Debates — General Debate

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

In the last few days and weeks, we have seen an ugly side to New Zealand politics on display in this House, with outright race-baiting and, in some cases, direct racism being expressed in this House—attacks on our Chinese and Asian communities in New Zealand, attacks on our Indian communities in New Zealand, and, just today, attacks on whether those who have Pasifika heritage are entitled to ask questions in this House. What have we heard from the Government side on those attacks? Absolutely nothing. My challenge to the National Party is absolutely clear in election year: what are they going to do to combat and challenge that racism that we are already seeing in this year’s election campaign? It is totally unacceptable, and it is totally unacceptable for those who are leading our country to say nothing and do nothing whilst Ministers in their own Government are doing that to the people of New Zealand.

New Zealanders deserve better, and they deserve leadership from their Government, and they are seeing nothing. They’re quite happy to stand by while members of their own Government attack our Chinese community, our Indian community, our Pasifika community—migrants to New Zealand who work damn hard and contribute to New Zealand—and it’s an absolute disgrace. Our diversity as a country is one of the things that makes us strong, and our Government should celebrate it, not cast aspersions on it.

That isn’t what I was going to talk about today, because watching the Government patting themselves on the back and celebrating a job well done when it comes to supposedly fixing the basics shows just how out of touch they are with the day-to-day lives of New Zealanders. As Kiwis go to the supermarket, they will have Nicola Willis’ promise to drive down grocery prices ringing in their ears.

Today, we had the Government deny that that was ever their goal. They had the Government say that, actually, lower grocery prices were completely off the table, despite the fact that only a few months ago, this very same Government was saying that its goal was to drive down grocery prices. They have given up on that.

We had the Government today saying that unemployment was nothing to be concerned about, which is a slight improvement on what they were saying last year, when they were saying that people who lost their jobs shouldn’t take it seriously—160,000-odd New Zealanders out of work do take that personally, and this Government is completely out of touch on the fact that unemployment is hurting.

We saw the Reserve Bank deliver its verdict today: inflation staying higher for longer, unemployment staying higher for longer, interest rates going up faster than they were going to as of November, when they delivered their last update. That is all on this Government. If the Government was responsible when those figures were improving, the Government is responsible as those figures are getting worse. This is a Government that wants to claim all the credit when interest rates go down, but when interest rates start going up again, oh, well, that’s just the independent Reserve Bank making those decisions. It is the independent Reserve Bank making those decisions, but if the Government think their actions were what lowered interest rates, then their actions are what is driving interest rates back up again.

I’ll quote directly from Nicola Willis, when she said, “Kiwis are being pummelled every time they shop for food, with hard-working people being forced to empty their bank accounts just to half-fill their trolleys.” That was back in mid-2023. Well, what’s happened? After two and a half years of this Government, it’s gotten more expensive to go to the supermarket after they fixed it. What did they say just under a year and a half ago, October 2024? Nicola Willis, or the Government, declared, “The era of crushing prices is now over.” Well, what’s happened since then? Prices have gone up more—food prices up, electricity prices up, council rates up. What’s one of the things driving up council rates? The fact that this Government have cut funding for council infrastructure projects, so councils are filling the void by hiking up rates even more.

Administered inflation, the component of inflation that the Government directly has the ability to control, is one of the main reasons inflation is now back above 3 percent, and that is directly on this Government. It is the bit of inflation they can do something about. It is the bit that they have an ability to directly control, and it is one of the major things driving inflation above the 3 percent target band.

This is a Government far more interested in blaming everybody else for the country’s problems than accepting responsibility for the fact that they are making things worse.

I’d like to acknowledge up and down the country where community has stood with iwi Māori for Te Tiriti o Waitangi, seen across community, across our peoples, celebrating the centrality of Te Tiriti, like we did at the Whare Rūnanga, like we did at the pōwhiri for our parliamentary colleagues as well as for community, as well as for Ngāi Tahu, who came to Waitangi this year. Māori and community stand up for Te Tiriti.

As we see the need for a dedicated Māori voice in Parliament, I have a member’s bill that brings forth the ability for us to entrench that dedicated Māori voice. It is now time for us as community to stand up and address the constitutional inequality that Māori have suffered for generations. For 159 years, Māori have been here in Whare Pāremata with dedicated Māori seats. These Māori seats provide a space for inclusion, for, also, accountability for Māori to our constituents. That is different to the 33 Māori voices that we have in Whare Pāremata today. These Māori seats correct an opportunity for us as community and iwi Māori to be here at the tēpu of Kāwanatanga.

Dedicated Māori seats are important, and we need to entrench them. Why? Because from a simple majority, this House can abolish that dedicated Māori voice, the dedicated Māori voice that is essential for us to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. I pay tribute to the many voices over the 159 years that we have had dedicated Māori seats in Whare Pāremata. That representation is tuku iho—tuku iho—and it needs to be dedicated today and now into the future. It’s important for us as Aotearoa that, if we are going to have a thriving democracy, dedicated Māori representation is required here today and, also, into the future.

I hark back to the fact that this dedicated Māori voice is just one man, one vote—no different to any other seat that sits here. Māori have a choice to be on the general or the Māori electoral roll—and, in fact, it’s getting harder for us, too. It’s getting harder for us, too, to be able to change rolls, because there are restrictions on the way in which Māori can choose to be on the general roll or Māori electorates. That’s the issue right now: we seek to entrench these Māori seats so that we have the ability to exercise that dedicated Māori voice in te Whare Pāremata. That’s the challenge for us as iwi Māori: while we might have some 33 voices in the Whare that have Māori descent, it is the dedicated, accountable to Māori, constituency voice that is required. So I pay tribute to the way in which we all come with our whakapapa, we all come with our diversity, but, at the end of the day, if we don’t correct this constitutional error that has come over our heads as iwi Māori for 159 years, then where are we as a country?

