Volume 711 Week 39 - Tuesday 1 March 2016Text is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVolume 711 Week 39 - Tuesday 1 March 2016[Sitting date: 01 March 2016. Volume:711;Page:9195. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 1 March 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.VisitorsAustralia—Electoral Matters Committee of the Victoria Legislative AssemblyMr SPEAKER: Honourable members I am sure that members would wish to welcome members of the Electoral Matters Committee of the Victoria Legislative Assembly led by Chairperson the honourable Louise Asher who are present in the gallery.MotionsFiji—Tropical Cyclone WinstonRt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister):I seek leave to move a motion without notice on Tropical Cyclone Winston.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I move That the House express its support for the people and Government of Fiji and other Pacific neighbours affected by Tropical Cyclone Winston. During the weekend of 20 and 21 February Cyclone Winston cut a path of destruction through Fiji resulting in loss of life and significant loss of property and crops. Cyclone Winston was designated a category 5 cyclone the strongest cyclone to make landfall in Fiji with sustained winds reaching over 300 kilometres per hour. In some villages that the eye of the storm passed directly over the devastation is near-complete. It has been assessed that up to 40 percent of Fiji’s population has been impacted by the cyclone.In the immediate aftermath of Cyclone Winston New Zealand quickly understood that significant resources would be required to help Fiji. Our early offer of P3 Orion flights to undertake aerial damage assessment was accepted and over the past 10 days the P3 Orion has undertaken four flights. The reports and imagery following were valuable in assessing where relief is needed most. A C-130 Hercules has also made a number of flights to Fiji taking much-needed relief supplies. To date over 160 tonnes of priority emergency goods have been provided to Fiji including food construction supplies generators tents tarpaulins blankets and shelter kits as well as water and sanitation kits. More Hercules flights are planned for this week.Last week an Air Force 757 flew a team of army engineers and urban search and rescue personnel to Fiji and they are now working alongside Fijian partners to bring immediate relief to communities including repairing schools and public infrastructure and clearing debris. A New Zealand Air Force King Air has also been made available to the Government of Fiji to enable its officials and medical teams to travel to remote villages. A New Zealand medical assistance team is also in Fiji supporting the Fijian Government in undertaking assessments and providing primary health support to those affected. On Sunday our navy’s offshore patrol vessel HMNZS Wellington arrived in Suva and HMNZS Canterbury is also expected to dock tomorrow carrying nearly 90 tonnes of relief and building supplies and helicopters. By the end of this week there will be close to 400 New Zealand personnel in Fiji doing what New Zealand does best—getting out on to the ground and helping our Pacific neighbours in their time of need.Our already established aid programme in Fiji has been bolstered in the wake of Cyclone Winston. Our total financial contribution to the cyclone response to date stands at $4.7 million. The New Zealand public has been generous and many companies have also made offers of assistance. The Fijian community here is rallying its support for its friends and family back home. New Zealand’s response to Cyclone Winston is shaping up to be our largest humanitarian response in the Pacific. Yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs Murray McCully travelled to Fiji to see first-hand the wreckage caused by Cyclone Winston. Mr McCully flew over some of the devastated areas and has told me about the widespread damage to housing the scarring of the landscape and the loss of crops. During the visit Minister McCully met with the Fijian Minister for Foreign Affairs and also with the Minister of agriculture and national disaster management. Both have expressed their gratitude and appreciation for the swift and generous response from New Zealand.A strong bond exists between the people of Fiji and the people of New Zealand. The thoughts and sympathies of all New Zealanders and of this House are with the people of Fiji during this time. The Fijian people are resilient and they will overcome this event and in time they will recover. They can be assured that New Zealand will continue to work with them and support them through the relief recovery and rebuild phases.ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition): On behalf of the Opposition the Labour Party I would like to join and support the Government in its resolution before the House today in sending our thoughts and sympathies to the people of Fiji following the loss of lives and the destruction caused by Cyclone Winston and to acknowledge the contribution that the Government has made on behalf of the people of New Zealand and indeed the contribution coming from the Fijian community also resident in New Zealand.Cyclone Winston was the largest and strongest cyclone ever recorded in the southern hemisphere. Clearly Fiji has suffered significant damage: in some areas entire villages have been flattened. The geographic distances and the remoteness of some areas involved make it hard to assess the full impact of the cyclone but we know it has been catastrophic and it is reassuring—at least from a New Zealander’s point of view—to see the role and contribution that the New Zealand personnel are making in making the assessments and assisting in the recovery. The number of people in emergency shelters doubled almost every day last week peaking at almost one-twentieth of Fiji’s entire population. According to Unicef 51000 people are still in shelters. We know it could be weeks before electricity is restored to some areas.New Zealand as the Prime Minister has said stands side by side with the people of Fiji and we will do whatever is required to help them through this disaster and the years of recovery ahead.JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): Our hearts do go out to the people of Fiji. Tropical Cyclone Winston was as has been mentioned the strongest storm in recorded history in our hemisphere. Wind speeds topped 320 kilometres an hour; whole forests were stripped of their foliage; and schools hospitals and houses were flattened. More than 40 people are dead and thousands are now homeless.Personally I have found it impossible not to be moved by the images of children standing by their wrecked homes and the wreckage of entire communities lying scattered on those famously beautiful Fijian shores. I thank the National Government for its immediate and its substantive response in the aftermath. Our close ties to Fiji make this unlike many global catastrophes and it is heartening to know that those ties are now moving thousands of New Zealanders to give generously to our brothers and sisters now suffering in Fiji.There is another way that New Zealanders and the Government can respond to this cyclone and to others like it. It is no coincidence that this was the strongest cyclone recorded in our hemisphere or that this was one of many record-breaking storms that have occurred in recent times. As a nation we need to start facing the truth that climate change is making tropical storms like Cyclone Winston more ferocious. As New Zealanders we are the fifth-highest emitter per capita of climate pollution. Since we committed to reduce our climate change emissions in 1990 and under successive Governments New Zealand’s net emissions have risen by 42 percent and the Ministry for the Environment projects another 50 percent increase by 2030 if we keep doing what we are doing. We as a nation are not properly reckoning with the fact that our actions are hurting those people in the Pacific who are the most vulnerable to the impacts of the pollution that we are adding to. If we really want to help the Pacific our climate emissions should be going down not up.New Zealanders are getting in behind the recovery effort in Fiji. The Government has provided financial aid and deployed Defence Force resources and personnel to help. The Green Party supports these efforts but along with that desperately needed and immediate aid the next most compassionate thing that we can do for Fiji now is to listen to the pleas of Pacific Island leaders and commit to taking real action on climate change. While we wring our hands and we fret at how expensive it might be for New Zealand to do anything about climate change we ought to recognise that the cost to our Pacific neighbours of our doing nothing is now being measured in human lives. Thank you.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): At times such as this it does not matter what one’s political persuasion is or—dare one say it—what one’s name is. New Zealand First joins with our political opponents in expressing our regret for what has happened as well as our best wishes and support for the Fijian nation and people as they begin the long road to recovery from this terrible event. This is not a time to discuss why it may have happened but we are very mindful that there needs to be a discussion as to why it is happening. We are sure that the New Zealand public will show their characteristic generosity in giving aid and financial support to our Pacific neighbours.MARAMA FOX (Co-Leader—Māori Party): The Māori Party would like to add its voice to the sympathies that have been offered to the people of Fiji who have lost loved ones at this time. Last week as the cyclone looked like it was going to bypass it and then made a U-turn to come back towards Fiji our close family friends were on a flight to Fiji and landed the day before the cyclone arrived. They found themselves in a place of utter devastation. They were there to visit with their family members and also to witness the rededication of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints temple. They travelled for some hours through the devastation to check that their family were OK. They report that the majority of the people in the village and the families that were there are subsistence-living. What they gather and what they grow is what they eat and thereby looking at the devastation of the crops and the people and the way that they were affected there will need to be ongoing support from our Government and we recognise the generosity of our Government and of the New Zealand people in the Fijian community here.But that support will need to be ongoing for some time until crops can be replanted; until life can go back to normal. They found themselves—tourists in Fiji—being cared for by Fijian people who while looking after them had no home of their own to speak of. So I want to acknowledge the resilience of the Fijian people to gather together in communities to pick up and to start again. They are already clearing this ground for crops. They are already rebuilding shelter to live in. We offer our support and our sympathies to them and recognise their strength and courage. I have some pretty poorly pronounced words in Fijian that I would like to offer and this comes from the high commission.Kei mami duavata kei kemuni kei na nomu ni vanua ena gauna dredre ni lako curuma tiko. Mo ni tu vaka kaukauwa tiko me rawa ni tarai cake tale o Viti lomani.Thank you.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): On behalf of the ACT Party I would like to join other leaders in expressing heartfelt sympathy for the people of Fiji particularly those who lost their lives and lost loved ones. I would also like to wish safe passage to the New Zealand Defence Force personnel assisting in the recovery from this disaster and acknowledge the very generous response by many New Zealanders who have responded by voluntarily giving aid to assist in that recovery. Thank you.Motion agreed to.ObituariesDr Ranginui Walker DCNZMMARAMA FOX (Co-Leader—Māori Party): I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate on the passing of Dr Ranginui Walker.Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none.MARAMA FOX: I move That this House acknowledge the passing of Dr Ranginui Walker who was not only a great statesman but a distinguished scholar an inspirational mentor and a champion of the people. E te rangatira te tōtara haemata moe mai rā.[Esteemed leader rest there the strongly growing tōtara.]Motion agreed to.Questions to MinistersEconomic Outlook—Reports1.KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Finance: How does the outlook for the New Zealand economy compare with other developed countries?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Reasonably good. New Zealand businesses are confident and backing themselves despite some global uncertainty. Exporters who were forced to become more efficient when the exchange rate was around 88c are now able to reap the rewards of a much lower exchange rate. The manufacturing sector has notched up 40 straight months of expansion and the services sector which makes up 70 percent of the economy has been growing at the fastest level in 7 years. Treasury forecasts that growth will be around 3 percent over the next 2 years similar to Australia and a bit faster than the US Canada and the UK.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How is the positive economic outlook translating into more jobs and higher income for New Zealand families?Hon BILL ENGLISH: In the last year the annual average wage increased by 3.1 percent much faster than inflation and by 2020 at moderate rates of increase it will reach over $63000. Against this background the Government announced an increase in the minimum wage yesterday up 50c an hour to $15.25 an hour which will directly benefit over 150000 workers. This 3.4 percent increase in the minimum wage is significantly more than the cost of living increase which is 0.1 percent.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What risks are there to New Zealand’s economic outlook?Hon BILL ENGLISH: With reasonable pace of growth and real wage rises for many New Zealanders domestic results are reasonably strong despite ongoing wobbles in the global economy. There is uncertainty around the impact of US interest rate hikes risks around European banks and always some uncertainty about the nature of the changes in the Chinese economy. However New Zealand is relatively well positioned to deal with what we would regard as the normal spread of risk in the global economy.Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What steps is the Government taking to mitigate risk and continue to support our growing economy?Hon BILL ENGLISH: One way this Government and previous Governments have taken steps to mitigate risks is through the negotiation of a network of free-trade agreements. The importance of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement is so high because it gives us better access to 800 million customers in 11 countries and accounts for 36 percent of the global economy. We believe the benefits that have been calculated for this agreement are conservative based on the success of the most recent free-trade agreement negotiated by the previous Labour Government the Chinese free-trade agreement.Housing Rental—Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill2.METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for Building and Housing: Will the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill guarantee that no New Zealand renter will live in a cold damp mouldy house that makes them sick; if not why not?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Housing): This bill will make 180000 homes warmer drier and safer without imposing excessive compliance costs on landlords that would inevitably be passed on to tenants. The bill requires that all rental properties have a smoke alarm by 1 July this year and that they are progressively insulated over a period of 3 years. No bill provides an absolute guarantee; it is as foolish as pretending that our criminal laws prevent all murders or that our road safety laws prevent all motor accidents. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just before I call the member mention the level of interjection. We have been away for a week so I would expect some level of interjection but if it is going to be disruptive then I will start naming members mentioning their names and then if it continues beyond that I will with regret be asking some members to leave.Metiria Turei: Will the Minister take the advice of the Child Poverty Action Group and include a rentals warrant of fitness in the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill to provide a more comprehensive improvement in the warmth the dryness and safety of rental houses?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: There are two problems with the warrant of fitness proposal. I am advised by officials that it would cost $225 per home or $100 million per year just for the compliance and the administration without fixing a single house. The second concern I have is the pedantic nature of having “Clipboard Charlies” putting in unreasonable requirements. For instance if I look at the member’s own bill it would assess my Beehive office as unsafe because I do not have a safety strip on my window or my flat and I do not think that is reasonable. The third part is of course that any cost that you impose actually goes on to rents and if you are going to put $225 on the cost of every rental property in New Zealand that is actually a cost that will impact on the very families that we should be helping.Metiria Turei: What then is the cost of the lives of the 15 children who die each year from poor housing and the 42000 child admissions to hospital each year from cold damp housing and poverty?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: This Government has made more progress on getting our homes insulated than any other Government in history. That is why we have a bill before the House that is going to require all homes to be insulated by 1 July 2019 and to require a smoke alarm because there are too many New Zealanders who die unnecessarily as a consequence of the lack of those things. What we are not going to do is impose a massive bureaucracy that will impose costs on the very families that we are trying to help.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister referred to the cost of a warrant of fitness scheme. I asked him the financial cost of the deaths of 15 children and the 42000 child hospital admissions. He did not answer that question—Mr SPEAKER: Order! And nor could you expect a Minister to do that. When you consider that it is a supplementary question I do not think the member could rightfully expect the Minister to put a dollar value on to 15 deaths and what I think were 40000 hospital admissions. The question was without doubt addressed.Metiria Turei: Has the Minister sought any advice on the cost of 15 child deaths and the 42000 child admissions to hospital caused every year by cold damp housing?