General Debate

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

Times are tough, but they do not have to be. I want New Zealanders out there to know that the polluted waterways, the droughts across our productive farmlands that Ministers of this Government were talking about just at this question time today, the gridlock that’s clogging up our cities and our towns, the gut-wrenching inequality which the Inland Revenue Department and Treasury demonstrated in the form of reports last year which showed us that the top 311 families in this country hold more wealth combined than the bottom 2.5 million New Zealanders—none of that is inevitable. It is a consequence—a direct consequence—of a tax system that sees those New Zealanders at the top paying an effective tax rate less than half of that of our average New Zealanders.

The point that we want to make here is that these are choices—these are choices—that Governments get to make. These are choices that successive Governments have made, which have given us precisely these consequences.

This Government wants New Zealanders out there to think that the system that we live under is inevitable. They want New Zealanders to think that the only optional pathway in front of us is more trickle-down tax cuts straight from the playbook of 1980s and 1990s economics, but we here in the Greens know that another system is not only entirely achievable but that it is possible if New Zealanders across this country realise our collective power to hold not only this Government but future Governments to account to make it happen.

This exhaustion that New Zealanders feel out there across Aotearoa New Zealand but also at home in my electorate of Auckland Central, that exhaustion is not inevitable. I know that it is felt largely in servitude to this exhausting system, which many feel, in their day-to-day lives, is exploitative not only of themselves but of our planet and the natural world that we rely on for our very survival.

Now, we have a recent example which exposed precisely how these choices can be made, and it was, of course, COVID-19. We saw that all of these things that Governments successively have told us are impossible, whether it be rent freezes, whether it’s direct payments to struggling people, whether it was flexible working arrangements for sole parents or people with disabilities, it happened, effectively, overnight, exposing that these things were always simply a matter of political willpower.

Now, this Government has made it abundantly clear where their priorities are. They are bloody-mindedly focused on delivering trickle-down tax cuts at the cost of pretty much everything else. This Government is also having the gall to tell us that they care about the climate and the environment, while in their own words from their own Government Ministers, they are telling us that they are passing legislation that is designed to, and I quote, “supercharge mining”. They are committed to pouring oil and gas on the climate crisis fire by reopening exploration for oil and gas in Māui dolphin habitats.

Now, we want New Zealanders to know and to hear from inside this place as much as they do from us, the Greens out there on the streets rallying along with them, that a different world is possible. You only need to look at the economic history of this country to see that every 30 or 40 years or so there is an economic transformation. In the 1930s and 1940s, in the wake of world wars and the Great Depression, there were decisions made by the Government of the day to implement the welfare State, to create public housing, public education, and public health care, and to pay for it by higher taxes on those who had profited during a time of hardship for many.

But we saw that that social safety net—decisions were made to shred that social safety net through the 1980s and 1990s in favour of this rampant, dogmatic ideology of trickle-down economics. And how’s that served us? Well, we are currently facing the dual crises of the greatest wealth inequality that we have ever seen on record in this country and the climate crisis. In the face of that, I believe in the ingenuity, the creativity, and the imagination of New Zealanders. The Greens believe that in working together we can completely transform that system, because another world is possible. In the words of the Hurricanes Poua team, “Governments are temporary”, and New Zealand is the one who gets to decide our future.

When Christopher Luxon’s fishing around looking for a theme song to enter his next conference with, he might look to Split Enz’s “Six Months in a Leaky Boat” because that definitely sums up this Government’s beginning in office. It’s a Government of broken promises, and it is a Government of wrong priorities.

Remember the rock-solid reassurance that Christopher Luxon, Nicola Willis, and all of their MPs gave before the election that there would be no cuts to front-line public services—no cuts to front-line public services. And yet what have we seen day after day? More evidence of exactly that happening, police hiring freezes in place because they can’t be assured that they’re going to get the funding from the Government that they need to be able to do the job that they have in front of them.

But, actually, the one that I want to devote my time to today is talking about the cuts to front-line disability support services. Because what we’ve seen in the last few days is a Government penny-pinching when it comes to the support for some of the most vulnerable in our communities whilst dishing out literally billions of dollars to the country’s landlords. They decided that tax breaks for landlords were so important that they needed to be decided before the Budget process had even begun, but those who have real issues around disability support on a day-to-day basis now are going to have to wait for longer and, in fact, in the meantime they are having support cut off from them.

I think that says everything about this Government’s priorities but, actually, it gets worse than that, because I think one of the most reprehensible things that we saw here in this House yesterday was when the Minister for Disability Issues came into the House and belittled the disability support carers who are accessing that support, suggesting that they are living the high life using that funding that is provided for those with disabilities on themselves instead of caring for those who have the disabilities. I think that was absolutely reprehensible and I hope that when the Minister goes away and reflects on that, she will actually apologise to those carers, because those carers are people who devote their lives to providing support for some of the most vulnerable members in our community. I know that I’ve spoken to a number of parents who have kids with severe and complex needs, and they will tell us that it is a 24/7 job. There is no break. Even when the rest of us think we can have a bit of a break at bedtime when we go to sleep, they don’t even get that. Some of those kids are up all night with their needs and some days those parents do not get one minute of respite.

