Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDebate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 11 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8932. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementDebate resumed from 10 February.Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): It is great to be back in Parliament and the Government and I think New Zealand is looking forward to a fantastic year in New Zealand. Can I just wish you every success this year Mr Speaker after I am sure a refreshing break. Can I also on a personal note offer my heartfelt congratulations to Simon O’Connor the National member of Parliament for Tāmaki. Can I actually offer him my thanks as well for his engagement to my sister Rachel. I can confirm there have been no promises of special transport deals for his electorate but I do wish him very well. As I think Stuff said yesterday it is good to keep it in the family and that is I think what we are doing here.Can I just say that what is very clear in the pre-Parliament posturing that we have seen this year in politics is the absolute contrast that there is between the parties in this House in the lead-up. On one side I think we have a Government that is very confident that is optimistic about New Zealand and about its place in the world and that accepts that there are risks and that good people competent people like Chris Finlayson and Gerry Brownlee—I just said competent by the way; I did not go too much further than that—are leading. We are fundamentally optimistic and confident about where we are going as a country in the world while the other parties—it seems to me it does not go too far to say—are fearful about our role in the world and want to retrench want to be inward-looking and want to in a sense hark back to those sort of Muldoonist days when the last one out was supposed to turn out the lights.Denis O’Rourke: That was National Party.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: That is not a vision that New Zealanders—Denis O’Rourke—want to buy into. They do not want to be defensive. They do not want to be fearful.I think actually the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) debate that we have seen is really a symbol albeit an incredibly important one for New Zealand of that. We think on this side of the House that the left fundamentally miscalculated that first because TPP is so good for New Zealand—the benefits for New Zealand and provincial New Zealand are so strong—but also in terms of the politics of it. We say on that bring it on. And can I say as a provincial member of Parliament representing Tauranga and the Bay of Plenty along with Anne Tolley; Todd McClay the trade Minister who of course will be working so hard on these matters; and Todd Muller an ex-agricultural executive who knows a lot about these things that we are absolutely firm in the feedback we are getting. I know from talking with Ms Tolley and with the others that feedback is so strong on this TPP. They are so supportive of it in the Bay of Plenty and I know as well that that is the message going out from provincial New Zealand all around the country. That is why we hold the seats and that is why the MP for Napier who is not here right now and the MP for West Coast - Tasman will be sheepish on this issue because I know the feedback they will be getting from their constituents.If you just take the Western Bay of Plenty where I reside it runs on an increasing number of things but a small number of things. Sue Moroney is laughing. I hope she stays for the speech because I have got a few things to say to her a little later on. But in the Western Bay of Plenty—kiwifruit going so strongly—they are at one in supporting TPP. They know that it is worth $6000 a grower—$1000 a hectare. And it is not just those areas. Nathan Guy talked about wine in the south in answer to questions just a little while ago. That is not something at least in terms of production that people think about when they think about the Western Bay of Plenty but there are wine labels in our area that have been trying for years to get into the US. They are very excited about the tariffs coming off in this area and the flow-on effects in a buoyant economy.Tomorrow in Tauranga I will be opening a new addition to a very substantial auto dealership—a new part of that. That is really a symptom of a buoyant economy where people are doing well and the effects of strong kiwifruit growth and property construction are flying through.Over and above all of that though can I just back everything the Prime Minister has said and reinforce what a busy programme and agenda this Government on this side of the House has this year. Certainly it is true in my portfolios. I am really excited about—Hon Christopher Finlayson: Mine too.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: And true in Chris Finlayson’s. That is just because he likes to be busy but enough of that. In transport in aviation in maritime in land transport and also in energy we will be putting bills before this House making very good progress.Denis O’Rourke: How about the other seven bridges?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: They are Mr O’Rourke great portfolios—Denis O’Rourke: Are they illusory bridges? Are they mirage bridges?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —because unlike Mr O’Rourke where it is all talk on that side of the House we are a Government that is doing significant infrastructure. We are the Government and the party—the National Party—of infrastructure. We are getting on with the job in an unprecedented fashion with quality investment all over the country Mr O’Rourke from the top of Northland right down to the bottom of the South Island. If you want some evidence of that I suggest that members look at the National Land Transport Fund programme and funding over the last several years. Actually it went from around $1 billion in the early 2000s—Denis O’Rourke: What about railways?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —I will come to that—to over $3 billion per annum last year. Consistently over $2.5 billion is going into land transport in this country. Recently actually in the last couple of years it has been over $3 billion.Whether that is rail—Denis O’Rourke: What about the ferries? What about the Cook Strait ferry?