Special Debates — Debate on Constituency and Local Issues

Members, we come now to the debate about constituency and local issues, arranged by the Business Committee under Standing Order 80. Speeches will be five minutes long, allocated at the discretion of the presiding officer.

I move, That that the House take note of constituency and local issues.

I would like to talk, in my contribution today, about the flooding in Tasman. As most people will know in this country, the area suffered from half of a years’ rainfall in two weeks, over two different storms. It’s damaged so much land and so many properties, and so many families and their homes, and it is truly heartbreaking to see. We’re still doing some needs assessment, and the damage is not yet fully understood. I know that there are quite a few issues that are still outstanding, but the efforts of the people who have come to the aid of the area have been truly, truly outstanding.

Even getting to some of those areas to do the needs assessment has been challenging, because cellphone towers were down, roads were closed, there were slips on local roads and highways, and properties were damaged. Some towns lost their local water supplies and were reliant on tanker supply for many days. Power was out, as was internet, for many people. So even getting assessments through the emergency operations centre about people who were in isolated valleys was challenging, because no one could get in to check on them.

The Government agencies have been providing support and offering that support to those areas through the disaster relief funds, through the Ministry for Social Development, through housing insurance, and also the health agencies. Everyone across Tasman has felt the might of mother Nature, right through Motueka, down through State Highway 6, over Spooners Range, out through the Motueka Valley, through Tapawera, and then over into Golden Bay. No one really escaped the might of mother Nature, and most of the smaller valleys in that area have also been badly affected. It has been truly overwhelming for the residents in those areas.

But the funding support has started. It was done very quickly by the Hon Mark Mitchell when he came with his team on 30 June and announced $100,000, and then back on the 16th of this month a further $500,000 was announced by the Hon Todd McClay; $300,000 of that was to the Mayoral Relief Fund, tagged for the rural sector, but another $100,000 in that contribution was by the Government and Federated Farmers. I’ve got to say that Federated Farmers has stood their teams up very, very quickly and started the assessments for their members and the wider community, which was outstanding, so that support could be directed really well. The other $100,000 in that contribution was by the Government and Horticulture New Zealand. As many people here will know, horticulture is a very, very big part of the Tasman economic contribution, and it’s one of the three main economic drivers for the region—there is horticulture, forestry, and tourism.

The horticulture sector has been particularly badly hit, and the crops—like apples, kiwifruit, pears, blueberries, and hops—badly affected, with trees and land being devoured by those floodwaters—water to the level that many people, in living memory, had never experienced before. And, of course, that brought the debris up, it attached itself to the fences, and the force of that just took fences away, never to be seen again. Unfortunately, the ones that can be seen are messed up in the silt and the debris that came with it. Four thousand hectares of trees were flattened—sadly, the weather came from a different direction than normal, and these immature trees were flattened. It’s a sad sight, to see the devastation. One of the impacts was also in Nelson, Rocks Road, and it showed how vital the new roading system is going to be over there. Where you can normally get four trucks delivering to the port, today it was down to two or three, so a huge hit on the productivity of that region.

But out of the adversity, there is always a silver lining, and I’m very happy to talk to some of the community groups and businesses that stood up in the time of need. The neighbouring councils brought in manpower. The emergency response teams were stood up very quickly. Many of those people volunteered there for 24/7. The Top of the South Rural Support Trust, which was led by Richard Kempthorne and his team, were directing callers to the relevant agencies and representative groups where the practical support could be found. Enhanced Taskforce Green, Taskforce Kiwi, the Rapid Response team—the spirit of generosity ran deep. Local businesses, like ITM, Smoking Barrel, and—

The member’s time has expired.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just want to acknowledge the speech of the previous member, Maureen Pugh, at beginning of my speech. As I mentioned in the general debate last week, I just acknowledge, as well, the people of Tasman, and particularly just want to further acknowledge those who have suffered so much, particularly the family of Peter Lines, who so sadly lost his life in the floods. We have more rain forecast for next week, and that would be devastating to have another rain event. So we are all working really hard at the moment, and I know the people on the ground are doing their best to be prepared. We do encourage people to have a plan and be prepared should we face another rain event on Thursday.

I want to focus on the local issue today that is top of mind for the people of Nelson, which is the rebuild of Nelson Hospital, and the resourcing of Nelson Hospital. Yesterday, Health New Zealand released their review into Nelson Hospital, which came about as a result of senior doctors, nurses, patients, administrative staff, and many others speaking out about the concerns they had about the resourcing of the care at Nelson Hospital. I want to reflect on the commentary, particularly from the senior doctors, that came out yesterday—huge disappointment in so many parts of this review. It is, essentially, a plan about a plan. The senior doctors commented yesterday that they have been telling the hospital for a long time what the issues were, but instead of actually coming up with a plan to fix the issues and the investment needed to fix the issues, all Health New Zealand did was outline the issues that have already been raised, particularly by the senior doctors.

My question to the Minister and my question to the Government, and what I will be pushing for as the local MP, is: where is the investment to hire the doctors and hire the nurses that we need to ensure that Nelson Hospital is properly resourced? This report yesterday is very, very clear that it is not resourced enough to support the people of Nelson, especially in the context of a hiring freeze that the report clearly outlined and said made it very, very difficult for the hospital to actually hire the staff that we need to deliver care in Nelson.

The next thing I want to talk about in regards to Nelson Hospital is the business case that has quietly been released around the plan to rebuild Nelson Hospital. There’s a part in it that is very concerning to us here in the Labour Party, and that is the over-reliance of 15 percent of care being provided in the community. Now, there is a place for care in the community, but, again, where is the investment for it?