The fact that we changed the funding criteria when we were in Government to give those parents the ability to access respite was not a mistake. It was totally and utterly justified. And let’s look at the examples that the Minister gave yesterday of parents supposedly getting massages and pedicures using the funding provided for disability support. Well, I want to talk to the Minister about what those pedicures actually help to prevent: ingrown toenails, fungal nail infections, corns and calluses, athlete’s foot; people who are dealing with disability support face those very ailments. Back issues: getting physiotherapy or, yes, a massage because you are lifting someone heavy all day, every day is not an unreasonable thing for those communities to ask for. It’s not unreasonable for parents who have non-verbal children to be asking for things like iPads to use so that that child has a way of communicating. That’s exactly what the introduction of flexible funding was designed to achieve.

I don’t think that a Minister for Disability Issues should be belittling the parents who are accessing those very supports. Talk about punching down; these are some of the most vulnerable people in our communities and the people who are supporting them are vulnerable as well. They are giving up their lives, in many cases, to supporting people with disabilities and to see the Minister who is supposed to be their champion belittling them in the way that she was in the House yesterday is absolutely shameful. I think the Minister should take the time to reflect on that and should apologise. But not only that, she should put it right and make sure they’re getting the support they deserve.

The Hon Chris Hipkins.

I think you might mean “Mr Bishop”, Mr Speaker. It has been 100 days of action on this side of the House, compared to 100 days of invisibility for the Opposition, and we’ve just seen the duelling, competing “Leaders of the Opposition” go toe to toe on the first and second speech. The newly elected leader of the Green Party, Chlöe Swarbrick, against the so-called Leader of the Opposition, Chris Hipkins, and soon enough, the next “Leader of the Opposition”, the Hon Kieran McAnulty, will be up in the second slot in the general debate for the Labour Party. I actually reckon Chlöe outdid Mr Hipkins, and that doesn’t speak well about his prospects. A hundred days of invisibility for them, and a hundred days of action for this Government.

There’s been some criticism from some commentators who should know better—about the speed with which the Government has moved to do things. At the election, New Zealanders had a choice. They had a choice about whether or not they wanted three more years of endless drift and malaise. The three more years of talking about kindness. Three more years of kumbaya and mush, as the Prime Minister puts it. Three more years of good intentions as a substitute for good public policy. What we learnt over the last six years is it’s all very well to talk about kindness, it’s all very well to talk about the things you want to do about child poverty and making New Zealand better; actually, what matters is good public policy and action and moving with a sense of purpose and speed. That’s what this Government has done in the first 100 days.

We repealed the Auckland regional fuel tax, We killed Let’s Get Wellington Moving, which delivered a set of traffic lights on Cobham Drive and nothing else. We got rid of three waters, and we’re going to implement a proper Local Water Done Well policy. We introduced legislation to ban gang patches and crackdown on gangs that are causing mayhem. We’ve banned cellphones in schools. The Opposition said during the election campaign “Oh, that can already be done”, and also, at the same time, “That would be a disaster. How will this possibly be enforced?”—blah-blah. Actually, we did it really quickly and it’s working remarkably well. We’ve introduced an hour a day of reading, writing, and maths in the classroom. We’ve set up new health targets. And we have moved to establish a one-stop shop, fast-track consenting regime to actually build things in New Zealand—the infrastructure that we need. There are 49 actions—we accomplished every single one of them in those first 100 days.

The feedback we are getting—across the coalition, from ACT, through to National, through to New Zealand First—from the public is that, finally, people are glad we have a Government with a sense of purpose, a clear sense of direction, that has sought a mandate from the New Zealand people and is working to implement that mandate at pace.

Something else we sought a mandate for was in relation to Kāinga Ora. Now, there would not be a member of this Parliament, either electorate or list member of Parliament, who over the last few years has not been confronted with horrifying stories about the unruly behaviour of some—I emphasise “some”—Kāinga Ora tenants in properties around New Zealand. You only need to google “Kāinga Ora tenants disruptive behaviour” or “antisocial behaviour” to hear some of the horror stories out there, and I have a list, which, in the interest of time, I won’t read out to the House, but every member of this House knows that there are gang members causing mayhem in Kāinga Ora properties, there are people who are engaged in acts of violence, intimidation, and harassment. The stories are shocking, and those people are breaking their social contract to New Zealanders.

New Zealanders quite rightly say there’s a really important role for State housing and social housing in New Zealand. People fall on hard times, people are in vulnerable circumstances, not everyone earns enough money for the private rental market—that’s why we have State housing. But what they also say is if you’re going to pay 25 percent of your income in rent with a taxpayer subsidy, which the vast bulk of people do in Kāinga Ora properties—they say, “Actually, you know what, you have obligations. Your obligations are to be good tenants and be good neighbours.” The last Government’s policy of, basically, walking away and making sure that no one could ever be evicted from a State house caused mayhem. We’ve said that enough is enough. It’s time to go back to consequences, bring back the social contract and make sure that people can be evicted if they break that social contract and they’re bad tenants. I think this will work. This Government is getting on with things and making sure we deliver for the New Zealand people.

