenging position, interest rates which have gone up sharply, an enduring cost of living crisis, the Government books having dived into red, debt has soared, and times are tough for New Zealanders. That’s why the Government today released our Budget Policy Statement on the Budget, which outlines that urgent tax relief for New Zealanders is needed, and this Government will provide hard-working New Zealanders with the tax relief that they need in this year’s Budget. This Opposition over there on the other side have left this Government with a mess to clean up, but we have the Government priorities and we have the Government outcomes that we know are needed to fix that. So our priorities for Budget 2024 are very, very clear.

Number one, this Government will deliver meaningful tax reductions for working families to address the cost of living crisis facing New Zealanders. We will identify enduring savings across Government. And you hear them on the other side; every time we find savings, they complain, while the reality is they left this Government with hundreds of millions of dollars more being spent on consultants and contractors, and nothing to show for it. We will improve public services by ensuring that we focus on the front line. We will keep a tight lid and control on Government spending, and we will develop a pipeline of sustainable infrastructure for New Zealanders. We have been listening to New Zealanders, and we understand the priorities that matter to New Zealanders, and our Budget Policy Statement for the Budget outlines very clearly what needs to be done.

But then you listen to what the people on the other side keep on talking about. Well, they say it this way: when the economy is good, what’s the answer? More tax. And when the economy is bad, what’s the answer? More tax. They haven’t learnt. But the answer to every single question by the Labour Party is: more tax. I can tell you that New Zealanders up and down this country are feeling the cost of living crisis. They’re feeling the pain of the challenges that they’re facing, and they want a Government which will provide tax relief. They voted for a Government which will provide tax relief, and this is a Government which will deliver tax relief for New Zealanders. But we now hear the Leader of the Opposition saying the next election is going to be about tax. Well, we know what that’s going to mean: more taxes for New Zealanders by that party on the other side.

But it’s not just the Leader of the Opposition; the new finance spokesperson, Barbara—and I congratulate her on her ascension to the role. Not only is it more taxes, but saying that Labour would also consider taking on more debt. Because, of course, that’s the answer! After $100 billion more debt being taken on by the last Government with very little to show for it, their answer is more debt as well. And, if you’ve got a problem, just ask Jan Tinetti. Just allocate it! Just appropriate it! That’s the answer to every problem: if there’s a challenging financial situation in a department, like we’re facing across Government because of the reckless spending by the last Government, just appropriate it! There’s a magic money tree; just appropriate it! That’s the culture that’s been left behind by the other side of the House.

But, wait, there’s more—there’s more. There’s the public meeting in Auckland Central—“Labour Party economic myths”—which is coming up. The Labour Party economic myths public meeting that’s coming up. Well, I’ll tell you about a Labour Party economic myth, and I’ll tell the members on the other side of the House: you can’t tax yourself to prosperity—you can’t tax your way to prosperity. You need a plan for growth. You need a plan to grow the economy. You need a plan to grow incomes. You need a plan which grows businesses and opportunities in our country. But all we hear from the other side is more taxes, more debt, and a failure to actually think about the challenges facing New Zealanders and the opportunities that we have.

So, on this side of the House, we’re going to grow the economy. We’re going to provide tax relief. We’re going to get Government expenditure under control. We’re going to make sure that public services are delivering value for money for New Zealanders. We are up for the challenge left behind by the other side, and we will deliver for New Zealanders.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. You know, a wise woman once said the problem with socialism is you run out of other people’s money. And along came the New Zealand Labour Party and they proved her correct for only $100 billion. You shouldn’t joke about it, but the way this country has been left by the Labour Party, if you didn’t make the odd joke, you’d cry. Even Chris Hipkins is now telling New Zealanders that the country is in an awful state. Well, we know that, Chris Hipkins, we watched you do it. The problem was you didn’t know it and if you had, we’d all be a lot better off.

I want to talk to the people who believe in building a country where your efforts can make a difference, those people who get up early and take their kids to school with lunch, hoping that they too will learn valuable things so they can make a difference in their life. The people who wake up and they buy a property and they get it ready to rent out to another person to live—mutually beneficial, win, win—cast as villains by the previous Government. Those people who work out on the land, get up even earlier to milk cows, feed the world, and make an honest buck, making a difference in their own lives and the lives of their communities. Those New Zealanders who take a chance going from a steady pay cheque to starting their own business, taking that risk so they can pay someone else’s pay cheque, villainised for too long as they try and build a country where New Zealanders can make a difference in their own lives.

And, for too long, those people have rightfully asked, “Who is this Government working for?” That’s what they were asking all through the last two terms of Labour. “Who is this Government working for?”, they asked themselves, and they got a sense they’re not working for people who work themselves; they’re working for anybody but. That is the great shame that has sapped the joy and the potential of this country: a Government that was out of touch, out of ideas, and out of other people’s money.

That’s why I’m proud to be here as the leader of ACT, as part of a coalition Government that is committed to the values that people have a right to make a difference in their own lives. I watched Brooke van Velden, our Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, who says we’re going to make it easier for one New Zealander to offer another New Zealander a job—as if it’s a positive and beautiful thing to cooperate and create wealth, not something where one party to the contract needs to be treated as a villain who’s always kind of up to something, as we saw for too long with employers being beaten up on by the Government.