Here are some of the comments—I’m just going to quote from the people of Nelson who are very concerned about this. Wendy, who I know personally, who lost her husband, Dave, earlier this year—and my thoughts are with her family—has said, “I’ve been in this situation. We had community nurses for wound care and hospice nurses for pain control, support workers for personal care. All were amazing, but it also required an at-home caregiver who was able to give extra help, such as sub-cut pain relief, monitoring the medication, being there 24/7 to support with some limited respite. Not all family members have the skills or ability to manage an in-home patient. To expect them to do so is putting both the caregiver and the patient at risk. Respite in a care-home facility is only partly met by Government, with the balance, $98 a day approximately, being met by the patient.” There were many comments on my page like that from concerned Nelsonians who are concerned that this build from this Government will not have the required number of beds, that care will be pushed into the community with no plan and no investment to do that.

Now, the final thing is that our plan was to build an acute services building that would have ensured the emergency department, the ICU, and the theatres were in a building that was able to cope if the Alpine Fault ruptured at magnitude 8. Now, in their business case, there is no acute services building; the emergency department, the ICU, the theatres will stay exactly where they are; the earthquake resilience will be moderate. It could be days or weeks if the Alpine Fault goes in Nelson, under National’s plan, before the emergency department and the ICU and the theatres are working. That is disgraceful. No commentary from the other side—not good enough for the people of Nelson. If the Alpine Fault goes, our emergency department, our theatres, and our ICU need to operate. We have a commitment from Labour that we will make sure that happens.

Tim Costley: Didn’t last time.

RACHEL BOYACK: We absolutely did deliver our plan—rather than your substandard, downgraded plan—for the people of Nelson.

I begin my contribution with a content warning: code brown in Mahurangi! Since Cyclone Gabrielle, February 2023, we’ve had ongoing contamination events of sewage and waste water being discharged in the Mahurangi River. This has significantly disrupted oyster farming in the region. At one stage, it was so bad it was described as a sewage plume infecting our beautiful river. The health of the marine environment has now been severely compromised.

Let’s look at some of the totals of what’s been discharged by Watercare. In 2023, 1.5 million litres discharged; in 2024, 800,000 litres discharged; 2025—and we’re only in July so far this year—3.3 million litres of discharge into the Mahurangi, including raw sewage. That would be the equivalent of 110 trucks carrying 30,000 litres. Faecal matter is infesting our river, while our oyster farmers aren’t able to harvest because of Watercare’s failures—commercial losses for our local farmers. They rely on the harbour’s clean water for their aquaculture operation. This is a small operation, $8 million, but it’s significant for our local region. The continued degradation of the water quality due to the infrastructure failures and the operational mismanagement by Watercare must be addressed urgently.

Auckland Council are the regulator. They are the ones who have been totally silent on this issue. How long have they known about this issue? Well, they should certainly know all about the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010, Policy 8, Aquaculture. The council must “Recognise the significant existing and potential contribution of aquaculture to the social, economic and cultural well-being of people and communities by: … the need for high water quality for aquacultural activities;”.

Auckland Council has renewed the consents of the Mahurangi oyster farmers. They now have more than 20 years on their consents to farm in the region. Auckland Council has pocketed the money, but they are silent on this issue of Watercare discharging sewage into the Mahurangi River. The council has the responsibility to treat the effluent and stormwater to the required environmental standards. This is not happening. It just doesn’t make sense. Where they’re discharging all these truckloads of, basically, sewage into the river is classification 3, but down at the harbour—and the water flows down into the harbour—it’s classification 1, which is a food-growing area. It just does not make sense.

Auckland Council do fine people for breaching the Resource Management Act in relation to contamination of waterways: for a chemical spill, $112,000 where someone spilled into a stormwater drain; for discharging waste into a nearby stream, they charge them $86,000; contaminating stormwater systems with multiple charges of discharging sediment, a $67,000 fine; discharging sewage into the environment, $14,000; another one, $40,000 for illegal sewage discharges—the list goes on.

Now, who has raised this issue with Auckland Council, Mayor Wayne Brown, and Watercare? Well, oceans and fisheries Minister Shane Jones has; local government Minister Simon Watts, thank you—he’s fired a shot across Watercare’s bow yesterday; local MP Chris Penk—he’s playing good cop in this one; food safety—of course Minister Hoggard has raised the issue; Aquaculture New Zealand; our local mana whenua, Ngāti Manuhiri, and our CEO Nicola MacDonald have been raising this issue constantly. But on deaf ears it has fallen. Minister Jones has basically said they have failed in their statutory duty of care to the Mahurangi oyster farmers. Their organisation should be renamed “Zerocare”.

In fact, in an email from Watercare to Aquaculture New Zealand, they basically said the Minister should find some Government money for the oyster farmers. What? They expect the taxpayer from Huntly and the taxpayer from Kaikohe to pay for Watercare’s mistakes in the Mahurangi? No. This needs to sit with Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown. It is a code brown situation, and we respectfully request that this time, yes, you do rush out with buckets, Mayor Brown, and fill them up with coin and support our local farmers, our oyster farmers; jazz up the support from Watercare; open up their purse strings wide; and do the right thing. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The average age in Wellington Central is 26 years old. That is how old I was when I was elected to represent this city. Since then, I feel that I have aged considerably in this mahi. However, I think that the average age of our city is going to increase significantly, not just because of lower birth rates, not just because life expectancies are getting longer for some, but because all of our young people in Wellington are going overseas.