Is someone—are you going to take a call?

Mark Cameron: Well, I’ll take a call, if no one else will.

SPEAKER: In that case, I call Mark Cameron.

What defines a veteran? I’ll say it again for the sake of this House: what in fact defines a veteran? What prescription, precondition, threshold qualifies as service testament? How do we recognise former servicemen and women? How is it that we do not know the answer to this fundamental question? Or is it the case that in fact we do know the answer?

Is it the case that what fully determines a vet has never been fully reconciled? Is it a case of active service in countries and conflicts abroad, deployed in front-line service, or is it that of logistical support? To be those people, potentially at risk of losing all your tomorrows so we all here can enjoy our todays—is that the meaning of a veteran? I genuinely ask this House to reflect on that question.

What does a veteran mean to everyone here, beyond Anzac Day, beyond Armistice Day? We all need to ask ourselves this fundamental question. What of the men and women who donned our service uniforms, wore our colours, and carried our flag on their shoulders, deployed or not? Why can’t we square away what is actually a veteran?

This, to me, is something of a nonsense. How do we square away with active personnel? What? “We’ve got your back, until we don’t.”? This is the question I fundamentally want to ask. I openly commit to helping the Minister for Veterans resolve this very pressing issue. Sometimes, service-tested men and women are years in the making and this House has some of those people here today. They stood ready and bloody proud of this country at a moment’s notice, to represent our national interests, our country, and our collective people. That debt on society must be made good with.

In 2019, the Veterans’ Advisory Board recommended that all those that served be recognised, considered veterans; a reflection, perhaps, of the many sacrifices so many had made, from peacekeepers in Tonga or Papua New Guinea, or in the multiple humanitarian missions that were the face of deployment to assist in natural disasters. Perhaps tens of thousands now sit and languish in a place unknown, awaiting recognition.

One person said to me, “If I’m not a veteran, well, who the hell are we, then?” He followed on by saying that surely the length of service must be a consideration. I’m talking about a former commander—and this is one example I want to impress upon the House—a member of the SAS no less, with 32 years of active service, three postings in the NZSAS as a commanding officer no less, retired as a colonel, with two years in the Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment in Singapore, and four years as an adviser in Kuala Lumpur. He led the initial reconnaissance mission in Bosnia. Gracious me, he moved his family 15 times. He is not today a veteran. Brian Franklin flew Bristol Freighters in and out of Vietnam doing parcel drops. He was part of No. 41 Squadron posted for 21 months in Malaysia. He doesn’t qualify either. How is this so?

These are a few examples of the thousands, potentially tens of thousands, yet to be recognised. If we don’t recognise and protect those people in our history, how can we truly invest in our future and the surety that must surely follow? And it is for that reason that I and the ACT Party fully support any work that finally paves the way for better recognition of former servicemen and women and protects those brave people that in our future we’ll come to need.

It’s been 112 days since the coalition Government was formed, 112 days since change came to our communities and our country, 112 days since we left the frustration of the leaky boat of the six years of the previous Labour Government and we can focus on a better and brighter future for our country. My community in Northcote voted for safer communities. They voted for a more prosperous economy, better access to health and education, and an infrastructure that works. They voted not for promises but for a Government of delivery. From the swing seat of Northcote, I want to focus my contribution today on two areas that this Government will deliver on: law and order, and the economy.

Firstly, law and order. The stories I heard while campaigning and doorknocking the streets of Northcote were concerning. A lady got scared when I turned up on her doorstep because she thought I was an intruder. A chap in Birkenhead actually tackled an intruder that came into his home, and he couldn’t get the police to come out and deal with it. People were concerned with gangs on their street and the issues of youth crime. I want to acknowledge the late Joshua Tasi, who, in my community was sadly killed by youth in our community. I’d like to acknowledge his family and loved ones and the grief that they’re feeling.

The hundred days of actions are a start, but more needs to be done. In this speech, I want to talk about some of the positives that we’ve done that will make a difference. We have abolished the prisoner reduction target. We have introduced legislation to crack down on gangs, give police greater powers to intervene, and extend rehabilitation programmes.

But there are good things to come in the law and order space. We’re going to back our police and make sure there’s 500 extra front-line police on our streets in the next two years. We’re going to limit the amount of deductions that judges can make to prisoners at sentencing. We’re going to deliver youth military academies, and we’re going to trial one this year, which is going to be in Auckland to help give these troubled youth a hand up, not a handout. And we’re going to restore consequences for crime in this country.

The second area that I want to talk about is the cost of living, because, as the Prime Minister noted today, it is the number one issue for our country and for my community of Northcote. I’ll never forget the harrowing story I heard of a supermarket worker whose husband took a job in Australia just to pay for the increased mortgage payments that they were facing.

Now, we’ve made some progress in this area, and within 100 days. We’ve taken the regional fuel tax off, that will save hard-working New Zealanders money at the pump. We have started to reduce the bloated bureaucracy in Wellington, and we’re axing wasteful projects. We’ve introduced 90-day trials for all businesses so that they have the flexibility to hire and take on new workers. And we’ve axed Labour’s three waters reform, which we know cost this country too much money, as well.