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yes I have. There has been extensive cost-benefit analysis on the Government proposals. The analyses showed that a warrant of fitness imposed more cost than benefit and that the proposal that we have in the bill is the best way in which we can address the very issues that the member is concerned about.Joanne Hayes: What progress has been made in improving home insulation over the past 15 years?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The previous Government managed to do 2000 home insulations per year or 18000 over its 9 years. We firstly put a focus on insulating those 30000 State houses. We then provided for Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart and Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes which provided for 290000 houses. This bill provides for a further 180000 houses a total of 500000. I do find it a bit rich for members opposite who did fewer than 20000 to criticise this Government for doing 500000.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister was not required to answer my initial question on the costs of deaths and child admissions because he did not have the information. He just admitted that he does have—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question was whether the Minister had sought any advice. His very first answer was yes he had sought advice on that issue. Without doubt the question was answered.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: To help the House because there have been some questions about the cost-benefit analysis a review has been done by Arthur Grimes and I seek the leave of the House to table that review of the cost-benefit analysis.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that cost-benefit analysis. Is there any objection? There is none; it can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Metiria Turei: Is the Minister denying the evidence of the Victoria University of Wellington Students Association which reports students—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Start the question again.Metiria Turei: Thank you Mr Speaker. Is the Minister denying the evidence of the Victoria University of Wellington Student Association which reports students having to spend over 98 percent of their student living costs loans on rent for cold damp mouldy homes which make them sick?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The member wisely makes the point that there is a connection between making sure homes are affordable as well as good quality. What the member needs to look at in this bill is the new enforcement provisions. The Government’s view is that rather than spending on a compliance cost that has a warrant of fitness over all 500000 homes what we actually need to do is to enforce the existing housing regulations which many of those student flats breach and actually give my ministry the powers to prosecute those landlords and that is what is provided for in the bill. The member may be interested that when I met with the students association it was very positive about those provisions in the bill.Metiria Turei: Does the Minister dismiss the evidence of the Auckland Regional Public Health Service the Public Health Association and the nurses’ associations which all say that the bill does not go far enough to protect health and that what is needed is a proper warrant of fitness in this bill?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Where those groups are incorrect is that they do not look at the $100 million cost of the bureaucracy of a warrant of fitness over all 500000 rental properties in New Zealand. And what is a far more sensible response—that is what is provided for in the bill—is for us to actually focus on those homes that are substandard and breach the current housing regulations and to actually get on and enforce those. That is a far more sensible approach to this issue than a warrant of fitness over all 500000 homes.Metiria Turei: If the Minister will not take the advice of these groups will he take the advice of Andrew King of the Property Investors Federation who agrees that cold damp rental homes are a problem in New Zealand and that the Government should fund power bill vouchers to the 30000 families with children who have cold-related health conditions from rental properties?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Mr King has made very plain to me that he does not support a warrant of fitness. What he would wish is that the Government either through tax or other grants pay for the cost of landlords getting their properties up to spec. It is the Government’s view that landlords do have responsibilities and although through Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart we have provided $500 million for insulating houses landlords also have responsibility to have their rental properties up to standard.Pharmac—Funding and Subsidised Medicines3.ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Health given the Minister’s statement regarding funding of Keytruda that Pharmac “haven’t got the money at the moment … that’s the issue”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.Andrew Little: Why did he cut health funding in four of his seven Budgets—a total of $1.7 billion—denying Kiwis access to modern medicines like Keytruda?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Given that health funding has gone from $11.8 billion to $15.9 billion in the time that I have been Prime Minister it is not hard to see why the New Zealand public does not take the Leader of the Opposition seriously when he gets up and just makes it up and it is plain wrong.Andrew Little: How on earth can the Prime Minister possibly say that when his own Minister said on radio this morning that Pharmac “haven’t got the money at the moment … that’s the issue”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member needs to read the supplementary questions that they write for him before he comes to the House. What he actually said in his previous question was that health funding had been cutin three Budgets when it had not. Of course if Pharmac has more money by definition it can fund more drugs. I am quite confident that under this Government Pharmac will get more money. And I am quite confident that at the moment Pharmac is undertaking complex commercial negotiations looking at melanoma drugs.Andrew Little: Given there is no effective front-line treatment for advanced melanoma currently funded will he tell the cancer sufferers here today why there is money for flag referendums but nothing that is going to help save lives?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: At the moment the Government funds about $800 million a year into Pharmac of which about $131 million goes into cancer treatment. This is a Government that has increased that expenditure andwill I have no doubt increase it again. One thing we do knowabout Keytruda though is that it is effective for one in three patients who take it; two out of three do not. There are other drugs on the market and other drugs that potentially might be more effective and at the moment Pharmac is in the process of complex negotiations to sort out which one might be best.Andrew Little: Is he serious in his answer that New Zealanders desperate for this front-line drug might have to wait for the Budget? Knowing that one New Zealander a day is dying from melanoma that is another 90 people who will give up their lives while they wait for this Government to do something.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The Government is working through the process with Pharmac and I think that is the right way to go. I might simply make the point that actually putting Keytruda and the issue of melanoma to one side there are also a great many other drugs that are unfunded for which other New Zealanders are dying. So in the end it is an allocation of resources. The Government is putting in more money and it will continue to put in more money.Andrew Little: Can he not see that those New Zealanders who are suffering from melanoma and are desperate for treatment cannot put that aside and can he respond to the woman suffering from melanoma whom I spoke to today who said: “New Zealanders don’t have time for him to piss about on this issue.”?Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In fairness—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will let the Prime Minister address the question.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In fairness if one looks at the health system under a National-led Government not only has its funding increased by more than $4 billion but also the amount of elective surgical operations has increased dramatically the state of the district health boards has increased dramatically the amount of money going into cancer drugs has increased and the amount of money going into Pharmac has increased. We live in a world where there will be more and new biological drugs that will come along and they will put even more pressure on future Governments. We have a system that we work through but we are quite conscious of that and we are putting in more money. I just say that we have enormous sympathy with the issues of those individuals at the moment but there are also other drugs and other issues that get less profile as well. If the member wants to be fair he should list all of those but then also he should stop asking for money in certain areas and say he wants it all directed to Pharmac. But that is not actually the policy that Andrew Little is talking about.Andrew Little: In view of the statements by the Minister of Health this morning that he has great sympathy for those suffering from melanoma if they have no treatment is that all that melanoma sufferers in New Zealand can hope for now—sympathy from National Party Ministers?Hon Annette King: Yeah good question.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Well actually no it is not a very good question because if the member were listening he would hear this response: (a) there is more money going into Pharmac; (b) Pharmac is going through complex negotiations; and (c) over time I am confident that we will get these things. At the start of this year Andrew Little got up and told New Zealanders the most important thing was that youngsters got more money towards a student loan that is already 70 or 80 percent paid by the taxpayers of New Zealand. He did not get up and say: “More money for Keytruda.” He did not get up and say: “More money for other drugs.” He got up and said that students who get 80 percent of their funding already paid for by the taxpayer who earn more money than the average wage—they are his No. 1—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The question—[Interruption] Order! The answer to that question was too long.Andrew Little: How on earth can he as Prime Minister plan for tax cuts while Kiwis are dying because of a lack of treatment for melanoma?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member will need to wait for Budget 2016 to see what the priorities are. Under a National-led Government the health system of New Zealand is run well. Under Annette King I would have my head down in shame at the way she ran the health system in New Zealand. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I do not want to specifically mention by name the people who are interjecting too much.Hon Annette King: Yeah well if you bring me into it.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has been in it all afternoon actually.Gang Action Plan—Pilot Programmes4.TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister for Social Development: What recent announcements has she made on the whole of government Gang Action Plan?Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Today I announced two new community pilots that will support the partners and children of gang members to lead successful lives and help steer young people away from gang life. As part of the Gang Action Plan these pilots will see the Ministry of Social Development partner with local social service providers to work with gang-connected families and deliver wraparound intensive support services as well as education employment and mentoring opportunities. The pilots will also work with gang members who want to leave the gang lifestyle. Total funding for the two trials is $1.1 million over 2.5 years with more initiatives in other regions to follow soon.Todd Muller: Why is the Government focused on working with gang members and their families?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: A report by the Ministry of Social Development released today estimates that gang members and their children cost the taxpayer $714 million through their contact with the ministry and Child Youth and Family. The report shows nine out 10 gang members have received welfare assistance costing the taxpayer $525 million. Additionally over one-quarter of the allegedly abused or neglected children and 60 percent of their children have been victims. Gang life ruins families and the social cost through domestic violence and child abuse is unacceptable. The new Gang Intelligence Centre involving Police the Ministry of Social Development and other Government agencies will give us more detailed information to help address these issues.Darroch Ball: Why is it taking 2 years to initiate two pilot programmes that do nothing but subsidise current criminal behaviour and do not address the real problem which is the existence of the gangs themselves?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Well if there was an easy fix to the issue it would have been resolved years ago. This is not an easy fix; it is a very complex area. And because we are seeing the gangs work together Government is now working together. These trials are working on the ground with gang families who are actually willing to change because that is the first step to get through where you have families who do want better outcomes for their children; secondly to establish providers who are willing to do the work and that has taken some time to do. You cannot change overnight what has taken generations to produce.Darroch Ball: Will the Government continue to support criminal gangs by using taxpayer funding to pay for the State houses in which many of these gang members live or will she support New Zealand First’s calls to ban gang members from living in our community State houses?Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Well unfortunately gang families by their very nature have women and children who are often at the mercy of the gang members so it is important that we put supports around them. Yes the welfare statistics are there to show just how many of these gang members are actually reliant on the taxpayer for funding their lifestyles while at the same time they are making extraordinary amounts of money through their networks producing methamphetamine. So a whole-of-Government action plan that combines work from both my colleagues the Minister of Police and the Minister of Corrections and also the social support for their families is important to address long term the issues of the harm that gangs do. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Could Darroch Ball please stop interjecting or the next time I will be asking him to leave.Exclusive Economic Zone—Marine Reserves5.EUGENIE SAGE (Green) to the Minister for the Environment: When he said last year that the Marine Reserves Act “is now outdated. It does not provide for protection in the huge Exclusive Economic Zone” was he saying that a new Act should provide for new marine reserves in our EEZ; if so why has his position changed?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): Marine protection is needed in the exclusive economic zone and that is why our Government is committed to the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary covering 15 percent of the exclusive economic zone. It will provide for an area twice the land size of New Zealand in which mining fishing and petroleum drilling will be banned. We have modified our language in the exclusive economic zone from “marine reserve” to “ocean sanctuary” based on the legal advice that our rights and obligations in the exclusive economic zone are different from those in the territorial sea under international law. For instance deep-sea cables that would be prohibited in a marine reserve cannot be prohibited in the exclusive economic zone under that law nor a number of shipping activities. I do not think the public will mind whether it is called an ocean sanctuary or a marine reserve; what they care about is that 15 percent of our exclusive economic zone will be fully protectedunder this Government.Eugenie Sage: Does he agree that the reform legislation apart from the special legislation for the Kermadecs will do nothing to protect 94 percent of the marine environment—areas where threatened seabirds such as albatross and yellow-eyed penguins feed—and nothing to protect the deep-sea ecosystems that our billion-dollar fishing industry depends on?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I think you need to look at the Government’s legislation package as a whole. When you consider that this Government is committing to protecting 15 percent of our exclusive economic zone in the Kermadec area—an area 50 times the size of Fiordland our biggest conservation area; an area that has got over 50 volcanoes and that has got 20 species of marine life—I would be expecting the Green Party to be congratulating this Government on its marine conservation efforts.Eugenie Sage: Is the Minister saying that he is comfortable that oil and gas drilling seabed mining and fishing can occur throughout the exclusive economic zone without balancing this with a new law that enables some areas within the exclusive economic zone outside the Kermadecs to be protected?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: We are the very first Government in the 150-plus year history of this nation to set aside an area of the exclusive economic zone for pure protection. I make this further point to the member: the area of the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary will be the largest no-take contiguous area of ocean anywhere in the world. New Zealand is setting aside the biggest area anywhere in the world for marine conservation. I think that is something that all members of this House should celebrate.Scott Simpson: What overall progress has this Government made to improving the management and protection of our marine environment?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Our first achievement was in putting in place the exclusive economic zone legislation because prior to that deep-sea drilling or any of those activities could be done out in the exclusive economic zone without any requirement for a consent or any restrictions at all. Our second step has been making real progress on a number of marine reserves that had stalled for years or in some cases decades. The three new marine reserves in the Subantarctic Islands the five new marine reserves on the West Coast and the new marine reserve at Kaikōura and at Akaroa are all examples of progress in marine conservation under this Government. The last I would re-emphasise again and about which I have had numerous correspondence from all round the world is the Prime Minister’s announcement of the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary which I think has been welcomed internationally as well as in our own country.