Now, young people choose to come to Wellington for a number of reasons. I came down here because after just a few visits, I love that people just let you get on with what you want to do. We’re not judgmental. We’re a city that allows you to be your full, authentic, and genuine self. It’s considered safe in comparison to other international cities. It is one of the most queer-friendly cities in Aotearoa. It’s the arts and culture capital. We have really amazing walkways in our green belt, and we have a southern coastline to die for.

But since 2023, in Wellington, job listings have decreased by 37 percent, vacancies have fallen by 39 percent, job applications have climbed by 10 percent, and applicants per job listing and per vacancy have nearly doubled. I spoke to a woman in my electorate office named Suzanne George. She had applied for over 400 jobs in Wellington in 13 months. She worked in the public sector for 12 years and she is now on the jobseeker benefit, still trying to find mahi. This has become the age-old story in Wellington: stories of people applying for hundreds and hundreds of jobs who continue to get declined applications.

We know that here in Wellington the Public Service has been slashed enormously. Hundreds of graduate roles have been cut from the Public Service, many of those roles based right here. For example, the Ministry of Health put 566 graduate roles on hold or they have cancelled these roles. I have to ask: when it comes to the Public Service and those jobs here in Wellington, why is the future the first thing we trade off for short-term gain?

On top of this, the Government’s disastrous vocational education reforms have meant that our local polytechnics here in Wellington are facing teaching job losses, campus closures—for example, at Te Auaha, which is a bastion of creativity and learning here in our city—and courses are being cut. We’re telling young people that they have to go all the way to Petone to learn the things that they want to have as jobs in the future, but we’re going to cancel those courses outright after a year anyway. These are our future nurses, our future tradies. These are our future artists, the people that build stages, film movies that bring the arts and culture to our lives, that give our lives meaning, and that help us to understand the world that we navigate. They are taking their skills, their money, their families, and their futures overseas. This is why the Victoria University Wellington Students Association took to the Mount Victoria Tunnel and placed a massive banner which said “NO [JOBS]. SHT PAY. WHY STAY?”

I don’t want to say the swear word, out of respect for you, Madam Speaker—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: As long as you go quote—just do quote.

TAMATHA PAUL: The “S” word. Ha, ha!

This Government has hollowed out all of the opportunities for young people in Wellington to stay here and contribute to our country. You don’t go into the Public Service as an entry-level worker for the pay—and you definitely don’t if you’re a woman, thanks to the changes in the Budget this year. Young people, especially here in our capital city, join the Public Service because they give a damn about their country and they give a damn about their neighbours. Instead, we fire them all or we take away their opportunities and we replace them with expensive consultants and international agencies that rack up profits that are not spent here on our home soils.

It has been demoralising to watch people who are told that they are the problem and that they are not trying hard enough. We are exporting our future at an alarming rate and, sadly, our capital city can no longer compete with the tantalising temptation of a job in Australia that pays a wage that keeps up with the cost of living, and with a society that values its workers and its future.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Well, it may have been Freudian, but never was a truer word spoken than when the last Labour member to speak said, “Can the National Government please deliver our plan for us?”, because I can tell you that they didn’t deliver very much in their time, and that’s what it takes: a team that is actually focused on delivery.

One thing we need to deliver on right now for this country is growth. That is what is key in our area: bringing growth. There is no better example of the lack of delivery by the last Government, or the growth coming to a region like I’m proud to represent in Kāpiti and Horowhenua, than the new expressway, which Suze Redmayne knows all about, from Ōtaki to the north of Levin.

The first petition I ever ran was about this road, after Labour cancelled it in 2018. I ran a petition, and we promised at the time that when we were next back in Government, we would build this road. That is exactly what we are doing, and I am so proud. We found, of course, in getting into Government, that all the money wasn’t there, it wasn’t fully funded, and Suze and I had to fight. The next petition was to get the right design. We’ve delivered that with the full interchange at Tararua Road in Levin, a full interchange at Taylors Road in Ōtaki, and we are so excited to see construction start come spring. It is an opportunity for us.

In Horowhenua, Levin has that real opportunity that everything coming out of Wellington passes through that little gateway of Horowhenua before it splits to Hawke’s Bay, to Manawatū, to Taranaki, to Taupō, and the central North Island. That’s a real opportunity for growth for us, and we see other signs—not just the road but new subdivisions like Tara-Ika, new housing, new businesses popping up and old businesses that are doing well. I would like to mention Lewis Farms that took out one of the top awards at the Wellington Gold Awards recently, and I congratulate all those businesses that have been selected as finalists for the Wellington regional awards and the local business and top shop awards.

While I’m mentioning local people, can I also say that part of our story for growth is we obviously need to support our businesses—they are part of that story for growth—but we have some local heroes in the community. I’d like to acknowledge my youth team—there’s not just one youth MP where I come from. Can I acknowledge Monique, Sam, Jack, Aroa, Kristina, Harrison, Olivia, Fern, Abigail, Liam, Yilin, Charlie, Imogen, Keita, Hamish, and Ryan for the great work they do and for being able to support them and see them do great things for youth, like the public safety campaign in Paraparaumu that has delivered real results. It has been fantastic to be part of that.