This is only a small step to democracy. The entrenchment of Māori seats is well overdue, and the ability for us, just as we did in local government, to see the way that communities stood up for Māori seats and Māori constituencies, and Māori wards in local government, is a tribute to the way that communities are standing up for Te Tiriti. Ultimately, a thriving Aotearoa benefits when Māori are at the table. What’s wrong with having a Māori voice at the table in a dedicated way that is accountable to our people? For good or for bad, I am at the table too and I am here in a different capacity—I need the here [tie] back to our people, and that is what dedicated Māori seats offer us. He aha te hē o tērā—he aha te hē o tērā? [Where is the wrong in that—where is the wrong in that?]

If we want to see the way in which our country and our community can thrive, and if we can create a pathway for Māori to be able to be at the table, entrenched—motuhake—why can’t we do that as a country? Why can’t this House all get in behind a member’s bill that has been around for a while, but also provide the voter choice for Māori to be able to change the electoral roll? We know that there have been changes right now in the Electoral Act, last year, that will restrict the way in which Māori as new voters can come on to the roll.

Time is short, and if we want to see a Government that really genuinely upholds Te Tiriti o Waitangi, it’s one where Māori seats are dedicated and entrenched.

This afternoon, I want to highlight an area where the National Party and the National Government, in coalition with New Zealand First and ACT, are fixing the basics and building the future. That, of course, is tourism and hospitality. Figures out last week, on Friday, showed overseas visitor arrivals reached 3.51 million people in the year prior to December 2025—an increase of 196,000 people. That puts us at 90 percent of pre-COVID levels. That is an extraordinary result in the year.

I want to just give you some reasons why we’ve seen that increase. Why is tourism and hospitality so important? It’s our second-largest export. It employs one in 10 New Zealanders. So when we talk about growing tourism and hospitality, it is growing the employment opportunities of New Zealanders. That’s exactly what it’s all about.

An interesting fact from just yesterday, when I was focusing on a workshop with the Wellington Chamber of Commerce: 24 percent of those who work in tourism and hospitality identify as neurodiverse. So it’s also a fantastic opportunity to ensure that a wider range of New Zealanders get employment.

Let’s just look at the last week alone, a week when the New Zealand International Convention Centre finally opened, something that we talked about in this House in 2013, and, Mr Speaker, I know what an important role you played in that. To have it open last week, there is potentially $90 million of economic impact—33,000 additional international visitors coming from that alone.

If you think about the other events we had last week: an amazing event on the water, SailGP in Auckland; here in Wellington we had the Women’s Amateur Golf Championship; we had the Indigenous All Stars NRL match in Hamilton—wasn’t that an amazing show? Of course, I have to say it again, what did we announce this week?

Tom Rutherford: Oh, State of O!

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: State of O—State of Origin, coming to Auckland, coming to New Zealand, moving outside Australia for the first time. I think, actually, more than just quietly, big rounds of applause around the House, because we know, in terms of events like that, it will have a massive impact on the number of visitors coming to New Zealand. It’s only possible because we’ve changed the rules at Eden Park. We would not have got the State of Origin without those changes.

This is a Government that is really fixing the basics and building the future—change by change, investment by investment—by making decisions that we know have an impact. If I think about the announcements last Tuesday in Events Boost, supporting events across our regions from Ōpua, Nelson Tasman, AIMS Games in Tauranga, an extra boost to Wellington on a Plate—you name it. That’s another 15 events that will mean more visitors spreading out into our towns, cities, and regions, which means those job opportunities aren’t just concentrated in our cities but they are going to every corner of New Zealand.

When our Government talks about economic growth, we are taking the steps day to day, week to week, making decisions that we know will have an impact. As I said, those results, we are now at 90 percent of pre-COVID levels of international visitors. When I set the target a year ago to get back to the 2019 levels by the end of 2026, there were quite a few naysayers, but, actually, it just shows that when you have a clear plan, when you have a Tourism Growth Roadmap, and you chip away at it, you work with the industry, you hear the sector, you absolutely roll out the decisions of what they know will work, you back them as an industry, you back them as a sector, and support them with Government investment, it pays off. That’s exactly what we are seeing.

When the Government talks about economic growth, it’s not about economic growth for the Government’s sake. It is because we know that when we have additional visitors, it means that a shop will have more customers, a café will have more customers, there will be more customers going into a visitor experience and staying in a local motel. That means that the employer is able to take on more staff, extend the hours of those that they have working for them, lift their wages, and that is what makes an enormous difference to households up and down New Zealand. That is why we are absolutely doing everything to grow tourism and hospitality. That’s why we have an ambitious target to increase the number of visitors, and it is working. We are building the future, and National is doing it.

The time has come for a decision on the future of the Māori seats. It has been said many times, but it’s a vitally undeniable fact: the Royal Commission on the Electoral System in 1986 stated that with the implementation of MMP, it would create a more representative Parliament and the original justification for separate Māori seats would no longer exist. This point cannot be ignored.