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask this Minister if he thinks the history of this country is 150 years—if he thinks that that is an appropriate thing to say in this Parliament why does he not resign?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I openly acknowledge that our Māori people have been here for 800 years but this institution of Parliament has been going for 150 years and I say again—I say again—that this Parliament has never made as good a progress in marine conservation as it has under this Government.Eugenie Sage: Given the widespread support for the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary is he really convinced that his new marine protected areas legislation cannot provide a simple process to create new marine protected areas in the exclusive economic zone which comprises 94 percent of our ocean environment?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: As I have said to the member we are setting aside 15 percent of that exclusive economic zone with the Kermadec legislation. In respect of the marine protected area proposals providing for four different types of marine protection tools species-specific sanctuaries seabed reserves and marine reserves as well as recreational fishing parks they are more appropriate for the territorial sea. For instance it is perfectly proper for local communities to have a say in their sea immediately adjacent to their community but it is the Government’s view that in respect of the exclusive economic zone the more appropriate way is special legislation and that is exactly what we are doing with the Kermadec Islands.Pharmac—Funding6.Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his statements?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Yes within the context that they were made.Hon Annette King: Does he stand by his statement on Radio New Zealand this morning regarding unfunded drugs for melanoma patients that “365 deaths a year—it works in one-third of patients so you know 120-odd could benefit”; if so are these 120 people not worth saving?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: To the first question yes.Hon Annette King: Is he satisfied with the current standard treatment for advanced melanoma even though cancer specialists are telling him it does not work and the only people able to access life-saving drug therapy are those who are able to raise the money?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The point is there are new drugs available. Pharmac is in complex commercial negotiations that are now looking at which might be the most appropriate to fund. The issue is really at the next Budget when we have a bid for health that if we get more money it means that more pharmaceuticals can be funded.Hon Annette King: Does he stand by his admission on The Paul Henry Show this morning that the Ministry of Health has not got the money to fund Pharmac; if so will he also now admit what everybody knows which is that health has been underfunded by $1.7 billion under this Government?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: What I said was that the $800 million that Pharmac gets is totally accounted for—and that member is totally incorrect going around saying that there have been cuts to the health budget. There have not; funding has gone up by $4 billion under this Budget—and she should stop saying that because she is misleading the public of New Zealand.Hon Annette King: Has underfunding of health especially Pharmac led to New Zealand now being last out of 20 comparable OECD countries for access to innovative medicines with 81 medicines waiting to be funded by Pharmac with an average wait of 3 years?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: What I can tell the member is that public health spending in New Zealand is higher than in Australia as a percentage of GDP—[Interruption] It is I am afraid—sorry that is the truth.Hon Annette King: Why did he say on Radio New Zealand this morning that petitioner Leisa Renwick “asked for a meeting sometime after 1.30 p.m. today” when she started emailing him on 18 February offered to meet him anytime—over breakfast or even accompany him to a rugby fixture—if he would just meet with her? Was he being straight with the public when he said that?Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The member is misrepresenting what is in those emails and actually as you know I have met with Mrs Renwick today out on the forecourt because you were there.Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table Leisa Renwick’s emails to the Minister so I am not misrepresenting her—Mr SPEAKER: Order! We do not need that part added.Hon Annette King:—dating back to 18 February seeking a meeting with him at any time.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table those particular—[Interruption] Order! Leave is sought to table those emails. Is there any objection? They can be tabled.Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon Annette King: So he lied.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will stand and withdraw that remark immediately.Hon Annette King: I withdraw Mr Speaker.Roading Waikato—Waikato Expressway7.DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Transport: What recent progress has the Government made on the Waikato Expressway Road of National Significance?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): It was my privilege to open late last year the Cambridge section of the $2.1 billion Waikato Expressway. This new $250 million stretch of road was delivered 6 months ahead of schedule and under budget. The new highway has significantly improved safety on the current State Highway 1 created a new gateway to Cambridge and removed congestion in the town centre. Completion of the Cambridge section is a major milestone on the journey to complete the entire 102 kilometre Waikato Expressway project by 2020. The expressway will be a game-changer for the region and is a good example of the Government’s focus on building infrastructure that will drive New Zealand’s economic success and greatly improve safety.David Bennett: What reports has he seen on how the new Cambridge section of the Waikato Expressway is benefiting motorists?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I have seen a report from the Transport Agency that says that an impressive 15000 vehicles per day have been using the new road since it opened in December and I am pleased to say that people are shaving up to 23 minutes off their daily commute between Cambridge and Hamilton using the new section of the Waikato Expressway. That is up to 23 minutes a day on a round trip that people do not have to spend sitting in their cars. Along with time savings this also saves people money on fuel and shows the real benefits that the Cambridge section of the expressway is delivering for commuters in the Waikato.Government Financial Position—Crown Debt8.GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: What was the dollar figure of net core Crown debt when he took office as Minister and what is that dollar figure today?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): In 2008-09 core Crown net debt was $17.1 billion or 9.1 percent of GDP. Net debt in 2014-15 was $60.6 billion or 25.2 percent of GDP. In between we had the world’s most significant financial crisis since the Great Depression and we had to borrow $17 billion to rebuild Christchurch. Every proposition I have seen from the Labour Party since would drive debt up.Grant Robertson: Has he seen the report by Citigroup entitled “Here Comes a Global Recession” and what is he prepared to do to change his approach to managing the economy to meet that challenge?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I do not have to read Citigroup’s voluminous commentary to hear about coming recession because the Labour Party has been predicting it the whole time the economy has been growing. About every second week it predicts a recession so no I have not read that report.Barbara Kuriger: What steps has the Government taken to return the books to surplus and get on top of debt?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Government is focused on careful management of new spending. In the last seven Budgets we have spent an average of $680 million in discretionary spend each Budget compared with an average of $3 billion per year in the 7 years before that. We have also focused on getting more for less out of existing public services not just new ones and that has meant pursuing with some vigour value for money in our large spending areas such as in education in health in the justice system and also in welfare using some more innovative techniques that are starting to show long-term benefits.Grant Robertson: Does he stand by his statement in November 2008 when net debt was $50 billion less than it is today: “I want to stress that New Zealand starts from a reasonable position in dealing with the uncertainty of the economic outlook.”?Hon BILL ENGLISH: In respect of net debt levels yes but of course in respect of the policy settings left behind by the disastrous management of the previous Labour Government no.Grant Robertson: Does he recall saying in November 2008 “In New Zealand we have room to respond. This is the rainy day that the Government has been saving up for.” and how are we placed for an upcoming rainy day with $50 billion extra debt?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I did say that and I must say that since then my appreciation of the skills of Dr Cullen as a Labour finance Minister has grown enormously. He had much more understanding and ability to deliver on these things than any of the six finance spokesmen since.Simon O’Connor: What other approaches has the Minister seen to managing the Government’s books?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have seen proposals just in the last few months for increased spending on public sector wages infrastructure education health tertiary education social services the Venture Investment Fund and the Superannuation Fund. All of these have come from the Labour Party which is advocating that we have got too much debt.Grant Robertson: Is it not true that his failure to grow the New Zealand economy in real terms means that our borrowing is tens of billions of dollars higher and that the rainy day that is coming now we are not prepared for as we were in 2008?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No I would disagree with that. In 2008 although Government debt levels were low it was the product of a time when nominal GDP had grown very rapidly. Inflation was 5 percent first mortgage interest rates then were 10 percent—so although debt levels were low the economy was in very poor shape. This time round debt levels are higher because they have had to be to run a decent community and decent support for the New Zealand people but our economy is in much better shape than it was in 2008.Freshwater Management—Farming Practices and Water Quality9.STUART SMITH (National—Kaikōura) to the Minister for the Environment: What progress is the Government making on improving management of fresh water and particularly in addressing the problem of stock polluting rivers lakes and wetlands?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): We have been progressively moving to strengthen national standards for fresh water firstly with the compulsory regulations in 2009 that require the metering of all water takes; the first national policy statement under the Resource Management Act on fresh water in 2011; and the national bottom lines to maintain or improve water quality that were brought in in 2014. At the Bluegreens Forum on 20 February I announced with the Minister for Primary Industries Nathan Guy national regulations that progressively require fencing of stock out of waterways starting with dairy and pig farms by July 2017 dairy support by 2020 followed by beef and deer farms by 2025 and 2030 relative to the steepness of the country. The proposal has been developed by the Land and Water Forum involving Federated Farmers and key environmental NGOs and is a successful product of this collaborative model of resolving environmental issues.Stuart Smith: How much has the Government invested in freshwater clean-up projects and what improvements in freshwater quality have been achieved?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: This Government has spent $125 million on freshwater clean-ups over the last 7 years. That compares with just $17 million over the previous 7 years. Lake Rotoiti is one of those projects. That has improved hugely: a decade ago it was regularly having toxic algae blooms; today all the data shows a marked improvement in this popular recreational lake. I was recently with Maureen Pugh on the West Coast at its largest lake Lake Brunner. There with Government funding there are substantial improvements in water quality. The third I would mention would be our largest lake Lake Taupō where we are 3 years ahead of schedule in reducing nitrogen runoff into that very significant lake.Stuart Smith: How does the Government support in investment for water storage projects help towards the goal of water quality improvements?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Water storage infrastructure can have a very positive contribution to water quality. I draw members’ attention to the Central Plains Water scheme in Canterbury which involves substituting aquifer-drawn irrigation with reticulated water from Lake Coleridge and the Rākaia River. The excessive draw-down of water from aquifers and smaller rivers is at the core of Canterbury’s water issues. The new scheme also puts far tighter requirements on farms for nutrient management. Another good example is the Ōpuha scheme where in the most recent droughts Fish and Game was transferring fish out of other water bodies because they were so dry to the one that actually had the flows that could maintain that aquatic life. I also note in my own area that water storage schemes will provide for dryland farming to be converted into crops like apples that actually reduce the amount of nutrients.Prime Minister Statements—Northland Rail Network10.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements; if so why?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes in the context they were given because I do.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he stand by his answer yesterday on the rail line north of Whangarei—and apologies for the grammar but I quote him: “I think it’s the opposite. I don’t think there’s any plans to close it.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes I do stand by that statement. In fact I have the exact transcript of that and it was words to the effect of something about closing the line and as we know the line is not being closed.Rt Hon Winston Peters: How does he reconcile that answer with the written statement of KiwiRail’s Steve Muir Manager Bulk and Forestry just 2 weeks ago: “We will also not be running trains north of Kauri from 1 September.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In the interests of the last question the exact question from the media was: “Are you aware of any plans to close the rail line north of Whangarei?”. As I have just stated to the House the rail line north of Whangarei is not closing. There have been issues in relation to the commercial contractor on that line and the contract has not been renewed because the contractor is not prepared to pay commercial rates. If somebody else wants to pay commercial rates or that party wants to come back and pay more commercial rates then they can operate. But the line is not closing.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Prime Minister why he is engaging in bulldust on this matter when everyone up there knows that if there are no trains on the line then the railway line service is over; why is he engaging in such obfuscation and bandying words around that mean nothing—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question has been asked.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: If I wanted to look at an expert in bulldust all I would do is look across the House. The member has a PhD in it.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If the Prime Minister wants to engage in that sort of behaviour which I think is unparliamentary I just want to remind him that the last time he tried it he got dusted-up up north.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I think the supplementary question was the question that led off to where the answer then got to.Rt Hon Winston Peters: To the Prime Minister—[Interruption] That is “sir” to you. Why did he allow the Minister of Transport on 20 October last year to give assurances that there are no railway closures planned for Northland when separate correspondence from KiwiRail on the Portland line means that those assurances were categorically deliberately false?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Because the Minister of Transport was correct.Rt Hon Winston Peters: How could the Minister of Transport be telling the truth when the correspondence from KiwiRail shows that the Portland line is to be closed in favour of a metal road and that is in the documentation?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The advice I have had from the Minister of Transport is that he refutes that assertion.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I seek leave to table the correspondence from KiwiRail as to the Portland line shunting-line closure covering 3 miles and second the railway line north of Kauri—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I simply need now how many letters the member is seeking to table—KiwiRail letters—and the dates of those letters before I put the leave.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Fortunately two on two different matters.Mr SPEAKER: And they are dated last year I take it?Rt Hon Winston Peters: I beg your pardon?Mr SPEAKER: What dates are the letters?Rt Hon Winston Peters: They are 27 October and February of last year and February of this year.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table those two KiwiRail letters. Is there any objection to them being tabled? There is none. They can be tabled.Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House.Sue Moroney: Point of order—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! A point of order has been called.Sue Moroney: I seek leave to table a transcript of the 2014-15 annual review of KiwiRail where the chief executive officer says: “At this stage there is no rail—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I need no more assistance. If that is a transcript from a select committee it is available to all members if they so want it.Sue Moroney: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Are you speaking to the point of order?Sue Moroney: Yes. I believe the transcript is not yet publicly available.Mr SPEAKER: If it has been before a select committee it is available via the e-committee process. It is therefore available to all members if they want it.Trans-Pacific Partnership—Horticulture Industry11.MAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister for Primary Industries: How will the Trans-Pacific Partnership support growth in our horticulture industry?