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well the member over there talks about rail. The City Rail Link—we are bringing forward the business case and getting on with that. The East-West Link is a $1.25 billion to $1.8 billion game-changer not just for Auckland but actually for industry and heavy industry in this country. We have got the Auckland alignment project going along—Bill English and I are working on that—to get alignment on transport projects to make a difference in that big city for the long term.And Mr O’Rourke where your party is constantly harping on about regional development we are doing the work in this. [Interruption] Shall I list the projects? Shall I list the projects we are doing with Crown funding? Kawarau—or as they say down there “Kawara”—Falls Bridge in the Queenstown area. They have been crying out for that for decades and that is true of all of these projects: Taramakau on the West Coast the Mingha Bluff to Rough Creek project in Canterbury the Akerama curves in Northland—Mr O’Rourke—and the State Highway 35 improvements that we have done and we have delivered in Gisborne and the East Coast—Hon Anne Tolley: Mōtū Bridge.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —where they were as Anne Tolley knows so grateful to this Government for getting on and doing that. Mōtū Bridge is coming; so is Normanby Overbridge realignment a very excellent project that has been advocated for strongly. Many others—I will not go through them all. There are too many to name. But in cycleways where the left says you know we are doing nothing they talked and we are delivering the most significant set of investments—Denis O’Rourke: Very slowly.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —in that area ever in New Zealand’s history. The member says “slowly”—over 3 years $333 million. And in rail again there was a lot of talk in the 2000s but it is this side of the House that has delivered billions and billions of dollars in infrastructure. So although the rhetoric on the other side is “We could have done it better.” that is what it descends to. Well Mr O’Rourke “would’ve could’ve should’ve”—we are the Government of infrastructure that is getting on with the job in this country and that is delivering projects that deliver better safety better resilience and much greater economic productivity so that New Zealand is backed in this area.Sue Moroney: The road toll is going up Simon.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Sue Moroney can I finish on you? I think it is absolutely disgraceful that this member does not back—indeed opposes—the Waikato Expressway around her electorate one of the most significant game-changers in the upper North Island which the people universally back. If the member wants to know why she has never been an electorate MP it is right there.Unlike on that side of the House we are backing infrastructure and making a massive difference to this country. The year 2016 will be a great year for New Zealand and for making progress on projects all over this great country.JACINDA ARDERN (Labour): The Minister of Transport who just resumed his seat spent the majority of his address to this House listing a range of land transport projects. You may not have noticed that in between his excited listing of roading projects he let out a little squeak about something called the City Rail Link and I would describe that as the political equivalent of swallowing a dead rat. He did not expand on the $2.5 billion investment in that project—that “game-changer” for New Zealand that “game-changer” for Auckland—because he is so reluctant to be spending money on that project. So in 10 minutes we had one tiny little mention of the City Rail Link. He can barely even talk about it with a straight face. And I can tell you Mr Bridges at least Labour will let you off the hook in one regard. You will not have to cut the ribbon on that project you do not believe in because by then Labour will be in Government and we have stood by that project from day one. So we will spare you that misery.It is easy in the House sometimes to feel like you are in a strange parallel universe. On the one hand the Minister of Finance cannot tell the House what net Crown debt was when he took office—he cannot tell us. This sudden amnesia overcomes him. But ask Government members for any Taylor Swift lyrics and they will be able to recite them off the hip because that is what we had from the Minister for Social Housing today. I am very disappointed to see that Bill English is still unwilling after all these years to acknowledge that he inherited close to zero net Crown debt from the Labour Government. That is the truth of it—that is the truth of it—and Labour will consistently remind the Government of what it inherited instead of allowing it to rewrite history as it is wont to do.I want to reflect on the Prime Minister’s statement because of course that is what this debate is meant to be about. For some reason even though I have been in this House for 7 years and I have got experience listening to these speeches a part of me still expects that when he stands up to deliver those speeches the Prime Minister will act like a Prime Minister. I expect him to be a statesman. Perhaps I am naive to still expect that after 7 years of prime ministerial statements. I wanted the Prime Minister to stand up and acknowledge the reality that New Zealanders are experiencing—the Kiwi reality.In Labour we talk about the Kiwi Dream because we are so stunned by the reality of what people are currently experiencing. And what is that? It is unemployment at 5.3 percent—and yet actually I question whether that is accurate when we know that there is significant under-employment amongst New Zealanders now. What does that mean? They have got a job but it is not enough—they need more. And we already know—in fact any National MP worth their salt will have spoken to constituents people in their area who will tell them that they are working multiple part-time jobs just to make ends meet. That is a growing reality for New Zealanders.What does that mean? It means that parents are making a trade-off—families are making a trade-off—between getting by and being there for their kids. It is a choice that no one wants a family to have to make but it is the reality. That is why even though we use the shorthand of child poverty we actually mean family poverty and a quarter of our families in New Zealand or more are experiencing that now—the fact that they do not have enough to get by to have a decent way of life and to have that Kiwi Dream that Labour at least has not given up on.But what does that Kiwi reality also mean? It means that the next generation is experiencing a pretty significant amount of hardship too. Students