The Māori Party themselves don’t want the Māori seats. They say they don’t want this colonial construct. They want a separate Parliament, separate laws, separate land. They hold the majority of the Māori seats and do not turn up to Parliament, disregard the rules and processes, and show utter disdain for the system that gives them the seats they hold. They represent no one. They have proven the seats they hold are no longer relevant and do not serve their original purpose. We have just had the referendum on local Māori wards. With the current Māori seat holders showing how much of a mess they are in, it has been proven that the time has come for the public to decide if they are effective, relevant, and if they are needed.

The fact is that we currently have a record number of Māori in Parliament and in Cabinet, with 27 percent of the House having a Māori background—far higher than the often-claimed 17 percent of the country’s Māori population. Additionally, the proportion enrolled on the Māori roll itself has steadily decreased in recent years from around 60 percent of Māori voters 20 years ago to now only half of the eligible Māori voters being on the Māori roll. They are voting with their feet already. Between 1854 and 1978, there were only four Māori who held a general seat. Since the introduction of MMP, that number has massively increased to be, today, an overrepresentation. Between 1854 and 1978, there were only four Māori who held a general seat, but since the introduction of MMP, that number has massively increased, today, to be an overrepresentation. The arguments for a separate franchise based on race have become irrelevant. We have legislation ready to go right now. We don’t have to wait until the next general election if we have the support of other parties in Parliament and we get this referendum completed at no extra cost and no waste of time and if we hold it in conjunction with the general election in November.

It’s a simple referendum question—should there be separate Māori seats in the New Zealand Parliament?—with a simple yes or no answer. New Zealand First believes the decision should be put to a binding referendum where the people decide, not temporarily empowered politicians, because we believe in our democracy, and this issue needs to gain a true mandate from the New Zealand people so we can move forward together, united as one—one law, one flag, one vote, one people, all equal. The House of Representatives has the chance to involve the New Zealand people in deciding the future direction of our country together. New Zealand voters are ready to have a voice and a choice.

Now, you’ve just heard from the Greens. It’s fascinating how these people come here. They claim to be educated, claim to be steeped in Māori understanding, but don’t even know that over 100 years ago, Sir Apirana Ngata ruled out what she just said. He said, over 100 years ago—of course, he got a law degree in two years flat; he holds the record for getting a law degree of anybody in this country, and he made the simple logical point—

Hūhana Lyndon: Huri te ao—huri te ao. [The world has turned—the world has changed.]

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Here, she’s shouting now, right? I know her type. She took a very profitable group called Ngātiwai, a committee that we set up all those years ago, where the total cost used to be $22,000 a year, and it’s now broke. That’s her record. I’ve seen that type before—for Māori, by Māori; no, for Māori, for just some Māori—and we’re not having that. Ngata pointed out years ago—and here’s a chance for her to learn again, but, no, here she is. I’m one of the four that made this Parliament in all those years from 1854 to 1978. Only four of us made it, and it wasn’t easy. Of course, she came here. Guess where she came here from! She didn’t come here on a Māori seat, but, now, she wants to entrench it, even though Ngata said—and he said it so logically—“So you entrench it. It takes a simple majority to remove the entrenchment clause, and, now, you’re back to a simple majority to get rid of it.”—said logical, plain—

Hon Shane Jones: Buck.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Buck, Pōmare, all of those who honour it, and here comes this new breed. They know nothing about the Māori world, know nothing about the conditions that we had to sacrifice for, know nothing of the strife that some of us had over all those decades, know nothing of putting money and time into great causes at great loss to yourself personally, and that’s why they talk that way. They are not from the Māori people. They are not for the people of this country; they are for separatism and division, and they scream racism—they scream racism. It is their policy. Oh, and just to make sure that’s not quite enough, they’re communists, as well. Thank you very much.

We’ve had a number of motivating and inspiring speeches today, but I’m here to talk about the economy and to focus on values and fundamentals—values like sustainable developments, equal opportunity, reward for achievements in limited government; fundamentals like fixing infrastructure; sorting out productivity of land and sea; jobs in the regions, Matua; certainty for businesses; and responsible management of our natural assets. That’s exactly what we’re doing as this Government.

Across my portfolios—conservation and Māori development—we’re making practical investments that unlock economic growth while protecting what makes this country unique. We are not going to rely on the Treaty of Waitangi as a Trojan horse for red tape and green tape. We will not do that. It starts with a simple truth: the environment and the economy go together, but we will manage our conservation estate well, because it’s 30 percent of the country. It’s 30 percent of the country, and we are really focused on acknowledging and implementing conservation—and the land and the seas that go with it—as a cornerstone of economic infrastructure.

What have we done? We’ve approved concessions that actually unlock jobs and that actually drive the tourism that brings people to the country to watch games like the State of Origin and to go on guided walks, to go and spend money in far-away places—even on State Highway 35, for the member from the Waiariki. We are making decisions that will enable businesses to operate, to employ people, to create jobs in the regions, and to invest in infrastructure—places like Milford Sound with the Milford Track and Milford Sound Tourism Ltd, the Remarkables, the Te Ānau glow-worm caves, and it was great to hear about Ngāi Tahu partnering up with those owners of Milford Sound Tourism to go and fix up that place, a beautiful place, Piopiotahi.

Economic growth that is predictable needs that certainty. It needs concession decision-making that has certainty and clarity, and at pace—no more waiting for seven or eight or 10 years for a decision to be made. These decisions sit alongside the wider work to modernise our conservation system and reduce red and green tape. Mining—yes. Tourism—yes. We are a coalition Government of yes, not no or, even worse, a long maybe.

