General Debate

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

Members, spare a thought for Barbara Edmonds. She got thrown under the bus this week by no one less than her party leader. Ouch! You know, it’s pretty hard for Barbara Edmonds, because she is the finance spokesperson in a party where to both the left and the right of her are people who want to spend like an eight-armed octopus.

And so, what she got embarrassed about last week was the Greens. We all remember that the Greens had their departure into a Soviet paradise in a planet far, far away last week, promising billions of dollars of extra tax, billions of dollars of extra debt, and somehow claiming that that would be better for the country. It all seemed ludicrous. And Barbara, to her credit, recognised—

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Barbara who?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Edmonds, the finance spokesperson for Labour—

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, you may not have heard, but the member who was doing her speech was referring to one of our members by her first name only, and my understanding is that that’s against the rules.

SPEAKER: It is, in fact, inappropriate to refer to a member by their first name only. Please comply and refer to the Hon Barbara Edmonds by her full name.

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I did immediately correct, but they don’t like this line, do they? They don’t like me talking about this. I suspect there’ll be a few more interruptions, because here’s what happened: the Greens put out a plan to trash the economy. Barbara Edmonds was smart enough to see that she should distance herself a little from that. So in The Post, here’s what she said—she had a special name for what Labour would be doing: she called it—she thought up the phrase—“balanced fiscal responsibility”. That’s what she called it. And what was this new approach to be characterised by? Well, she said that Labour had agreed with the 50 percent debt cap last time they were in power, and they would continue to do so. A welcome piece of fiscal reality when, normally, the members opposite live on “Planet Spend, Spend, Spend, Borrow, Borrow, Borrow, Tax, Tax, Tax.” She went further. She also made clear—she affirmed—that an operating surplus, by June 2029, remained the appropriate goal. So good on Barbara Edmonds—she said it how it is.

So then what happened on Monday? I’ll tell you what happened. Chris Hipkins got Barbara Edmonds and he threw her under the bus. In fact, what he did was he walked back her comments almost immediately, telling reporters he wasn’t ready to commit to the targets—a little bit too soon for him. And then he went further. On the Bradbury Group YouTube channel, just yesterday, he said this: “Look, I don’t think we should read too much into the fact that Barbara, our finance spokesperson”—Barbara Edmonds—“was talking about the policy.” It is very rare that a leader so blatantly and disrespectfully disowns their finance spokesperson and the sensible positions that they take. But that is what Chris Hipkins has done. He has completely thrown her under the bus.

So the question is: why has he done that? Well, what he said was: “Oh, look, look, look: she was referring to the past.” Now, we all know that Mr Hipkins is pretty flexible with the facts, but to claim that she was talking about the past, when her specific words were that she had agreed with the 50 percent cap when last in power, and said she would continue to do so, it is quite hard to characterise that as referring to the past. When she referred to the year 2029, which didn’t even exist in the fiscal plan from the last election, I think we can see that Mr Hipkins was not very artful in his flexibility with the facts this time.

So what is this actually all about? What this is actually about is the fact that the Labour Party and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori oppose every single attempt to provide fiscal responsibility. They have never seen a spending commitment they couldn’t walk past. Their addiction to spending remains in overdrive. We saw it for their six years in Government, and New Zealanders know what it delivered. It delivered a cost of living crisis, a mountain of debt, and perpetual deficits. So if the members opposite want to spare a moment to listen to Barbara Edmonds, they’ll understand that if they keep committing to every single spending, then this is the question they’ll be faced with: show me the money. They need to find the money, and we all know where they’ll find it: higher taxes and more borrowing, which has proved a disaster for Kiwis. Barbara Edmonds is on to it. It’s a pity Chris Hipkins isn’t. And just spare a thought also for Chlöe Swarbrick: she wants to save a planet that she doesn’t even live on.

One day to go; one day to go until this Government’s second Budget. They’ve got a chance to talk about all the things that they’ve supposedly done and what do they talk about? Us. They don’t talk about them. They talk about Barbara Edmonds. A confident finance Minister doesn’t talk about her opposite; she talks about herself and what they’ve achieved and they didn’t mention that once and New Zealanders know exactly why: because they have done bugger all, because they’ve buggered up the Budget.

That is a fact: they have buggered up the Budget. Because they have given tax cuts to landlords, they have given tax cuts to tobacco companies, they have given tax cuts to tech companies like Google and Facebook, and what do you know, the books don’t add up. Now what do we do? What does this visionary of finance called Willis do? She targets the women workers and they kick the homeless, because tomorrow they will make themselves out to be virtuous and they will make announcements that make it look like they are investing in this country. But every single announcement will be paid for from women workers’ future pay and depriving people in genuine need of the homes that they need.

They crow about saving a billion dollars by keeping people out of emergency housing.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Shame.

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: It is shameful. And today, even, at question time, they were celebrating the fact, supposedly, that so many people had got into homes—homes that the last Government paid for and the last Government built. And what does this crowd do? They’ve stopped Kāinga Ora expanding homes, and they have significantly reduced the funding going to community housing providers. They have deliberately changed the rules that deprive people in need getting into emergency housing—to save money. Women and children escaping domestic violence are being deprived an emergency house because of the changes that each and every one of them have voted for. I don’t know how you sleep at night.