I’d also like to acknowledge some local legends who have been recognised recently in the community awards. Particularly in Horowhenua, I think of Geoff Ritchie from English Language Partners; the Kai Hub youth team from the Shannon Kai Hub—one of Suze’s favourites; the Health Shuttle in Ōtaki; Hoani Mananui and Steve Biddle from the Hope Hub Free Store—and Tony and the team do a great job at Hope Hub; Perry Rackley from Hinemoa House; Heather Wilson at House of Science; Aja Harlen from MASH Trust; and Katrina Phillips from Plunket. Congratulations—you deserve the recognition.

I did want to just also mention Dr Andy van de Vyver, retiring after 40 years serving as a GP in Levin—everything from delivering brand new babies to end-of-life care, he’s been there with us all, he’s seen it all, and he deserves the accolades. I’m proud to meet these people and to work with people like that every week.

In fact, this week I had just a couple of touching stories that came back to me. One was about someone that had been waiting to get an operation. They had been waiting 4½ years, and we were able to get that through. Obviously it’s not just my advocacy locally but the focus in this Government on actually delivering and putting patients first, delivering them, bringing back public health targets, and that has made a real difference for people in Levin that I have seen firsthand, and for people in Paraparaumu, for people in Ōtaki. I am proud to see that.

I also think of a message I was sent from a mum—someone we’d helped to get the special transport they need to get their child to school on time each day, and it was described as being life changing. I tell you that it is a privilege to serve these people, to serve alongside them, through their situations.

I can make a difference as a local MP, one person at a time, and I do believe that matters, that counts, but as a Government, we need to bring the growth, because it’s the growth that brings the opportunities. Our future is defined by growth. The new O2NL Expressway is just one visible sign. Growth is what I’m focused on, growth is what this side of the House is focused on, and when partnered with the community legends that I have mentioned, from my youth team through to retirees, I am confident, and it gives me confidence, that our region is positioned for growth. That will in turn bring the things that we need—the jobs, the ease in the cost of living, the housing, the health. What a privilege it is to represent them. How exciting to see in the spring O2NL under construction.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s great to have the opportunity to make a contribution in this local issues debate. It’s unfortunate that the reason I’m making this contribution is because we currently have a homelessness crisis in Christchurch East—a homelessness crisis. Now, the Prime Minister tells us that homelessness is a really complex issue but that he is proud of the work that they’re doing, and yet no one can tell us where a large percentage of people kicked out of emergency housing have gone.

The Minister tells us it’s clear we have a real problem, and it is clear. It’s clear in Christchurch East, because we see it every day. Some of these mornings it’s negative 3 degrees and we’re seeing children living in tents and cars. We’re seeing retired people living in tents and cars. We’re seeing working people living in tents and cars across Christchurch East.

Now, our front-line experts are telling us this. Christchurch City Missioner Corinne Haines tells us that they’re seeing more homeless people here in Christchurch than ever in the past, and many more new people, including those who have work. If we go into our red zone, the area that was previously residential in Christchurch East—abandoned after the earthquake because it’s not suitable for homes—we find a 23-year-old woman parked up in our red zone, and those streets are now lined with campervans, cars, and tents, and they tell us it’s cheaper to live in a car than it is to rent. This is a full-time worker. She would love to have a permanent place to live, but she doesn’t hold out hope for any Government support, and she tells us that they care more about money than actually the love for people. That’s what she tells us.

So why are there people living in cars? Once again, our City Missioner tells us many people are sleeping rough in the red zone and elsewhere, and they’re telling us that they have been declined emergency housing. That’s what we hear in the Christchurch East electorate office. People are coming direct to us in dire need for emergency housing and accommodation and they are told that they have contributed to their homelessness and that they will not get help, despite what the Minister and the Prime Minister tell us in this House—“Go to the Ministry of Social Development; they’ll be able to help.” That is not really what’s happening.

There is a woman—Polly; she’s 69—and she has been living in her van in the red zone. Now, Polly tells us that she has money in the bank but not enough to buy a house. As a pensioner, renting for her, she says, is out of the question because she wouldn’t have any money left for her food or her bills, so literally her van has become her home. She has no heating in the van, and it’s been minus 3 degrees. Polly tells us that she just takes to the bed in her van and burrows under the covers—a 69year-old retired woman on her own who has contributed a working life and now burrows under the covers in her van. She says that she’s mostly happy in her own company and she also says that living in the red zone was lonely. She says that she’s not alone, but that she’s lonely.

Now, at the same time as Polly tells us this, there’s something happening in suburbs across Christchurch East, in Parklands, in Aranui, in Bromley, in Avondale, in Shirley, in Linwood, in New Brighton. This Government is selling Kāinga Ora homes. People are living in tents and cars, and you are selling homes in Christchurch East that they should be living in. Children are living in tents and cars in winter, and you are selling the homes they should be living in—not you, Madam Speaker; the Government. These people are not alone because there are lots of them, but they are lonely because this Government is leaving them behind.

I want to take this opportunity to highlight a critical issue that is impacting so many construction companies in Auckland. These construction companies want to build houses in Auckland. We all know it’s so important to build houses, because we always talk about supply and demand and affordability of houses, and it will happen only if more houses are built. These construction companies are not able to proceed with their projects, not because they don’t have people to work on their projects, not because there are any issues with their finances or there are any issues with availability of land—they have land, but they just can’t proceed with building houses on that land because of Watercare’s constraints.

I want to acknowledge that Watercare has proactively released a map which shows where the constraints are. In East Auckland, there are both water and waste-water constraints. In Bombay, there are water constraints.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Cancelled affordable water.

Hon Member: Ha, ha!