Let me turn to Māori development, because if we want a productive economy, we must work harder and more effectively to unlock the potential of our communities and the potential of our land and waters. Māori land and Māori Enterprise: I was just there today, at lunchtime, announcing the finalists, some of whom are from Ngāti Hine: the Ngāti Hine Forestry Trust, Otama Marere Trust up in Bay of Plenty, and, of course, the Mātai Pacific Iwi Collective, one of the largest kiwifruit orchards in the country—the three finalists of the Ahuwhenua Awards. Know this: over the last 10 years, the amount of horticulture on Māori land has gone up by 50 percent—horticulture, aquaculture, viticulture, apiculture; all cultures are going in the right direction to boost this economy, and Minister Jones and others have been an instrumental part of this.

Whether or not it’s the $200 million in the stopbank or the work that Minister McClay is doing in order to unlock free-trade agreement arrangements to enable kiwifruit from Māori orchards, to enable seafood from all over the waters around our country, to enable places like the Bluff oceanside freezing works, which produces pāua, seaweed, and a whole range of other goods, including a bit of south gin, to be exported. That’s what we are talking about.

Last week, or two weeks ago, we made an announcement around the Rangihamama and Oromahoe Trusts to give them some pūtea to lay down some kiwifruit orchards on Māori land that is underutilised in Northland. That’s exactly the space that we want to be in. They will link up to the Matawii and Otawere dams that were put in by the Matua several years ago. Ngāti Hāua in Waikato, their berry farms, their asparagus, strawberries, blueberries, and commercial production of horticulture—we’re supporting them with a repayable grant. Rukumoana Schaafhausen, Lance Rapana, and Muna Wharawhara—all those people doing hard work in the middle of Waikato to get their land back on track.

That’s what we’re about—supporting and partnering with Māori Enterprise to do good things. Eastland Generation in Kawerau: what they’re doing on the Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau land is absolutely fantastic. It’s all part of the geothermal aspirations that we as a Government have.

Housing supply: I will not go any further than a place like Ōwhata, where Ngāti Whakaue are building houses 50/10 to the dozen. But the Government cannot and will not do everything for everybody. We will partner with those that are credible to support initiatives on conservation land and waters and Māori land, to do good things for their community, to build the economy, to fix the basics, to enable jobs, and, importantly, to bring our country into the future.Tēnā tātou katoa.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to speak in the general debate. It’s been a really interesting general debate because, for once, in the last two years, you finally have Government Ministers talking about stuff that they’re doing. Now, they must have had a caucus memo or something saying, “Dear National Party caucus, please talk about yourself. Yours sincerely, Research Unit.”, because it’s quite clear that this has been a change in tactic.

Obviously, New Zealand is not believing that things are better under the National Party Government. Clearly, New Zealanders weren’t believing it, and every time the National Government Ministers come into the House, all you hear is a lot of deflection and gaslighting and blaming everybody else, including Donald Trump, including the merchants of misery, including bottom feeders and every other single person that is available in this community to blame except for themselves. It’s quite interesting to see this political-strategy change by the National Party to be like, “Oh, we gotta talk about some good things, because people clearly are not believing us.”

Also, what we saw in question time today was the Minister of Finance—who was struggling to defend some of her policy choices—talk about counterfactuals. The interesting thing about her counterfactuals—and it’s all backed up by the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update. I went and found this on my shelf just for today’s general debate, to show some different counterfactuals. Here’s one, in particular: for the jobseeker benefit between June 2024 and 2026, there is now forecast to be 50,000 more people on the jobseeker benefit than when they took office, as set out in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update. How’s that target going?

Net debt: before the election, it was forecast to be $102 billion in the 2026-27 financial year. Well, in December 2025, when they opened their books, that’s now forecast to be $128 billion. Again, just to make sure, because I know numbers can be confusing for that side of the House, that’s more—that’s definitely more—and that’s a rise of 18 percent in just two years.

Another counterfactual: the surplus. When the Minister of Finance realised she couldn’t make the surplus within the forecast period under the operating balance before gains and losses (OBEGAL), she changed the goalposts and brought in the operating balance before gains and losses, excluding ACC revenue and expenses (OBEGALx). Let’s go back to OBEGAL, because, before the election, the forecast was set to have our Government books in surplus by the 2026-27 year, but ever since that Government took office, every single year, it has been pushed out—pushed out so much that, under the old measure of OBEGAL, it doesn’t even feature in the forecast period. I acknowledge Treasury for still keeping that figure in, because no matter how much the Government wants to change the goalposts or their targets, and no matter how much they want to change it, the facts don’t lie. That’s the counterfactual that the Minister of Finance failed to address today.

The other counterfactual was GDP growth. Before the election, in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update, it was meant to be 3.7 percent by this year. However, it is now only meant to peak at 3 percent. Again, for a Government that is, basically, targeting on economic growth, they have failed. They have failed based on the counterfactuals as set out in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update.

Some members may ask, “Well, what does this actually mean to the economy? What does this actually mean for the everyday person?” What it means is that things have actually gotten worse: there are record KiwiSaver hardship withdrawals, almost double in two years—people are dipping into their retirement savings because they cannot afford their everyday costs; business liquidations are up at a 15-year high—a 15-year high; 165,000 people are out of work and want a job—165,000 people. There are 32,000 fewer jobs since National took office. Despite the mumbling or whatever it was that the Minister of Finance was trying to answer today, the unemployment rate—and this is a tragedy for young people—has shot up since 2023. It’s up 28 percent for people aged 15 to 19; it’s up 57 percent for those aged 20 to 24; it’s up 54 percent for 25- to 29-year-olds. It is no wonder why we are having record numbers leave New Zealand to go to Australia, because there are jobs there that are better paid.