What will we do? What’s coming people’s way? Well, it is my privilege to say that we will deliver tax relief, come the Budget on 30 May, and that is coming your way if you’re a hard-working New Zealander. We will continue to rein in spending and ask every ministry to go line by line and make sure that they are delivering value for money in their budgets. We will grow the economy, and our finance Minister’s already articulated a great plan to actually boost growth in our economy, because that’s how, ultimately, growing comes: grow the tax base in this country and make all of our communities better off.

So, in summary, change has come, we’ve started on progress, but there’s more positives to come. I want to end my contribution today with a quote from an iwi leader who I met recently: Robert Edwards. He says, as I put it: “The past is the past, let us learn from it. The future is before us, let us prepare for it.” Thank you.

It is really important that the Greens get on record the voices of those disabled people, their families, and their carers and communities who have been cruelly stressed by the announcements from Whaikaha over the past couple of days. I think it’s really important that while the Minister for Disability Issues is at pains to make sure that this is not a funding cut as such, that doesn’t recognise that particularly for disabled people, family, and carers, their access to services, their access to care and all of the supports that they need has been underfunded for decades and decades. It is simply not good enough for a Minister who has the responsibility right now to not have asked and ensured that more funding is taken into account when it comes to disabled people, who are continuously—continuously—at the end of the line when it comes to funding, acknowledgment, value, and support.

The fact that the Minister for disabled peoples and of Whaikaha is trying to uphold a narrative of austerity, that these changes to how disability support services are delivered and the changes to rules and flexibility around how people access and use the funding are driven from having to watch the wallets of Government—that is a really unjust and, if I can be clear, quite hostile narrative to have to burden on carers of people, of disabled people themselves, and their families. What that is, essentially, trying to blame is that we are having to tighten our belts in an area that has had its belt tightened for generations, when instead the choices that Government gets to make is that this area of funding should have a priority and has to be increased—but the focus has come down to who’s getting a pedicure? That is quite a cruel, cruel way to apportion blame of systemic underfunding to the fact that the wellbeing of carers and the wellbeing of disabled people are interlinked. They are not separate. We have to have our carers cared for.

Anybody who knows what a role it is, what a massive role it is, to be part of the village of caring for disabled people, anybody who understands that, can understand the complete and utter exhaustion that can happen for those carers, who we know also consider it an honour and a privilege to be able to care for disabled people. But it pulls on a lot. It pulls on a lot of our carers’ spirit and energy and resource. Why on earth would any Minister want to focus on what they do for their wellbeing instead of focusing on the systemic undervaluing of our caring sector, that has been this way for decades of undervaluing?

And that is what I wanted to put on record for the Green Party today, having heard directly from advocates, whānau, parents, particularly of children, who have been quite devastated by this news. I acknowledge that the Minister admits and has some regret about the way it was communicated out, but this is also what happens when you don’t work with the sector. As a former prevention of violence Minister, I know firsthand what it is like for the sector to not believe that you are doing things to them instead of with them, for the community to not believe that you are doing things to them instead of with them. So the consultation, the discussions, and the solutions, directly with disabled people and their carers and advocates, has to be a priority in any funding changes. Even they have said they are open to looking at where we can do better with current funding, but let’s not be distracted away from the bigger issue here, which is the further dehumanising of disabled people and their families, that has already been the status quo; the pointing out of blame when we should be apportioning it to the underfunding and therefore increasing funding to this sector non-stop. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. “Devastated’, “heartbroken”, and “distraught”—those are just some of the words that parents have used in emails and other communication with me over the past couple of days in relation to the changes that were announced on 18 March. They were announced and implemented immediately. These are changes that will significantly reduce the amount of support that carers of disabled people in New Zealand will get.

I want to just take a minute to read part of an email that was sent to me just yesterday of someone who describes just how difficult it is in terms of caring 24/7 for their disabled child. They say that “through IF”—individualised funding—“I had finally found a little bit of hope that our situation is survivable. The news yesterday that all of our funding is now obsolete for our circumstances is devastating. I don’t use that term lightly. The grief and turmoil is huge. The news is so fresh, I’m shaken to my core, and I can only wonder just how long it’ll take before I’m in the same difficult position” that they describe in their email prior to that. This is just one email.

The respite that parents have been asking for for years, finally got through the flexibility of funding, is now being taken away from them. One mother wrote to me today and said that she’s surviving on 12 hours of sleep over four days. The respite allows her to get some sleep or to take a shower. This is what the Government is taking away by narrowing the criteria for disability support funding, so let’s be clear about that.

Disabled people, their whānau, and their carers—as the former Minister for Disability Issues, I have met many over my time in office. They are determined and strong people, and they need to be because of the challenges that they face to accessibility and support day to day. They have been calling for more flexibility for decades.