Dr PARMJEET PARMAR: In Paerata Rise, for example, there are waste-water constraints. There are other areas, as well, where there are Watercare constraints, because of which construction companies cannot build houses.

I have spoken to so many people in the construction industry, and they are really frustrated about this, because they have land. Sometimes people drive past this land and think that “Oh, somebody’s land banking.” But it’s not land banking—actually, they don’t know the reason behind why they are not able to proceed with their projects. In Paerata Rise, I was talking to a construction company that wants to build 98 houses. They got land-use consent, but when they applied for subdivision consent, from that point they have been stuck. Another construction company wants to build 50plus houses in Bombay. They are stuck because there are water-supply constraints there.

These are serious issues, because in Auckland we have demand for more houses. When we build houses, it’s not just like one house is being built. It’s about supply and demand, but it’s about lot more than that. There are a lot of flow-on effects of building houses. We know that there are a lot of jobs created, not just on the site but at the suppliers as well. Then transportation requires a lot of jobs. Then, of course, the tax revenue comes to Government. So, in a way, this constraint is also hindering economic growth.

This bottleneck didn’t appear just overnight. It appeared over time, because previous Government, Labour members—I heard them laughing before. Those members, when they were in Government, didn’t anticipate future need. Now we have to look at what the future need is, and now we have to also react to this past shortfall. These delays which are happening are very, very costly delays.

So, yes, I have highlighted this issue. Now I would like to highlight what this Government is doing to address this issue. As we will know and remember, what Labour wanted to do—they wanted to enforce co-governance in water supply. Did that help—did that help? No, that didn’t help at all. That’s why we made changes and we brought the Local Water Done Well policy programme. Because of the Local Water Done Well policy programme, now Watercare have their own balance sheet. This has enabled them to have their own balance sheet so that they can go and borrow money to invest in long-term infrastructure. The good thing about this is that this won’t fall under the council debt-limit, so it frees them up to see where they want to do investment. It’s very important that Watercare utilises this opportunity, this tool, to invest in infrastructure.

We also see that Watercare has a new charter that is to rebalance revenue so that growth is paying for growth. Just recently, an email was forwarded by a construction company to me—just yesterday, and I think they received it just a couple of days ago—where Watercare themselves have acknowledged, and I’m quoting from that email, “On 1 July, Auckland’s water services enter a new chapter. While we remain 100 percent owned by Auckland Council, we are now financially independent, giving us the ability to fund the infrastructure our city urgently needs, without steep price increases.”—which is so important to note.

We also know that my ACT Party colleague Simon Court is working really hard to replace the Resource Management Act. We are really looking forward to seeing that Watercare is utilising all the tools that are going to be available to them. We know that there are serious challenges ahead for Watercare, and it will be up to Watercare to prove that they are able to meet those challenges to ensure that more houses can be built—to support our economy, to meet the demand, and also for the wellbeing of families. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Tēnā koe, Madam Speaker. Tēnā tātou e te Whare. I want to share some information regarding Te Tai Tokerau. That’s Northland. In terms of the electorate, you should know it stems from Te Hāpua. If you’ve ever been to the very Far North, you must go. If you haven’t—

Grant McCallum: You must go. Everyone must go.

MARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI: Yes, good on you, Grant. You must go, because it’s a pretty place.

Grant McCallum: Absolutely.

MARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI: But what it is—it is a paradise, isn’t it?—it’s a paradise in poverty. Of course, I mean, the ‘Look North’ kaupapa last night—I get it, of course. But what it demonstrated last night, McCallum and others, is that it really showed the haves and the have-nots. It was a wonderful big display. It was fantastic—some blinking good people, relations of Grant and I. What it showed last night in the Banquet Hall was a great idea and wonderful thinking and so on, but the disconnect between ‘Look North’ and what I saw in the Banquet Hall to the actual north of where I know and live, at times, you couldn’t be more—I mean, it’s just so vastly different. It is the haves and it is the have-nots. It is the privilege and it’s the poverty-stricken, and it is poverty in paradise. Poverty in paradise, so that’s a point. And this is Te Tai Tokerau.

Here we go—more mokopuna made homeless in Te Tai Tokerau. You heard my comments earlier on today at question time. For that result, I want to mihi to the Hon Tama Potaka, Chris Bishop, and Louise Upston. Now, each of those Ministers holds responsibility: on one side, housing, and on the other, employment. These two pillars are critical in determining whether our mokopuna are raised in homes or in the back seat of a car.

Grant McCallum and I, we know this reality. We’ve probably got to do more, Grant—just saying. Now, these Ministers must answer to all whānau and mokopuna who have been made homeless in the wake of regressive changes to the emergency housing eligibility, especially in Te Tai Tokerau. We’re seeing it every day. More recently in Kaitāia, driving through Pak ‘N Save, you see a car parked up, see a wahine in her car and all of her clothes are jammed in the back of the back seats and she’s trying to feed her baby. I go up and we have a conversation. I go, “Babe, this ain’t good. This ain’t good for you, this ain’t good for this baby, so let’s go.” I have a reputation for just if I see it, I do something about it. I wish that we could all do that—not only singularly but particularly for Government. I really want you to consider—not just that single story, because I’m hearing other stories and they have a very, very familiar and similar vibe when it comes to homelessness, when it comes to people that are not living in poverty because they want to but because the circumstances which are imposed on them cause them and are so oppressive that that’s where their lot is.