who decide to take on post - secondary education are leaving with debt of $20000 on average and are on average taking 9 years to pay it back. That has a massive flow-on effect. That means that it takes longer to own that unaffordable house if at all. And it is utterly depressing to me that people in Auckland of my generation do not believe that they will own a home in their lifetime. When you have an average house price of over $900000 and you have $20000 of debt because you had to go and extend your education just so you could get a decent job and it is going to take you 9 years to pay that back the house goes on the back-burner and having kids goes on the back-burner too. This is the reality for that next generation. It is no wonder that we have the lowest homeownership rate since the 1950s.All of that reality presents a pretty grim outlook for New Zealanders. That is what I wanted the Prime Minister to address in his statement at the beginning of this year but that would have needed leadership. In my view the only leadership I have seen on those big issues is coming from the statements I have heard in a state of the nation speech from Andrew Little. We know on this side of the House—in fact the World Economic Forum is now saying—that unless nations start tackling some of those bigger longer-term issues like the changing nature of work like lack of job security and like automation in New Zealand wiping out 46 percent of jobs within two decades we will be in a much more dire state than having the 5.3 percent unemployment rate we see now.We need to plan—and that means acknowledging just as we did when we went to free education back in the day—that in the current environment. Secondary school education is not enough. It is not enough. Now leaving secondary school is only the beginning of your preparatory work for going into the market place to find a job—it is only the beginning—and yet what statistics are telling us is that we are not preparing. We have had a 22 percent decrease in the number of apprenticeships under this Government. We know that we have demand in the trades—just look at the lack of housing supply in Auckland—and yet not enough young people are training to ready themselves for those jobs.There has been a 20 percent decrease overall in people taking up post - secondary education under this Government and yet if you ask anybody they will believe that that is more important now than ever. The Kiwi Dream is based on the idea of having a decent job and a decent income and that means having a decent education and consistent access to retraining as well.That is why when Labour sat down and said “What message do we want to send at the beginning of the year?” it was a message of hope that all of the principles we have ever based ourselves on going right back to Savage and to Kirk—who always used to articulate that all people really need is a place to live something to do someone to love and something to hope for. We definitely know on this side of the House that unless we have Government-endorsed Tinder we cannot help with all of that stuff. Maybe Simon Bridges thinks he can with his family-based dating service but not on this side of the House. We know that the stuff we can help with is housing jobs and hope.Hon Paul Goldsmith: That was weak.JACINDA ARDERN: The Government has a role in all of that—Paul Goldsmith just called a joke from me weak. I want to see you stand up and try having a sense of humour in this House for a change Mr Goldsmith. I issue that as a challenge. I will put my weak Tinder jokes against anything you say in this House.Three years of post - secondary school education for free—that is the kind of policy that captures our belief that we need to meet current challenges that we need to prepare not just our school-leavers but people currently in the workforce and that we need to give people hope. Those are all things that Labour believes are fundamental to the Kiwi Dream and that is what we as a party are focused on. Although I was hugely disappointed by the Prime Minister’s speech and although I was upset not to hear him make grand statements on big issues like child poverty at least I am satisfied that I know those are the issues that one side of the House at least will be addressing in the coming year.I would like to finish on one particular area of passion for me. On this side of the House there has been only one person who has committed to taking a zero-tolerance approach to child poverty in New Zealand and that is Andrew Little. For all of the rhetoric about what the Government believes it is doing in that area we have an increasing number of children and families living in the kinds of circumstances that we would consider intolerable and inexcusable in this country. We in this House should all have a zero-tolerance approach to child poverty but at the moment the kind of leader whom I want to back and whom I believe in is standing up and saying thatnow. That is Andrew Little. That is why I absolutely believe that the only way we will see the restoration of the Kiwi Dream in New Zealand will be via a Labour Government.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations): It is great to be back after a glorious summer in this magnificent capital city. I had a great summer. There is nothing more enjoyable than charging up Mount Kaukau to look out on this city—the best views in Wellington.Unlike Jacinda Ardern I thought that the Prime Minister gave an outstanding address to inaugurate the political year and I was particularly interested when the Prime Minister outlined a number of significant New Zealand sporting achievements. He mentioned the Sevens our great cricket team and Lydia Ko’s brilliance. I was just a little disappointed that he did not mention another great New Zealand sporting achievement—namely my hole in one on the 11th hole at the Royal Wellington Golf Club at 1.30 p.m. on 29 December 2015. Mr Faafoi would be interested in this because I know he plays at Heretaunga. It was a 7-wood brilliantly teed-off. It went slightly to the left—well about 160 metres in a northerly—it jumped the bunker and slid into the hole and I was very proud of that.I want to begin by paying tribute to my colleague Tim Groser who is about to leave for the United States. He and I came into Parliament together in 2005 and I was his associate culture and heritage spokesperson until Tim was reshuffled out of that role and I took it for myself. In 2014 Tim and I won the party vote in New Lynn and Rongotai embarrassing our high-profile opponents. In