Woodhouse Michael: Supplementary Estimates — Imprest Supply Debate 
Woodhouse Michael: Supplementary Estimates — Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:673;Page:19541] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 As some members know I am the head of a parliamentary liaison friendship group with Arthritis New Zealand. Last week at a breakfast meeting of that organisation there was the release of a document entitled  
New treatments for arthritis: Assessing their values in human terms 
. I sat through some amazing stories that patients had shared about how some of the new drugs that are now available have changed their lives. It was really really appropriate that those drugs which were initially funded under Labour but for which access has been significantly widened under this Government have absolutely transformed their lives. So I was delighted by recent announcements by the Minister of Health that access to those drugs will be widened even further. Not only that; thanks to this Budget and the last two Budgets Pharmac has been able to fund 52 new medicines—52 new medicines—and increase access to another 51 medicines. All of this has been possible because the combined pharmaceutical budget for 2011-12 is now $770 million which is more than 9 percent up on last year. That is really consistent with the approach that this Government has taken to funding Vote Health and to funding what is important to New Zealanders.  
What is important to New Zealanders is not policy analysts not funding and planning managers and not the plethora of back-office staff that grew like mushrooms under the previous Government in the health sector alone; what is important is more medicine more surgery faster radiation treatment shorter stays in the emergency department and better vaccination rates. All of those things are already having a marked impact on the health of New Zealanders.  
But warmer homes are also important. To all the members on the other side who accuse this Government of not doing enough for public health and health promotion I say they should go and talk to the residents of the 180000 houses that have been insulated under the Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart initiative. Several hundred million dollars— 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: We know; we started insulation programmes. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: The member says she started it. Labour talked a good game and I want to compare that with Labour’s promise during the 2008 election campaign with the Greens to invest a billion dollars in home insulation. That billion dollars was invested over 15 years which is less than $40 million per annum in real terms. In just over 2 years this Government has invested over $400 million in real terms. So I am very happy to debate with Miss Chadwick or any other member on the other side about the quality and the quantity of the programme. That party talks; this Government delivers and it delivers exponentially greater numbers of insulated houses. The public of New Zealand know that because that is compassionate conservatism. That is what a responsible Government does in straightened times.  
I shall talk about another area of significantly increased funding because I think this area holds the key to the difference between theleft and the right. It is in respect of our rail infrastructure. It is true that on a point of principle National did not support the buy-back of our rail network and it certainly did not support the previous Government paying a price that was between a quarter of a billion and half a billion dollars more than the fair value of that organisation but we have it and the National Government has committed billions of dollars of taxpayer funds both operational and capital as part of the turn-round plan for KiwiRail. Regardless of whether the taxpayers support that investment they expect every ounce of value to be extracted from the investment which is not something that can historically be said has been done with our rail services.  
Some of that investment was for the electrification of Auckland rail and some of it was for rolling stock. Two weeks ago KiwiRail made some announcements about reductions in staff at the Hillside railway workshops and the Hutt Railway Workshops. Of course that was met with quite a bit of disappointment and anger and the member Ms Curran last week challenged me to say where I was on this issue. I am very happy to do that because she knows where I am on this issue. She and I have been part of a working-group that was set up in Dunedin some 18 months ago to look at the opportunities that might be presented by the amount of money that the Government was investing in rail—in particular in the electrification and the electric multiple units the electric trains that were being tendered for.  
It quickly became apparent that Hillside did not have the necessary skills to build those carriages as a lead tenderer and the focus of that group was to try to negotiate with and present Dunedin in its best light to the potential tenderers which happened not to come from China I have to say. The other big option was for the several thousand flat-deck wagons that are required to increase the rolling stock. Hillside did tender for them and it came third. That was extremely disappointing. We heard from members on the other side that the Government should immediately leap to rail’s aid and do something about it. Those members were not specific about how we should do that whether it would be by a subsidy or by a tariff. Regardless of that it would be a return to the bad old days when price quality and timeliness were not of paramount importance.  
I am not so full of doom and gloom as Ms Curran is about the future for Hillside railway workshops because I think they very much have a part to play in the future manufacturing infrastructure for Dunedin. If Ms Curran continues to walk around with the dark cloud over her head as she has over the last couple of years much less couple of weeks then one would perceive that the Hillside railway workshops do not have a future. I certainly do not believe that and I certainly do not believe that a free-trade agreement that was put in place by the previous Labour Government and signed off by this Government with a country with which we now have bilateral trade of several billion dollars should be put at risk by the sorts of protectionism that some in this House would have the Government wrap around those industries. This is about quality and value for money. I am very encouraged to see that the members on the other side are agreeing with me because plenty of other colleagues in that party do not.  
Phil Twyford 
: Modern procurement policies.  
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: Let us talk about procurement policies because we do have a comparison with the previous Labour Government in so far as the loan that was extended to the Wellington Regional Council for the Matangi tender the electric trains for Wellington. I am really interested in the expectations on that purchaser the Wellington Regional Council when it was lent money by the Labour Government. Do members know what those expectations were? Nothing. Not a single expectation was placed. But there was the then Labour Minister of Transport at the signing ceremony saying what a fantastic thing this was. No one from the unions was complaining. No one from the unions at that time was asking where the jobs for Kiwis were and why the then Government did not pay a bit more to get the jobs. The Hutt Railway Workshops was only a stone’s throw away.  
I find it remarkably inconsistent that Labour members are now lions in Opposition. They are roaring about the benefit of Kiwi jobs and protecting their union mates. I know those union people and I know that the Hutt Railway Workshops deliver a damn good product and would be horrified to think that it would need Government assistance to prop it up in the future. There is a future for the Hillside railway workshops and for the Hutt Railway Workshops and I am very very encouraged by the sorts of noises that are being made except perhaps by the member for Dunedin South. It is job growth is it not? I do not know how many times I have heard members on the other side of the House ask where the jobs are—170000 jobs. I will tell those members— 
Clare Curran 
: Go and tell them what you really think. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: I have just explained what I think which is that this is about value for money.  
Clare Curran 
: Go down to the meeting tomorrow night and tell them face to face. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: Actually members on this side of the House do not keep running to their union mates when things go bad. We have laws to pass and a Government to be part of. I am sorry I will not be there. I would be very happy to do that but I will not leave this House to go and say what I have already said. I am sure Ms Curran will be able to articulate that—as well as she has over the last couple of weeks at least. There are jobs to be had there are opportunities to be taken— 
Clare Curran 
: Where? 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: See there it is. The member asks: “Where?”. Well there has been a little matter of an earthquake and there is about $9 billion to be spent in that city alone over the next 2 years.