I see Nicole McKee as the Minister for Courts trying to make sure that our courts are unclogged so that when you’re a victim of a crime and the police come, the justice system can actually process them and lock them up so that you can feel that your hard-won assets and earnings won’t be taken from you in a country where there is no justice. Because there’s no point making a difference in your own life if thugs and bullies just take it off you. That’s what Nicole McKee is doing in a Government committed to justice for a change.

I watch Andrew Hoggard standing up for rural New Zealand, for too long maligned for the simple crime of trying to make an honest buck, care for their land and their people and their stock, and get valuable export receipts for this country. He’s making sure the freshwater rules and the on-farm management is fixed up to be more realistic, and respect the fact that farmers actually want to look after their land; they’re not trying to destroy their own livelihood. And the people who suggested for too long that they’re that stupid have been insulting and, frankly, ignorant of how rural New Zealand actually works.

And then I watch Karen Chhour bringing legislation to Parliament very soon that will say, “You know what? If you’re a kid who’s been abused, we’re going to help you and we’re going to put you at the centre of the system. We’re not going to racially profile you and put you back in a dangerous environment because we think your colour is more important than your essential dignity as a human being.” All the while, Simon Court works to design a new resource management law that means the next generation will have a shot, if they do the right thing and make a difference in their own lives, of actually owning a part of this great country themselves because it will be easier to build a home.

That is the hope, that those Kiwis who want to make a difference in their own lives day by day actually have a Government that is working for people who work, that is making this country once again a place we can all be proud to be a part of, regardless of who we are or what our background may be. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Our disability communities deserve better. They deserve better than a Minister for Disability Issues who knew that Whaikaha had funding issues on 15 December, did absolutely nothing, did not alert that to her finance Minister or Prime Minister, didn’t ask for more money for Whaikaha, but, instead, on 14 March signed out a briefing approving changes that were announced and implemented with immediate effect on 18 March—changes that left our disability communities blindsided and, in their own words, “devastated”. These are changes that remove flexibility of funding, and I just want to delve a little bit into what that really means, because what this Minister is doing is taking us back to a time prior to when flexibility was introduced to funding pools, like individualised funding, back to a time when it was so prescriptive that carers couldn’t access that funding for respite care. That’s why that fund was always underutilised. When flexibility was brought in, it’s not that need miraculously increased; it’s that people could actually meet the needs that they had to be able to take respite, to be able to have capability to then care for the disabled person. And that’s what this Minister seems to be missing.

And, yet, two years back, almost to the date when she made these changes this year, back on 11 March 2022, the Minister wrote an op-ed—a really good op-ed—that’s titled: “Who cares for the carers needing respite?” In that article, she talks about the importance of carers and the role of caring. She talks about a survey by Carers New Zealand, and she says, and I quote, “There were also many comments from carers who said access to less respite had affected their wellbeing. These are sobering revelations and make me question how long these family members can sustain this relentless support work before they become sick themselves. It also sends a clear signal to Government that more help is needed for the carers in our community—we cannot ignore their plight because we simply cannot do without them.” So this is a Minister who, two years ago, knew that carers need respite in order to be able to care for the disabled person. Then, logically, one could assume that removing that access to respite will affect the wellbeing of disabled people, the very people she purports to represent in this House and in Government.

Many people have emailed all of us across the House about how these changes have been shocking and how their lives have been impacted for the worse in a day. And yet this Minister stands in this House and tries to convince herself and us that no cuts have been made. How can that be true when people cannot access the support that they require and that they need as carers and as disabled people too? Because we know there’ve been changes to the Equipment and Modification Services as well. Instead of taking responsibility, what the Minister does is to denigrate the work of carers, the same carers, the very carers, that she wrote about so compassionately two years ago. That was received. The implication that many are using taxpayer money for pedicures, massages, and overseas travel has been received like a slap in the face.

And so what do we know? This Minister knew, back in mid-December, that her agency needed a funding top-up. She did nothing about it, didn’t alert anyone who could provide that top-up, signed out changes that have changed the lives of many, no consultation on those changes, no consultation with those who’d be most affected. Now this Minister’s had her ability to make decisions taken off her hands and given to Cabinet. Really all this Government needs to do—this Government can fix this. This Government can top up Whaikaha’s funding, reinstate flexibility and do things properly—

Hon Member: That’s just making it up. Using Parliament to smirch someone else.

Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: —work in consultation with our disability communities if long-term changes are needed. They’ve done none of that.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Point of order! I heard a member call out, “She’s making it up.”—

SPEAKER: I’ve just called you. You were offering your point of order while I was still calling you. Please start again.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Sorry, Mr Speaker. I heard a member say, “She’s making it up.”, which must be an unparliamentary remark.

SPEAKER: If I was to rule that unparliamentary, then there would be almost silence for many days of the House. “Interjections”—can I just quote a former Speaker—“should be rare, reasonable, and if at all possible, humorous.” I don’t hold out much hope for any of those, so let’s carry on.

Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Members opposite think I’m making things up on this side of the House. Perhaps they could read the numerous reports where it is said, for example, we’ve asked the Minister’s office for evidence about this claim about pedicures and so on. Her office has said they didn’t have any numbers but the Minister heard it anecdotally. Or perhaps the fact that the ability to make major decisions has been stripped from her. The point is they can fix it; they’ve done nothing. Minister, it’s time to go.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to start this discourse by thanking our hard-working health professionals, both clinical and non-clinical, for their continued support and commitment to serving New Zealanders and maintaining our health system. Despite the obvious challenges they’ve had in the past six years, they turn up to work every single day. I met some of them this morning—several hundred of the clinical leaders at a function this morning—and their collaboration and their enthusiasm for a move for change was, by itself, infectious and much welcomed.