fact Tim almost became the member of Parliament for New Lynn which was slightly better than I have ever achieved against Mrs King although Tim did have the benefit of being up against David Cunliffe.I am very interested to hear that Annette King may be standing down as the MP for Rongotai. That is a very important political development because it will have the effect of turning Rongotai into a hair-trigger marginal. Whenever I am out campaigning with the people in Rongotai the voters always say they will switch to me once Mrs King retires. So I used to say I would win the seat in 2038 but I have been doing some very hasty recalculations and I think it could be as early as 2023. Tim and I were bench mates for our first term. We used to sit in the second row where David Shearer sits now and we often used to come down to question time reading our Spectators until Marian Hobbs the then MP for Wellington Central told us that no that was not very wise but we should try to look riveted when the speaker is asking questions. It was very sound advice which I have always remembered.I am very sorry that Tim has left our presence without giving a valedictory speech so I thought I would give one for him. I would like to outline what I think are his top five contributions in office even if Tim would have done a far better job of telling us about his achievements than I will be able to do and over the course of my speech I will avoid quotes from Napoleon Juvenal and Thucydides.Tim’s achievements were momentous. The first one of course was the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement—the obvious one. He achieved what many people thought was unachievable. Secondly there was the Taiwan economic agreement and the Hong Kong free-trade agreement which made New Zealand the first country to have trade deals with all of China. He concluded a free-trade agreement with the ASEAN Australia and New Zealand arrangement. He positioned New Zealand’s trade relationship with Asia in a very effective manner. He also concluded a free-trade agreement with Korea. These all prove the value of free-trade agreements as traditional Labour leaders have always said. The rise in the volume of New Zealand’s exports has been huge and the same will happen with the TPP agreement which makes Labour’s approach both so bizarre and so disappointing given its very positive contribution to trade over the years.Tim was a very respected voice overseas for New Zealand business and I am sure he is going to continue to be so in his new role. He spearheaded overseas business trade missions to introduce New Zealand companies to new markets. Whether at the World Trade Organization or whether at Washington or Beijing people listened to him—they had no choice—and New Zealand businesses all benefited from it.Finally he was a very effective Minister for Climate Change Issues. The work he did behind the scenes on international agreements earned him significant respect. The recent Paris agreement was based on the New Zealand proposal. I know the Greens are looking disconsolate because they think they have a monopoly of virtue on these matters but Tim was a very effective Minister in that area. I should not finish without mentioning his glorious reign as the Minister of Conservation between 2008 and 2010—as Tim himself calls it the golden age of conservation in New Zealand—until he was fired by the Prime Minister.I am sure all of us wish Tim all the very best for the future and I know that he will be a very effective ambassador to the United States.There is a lot to do this year and I am very much looking forward to approaching the issue of Treaty settlements with renewed enthusiasm. We had a good year last year and I acknowledge my friend Mr Nuk Korako for being such an effective chair of the Māori Affairs Committee. I acknowledge the wonderful work of the Leader of the House and of the Business Committee around Parliament for being so generous with parliamentary time so that we could move Treaty legislation ahead. I want to acknowledge all my fine negotiators like Paul Swain and Rick Barker for the good work they have been doing in so many areas to advance Treaty settlements. Paul is stepping back from the front line this year but I want to place on record my respect and my affection for him. He is a fine New Zealander.My friend and colleague the Minister for Māori Development is an outstanding Minister and he has been working on a variety of projects over the last 12 months including reforming the Maori Language Act and working towards the reform of Te Ture Whenua. I would like to say as Tim would say by reference to Thomas Gradgrind of Hard Times that the facts matter and we are not seeing a great many facts on the reform of Te Ture Whenua. The tribunal itself earlier this week acknowledged that much of the impetus for reform of this antiquated and outdated legislation has come from the people themselves. It is legislation that cries out for reform. It needs an urgent upgrade. That is what inspired me when I was the Associate Minister for Māori Development to put together a technical group which conducted around 30 hui around the country to see what could be done to improve this legislation engaging with iwi and whānau engaging with various groups and coming up with a very very good report. That report gave rise to policy proposals and those proposals have been consulted on up and down this country.I find it incredible that 100 hui at least and two exposure drafts are not regarded as sufficient. I was amazed when Prue Kapua of the Māori Women’s Welfare League said that Te Ture Whenua Act 1993 was the result of 20 years’ consultation. Surely to goodness 4 years of consultation two exposure drafts and ongoing consultation is something that is going to result in a very good piece of legislation. And then once the legislation goes to the Māori Affairs Committee there will be 6 months for people to make submissions. People are listening and they are being listened to. Consultation does not necessarily mean agreement or acquiescence. It does require that people listen with an open mind and that is what this Government is doing on this very important area.I was disappointed that Meka Whaitiri was so negative in the House yesterday. Her speech was very disappointing. I do not know who is briefing her but they are simply ignorant of the facts and they know nothing about the law. I was disappointed that the draft report that was released on Friday last week was released by her before the embargoed hour of 7 p.m.So there we have it—there is a lot to do this year. I am looking forward to approaching these issues and also the security law reform where Michael Cullen and Patsy Reddy have been doing such a great job. I hope that when we have that discussion people will engage in the facts and engage in a principled debate rather than waffling and engaging in piffle.