So when the Minister on that side of the House says that flexibility was put in place during COVID and now all she’s doing is taking it away and returning it to pre-COVID levels, that’s not true. This community has been fighting for flexibility for decades, and that was the trajectory of travel that our Government was investing in over the last term: more flexibility in how funding could be used; moving towards progressing the roll-out of Enabling Good Lives, which is an approach that gives disabled people more choice and control over the decisions that they make for themselves in terms of how they access support. And now, the changes—which I believe are probably just the start, because this Government, we know, has asked Whaikaha to find another 7.5 percent of cuts in funding. This, I believe, is the start of rolling back decades of work that this community has been fighting for.

Disabled people and their carers are also entitled to their entitlements, not just the Prime Minister with his accommodation. Politics is about making choices. The choice between increasing disability support for carers and for disabled people, because we must bear in mind—and, again, the numerous comments that I’ve read and emails that I’ve read that have been sent to me. I don’t understand how this Government doesn’t get that carers of disabled people need some respite so that they can better care for the disabled people. Ultimately, this will impact both their wellbeing and the wellbeing of the disabled people—let’s not be in two minds about that.

So increased disability support, or $2.9 billion of tax cuts for landlords? That is a political choice, and I believe that this Government is making the wrong choice, because what we’ve heard today is that this Minister for Disability Issues, the Hon Penny Simmonds, didn’t fight for her community. She didn’t go to Cabinet to ask for more money.

She talks about a Budget bid, and she probably shouldn’t, but she talks about a Budget bid now—that is, after she has made changes—that will take away the support that many can access. Why didn’t she do that in December? She said that she knew about this before Christmas. Why did that Minister not fight for the disability community? Why didn’t she ask for more money then? Why is she only doing that now, four months on—because that is a political choice. Tax cuts of $2.9 billion, but can’t fight for extra disability support services for some of our most vulnerable and marginal.

That is a lazy Minister who didn’t go to Cabinet, and that is an entitled, callous Government that paints this as a picture of pedicures and massages, and not as respite that is required for the wellbeing of our disability community and our nation. As a nation, we deserve better. Our disability communities deserve better.

We are a Government of action; a Government that gets things done. As the MP for Tukituki, I thought that I would take this opportunity today to talk about the 49 actions that we have done in the past 100 days that will benefit New Zealanders and the people of my electorate in Hawke’s Bay. Tukituki is a food-producing region that is reliant on our trades and exports. It creates many, many jobs and opportunities; it’s the powerhouse of horticulture in this country. But our farmers, our growers, our fishermen, our foresters, they have found it so difficult in the past six years: challenges, red tape, lots of inflation, lots of spending by this previous Government over here. It is time now to get the wheels moving and strengthen our economy and reduce the cost of living and get inflation back in check.

We have taken actions to do this, and I’m going to talk about some of those actions today because we have got the Reserve Bank back to its single focus on price stability after years of rampant inflation and economic mismanagement. We’ve abolished the ute tax. We are delivering for our Hawke’s Bay farmers, for our New Zealand farmers and our tradies. After years of disrespect, we are finally respecting them.

But I am particularly proud of the focus this team has on driving productivity in this country. One of the first actions in our 100-day plan was to ensure that our Prime Minister, our Minister of emergency management, and our Minister of Transport came to Hawke’s Bay and came and saw the support that we need a year on since we were ravaged by a cyclone. They announced $14 million for Hawke’s Bay for further silt and debris clean-up to clear productive class 1 and class 2 land, and that has been welcomed by a lot of families that are still struggling to clear the land over a year on.

But I think it’s really, really interesting to note here that the previous $150 million or so that was spent on the silt and debris clean-up under the previous Government had not been through a robust procurement process. This just epitomises the last Labour Government’s throwing the money around with no outcomes and no results. But as the local MP, I have been liaising very, very closely with our silt task force and recovery agency and various departments to ensure that there is a full procurement process in place. There are now quotes, there are tenders, and there is a focus on getting value out of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This is really reassuring to see: that we are respecting taxpayer dollars.

Further announcements in our 100-day plan, which I was thrilled to see for Hawke’s Bay, was the Hawke’s Bay Expressway four-laning on the roads of national significance. A focus on building strong, resilient roads in Hawke’s Bay is going to be paramount to productivity in our region and across the country, carrying logs from the Central Hawke’s Bay and apples from Hastings, getting to the port faster and more efficiently. The four-lane expressway is the lifeblood between Hastings and Napier, and it will be hugely positive for our region and for New Zealand.

We are focused on building infrastructure and getting things done. That is why we’ve also repealed Labour’s very broken Resource Management Act reforms that made it harder and more expensive to build anything. At a time that we need to actually get the economy moving again, we need tools to build things faster. That is why I’m a massive supporter of our fast-track legislation, which is going to enable infrastructure to be built. We can build the roads; we can build water storage infrastructure. Let’s get building.