This Government, despite all their gaslighting, can blame everybody else, but they have no one else to blame for their choices for making it worse, not better.

I take a phrase from a song by Luther Vandross: “A chair is still a chair, even if there’s no one sitting there”. And so, we’ve got somebody who drops bombs and then takes off. I just want to say about the Māori seats: back in 1867, when they established the Māori seats, those Māori seats were put in place, and the purpose was to break down the Māori organisations who opposed the sale of Māori land. That was the original intent of the Māori seats. It wasn’t out of the goodness of Pākehā hearts—who were running Government since the 1852—to give Māori representation in this House. Absolutely not. It was there to suit their agenda—it was there to suit their agenda.

Since then—let’s just fast-forward to today—the Māori seats are in one of the most powerful positions they have ever been—they have ever been—and that frightens people like Winston Peters and New Zealand First. It frightens them because, since 1996, they have had the monopoly over deciding who is going to be the Prime Minister come every election, besides some of the others where they lost—well, they lost eight MPs back in 1998. In 1996, they won all the Māori seats. The next election after that, they lost all their Māori seats, plus all their Māori members, plus some. What we’ve got is a party who is absolutely threatened by the power of the Māori seats.

The Māori seats will be determining who the next Prime Minister is come 7 November. Every poll, every bit of statistic that is coming out at this particular time, is telling you—sorry, not you, Mr Speaker, but telling New Zealanders and Aotearoa—that the Māori seats are in the most powerful position they have ever been in. Why? Since 2023, there have been 14,000 more people enrol on the Māori roll than on the general. There are more Māori on the Māori roll than on the general roll. Somebody’s been telling fibs—somebody’s been telling fibs to the media; somebody’s been telling fibs about the statistics. These are the real statistics: there are over 303,000 Māori on the Māori roll. Māori on the Māori roll outpopulate Māori on the general roll. This is the problem that this House is having at this particular time. They’re in a quandary—they’re in a quandary. Why? It’s because Māori have matured so fast. Māori have matured so fast in the last five years, to give the power that they have and to realise the power that we have in regards to determining who the next Prime Minister is, come 7 November. That’s just a reality—that’s just a reality.

I can tell you what: there has only been one party—one party in this House—that has driven more people over to the Māori roll than any other party in this House. There’s no other party that has actively campaigned to put Māori on the Māori roll. In the last five years, we have matured in that particular space—we have matured in that particular space. We have matured in this country’s democracy, and that frightens people—that frightens people. It frightens New Zealand First because, for the first time—for the first time—they will not be sitting in that position, deciding who is going to be at the front.

That race-baiting that we saw earlier on today in the House is disgusting. If that Government can sit there and allow people in their Government to run that type of narrative, and it runs it just about every day in question time—you ought to be ashamed of yourselves; you ought to be ashamed of yourselves. My thing is also, to the Opposition parties: we’ve got to rule out that type of partnership—we’ve got to rule out that type of partnership. People have to now start standing up for people—standing up for people.

Jenny Marcroft: One-seat wonder.

RAWIRI WAITITI: One-seat wonder, she reckons. I got 17,000 votes—17,000 people put me here. I wonder how many put you here. Nobody knows who you are or who you represent. You don’t have one. We should be running a referendum, maybe, on list seats—I don’t know—or maybe on age. I don’t know. We can have a list of things we can run a referendum on, but one of those referendums should not be about removing Māori seats from this Parliament. The only reason why you want to remove Māori seats is because they’ve become more powerful than they ever have been—more powerful than they ever have been. That’s what scares this House—that’s what scares this House. We are here with a 100 percent Māori votes mandate—100 percent. I can tell you that right now: 100 percent of the people that voted for me have whakapapa Māori. Absolutely. That is a fact. We have the mandate to represent those communities.

So my thing to this House is: National, rule it out; Labour, rule it out. Let’s get this rubbish out of this House and ensure that the rights of te iwi Māori, under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, are entrenched. Kia ora tātou.

It’s a real privilege to speak in this general debate. There’s been a lot of yelling this afternoon, gosh, and I guess it gives me cause to just reflect. I’ve been here—I’m a relatively new politician—only a little over two years and can only but see the cracks falling through the Opposition. We had Chris Hipkins, today, yelling in his general debate and his question time, asking about deflation and throwing tones of racism on us.

Rawiri Waititi: It’s called passion. Try it.

RYAN HAMILTON: I like Rawiri, but he’s going, so I won’t be able to talk about him. We heard the Prime Minister’s maiden statement. We were reflecting on that last week; I got to speak to that. I enjoyed hearing Kieran McNulty.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: McAnulty.

RYAN HAMILTON: McAnulty. Thank you for that, sir. I enjoyed your leadership pitch. Obviously, Chris Hipkins is struggling, and you’re making a leadership pitch.

I actually really like Peeni Henare, too—he’s got a lot of mana. I’ve enjoyed playing parliamentary rugby with him, and I’m disappointed to see him go, but, obviously, he’s seen the light. People are leaving and cleaving.