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call for the Green Party—Jan Logie.JAN LOGIE (Green): I am pleased to follow on from that piffle. As I listened to the Prime Minister’s statement to this Parliament earlier in the week I must say that unlike others who seem to be in awe I personally was left bored and frustrated by the cheap barracking and the smoke and mirrors. It is not like we do not have major social environmental and economic challenges in front of us as a country. Half of the population did not get a pay rise last year. In just 2 years there has been a 20 percent increase in the number of people who are underemployed. There are 305000 children living in poverty in this country and our emissions are going up while we watch the cyclones approach. In all of John Key’s many speeches over the last 8 years he has mentioned poverty only 15 times—and even then it has been mostly to deny its existence—and he happens to have mentioned rugby 21 times.Despite our pressing global challenges the Prime Minister has never mentioned climate change in a state of the nation speech. John Key seems incapable of naming our challenges or accepting that we can do something about them. He seems so tied up with what is in front of him and his mates that he is missing the bigger picture and this is so evident when you look at the Government’s Better Public Services targets. These are its main goals for what it wants to achieve in Government. The No. 1 goal is reducing long-term welfare dependence—specifically to reduce the number of people getting income support by 25 percent by 2018—with 75000 fewer people getting income support within this parliamentary term. I really want to examine that a little bit because I can understand that some people will think that that is ambitious and is a really good thing. But is that really the most important goal for this country? Is it more important than reducing poverty? Is getting someone off income support without any concern as to whether they have got a job or whether they are well or whether they are safe more important—the most important thing in our country? Is that the extent of our ambition?But put aside for a second the poverty of the goal and let us consider how the Government is doing on its No. 1 goal. The only real at all relevant material I heard in the speech in relation to that goal was the Government saying that it has created an extra 160000 jobs over the past 3 years and that Treasury expects another 195000 by 2020 which actually if you analyse those numbers shows us that the job creation rate is slowing and the Government is telling us that is a good thing. These are the figures that John Key promoted in his speech so we are all expected to think: “Well OK surely there are more jobs so these beneficiaries are going to be able to get off welfare and into work. If they need the work great.”But last year the same Government granted almost 186000 work visas. Admittedly that includes visa renewals but the majority of these visas—120000 of them—did not cite an occupation and are likely to be low-wage jobs. So even allowing for these renewals these are obviously more visa work permits than the number of jobs created. So while saying getting people off income support is its No. 1 goal the Government has actually made it harder for New Zealanders to get off income support and get into work. It has effectively flooded the market with low-wage workers.When I asked the chief executive officer of the Ministry of Social Development about how it was tracking on this target of 25 percent—it was 2.8 percent last year—he said: “Oh well actually it’s more of an aspirational target.” He is not even expecting to achieve it. This is the Government’s No. 1 goal and the chief executive officer has given up on it—and no wonder when the Government’s other policies directly conflict with doing this and the achievement of it. And what it has left us with is a stigmatised group of people who have been subjected to some of the harshest most intrusive welfare reforms that this country has ever seen. It is time the Government—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am sorry to interrupt the member. Her time has expired.GARETH HUGHES (Green): Kia ora. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. Prime Minister I have sat and I have listened to all your speeches opening Parliament and I would like to congratulate you on delivering your eighth. It is a real accomplishment and you must now be thinking how history will remember you.Just outside this Chamber are the portraits of our great political leaders from Seddon to Savage from Fraser to Kirk. How do these giants who established universal suffrage and a caring State in the midst of the Great Depression and a world war and who built a modern independent bicultural New Zealand compare with you? Is the flag it? Your desperate lumbering grasping attempt at building a legacy with a flag will not mask the realities. Hungry kids up; inequality up; pollution up; electricity costs up; housing costs up; foreign ownership up; debt up; corruption up.You might have once been a national leader but now you are looking like a National Party leader. Once you attacked the nanny State of efficient lightbulbs but then presided over the most wide-reaching mass surveillance network of our country’s history. You passed the Skynet law under urgency sacked elected councils then refused elections.You are our first selfie PM our first comedian PM—a derping planking rape-joking expert at getting us on American late-night comedy shows. At a time of growing inequality rapid global change and systemic economic problems we basically got a chilled-out entertainer as a Prime Minister.On election night 2011 you first and foremost thanked your pollster. You are our most poll-driven Prime Minister yet after all these years we still do not know what you stand for bar the jokes and the three-line slogans.Do you see more for New Zealand than just China’s dairy farm and America’s spy station? Prime Minister why just last week on our national day did you run from debate at Waitangi into the arms of rugby players? To the 300000 Kiwi kids growing up in poverty do you really say: “Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for Skycity Serco Saudi sheikhs MediaWorks Rio Tinto.”