With the health leaders this morning I talked about not only the work that needed to be done but also what we already have done and the success together that we have had in the past 121 days across key enablers for the health workforce, which would be, obviously, your health workforce, targets, and infrastructure. I described to them that, in the health workforce area, we have placed more GP registrars actually out with practice than many of us can recall for many years. I want to say that there are several hundreds of GP registrars now, as we speak, currently out with practices, hoping to ameliorate, and it will certainly relieve some of the challenges we have with access and the heavy workload that primary care has.

There have been 50 new medical school places filled this year; I believe the split is 30 to Auckland, 20 to Otago. That’s a good thing. There has been increased funding for nurse practitioners. Huge numbers of internationally qualified nurses have registered with the Nursing Council in the past six months. In fact, it was put to me that it’s the most number of registrations of internationally qualified nurses in the past decade. This is good for us, also, when we consider that one of the hurdles across all of the health domain has been the number of nurses that we have not had.

When we reflect on targets—remember those key enablers are workforce, targets, and infrastructure—a few weeks ago, the Prime Minister and I announced the five health targets, which will set a key direction for health. Those health targets were: faster cancer treatment, 90 percent of patients to receive cancer management within 31 days of the decision to treat; improved immunisation for children, 95 percent of children to be fully immunised at 24 months of age—that will be a challenge; we have never ever reached that level of immunisation, and I share that observation in the context of comments from epidemiologists, like Michael Baker, who are warning us of an impending measles epidemic, and we take this very, very seriously, as, I’m sure, does the sector—shorter stays in emergency departments (EDs), 95 percent of patients to be admitted, discharged, or transferred from an ED within six hours; shorter wait times for first-specialist assessments (FSAs), 95 percent of patients to wait less than four months for an FSA. Some might wonder why it’s 95 percent. It turns out we could say 100 percent—everyone—but there’s always those outliers, who, for reasons that are sometimes not clear—you offer them an appointment but it just doesn’t suit—sit outside the measures. So we think 95 percent is more appropriate. And shorter wait times for treatment, with 95 percent of patients to wait less than four months for elective treatment.

As well as the five headline targets, there’s also been a whole body of work around the 100-day initiatives, which, again, we’ve completed in this—actually, 121 days. That includes actions and initiatives, such as taking our first steps to extend breast cancer screening for free to those women aged between 70 to 74; opening the 13 breast cancer screening mobile units at Counties Manukau; signing a memorandum of understanding with Waikato University to progress a third medical school; improving security for the health workforce and hospital EDs; turning the sod on the first linear accelerator radiotherapy cancer linear acceleratora—called LINAC—in Northland for the 520 patients a year who travel down to Auckland to receive their treatment. A big thankyou to the Cancer Society and Domain Lodge for housing our Northland people when they’ve travelled and who may well be able to use the National Travel Assistance, which we’ve discussed here this morning. Opening the first provincial PET/CT scanner in Whangārei, the seventh—they only exist in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Hamilton. Imagine there’s a PET/CT scanner in provincial New Zealand, the first in Whangārei, and what I heard from the developers was that they are looking to extend them into—

Hon Member: Look after the regions.

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: —further provincial regions—you’re quite right. Ten new chemotherapy chemo infusion sites in Whanganui. The member from Whanganui and I were talking about that.

Pharmac has decided to retain the 8.1B exemption for children; this means that children with cancer will be able to receive their medications from Pharmac and have it administered in a hospital. The previous Government put that under review. They reviewed whether or not they would continue free cancer treatment for children. That call has been made and we stand by it. New cancer drugs for acute myeloid leukaemia and metastatic breast cancer. And, today, we announced an $18 million a year increase to the national transport allowance. We’re proud of our record.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was flabbergasted today when I heard Brooke van Velden, the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, saying that a coordinating agency for the protection of vulnerable people was “added bureaucracy”. Gloriavale is not some quaint, outdated community. It’s an oppressive, backward, harmful, and evil institution, run by a small group of controlling men. They have the temerity to call themselves shepherds.

There are 300 children or thereabouts at Gloriavale, and that Government is disestablishing an agency whose job it was to coordinate a series of departments to address the harms that are going on there. Progress has been made in dismantling the evil that goes on there. Assistance was being given, prosecutions were being made, and people were being assisted to leave. A public service commissioner was tasked with coordinating that work, and that Government is abandoning that work because it’s additional bureaucracy. It’s shameful.

Basic human rights are not a priority for this Government. Children are not a priority for this Government. Preventing an evil blot on the West Coast from spreading its hatefulness is not a priority for that Government. It’s a sign of an incompetent Government—a Government that doesn’t care, and a Government that’s too obsessed with its own chaos to look after people.