Another part of our 100-day plan, which I personally see the impact of as a mother of four young children, is to get back to basics in the classroom: an hour of reading, writing, and maths every day, and banning cellphones. These are the types of things that are going to get our country ahead, get our children ahead, and get this country back on track.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The general debate is a great part of Parliament’s week and is a chance for members to speak on whatever topic they choose to speak on and about the vision that they have for New Zealand. We have heard speech after speech from Government members about the shopping list of policies that they have introduced under urgency that show no vision for New Zealand. This is a Government with a grab bag and a mishmash of random ideas which have been promoted by lobbyists and vested interests on the campaign, and do not reflect the kind of Aotearoa New Zealand that we could have now and could have for the future of our children.

It’s disappointing because, you know, the general debate is a fun time in the week, and I will speak soon about a parliamentarian with a true vision for Aotearoa. But, you know, it is also a time for Government members to make that kind of contribution that we all hope to make as parliamentarians, both in this House and in select committee. And this is the first week that select committees have sort of been able to begin scrutinising bills, get out of the rush of urgency, and get down to the work of being parliamentarians who represent the communities that we are from and making things better for the lives of those people that we represent. Someone who has always done that, someone who has been a leading light in this Parliament for that, is Grant Robertson. He has always had a vision for change. He’s always been determined to design the kind of economy that delivers for people and for social and environmental wellbeing, not just for this generation but for future generations to come. And that is who I will speak about in the next three minutes.

Through his career, he’s worked on some of the most revolutionary policy that Labour Governments have introduced. First in the Clark Government, his work on KiwiSaver and student loans moved the country forward in the type of support that people could expect from the Government and the type of social elevator that we would create to lift people out of poverty and into successful lives. The Future of Work that he led in his Opposition years was also something that changed the national conversation about what we could expect for people’s incomes, the kind of work that they would do. And that was as a member like the other members on this side of the House, who weren’t backed by ministries; they weren’t backed by public servants. This was a vision that he had, and he brought people along with him. And I’ll return to that theme because it is one that marks Grant’s career as pretty special.

The Wellbeing Budget in 2019 was also a huge achievement, with five key areas being targeted to mental health and child wellbeing, and other policies that had not had the kind of elevation in the Budget process that they should have before he took that lens to the budgeting process. Particularly proud to see my colleague’s focus on targeted health for Māori funding, which parliamentarians had known for a long time was inequitable but only through that budgeting process could it be addressed in the way that it was through things like the Māori Health Authority. But also special funding that carved out a special place for Te Matatini; that is something that creates a sense of national identity that we can all be proud of and would not have had a look-in had we not been bringing that kind of focus to the Budget.

Things like keeping unemployment below 4 percent for nine consecutive quarters is the kind of legacy that as a finance Minister one can be proud of. That keeps people in work, it keeps people with hope in our communities, and it makes a real difference when I look around at how Manurewa and South Auckland look, as its local MP now.

Supporting businesses through COVID is also something that he can be proud of. There are businesses operating right now in our communities who employ local people who would not otherwise be operating without the kind of decisive action that the finance Minister had to take within 24- and 48-hour periods within that COVID time.

The 2021 welfare package undid the damage that the “mother of all Budgets” did in 1991 by restoring welfare to the level it was then in real terms. That is something that has changed the way that beneficiaries are supported in New Zealand and will be meaningful for decades. He also shifted the discussion on debt and investment in New Zealand and committed record levels to infrastructure and investment which will make a difference for many, many generations to come.

His whole philosophy is lifting people up. He said, as the former Prime Minister Norman Kirk used to say, that New Zealanders wanted a job, a place to live, and someone to love and something to hope for, and he set about designing the sort of economy that would create that for everyone. But it wasn’t just a philosophy; he lifted the people up around him too. Those were the volunteers in his campaigns, the staffers in his office, the people working in the Public Service, the NGOs and the international organisations, and the MPs on this side of the House who owe our careers to him—like me, one of his many teenage volunteers who has supported him right through his career. I am proud of his contribution and I look forward to his valedictory statements today.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. He Hōnore, he korōria ki te Atua; he maungārongo ki te whenua. [Honour and glory to God; peace on earth.]

I won’t wax lyrical about the last 100-day programme, or the 49 projects which we were both committed to and achieved, although it was very good, and the community is certainly relieved to see the meaningful progress after six years of well-meaning ideology, fantasy, unicorns, and, frankly, hot air. But talking about hot air, I would like to discuss the Balloons Over Waikato, which is happening this week and actually kicked off yesterday and will culminate in a great finale in Claudelands this Saturday night, attracting over 10,000 people, which is the ZURU Nightglow.

Moving on, though, aside from the cost of living, which is the biggest challenge facing our people and certainly the people in Hamilton and during the campaign period, was the issue of crime—ram raids; breaking and entering, sometimes for tobacco, alcohol, vapes, but sometimes just for energy drinks and food—not just liquor stores, dairies, and gas stations either but salons, pharmacies, restaurants, cafes, jewellery stores in the middle of the day. Last year in New Zealand, 12,383 retail crimes occurred, on average, every month—that’s one retail crime every 3½ minutes in little, old New Zealand. Real people were affected too: Gaurav and Pooja in Hillcrest; Manish and Rupali in Green Hill; Ash in Flagstaff. Well, let’s talk about entitlement, like the previous member brought up. How about people thinking they can just walk out of New World Rototuna or Woolworths with a bag or trolley full of groceries, or a surf shop with clothes and walk out and intimidate bystanders? Those days are over. Help is coming. I must acknowledge the advocacy of Ash Parmar in this space, back home, too.