?Under your leadership scientists have been ridiculed and silenced and NGOs have had their funding and voice cut. Rape crisis centres are closing and food banks are doing a brisk trade. Kiwis are known for their generosity and their hospitality but Prime Minister under you New Zealand has become more welcoming to oil companies than to refugees. Whenever there was a Government scandal there were extreme benefit measures floated and: “Hey look pandas!”.Prime Minister you may not have a plum in your mouth like your political hero Holyoake but you are exactly the same—an arrogant born-to-rule out-of-touch short-term “kick it down the road” style of leadership. You delivered tax cuts the country could not afford and you are leaving $120 billion in national debt a superannuation crisis crippling student loans and a generation locked out of homeownership. You may call that a legacy; I call it intergenerational theft.Once we were one of the richest nations in the world yet now Kiwis work some of the longest hours for some of the lowest wages and pay some of the highest costs of living in the OECD. After selling our assets you are now selling out our sovereignty to corporates and the Hollywood industrial complex. Your small army of spin doctors tells us again and again how you grew up in a State house but now that you are on the ninth floor you are even selling them too.But you do seem like a good guy to have a beer with and no one else in this room could have got away with your antics and your gaffes. How have you got away with it? Well we could ask Crosby/Textor and we could also point to the biggest of big business bucks and the dirtiest of dirty tricks operations in this country’s history. But Kiwis are a good people a caring people and we can reclaim our democracy from dirty politics and big money.One of your legacies—what you cynically call the rent a crowd—is growing into a real movement for political change. Another legacy is a Green Party bigger and stronger than ever before. Thank you Prime Minister.Prime Minister as you reflect this may be one of your last opening speeches to Parliament. I have no doubt that you will go down in history as one of the most successful politicians of a generation but by that I mean “politician” in the sense used on the Stuff comment threads.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call for the National Party. I call Jian Yang.Dr JIAN YANG (National): It is a pleasure to speak in the debate on the Prime Minister’s statement. May I first say hou nian kuai le which means “happy Year of the Monkey” to my colleagues and to all New Zealanders including the members of the Chinese community. The Chinese believe that the monkey is a very intelligent creative and clever animal so those born in the Year of the Monkey will have great careers and wealth. With this in mind I am very proud to be part of a National-led Government that is making great strides towards building a stronger and more prosperous country in New Zealand. We are continuously working hard on delivering what matters to Kiwis. It is about building a stronger economy that attracts new investment and creates more jobs. It is also about delivering world-class public services including health and education.Ensuring every child gets a good education is one of the most important things National can do to raise living standards and also to build a more competitive and productive economy. As chair of the Education and Science Committee I am very proud of what we have achieved and what we have been able to deliver in education. So may I take this opportunity to congratulate our Minister of Education the Hon Hekia Parata on what she has achieved to date.The National Government has set a number of targets particularly for education and we are doing well in meeting these targets. More specifically the National Government is investing $359 million to raise the quality of our teaching and leadership in our schools. We are helping keep our best teachers in the classroom and sharing experience or expertise in leadership across schools to lift children’s achievement. Regular participation in quality early childhood education dramatically increases a child’s chance of succeeding in education. That is why we have almost doubled investment in early childhood education since 2008 and we are also investing heavily in infrastructure such as schools which will in turn create jobs and offer learning opportunities.I would like to talk about our schoolkids learning Asian languages particularly Chinese. It is important that we prepare our children for the future. A trend in the past few decades is that New Zealand is moving closer to the Asia-Pacific including East Asia economically and socially. For instance East Asia as a whole was our minor trading partner in the 1970s. Now it is our most important trading partner. In the 1970s we could barely notice new Asian immigrants but now the Asian population accounts for 11 percent of our population. So not only does New Zealand need to increase the number of students learning Asian languages to support our growing trade and international relationships but also international evidence shows learning a second language can contribute to the development of a student’s literacy skills in their first language. Against this background the Government has committed a total of $10 million over 5 years to increase second language learning for all students.The Government has achieved a lot. We believe that New Zealand is in very good shape. Thank you.CHRIS BISHOP (National): Well it has been a great start to the year for the Government but it has clearly been a very bad start to the year for the Green Party. I have heard some poor speeches in this House in the short time I have been in the House but I have never seen or heard such a spite-filled hate-filled pile of bile like we just heard from Gareth Hughes. It is that speech that demonstrates precisely why the Green Party is going nowhere in politics.It has been a great start to the year for the Government and indeed a great start to the year for the country because the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal was signed just a few days ago—hugely significant for New Zealand and its future a proud day for New Zealand and the apex of trade and foreign policy in New Zealand. The National Government knows that the former leader of the Labour Party Phil Goff knows that and former leaders I should say in this House