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will save the horticulture industry an estimated $26.3 million per year when fully implemented. Horticulture is New Zealand’s fourth-largest export earner sending products to more than 120 countries and it is valued at around $4 billion of exports per year. New Zealand exports a diverse range of premium fruit and vegetable products. The TPP will allow these products to better compete in key markets such as Japan the USA and Viet Nam.Maureen Pugh: What reports has he received about the importance of this agreement to the horticulture industry?Hon NATHAN GUY: Horticulture New Zealand Chief Executive Mike Chapman has said that the removal of these tariffs does not just mean savings for growers exporting now; it means the products they export in the future will be more competitively priced and will challenge the offerings from other countries. He goes on to add that an agreement like TPP is overwhelmingly welcomed by growers. I received very similar feedback last week in the Bay of Plenty from growers who are welcoming the TPP.Maureen Pugh: What are some other ways in which the Government is supporting the horticultural industry?Hon NATHAN GUY: Good question. Last week I was in Tauranga for the deed-signing of a Government industry agreement the biosecurity readiness and response between Avocado Growers Association Inc. and the Government. Avocados are the seventh industry signatory to the Government industry agreement. The agreement gives industry the opportunity to influence biosecurity readiness and response and how they impact overall. This partnership approach is evidenced in the successful Biosecurity Operational Excellence scheme at the Port of Tauranga. This is being driven by the Government industry agreement partner of Kiwifruit Vine Health alongside the Port of Tauranga the Ministry for Primary Industries local government and industry organisations. It is about increasing the overall biosecurity awareness for port workers.Economic Development Minister—Saudi Agri-hub and Ministerial Involvement12.Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by the statement reportedly made on his behalf two weeks ago that the Saudi sheep deal is Murray McCully’s and all questions should be directed at him?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): Yes I stand by the fact that in response to a media inquiry as to whom they should speak about the Saudi agri-hub my press secretary responded that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is the Minister responsible for this issue and that is because he is.Hon David Parker: Does he deny that his office also contacted a journalist to complain that Radio New Zealand had mentioned him Mr Joyce in a Saudi sheep story?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I do deny that because I understand from the press secretary that it was not a complaint at all.Hon David Parker: Does his office often phone up journalists asking that Mr Joyce’s name not be associated with Murray McCully’s deals?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: No not at all. I enjoy being associated with my friend Mr Murray McCully whom I have known for many years and he is a very efficient and effective Minister of Foreign Affairs.Hon David Parker: Does he accept that his department New Zealand Trade and Enterprise has primary responsibility to administer the millions his Government is spending on this Saudi farm in the desert; if so why has he repeatedly refused to answer parliamentary and media questions?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The member may recall there was a Cabinet document put up by Mr McCully—which is in the public domain—in February 2013 that has been provided to the Labour Party where Mr McCully took the lead on that issue. He has asked New Zealand Trade and Enterprise to manage that issue which as far as I am concerned it is doing well but Mr McCully has retained the leadership on that issue.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think my question was pretty direct—Mr SPEAKER: Order! No there were two parts to your question and the second part has now been addressed.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Another question from Radio New Zealand—oh sorry Radio Labour.Hon David Parker: I hope the media heard that.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I did not hear the interjection but the interjection from Mr Brownlee will cease—[Interruption] Order!Hon David Parker: Will the Minister assure Parliament today that in his opinion all parts of the Saudi sheep deal with the Al-Khalaf Group are 100 percent proper and complied with Government procurement and appropriation rules?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: To my knowledge yes but the reality is that particular arrangement is run by Mr McCully. I know the member put down some questions to him a couple of weeks ago and I think they were satisfactorily answered.Hon David Parker: Is the reason that his staff have said to the media that all questions about the Saudi sheep deal should be directed to Murray McCully because he does not want to be tainted?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The member I think is wasting the House’s time—I genuinely believe that is what he is doing. He is so far going down the rabbit-hole he is going to hit his own tail shortly. On the Saudi agri-hub Minister McCully has worked with both the Ministry of Foreign Affairsand New Zealand Trade and Enterprise. He put up a Cabinet paper; Cabinet agreed to it. The member needs to find something to do with his time.Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementDebate resumed from 17 February.Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): I have been looking forward for some time to taking a call on the Prime Minister’s statement because I have got quite a lot to say. People in the south-west suburbs of Christchurch where I live and where my electorate of Wigram is located have long memories of a local MP called Norman Kirk who served the Sydenham electorate faithfully for the years 1969 to 1974. He is a leader who is warmly remembered because he had a pretty simple message for the people of the Sydenham electorate and the people of this country as their Prime Minister and that was that they needed some security in their lives they needed somewhere to live and they needed a job. This is of course what we call the Kiwi Dream.That is right this is the dream that this Government has given up on—these pretty simple aspirations that our great Prime Ministers like Kirk could articulate and stand up for the people of this country in relation to. But this is a Government that has lost its way. It is arrogant it is out of touch and it is ignoring these big issues that are facing New Zealanders. We just need to look to issues such as the housing crisis. We need to look to issues such as the health cuts that we had questions this very day in the House about. We need to look at jobs we need to look at wages we need to look at the Christchurch recovery and what is happening in that very city where Norman Kirk made his life. This is a Government of broken promises. This is a Government that has given up on ordinary New Zealanders. When we listened to the Prime Minister’s statement that we heard in this House it was a statement that was full of platitudes. It was a statement that was full of claims that everything was OK. Nothing to see here; move along—it is all OK.But as a child of the 1970s I can very much see that that Kiwi Dream is slipping away. What I remember from those long warm summers of the 1970s as a child where people did actually believe that they had a future—if we take that forward into what that means in the 21st century we have a generation of New Zealanders who are not growing up with that hope. What we have under National instead is an economy that is stacked in favour of a privileged few while everyday Kiwis find it harder to get ahead. We have a housing market that has become a plaything for speculators locking a generation out of the dream of homeownership. We have a health care system where people are having to think about mortgaging their houses to pay for drugs. So we have a system where if you have got money you can access health care and if you do not you cannot. We have an education system that is drowning our young people in debt and we have rates of child poverty that no member in this House should be content to tolerate. This simply is not the New Zealand that any of us think about when we think about what it means to be a New Zealander and what we are capable of in this country.This year began with Andrew Little showing to the country a way back to this Kiwi Dream. For Andrew Little to set out a vision for the future is something this Government cannot do because it has given up on any kind of vision or future and it is plodding along. The Working Futures Plan that Labour and Andrew Little outlined at the beginning of this year showed a very clear path to the kind of New Zealand we could have the alternative that could exist where we back an economy where everybody can have access to education.We have heard the absolute spinning around of the Government trying to counter this. First of all it sent out the “Spin-master-General” Steven Joyce who came out at first saying that it would not do anything. Apparently the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment does not think greater access to tertiary education will actually do anything. We thought that was a pretty interesting response. I think the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment quickly realised that perhaps this was not the best thing for him to be saying so he changed the spin—“We’ve got a problem; we’ve got to change the spin.”—so then it was going to cost too much. The way that Labour had a future for people where every New Zealander could access education for up to 3 years was simply going to cost too much said Steven Joyce. But then wait a minute he remembered the Government had started foreshadowing tax cuts and this money was going to be spent somewhere else anywhere so he had to change the tack on that one; he went back.What we have is a very clear difference. We have on the one hand the Labour Party which is setting out a vision for our future and for our young people that backs them and says: “When you leave school we want to make sure you have the right skills and training whether that be a university degree an apprenticeship or some kind of polytech qualification that will get you into a job. What is more we do not want to set you up and saddle you with debt for the rest of your life in getting there.”There are a lot of members in this House who go on about how debt does not matter. Well this week we are going to see how much that debt does matter and what the level of student indebtedness in this country has risen to. As someone who did pay for her education—because as well as being a child of the 1970s I was a teenager and young adult of the 1990s where I had to pay for my university education and where I borrowed for that education—I actually finished paying off my student loan last month. It was a very momentous day; it was great. I went through the student loan scheme at the very worst ravages that it could wrest and the very worst circumstances that you could have and I actually do not want anyone else to be saddled with the kind of debt that I was saddled with after my education. I was saddled with debt in excess of $100000 for the PhD that I did at the University of Canterbury. This is the kind of debt that I do not want to stand by as someone who can make decisions in this country and not change. I think we all have a duty to make sure that we are making the future better for young people and I am proud of the policy that Labour announced at the beginning of this year.It is not just in education that this Government is failing us; it is in health. There is no greater demonstration we are seeing of that than the cuts to health funding. Again the Government’s spin machine comes out and it tells us that it has increased health funding every year. Let us cut the games because we all know this is about real costs and how much the real costs are increasing by.I want to talk specifically about mental health funding in Canterbury. We have a Government that said it was going to stand with the people of Canterbury. No one would be worse off. It would walk every step with them. That was 5 and a bit years ago. This Government has done anything but walk hand in hand with the people of Canterbury when it comes to their mental health funding. Instead we have seen over $5 million cut from mental health services to a region that has greater need in mental health services than anywhere else. We are seeing an increase in emergency department admissions for suicide attempts. The police are reporting increased call-outs for suicide attempts. We have children starting in our schools who have severe development problems because of the last 5 years that they have lived with. Prescriptions for antidepressants and for anti-anxiety medications in Canterbury top anywhere else in the country. This is a region that is under pressure in mental health services and this is a Government that is cutting funding to our region for those issues. But it is not just in the issues of mental health services.If you read the written version of the Prime Minister’s statement there were a couple of paragraphs that made it in there about the Canterbury recovery. If you listened in the House once you got past the sports jokes and the political put-downs Canterbury did not make the director’s cut of John Key’s speech on the day. Simply Canterbury is slipping down this Government’s priorities. Instead it is taking money out to manufacture its surplus in terms of Earthquake Commission funding. We have the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority which has presided over botch-up after botch-up. Instead of delivering the kind of recovery and the pace and the optimism that the people of Canterbury need we have an organisation that has been nothing more than a roadblock. Then the Government spends $2.6 million on spin trying to tell everyone it is OK but 74 percent of Cantabrians do not have any confidence in the recovery decisions being made. That is not really on track. There is an alternative. We on this side of the House—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am sorry to interrupt the member but her time has expired.Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister): The debate on the Prime Minister’s statement is an opportunity to I suppose listen to and learn from—if you do not have anything else to do—the Opposition. We have learnt one or two things. I think the first is that when Labour talks about the Kiwi Dream it is dreaming of 2005 to 2008. I think that is now pretty clear. We have been assailed for the last few sitting days of the House with the best thinking from Grant Robertson and Andrew Little’s finest hour which was low debt levels in 2008 and interest-free student loans in 2005. There is nothing we have heard that indicates their thinking has grown up from that point. In fact their best efforts then came straight out of their days as student union leaders like most of the front two rows of the Labour Party.Labour’s dream is Helen Clark as Prime Minister handing out more goodies to students and claiming that Labour got Government debt down. Well Government debt was low then; of course other things were not. Interest rates were 10 percent and Government spending had grown by 50 percent in the previous 5 years. And that is another thing we have learnt from this debate that Labour intends to do it all again if it becomes the Government—the same things. You have just got to look through the list of extravagant spending promises to see that.We have also learnt something else though: the centre of gravity for critics of the Government is now the thuggish left. Because of the increasing irrelevance of Labour and the Greens—mired in their dreams of 10 years ago—the thuggish left is taking the stage. And in fact increasingly the incoherent people who throw things are dragging the Greens and Labour to the left. The most obvious example we are familiar with is Labour’s position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). A once moderate market-minded social democrat party is now opposed to free trade—or at least I think we are allowed to sell to other people but they are not allowed to sell to us because Andrew Little said that he is going to renegotiate some of it. I think that is the bit: “We will keep the bit where we can sell to other people but we will negotiate out the bit that says they can sell to us.” Or maybe it is the other way round; I just cannot remember.But the Parliament will deliver the Labour Party a chance to look decisive and that is during the TPP legislation which will turn up here and its members will have to vote one way or the other. They cannot as I once saw a member do stand in the middle between the Ayes and the Noes lobbies and hope that the bells go so that they do not have to vote. And I think that is where we will see Andrew Little on the day.The other example is the Greens. The speech from Mr Hughes was the nastiest personal attack I have heard in this Parliament in 25 years—shameful from a member and a party that said it would not do that sort of thing. It is becoming increasingly preoccupied by how to look more angry than the thuggish left who throw things. That is what the Opposition is competing for. And the votes are moving round no doubt among Labour and the Greens depending on which appeals most to the angry incoherent dumbed-down left.And in the meantime as the Prime Minister outlined in his statement the Government continues to deal with the challenge of underpinning moderate growth in this economy while there is an ongoing level of global uncertainty. It is hard to know whether it is more than it used to be; there is a different set of preoccupations now which the Opposition says means global recession is coming. But whether there is more or less of it we have continued to focus on ensuring that the structure of this economy is resilient and on ensuring that it provides opportunity.I just want to actually point out something I thought the Opposition might have pointed out today: the minimum wage went up—it is going to go up; it has not gone up it will go up on 1 April—at the same time as beneficiary families with children will get the first increase in their benefits above Consumers Price Index in over 40 years; on the same day. Since National became