Hon Matt Doocey: Ha, ha!

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Domestic violence—Matt Doocey laughs. Try and defend that in your local electorate. One of your constituents defending domestic violence—now they’re all laughing. Let’s just take a second here and take a moment. They are laughing when we are talking about people escaping domestic violence being denied an opportunity to get into an emergency house because of the change in the rules that they made, while they celebrate the money that they’ve saved and their response is to laugh: Matt Doocey, Simeon Brown, and Sam Uffindell. Put it on the record. They laughed at domestic violence and they laughed that they’re being kept on the street, because that is a fact.

Homelessness has gone up at unprecedented levels because of each and every one of them. The front-line providers have been screaming out, telling them that the changes they made to save money, to try and make this Budget add up, are meaning that people are living on the street and in tents and in cars and in garages. They don’t care. The only thing that they care about is trying to pay for the tax cuts that they can’t afford. And their response was to laugh.

I bet they don’t have the guts to laugh at people who actually are homeless. I bet it’s only in here—

SPEAKER: Sorry, you can’t make that sort of suggestion. You can imply it but you can’t say it directly; you know that. So please carry on without those references.

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: I bet if they had the opportunity to talk to a homeless person, they wouldn’t laugh. But here, where they feel like they’re protected, where they feel all buoyed up, they can do it. Will they laugh to the women workers who are going to come to them after tomorrow’s Budget and say, “Every single thing that you have just announced is because you’ve deprived me of my future pay?” Of course they won’t, but they’ll do it here.

I think sometimes this debating chamber can give the public of New Zealand an insight into the true feelings of this Government, and they have demonstrated it today. They don’t care that women’s pay is being cut. They don’t care that they are screwing over some of the lowest-paid workers in the country. They do not care that women and children are sleeping on the street, because they need the money, because they decided to favour—

Hon Member: For their mates.

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: —their mates. Landlords, big tech companies, tobacco companies, over the people that actually need it. The people paying for this Budget are the ones that can least afford it. That’s on them.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, it’s one more sleep until the Budget; two if you’re in the Greens—two if you’re in the Greens. So one more sleep until the Budget. I would have thought that the first person leading off the debate for the Opposition would have been the finance spokesperson for the Labour Party. But no—it was Kieran McAnulty, who lost his seat of Wairarapa at the last election, complaining about the fact that we represent the electorates up and down this country. Well, what he forgot to talk about in his speech—

Rima Nakhle: Leadership pitch.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Oh, yes, absolutely—that was a leadership pitch if ever there was one, wasn’t it? But what he forgot to speak about—and there he is; he’s smiling, he’s very happy, he loves that. What he forgot to speak about was what the fiscal plan of the Labour Party is. What’s the fiscal party of the Labour Party?

What people out there know is they know three words: tax, borrow, spend—tax, borrow, spend. That’s what we know the Opposition know about. But, of course, there was the confusion, the absolute confusion, that’s been sowed this week. The Opposition finance spokesperson coming in and saying, “We believe in fiscal responsibility and having a debt cap and trying to sow the seed of fiscal responsibility.”, only to have the bus run right over her and then reverse back over again. Run over and then reversed right over by the leader, Mr Hipkins, who’s now saying, “Well, actually, no, we’ll borrow more. We’ll borrow more.” Well, of course, that’s the Labour Party way: to borrow more. They promise surpluses with no plan to get there. They oppose every single savings measure and promise to spend more on anything. They haven’t seen a spending measure that they haven’t liked or said yes to. They have never seen a spending measure that they haven’t liked or said yes to.

Of course, we know where their mates in the Greens are at every single day. They want to go even further, borrowing and spending even more.

Of course, they forget that in order to actually spend on the public services which the taxpayers of New Zealand rely on, you have to have a strong economy. Not one word about the economy. Not one word about the need for a strong economy from the Opposition. You can’t invest in public services without a strong economy. You can’t invest in infrastructure without a strong economy. You can’t invest in better health services without a strong economy.

So, of course, this weekend the Government announced our Budget investment in urgent and after-hours care: urgent and after-hours care which is going to make a huge difference for New Zealanders up and down the country; $164 million of spending over four years to help ensure that New Zealanders can get access to urgent and after-hours care across New Zealand.

What was the Labour Party’s response to that? The Labour Party’s response was to call this “Pocket change”—pocket change. Well, tell that to the parents with a sick child. Tell that to the people who need these services. Only Labour would call $164 million “pocket change”. Only Labour would talk about that as pocket change after the hundreds of millions of dollars of wasted money they blew on consultants when they were in Government. They don’t care, but this is taxpayers’ money. Every single dollar that the Government spends, whether it’s in infrastructure, whether it’s in housing, whether it’s in education, whether it’s in healthcare—every single dollar is taxpayers’ money. On this side of the House, we will respect every single dollar that is spent.