Since these Ministers insist on defending these damaging policies, I challenge them to come to Te Tai Tokerau. I want Tama to come and I want Chris to come and I want Louise to come—sorry: Tama Potaka, Chris Bishop, and Louise Upston. Grant McCallum and I will take them to those places. We will take them to those stories, not just to the bright and shiny bits, right? Not just to all the paradise but to the poverty. Then they will know absolutely and surely that Te Tai Tokerau homeless numbers—for instance, let me share those numbers with you. There are 525 homeless in the Far North. Now, the next biggest number to that is 747 in Tāmaki, in Auckland. Why would a tiny place like Kaitāia, Whangaroa, Ahipara—those numbers nearly reach the same numbers in our biggest city in the country. That is utter nuts. What that tells our people is that we just don’t matter—we just don’t matter—not in quite the same way.

It might matter if you could turn up to the hui last night in Banquet Hall. Then it might matter, then it might reflect, but if you don’t see it and you don’t see it enough, it just doesn’t matter. So these are the real stories that are going on, whether I’m in Te Atatū North, whether I’m in Northcote, Birkenhead, or whether I’m in Mahurangi, right? Whether I then go up to Ahipara, Hokianga, Tākou Bay, Te Kao, or Te Hāpua, these pockets of poverty, impoverishment, dislocation, deculturation exist—deeply, unfortunately, horribly—in Te Tai Tokerau.

I want to say greater things about Tai Tokerau except, unfortunately, they’re not quite great enough. So please, Grant McCallum, and all the others that want to ‘Look North’, yeah, come. Haere mai ki Te Tai Tokerau. Kia ora.

The Waikato medical school journey actually began 73 years ago when the first female National Party MP, Hilda Ross, was enthusiastically bidding for it for Hamilton.

In 1952, the Auckland Hospital Board was planning a new hospital building and asked Auckland University College whether to provide an undergraduate medical school. Dr A T Rogers suggested Hamilton due to its proximity to Waikato Hospital, which was the largest hospital in bed numbers at the time in New Zealand. A Mrs Hilda Ross, MP for Hamilton—later Dame—was enthusiastic. Support grew, but the idea was eventually turned down because Hamilton didn’t have a university. In an ironic twist of fate, what was the genesis of an idea for a medical school actually became the genesis of an idea for a university. Here we are, full circle.

I’d also just have to say that just over two years ago, before our campaign proper started, I was on holiday with my wife and I heard that our leader—now the Prime Minister—was going to announce that the National Party was going to rebid for the medical school in Waikato. I cut my holiday short because I wanted to be there. Just a couple of weeks ago, my wife said to me, “How’s that medical school coming along that you cut your holiday for?” I said, “We’re working on it—we’re working on it.” I’m pleased today that we’ve got the medical school coming and, hopefully, some redemption for cutting my holiday short with my wife. Marie’s here to support me today, and isn’t it just wonderful?

I know the Opposition have been jibing for a while, “What’s been happening with that medical school?” Well, I’ve got good news: it’s coming. In my maiden speech just a little over 18 months ago, I said, “imagine, if we can, housing New Zealand’s long overdue and first graduate [degree] medical school.” Well, good news: it’s coming. Championed by David Bennett and Tim Macindoe even back in 2016—and they took it to the campaign in 2017. Scott Simpson was part of that team and that enthusiasm. But the Labour-Greens coalition did not support it.

Through resilience, it has lived through the advocacy of the Hon Shane Reti and the drive of vice-chancellor Neil Quigley. The idea, the dream, the vision has survived. I’d also like to give a special shout-out to Professor Jo Lane, pro vice-chancellor of health at the university, for his advocacy and resilience in seeing this through. Myself, Tama Potaka, and all our Waikato and neighbouring MPs are delighted with the result—and, of course, all our rural MPs—because of the benefit. The cost to the Government of $82 million and the contribution of the university and generous Waikato philanthropy of $150 million makes it a fantastic deal for the New Zealand taxpayer.

The four-year programme is run by the University of Waikato and will accept its first cohort of 120 students in 2028, and they will all be graduated by 2031. I know people say, “Oh, why don’t we just keep boosting Otago and Auckland?” We’ve been doing that and we’ve increased another 100 or so, but the problem is that with just two medical schools in New Zealand, New Zealand is one of the lowest represented in the OECD. If we were to compare ourselves to Australia, we’d be working on our fifth medical school.

Our current medical workforce shortage—we have 1,810 doctors, including 220 GPs, short; and by 2032, we’ll be short by 3,440 doctors and 870 GPs. We can’t keep doing what we’re doing, because it’s not working. We have to create a circuit breaker, and that’s what this school will provide. Only one-sixth of current graduates actually become a GP, and only one-fifth of them work outside of Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, or Dunedin. This model has been proven around the world to successfully deliver more GPs and more rural doctors in Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US. The goal of Waikato medical school is for 60 percent of graduates to become GPs and work outside the main urban centres. It’s fantastic.

The University of Waikato’s division of health is also home to New Zealand’s largest graduate entry nursery programme and the country’s first graduate entry programmes in pharmacy and midwifery. So this is a marriage made in heaven.

Ehara te kura hauora o Waikato i te urupare noa iho ki tētahi raruraru hauora, engari he whakatūranga tēnei o te whakatinanatanga.

[The Waikato medical school is not just a response to a health crisis; it is a manifestation of delivery.]

