Mahuta Nanaia: Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill — First Reading 
Mahuta Nanaia: Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:21315] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 If David Bennett’s speech was an indication of the level of commitment and passion that the National Government shows the Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill I can tell members now that it will be going nowhere very quickly. In fact that is why the bill is being introduced just before the end of this parliamentary term. The National Government has no intention whatsoever to continue with this bill beyond the next election. If it did it would have introduced it 6 months after it was elected as Government as the supply and confidence agreement somewhat indicated. That member had all the passion of a wooden block when he spoke to the particular details of the bill— 
Hon Member 
: Improvement. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: I hear that it is an improvement but I have heard him in other forums and he is actually not too bad. It is a clear indication that the National Government does not intend to progress this bill. When I was reading through the intent of the bill and its purpose I struggled to see why we were debating this bill at this late stage in the parliamentary term. I think it is an absolute affront to members in the House that we are even spending time on it. 
Labour will not support the bill. We do not see the need to progress a bill like this. If we look at the intent of the bill which is to put a spending cap on Government spending we see that it is an affront to how good Ministers actually manage their vote and try to ensure in the context of the time that they are managing their budgets accordingly and are able to ensure that they are keeping within budget for the most part. But this bill is not addressing one iota the level of debt that this Government is going into to fund tax cuts. I would far rather debate that as an issue and a very real concern. That is the type of concern New Zealanders have: why is National providing tax cuts to the top 3 percent of income earners and borrowing for those tax cuts? That is the type of question that Kiwis when they want to make a decision about who they will support in Government want to hear this Parliament debating. 
They also want to hear what the Government is doing to ensure that more young Maori and Pacific people will be trained and employed. That question would lead them to the Government’s investment policies in skills and training and what is happening within that vote. There is in fact a cap on the spend in that particular area. The Government is currently pulling funding away from skills training under tertiary education which makes it harder for those providers to get young people employment-ready in order to get a job—if there is a job out there. I would far rather spend time in this House debating those types of issues rather than the Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill which we in this House know will not see the light of day beyond the next election. 
So why are we bothering? Why are we bothering when the very real and pressing issues facing Kiwis are about what the Government is not spending and the priorities that are not being addressed which are affecting everyday families? We could be discussing things like the greater inequality that Maori and Pacific children are facing where one in five is in a benefit-dependent household. The great majority of them are Maori and Pacific children. What is happening there? The spending cap there is an affront to the greatest level of inequality of the most vulnerable young people that we have in this country. We are not debating that issue at all but we should be. Instead we are debating a bill that will not see the light of day beyond the next election and it is terrible. 
I look forward to hearing the next member who will take a call on this bill justify why we are not debating in this House the pressing issues that are facing Kiwis and New Zealanders—vulnerable low-income and modest-income families—and the issues that they really want addressed. Instead the Government has put Parliament in a position of debating a bill that is a sop to an outgoing member of Parliament who is soon to leave this House. The Government has no intention whatsoever of pursuing this bill through the select committee. If the next member taking the call can assure this House before it rises that not only will the bill go to select committee but also the Government will call for submissions in the same session in which it is tabled at the select committee I will be very happy to sit and reflect on my comments. If they could further give a guarantee that this bill may be picked up beyond the next election let them stand in the House and put their name on the record to give that undertaking. 
I can say right now that in this very late stage leading up to the election we are looking at a first reading and at sending the bill to select committee before the election. It is a bill that the Government members certainly have no passion whatsoever to endorse not Amy— 
Grant Robertson 
: Adams. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: —Adams not David Bennett and I am sure not the member who will follow me. None of them will have sufficient passion to convince any person listening to this debate that the National Government will continue with this particular bill. 
We know that it is a waste of time and we are not supporting it. We understand that in fact good Governments and good Ministers manage their votes and are quite upfront and clear about their priorities when they are looking at their portfolio and at where they will shift their priority spend. That is a far better more transparent way for all Kiwis to understand what the Government’s priorities are where funding will be attributed and where the priority spend will be. That is far more transparent and it gives far more accountability and far more opportunity for Kiwis to see what the Government stands for and its priorities. 
Instead this Government wants to continue down a path of some vague priorities that will I think be slipped away. People are not debating the real issues as we should be. We should be debating why the number of Maori and Pacific youth in unemployment has gone up why there is not enough spending in upskilling and training those young people and why there is greater inequality in households in New Zealand. Low-income and vulnerable families and especially Maori and Pacific children are becoming more vulnerable under this Government. 
In this House we should be debating with respect the very serious issues of the lack of jobs in our communities so that we can provide people with a real plan for growth and opportunity so that they can get a job put kai on the table and feed their whanau. It is that simple. This bill has no future in this House and I challenge the next National Government member to tell us that it does.