Labour’s vision: consultants, bureaucrats—wasted money. On our side of the House: investing in critical front-line services of health, education, and law and order, and a strong economy to back that up. So I’m proud of the investment we’re making in healthcare. I’m proud of the investment we’re making in our front-line services. We have record numbers of doctors and nurses working at Health New Zealand. We’re delivering the electives boost right now, which is seeing thousands of patients get the care that they need in a faster and more timely manner. We’re investing in front-line primary healthcare to make sure there are more doctors and nurses working in primary healthcare. These are the things which matter to New Zealanders, and we can make those investments because we’re investing and we’re focused on growing the economy. A stronger economy means more investment is able to be made in those critical front-line services.

So I’m looking forward to tomorrow’s Budget. I’m excited about tomorrow’s Budget. I’m excited about the “growth Budget” and about growing our economy so we can invest in critical services. I say it once again: one more sleep, and two for the Greens.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. New Zealanders are stuck, and I don’t just mean in traffic. From the Far North to the deep South, infrastructure is failing hard-working New Zealanders. Whether you’re in Wellington, Ashburton, Auckland, Bay of Plenty, Northland—you know the deal; overpriced homes, buggered roads. Infrastructure is failing everywhere. It’s holding us back. Families can’t live close to jobs, schools, or entertainment. Businesses can’t base themselves near the workers they need or move goods efficiently to market.

And why is that? Because the previous Labour Government cancelled, delayed, and sabotaged the very projects that we need to get New Zealand moving. They weren’t guided by reason or rationale; they were guided by a cult-like hatred of cars and a completely irrational obsession with climate change. They killed four-laning from Whangārei to Port Marsden, they stabbed to death the East West Link and Mill Road, and they halted the next stage of the Waikato Expressway. What did they give us instead? Billions wasted on rail and cycle projects that delivered practically nothing.

Enough is enough. New Zealanders deserve better. They deserve affordable homes, they deserve better-paying jobs, and that means we need infrastructure that actually works for Kiwis. We’ve seen what happens when a Government does commit to long-term investment, though. You only need to look at the Waikato Expressway. Started in the ‘90s, it has transformed the region, it has unlocked billions in private investment, it has created jobs, super hubs, opportunity. Just ask Tainui Group Holdings, the Ruakura Superhub: an inland port, a logistics centre, and an industrial precinct plugged directly into rail and the nearby highway. It’s connected to Tauranga and Auckland ports.

Now, imagine what Northland can do: a 100-kilometre highway connecting Auckland and Whangārei, unlocking Auckland’s north and west and helping growers and manufacturers in the North reach New Zealand’s biggest markets and the entire world. ACT in Government is making it happen. The first stage of the Northland corridor project kicks off in late 2025. It’s going to be procured through a public-private partnership (PPP). That full project, on that basis, is going to be delivered in less than a decade. That’s twice as fast as the Waikato Expressway. Why? Because ACT and National agreed we need more PPPs to get more infrastructure delivered faster, so we can get the benefits of it sooner. We won’t let bureaucrats turn “shovel ready” into “never ready”. We’re going to get stuff done.

But let’s be real: even public-private partnerships need funding. We won’t get it by taxing and taking more, like the Greens propose in their so-called alternative Budget. We won’t get it by dividing New Zealand with race-based separation and creating alternative sovereignties, like the Māori Party are always wailing for. And we sure as hell won’t get it by borrowing billions to build bike bridges, like Labour tried to do. ACT is instead doing the hard yards. David Seymour found $486 million in savings in the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment in the last year. Brooke van Velden found another $421 million in Internal Affairs. That’s real money redirected to schools, hospitals, and, yes, roads.

Kiwis have waited long enough. Budget 2025 is how we stop talking and start building. With ACT in the driver’s seat, 2026 and beyond is going to be all about delivery, not delay. Let’s build the roads. Let’s grow the economy. Finally, let’s give New Zealanders the future that they’ve been promised. Thank you.

Not only has this National Government buggered up the Budget but they’re actually buggering up the mental health system.

SPEAKER: No, hang on. Hang on. Look, sorry, I’ve had an enormous amount of correspondence because, unfortunately, a member over here used a word that is completely unacceptable and it can only be described as a profanity. I have suggested that that member might like to rectify that situation, and I’m sure that they’re thinking about that. The Hon Kieran McAnulty used, on three occasions, that particular word and description. I’m now saying it’s not to be used.

INGRID LEARY: May I speak to the point of order, Mr Speaker?

SPEAKER: No, I was ruling; I wasn’t taking a point of order.

INGRID LEARY: Not only have they stuffed up the Budget but they are stuffing up the mental health sector. Their cuts to pay equity claims will dismantle the mental health sector. I say this paying tribute to Hear4U, the NGO in Gisborne that has folded. I say it in relation to Segar House, which is facing imminent closure because of decisions being made by this mental health Minister. I acknowledge the youth one-stop shops in Taupō, Rotorua, and Christchurch that have closed down due to the changes in the Oranga Tamariki contracting which meant their funding was closed.

Now, let’s look at Rotorua. In the Lakes District mental health services, they have been cut to one session per week in telehealth, due to recruitment issues. This is in a week when last week’s suicide statistics show that children and youth in New Zealand have the highest level of suicide in the OECD. That puts us at the top of 36 countries. That is shameful.

And yet the Government insists on making these pay equity cuts which are going to further decimate the community sector. This, in a week when we’ve learnt that there are 5,000 workers in that sector, mainly women, who have been working for three years on their pay equity claim. That has been cut. They are amongst some of the lowest-paid workers. How is the Minister going to find mental health workers to staff his crisis cafes that he has been crowing about for so long?