It is a promise fulfilled from National. It is both an investment and a gift to our future for a healthier, fairer New Zealand with abundant opportunity.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Back in 2016 I met a young woman—we’ll call her Lisa. I met her at a local school in the Maungakiekie electorate. Lisa had spent some time in Australia and had come back to New Zealand with her young family so that her children could grow up here. She told me she’d moved temporarily in with her parents while they looked to buy their own home. When I met her, she’d been staying with her parents for three years. There were about 15 of them in a three-bedroom home. She was a teacher-aide, and it was her last week at school because her pay no longer afforded her the money that she needed to buy a home.

I’m proud that soon after that, Labour got into Government, and we increased the pay for teacheraides. We knew at the time in 2017 that the previous National Government had left us with 1,500 fewer public homes than when they took office. In Government, we delivered over 13,000 public homes, the most of any Government since the 1950s. Close to 10,000 of those were new builds, and that’s important because we introduced a target of 15 percent of new builds by Kāinga Ora that would be accessible homes. We then, in 2023, raised that target to 25 percent. We also delivered over 4,000 transitional homes.

But sadly, we’re going backwards. The homelessness insights report released yesterday gives us the evidence that backs up what so many of us have seen on the ground and have heard from social service providers that we have visited—that we’re back in a housing crisis. Auckland City has seen a rise of 90 percent of people sleeping on the streets in just eight months. Auckland Council’s latest quarterly update shows that at the end of May 2025, the six providers with outreach capacity have been working with 809 unsheltered clients who were sleeping in cars, streets, and local parks—up from 653 in January and 426 in September last year. That’s a 53 percent increase in a four-month period.

Now, as of December last year, 396 people—close to 400 people—were on the housing register just in the Maungakiekie Tāmaki Local Board. But what are we seeing? We’re seeing this Government scrapping housing builds, Kāinga Ora builds, in this electorate or in this local board area.

In responses to my written questions, Minister Bishop confirmed that 11,000 housing projects have been scrapped in this local board area. That’s hundreds of houses. I’m trying to work out exactly how many houses have been scrapped, but so far here’s what I’ve found. In Onehunga and Mount Wellington alone, almost 500 homes have been scrapped. The Oranga development: 400 State houses that we had decided to demolish because they were old, but we were replacing them with 1,100 homes, of which 440 would be State houses—to date, only 370 have been built; of those, 233 are social homes. Some of the projects that are on the list to be scrapped, I’m pretty sure, are part of this development as well. I will be getting those details, because this is a Government that is abdicating their responsibility to ensure that people have access to affordable, quality homes.

At the same time, food insecurity is increasing. I’ve been visiting providers in the electorate. Vinnies in Onehunga tells me that some years back, on average, they gave out 200 food parcels a month. Now, the peak is 1,200 a month and on average it’s 500. They’re forecasting this figure to rise. I visited the New Zealand Food Network, which is also in the Maungakiekie electorate. Thirty percent of their monthly recipients are new, have never asked for a food parcel before, and it’s a challenge that is now consistent. Often, they’re employees from dual income households, and they can’t afford food. Ninety-three percent of them cited the rising cost of living as the main reason for this, followed by low household or individual income due to low paying jobs and unemployment.

We can point to all of these metrics increasing as a direct result of the choices made by this Government. The fact that people lack housing affects all of us—first and foremost, those who are sleeping in cars, in tents, and in our local parks. Ultimately, is this the kind of society we want, or one that we want to go back to, where children are learning by lamplight in cars? It’s not the society that I want.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Te rohe a tokerau—it is time to look north. It is time to unleash the potential of Northland. It’s time to build the roads so the Brynderwyns become part of an economic accelerator and not the economic handbrake it currently is. It is time for Northland to show it is miles above the rest.

The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) report released yesterday, commissioned by the Northland Corporate Group, is more than a document. It is a blueprint for growth, a road map for resilience, and a declaration that Northland is ready to deliver, not just for itself but for Auckland and for all of Aotearoa New Zealand.

Let’s begin with the facts. In 2024, Northland contributed $11.2 billion to New Zealand’s GDP, 2.7 percent of the national economy. Yet our GDP per capita remains 30 percent below the national average—not because we lack talent or ambition but because of decades of under-investment in infrastructure and connectivity. If we reached parity today, our economy would be worth $16 billion. But we’re aiming higher. We have set a bold, achievable goal: to grow our economy to $60 billion by 2050. That means lifting our growth rate by just 1.1 percent above current trends. This is not a pipedream. NZIER modelling shows that targeted investments, such as a high-quality four-lane expressway, could boost national GDP by up to $1.2 billion per year by 2050. The Marsden Point Energy Precinct alone is expected to contribute $260 million annually and support over 1,100 fulltime jobs.

Madam Speaker, Northland is already delivering—or Mr Speaker, sorry; I just noticed a bit of a change. Northland is already delivering. We are home to New Zealand’s largest fuel import terminal, supplying 40 percent of land transport fuel and 80 percent of the jet fuel in New Zealand, including for every plane leaving Auckland International Airport. We are home to Golden Bay cement, New Zealand’s only domestic cement producer, producing 60 percent of our domestic demand. We produce 96 percent of the country’s kūmara, 42 percent of its avocados, and we’re expanding into subtropical crops like bananas and coffee. Our energy companies, Northpower and Top Energy, are community-owned and leading the charge in renewables. By 2026, Northland will be a net exporter of electricity. With the energy bridge proposal, we can unlock up to 600 megawatts of new renewable energy in the next five years. But this is not just about Northland. It’s about Auckland’s growth and New Zealand’s resilience and our transition to a low-carbon economy.

Our Māori economy is also growing. Māori-led enterprises are driving innovation in tourism, agriculture, and sustainable land use. Cultural tourism, especially in places like Waitangi, Hokianga, and Te Hiku, offers story-driven experiences that celebrate our heritage and enrich our economy.