the Government and a National-led Government came in the minimum wage has gone up 27 percent; inflation has gone up 11 percent. The minimum wage has gone up 27 percent; inflation has gone up 11 percent. We now have the smallest gap in the developed world between the minimum wage and the average wage and one can argue—some would actually—that it is probably a bit too close. The fruits of consistent moderate growth are being shared out across New Zealand. The average wage itself of course in the last 12 months has just gone up over 3 percent—in a year when inflation was 0.1 percent. There cannot be too many more relevant measures for New Zealand households than real increases in their benefits if they have got children; in the minimum wage; and in the average wage—consistent real increases in the value of those incomes.So what most of Mr Hughes said about that was simply wrong. And I do not mind disagreeing with people but wilful ignorance on the part of the Greens about what is happening in our environment in our economy—and you know you would think you may expect a bit of graciousness about the Kermadec park; you might have. It is the largest protected piece of ocean on the planet about which the Green members are meant to be so preoccupied but they spend so much time creating carbon dioxide emissions flying around the planet that they have not even caught up with the fact that the Kermadec Marine Reserve has been created. Those members do not have to acknowledge the National Government because we know they do not because they have become so mean-minded; they just need to acknowledge the presence of the reserve about which so many people are so happy.We will continue with the economic programme the Prime Minister outlined and it includes some real challenges. It is fantastic to be part of a team that has the energy and the focus to get into the hardest issues this economy now has to address: fresh water and how we have intensive agricultural production and improve the quality of our water because that is what we are going to be able to achieve; and the regulation of our housing market—New Zealand’s biggest asset class. Just look at the number of people who turn up to meetings in Auckland about it. That tells you how relevant our concerns are and their concerns are to this Government because we need to ensure that our housing market does not create macro-imbalances: higher interest rates than we need unfairness by locking people out of the market and very big fiscal cost—the $2 billion a year we spend subsidising rentals in the housing market.Those are just two of the issues; there are any number of others before this Parliament that will show real progress this year like the review of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act when that gets here before too long—a hundred-year wait for significant reform that will allow the better use of much Māori land. Is it politically high profile? Not particularly. Does it matter? Absolutely along with those other complicated issues. And they are all a bit controversial. They are all a bit challenging. They all need a lot of consultation and explanation. And the Prime Minister is leading a Government that has every intention of boring into those issues and that is before we get to the hard-core difficult social issues where most of our Government spending goes.And if anything sums up the Labour Party’s lack of relevance it is that its proposition about free whatever-it-was for students shows no understanding of anything that is going on in the analysis of social policy these days anywhere in the developed world—it is straight out of the 1970s. So I was wrong. I thought the Kiwi Dream was 2008 but actually now that they are getting back to Norman Kirk—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry to interrupt the member but his time has expired.Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour): Before I attack him I will say I do have some respect for the Hon Bill English. Can I say in respect of his speech that although I disagree with parts of it which I will cover he at least did cover the Government’s proposed programme this year thin though it is. In contrast the Prime Minister a couple of weeks ago when he delivered the Prime Minister’s statement laid it on the Table and then proceeded to act like a court jester telling jokes and attacking the Opposition rather than talking about his own programme.Bill English just gave a speech then and he criticised the increases in spending by the last Government. In question time he was good enough to acknowledge that by the end of the last Government Labour had reduced gross Government debt from 38 percent to 18 percent and actually reduced net debt virtually to zero. When you included financial assets like the Cullen fund it was in a positive balance and since then we know that debt has grown.He then said: “Well of course the problem was the increase in Government spending.” Well what were the biggest increases in Government spending by the Labour Government? Well the biggest one was the Working for Families tax credits which the National Government to this day—although they are tax cuts effectively for people—actually counts as spending. At the time the now Prime Minister and I think Bill English called them communism by stealth. So that was the biggest increase in spending. Those members called it communism by stealth even though they were tax cuts. Have they reversed it? No they have not.What was the next big initiative? Well research and development tax credits they did not like. Did they reverse those? Yes they did reverse those. KiwiSaver—those members said that they did not like it. Have they reversed KiwiSaver? Well they have stripped back some of the incentives so it is not working as well. They have taken away the $1000 kick-start payment that gave hope to young people as they started on their savings journey but no they have not done away with KiwiSaver.Interest-free student loans—remember how vexed those members were with interest-free student loans in 2005? They were apoplectic about interest-free student loans—another increase in spending under the last Government. Have they reversed them? No they have not because they were good policy.Having dealt with the misrepresentation of the previous Labour Government which left the Government books in such good order that Bill English was forced to acknowledge in 2008 that “This is the rainy day that Government has been saving for.” because we ran nine surpluses in a row he then did not say much about what has gone up and what has gone down under the National Government. Well what has gone up? What is happening to Government debt? Well we know Government debt has gone up. Net debt was down to zero; it is up about $60 billion or $70 billion—a huge increase in Government debt.What about growth? Has growth gone up or down? Well growth rates in the 2000s were held a bit high by increased rates of private borrowing—I will acknowledge that—but we were criticised by National for having growth rates of between 3 and 4 percent. What has the growth rate been in the last year Dr Smith?Hon Dr Nick Smith: 2.4 I thought.Hon DAVID PARKER: Per capita—zero. Per capita growth rates—the per-person rate of growth in New Zealand over the last year—has been zero and that is even with the huge amount that is being spent in Canterbury on the Canterbury rebuild. Nick Tuffley of the ASB is the author of that calculation. Per capita growth rates over the last year have been zero and indeed there have been prior references to that from the likes of Mr Glass another investment banker who made similar comments last year.What about exports—a great indicator of health or otherwise of the economy? Well the Government came into power when exports were over 30 percent of GDP and those members promised they were going to increase them to 40 percent of GDP. What has happened to exports? They are down to between 27 and 28 percent of GDP and the Government’s target of raising them to 40 percent of GDP is shattered. So much for the brighter future that it was promising.What about homeownership? Well Bill English may say that the huge public meetings that they are having in Auckland are a sign that things are good in Auckland. Actually people are coming out in droves because they are protesting about the state of the housing market in Auckland. And Dr Smith is doing his best but it is not good enough because after 8 years in power we have got the highest house prices ever in Auckland—a disgraceful average house price in Auckland—of around $900000. People cannot save to buy a house in Auckland if they are an ordinary waged worker and they have to inherit money to do so and that is the reality of life under the National Government. Really the privileged few succeed and most people struggle to get ahead—the lowest homeownership rate in over 60 years and still declining.If there is any part of the Kiwi Dream that is more fundamental than homeownership in New Zealand well I do not know what it is. You know The Half Gallon Quarter Acre Pavlova Paradise was the name of the book. Now people cannot afford their slice of our paradise and we have got the lowest rate of homeownership since the 1950s—indeed since the 1951 census over 60 years ago—and it continues to decline.There are measures that could be taken by the Government to make it better. It does need to roll up its sleeves and actually build some affordable houses and to control land supply in respect of some big subdivisions that are needed. It needs to actually stamp its foot and say “We do need intensification in parts of Auckland.” if we are going to have the rates of net migration that this Government insists on inflicting upon Auckland throwing fat on the fire and making these things even worse.Well what has happened to wages? We heard Nick Smith saying that average wages are up. I read the Prime Minister’s statement in this regard and the paragraph in it said “Wages are going up.” and then you could see quite obviously someone had gone through proofreading it and they had inserted the word “average” at the front of it. It sort of read rather bluntly in the way it was phrased and you could see it was a late addition.Well why is that? Why are those members focusing on the average wage? Because in truth we know that wage increases are concentrated at the top 10 percent of the population and that earnings for most New Zealanders are stagnant. Indeed I think the latest statistic was that 46 percent of New Zealanders got no wage increase last year. The income gaps are growing just like the wealth gaps.On the environment I heard Nick Smith here today heralding his collaborative process outcome saying that the Government has got to an end point by when rivers have to be fenced against dairy cattle and beef cattle: 2030 for our mid-country and 2025 for our flat land. It is different if you are a dairy farmer but the dairy boom is over. The pressure environmentally is now coming from the beef boom.No wonder the NGO in New Zealand that is most connected with freshwater quality the New Zealand Fish and Game Council—the people who represent the tens of thousands of New Zealanders who every year get money out of their own pocket to pay for a licence to go fishing in our riverways—pulled out of the Land and Water Forum. It was so disgusted by these consensual outcomes being the lowest common denominator that it said: “We’re out of here. We’re not up for an outcome that says we’re not even going to keep our dairy cattle and our beef cattle out of our waterways until 2025 or 2030.”Our rivers after 8 years of the National Government are getting dirtier still. I see that. I am a person who swims in rivers I fish and I tramp. Outside our national parks it is a disgrace the number of our waterways that can no longer be safely swum in because under Nick Smith the minimum standard that is being required is “wadeability”—that is clean enough to walk through but not clean enough to swim in and put your head under because you will get sick. That is a disgraceful bottom line Dr Smith and something that you should not be proud of as the Minister for the Environment.Education—do you know we have reached the parlous position in New Zealand where the OECD says that the cause of the big tail that we have got in New Zealand of underperformance amongst some of our students is caused by their economic deprivation? The gaps have got so big in New Zealand that our kids at our poor schools do not get ahead. I thought it was disgraceful a couple of weeks ago. I was ashamed to live in the country where a school providing free swimming lessons in South Auckland—and too few kids learn to swim these days—said that a substantial proportion of the class were not participating because their parents could not afford togs and there had to be a public fund-raising effort to raise the money for them to buy togs.That is what is happening in New Zealand. We have got people living in cars and garages and parents cannot even afford togs for their kids when they are getting free swimming lessons.Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): It is always a pleasure to follow David Parker because he is a member who wants to engage in the House and he makes a thoughtful contribution. But I would challenge him to reflect on a time when as many of New Zealand’s core economic statistics—those vital signs that say how well we are doing—have looked as good. I have to say as a member of 25 years that if I look at those core figures of GDP—growth interest rates unemployment—I would challenge members of this House to tell me a time when New Zealand was doing better. Let us go through them: economic growth—Carmel Sepuloni: Under Labour.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The member says: “Under Labour.” Well let us see how well that member is connected to the real world because one of the issues for families is the cost of living—how much it is going up each year. One of the reasons that members opposite got biffed out in 2008 was that the cost of living was going up by 5 percent per year. It is no good getting a wage increase I say to the member opposite of 3 percent if your costs are going up by 5 percent. Do you know what the inflation figures are for the last year? They are 0.1 percent the lowest level in 23 years. That is good news because that means that the costs for families of their power bills their food bills and all those other costs are constrained and are going up by diddly-squat.Then you look at a figure like wage growth—because the real gain we need to make in our community is that wages are going up faster than the cost of living—and wages have gone up by 2.4 percent in the last year. And significantly yesterday the Prime Minister announced that the minimum wage is going up by an additional 50c per hour. That is growth of 3.4 percent and it is not one of those increases of 3.4 percent; it is real because inflation is so low.In an area that is so relevant to housing the interest rates that families are paying that businesses are paying and that farmers are paying are at the lowest level in 50 years. Why does that matter? Well actually if you are a family out there in New Zealand trying to pay the mortgage we now have banks that are offering interest rates at less than 4 percent. I say to members opposite: when was the last time you picked up a newspaper and a bank would offer you an interest rate of less than 4 percent? Why does it matter to the economy? Because if you are a business out there—and I was visiting them in my own electorate last Friday and they were looking at investing an extra $2 million in a processing facility for fruit in my electorate—actually interest rates are the difference between investing in that additional equipment for that export industry or not.Of course I think all members would agree that one of the core economic statistics is the level of unemployment. We know from the last figures coming down from 6 percent down to 5.3 percent that New Zealand has one of the highest labour participation rates—the highest levels of jobs—anywhere in the OECD.We can argue figures and quote them all we like—actually do you know what one of the most important signals is of how well our country is doing? It is the fact that everybody has a choice—a choice to get on a plane and leave this country. I would remind David Parker that if New Zealand was so great in the Labour Government years between 2000 and 2008 why were there 35000 bright talented young New Zealanders who chose to vote with their feet and take their talent elsewhere? What we see in contrast today is a record period of New Zealanders actually coming home. That is putting some pressure on my job as the Minister for Building and Housing but I say I welcome it. I welcome that our country is doing so well that more migrants and more New Zealand citizens are choosing to make New Zealand their home.I also want to reinforce the message that this is a Government that is making real progress on the issues that are of concern around those New Zealanders who are most struggling. I mentioned earlier the issue of the lift in the minimum wage. I remind Parliament that on 1 April there is going to be the first increase in core benefits in 43 years. Why can the members opposite who plead so much who moan and whinge as though they are experts not acknowledge that this Government is providing that significant increase—not just in core benefits but even for those people on low incomes with families and it is giving them additional support? I look at the early childhood education participation figures—the best our country has ever had. I look at the performance of health and the best child immunisation rates that we have ever had and they are part of a picture of a country that is doing well.But the responsibility of a Government is not just to deliver and do well; it is to have a forward programme and that is some of the things that I want to talk about in respect of my own portfolio. I was fascinated at the questions today around the issue of home insulation because as I pointed out in the 9 years of the previous Government an average of 2000 homes were insulated each year. I think we in this Parliament all agree that insulating those older homes that were built before 1978 and did not have insulation is a good thing. But I do have to challenge members opposite: when your record was doing 2000 homes per year it is rather difficult to describe a bill that will require 60000 homes per year to be insulated as somehow mean and inadequate. It is simply not credible.I was also interested in the Greens criticising this Government and saying: “Oh it’s just all ‘greenwash’.” How can you describe the largest area of ocean protection in the world an area twice the size of the land area of New Zealand which this Government is committing to global marine conservation an area of the second-deepest ocean in the world an area where there are over 50 different marine species and over 6 million birds—and the legislation that we will be bringing into this House consequential to the Prime Minister’s announcement at the United Nations in creating that Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary