Heatley Phil: Address in Reply 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Heatley Phil: Address in Reply 
[Sitting date: 14 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:345. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 I appreciate the opportunity to once again lay out for New Zealand and for interested colleagues the National-led Government’s plan for a brighter New Zealand and what we are laying out for the next 3 years. Our four main priorities of course are first responsibly managing the Government’s finances. We have no particular interest in borrowing more and more and more from overseas such as other parties are peddling to the New Zealand public at the moment in order to fulfil their election promises.  
Secondly we want to build a more competitive and productive economy. Part of that of course is investment in very important infrastructure whether it is electricity transmission and generation infrastructure whether it is roading or rail or whether it is broadband or other forms of telecommunications which is important for New Zealanders particularly in the provinces to communicate with the rest of the country and the world. All those areas of infrastructure investment are important to us.  
Thirdly we want to deliver a better more effective and more responsive Public Service so that New Zealanders can more readily engage with Government and Government departments and agencies right throughout the country. Lastly of course is that all-important rebuilding of Christchurch. Those are our goals over the next 3 years ones that we will be measured on and fortunately ones we have already made considerable progress on.  
In terms of building a more competitive and productive economy I have already outlined that the importance of infrastructure is so very very high. It does not matter whether we communicate by rail and road physically travelling to places; through transport links delivering goods and services from one place to another; or in the virtual travelling through broadband or telecommunications. The point is that New Zealand being a long narrow nation needs to ensure that our communications and transport links are world class.  
I was stunned for instance when we had a region that historically has been isolated from the rest of New Zealand—I am talking about Northland. I am sure Southland Mr Deputy Speaker where you are from has never experienced this but Northland in the far reaches of the north of New Zealand has historically—100 years ago—been isolated from the capital and other parts of the country. I was stunned to see the Leader of the Opposition beating the drum for no more investment on that State highway network north of Auckland. He was beating the drum saying that State Highway 1 from Auckland to Whangarei should not be upgraded. In fact in a condescending manner he called it the “Holiday Highway” and said that the Labour Party would rather pull the $1 billion committed to that and spend it on everywhere else but Northland. It is very disappointing for Northlanders—very disappointing for Northlanders.  
For colleagues this will come as some surprise because my colleagues on this side of the House do not actually realise that the Labour Party leader at the moment ran for the seat of Whangarei. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: No. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: No you did not know that did you? 
Hon Amy Adams 
: No. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Many colleagues did not know. He ran for the seat of Whangarei in 2002 as a proud Aucklander. The Labour Party usually sends Aucklanders to Whangarei to stand. He came to Whangarei and actually said back in 2002 that he would stand up for Whangarei would stand up for Northland and wanted more attention to be given to Whangarei and Northland. That is what the Labour Party leader said in 2002. In this general election we found that he wanted to cut ties with Northland and did not want to invest more in that highway State Highway 1 to Whangarei. Whangarei residents were aghast at the change of fortunes—the turn I guess that the Leader of the Opposition has made in that time.  
So Labour Party members might want to continue to call State Highway 1 north of Auckland to Whangarei and Northland the “Holiday Highway” and mock it but actually we will accept that. We are delighted that Aucklanders want to come north. We are pleased actually that it is a tourist destination. If Aucklanders want to travel north pull out their credit cards and spend money in Northland’s capital Whangarei then we are absolutely delighted about that but we want to see that sort of investment in the north. We have seen decisions made on the Waterview Connection and of course on the Kopu Bridge and other important transport investment infrastructure right across New Zealand and we celebrate it. And there is much much much more to come.  
Roads are not the only area where we are investing significant finances for the benefit of economic growth. The electricity network across New Zealand is also looking at a massive upgrade. People would have read in the last 2 weeks that there is going to be a marginal increase in electricity prices due to the investment in Transpower’s network for the national grid right across New Zealand. I recall that when the National Party was in Opposition the Government of the day was talking about upgrading the national grid. It was concerned at that time that should there be power blackouts it would be unfortunate if that occurred because Transpower’s grid throughout New Zealand had somehow failed. I remember the Labour Party talking about that in the year 2000. In 2000 or 2001 they continued that discussion and I believe—and Maurice Williamson will correct me on this—in 2002 the Labour Party did what it did best and the Government of that time I think formed an officials committee.  
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: That’s right. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: That is right. It discussed that for 12 months and then was it not in 2003 or 2004 that it decided to get expert advice? I think some members called for a select committee inquiry so we had 5 years of Labour Government discussion about whether we should or whether we should not upgrade the transmission lines throughout the country. It probably issued a discussion document—a discussion document. I am not sure whether Labour surveyed but as was its habit when it governed during that period—it did not matter whether it was building a road electricity generation electricity transmission broadband rail or whatever investment it was—it simply did a number of things all in a row. It would have an officials committee discussion documents select committee inquiries expert advice and royal commissions—anything but make a decision. It would do anything but make a decision in case it isolated someone. Unfortunately as is the case throughout the world yes constituents like to be heard like to be loved and like to be agreed with but in the end if year on year you show no leadership and you show no decision-making prowess they will toss you out and that is what has happened.  
That is why we are saying quite clearly—nailing our colours to the wall—that we are about responsibly managing the Government’s finances and building a competitive and productive economy. We will invest in roading we will invest in electricity generation and transmission we will invest in broadband and we will invest in all these infrastructural opportunities. We will do that and make those decisions.  
That of course leads me to the investment in housing. Members will know that the previous Labour Government was very proud of increasing the number of State houses in its stock. When we took over we made a very distinct and clear decision that we were enthusiastic about having State houses that were fit for purpose warm dry and livable as well as increasing their number. So we decided that our investment would be upgrading the State housing stock and increasing it—doing that together—and that has been a very wise decision indeed.  
The previous Government interestingly enough looked at the issue of State houses being on quarter acre and half acre sections and being sort of 1940s and 1950s houses—being old cold and mouldy pieces of infrastructure. It discussed for many many years doing something about that but never actually did it. National has decided that we will subdivide large sections and we will demolish old cold and mouldy State houses and build new modern insulated ones. We will make better use of those assets. That is what we are doing. So although members on that side of the House might have increased the number of old cold and mouldy State houses on this side of the House we have decided that we need to invest in the quality not just the quantity of housing. That is what we are doing.  
We are very proud of the goals that we have outlined in our four main priorities: responsibly managing the economy building a more competitive and productive economy delivering better public services and rebuilding Christchurch. That is what we will be doing that is what we will be measured on and we are pleased that that in fact will be the bar we have set for ourselves and for New Zealanders to judge us by in 3 years’ time.