The history of Gloriavale is a litany of harm, perpetrated at the highest level. The list of crimes prosecuted and convicted is long, but we know it’s the tip of the iceberg. In 1995, the very founder was convicted of three charges of indecent assault against a 19-year-old. The overseeing shepherd, Howard Temple, is currently facing 27 charges of sexual offending. In 2023, Jonathon Benjamin was convicted of 26 charges of sexual offending. In 2021, Vigilant Standtrue pleaded guilty to three charges of assaulting three boys. In 2019, an unnamed member of their community was convicted of indecent assault. In 2019, Just Standfast was convicted of sexual conduct with a girl under 12—and the list goes on.

People like Clem Ready, who have left the cult, talk about the prevalence of sexual offending, the concealment of that offending, the exploitation of women, premised on abuse and submission. These are matters which have been prised out of the cult. What has not seen the light of day horrifies me, and that Government is turning the other way.

This evil community sets out its beliefs in “What we believe”. At its heart, it doesn’t recognise the authority of the New Zealand Government. It dictates that the church does not hand sinners over to secular authorities for judgment. Abuse and subjugation are built into the very fabric of this community. And it’s got a medieval approach to the place of women. And it says in that document that women must “not question or correct the men.” They must “submit themselves unto their own Christian husbands”, “show a meek and a quiet spirit”. Pervading the entire document is an approach to sex which is deeply concerning. It says, “God made men and women to marry once they reach sexual maturity, and not … some arbitrary age.”

Look, we need to recognise that the inmates at Gloriavale are stranded. They have no means—physical, financial, or emotional—to leave. Adolescents and young people are required to sign this declaration of commitment, where they commit to living there for the rest of their lives, giving over all their money and property to the shepherds, and they’re indoctrinated to believe that if they do leave, they do so at the peril of their soul. They’re cut off from families and loved ones. When they leave, they leave with nothing. No bank account, no documents, no identity. They don’t even know how the world works. They’re refugees in their own country. And this Government has defunded the coordinating agency because it’s added bureaucracy. It’s absolutely shameful.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to congratulate Minister McClay on the NZ-EU free-trade agreement, which will be gaining Royal assent on 1 May. We made sure that it came into force early, and my goodness, have there been some good wins for our exporters as a result.

Now, let me take you through a few of the good points of this. When it comes into force, it will increase our exports via the EU by $1.8 billion annually—a substantial amount from a Government that is focused on trade and trading with the world. And I do, of course, have to acknowledge the other side for their work, but I will congratulate Mr McClay for his work and making sure that we got it into force quickly and efficiently. It notes that we will have 91 percent of duties removed when it comes into force, and 97 percent after seven years. When you consider the incredible amount of primary produce that we export, it constitutes 80 percent of our goods exported—it’s the backbone of our economy; it’s the way we pay for our way in the world and pay for the goods and services that we need. This is a very good free-trade agreement.

The EU is our fourth-largest trading partner, with around $20 billion in two-way goods and services traded on an annual basis—very significant amounts. We’re noting tariff savings of $100 million per year on New Zealand exports.

Katie Nimon: Game-changer.

SAM UFFINDELL: It is a game changer—it is. It certainly is. It certainly is for the people of Tauranga and the Bay of Plenty. It certainly is for the good people of Napier and the Hawke’s Bay, and for all exporters out there. We note significant new quota access for beef and sheep meat, butter, and cheese products as well, which is very good for our primary producers.

I’m going to talk to some of those savings in particular. In the region where I come from, Tauranga—

Hon Member: It’s got to be kiwifruit.

SAM UFFINDELL: —we have a lot of kiwifruit in the area—you picked it—significant amounts of kiwifruit, and we’re looking at around $43 million in tariff savings for kiwifruit growers, which accounts to, on average, an annual saving of $16,000 per grower.

I want to give a little mention to the growers in Tauranga and the Bay of Plenty and surrounding areas because they have had a very challenging couple of years: labour shortages during the COVID era and then some very poor weather conditions last season, which led to damaged fruit and reduction in trays being put out to market. I know the good people in my region will be very, very happy with the crop that’s coming through at the moment. Zespri is gearing up to sell 190 million trays this season, which is fantastic, and there are some good savings and tariff reductions coming up.

I’ll also give a mention to our friends at Onions New Zealand. Our onion growers out there are hard-working growers, who will see tariff savings of around $6.5 million a year—now, apple growers, with around $1.3 million per year; wine growers, with about $5.5 million in tariff savings per year; and, of course, manuka honey as well, getting out there, with about $3.5 million in tariff reductions per year. And while we’re doing all of this, a lot of it does come through the Bay of Plenty and through Tauranga, and it’s important that we keep upgrading our infrastructure to ensure we can get these goods out to market in a timely and efficient manner. We have some significant infrastructure projects under way: the Takitimu North Link, State Highway 29 bringing our goods over from the Waikato and out through our major export port of New Zealand, the Port of Tauranga, and looking forward to seeing Hewletts, Hull, and Totara hopefully upgraded in the near future, because we certainly need that investment.