is a part of this Government’s programme that reinforces that we are a blue-green Government. We are a Government that wants to grow the economy but also do the right thing by the environment.The last point I want to make in this debate is that I have never been in a Parliament in which Opposition parties have had so many contradictory positions. You know we started the year—and I remember if we make the equivalent time—on the issue of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). I say to the members opposite that I still do not quite understand their position. I know in my constituency where there is going to be a reduction in tariffs on fish there is going to be a reduction in tariffs on exports of processed forest products where I know there is going to be a reduction in the tariffs on the products that we export like the kiwifruit like the apples like the berryfruit—meeting with those industries they are so encouraged about that in the capacity for them to be able to grow employ more people and pay more to people. Then why is it that members opposite are so opposed to those fruit those forestry those meat those dairy industry gains that have been so successfully negotiated in the TPP? I see some Labour members are in favour some are opposed and I cannot understand the confusion.Then we take a core issue—and there has been a bit of debate today about the issue of debt. Again I have to say I am confused. I listened to Grant Robertson and he said: “The Government needs more stimulus. It needs to borrow more and stimulate the economy.” In the next minute I hear another Labour member David Parker express concerns and saying: “Oh the Government is borrowing too much.” Well you cannot speak out of both sides of your mouth; you need to have a clear position.And then we come to the issue of housing. David Parker in the speech that was just given said that the Government needs to go harder on the Auckland Council and make sure that there is intensification. Well actually only last week Phil Twyford was saying that the Government was interfering and bullying the Auckland Council to try to get intensification. Well is David Parker right or is Phil Twyford right or is this just another case of Labour being all over the paddock and not knowing what it stands for?I equally point out the area of social housing where I compliment the work that Paula Bennett and Bill English are doing. I see the members opposite railing in the House railing in their electorates opposed to the transfer of State houses over to community housing providers and then standing on platforms with Phil Twyford when he says to the community housing organisation that he supports the transfer of State houses to those community housing providers. I know of no time in my time in this House when we have faced an Opposition that has had such a confused position on what it stands for. It is a party that has lost its way. It is no surprise that it is polling so badly. It is so far from being a credible Government because it does not know what it stands for.RICHARD PROSSER (NZ First): It is always a pleasure to follow Dr Smith’s stand-up routine. I am delighted to have the opportunity to rise to respond to the Prime Minister’s statement and that is partly because there is so much that needs to be responded to—not so much about what the Prime Minister had to say as about what he did not have to say.A great deal of what the Prime Minister did not have to say concerns the primary sector. It concerns the farming sector the agricultural sector the provinces rural New Zealand—the heartland. The Prime Minister had very little of very much use or value to say to rural New Zealand in general or to the farmers of New Zealand in particular. That is something of a paradox because the National Party this National Government has long touted itself as being the party of the farmers and for the farmers. Indeed that was true once upon a time a long time ago—a very long time ago.National has continued to trade on that old reputation and those old allegiances even though nowadays and for quite a long number of years now National has in fact been the party for Queen Street the party for merchant bankers and actually the party that does not really appear to give a damn about the farming sector at all anymore. The farming sector is beginning to wake up to that. It is beginning to realise that its own party of old has abandoned it in all but name and it is starting to look elsewhere and the by-election in Northland showed that. The traditionally true-blue territory of the far north which has been National since forever has grown tired of being taken for granted and tired of being marginalised. It showed that it was tired by turfing the National Party out of its turf and installing the Rt Hon Winston Peters and New Zealand First instead.The cracks are beginning to show in other places as well. In Mr Barclay’s seat of Clutha-Southland party members and committee members are leaving the National Party in droves such is their disaffection with the direction that this John Key – led “National and friends” Government is going. In the Wairarapa the winds of change are blowing and come 2017 they are going to deliver another body blow to the National Party in the form of a change of member and the new member is going to be Ron Mark.Why is this happening? Well it is happening because National’s priorities are all wrong and people have had enough of that. Commodity prices are down milk is down and farmers are hurting and yet this National Government is steadfastly refusing to do anything to help. Its priorities are with the internationalists with the bankers and the globalists and with its foreign paymasters—and by that I mean the people and the institutions with links to overseas who funnel donations to National. That is where its priorities are.Farmers are hurting. Farmers are hurting and rural communities are hurting and the Government is doing nothing to help them. We are not talking about handouts; no one is suggesting that we go back to the days of subsidies. But there are concrete tangible things that this Government could be doing and should be doing in order to help support farmers and the communities who depend on them at this time when things are grim down on the farm.New Zealand First has two bills in the ballot which the Government could choose to support that would tangibly improve the lot of our beleaguered rural heartland and our embattled agricultural sector. One is the Meat Industry Restructuring Bill in my name. This bill would see the red meat processing industry stay in New Zealand hands. It would see the value of New Zealand’s red meat exports stay in the New Zealand economy. It would see returns for farmers improve and it would guarantee jobs for New Zealand workers in our provincial towns and service industries that support the sheep and beef farmers of New Zealand. As things stand that industry is on the brink of being lost to overseas ownership and the great bulk of the value of that industry is on the brink of being lost to the New Zealand economy.The other bill is the Receiverships (Agricultural Debt Mediation) Amendment Bill in the name of my colleague Ron Mark. This bill cuts to the heart of what has become of the National Party the party that used to be the party of farmers and the party of the provinces—the party that is now being supplanted in those roles by New Zealand First because we still give a damn. We still give a damn. We still prioritise rural New Zealand and provincial New Zealand where the real wealth of this country is generated and where New Zealand’s income is earned. This bill highlights the way that National has become a party that gives priority to the profits of foreign-owned banks over and above the interests of New Zealand and New Zealanders.There are laws very similar to the law that this bill would become already in place in a number of Australian states and a number of Canadian provinces. What they do is require banks to enter into a process of mediation of renegotiation before they call in the receivers in cases where farmers find themselves up against the odds for reasons beyond their control. Farming is not like any other business. There are variables that do not exist in other industries there are fluctuations in commodity prices and exchange rates and there are vagaries of weather about which farmers can do nothing. With the best will in the world with the best planning in the world with the hardest back-breaking work in the world farmers can and do still find themselves up against the odds when the fates conspire against them.The banks are a part of this. They claim to be a partner for the farming sector and when the times are good the banks are creaming it. In fact I have some numbers here prepared by the Parliamentary Library that show the aggregate income of the 25 registered banks operating in New Zealand. For the year ended 30 September 2015 interest from income alone was $23.5 billion.Ron Mark: How much?RICHARD PROSSER: $23.5 billion. The profit after tax for these banks—all but two foreign-owned—was $5.1 billion. They take their share of the spoils but it would seem that they are not so keen in the bad times to carry their share of the load and that is not good enough. New Zealand First says that that is not good enough and this bill in the name of my colleague Ron Mark would compel them to take a share of the load during the lean times.National could choose to support this bill. It could choose to demonstrate that the welfare of our farmers and our rural communities is at least as important as the profits of the foreign-owned banking sector. It would be nice to think that the banks might see fit to take this step themselves but as we are seeing and as legislators in Australia and Canada have already seen and have already dealt with they do not appear to be keen to do that without a bit of stick. This bill provides that stick. If this Government really cared if it really gave a damn about the farming sector it would come out and support these two bills from New Zealand First.Make no mistake—things are getting rough out there. Farmers are up against it and farmers are having a hard time. Farmer suicides are a silent epidemic and it is going to get worse. I have a paper here a story from Radio New Zealand saying the Reserve Bank says that dairy farm debt alone has reached $38 billion and a recent Federated Farmers poll found that more than one in 10 is already under pressure from the banks over their mortgage. One in 10 dairy farmers—that is 1250 dairy farmers across New Zealand. If 10 percent of our single most important export industry is in trouble the country is in trouble. The commercial banking sector needs to step up and become a true partner to the farming industry. It needs to take the rough along with the smooth it needs to behave in a manner that is decent and honest and ethical and this bill would compel it to so do.New Zealand First drafts and sponsors bills like these two because unlike National we are still in tune with the needs of New Zealand’s farmers and with the needs of the heartland. New Zealand First recognises that the engine room of the economy is in the provinces not in Queen Street and out there in the provinces people are realising that too. They are voting with their feet and they are giving up on National because they are realising that National has abandoned them. They are flocking to New Zealand First in droves. We are the town and country party and we are coming to the rescue of New Zealand.The Prime Minister makes a lot of noise; he makes a lot of statements. The Prime Minister makes a lot of noise about a lot of things that are not important like $26 million on a referendum on a flag change that nobody wants but he has very little to say of any actual value to the people of the heartland. But fortunately those people can take great heart from the fact that New Zealand First is here to say it for him and to do it for him. Roll on 2017. Thank you.DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): Well it was interesting that that last speaker finished around priorities and the flag change. I remember the New Zealand First Party has come out with a policy that only citizens can now vote in New Zealand and not residents. The New Zealand First Party has an attack on our migrant communities saying that they are not valued members of this society and saying that they are not able to vote. [Interruption] Next the Labour - New Zealand First - Green coalition will come up with taking away—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I regret interrupting the member but I think Mr Mark needs to address interjections to the member and not to me. Thank you.DAVID BENNETT: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. That member Mr Mark has been interjecting because he is worried that he will see that the New Zealand public will now know that New Zealand First wants to take away the right to vote from those people who are only residents and not citizens. Taking away the right to vote is something that this Parliament should take very seriously and it is a disgrace that the New Zealand First Party wants to do that to New Zealanders who work hard and make this country so strong and that is the disgrace that is the New Zealand First Party in this Parliament. The New Zealand First Party will not stop at this referendum to take away that right to vote. It will take that into the election and it will take it away on other issues where it sees that only citizens and not residents should be allowed to vote—that is becoming the policy of the New Zealand First Party. We know that is how it works; it has done it in the past and it will continue to do that again in the future. That is the way it operates we all know that.And all those other parties in this Parliament that will support the New Zealand First Party: the Labour Party and the Green Party—they need to come out to make sure that they are not supporting a policy that would take away the vote from residents in this country like the New Zealand First Party is intending to do. I know that New Zealand First is led by the Don Trump of New Zealand politics but if that is the way it wants to do it there will never be a wall high enough for the New Zealand First Party. It will never build the wall as high as Don Trump can do. Its leader has never employed anyone as Don Trump has; its leader would never be able to build the wall that the New Zealand First Party would love to see in this country.It is outrageous to see the attack from that party on our rural sector—that party that would not support the trade agreements of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. Go to each of those farmers in Northland; go to each of those farmers around the country and say to them that you come to this House and you are the saviour—or the New Zealand First Party says it is the saviour—of farmers and yet it will not support one of the biggest things this Government and this Parliament could do for farmers this year and that is support a trade agreement. Why will it not support a trade agreement when it actually will deliver for New Zealand farmers; why does it not do things that actually matter; why do they not do something that is substantial and vote for something that will help New Zealand farmers; why does it vote against New Zealand farmers in this House; why does it consistently vote against the people it says that it wants to represent?That is the dichotomy of the opinion within the New Zealand First Party: it does not understand what it actually means to be a farmer. None of its members are farmers. There are no farmers in the New Zealand First Party. There is no one there who understands what farming is actually about. Nobody in the New Zealand First Party is going to support farmers when they need them to have support in a trade agreement. I want to see the New Zealand First Party actually vote for trade agreements vote for farmers vote for regional New Zealand vote for a stronger economy and vote for economic growth—not vote for higher walls no voting and taking away rights from migrants as the New Zealand First Party intends to do.Things are going well in one of the biggest provincial cities in New Zealand: in Hamilton. In Hamilton we have delivered for the people of this country. There is a positive mood in that city and the good representation of the two local MPs Tim Macindoe and David Bennett is part of that. Not only have we delivered new schools for our electorates—new schools have been opened in the north of Hamilton and Rototuna and a new school to come in that area too with the junior high school opening this year and the senior high school opening next year. This is something long awaited by residents in that area. The previous Labour Party candidates have stood on pieces of ground in that area and said this would be a nice place for a school but never actually delivered the money to build those schools. The National Government delivered the money; the National Government built the schools; the National Government gave the residents what they wanted. The National Government has delivered and the National Government has a plan for economic growth that is delivering there.Tim Macindoe: Same story with the expressway.DAVID BENNETT: The other plan for economic growth in the Waikato is the expressway Mr Macindoe. There was a question in the House today about the Cambridge Bypass. Ron Mark is wondering what the Waikato Expressway is. It is a four-lane road—probably two more numbers than he can count to but it is a four-lane road.Ron Mark: Ten long years.DAVID BENNETT: Ten long years or 10 years to build a road that New Zealand First never supported. And the Cambridge Bypass opened before Christmas and many residents have used that because it is an exceptionally great link between the Waikato and the Bay of Plenty.Tim Macindoe: And all on time and under budget.DAVID BENNETT: Yes exactly Mr Macindoe. What is more there is more to come: the Huntly bypass is now under construction. Anyone travelling south from Auckland and coming to live in the fine Waikato region which is a great opportunity for all Aucklanders will see the Hamilton bypass that has been started to be constructed: a $450 million project delivering for regional New Zealand—$450 million spent in regional New Zealand; spent for regional New Zealand and spent to build stronger provincial cities in our country. Not only that we have the sod-turning on the next part of the Waikato Expressway: the Hamilton bypass—$800 million approximately for that bypass including another $100 million on top for the Longswamp four-lane road. That $800 million is going to be spent in Hamilton going around the boundary of Hamilton to provide a bypass there that will create the modern city that will be the economic growth hub of the Auckland-Hamilton-Tauranga growth triangle: the golden triangle.That is something that this Government has come into Parliament and delivered for provincial New Zealand; it has delivered for our city and it has delivered for our country. At the same time we have seen unemployment reducing through this country and that is something that I think many New Zealanders have been looking forward to for many years. We have seen the minimum wage increasing substantially in New Zealand; we have seen average wages increasing substantially in New Zealand; we are seeing low inflation; we have seen low interest rates which means that New Zealand households are in a much better position. The New Zealand economy grew by 2.3 percent in the year to September 2015. That is great growth when you consider the world economy and how delicate it is out there. That is all part of good economic management; of prudent economic management; and delivering the infrastructure—just as we have seen in Hamilton—for it to grow our country and our city.New Zealand is in great shape. Hamilton is in especially great shape. Hamilton has a strong future ahead of it. It is a provincial city that knows where it is going that is getting the investment and delivering. We welcome all people to the city of Hamilton and we are not intending to take away their voting rights like the Opposition parties will do when they get a chance at some point to put in front of this House bills in their names in their members’ bills.Carmel Sepuloni: Sit down.DAVID BENNETT: The Labour Party says to sit down. Well the Labour Party is supporting the New Zealand First Party. They are mates; they are together in this. The Labour Party is against migrants as well. It has shown that time and time again by wanting to reduce immigration into New Zealand as part of its policy. Its policy is to reduce immigration—that is how it is good bedfellows with the New Zealand First Party. Next it will be taking away voting rights and that would be a disgrace to this Parliament. Thank you.