This is a week when the roll-out is happening in emergency departments (EDs) that will enable police to stay for only up to an hour with people who are detained under the mental health Act. We’ve already seen numerous stories in the media about transportation issues and safety. Radio New Zealand has reported that 85 percent of workers in EDs over the last week have faced a violent incident. We’ve just seen a new report today about an attack on a midwife, which was horribly brutal. Yet the Minister is continuing to put these staff in vulnerable positions because of the cuts that his Government is making. In fact, I spoke with the Police Association president, Chris Cahill, last week, who admitted to me that there is a serious risk that has gone from one public sector—i.e., the police—over to mental health workers. I suggest that that hasn’t changed thanks to anything that is being done by this Minister.

If we go back to Rotorua and we look at why they are in crisis, it’s because of psychiatry. Then we saw a TV3 story where there was gaming of the targets, including psychiatry and psychology. Previous speakers in this debate have spoken about people being thrown under the bus. Well, how about this Minister who has thrown his officials under the bus once again, as he did with the Gumboot Friday debacle, this time saying it was his officials who made the changes to the targets?

Well, I have a bunch of emails and an Official Information Act request that date from 17 September last year, from the morning through to the afternoon, that showed very clearly the Minister’s office knew that the changes were being made, knew that the baselines to psychologists were being changed, knew that there was massaging of numbers, and was actually trying to keep well across it because he was due to have a meeting with the Prime Minister. None of that came out in the TV3 story. The Minister, instead, threw his officials under the bus, and said, “Nothing to do with me; talk to them.”

So this Government does not care about the workforce in mental health, it does not care about pay equity, it does not care about the most vulnerable New Zealanders, and it looks like a Government and a Minister that want to look good, rather than making a difference in the sector. I would say to this Government and I would say to that Minister: getting back into surplus in tomorrow’s Budget should not be at the expense of women—through the pay equity claims and the cuts—and it should not be at the expense of New Zealanders’ mental health. I ask this Minister to reassure the House that he has done some decent work to try and get some more funding into a sector that is absolutely in crisis, and I look forward to seeing the Budget tomorrow to show that there will be funding for the community sector, there will be funding for those who are facing uncertainty over the 30 June contract deadlines, but I’m not holding my breath.

While the Opposition is at war with itself, totally distracted, and only talking about themselves, this Government is focused on the things that matter to Kiwis. Fundamentally, that all centres around achieving economic growth. Reigniting and sustaining growth is how we will continue to deliver better law and order, higher education standards, and better health outcomes. And so while they’re flailing around hoping something will stick, this Government has been singly focused on bringing down the cost of living and we are starting to see results.

Let’s not forget the giddy heights of 7.3 percent inflation. Annual inflation is now down to 2.5 percent—well within the Reserve Bank’s 1 to 3 percent target band. At the same time, the official cash rate has reduced by 200 basis points since August 2024, currently at 3.5 percent, with another official cash rate decision next week. Mortgage interest rates have gone from having a seven in front of them just a couple of years back to having a five or even a four in front of them today. That makes a huge difference for someone—let me tell you—with a $500,000 mortgage over 25 years. A two percentage point drop in their interest rates reduces their repayments by about $300 a fortnight. That’s nearly $8,000 extra a year in the back pocket. If you live in the likes of Auckland, with a $1 million mortgage, that’s nearly $16,000 in savings a year. Guess what! It’ll only get better. The Reserve Bank told us just two weeks ago that 60 percent of mortgage lending will reprice to lower rates in the next six months and around 80 percent within a year. Lower mortgage costs mean a boost to disposable income, which in turn will mean household spending gradually lifting.

We’ve got a long way to go, but I’ll tell you what we’re not doing tomorrow. We are not introducing a wealth tax. We’re not introducing a capital gains tax. We’re not introducing an inheritance tax or, indeed, any other taxes that other parties are proposing. Let’s, for a second, listen to an economist from New Zealand’s largest bank, the ANZ. This ANZ bank economist recently described the last Labour Government as going on a “debt-funded spending spree”, leaving a fiscal mess for the current Government to clean up. He described Labour’s second term purely as “inflation fuelling fiscal expansion”. What a mess and what a clean-up job we’ve got to do.

From 2019 to 2024, New Zealand’s net Crown debt leapt dangerously, soaring from $58 billion to $175 billion. The interest bill on Government debt alone has soared from $3.6 billion in 2014 to $8.9 billion last year. As the finance Minister tells us, that sum of $8.9 billion that we’re paying in interest is more than the annual core Crown expenses for Police, Corrections, the Ministry of Justice, Customs, and the Defence Force combined. This Government’s goal is to put net core Crown debt on a downward trajectory, and we will, and we will get back into surplus next term. Only this side of the House will ever achieve that.

