Hobbs Marian: Budget Debate 
Hobbs Marian: Budget Debate 
[Volume:639;Page:9627] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 This Budget debate has been framed as KiwiSaver versus personal tax cuts. The previous speaker who yet again referred to his experience as a well-paid public servant based his Budget analysis just on that—on KiwiSaver and whether it works. This simplistic framing ignores the continuing strengthening of the Government’s support for our families as provided for in this Budget and it ignores the strengthening of underlying contributors to the needed increase in productivity that has also been delivered in this Budget. 
If I look just quickly at strengthening families it is not enough and we have seen it happen on too many Wednesday nights not to realise this for members to stand in this House after the different personal tragedies that happen to various New Zealanders and talk platitudes about how families are left unsupported and how children are vulnerable and to say that they are left unsupported to deal with issues around education youth justice or health—then to vote down the very solutions promoted in this Budget that are about strengthening families. The only option that National puts up is tax cuts. But it is not tax cuts; it is cuts to the solutions to strengthen families. 
Let us look at education. In the education budget we have put up funding for 14 new schools and 180 new classrooms. When I listened to question time today there was a debate about whether we would reach the 1:15 ratio. We cannot reach that 1:15 ratio until we actually build the buildings to put the new entrants classes in if we are to split them up into smaller and smaller classes. Ten school gyms are not only school gyms on their own but also school gyms are to do with producing healthy young people and to do with the work on preventing obesity and promoting healthy lifestyles. If we are talking about teachers—I cannot believe this in a sense as a former teacher and now a prospective teacher again—5000 extra teachers over roll growth have been put in since we came into Government in 1999. That is not about supporting the unions; that is about supporting families and our young people. 
If we think about supporting families and looking after the youngest members of our families the 20 hours’ free early childhood education programme has received an extra $50 million in this Budget. That means a total of $769.7 million in this year alone has gone into this area. This is matching words matching platitudes with action. This is what this Government and its support parties are about. But is this a programme that the National Party would support? We have not heard a thing about that. Probably that $769 million would be dissipated in personal tax cuts if we had a National Government today. 
If we look at things like the Early Years initiative which is about antenatal care home visiting programmes and parenting support for vulnerable families that will all be forgotten when members stand in here and cry tears for the child who is beaten or killed. Those members will forget that there is a package there to support just such families. This is action instead of parliamentary hand-wringing. We have the newborn hearing programme which is identifying newborns with hearing impairment and specialist support has been put in in addition to the cochlear implant services—and I heard the previous speaker Mr Groser call that sort of work “fatally flawed” health support. That is not fatally flawed; that is what the community has been asking for. There is $17.4 million for extended support for out-of-school services. 
Then we can talk about tertiary education. In the Budget we see a huge increase this time focused on supporting universities institutes of technology and polytechnics to provide the quality of education needed in order to increase productivity. So we have money for tertiary staff salaries. Why? Because those institutions are in the international marketplace for those staff. There is money for operating costs and for expanded research. The students have not been forgotten. Students are being supported because the parental income threshold will increase by 10 percent on 1 January—$16.2 million has gone into that area. The student allowance personal income abatement threshold will be adjusted for inflation. The step-up scholarship pilot has been increased as has the Ngarimu scholarship. But will National guarantee to help these same students? Will it keep interest-free student loans? We have not heard an answer on that matter. 
If we come to health in the Budget and aged residential care—again how many crocodile tears have been shed in this House about the plight of workers who work in that sector and about aged care? Yet these are the same members who will vote against this Budget. They will vote against $150 million going out there for aged residential care. They will vote against home-based support services and against people aged over 65 years getting $81.2 million. Those members will vote against home-based disability support services. They will vote against residential services for the disabled who are under 65. They will vote against the “Get Checked” Diabetes Aotearoa programme being expanded to cardiovascular diseases. That is what those members are going to vote against yet they will cry crocodile tears in this House about supporting families. 
Then we could look at things like the immunisation for—this word I find hard to say—pneumococcal meningitis which is absolutely important. 
Hon Member 
: Well done. 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I think I got it—I thank the member. It is a very difficult word. Then we go to the area of having warmer healthier homes. This is actually killing several birds with one stone. We want clean air we want warmer homes and we want to do something about climate change. We are putting in $23 million for interest-free loans to help homeowners pay for new energy efficiency; $15.3 million to have a home energy rating service; and grants to continue with energy efficiency retrofits for the houses of those on low incomes. That is the sort of work we are doing in that area. 
Have we forgotten older New Zealanders? No we have some colleagues and people to support us. As a result of our agreement with New Zealand First we have ensured that superannuation and veterans pension rates are not less than 66 percent of the net average weekly wage. We have returned superannuation and veterans pensions to that level so from 1 April single superannuitants living alone will receive an extra $13 a week and a couple on superannuation will receive an extra $20 a week. 
Then we think of strong families and of the priority there and sometimes it is the small things that count. In the news are gangs in Counties-Manukau. Where is the Government? It is right alongside with the schools and with the social work services working with the schools the parents and the community. There is funding of $700000 going into Turn Your Life Around and the Project K programmes. This Budget is about working with the communities out there. 
We must consider those programmes in the Budget alongside the increases to the minimum wage. Let us think about that—this Government has given eight increases to the minimum wage in 8 years. We can compare that with the miserly I think it was one— 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: New Zealand First forced them to. 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: —they drove it down—the one increase from the previous National Government. If people remember that then they will begin to see the difference. There have been eight increases to the minimum wage from this Government with its friends and one from the previous National Government. People will begin to notice the difference. 
This Government has brought in 4 weeks’ annual leave Working for Families and income-related rents. Will National members go back to market rents? What about paid parental leave? Who voted against paid parental leave? That will be gone. It will be gone by lunchtime—or was that another Prime Minister in waiting so they thought? Those members opposite wait an awfully long time. He is gone. 
If we talk about productivity which those members keep on thinking we are not interested in we see that this Government has been upskilling the workforce and has made investment in transport and in research and development. This Budget is a much more sophisticated plan of attack for New Zealand than a simplistic debate on KiwiSaver versus personal tax cuts. 
 Let us have a quick look at KiwiSaver versus tax cuts. This is the vox pop from the young of Wellington Central: “A $20 a week tax cut is four beers. It’s quickly adapted to that extra $20 and then you want more.” I can remember that from when I received wage rises. It is funny how we got the $500 wage rise then forgot about it within 6 months. But $20 a week saving is $20 plus the Government contribution of $20 plus an employer contribution of say $10 which makes $50—and it is growing. It is not dissipating; it is growing. It is not adding to inflation. But the choice is even deeper. One choice that the Opposition wants to avoid is that tax cuts for the individual equals programme cuts for the community. Tax cuts for the individual is programme cuts for the community. 
In 1998 National took superannuation from 65 percent to 60 percent of the average wage. We restored this with help from our friends. What will National do? Ha ha! Its record stands. I turn to the 20 hours’ free early childhood education. National has been remarkably silent on whether it will keep that. National voted against paid parental leave. Will National cut it?