Before I finish, I want to give a special mention again to Minister McClay, but also to the Rt Hon Winston Peters, because they understand that the way New Zealand gets wealthy is if we get out there and we trade with the world. We aren’t going to get wealthy trading with ourselves. We aren’t going to get wealthy growing mega Government bureaucracies and shuffling paper back and forth. The way we do it is to grow and to export and to innovate and to improve our productivity. We have got a Government here and a foreign Minister and a trade Minister who understand what we need to do to build our relations and to build our trading networks. There are good times ahead for New Zealand. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Let’s not sugar-coat it. These few first months in Parliament have been bleak for all citizens of Aotearoa and our precious te taiao—environment—and I’m particularly disappointed by this, because nature matters. When we feel the fury and experience the devastation of when nature is out of control, we know nature matters. When we understand the true, immense value of protecting and restoring the very thing that sustains us as human beings on this planet, and our responsibility to not screw that up for our kids, our grandkids, and for future generations, we know nature matters. But some serious disconnect happens between what we know to be true, be that through an evidence base, mātauranga, or what some might simply call common sense—a disconnect between that and the decisions of this Government when it comes to nature.

Their actions and decisions to date in repealing and dismantling the pretty meagre environmental protections that we did have have been totally disjointed and ignorant to the reality of our climate and ecological crisis, a response to which could either secure or threaten our own existence within nature. They’re decisions that span the full gambit of the environmental sphere, that have constituted a blatant attack on nature, Te Tiriti, democracy, and the future of our planet. From the repeal of the Natural and Built Environment Act, the Spatial Planning Act, the abolishing of freshwater improvements through the Water Services Act, and the delay in freshwater regional planning processes to the opening up of our precious environment and whenua to development, this Government has been breathtakingly reckless in prioritising short-term profits over the long-term health and wellbeing of our environment and communities.

Now with the Government’s proposed fast-track legislation, they’re going to the next level—or, as resources Minister Shane Jones so accurately describes it, turbocharging environmental destruction. It overrides key environmental laws, including the Resource Management Act, the Conservation Act, Wildlife Act, Reserves Act, among others. It means almost any project could be approved. From infrastructure to coal to dams to seabed mining, it can be fast-tracked regardless of its environmental impact.

And it’s not just environmental laws that are being overridden; it’s also threatening our democratic principles. By fast-tracking projects and bypassing established legal processes, the Government is undermining the very foundations of our democracy. Equally, they’re overlooking the vital importance of Te Ao Māori, the rights of iwi Māori, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the foundation of effective environmental governance and management. The Government acts as if they’re blind to the fact that the tino rangatiratanga of iwi Māori, hapū, and whānau must be respected and upheld, not sidelined and overridden at the whim of Ministers.

In the biodiversity space, we had Associate Minister for the Environment, Andrew Hoggard, claiming that his Government will protect biodiversity on private land by simply “encouraging the behaviour that has already been happening”. Quite astounding when his own ministry reports that over just a six-year period, our country’s area of indigenous vegetation cover decreased by over 12,000 hectares, and we currently have the highest proportion of threatened species per capita in the world. The whole point is that we can’t keep doing what we’re doing.

This Government often trots out the vastly outdated rationale that they’re balancing the environment with the economy. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment points out that only 2 percent of Government expenditure goes toward nature. If only there was balance, because, today, balance would look like wholesale environmental protection and restoration. If the Government bulldozes on with this short-sighted, reckless approach to nature, we will ultimately face dire consequences, and Aotearoa deserves much better. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I’m wanting to help the coalition Government today, so I want to give them a recommendation. It’s over their Ministers—and I really think there’s a promotion in line for the Deputy Prime Minister—and the position we’ve been thinking of was broadcasting Minister, because the current Minister is nowhere to be seen. It’s ironic, really, that we would be promoting, of course, Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, given his long history of warring with the media. Of course, he’s blamed them for everything. I want Mr Patterson to tell Mr Peters this: that, in fact, we will back him for that portfolio because, ironically, he became the best advocate from the coalition Government when Newshub closed down. Winston Peters talked about it being a dark, dark time in terms of democracy—and well done to Winston Peters—while the Minister of broadcasting was virtually nowhere to be seen. It was sad what she talked about. She talked about the market ruling—it was a cold, sad response.

On top of that, not even the Prime Minister now seems to have confidence in Melissa Lee. According to Shayne Currie from the New Zealand Herald, she’s been gagged by the Prime Minister’s office not to do any interviews. So while the whole entire media industry is crumbling, Minister Lee has disappeared, basically—incompetent. Even if you look at her Facebook, you wouldn’t even know that she was the Minister of broadcasting. It’s sad watching how this Minister has disappeared off the face of the earth. We’re seeing a Minister completely out of her depth. As reported in Newsroom today, apparently Melissa Lee rushed Cabinet proposals through without even consulting the boss. That’s Winston Peters, as we’ve been saying constantly today.

The entire media industry has to wait now while Melissa Lee grovels to the boss—that’s the real Prime Minister, Winston Peters—in terms of trying to put a media strategy together. She can’t even get the basics right. Now, don’t get me wrong, we’re not nasty people on this side of the House. I’m not calling for the broadcasting Minister’s resignation.

Hon Member: Why not?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: I’m a good person, you know? But in her own words, she won’t do media interviews because—in her own words—she’s “boring”; her words, not mine. And when she’s interviewed by the media, she shrugs her shoulders and blames the free market and she says, “Look, I’m a bit incomprehensible and incompetent.”, you know, and I want to help; we want to help her. But we are not, as I said, calling for her resignation; not yet, anyway. Because, you know, we think she may have something to offer, but voices within the media industry are asking for her resignation and who can blame them? The industry needs a champion, it needs support and understanding of the media landscape, not a Minister who suggests the alternative to news is to simply watch Sky and who considers media policy as boring.