This is a “no BS Budget”. Even The Dominion Post is promoting the no BS Budget: “Willis to give a ‘no BS Budget’ ”. This will not be a Budget where we saddle the country with $88 billion worth of taxes and $44 billion worth of debt, as the Labour Party’s coalition partner wants. We are not going to tax our way to prosperity. We’re not going to borrow our way to prosperity. We are going to grow our way to prosperity. Economic growth is the only way we will build more hospitals, it’s the only way we will build more schools, and economic growth is the only way we will get anywhere close to funding the $71 billion superannuation bill by 2050. Budget 2025 will responsibly showcase good and steady Government and careful spending choices. It will not be a lolly scramble. We are growing the economy to create jobs, lift wages, and help Kiwis get ahead. Instead, tomorrow, as our Prime Minister has described, will be the right Budget for the right time. Let’s get behind our local people, let’s get behind our town and country businesses, and let’s secure this wonderful country’s future. Bring on Budget 2025. Bring on the “growth Budget”.

Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Tēnā tātou katoa e te Whare. I rise today to speak to this shameful report that’s come out of the Auditor-General’s office regarding Oranga Tamariki, so I’ll start my comments with this: congratulations to the Minister for Children—another failure on your watch, under your leadership, care, and supposed protection. This is not a rumour. It’s not gossip. The Office of the Auditor-General has just told us so in an extremely damning report.

So what are we to make of it? Well, there’s only one thing we can make of it, to be completely honest, and that is that the Minister took her eyes off the ball and focused on targeting mokopuna Māori and their whānau by diminishing their culture, customs, and practices, suggesting that safety is more important than those things. Culture and custom are critical protective factors, and that would be known to the Minister and probably anyone else that is muttering to the left of me if they read new material, if they understood the evidence, and if they knew the reality of Māori mokopuna and their whānau. It seems to me, particularly to the left of me, that that’s just misunderstood, and it’s probably best to disregard it, I would say.

The other thing that’s happened in this regard, too, to get her to this point is that the personal experience of the Minister, I think, had far too much to do with the lawmaking and resourcing of things, particularly when it comes to mokopuna Māori. If safety of the child was truly the priority of the Minister, why has an urgent inquiry by the Auditor-General into Oranga Tamariki procurement and contract-management processes revealed it’s such a blatant disregard for the safety of children reliant on care providers?

We have heard the Minister repeatedly claim to be—what is it?—refocusing on Oranga Tamariki and child safety—this being the only piece of evidence she seemed to need in the removal of section 7AA, her own opinion. To discover that poor contract management and flawed procurement processes have endangered our most vulnerable tamariki is utterly shameful.

I would suggest one hangs one’s head when you recognise that no risk assessment or meaningful consideration was undertaken when the Minister pushed through major funding cuts that directly affected the very providers responsible for supporting tamariki and their whānau. These funding cuts were made without credible evidence, and when contracts were cancelled as a result, Oranga Tamariki dumped the responsibility of relocating tamariki and their whānau back on to the providers and said, “You did a very poor job. The fact that we didn’t fund you properly is not on us; that’s all on you.” And when things inevitably fell apart, which is what they do when things happen like this, the result is always harm to mokopuna and their whānau. I bring attention to these findings because te iwi Māori are too often consumed in having to survive all of this nonsense and churn inside a system such as Oranga Tamariki.

The Auditor-General’s inquiry outlined four recommendations for the Minister and Oranga Tamariki to implement to prevent that disaster that was last year’s contracting rounds. I can tell you right now that zero of those has occurred. Again, it comes back to what our families, what our mokopuna, and what our hapū have to contend with at the end of the day. It’s poor management. I used to be an assessor back in the 1990s—that’s quite a while ago—and at that time, you had to have a section 403 and a section 396, and these were good things that we were able to do to get community providers into the game, whānau for whānau, Māori for Māori. Those things worked. Those things are gone now.

I’m confident in saying that survivors of abuse in care are—I just want to mention this—yet to see, yet again, any of the recommendations from the Whanaketia report—another failing, another instance of ignoring the truth that comes from survivors—and, unfortunately, this is the result that particularly mokopuna and their whānau are having to deal with, and suffer, on a daily basis. So I raise these, in this general debate, with hope and implore the Minister to recognise and take note. Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, it’s an exciting week in the parliamentary calendar as we all wait for tomorrow’s Budget announcement—something that the Opposition should take note of. They might learn a thing or two. I’m proud to be part of this Government that will deliver a pragmatic and sensible fiscal plan for the next year. It’s the only way we can really focus on fixing this country’s economy. We need growth and we need a thriving economy. I want to focus my short call on just one part of what we’re planning on doing, which is the work in social investment and how it links to growth and the economy.

The Minister for Social Investment has announced a $275 million boost into the Social Investment Agency, with $190 million into targeted investment in projects to improve the lives of all Kiwis. Really, what that’s about is how we use our social sector spend to actually make a measurable difference to people’s lives for enduring periods of time. Nationally, in this country, we spend $80 billion a year on the social sector. The community section of that—I guess you would call it—is $6 billion to $8 billion, and the rest is in core Government delivery. The Social Investment Agency is focusing on how we use data and evidence to improve outcomes in health, housing, and education, by understanding how we do a better job of commissioning work and doling out contracts to social sector agencies.

