Robertson Grant: Appropriation (2014/15 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2015/16) Bill — Second ReadingsText is subject to correctionRobertson Grant: Appropriation (2014/15 Supplementary Estimates) Bill Imprest Supply (First for 2015/16) Bill — Second Readings[Sitting date: 17 June 2015. Volume:706;Page:4503. Text is subject to correction.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central):That is right.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I nearly gave you an “Hon”.GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right Mr Assistant Speaker. I have not changed that much.It was interesting that the Minister acting on behalf of Bill English could not quite get through her statement about the Government’s surplus/deficit without a little snigger. The truth is the new language fed to Government Ministers by Lynton Crosby is to talk about trajectory. That is the answer. It is not about whether you are actually going to get to a surplus or not. It is a little bit like Nick Smith’s conceptual house. It is all about the trajectory that we are going on despite the fact that as the Government staggers towards the end of the financial year covered by the supplementary estimates it staggers towards a failure for the seventh time to reach a surplus.It is not about trajectory; it is actually about the integrity of this Government. Before the last two elections this Government told New Zealanders that there would be a surplus in 2014-15. It may have been a legitimate debate for the Government to have gone to New Zealanders before the 2014 election and say: “Do you know what? There is a range of serious social issues facing this country that mean we can’t make surplus.” The Government could have gone there. The Government could have gone there and said: “We failed over the last few years to actually deal with child poverty. We failed to invest enough in health to ensure that budgets are kept up and that people can get the basic health services they want.” The Government could have come to New Zealanders and been honest and been up front and said that. But it did not. The Government went to New Zealanders with its No. 1 economic priority being to be in surplus for 2014-15. That date was there; that promise was there. It had been there for two elections. That promise has been breached.Members on the other side of the House might think it is not important. They might think they can just change the language and talk about trajectories and conceptual ideas but the reality on the ground is that they broke a promise to New Zealanders. They have failed to reach that surplus.As they do stagger towards the end of this financial year the year in which they promised New Zealanders there would be a surplus they sit alongside an economic record that the Reserve Bank Governor has now been clear is one that is struggling and staggering along. There are members on the other side of the House who like to say perhaps when my back is turned Jami-Lee Ross that I talk the economy down. The reality is that this is not me Mr Ross. This is not me. This is the Reserve Bank Governor coming along to New Zealanders and saying that there is no sign that exports are going to recover. The Government having outsourced housing policy to the Reserve Bank now outsources economic policy and says: “Well you had better sort this out as well because we haven’t got any ideas as a National Government.” So Graeme Wheeler has to be able to say: “Well I will cut interest rates now. I’m worried about whether that is going to pour petrol on the overheated housing market in Auckland but there is no sign of this Government stimulating the economy.” He has to act.So this Government has failed to deliver to New Zealanders the kinds of benefits that would be expected from an economic growth rate of around 3 percent. In 2006—which you might recall Mr Assistant Speaker Mallard—the Government at that time had a growth rate of around about 3.5 percent and that delivered a multibillion-dollar surplus and had unemployment as the second-lowest in the OECD. Fast forward to 2015: a similar growth rate but a deficit; 41000 more people out of work than when National came into office; a failure to lift exports; and a failure to invest in core areas like education and health to the extent that is needed.This kind of economic growth that the Government currently has is not delivering to New Zealanders across the board. One of the reasons for that is that economic growth is built on something very soft and very shaky and that is the recovery from the Canterbury rebuild. That recovery is important for the people of Canterbury but it is not an economic plan—it is not an economic plan. If we remove that from the growth figures and then we take into account the high levels of migration real growth per head of population is under 2 percent now. That is why right around New Zealand people are not feeling the benefits of this growth.In the Northland by-election and Mr Bishop is very familiar with this the message that was given to the National Party was: “Don’t come up here and tell us we’ve never had it so good. Don’t come up here and say: ‘There’s 3 percent growth. Isn’t it great?’.”Hon Ruth Dyson: Wasn’t it just: “Don’t come up here.” to Chris Bishop?GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right. For Chris Bishop it was just “Don’t come up here.” but it was a message to the National Party from the regions of New Zealand. It does not matter whether you are in Dunedin or whether you are in Gisborne or whether you are in Whanganui what you will hear from New Zealanders in the regions is that they are working hard but they feel like this Government has neglected them. You take a look at the Budget the imprest supply bill and the supplementary estimates and you ask yourself: “Where in the investment in New Zealand’s regions? Where is the investment in diversifying the economy away from our reliance on commodity prices?”.Hon Christopher Finlayson: What about the wharf at Waitangi?GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right. I will give Mr Finlayson credit for this: the wharf at Waitangi. There is the plan to turbocharge the New Zealand economy from Chris Finlayson. I understand Mr Finlayson has had a large print of himself put on the wharf design so it will be there and people will see his beaming face on arrival at the Waitangi wharf in the Chatham Islands. Good on Chris Finlayson for helping the very hard-working MP Annette King achieve that long-held dream of the wharf at Waitangi.Hon Christopher Finlayson: She did nothing.GRANT ROBERTSON: I will tell her you said that—I will tell her you said that. But that is it. That is it in terms of regional economic development from this Government and in this Budget. I will wait for one of the members on the other side of the House to get up and say: “No the regional research institutes are here.” Well this deserves a little bit of unpicking does it not? The regional research institutes—up to $25 million. That “up to” phrase got left out when Steven Joyce made those announcements during the Budget period. And also there are only three of them. So only three regions in New Zealand are going to benefit and I will bet you they already know which regions those are. There are going to be a lot of disappointed regions in New Zealand because that “up to $25 million” is not going to stretch very far.That is the problem because today we saw for the seventh consecutive global dairy auction a drop in the global dairy prices. That is a 55 percent drop since February last year and a 30 percent drop since March this year. To turn that into real numbers that is billions of dollars not present in regional New Zealand. It is tough work for the farmers concerned and some of them have got very high debt levels and will have struggles over the next 2 years but it is also tough work for that wider rural community. Take a small place like Ōpōtiki in the Eastern Bay of Plenty—$30 million will not be in that community next year. In a small community like Ōpōtiki $30 million makes a huge difference.. That is jobs in the service sector. That is jobs in a community that struggles without that.That is what is missing from this Government—a long-term plan to say: “We can grow the regions of New Zealand to deliver jobs.” We know there is huge pressure on Auckland housing and Nick Smith makes the problem only worse. He puts the pressure on. But if we want and we expect people to go and live in the regions of New Zealand there must be job opportunities there for them and that will happen only when the Government partners up with regional communities. There is no sign of that from this Government. Instead it is distracted by its own pet priorities. Nothing is a bigger symbol and emblem of that—and it is in the estimates here—than the flag. The flag referendum—the $26 million flag referendum—says everything you want to know about the priorities of this Government. A $28 million social bonds pilot for a project that nobody knows whether it going to work—that is just a gross ideological experiment. That is another $28 million. This Government has its priorities wrong.If this Government were to introduce a Budget to this House that was about investing in the future supporting opportunities for future generations of New Zealanders and giving them the chance to actually own their own home then we would be in there supporting it but that is not the Budget that has come to us. These supplementary estimates are the last gasp of the 2014-15 financial year which was a failure of a financial year for this Government—a failure to reach surplus a failure to grow jobs and a failure to invest in the regions which now have another year of neglect from this Government. This bill will be opposed by the Labour Party because it is a continuation of this Government’s failure to deliver to New Zealanders a sound economic plan.