There are solutions in the industry at the moment, solutions like the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill, which you won’t support despite people in the industry crying out for it; the Ashburton Guardian; the Gisborne Herald; the Otago Daily Times. This is a bill that the National Party should be supporting. It could bring hundreds of millions of dollars into the industry—hundreds of millions of dollars—but they won’t support it because they’re in the pocket of the lobbyists. They’re in the pocket—we all know this. They’re in the pockets of the property developers and they’re in the pockets of the—[Speaker gets to his feet.] They’re not, Mr Speaker?

SPEAKER: No, no, you can’t.

Hon Damien O’Connor: They are; you’re just not allowed to say it.

SPEAKER: Mr O’Connor, you’ll be withdrawing and apologising too. But just withdraw and apologise to that. You can’t suggest that other people are in the pocket of someone else. The member knows himself that such an allegation has had to be withdrawn in his own case. So it’s not unusual.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: I withdraw and apologise, Mr Speaker. Certainly, there’s some question marks anyway. In terms of why is National not supporting—[Speaker gets to his feet] Oh, Mr Speaker, come on.

SPEAKER: The member knows; he’s been here a long time. He’s probably been the cause of more rulings of these sorts of matters than most other members of the House. He will know that you can’t withdraw and apologise and then immediately qualify the withdrawal apology. So let’s just leave it here. Carry on—I hope your time has been stopped, has it? That’s good. So let’s make the next 45 seconds something spectacular and wonderful on behalf of the member.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, I was just saying, you know you’ve got to ask the questions why they’re not supporting a digital bargaining bill that will return hundreds of millions of dollars back into the industry. The industry is demanding it.

I want to finish off by saying Melissa Lee to the media industry is what disability Minister Penny Simmonds is to the disability sector: utterly hopeless.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Hopeless.

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Totally agree with Kieran McAnulty there. We’re worried, on this side of the House, in terms of where we are with democracy. There’s a byline that everybody should know from the Washington Post, which is: “Democracy Dies in Darkness”. And we see from the TVNZ newsroom job losses and massive Newshub job losses and it’s apparent that democracy does die in darkness and all broadcasting Minister Melissa Lee is doing is turning off the lights. Kia ora, Mr Speaker.

I am so pleased for this opportunity to speak about the National Government’s latest policy, FamilyBoost. It is a policy that so many Kiwi young parents with young children in New Zealand have been waiting for. It is a policy that the National Party campaigned on really hard during the 2023 election, and it’s a policy that I campaigned on with fellow National candidates and volunteers through many communities. It is a policy that will bring real help to Kiwi parents.

The FamilyBoost policy is what we need in New Zealand right now, and I will give some context for everyone who is listening in. In the global environment, New Zealand families are paying some of the highest childcare costs in OECD countries. Most OECD countries pay about 14 percent—14—of average income. However, the highest costs are observed in New Zealand where net childcare costs for working families can reach as high as 38 percent of average earnings.

So the National Party is working very hard on delivering on the mandate that has been given to reduce the cost of living crisis faced by ordinary Kiwis by the previous Labour Government. Ordinary Kiwi parents will be getting direct financial assistance with the reimbursement of up to 25 percent of early childhood education (ECE) fees that they’ve paid for. That is up to $75 a week for working families with young children, directly reducing the out-of-pocket expenses incurred for early childhood education.

The way it’s been set will provide financial support for many families across the income spectrum but targeted to support the low and middle income families who have been squeezed so hard under the last Government.

Finally, help is here. The National Government’s FamilyBoost policy will provide financial assistance to those who really need it the most, reducing the burden for low- and middle-income families. You may ask how we do that. We do that by targeting those families that need it the most. What we won’t be doing is a one-size-fits-all blanket policy, like the Labour Party suggested during the election, regardless of family need and status. But we will be targeting our support to the low- and middle-income earners and give them the maximum level of financial support that we can provide, up to 25 percent of ECE fees. So the higher the income, the less support they will get, so that we can target the low- and middle-income families.

Why is this particularly important for me and many of my friends in my community? It is because I am also a mum of young children. I have two young children who are two and four years of age, and the photos of my young children remind me how important it is for me to send them to the early childhood centres. I will share a story as to why young children need to go to ECE and should not be sacrificed because parents have to choose between education for young children or the workforce for their career.

I remember one day, my oldest daughter Amber, when she was two, ran towards me from the playground. She came and hid under my legs and basically started crying. I asked her why. I said, “What’s wrong, Amber?” She responded to me in Chinese. She said, “妈妈，有人，有人”. She said, “Mum, there are humans. There are humans.” Before that, she’d never been to early childhood education because I was unemployed, and I didn’t have a chance to send her to it. She was frightened to meet and play with other children and interact with their families. That was the moment that I decided, no, my children, my child, my daughter Amber needs to go to ECE and learn how to communicate, learn how to socialise, learn how to be a good Kiwi child, and learn about the many, many cultures that we offer in our community and also in our ECE.