In Tairāwhiti, we spend up to $1.5 billion a year on social sector agencies. And in the Eastern Bay of Plenty they can’t give you a figure, but we are working on it. But in the report from Manaaki Tairāwhiti, which is one of the great organisations in Tairāwhiti that gathers the evidence and data, they say they are currently aware that the Ministry of Social Development in Tairāwhiti alone has approximately 150 contracts with around 25 providers, worth about $50 million on its own, which is just evidence of the fragmented and non-material nature of the current practices. The reality is, we have amazing people working in our community doing a really great job of supporting people through mental health and addiction, through getting driver licences, literacy, social housing, all sorts of ways. But the reality is that our metrics are not improving at the same rate as our ability to contract social sector agencies.

For far too long, the focus has been on measuring outputs instead of outcomes, and anyone can do outputs. Measuring outcomes is somewhat different, but with evidence collected by entities like Manaaki Tairāwhiti and a collective approach by iwi, Government agencies, and the community, we will have a better approach, via social investment, to how we commission contracts for better results. Our investment is the key to unlocking potential in our people and our regions. It’s critical to breaking the intergenerational cycles of poverty, poor access to support and educational opportunities.

And in the regions, we’ve already figured some of this out, we’ve already identified what needs to happen. In Kawerau, there is a leadership group that focuses on what the biggest issues are for Kawerau. They’ve identified education and housing as the places that all of those social sector agencies, the community, the council, and the iwi, will focus on to deliver better for their community. We have Eastbay REAP doing phenomenal work in that same space. They know the return on investment for every dollar they spend. They’ve done an incredible job. And Waiariki Whānau Mentoring, who I’ve talked about previously, are doing an incredible job too in that social sector space around mental health and addiction services.

So how are they linked? Well, let’s just take the example from last week, which we’ve talked about a bit in this House: Toitū Tairāwhiti and the social housing, 150 homes into Gisborne. Iwi are funding $25 million—the collective iwi approach—and the Government is funding $49 million. That’s how you make your dollar go further, because you give them ownership. They have done an amazing job, those iwi, of getting that organised. It’s an example of social investment. That project is not just about housing. It provides community support, whānau approaches to education, and safer, warmer, responsible living for people who need it. It brings jobs, skills, apprenticeships, and money being spent in our community.

That, on top of the great work done by this Government to get interest rates down, inflation down, investor confidence up, means businesses do better. And if businesses, farming, and communities are doing better because inflation is down and interest rates are down and the great rural returns are going way back up, and we have investor and business confidence, that helps all of us to do better. Social investment, economic growth, and a pragmatic Budget all work together to bring a better future for all New Zealanders. I say bring on tomorrow; let’s get New Zealand back on track.

Why won’t this Government deliver for Kiwis? They have the power to create a future where homes are warm and cosy, powered by affordable electricity, where electric trains, electric vehicles, and electric ferries provide mobility, where green manufacturing is enabled in our regions, where we focus on the common good over corporate profit.

But that’s not their agenda and the evidence is really clear on that, because over the last 12 months we’ve seen Winstone Pulp International closing two mills with 230 jobs lost, a huge impact on the Ruapehu region. Oji Fibre Solutions have shut up operations at their paper division at Kinleith Mill: 200 jobs lost there. They’ve also closed their Penrose mill in December, resulting in the loss of 75 jobs. Meanwhile, Glucina Alloys, Aotearoa’s only aluminium recycler, may go out of business because of the energy crisis that is this Government’s responsibility. Let’s call it for what it is: the Government is overseeing the deindustrialisation of Aotearoa.

The solutions, however, are really clear. It is basic stuff: listen to those who know. It is time to electrify everything. The major energy users’ group has urged the Government to be bold and to look for long-term solutions rather than the current chaotic, ad hoc approach. Meanwhile, households are facing real challenges in electricity bills. It’s unsustainable, it creates distress for households while gutting industry, putting more people out of work, sending more people off to Australia for sharper business opportunities.

The Government’s fascination with fossil-fuelled Ford Rangers places us in an incredibly vulnerable situation. Global trade uncertainty, conflict, and risk around trade routes expresses the fragility of a faith in fossil-fuelled growth. At the same time, the fixation on fossils simply fuels more climate changing pollution. Those impacts are hitting our farmers, our cities, our vulnerable communities like South Dunedin and Westport. Meanwhile in the energy sector, we are seeing an even greater concentration of power in just four gentailers who already dominate and control the market.

Where is the common good in that? Flick Energy has just been bought out by Meridian, Prime Energy has been absorbed by the gentailers, and the Commerce Commission has allowed Contact to take over independent generator Manawa Energy. Instead of diversification and innovation, we are seeing a retrenchment in the energy sector.

Economic growth Minister Nicola Willis has announced another $577 million to subsidise Hollywood movie producers and their private jets, but isn’t prepared to adjust the electricity market settings to save manufacturing in the regions. Transpower New Zealand has warned of high risks of electricity outages because solar, wind, and batteries aren’t coming online fast enough to make up for the dwindling gas supplies. We head into winter knowing that this Government won’t lift a finger to give thousands of Kiwis some respite from energy hardship.

We’ve got a broken electricity market. Kiwis are having to choose between heating and eating and this is unavoidable. There’s a common-sense approach to building an energy system that has the common good at heart. We need a Government that is prepared to lead with things like direct investment in new renewable energy generation and storage, to electrify everything. We need to adjust the market settings for a fairer, more transparent market. We need investment in energy efficiency and warmer Kiwi homes. We need incentives to boost the uptake of rooftop solar by homeowners for cleaner, cheaper power—something that the new energy Minister was knocked back on.