Rawiri Waititi: I quite like the man; I would have a drink with him, but, unfortunately, his party is dissolving before his eyes, too. I can’t even remember how many people are left in Te Pāti Māori now. Is it four or six? Is it six, Tom? Is it four? There’s a few that aren’t quite sure. I guess my point is that New Zealand’s tired of the fractionated politicking, and if they want a Government that provides stability, then they will look to a National-led Government with our coalition partners.

A little bit of a history lesson here that I saw my friend Dan Bidois put on his socials: 1972, Labour inherits a surplus from National; 1975, Labour bequeaths a deficit to National; 1984, Labour inherits a deficit from National; 1980, Labour bequeaths a deficit to National; 1999, Labour inherits a surplus from National; 2008, Labour bequeaths a deficit to National. We go to 2023: Labour bequeaths a deficit to National. Once again, we’re coming in, we’re cleaning it up.

I look across to the Opposition, and they sit there completely unrepentant and they point the finger, but they don’t realise that only a little over two years ago, they were the ones interfering with Kāinga Ora, rising debt, allowing unruly tenants, polytechs crumbling, no localism, hospitals—let’s undertake a reform in the middle of a pandemic, infrastructure falling apart, no law and order, ram raids high, education—kids not even at level. It was a complete mess. I remind the thousands of viewers that have tuned in right now that this National-led Government, with our coalition partners, has had a heck of a job cobbling together that mess and putting it together and building the future. Barbara Edmonds said we always talk about them; we’ve got plenty to talk about, but it’s about context. It’s about just reminding people how far we’ve come in such a short space of time.

I’m really privileged to sit on the Environment Committee, and we’ve got the Resource Management Act reforms coming through over the next few months. Submissions have just closed, and there’s going to be, I think, over 1,000 submissions from some very serious stakeholders in the community—councils, NGOs. We look forward to digesting those and making sure we come up with some really robust criteria, because this is a once-in-a-generation change. In fact, it was implemented in 1992, so it’s nearly two generations, depending on how quickly people breed. The thing is, it’s going to be huge. It’s going to be exciting. We’re saying yes to productivity in this country. We’re saying yes to enablement. As Tama Potaka said, we’re getting rid of the red tape and the green tape. We just want to get stuff done. It’s just got too hard in this country.

Very quickly, I look forward to the opening of the garden arts festival in Hamilton Gardens this Friday—49 acts, 800 artists; Balloons Over Waikato kicking off; Homegrown, which is going to attract 30,000 people. It’s all happening in New Zealand’s fastest-growing city.

Can I just close by providing a message to all New Zealanders—in fact, to all New Zealanders, to all Māori, to all Indian, to all Filipino: if you want a stable Government that backs you, that will support you, then vote for this National-led coalition Government, because we’re all about fixing the basics and building a future that’s going to be bright, that’s going to enable prosperity, where safety is paramount, education is esteemed, and Kiwis are adored.

Kia orana, Mr Speaker. Well, that was a dud. I mean, that speech was an absolute dud. The one opportunity that members of the Government get as a backbencher to contribute in the general debate, and they spend most of the time talking about us and not talking about the real issues.

There is a cost of living crisis happening in our country. You wouldn’t think that the members opposite are even aware of that, because they have not even referred to that. For many whānau all around the country, cost of living is not theoretical. Cost of living for them is when they get the bills and they see that they can’t make things add up; when they get the power bill and they know that it’s on the rise, on the rise, on the rise—and with a gas tax under this Government, that will continue; when they look at the rent and the mortgage payments and realise that it is simply unbearable for them; when they see that the grocery bills are stocking up, and it’s not a $60-a-week shop for households around this country; and when they, perhaps if they have a petrol vehicle, look and see that what’s left in the tank after payday—is that going to last them to the next pay check or not? There are families in our community that are living day to day, week to week, and this is a Government that is making it extremely difficult for them to make ends meet.

Transport is a direct cost of living issue: fuel, maintenance, insurance, parking—all of those things that drivers and owners need to turn their mind to. The simple question in the transport space is: are we as a country investing in transport in a way that lowers the pressures that are on households, or is it actually the Government that is adding to the pressures in households in terms of what’s important?

We’ve heard recently about changes afoot in the money stream when it comes to the “Roads of National Party Significance”. This was a Government that went to the last election and talked about the fact that this was something that was to be pitched as nation building—but when the focus is on building at any cost, New Zealanders are the ones, Kiwis are the ones, that get stuck with the bill at the end of the day.

Just last week in this House, we were talking about the fact that the cost or the shortfall is now at around $56 billion for the “Roads of National Party Significance”—$56 billion. Last year, Chris Bishop gave a speech and snuck in there that it was a $30 million cost overrun, where this money was going to go—now ballooned out to $56 billion. The Government need to be very clear in that space around how, at the moment, that $56 billion, which they are prioritising—they are prioritising the spend on roads. Roads are important, but they are prioritising the spend on roads to the tune of $56 billion, despite what the Infrastructure Commission has said as recently as yesterday. Is the Government going to increase transport taxes to meet that particular shortfall? Are they going to add debt, looking around $40 billion, to meet that particular shortfall? At the end of the day, it is households who are going to carry the can, carry that particular cost. This is a Government that, when it looks at its priorities, have placed all its priorities in the wrong place.