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): Labour supports an economy that works for everybody not an economy that works only for the privileged few who gather from time to time at Skycity Casino to pat John Key on the back for ensuring that the New Zealand economy delivers for a narrower and narrower group of people as it has done in the last 7 years under the National Government. Under a Labour Government New Zealanders will be able to have hope that they will be able to get a job—a job that pays well a job that has secure hours a job where they know from one week to the next how much they are going to earn so that they can pay the mortgage they can pay the power bill they can buy the groceries from the supermarket they can put food on the table for their kids and they can put a roof over their heads. That is the hope that we have for New Zealand; that is the Kiwi Dream that we believe in on this side of the House—the Kiwi Dream that has been slipping ever so further away from the grasp of ordinary New Zealanders every single one of the 7 long years that the National Party has been in power.On this side of the House we are interested in what is happening with the future of work. We are interested in ensuring that the future of work delivers for working people. On the other side of the House they laugh at us for having a Future of Work Commission. They laugh at us for bringing people like Guy Standing and Robert Reich to New Zealand to actually talk about the challenges of the future of work the challenges of greater automation the challenges of a greater number of people working in contracting situations rather than in employment situations the challenges of ensuring that the future of work actually delivers for people that it results in higher wages that it results in stable incomes and it results in people being able to live the Kiwi Dream—being able to own their own home being able to have a life outside of work. Those are the sorts of things that we are focused on and that is what National members laugh at us for. Well they can laugh as much as they like; we will continue to focus on the Kiwi Dream.David Bennett can say as much as he likes that more people are employed. Actually the number of people unemployed is still higher today than it was when the National Government came to office. The few people who have been able to pick up extra work are picking up part-time work or casual agreements or zero-hour contracts—insecure work that does not pay the bills and does not give people the security they need to be able to lead a decent life—and National is happy with that. Well we are not happy with that on this side of the House. We are unsatisfied with that. We think New Zealand can do better. Just because National has given up on the Kiwi Dream does not mean that the rest of us have to give up on the Kiwi Dream. So yes we are looking at the future of work. We are looking at how we ensure that productivity gains and the wealth that this country generates can be shared fairly so that a hard day’s work does result in a good day’s pay and actually means that you can have that Kiwi Dream and you can feed your family and you can live a reasonable life. That is what people expect from living in New Zealand and it is slipping away under the National Government.So we will look at things like how we ensure that people who are in contracting situations get the minimum rights that we should expect for everybody who works in New Zealand like getting the minimum wage. The Government can crow about putting the minimum wage up by a meagre amount—it has finally hit $15 an hour 6 or 7 years after the Labour Party first said that we should have a minimum wage of $15 an hour. That is great except for the fact that there are thousands of people who work in New Zealand who do not get the minimum wage because they are not employees and they are not entitled to those basic minimums. There are thousands of New Zealanders who do not get all the other basic rights that ordinary working people should be able to rely on in New Zealand—and do you know what? National is OK with that too. Well on this side of the House we think we can do better.So our Future of Work Commission will look at things like how we expand collective bargaining so that people who are in contracting arrangements can get the benefits of joining a union and bargaining collectively and using their collective power to get fair wages and a fair income so that they can live a decent life. Those are the sorts of things that we are interested in on this side of the House. Those are the sorts of things that National laughs at.One of the things that we believe should be part of the Kiwi Dream is being able to rely on our health care system to deliver when we need it. When you go to hospital you should be able to expect to get the care that you need. I am hearing overwhelmingly from people in my electorate and from people across the country actually that our health system is failing. That is what we get when National fails to fund the health system properly. OK the Prime Minister can stand up and say that the health budget has gone up every year. That is true. But the question is: has the health budget moved sufficiently to cover the costs of inflation and population growth? No it has not.In fact $1.7 billion is missing from our health system and that shows up in events like the one I experienced a couple of weeks ago when I drove for 2 hours to take my father from Palmerston North to Wellington Regional Hospital for an appointment that was pre-arranged—only to be told when we walked through the doors: “No your appointment is not going ahead.” Why did we not hear about the fact that that appointment was not going ahead before we left Palmerston North and drove all the way to Wellington? Because the booking clerk was so tired of calling my father and cancelling his appointments that they were too embarrassed to make that phone call and they put it back on whomever it was who made the decision to cancel my father’s appointment one more time and that phone call never happened.That to me demonstrates a health system that is sick and it has become sick under this National Government because National refuses to fund health care. It refuses to pay our health professionals properly and it refuses to provide the resources so that our health system can absorb one or two urgent cases and still provide the routine cases—which they had booked people in for written to them about told them to come to hospital and make a 2-hour journey or longer in some cases—and when people walk through the door they are told that “No your appointment is not going ahead today because we don’t have the resources to provide that appointment that we promised you were going to get.” That broken promise is delivered to us by National and Jonathan Coleman refusing to fund the health system properly.I received a letter that one of my constituents got from our local primary health organisation. This constituent had been referred to the primary health organisation by their GP and the referral was for a mild to moderate mental health condition. They were told that they did not meet the criteria not because their condition was not sufficiently acute for the primary health organisation to take them on—no they did not meet the criteria because the primary health organisation has the resources to provide for only mild to moderate mental health treatment for Māori Pasifika community services card holders and people between the ages of 10 and 24. I will give the organisation credit—it was absolutely honest about that. It did not say: “You don’t meet our criteria because you are not acute enough because you don’t have an illness because we don’t think you need to be treated.” They said: “You don’t meet our criteria because you’re not Māori Pasifika a community services card holder or a person between the ages of 10 and 24.”Our health system is sick if we cannot respond to the people who need treatment. This person could very well have received low-level treatment for a mild illness and saved the health system a lot of money. My concern is twofold: this person will become sicker because they are not getting the treatment they require and that bothers me greatly. But another thing bothers me and that is that they may very well end up in the mental health ward at the hospital with a more acute condition that is more detrimental to them and also more costly for our health system. That is what is wrong with our health system—it is short-sighted it is under-resourced and it is underfunded and that is thanks to this National Government.None of this lives up to the Kiwi Dream. None of this lives up to what it means to be a New Zealander. It is certainly not how I was brought up as a youngster in New Zealand—I was led to believe that this was the best country in the world to grow up in. But now it is a country where it is almost impossible to find a job and when you do find a job you are likely to be underpaid and to have too few hours to make ends meet. It is a place where the Government laughs at people who say we need to focus on the future of work and we need to make sure that people are prepared to engage in the future of work to get a decent income. And it is a country where you get turned away from the hospital even when you have an appointment. That is not the Kiwi Dream. That is the nightmare of John Key’s National Government.Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): The Prime Minister’s statement of 9 February outlines the current and future initiatives as this Government looks to continue to build a resilient and competitive economy and do a good job for New Zealanders. The underlying fiscal strategy that was enunciated is to have a tight rein on spending to pay down Government debt and then to return excess revenue to taxpayers. In return we expect results in efficiencies from our public services. This strategy is giving us projected economic growth of 2.7 percent over the next 5 years and this position does well against GDP growth in other major OECD countries like Australia the US and Japan.At a national level then the economic outlook is stable with steady hands on the tiller. Where we can policy influence key local drivers such as interest rates the Consumers Price Index and inflation we do so in the long-term interest and with the best information we have to hand. By definition then we have less influence on offshore factors and this is where a resilient and multifaceted economy provides the best solution yet at the same time recognises the not insignificant contribution by New Zealand to mitigate some of those global risks through our voice in forums such as the United Nations Security Council. At a macroeconomic level then the positive growth in a steady and stable economy is good.At a regional level this Government recognised the importance of the regions and the regional growth programme specifically focuses on five regions to identify growth opportunities: Northland the Bay of Plenty the East Coast Manawatū-Whanganui and the West Coast. This programme is a collaboration between the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and the Ministry for Primary Industries together with local businesses iwi and councils. Last year in Northland we had the regional growth strategy at the beginning of the year which identified the scope of the opportunities and this year a few weeks ago we had the regional action plan identifying 58 opportunities for Northland.Why Northland? Well you know we acknowledge the challenges. We are not afraid; we do not avoid them. We acknowledge the challenges that are currently confronting dairy and we are working hard to do what we can about that. We also acknowledge the challenges that Northland has in underperforming compared with other regions. So we are not afraid to address those issues. In fact the action plan with its 58 points identifies and prioritises what those actions might be.I would like to look at two of the significant actions in that plan for Northland. First of all there is the road of national significance. The road of national significance is absolutely critical for Northland. It is part of a nationwide investment in roading for roads of national significance at $4.5 billion. There are projections of 35000 jobs as part of that package. Northland was very pleased to hear the scoping out of the four-lane highway from Auckland to Northland the “Northland corridor”. That is real progress and even better it is an example of regional investments moving off the blackboard off the plan and becoming real and tangible.In fact Northlanders can see how real and tangible this investment is right now. As they come over the top of the Brynderwyns there is probably a kilometre of cones as the north side of the Brynderwyns is straightened out and the safety profile improved. Another 15 to 20 minutes’ drive on you will come to the Kensington roundabout which is about to commence—a significant piece of work on State Highway 1 which will also improve feeder roads into that area. Another 15 to 20 minutes on on State Highway 1 at Hikurangi there are several hundred metres of cones where the highway is being upgraded there and many other areas of roading investment as well.I would like to take one other example from the action plan: Hundertwasser Art Centre. It is another example of actually deploying an action—taking it off the blackboard and making it real. There is $4 million for the Hundertwasser and the Wairau Māori Art Centre. In 1973 Frederick Hundertwasser came to New Zealand. He was an established international artist when he did. He gained New Zealand citizenship lived in Northland where his artwork was prolific and was influenced by living in Northland by living in New Zealand and by living with Māoridom. I challenge a search for any other international artist who came to New Zealand with that reputation and has done the same. Stan Semenoff Phil Halse and others have led the Hundertwasser challenge and over many years others have contributed. It is a real example of this Government contributing to the regions actually putting its hands in its pocket—$4 million of proof and evidence right there. Thank you.TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): I would like to take a leaf out of Bill English’s book actually and spend just a moment reflecting on some of the Opposition response to the Prime Minister’s statement and particularly to its members’ discussion on the future of work. One of the things that I would like to draw out is how they particularly reinforce that the future is going to be a period of unprecedented change; we are going to have significant globalisation technological connectivity and disruption and massive turmoil. In fact it is a huge opportunity for both capital and labour—and they talk about a huge free flow of ideas and talent and investment.So with that as a basic premise I find it extraordinary that the policy response of the Labour Party to that future is to contract out of the very trading bloc that has been established to maximise the opportunity for this country to be able to participate in this future. It is a trading bloc that hardwires innovative businesses to over 40 percent of world trade: 800 million consumers. It is a trading bloc that creates a framework to be able to deal with the issues of intellectual property and services and investment into the future that other countries are lining up to join. It is a trading bloc that will exceed the expectations of the national investment analysis. That is a future that this Government wants to be a part of and the Opposition wants to withdraw from and I think it is very flawed thinking indeed.The other policy that Opposition members then put on the table is one that increases the subsidies for those who want to retrain. I respectfully put forward that that is precisely the wrong question to be asking. The real question here is whether we are teaching the right vocational and tertiary courses to enable people to have the skills and resilience to be able to be successful in that future economy. In my view this Government has a fantastic track record in investment particularly across vocational and tertiary areas both in terms of their prioritisations of ICT graduates STEM funding the lifting of engineering students and the like.In fact I believe that when we talk about resilience and the capacity to deal with a changing world looking out 5 10 15 20 years it is as much about attitude as it is about technical competency. In my opinion a party that—as we do—talks to that future is keen to embrace the world of tomorrow the one that sees globalisation as a significant generational shift and an opportunity to connect us with world consumers is the way of the future and is a party that has the right policy settings to be able to deal with that reality. In my view that future is particularly exciting and challenging and our success as a country will be measured on how connected we are to the world. It will be measured on how direct the pathway is for our innovation to the consumers of tomorrow and it will talk to how technically competent we are as a nation and how resilient we are as individuals and communities.As I have reflected over the last couple of weeks and listened to the various responses to the Prime Minister’s statement I firmly believe that on this side of the House we have a framework that is focused on preparing New Zealand for