Phil Goff Helen Clark Mike Moore and David Shearer—they all know that. The only person it seems in New Zealand who does not seem to know that is Andrew Little.So the question really has to be asked: who are we going to trust to tell us the truth about the Trans-Pacific Partnership? Is it the doyenne of the liberal left Helen Clark? Is it Phil Goff? Is it Mike Moore? Is it David Shearer whom we are going to trust along with credible people like the neutral and independent public servants who work at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade? Are we going to place our faith and reliance upon former Labour leaders and Prime Ministers including our own or are we going to place our trust in Jane Kelsey who does not support any free-trade deal New Zealand has ever signed? She does not support the Korean deal she does not support CER and she does not support the China free-trade agreement. Are we going to trust her? My answer to that is no. Are we going to trust the noted “independent commentator” Barry Coates who has been going around representing Oxfam New Zealand and putting out economic commentary on the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement? He keeps being reported by the media as being an independent commentator even though he is next on the Green Party list. Are we going to trust him? I do not think so.It has been a great start to the year for the Government but the Labour Party has also released some policy. You could be forgiven for not really noticing it. In keeping with its stance on the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal Labour has released a policy that is regressive and back to the future—right back to the 1970s—and is it not revealing about those members’ political priorities? They come down here to the House every day and they talk about child poverty and then they suddenly invent $1.3 billion. And what do they spend their $1.3 billion on which they have just materialised out of thin air—what do they spend it on? What does the Labour Party spend it on? Not child poverty—no. Those members come in and they say “No the real problem facing this country is that people who leave school”—who leave Auckland Grammar School and go to Auckland University—“have to borrow $5000 per year for a law degree. That is the real issue. I know we’ll give them 3 free years’ tertiary education.” even though people who leave university with a tertiary education earn far more than people who do not go to university and they pay those loans back and they contribute to the economy. There are private and public benefits—Carmel Sepuloni: Not just university—any tertiary education Chris.CHRIS BISHOP: —from tertiary education and it is only fair that people make a contribution. I hear Carmel Sepuloni bleating away over there. She has said some really silly things on this topic. Her point is that people in the 1970s got free tertiary education. Yes that is true. It was not completely free; it was very cheap to go to university in the 1970s. But as I have pointed out to her via Twitter the reality is that very few people went to university. So yes kids from white middle-class families who got their bursaries went to university. Guess who did not go? Māori children Pasifika children and kids from poor backgrounds.What has the student loan scheme done? The student loan scheme is one of the most progressive equitable policies ever implemented by any Government in New Zealand history. And guess who started it? Phil Goff. Student fees and student loans are a legacy of the reforming progressive administration of the fourth Labour Government because it shares the cost burden of tertiary education. It recognises that there are not just public benefits from tertiary education; there are private benefits. And not only are there private benefits where you ask people to make a contribution; then we wipe the interest from their loans. So it is an extremely generous system and it has massively expanded access. That is why there are more Māori at university that is why there are more Pasifika at university and that is why they are succeeding under this Government. The student loan scheme is something Labour should be proud of. It should not try to dismantle it through back-to-the-future 1970s policies.KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): Tēnā koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Ngā mihi o te Tau Hou ki a koe ā ki ngā mema katoa huri rauna i Te Whare.[Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. Greetings of the New Year to you and to all the members throughout the House.]Obviously our Working Futures policy is a good one because National is railing so hard against it. What does Chris Bishop have against helping people to get ahead? We know from the figures that in 20 years’ time 40 percent of the jobs that exist now will not exist at that time so the Labour Party is doing something about it. We are focusing on the Kiwi Dream on the Kiwi future; not just railing about what is happening today and being focused on today. He is obviously a guy who has grown up with a hint of privilege whereas people like the people I represent up north—Jacqui Dean: Oh that’s so Labour.KELVIN DAVIS: —do not quite have the same level of privilege. We actually do have to graft. We do struggle. There are a number of people up north—although they have the potential and everything that it takes to succeed at university the one thing they do not have and it is a barrier to their participation in university is the money. And that is just a fact. I heard a member over there screeching out—Carmel Sepuloni: Talk about privilege.KELVIN DAVIS: —yes talk about privilege; exactly—about this policy and railing against it and that is because members opposite do not really mix with the type of people who are in the Tai Tokerau or on the East Coast. They mix with the people of their own sort who have grown up with a measure of privilege.We saw how New Zealanders reacted actually to the Prime Minister at Eden Park on the weekend when instead of turning up at Waitangi Marae to face all those angry people—people who have not really had all the information regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement put in front of them. I mean look at it. There it is there I think in the grey folders on the Table there. I mean all the folk up north are expected to read that and absorb what is in those folders. I am not sure whether that is the TPP in its entirety or whether that is just one chapter but certainly it has not been touched. Nobody can actually