In transport, what was really interesting yesterday was that the infrastructure plan for the country, a 30-year blueprint, identified that transport was a key player in that particular space. In question time today, we heard, via my colleague the Hon Kieran McAnulty, about whether or not the Government is prepared to put those mega-transport projects through a process of independence to see whether or not they stack up. The suite of roads of national significance that are on the books at the moment, many of them only scrape through because the benefit-cost ratio has been changed in terms of how they are to be assessed by a different discount rate, but, also, the length of time is quite different, as well. What’s really important is hearing from the Government about how keen they are around actually wanting to do something a little bit different.

It’s very clear that simply burying one’s head in the sand and saying “We’re going to continue to deliver this suite of projects and programmes.”, where the Infrastructure Commission has clearly said that they don’t stack up—you need to go back to the drawing board. This is about priorities. This is about where this Government is choosing to place its priorities for households all around the country.

For households who are doing it tough right now, what we need is we need to have hope. We need to have hope in a Government that actually is going to get the basics right in the sense of knowing what the need is, and cost of living pressures are right up there right now. If you talk to anyone in the community, they know that them and their neighbours are doing it tough, but the reality right now is that under this National Government, they don’t care. They have the priorities in all the wrong places, and that’s simply not good enough.

I rise today with a heavy heart for my home of the Bay of Plenty. On 22 January, severe weather triggered catastrophic landslides in Mount Maunganui on Mauao, Welcome Bay, Pāpāmoa, and surrounding communities. Eight lives were tragically lost: Jacqui, Sue, Lisa, Max, Sharon Måns, Austen, and Yao Fang—lives that mattered, taken far too soon. To those grieving, to those displaced, and to those who still feel anxious every time the rain sets in, we stand with you. The shock of that day will not disappear quickly. Recovery will take time, but you are not facing it alone.

I want to acknowledge the extraordinary efforts of our first responders—Fire and Emergency, Police, St John, and Civil Defence—who worked in dangerous conditions to search, recover, and support families. I also acknowledge local iwi, marae, businesses, neighbours, and volunteers who opened homes, provided food, and simply showed up for one another. In the worst of times, the very best of the Bay of Plenty was on display.

People are asking hard but fair questions: how did this happen, what warnings were in place, and could more have been done? Those questions deserve proper answers. The Government is establishing an independent inquiry to examine exactly that. It will engage directly with families, operate transparently, and take the time needed to get this right. We owe our community clarity, accountability, and practical steps to reduce the risk of this happening again.

In the middle of all of this, I married my best friend, Hannah. It was a week of deep sadness and personal joy, side by side. It reminded me that in public life, as in private life, what matters most is the people beside you, and for me that person is Hannah. People say that marriage is about finding someone you can live with. Well, I didn’t do that; I’ve found someone I don’t want to live without.

Even in difficult times, Parliament does not pause, and nor should it, because communities rebuilding after a disaster need more than sympathy; they need a Government focused on doing the basics well.

Next week, the Labour Party will deliver its state of the nation address. That is part of democracy, but New Zealanders—especially those trying to rebuild homes, businesses, and lives—will judge all of us on results, not rhetoric. When Labour left office two years ago, inflation had reached 7.3 percent; mortgage costs were biting hard; crime was trending up; educational achievement was declining; and, over six years, Government debt had increased by $120 billion, leaving annual interest costs of over $9.5 billion a year—money that now cannot be spent on hospitals, schools, or roads.

By contrast, the National Party got stuck in to fix the basics. We slashed wasteful spending, to bring inflation down and ease pressure on interest rates. We delivered tax relief, for the first time in 14 years, and introduced FamilyBoost to help parents with the cost of childcare. We restored law and order by banning gang patches, strengthening sentencing, and driving down ram raids. There are now 38,000 fewer victims of violent crime in New Zealand. We put classrooms back to basics, with one hour a day of reading, writing, and maths, and took cellphones out of classrooms to get rid of distractions. We removed burdensome regulations for farmers, we cut red tape to make it easier to build, and we fast tracked major infrastructure projects that will create jobs and unlock growth, and we are not stopping there. We’re going to grow the economy through new trade opportunities, strengthening KiwiSaver, investing in roads, schools, and hospitals, and making it easier to build homes in New Zealand.

The people of the Bay of Plenty understand resilience, they understand responsibility, and they understand that recovery requires action. This is what our Government is delivering by fixing the basics and building the future.

Labour offers more tax, more spending, and more excuses. We offer discipline, growth, safer communities, better schools, and a stronger economy. We keep choosing practical solutions over ideology, we will keep choosing responsibility over recklessness, and we will keep choosing what is best for New Zealand.

Submissions on the Arms Bill have now closed, and I would like to take this opportunity to give a huge thankyou to everybody that was a part of the process and gave their Arms Bill submissions to the Justice Committee. I did ask the Justice Committee to extend that process by an extra few weeks, recognising that it was actually meant to close in the middle of January, right at the time when the outdoors people are enjoying the outdoors and enjoying their summer break. We had the extension through to mid-February. That will have allowed more people to submit and have their say, and I’d like to thank them for taking that opportunity.

I also acknowledge the fact that we have a six-month select committee process for the Arms Bill, and that is something that has not been afforded the firearm community for a very long time, including the three-day submission period that they had back in 2019. We had early public consultation that shaped what this bill was going to look like to ensure that the people who use firearms within our community—the law-abiding people—actually have a say on the law that is going to define how they operate.