This is why this policy is particularly important and helpful to many, many of the families, and since the policy was announced, I’ve received an overwhelming amount of support from the communities and from parents and friends around me. They cried out for help and the National-led Government is delivering the help with the FamilyBoost support. So with that, I am so pleased I have the opportunity to speak on this today.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do want to acknowledge Nancy Lu, the previous speaker from the Government. It is a really hard decision to put your children into early childhood education (ECE), and I support the decision making that she had to make for her children, because, as a mother of eight, one of the most difficult things was making that decision as to whether I’d put them into ECE. We were really fortunate that we could do 20 hours’ free, because our children were three and four—but I just want to acknowledge her bringing her personal story to the House in a reflection of her values and what she stands for.

But I’m going to stop there with the compliments, because, actually, there’s been a bit of what’s called an ear worm—an ear worm. There have been a couple of songs that have been playing in my head over the last few days, and perhaps it could be—I’m not going to sing them just in case I get a Sony cease and desist notice. Also, I’m a couple of weeks post-COVID, so there’s a little bit of a cough. But, actually, one of the songs that keeps coming into my head is an Ashford and Simpson song called “Solid as a rock”. Now—

Shanan Halbert: “Solid”.

Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: Yeah, that’s the one—“Solid as a rock”. The reason why it keeps coming into my head is because last year, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance continually stood by their statements that their numbers were solid as a rock, or rock-solid. They consistently said that they were going to be rock-solid. They’ve made a lot of promises—a lot of promises—and have doubled down on them since they’ve come into Government. They said that tax cuts were going to arrive from 1 April 2024. It was their first priority and there would be no new taxes for working people. There would be no cuts to front-line services, then fuel tax increases would be cancelled, and the app tax was not here and was going to push up prices.

“Nek minnit”, what we have seen is an incredible—an incredible—U-turn. Even just this morning, a tax bill passed in this House that had two brand new taxes—two brand new taxes. What we saw was that fuel taxes are going to go up by twice as much—admittedly, six months later—and I must have missed that part of the fine print of the National fiscal plan. Far from no new taxes, we’ve seen a $50 tax on every car up and down New Zealand with National’s drivers’ tax, with the Prime Minister speculating there could be more, and, again, just this morning, two brand new taxes.

But, actually, the biggest double down and the rock-solid of their numbered-ness comes down to their promise and their commitment around tax cuts, and the Budget Policy Statement today still reaffirmed their commitment to tax cuts, but yet at what cost? I think that if the members across the House don’t believe me, they could probably look at “Police pay offer from govt ‘insulting’ - Police Association”, “Cutting sorely needed supports for carers is cruel and harmful”, “Families ‘hung out to dry’ by new restrictions on disability support”—these are just small examples of what is going to pay for the tax cuts.

The most abhorrent thing is that the Budget Policy Statement has been botched. For the first time in my public service history, there is no clear indication of what the operating allowance is for the Budget. They said that it’s going to be less than $3.5 billion. This is the first time I have seen this in my public service career, and so, to me, that only points to one thing: there are negotiations happening in the Government and they cannot come to an agreement.

Another song comes to mind that’s by Eminem, and it says, “Will the real Slim Shady please stand up?”—so will the real Prime Minister please stand up, because we know there’s a coalition agreement? We know, having been in Government with the Rt Hon Winston Peters, that they are absolutely solid in what their coalition agreements are. So I think this Government needs to allow Winston Peters and New Zealand First to get what they asked for and what they committed to do, because it’ll be your vote of no confidence—it’ll be your vote of no confidence. It is quite clear from the Budget Policy Statement that those negotiations are still happening.

Then, what other key things have been removed from this Budget Policy Statement? All the wellbeing objectives. There’s nothing around climate change. Some of the objectives to help Māori and Pacific people who are in the lowest statistics across the board are gone—absolutely gone.

So I absolutely believe that this Budget Policy Statement goes back to—maybe it’s a break-up song for their marriage. No? Maybe it’s a bit of Beyonce—maybe move “To the left, to the left”, because, actually, that’s what’s actually happening because they can’t come to an agreement. That’s why there’s a botched Budget Policy Statement. So, do you know what? We’re going to “walk five hundred miles” for all these people of New Zealand that need our support.

At one minute past midnight tonight, State Highway 1 over the Brynderwyns reopens for Easter. I want to thank the hard-working contractors who have worked tirelessly since 26 February and made great progress towards their ultimate goal of securing this route for the next 7 to 10 years. Yes, that’s 7 to 10 years. That’s all the life left in this road. The rest of the work will be completed after Easter—here’s hoping the weather continues to play ball.

Opening for the long weekend is great news for the incredibly patient and understanding people of Northland. In particular, the tourism and freight sectors, who’ve had to deal with the challenges of the closures over the last month. I would strongly encourage the people of New Zealand to come and visit Northland over Easter. We have some of the greatest beaches and scenery in the country and some of the best hospitality. There is nothing better than enjoying a relaxing beverage and some quality seafood while overlooking the Bay of Islands or the Hokianga harbour.

Hon Scott Simpson: Or maybe the Coromandel.

GRANT McCALLUM: Now, now. What the opening of the Brynderwyns highlights is that while the Northland electorate is miles above the rest, its roads are not. Talk to any Northlander, who, in recent years, has added huge amounts of time in their travels dodging potholes and replacing tyres, and they will tell you they’ve had enough. In the last 12 months, I’ve driven more than 50,000 kilometres around the roads of Northland, so you might say I speak with a bit of knowledge and experience. Some people ask me why I drive a ute. Well, despite the previous Government’s unfair ute tax, which is now gone—isn’t that great news for the tradies and farmers of this country?—it is one of the only vehicles that can survive on our roads.