be bothered to read through it and decipher what it really means for us out there in the provinces. But John Key—instead of turning up to Waitangi to talk to the people and to allow Māori the opportunity to throw questions and challenge him on the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement he ran off to Auckland to the Nines. He walked along the side of the field in front of the terraces and the people in the terraces—our people—soundly roundly booed him to the point that he scurried upstairs to where he was comfortable in the corporate boxes and he was happy taking selfies with people. He was happy to be seen there. He was all relaxed. But out on the terraces where our people watch the sports there was not quite the reception that he hoped for.In fact it just reflected a measure of the anxiety that people up north at Waitangi had regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But where I really took offence—because I was one of the people at the meeting 2 or 3 days before Waitangi Day who voted on whether or not the Prime Minister should attend Waitangi. I was one of the people who stood up and said: “No. I think the Prime Minister should be allowed on to Te Tii Marae.” and I voted for him to attend on the basis that it is an opportunity the one and only time that Māori will have the opportunity to challenge him on the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. But instead he said: “I’m not going to turn up because they’re banning me from speaking.” Well look that did not stop anyone else from turning up. We were all told we were not to talk politics but we did in fact talk politics because we know—those of us who are in touch with the history of the area know—that on 5 February the day before the signing at Waitangi all the chiefs sat at a place called Taurangatira at Waitangi and they discussed the Treaty which in their day was the equivalent of discussing politics. So if you know the history if you know tikanga and if you are in touch with all New Zealanders including Māori you would know that no one is going to stop you from standing up on a marae and saying what you want to say.But instead the Prime Minister said: “Oh it’s a bit mickey mouse.” Let me tell you. When he said that it was a bit mickey mouse—the Te Tii Marae trustees—he is talking about half a dozen 70 to 80-year-old pensioners. He is the man with all the resources of the State at his disposal. He has goodness knows how many Ministers how many MPs how many spin doctors and how many advisers he has got Crosby/Textor he has got the resources of the State at his disposal and the best he can do is turn and pick on half a dozen elderly pensioners who are just trying to do the best for their marae. That to me was insulting. To me it also signified how out of touch the Prime Minister is with the people of Tai Tokerau and Māoridom in general. How dare he stand up there and belittle and denigrate elderly New Zealanders who are just trying to have a role. I bet you he does not even understand what they do in their role on the marae. Over the course of 3 or 4 days they had to sit there for probably 10 to 12 hours at a time and welcome group after group after group on to the marae. He does not understand that because he is out of touch.What I have suggested to Shane Reti the National MP for Whangarei is that next year the Government—because the Treaty is the partnership between Māori and Pākehā and it should be the Government and Māori actually sitting on the taumata of the marae and welcoming the rest of New Zealand in. That is what those members should be doing as a Government. I hope they take up that suggestion.Working Futures—the dream for New Zealand. The Kiwi Dream has been roundly criticised by the people on the other side of the House and that is to be expected. They were quite stunned by the audacity of the plan—the fact that it is forward-thinking and the fact that it is going to help New Zealanders. It is going to get people ahead. Instead what they want to do is saddle our young people with debt into the future.My daughter is one of those people. She is in her fourth year this year of a law degree. She knows that she has to pay off all that debt $20000-odd before she gets to start saving money for her house—getting on the property ladder. That is the Kiwi Dream—owning your own house. But that is out of touch for so many of our young people.A nephew of mine was lucky. His parents are quite well-to-do. They helped him to get into a house in a fairly average suburb in Auckland. That house cost $400000 and 4 years later he sold it for $790000. That is the skyrocketing cost of housing. That is the price our young people are having to pay for those houses and yet they have to pay off their student debt first.We really do not ask for much in this country. After the essentials such as oxygen and food and water we want a decent job. Let me tell you. I was appalled to read this the other day. David Clark has done some fantastic work to get the Mondayisation of Waitangi Day but then we heard about an employer who has insisted that their employees if they are called up must turn up for work on a public holiday—a statutory holiday. If they do not turn up on that day then they face the sack. What sort of a country do we live in where an employer can just break the law and demand that people turn up to work on a statutory holiday and give them the sack if they do not do that? That is absurd. All that New Zealanders want is fairness. That is part of the Kiwi Dream.Serco last year—I have to say that the previous Minister of Corrections did not cover himself in glory last year. Already we see the makings of another ministerial train wreck in the Minister of Customs who really is just not on top of the game. Nicky Wagner is probably the first nominee for the “Sam Lotu-Iiga Ministerial Incompetence Award”. All she talks about in terms of combating the importation of P and drugs is SmartGate. I suggest she should buy her own SmartGate install it in her office and walk through it about a dozen times a day in the hope that something—anything—rubs off.All that New Zealanders want is a fair go. We do not want to live in poverty. We do not want our children to struggle through life. I believe that Gareth Hughes summed up superbly what is going wrong in this nation and I congratulate—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member.Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Climate Change Issues): I move That this debate be now adjourned.Motion agreed to.Debate interrupted.