Moroney Sue: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Moroney Sue: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:645;Page:14271] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 New Zealanders should be very worried after listening to that speech because Lockwood Smith either wants to close down the borders and stop New Zealanders from going overseas and getting valuable overseas experience or maybe he has just announced a new National Party policy to raise wages in this country. Yeah right! We know that is the very last thing that the National Party would ever do based on its track record and based on its members’ voting record in this House where they consistently vote against any improvements to wages for New Zealanders. Yeah right! They must be going to close down the borders; that must be their policy. 
Today is National Heart Foundation Day and I am proud to be wearing red today in support of that. Of course red is one of my favourite colours anyway as a Labour member of Parliament. The Prime Minister’s statement was of course a very heart-warming speech indeed. It was heart warming because it had real vision—not this pretend vision and the slogans we saw in John Key’s speech but actual announcements of things that will make a real difference to New Zealanders’ lives. Labour has that strong vision and it was articulated by our Prime Minister the Rt Hon Helen Clark. We have big policies to roll out and we want to make further progress this year building on the progress we have already made in this term of Government. 
Some of the 2007 major achievements that we have already made are that we have built a strong and resilient economy and we have affordable health-care which has been extended through lower doctors’ fees. I may remind people listening to this debate that the National Party said in its policy that it was OK for doctors to have the right to increase and move up their fees once again. That is not Labour Party policy; we will keep those doctors’ fees low. One of my personal favourites from last year was the 20 hours’ free early education for 3 and 4-year-olds that was introduced by Labour. If that had been available when my children were 3 and 4 years old—and they were consecutively 3 and 4 years old—it would have been a huge saving for our family. But that was not available back in those days. There is the ever-expanding KiwiSaver scheme; 430000 people at the last count are taking part in saving for their futures. They are saving under a superannuation scheme and changing that culture that we have developed here in New Zealand of spending more than we save. 
Our plan is for a truly sustainable New Zealand and that is well and truly under way. But now we must take the next steps and the Prime Minister’s statement really set out this pathway. My favourite was the major funding boost for the community-based organisations because I know that will make a real difference to families in need particularly in the Waikato area. 
I want to let people know about the organisations in Hamilton that will benefit from the $446 million which will be rolled out over 4 years and will make a big difference for these agencies in being able to deliver services to families. It is a very long list but I think it is worthwhile reflecting on because just in Hamilton alone there is the Desert Spring Ministries Trust—the family support services provided by the Catholic network; the Hamilton Abuse Intervention Project which is one of the innovations that came out of Hamilton that looked at violence within families and men taking responsibility for that; the Hamilton Budgeting Advisory Trust; Kirikiriroa Family Services Trust; the Waikato branch of the New Zealand Prisoners Aid and Rehabilitation Society; the Institute for Child Protection Studies—another organisation that specialises in training school teachers how to look for signs of violence and how to help children who are seeing family violence in their own home lives; Raukura Waikato Social Services; Rostrevor House; Te Kohao Health; the Waikato Muslim Association; Anglican Action; Hamilton Apostolic Training Centre; Birthright (Waikato) Te WhanautangaTika Inc.; the Waikato branch of Family Works; Kaute Pasifika; the Link House Trust; the Pacific Education and Social Services Hamilton Trust; and the Hamilton Rape and Sexual Abuse Healing Centre. 
The list goes on. I am only halfway through it but I want to make particular mention of the Waikato Family Centre Trust—which will benefit from the package that was announced by the Prime Minister just on Tuesday—because it has a very interesting history. It used to be called the Waikato Plunket Family Centre. In the 1990s its funding was cut by the National Government. I was able to lead a protest action which was supported by mothers and fathers and their children to make sure that that family trust centre did not close its doors despite the fact that the National Government had pulled the plug on the funding for that very valuable service. 
Katrina Shanks 
: What did you do to Plunket? Tell us about your track record with Plunket. 
SUE MORONEY 
: If the member would care to listen I will tell her about Plunket. In the 1990s what occurred was that this valuable service—[ 
Interruption 
] I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am finding it incredibly difficult to speak with the member opposite barracking from a seat that is not her own and I ask you to intervene. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Can I just say that sometimes debate invites interjections. However having said that I say to the member on my left that if she looks at Speakers’ ruling 57/3 she will know that interjections are out of order unless they are rare and reasonable. If she looks at Speaker’s ruling 59/1 she will know that she should not move to facilitate interjections. 
SUE MORONEY 
: I think this is a story worthwhile listening to and the members opposite in particular should be listening to it. Waikato Plunket Family Centre was a centre that operated for families with young children who were struggling to cope with problems such as breastfeeding or behavioural issues—families just struggling to cope with that change in their lifestyles. I was not a mother at that stage—it was before I had my own children—but I thought it was absolutely appalling that the National Government at the time took away the funding and wanted to close down that very valuable centre. I was one of those who led a protest to stop that centre from closing down. We were not successful in changing around the National Government’s view on pulling the plug on that funding because it was belligerent in its view but we created enough community support for that trust to carry on in a private capacity. I am so pleased to see that particular trust on the list of organisations that will be getting increased funding as a result of this Labour-led Government’s commitment to families in our communities. 
Very real action came out of the Prime Minister’s statement on Tuesday. But there has been all this carry-on from the National benches with National members saying that it was a speech they do not even remember anything good coming out of. They should go and talk to some of these services in their own communities and they will find out exactly what goes on in these communities and how valuable this programme will be. 
I could go on and read out the statements from Plunket Barnardos and Women’s Refuge that actually reinforce just how valuable this programme will be. We have this programme that we must continue on with. The Prime Minister was very precise and very detailed about it. Her speech had substance and it had action behind it as opposed to John Key’s speech. Talk about a speech that was not memorable! I cannot remember one single thing in it—no announcement and no policy. I cannot remember one thing John Key said in his speech. It sounded to me like it was a bunch of slogans. All he left his MPs to do for the course of the rest of this debate was to continue to preach empty slogans—no substance not one policy and nothing that has any action behind it just empty slogans. 
Of course flip-flops have been happening in National. We need to make a point of reminding people about them. Even if National did have policy to announce who knows how long it would stick around for? National cannot even stick to its own policy in opposition. Goodness knows what might happen if it got into Government and into power and flip-flopped on its policies at that stage. Interest-free student loans are an example of that flip-flopping. At the time Labour promoted interest-free student loans in this House National members not only voted against them but made speeches about how much they would damage New Zealand. Now apparently National is in favour of them. 
The real danger for New Zealanders is if they think that the National Party continuing to develop and adopt Labour’s policy programme means that is what they might get should the Government change at the next election. But of course it will not be. National could not continue the programme Labour is embarking on. It could not continue the programme because it fundamentally disagrees with it. There are parts that National fundamentally disagrees with—the course of progress for our country—but the other bits it does not actually understand. 
We are on a pathway of having developed a good strong base in this country in the last 8 years. We want to continue the progress on that. We will continue the progress on it but it is only Labour that is capable of doing that because we understand the fundamental things that have created that progress in New Zealand. National does not.