This is not just a Northland problem, however. The entire country has battled with low quality roading and the resulting potholes and vehicle damage. To tackle this issue head on, the coalition Government has committed $500 million to fixing those damn potholes. The actions of the last Government would indicate they either didn’t realise or didn’t care about Northland’s roading woes. So what actions were those? In 2017, they cancelled the Roads of National Significance, which included the four-lane highway to Northland. A devastating blow for the people of Northland and for a region which has struggled economically for generations.

The way to unlock the undoubted potential of Northland is to commit to and build this crucial piece of infrastructure. A recent NZIER report indicated that the economic benefits of just building the Dome Valley extension to Te Hana was approximately $500 million per year. If the previous Government had continued to build this road as planned, it would be close to finished and we would be about to reap the huge gains that follow. How indicative is that of the short sightedness of the previous Governments?

Hon Julie Anne Genter: They only just opened Pūhoi to Warkworth—they announced it in 2008.

GRANT McCALLUM: Typical—they were either too ignorant to understand the potential benefits or didn’t care about Northland, or both. Listen to them. They don’t understand what it’s like to live in regional New Zealand; they just live in little electorates in town. But this Government does understand and does care, as shown by our Government Policy Statement on land transport, right, which commits to the Roads of National Significance. And thanks to our coalition agreement, a new route around the Brynderwyns is top of the list. Great news—great news. So whether you own a small business in Northland, you work the land, or run the port, this new, modern, intergenerational piece of infrastructure means transport security, and it’s a crucial step towards unlocking the potential for you and for Northland.

As I said in my maiden speech, the future is clear. The four-lane highway to Northland is what we need. I challenge those across the floor to open their eyes and their hearts to the people of Northland. If you want to create jobs, lift people out of poverty, and fix the housing challenges facing our wonderful electorate, we need to build the road. So I’ll say that again, people: build the road. Thank you.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker; thank you very much. Better things are possible. I know the vast majority of New Zealanders—86 percent of them—live in urban areas. Solving our urban transport problems will benefit the entire country. The way that we do that has to be one that is actually effective. And when we invest in fast, frequent buses and trains, when they’re affordable, when public transport works for people, they take it. Everywhere we’ve done this in Aotearoa New Zealand, it has worked.

It doesn’t just work in our larger cities; it works in smaller towns too. In Queenstown, for example, they dropped the bus fares to $2 for a flat fare, made the transfer free, made the buses run every 15 minutes, and what happened? They raised more revenue than when the bus fares were higher. More people were using the bus, and that meant less congestion and crowding on our roads. That worked in rural New Zealand, and Queenstown has, actually, a very small population. It worked in Dunedin. It’s like—public transport works, but it doesn’t work if you have no idea what you’re doing, which is clearly the case with this current Minister of Transport.

Right now, people don’t have options but to use a car, even when it’s for short trips in our towns and cities. The majority of our car trips are very short distances in urban areas. If we could lift and take away this burden of having to own so many cars from New Zealanders, and some of them can’t drive, like anyone under the age of 16, some older New Zealanders, and some New Zealanders with disabilities aren’t able to drive—when we make it possible for them to get around, without having to rely on their parents or their caregivers driving them, then, again, we free up the roads that we have and they work better.

It’s hard to explain the enormous cost burden that has been put on New Zealanders from a transport system that forces them to use cars for every trip. But we now have the highest car ownership rate in the entire world. And our entire dairy exports—$19 billion—do not pay for our annual imports of vehicles and fuel to run them, which is now at $22 billion. So although it is a beautiful dream of the 1950s that building urban highways or more roads will somehow, as the last speaker said, end poverty and improve housing, the reality is we’ve 70 years of evidence that this doesn’t work. What is better for people is to move more people and goods, with fewer vehicles and less fuel—that’s a direct productivity gain to New Zealand.

Ultimately, the main driving value here is giving people freedom and independence. The way we do that is to invest in better public transport in our towns and cities, to price the transport appropriately. That means if lowering the fares leads to more revenue, then lower the fares. But right now we have totally extreme and failed policies of last century proposed in the Government Policy Statement on land transport. Submissions on this close on Tuesday next week, after the Easter weekend. I encourage all New Zealanders to have a look at the Government Policy Statement, and submit on it, because there is no way that we are going to solve our transport challenges and our housing challenges by continuing to do the things that people did all through the second half of the 20th century, that led to higher reliance on private vehicles, most of which are parked, 96 percent of the time not being used, and less balance and less choice.

The reality is, while National goes around claiming that they care about freedom and choice and economic productivity, every action they are taking will achieve the exact opposite of what they claim to care about, and anyone who knows anything at all about urban transportation or transportation economics knows this. So New Zealanders need to get in and submit and call for something that is rational and reasonable. But, more importantly, we need to start thinking about our children. The Minister was on NZ Q+A on the weekend, and he was forced to admit that putting speed limits up to 50 from 30 kilometres an hour around schools only saves 15 seconds—that’s 1 percent of the average car journey. That’s not balance, because it means that if a pedestrian or vulnerable road user is struck by a car, they have a 300 percent increased chance of fatality.

The reality is better things are possible, but we need to take a different approach to transport and we need to put people and the planet first.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.