Parker David: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Parker David: Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17982] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 If ever listeners to Parliament needed to have it reinforced in their mind that this Government is full of bureaucrats rather then people who are going to grow the economy and get us out of an economic malaise this Statutes Amendment Bill (No 2) would do it. The delivery of that last speech by Nathan Guy fine as it was in content hardly excited anyone. In fact I think if there were 100 people listening on the radio to the start of that speech by the end of it most of them would have fallen asleep. Of course this really does show up National. If we look along the front bench of National and are honest about it we see that the majority of the National front bench are long-term bureaucrats; they have spent most of their life in this place. 
Grant Robertson 
: Institutionalised! 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Institutionalised by too many years in Parliament! John Carter is shaking his head but he knows the error of his ways and he is off to the Pacific Islands. He is not going to be put out to pasture; he is going for a little sojourn to the Pacific Islands. I wish him well in that appointment and I am sure he will do it well. 
Here we are again sitting under urgency at a time when we have a $16 billion Government deficit; when we are into a second recession or we are very close to it; when we are suffering an economic malaise that seems to be longer in duration than is the case in just about any other Western country; and when the Government seems to have given up on its objective to close the wage gap with Australia. Yet here we are in urgency in the third year of this Government not discussing its grand vision for the economy—because it does not have one—and not discussing how it will close the wage gap with Australia. Even in terms of the Government’s mantra about—what is it making front-line services— 
Grant Robertson 
: Oh yes moving services to the front line. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Well the closest we get to moving services to the front line is the amendment to the New Zealand Railways Corporation Act to increase the number of directors from seven to nine. This is in the same week as the State is taking over legal services. I am disappointed that this bill is not of more substance. I know that Statutes Amendment bills are meant to deal with issues that are not controversial and to tidy up little pieces of legislation that need to be tidied up. But can it be said in respect of most of the things that are being done here that they are more important than other Government business? How can it be important to pursue this when we have rising unemployment and huge problems in the economy? What is the number of young Pacific Islanders and Maori who are now leaving school and going into unemployment? 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: One in five. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: One in five. 
Grant Robertson 
: One in five one in four. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: It is between one in four and one in five. Between one in four and one in five of our young Maori and Pacific Island peoples an increasing proportion of our population in New Zealand have nowhere to go but on to the dole queue. They are not going into training. They are not going into further education so as to improve their capability and to improve the future productivity of the New Zealand economy. It is little wonder then that more and more of them are leaving every week to go to Australia—so much so that as we were embarrassed to find out when Julia Gillard was here recently Australia views New Zealand as a source of well-trained well-educated civil people who fit well into their society who go across to Australia settle there and make Australia’s economy thrive rather than ours. As a consequence we are in the doldrums from economic mismanagement under a Government that does not have a plan. 
In fact not only has the Government stopped talking about closing the wage gap with Australia it now seems to be promoting it. Last weekend on  
Q+A 
 when Bill English was asked questions by Guyon Espiner in what I thought was a very good interview he said: “Oh well we are so far behind Australia in wages now—30 percent—we’ll give it up and we will promote ourselves as being a source of low-cost labour to Australia for when it wants to outsource things.” That will have an impact upon the Public Finance Act 1989 because as a consequence public finances will be much more affected by that than this amendment to the Public Finance Act. Clauses 78 to 81 of this bill amend the Public Finance Act but not in any way that materially affects the performance of the economy. 
Another change made by this bill is to the Wills Act. From memory I was on the select committee that considered this amendment at the time of the last Statutes Amendment Bill—I was involved in some part of the process anyway—and I can recall that what the Minister says is correct and that an attempt was made to tidy up this matter in the last Statutes Amendment Bill. There is a tradition that the Statutes Amendment Bill does not take anyone by surprise and the provisions relating to wills were very important—we need to make sure that wills are appropriately witnessed because they control the disposition of people’s assets upon their death. The change proposed was not controversial but it was of significant effect and because it was introduced late in the process it was thought to be inappropriate by some of the interested parties including from memory the Law Society to include it in the previous bill. It was thought that if there was going to be a change of substance like that made it ought to have a full select committee process and people should have the opportunity to make submission on it. So it was withdrawn from the earlier Statutes Amendment Bill and it is now found in this bill in a way that enables the Law Society and other interested parties to fully submit on it in an open way to the select committee. The Labour Party supports that provision and the other provisions being referred to a select committee. 
But having said that and having dealt with how this bill does not do anything to advance the need for an economic plan to get our economy going forward rather than backwards I repeat my earlier criticism that I think it is because National is bereft of vision. National pretends that it is full of business people but it is not it is full of long-term politicians who have been here too long. There is the occasional person in National who does not meet that prescription but we have more movers and shakers on this side of the House than there are in National. 
Hon Nathan Guy 
: They’ve got gaggles over there. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Nathan Guy is giggling away on the other side of the Chamber. I think I heard him admit that he is giggling although I might have got the pronunciation a little wrong. 
Another provision in this bill relates to the Antarctica (Environmental Protection) Act 1994. I have no objection to the Antarctica (Environmental Protection) Act being amended in the way that is being proposed—but in urgency? We are in the third year of a Government during a time when we have an economic malaise and increasing unemployment. Criticisms are being made of the Government that it has no credible economic plan to get us out of this hole. More and more people are going to Australia. Why are we discussing the Antarctica (Environmental Protection) Act? How will that help people pay their bills? How much has the price of butter cheese and other staples gone up in the last year? Is it 30 percent or 50 percent? The cost of living is going up in part because the Government has put up GST on those items yet here we are dealing with these matters. It shows just how out of touch the Government is with ordinary Kiwis who are struggling to make ends meet. The Government is fixated on these bureaucratic steps that make no difference to the lives of ordinary New Zealanders who look to their Government to improve their lot and if the Government is not doing that they are rightly critical of it. 
Again the amendment to the Antarctica (Environmental Protection) Act might be technically correct but it does not meet the duty of the Government which is to work for New Zealanders and the future of their families rather than to work for the narrow interests of the few that this Government so plainly governs for with its income tax. 
We support this bill being referred to a select committee but we are disappointed that more vision has not been shown for the growth of our economy.