We recently abolished Labour’s prison reduction target of 30 percent. I just want to pause on this for a moment. I still can’t figure out why on earth they would think it’s a good idea to reduce the prison population by 30 percent. No commensurate social investment or rehabilitation programme or key performance indicators or rationale to figure it was good; let’s just empty the prisons, because it seems like a good idea.

In fact, since we have been in this Government, I have heard the Opposition use the word “outcomes” more than ever; it was a shame they didn’t use it in the last six years. Ironically, now they’re in Opposition, we hear them talk about outcomes and delivery, and, you know, tangible things. But I think it’s like an osmosis. I think we campaigned so hard on outcomes and deliverables that even the Labour Party caucus is starting to use these terms and say, “Hm, this is actually quite good.” Oh, well, it’s a little bit too late. As George Gregan said to Byron Kelleher in the Rugby World Cup final in 2003, “Four more years.” Although, in this case, three more years, but, of course, we’re going to be in here for much longer than this and we won’t be getting complacent like the last Government did with the people of New Zealand, and we will be not taking our foot off the plug-in hybrid.

We’ve introduced legislation to support police further. We’ve put limits on discounting sentences, and we’re getting rid of the taxpayer-funded section 27 reports and the gravy train that that created. We took steps to extend the eligibility for rehabilitation programmes for prisoners in remand. So nearly 60 percent of our prisoners were on remand, but they had no access to rehabilitation and addiction services. So it’s not just the carrot and the stick but we’re incentivising, we’re giving those people who have made poor choices an opportunity to find a better way. This could have been introduced years ago, but, of course, we did it in less than 100 days.

Very importantly, we’re starting to crack down on youth crime. Yesterday morning, I sat on the plane next to a very experienced community leader with programmes like Blue Light, and he said that those leadership camps, which we are proposing, work. They are an incredible partnership with the New Zealand Defence Force and act as a genuine circuit-breaker in the lives of those individuals, with the appropriate wraparound support and mentors that they need. Of course, his acknowledgment was often that the whānau back at home also need support. But we’re a pragmatic Government with holistic solutions, and so we will work and find a way forward through those challenges. We care about business owners and their employees. We care about our communities. We care about our rangatahi and our future, so we are taking action.

Hamilton looks forward to safer communities, communities with opportunity to get educated and prosper, a world-class education system, and, hopefully, a graduate-degree medical school that will empower not only our city but the rural regions of Aotearoa New Zealand. Fast, efficient, and productive roading networks; building consents that are timely; housing supply that meets a growing need—that is aspiration and that is what we are committed to. The day for hot air and half measures is over.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It is quite interesting sitting here listening to the contributions of the Government members, hearing what it is they want to talk about and noting what they don’t. Never before under MMP has a newly elected Government gone backwards in the polls within a matter of months, but this Government has. Never before has a Prime Minister dropped so drastically, so quickly, after a general election, but this Prime Minister has. If you listen to the Government members, you would think that they are the saviour of this country.

Sam Uffindell: We are—we are.

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: New Zealanders don’t agree. “We are.” is the cry in response. New Zealanders don’t agree, and it is reflected in the polls, because New Zealanders didn’t vote for the reversal of world-leading smoke-free legislation. New Zealanders didn’t vote for police officers screaming out to their Minister, “You promised that you would support us.” only to have the Minister run away and hide and refuse to answer simple questions while police officers sat in the gallery during question time today. New Zealanders didn’t vote for higher rates, but that is exactly what they are going to get and exactly what they are getting under this Government.

The National Party went around the country and promised councils that they would help them pay for water infrastructure. They reneged on that promise. There are councils around this country that said, “We support a change in Government because the National Party will help us pay for our pipes.”, and what did they do? They said, “You’re on your own.”—you are on your own. To regular and repeated and often questions to the Minister of Local Government asking what he is going to do to help councils, his response has been the same: that is a matter for councils—a broken promise that will leave councils high and dry, because the fact of the matter is there is $185 billion that needs to be spent on water infrastructure over the next 30 years. This Government reversed a reform that would have saved ratepayers money, and they haven’t replaced it with anything. Their own governmental and departmental advice says so—they’ve ignored it, and now there’s nothing in place in its stead. Councils are by themselves. They have this vague promise of a voluntary system that might help without any guarantees that it’s going to save ratepayers money, without any guarantees that it will contain balance sheet separation—a crucial factor that the Department of Internal Affairs says has to be included but can’t be included under the Government’s plan.

Ratepayers around the country are facing massive hikes—double-digit hikes. In some places, it is over 20 percent, and it is all the Government’s fault. The Government says it’s the councils’ fault, but it’s not the councils that reversed water reform. It’s not the councils that went around the country promising ratepayers that they would help fund it; it is the National Party, and it is the National Party that broke that promise. Now ratepayers are getting hit in the pocket, and it’s not going to end this year. The proposed rate increases around the country, roughly 50 percent of those increases are for water infrastructure and for servicing the debt attached to water infrastructure. The water reforms would’ve removed that debt from the council’s books. Now they can’t, and many councils are stuck at the debt cap. So how on earth are they going to build the infrastructure to meet the plan for 30 years’ housing growth if they’ve got no money? There are councils in this country who have paused developments and paused consents for two years because they don’t have the money to pay for the pipes to develop the land. That is down to this Government.