It’s important that licensed firearm owners are heard, and I have seen on social media many comments from people saying, “Why should I bother? I’ve never been listened to before, so why should they listen to me now?”, and it’s really important that everybody feels that they can contribute to democracy and they can feel that they will be heard. I will say to them that the submissions that they have put in over the last few weeks will be heard and will be read, and I implore the select committee to actually go through those submissions and pick out some of the niche issues that the licensed firearm owners have raised, because by the committee doing their job and fixing those niche issues and listening to the community on how to make it work better, it means that we will have, once again, the best firearm laws in New Zealand, just like we previously have had.

The thing is, though, when we look at the current Act, it’s over 40 years old. It’s had so many bits and pieces added to it and taken away from it, it’s become very hard to understand, and I have had numerous people, numerous professionals, say to me that they have struggled with it. It’s been confusing for licensed firearm owners, it’s been inefficient for the New Zealand Police, and it’s been totally ineffective at stopping criminals. Public safety and respect for licensed firearm owners are not in conflict; they actually go hand in hand with each other.

One issue that I know some members are concerned about is the proposal to create a new firearms regulator that is independent of Police. Licensed firearm owners understand why this separation matters, but for others, it comes down to something quite simple: we need to allow the New Zealand Police to focus on crime, on gangs, on criminals, and on the misuse of firearms, and the regulator will need to focus on clear guidance and consistent administration. This is what both these agencies will be good at, and so, by separating them, we can ensure that we have the robust system, but passing the Act is only part of the job. We are also working on regulations which will define how it’s going to be implemented. It’s an opportunity to build a modern, professional regulator from the ground up.

I’ve spoken about the committee, and I look forward to when they hear oral submissions and having them engage with the real-world examples that will be brought up for them. Submitters from the firearm community want laws that keep the public safe too, and their contribution will be extensive.

When it comes to sports shooting and exemptions, it’s easy to get worked up about semi-automatics, or even about registry issues, but ACT believes that a sports shooting exemption can be done safely. Competitive shooting is one of the safest sports in New Zealand. It operates under strict range and safety conditions, and I implore, again, the committee members to listen to those making submissions with open minds: be prepared to be persuaded by evidence.

This bill is about balance, it’s about safety, it’s about fairness, and it’s about practicality. It’s not scapegoating licensed firearm owners any more. It’s about ACT fixing what matters for those who work, enjoy having sport, and want to put food on the table for their families, and I encourage the committee to thoughtfully engage in that respect. ACT will continue to keep pushing for improvements through this process and beyond. We can do it, and we can do it together. Thank you.

As Ramadan begins, let us remember the 51 New Zealanders who were killed in a mosque. Ramadan will end around about the time of the anniversary of that killing, and I trust that each of us really understands the need to remember them, to respect and honour their memory, and to respect and honour what we must do to keep all of us safe.

As I stand and speak today, I also speak in the shadow of the storms that have crossed this country in recent weeks and years, and, very sadly, remember the people who have lost their lives in storms. I think that, since about 2023, since the Auckland Anniversary Weekend floods and the Cyclone Gabrielle floods, and now with the recent storm and the terrible landslide in Mount Maunganui, there seem to be around about 30 New Zealanders who have lost their lives in storms.

I want to pay particular respect to Tom Rutherford, who has been dealing with that in his own community, in the middle of having his own wedding planned, as well. It must have been a joyful day, Mr Rutherford, but also a very hard day as you were dealing with the strains in your community. It’s not just the lives that are gone; it’s the families who are devastated, the homes that have gone, the livelihoods that have gone.

This is no longer just storms; this is climate change. It’s not just weather; it is climate change. It is climate change that is exacting a toll on our country, that is driving costs in our country that will have long-term costs for all of us. Professor James Renwick at Victoria University of Wellington—a specialist—has said that, actually, there are no more storms than there were when we were kids, but they are much more intense and there’s much more water in them. That’s because of the warming climate, so the storms we face will have much more severe consequences.

Here, he says, “In a Cyclone Gabrielle kind of a storm, in another 30 or 40 years, you could have rainfall amounts that are 50 percent higher than we saw with that storm, and mega-flooding anywhere a storm hits—terrible slips and deaths.” It’s coming for us. The costs of climate change are real and they are not in the future; they are here now in our own communities. It is us now who are having to deal with it, and it actually has cost the New Zealand Government an extraordinary amount.

Now, there’s an analysis from Sapere, the economic consultancy, and it says, really, that we’re pretty good at dealing with disasters. We get in there, we put the recovery funds in; we help our community, we help our citizens. In fact, we’ve spent something like about $33 billion of Government money on recovery in the last 15 years, but what we are not good at, the report goes on to say, is planning our resilience for the future. That is what this Government must do, otherwise it will cost us even more.

Now, their own Ministry for the Environment has said, in their long-term insights briefing on resilience to hazards, that hard choices are unavoidable. We must stop hiding our head in the sand and pretending that climate change will not cost us. We actually need to do two things: we need to participate in the worldwide effort to get emissions down, but we also need to build resilience at home.

But what did that Government do? There was a $6 billion fund for resilience that was sitting there, put aside by the previous Government, used to recover from Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland Anniversary winds, but, also, there was $3 billion for resilience. What did that Government do? It folded it into tax cuts for landlords and tobacco companies.

That Government is not being serious about climate change. That Government is taking some short-term wins and it is imposing long-term costs on all of us. The cost of living is hard at the moment. It will get worse if we do not deal with the effects of climate change. It is time for them to stop hiding and to get serious and get real. Let’s make the hard choices.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.