We’ve got a broken electricity market that is gutting the regions of manufacturing and hurting households. We can have power through the people, through investing in new generation. We should challenge the status quo when people can’t pay their power bills, when industry fails, and when manufacturing jobs are lost. A better world is possible when we invest for the common good. Kia ora.

The National-led Government has been adamant that it will meet its climate goals. In December last year, the Minister of Climate Change assured this House that the Government was committed to meeting its climate change goals. Just one week ago, in the annual review debate on climate change, the Minister said, in his first contribution, “I want to make it very clear from the outset that as a Government we are committed to meeting our climate change goals.” They are the words of this Minister.

How was that Government going to meet its climate change goals? Well, they’ve placed a huge reliance on—and, again, I’m quoting from the Minister’s own speech—“recognising carbon capture utilisation and storage”. They were going to do it through the emissions trading scheme. In fact, if we look at the Government’s emissions reduction plans, all the way through it, there are references to the sequestration of carbon dioxide from industries. It’s sitting there on page 9 of their latest emissions reduction plan. It’s sitting there, again, on page 16. It’s sitting there on page—let me see it—34; it’s through and through and through the emissions reduction plan. In fact, it talks about carbon capture utilisation and storage, and it says—and it’s, again, sitting in their own plan—that the most likely opportunity for carbon capture utilisation and storage is to establish sequestration facilities in existing gasfields during this emissions budget period and the next one. That’s what they’re relying on.

In fact, we know that in terms of meeting the 2050 Paris goals, around about 30 percent of the weight of that is carried by carbon capture and sequestration. Well, bad news—bad news. Because that all hinged on a project at Kapuni in Taranaki, a project run by Todd Energy. Todd Energy now says it cannot do that at the current carbon price. That is not economic at the current carbon price. So that Government’s plan for meeting its climate goals, despite the Minister’s fine words about meeting their climate goals, has just gone up in—well, “smoke”, I suppose, would be the word for it. They have totally lost out.

Now, that begs one hell of a question. How on earth is that Government going to meet its climate goals? Now, it could have been that, perhaps, given that Todd Energy says this can’t be achieved through the current carbon price, the Government could have used something like, I don’t know, the Climate Emergency Response Fund to fund Todd Energy to do that. That fund’s disappeared—folded up into tax cuts—and now not there to provide other measures to reduce carbon in our atmosphere. It could have been that they perhaps would subsidise Todd Energy. You know, we subsidised carbon reduction at Glenbrook steel mill. That took the equivalent number of cars off the road that run on the road in Christchurch every day. That was the climate effect of that—it was really, really effective. But that Government has taken that option away.

Their magic technology solutions have failed. They are not available to meet the climate goals. That Government needs to engage in some serious thinking about how it is going to meet our 2050 climate goals. You know, they’ve got magical thinking on technology and they’ve got magical thinking around the Paris commitments. In fact, I see a fair amount of magical thinking around climate altogether: refusing to grapple with it and hoping that some solution will just pop out of the air, instead of doing the hard yards to actually address climate change in this country.

I keep on saying it’s magical, because they appear not even to really believe in climate change, given their lack of commitment to action. Well, I’m telling them: they may not believe in climate change, but their insurance company certainly does, and the people who insure New Zealand for natural hazards certainly do. We are now facing some real worries around that too. It is time for that Government to stop its magical thinking and actually grapple with the real challenge of climate change.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Time for something more positive. Today, I’d like to talk about the rural economy. I know it might be hard to believe that a farmer from the Waitaki would want to talk rural, but here I am. What I’ve got to say might actually surprise some on the other side of the House, but the heart of our economy beats the strongest in the paddocks and on the hills and on the waters of rural New Zealand. This is where hard-working primary producers and dedicated workers contribute their blood, sweat, and tears to our economic prosperity. They work hard, they innovate, they face challenges and find solutions to increase profitability and sustainability.

Profit is essential, because without it they will cease to operate, and borrowing is not a long-term solution. Being profitable means reinvesting in your business and technology and people. It also means taxes flow back to the Crown to pay for schools, hospitals, and the public services that we need. With over 80 percent of our export income coming from food and fibre, the primary sector proves it is not merely an industry but the lifeblood of our economy, it is a testament to the resilience and innovation of our farmers, foresters, and fishers, whose efforts ensure that New Zealand remains a powerhouse in global agricultural exports.

National backs farmers. Profitability for the food and fibre sector is bolstered by better market access and fewer trade barriers. We know this, and we are proactively building global relationships and securing agreements to support our economy. Here’s some of what we’ve done since we’ve been elected: we’ve secured a New Zealand - European Union trade deal, adding $1 billion to exports in 12 months. We completed New Zealand’s fastest ever trade agreement, eliminating 98.5 percent of duties to the United Arab Emirates. We concluded the Gulf Cooperation Council trade agreement, delivering duty-free access for 99 percent of our $3 billion worth of exports. We opened negotiations for a trade deal with India, signing a memorandum of cooperation around horticulture which could provide up to $600 million in benefits over a decade. We developed a comprehensive strategic partnership with Vietnam, opening greater access for our horticulture and arable sectors.