When ratepayers get a bill in the mail that they can’t afford, don’t go to the councillors, don’t go to the mayors. Write to your local National MP. Write to the Minister of Local Government and write to the Prime Minister and ask them to justify themselves, because it’s not the councils’ fault—their hands are tied behind their backs. It’s the Hon Simeon Brown, the Rt Hon Christopher Luxon, New Zealand First, ACT, and the National Party who are to blame.

Thank you. This debate started with the words that “times are tough”, and they are tough. They’re largely tough because of the last three years of mismanagement.

I’m going to give you a little graph here. This little graph here shows you the level of Government debt going up from 2020 to 2023, and it exactly mirrors the rate of inflation going up. People might glaze over when you talk about GDP and GDP per capita, but the reality is that we are going backwards per capita. That means that in real terms—real terms—we actually earn less than we used to a couple of years ago. We are going backwards. You see that at the supermarket. You see that with rising costs, rising rents, and you see that with mortgage rates as well. Those things hurt New Zealanders.

Retail sales are down eight quarters in a row—eight quarters in a row. We are still borrowing to pay for our lifestyles because our current account deficit is running at $30 billion a year—$30 billion a year we are borrowing to pay for our lifestyle. The last Government spend 80 percent more, but I don’t think it delivered 80 percent more. In fact, I think it barely delivered anything more. What it did leave is more divided than ever.

This is the first general debate we’ve had since the Government completed its 100-day plan. We’ve heard a lot about that. But what I do want to say is that this is a coalition that is working collaboratively and constructively together. I think it is working very, very well. We’re delivering on what we collectively campaigned on, we’re delivering on our coalition agreements, and we’re delivering real change. We’re taking our country back, and we’re getting out country back on track.

As the Hon Chris Bishop said earlier, we’ve essentially achieved every single one of our 49 items in our first 100-day plan. Even that well-known friend of the Government, Stuff, gave us a 100 percent pass mark, except for one thing. They said we hadn’t introduced the five objectives for our health system. Guess what! That’s been done in the last few days as well. So I think we’re doing pretty well there. It’s been about removing strangling, ideological legislation, reducing burdens and the cost of red tape, removing poor-quality investment—for example, Auckland Light Rail—and reducing wasteful spending of hard-earned taxpayer dollars. What we are focused on is getting our great country moving forward, more productive than ever.

What’s been great is that after the first 100 days of hard work, we’ve been able to hit the road, and been able to talk to, and more importantly, listen to lots of great New Zealanders up and down the country. I have to say, what I saw is a lot of excitement that there’s a breath of fresh air. There’s new management that people are looking forward to, and a greater sense of freedom to be the people that people want to be.

Our team’s been out and about as well. I’ve got a lovely picture of us all there, out and about around the country. As the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, our leader, has been reestablishing New Zealand on the world stage after three years of neglect. Matua Shane Jones has been meeting with productive industries and focusing on getting things done up and down the country. The Hon Casey Costello has represented New Zealand, as the Associate Minister of Police, in the UK. The Hon Mark Patterson has been meeting rural communities, farmers, and supporting the future of wool and fibre, and looking at gold mining as well. Jenny Marcroft, Jamie Arbuckle, and I met with the marine farms sector. That’s a really exciting industry. What we heard about is great innovations, and great work that they are doing in looking after the environment better. One of the other messages that we got—and this is a real support for fast tracking—is the difficulty not only of consenting, but of re-consenting. That’s something that I think that we need to do much, much faster, and much smarter.

We met with mayors and civic leaders, and we asked them: how can we help you? We looked at Provincial Growth Fund projects, again, up and down the country, water reservoirs, water storage, water treatment, civic libraries, making a difference, and that was the last, of course, contribution that New Zealand First made between 2017 and 2020. We met with key infrastructure providers, educators, and social housing providers. We heard a bit about Kāinga Ora (KO) today. We heard concerns from social housing providers who are providing transitional housing, but what KO is doing is they’re taking the most needy, the ones who actually need the social housing support, the wraparound support, and they’re taking those people away from that, and putting them in permanent housing. What could possibly go wrong? And it does.

We heard from downtown Auckland businesses, saying how thrilled they are to see the police back on the beat, and even chasing crims through town. That is great to see. They’re seeing a breath of fresh air. We met with small businesses and hospices, and what I can say is they love being heard. They want to see vision. They want to see certainty. They want to see action. They want to see inspiration.

We finished off with a wonderful Fielday in Feilding. All three of the parties in the coalition represented there, none of the Opposition, which was shameful, and our leader, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, speaking to a mass crowd of 700 people, gave a state of the nation speech. This country is under new management, and our country is loving it.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.