We need resilient transport infrastructure. Closures on State Highway 1, particularly on the Brynderwyns and the Mangamukas, have cost Northland businesses up to $230 million. Freight delays are forcing companies to reassess how and where they operate. This is not sustainable. We also need the rail link out to the port so we can unlock the potential of Northport. We also need continued investment in water infrastructure, tourism infrastructure, and in the amazing people of the North by rebuilding NorthTec and the vocational training opportunities.

This report is an invitation to look north, to see the strength of our industries, the resilience of our people, and the scale of opportunity in Northland. We are not looking for handouts. We are asking for partnership, for recognition, for the tools to do what we know we can do. Let us invest in Northland, not just for the region but for the nation, because when Northland grows, New Zealand grows. Te hure o tokerau—look north. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

Te Ātiawa tupua rau, he auripo i Te Awakairangi, he kaitiaki ki te whenua. Ko te wai o Te Awakairangi ko te toto o te whenua; ko te whenua te toto o te tangata.

[Te Āti Awa of many phenomena, a swirl in the Hutt River, a guardian to the land. The waters of the Hutt River are the lifeblood of the land; the land is the life blood of the people.]

The waters of the Hutt River are the lifeblood of the land, and the land is the lifeblood of its people. My local issue is an important one. Chris Bishop has a plan to pollute the Hutt River, and I would like to stop it. He’s rewriting the rules that protect our fresh water, our lakes, our rivers, and our drinking water. The core issue in this is that he is removing the cap on synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, which is already causing big issues for the Hutt River.

Some may say that Mr Bishop is a shrewd political operator, but he has committed the cardinal sin of defecating in his own backyard, and the people of the Hutt Valley will not stand to watch that happen. The problem we currently have is that nitrates cause toxic—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order. How can someone be allowed to get away with that comment in respect of Mr Bishop and the backyard. I won’t repeat it, it’s so disgraceful. It’s defamatory in the extreme and if it was said outside, it would be cause for a libel case, but here we are, tolerating it in Parliament. Now, she’d described him doing something in his backyard which is false, untrue, and she should be asked to stand up now, withdraw, and apologise.

SPEAKER: I think that while you can have some colourful descriptives inside parliamentary commentary, I did myself do a double take at the way in which the member presented that particular idea. I think the Rt Hon Winston Peters makes a good point. I’d also point out that this House is somewhat preoccupied with the whole concept of cyber-bullying and the pressure that comes on MPs from outside the House. You should not exacerbate that by comments that are made inside the House, and I think, on balance, I would ask the member to withdraw and apologise for that remark.

Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I withdraw and apologise. I would say he would be soiling his backyard. Is that acceptable?

SPEAKER: No, not particularly.

Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Polluting. Polluting?

SPEAKER: You’re trifling with the Chair, and I’m inclined to terminate your speech. I think you should apologise for that particular reference as well.

Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I withdraw and apologise. I will refer to polluting the backyard. The problem we have currently is that nitrates cause a toxic algae bloom in the Hutt River, so when summer comes and the water level drops and the heat increases, algae blooms and nitrates increase that growth. What already happens in the Hutt River is that we can’t swim at times in summer, and the other problem is that dogs die. We have a number of dogs that die each summer because of the high levels of toxic algae in our river. Mr Bishop is increasing that cap on nitrates, and I wonder whether he will walk his dog along the banks of the Hutt River in summer. Maybe he will stick to the Petone beach once his regulations pass.

It is great to see that RiverLink is going ahead. It was funded fully by Labour, and I’m pleased it hasn’t been undone like other construction projects under this Government. Mr Bishop just yesterday spoke about this project and how important it is for the Hutt Valley. It’s a new interchange, it’s a flood protection, but also it turns our city to face the river. That’s the most important part. The Hutt City Council will talk about how it turns to face the river. Now, I ask members: what is the point of our city turning to face the river if it’s full of swine? That is what is happening. We already have record levels of toxicity within that river, and by increasing the nitrate cap, by lifting that, it’s going to make it even worse.

The sad point is that there is no evidence that that nitrate cap was a problem—no evidence. What we’ve seen is an increase in water quality—an improvement has been made. So what I say to all those people in the Hutt Valley who have Mr Bishop as their local MP is that they have until 27 July to submit and say they do not want these regulations to be implemented and that they will be detrimental to our natural environment and will make the Hutt River a non-swimmable river. That is not acceptable.

We do not want corporate interests put over the top of our natural environment. Two-thirds of New Zealand rivers are too polluted to swim in, and drinking water is becoming increasingly contaminated with nitrate. Labour had a goal of swimmable rivers within our generation so that our children and our grandchildren don’t get sick from taking a swim in the Hutt River.

This Government is undoing all the work we did to ensure that rivers were clean enough to swim in, and they are actively stopping councils from implementing the protections that would clean up our rivers. This Government is going to scrap hard-won bottom lines—safety nets that were actually introduced by National back in 2014 to protect our ecosystem and to protect our health. These bottom lines were developed over years with scientific backing.

This is an important issue, a local issue, that impacts the Hutt Valley and its people. We want our swimmable river back. We want to restore it. All of those wetlands that have been put in will make the water quality better, but this will be undone when Mr Bishop rewrites the freshwater regulations and makes nitrates more able to be dumped into the river, making our river toxic, causing dogs to die, and preventing our children from being able to swim in it.

The time for this debate has expired.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.