All of these agreements and negotiations are more than economic transactions, they’re collaborations that enhance our reputation and our global footprint. This Government also understands that regulation, red tape, and uncertainty can reduce the ability for farmers to farm, which in turn impacts on our economy. We’re reducing duplication by reforming freshwater farm plans, banning full farm to forestry conversions, holding banks to account through the banking inquiry, and we’ve removed agriculture from the emissions trading scheme and are reforming the Resource Management Act.

Now, I’m going to throw some more numbers out there that might help to better understand the sheer scale and contribution primary production makes to our economy. Eighty: over 80 percent of our export income comes from food and fibre; 70,000: that’s the number of businesses directly associated with agriculture; 360,000: this is how many people work across the sector; 1.2: a $1.2 billion increase in red meat exports for 2024-25; 4.5: dairy exports were forecast to grow by $4.5 billion to $25 billion by June 2025; one: 1 billion in export dollars that our apple and pear industry hit for the first time; 4.5: $4.5 billion in global value that our kiwifruit export has reached; 2.2: $2.2 billion, a record for our seafood exports; and six: this is the billions of dollars our forestry exports are close to achieving; and one final number, 1.4: $1.4 billion in trade surplus for April 2025.

The rural economy is not just the backbone of our nation; it is the foundation of our prosperity. As we continue to support and invest in our food and fibre sectors, we build a lasting legacy of innovation, sustainability, and economic stability. Together, we can ensure that the heartbeat of our rural communities continue to keep New Zealand strong and thriving. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. All around the outside of the “Long White Cloud”, we have the most amazing marine space; we have a big, beautiful backyard. We grow amazing oysters, amazing scallops—

Shanan Halbert: Where are they?

JENNY MARCROFT: They are coming back. We have incredible fish, whether it’s wild caught or in our farms. And, right now, it’s the Bluff oyster season. I don’t know whether anyone in this House has had a chance to visit Barnes, whether it’s in Bluff or actually in their supermarket, and test this year’s supply of beautiful Bluff oysters.

However, what you won’t find is Mahurangi oysters at the moment, because Watercare has had spills into the Mahurangi River, which has affected all of the oyster farmers up and down the Mahurangi River. This is really shameful, because this has been going on for quite some time. At Elizabeth Street, in the middle of Warkworth, there is a pipe where the spill happens, and it goes into the river at the top, by the town. The sewage flows down through the river, out into the harbour, where the oyster farmers are. I’m very disappointed, and that’s why I chose to speak today about this particular issue, which has just hit the headlines.

For the last several months, I’ve been working closely with the oyster farmers, alongside my colleague the Hon Chris Penk, who’s the MP for the Kaipara ki Mahurangi region, and also with the Hon Matua Shane Jones, because we acknowledge that our oyster farmers in the Mahurangi are under extreme pressure. They are losing tens of thousands of dollars every week. They have serious mental health concerns because of the ongoing issues. Their businesses are on the brink. They can’t afford to pay their rent. They are laying off staff—and the reputational damage because they aren’t able to harvest their oysters right now, at the beginning of the harvest season, and because others that would normally buy their product don’t want a bar of them.

The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) has obviously had to shut down any harvest at the moment, and this is on the back of these oyster farmers paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to Auckland Council to renew their consents. They have done that willingly, because they love the work they do, they love growing oysters, and they love supplying an incredible product to the market. As I mentioned, I have been engaging with the Hon Chris Penk, and both he and I have met with Watercare to discuss the concerns that we passed on from the oyster farmers. Minister Jones has also written to Watercare. One of the problems, obviously, is the number of spills that have been happening, and with this heavy rain that we’re seeing, MPI, who do the water testing, have said that, while they’ve been sampling for norovirus, it’s not the only pathogen associated with raw sewage. MPI is well aware of the financial pressure this puts on all of the oyster farmers; however, as you know, the consequences of causing an illness outbreak linked to Mahurangi oysters are a lot worse.

Of course, the oyster farmers will comply, but Watercare needs to do a whole lot more. One of the emails sent by Watercare to the oyster farmers after there was another spill—and a longer overflow followed from about 8.30 a.m. to 3.30 p.m., with an estimated discharge of around 307 cubic metres; devastating. What the email said: “We understand this may be uncomfortable and disappointing news for you.” Well, that’s outrageous, to say how uncomfortable it might be for these oyster farmers, who are going broke. On Monday, there is a meeting. Finally, Watercare will meet with the oyster farmers, and I will be attending that meeting as well. Watercare has work to do to rebuild trust in our area, to rebuild trust in our community, and it’s going to be, I’m sure, a robust meeting. But I do hope that they are able to come and offer some consolation to these incredible oyster farmers, who have dedicated so many years in the area. They have their families there that are growing up.

I’d just like to finish very briefly with part of an email from one of the oyster farmers, who said, “We’re getting more desperate each year due to Watercare’s lack of responsibility for fixing the sewage spills. This is affecting all the farmers’ mental health and their families’. We haven’t even had one cent from Watercare, even when we’ve had to bin thousands of dollars of oysters.” Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.