that future and what we have on the other side of the House is a party that is captured in its 1980 student president and political rhetoric. I was with its members at that time. I was in the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations and Waikato Student Union with Grant Robertson. I heard his speeches. They are the same today as they were 25 years ago and Bill English is right: they are caught in a policy response that is 25 years old. They do not understand how they talk about this future of globalisation. They talk about the forces that are changing the world rapidly but their policy response is inadequate it is weak it is poor thinking and it is the reason why they are 25 points behind in the polls. It is the reason why the community of the Bay of Plenty and Tauranga are so supportive of John Key so supportive of this Government and I am very proud to be a part of it. Thank you.SUE MORONEY (Labour): The Kiwi Dream—it is not too much to ask. I think that the National Party has forgotten about the basic needs of New Zealanders: somewhere safe to live; hopefully a place that you can call home that you can own. That is not too much to ask. Basic needs include security for the people we love a chance to enjoy the outdoors and the environment that we care about and a job—a decent secure job—that gives us the time the money and the safety to lead a fulfilling life with those we care about. It is a simple concept—the Kiwi Dream—but for an increasing number of New Zealanders it is getting completely outside of their reach under this National Government.I was hoping to hear something inspirational from the Prime Minister’s statement that might change that situation but a couple of weeks after the Prime Minister stood up and gave his statement you know I cannot name one exciting thing that he said and I do not think any New Zealander can. What was the transformational thing that the Prime Minister came out with in his speech that will improve people’s lives? That is what we are charged with: we are charged with improving people’s lives not handing out the same old misery that is stopping thousands of New Zealand families and children from achieving that simple Kiwi Dream. That is what we are here to try to secure. It is out of reach for far too many New Zealanders under this Government.My generation of parents is facing the sad situation of being the first generation ever to look at our children and know that they are going to be worse off than we were. That has not happened before. I think all parents aspire to know that their children’s lives are going to be better than theirs. But we are facing down the barrel of being the first generation who will not be able to look our children in the eye and say that because they face increasing housing costs and their chances of actually owning their own home are becoming a distant distant memory. They face increasing debt for everything that they are engaged with—for their education and for just simply being allowed to live on this planet and participate in life in New Zealand. They are under growing amounts of debt. The life expectation of the generation below us is below the life expectation for my generation.That is a dreadful situation for any parent to have to contemplate. Also our children face increasingly insecure jobs. That is what they are facing under this National Government. It is only the Labour Party that is concerned enough about that prospect that we are doing the hard work and the thinking and the policy making around what the future of the workforce needs to look like to actually make it more secure for people to ensure that the workforce and the labour market work for people.I listened to the sad contributions from the last couple of National MPs. Todd Muller who has just resumed his seat said that our entire success is going to be measured on how connected we are to the world. No Mr Muller our success will be rated on how people’s lives are. We have an economy to serve the people; not the people to serve the economy. They have got it completely the wrong way round. That is what I think was at the basis of the Prime Minister’s statement that was so disappointing and did not bring forward any of the inspiration any of the vision that New Zealanders are desperately crying out for.Under National the Kiwi Dream is slipping away. National members are too distracted on working out how to get rid of our flag for goodness’ sake! They are so distracted on how to get rid of our flag that they had a crisis meeting about it. They had a crisis meeting on how to get rid of our national flag when they should have been having a crisis meeting on how to lift out of poverty the increasing number of children who are slipping into poverty under National’s reign. That should have been what the crisis meeting was about; not about getting rid of our flag. So the Government has completely got its priorities upside down.On this side of the House we are connected to the Kiwi Dream and we are determined to deliver that. I want to talk about a few aspects that we are taking charge of. Extending paid parental leave is one aspect. If the Kiwi Dream starts anywhere it starts in those first early days and months of a child’s life. Getting that right getting the support getting the security getting the attachment between parent and baby—there should be no greater priority than that. That is where the Kiwi Dream starts. If it goes wrong in those early months what all the research and evidence tell us is that we as taxpayers will pay for that over and over and over again. When that child cannot learn when that child ends up in hospital when that child is not going to school because of health problems when that child is disconnected from their caregiver from their parent then we all pay over and over again for the bad outcomes of that.On this side of the House and with the support of other wise parties what we know is that this sort of investment is the type of thing that the Prime Minister should have been talking about. He should have been agreeing to extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks. But was he doing that? No. Instead he is talking about putting a veto on it to go against the will of this Parliament and to go against the will of the majority of New Zealanders to put a stop to getting the start to the Kiwi Dream. That is what the Prime Minister is focused on; not on dealing with the issues that matter to New Zealanders.Decent jobs—that is what this side of the House is focused on. We know that having a decent job is fundamental to being able to secure the rest of the Kiwi Dream. It is fundamental to that. But under this Government zero-hour contracts are what have been going on. People have to put their lives on hold just sit and wait for a phone call that may never come to give them a little bit of extra money so that they can put food on the table. For far too many of our families those jobs mean not only that can they not participate in their community but also that they cannot do the basic thing of putting food on the table. We are a food-producing nation and 27 percent of our children live in poverty. Too many of our children go to school hungry in a food-producing nation. How can we get it so wrong? How can that be? Did the Prime Minister address that at all in his statement? There was not one measure—not one measure—to reduce child poverty. There was not one measure to secure decent jobs. There was not one measure that actually deals with the day-to-day pressures that New Zealand families are facing and it is very very disappointing.Another part of a decent job is the good old Kiwi adage that you get a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. There was never a rider put on that—I have never heard one—that says “but only if you are a certain gender or only if you are a certain race.” What I am talking about is equal pay. We need urgently to address equal pay as well. This Government cannot even talk about equal pay. It talks instead about getting women to go off and do jobs traditionally done by men. That seems to be the Government’s only idea that it has got in this space. Well it is not acceptable and it needs addressing.In the final part of this speech I want to talk a little bit about transport and its role in the Kiwi Dream. I can tell you that sitting on the Auckland motorway for hours on end is not part of the Kiwi Dream. That Government has presided over increasing volumes on the Auckland motorway without people getting anywhere. It has spent $2.3 billion on the Waikato Expressway. That was money funding set aside by a Labour Government to do exactly that. We agree with the Waikato Expressway but what the Government has managed to do is to squander that $2.3 billion. It now takes longer than ever to get from central Hamilton to central Auckland. It now takes longer than ever. It used to take an hour and a halfHamiltonians now have to put aside 3 hours to get from central Hamilton to central Auckland and that is after the Government has spent $2.3 billion on the Waikato Expressway. Why? Because it did not do the public transport part that needed to go alongside that to make it work. The Government has ignored the needs of public transport in Auckland and now what we are doing with the Waikato Expressway is we are feeding a greater volume of traffic faster to get to the “great southern car-park” and sit there for longer. That is what the National Government has managed to achieve. It is not good for productivity. It is not good for family life.Because of the housing crisis in Auckland which the Government has failed to fix we have got people moving to Hamilton living there but returning to their jobs every day in Auckland. They are going on that motorway sitting there for hours on end doing a full day’s work and doing it again at the other end of the day. They are becoming unsafe on the roads and when they get home they are feeling stressed with their families. That is not the Kiwi Dream. It is not working under this Government.NUK KORAKO (National): Ā kia ora e Te Mana Whakawā; tuatahi ka maumarahatia Te Rakatira Tākuta Ranginui Joseph Isaac Walker. Nō reira e Te Rakatira o Te Whakatōhea e Te Rakatira o Te Iwi Māori e haere atu rā haere atu rā ki Te Pā o Te Whakawairua e takoto mai takoto mai takoto mai e moe mai moe mai rā![Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. In the first instance I reminisce about the noble Dr Ranginui Joseph Isaac Walker. Therefore to you esteemed one of Whakatōhea and Māoridom depart and move on to the spiritual place. Lie there lie down and lay there. Rest and slumber on.]I stand to take this split call to support the Prime Minister’s statement. I want first of all to highlight the work of this Government to improve Māori well-being of individuals and communities. We continue to resolve the historical Treaty of Waitangi claims settlements and we have the whakaaro—the idea is that we do want to settle with all those iwi that are willing and are able by 2017. Also there is Te Ture Whenua Maori Bill which will unlock the revision of that Māori land legislation which has huge potential to unlock the huge economic potential existing in Māori land.Kelvin Davis: Which version? There’s been 18 rewrites.NUK KORAKO: Well wait for it. When it comes to the Māori Affairs Committee you will see it. I also want to reflect on the debate surrounding Waitangi this year. Waitangi our national day was hijacked by opponents of free trade. It was hijacked. Up and down the country we have seen Māori being fed misinformation about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. We have seen this right across the country. Two major things that they have been fed: the first one is consultation and the second one is this idea that the TPP agreement would infringe on their rights under the Treaty of Waitangi.Let us look at the consultation process because the truth is that the consultation process for the TPP agreement actually started in 2008 and for Māori there were specific consultations with the Federation of Māori Authorities individual Māori businesses and also iwi. Throughout the process the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade actually updated iwi and Māori businesses every 6 months so this misinformation that they were never consulted—that is misinformation. The next part of it is about this infringement of rights—Meka Whaitiri: Were you there? I was there. It’s not consultation.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I just ask the member to take a seat for a second while I remonstrate with one of my colleagues. I was not there and the member should know not to address the speaker in that way.NUK KORAKO: Kia ora. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. The misinformation around the TPP agreement actually infringing on the Treaty of Waitangi—nothing in the agreement prevents the Government from honouring the Treaty; nothing in the agreement. When we look at the trade agreements that have been negotiated since 2001 all of those in those trade agreements since then they’ve always had those provisions in it that there would be no infringement under the Treaty of Waitangi.Finally at the beginning I acknowledged Dr Ranginui Walker. In one of his books Struggle Without End—he was a man who saw there was far from doom and gloom regarding the development of iwi Māori—he called Māori development “the most powerful cultural renaissance […] of a colonised people in the world.” One of those cultural achievements he highlighted was Māori entrepreneurship. Māori own nearly 30 percent of our primary industries and stand to be the biggest beneficiaries of the TPP agreement. Māori care about the same things that other New Zealanders care about. They want jobs they want better wages and quality public services.That is why the Government has pursued and will continue to pursue the TPP agreement and other opportunities for economic growth. We are about wealth creation as opposed to about wealth redistribution. Kia ora.MAUREEN PUGH (National): It is a privilege for me to stand and take this my first call in the House. For the benefit of my colleagues I am based in West Coast - Tasman and I am very proud to stand here today in support of the Prime Minister’s statement—a Prime Minister who has taken it upon himself to recognise the importance of the tourism industry in this country and has placed himself in charge of that particular portfolio. Tourism is directly contributing $10.6 billion to the national economy. We are experiencing a very buoyant tourism sector at the moment and my recent visit to South Westland just last week encourages me that the industry is in good heart and the country is in good heart.The Prime Minister’s statement touched on several items that affect the people who live in the area of West Coast - Tasman in a very positive way. One of those is the changes that are proposed for ACC that will be coming in this year. A total of $450 million will be saved in levies paid by businesses and employees—that is $450 million that stays in the pockets of those people. That is a huge contribution back to this nation.When I was campaigning in 2014 the Government pledged that it would replace one of the bottlenecks in the tourism sector on the roads in between Greymouth and Hokitika and that is the Taramakau road-rail bridge. Although quite quaint in its design where you share the road and the bridge with a train in this day and age it is no longer satisfactory. The Government plans to spend $15 million to $20 million on replacing the Taramakau road-rail bridge. This project is expected to start later this year and delivers on that pre-election promise. I am very proud that we were able to promise that to the electorate and also deliver. This is part of the Accelerated Regional Roading Package.Also part of that programme is the realignment of what is called the Mingha Bluff and for those of you who have ever travelled State Highway 73 from the West Coast to Christchurch you will know that it is one of the remaining narrow sections of road—very windy. If you have ever had the misfortune of being stuck behind a transporter you will know that if two trucks meet on that particular section of road there is simply no room to pass—they literally touch wing mirrors. In this day and age with the tourist volumes that are making their way across that road it is very heartening indeed to see this work progressing at such a great rate and—I have got to say—too without too much disruption to the traffic flows along that road. This is a $22 million project being invested into the area and all going to plan it will be finished at the end of this year. This will significantly improve the safety of locals and visitors visiting and travelling across that road. It is also very important for our freight transport operators.Another item in the Prime Minister’s statement that is of particular interest to me is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. The industries that benefit in the areas of West Coast - Tasman—Hon Nathan Guy: Huge on the Coast. Huge.MAUREEN PUGH: —huge—dairy meat fruit and vegetables forestry and fisheries. By the time the TPP is fully implemented the tariff savings alone will value $259 million. That is $259 million nationally that is staying with the growers to grow their business to employ more workers and to benefit their industries. This is great news for New Zealand.There is an example on the West Coast at the moment of the central-local government partnership. I spoke about this in my maiden speech where working together produces greater results for Kiwis. This Government has pledged $300 million—sorry I wish—$300000 to help with the employment opportunity in Buller and that is a partnership one-to-one with the Buller District Council. That is going to see workers being able to be retained in the town so that other business opportunities can grow and take up their employment at a later date. Thank you.DENISE ROCHE (Green): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise to take the final call for the Greens on the Prime Minister’s statement and I want to address the four priorities that he outlined. They were to responsibly manage the Government’s finances to build a more competitive and productive economy to deliver better public services to New Zealanders and to support the rebuilding of Christchurch.I applaud the Government’s small army of public relations and communications staff for being able to spin this Government’s appalling record on these issues into some kind of achievement. National has promised to responsibly manage the Government’s finance. The reality is that it has increased New Zealand’s public debt to $120 billion. A legacy of National’s poor economic management is tax cuts to its rich mates and giveaways to dodgy corporates. It promised to build a more competitive and productive economy; instead it built an economy that was built on property speculation—ask anyone in Auckland—and on casino capitalism and on unsustainable practices. It has failed to meaningfully diversify the economy and implement a vision towards a greener and more sustainable economy.Our trading fortunes seem to rise and fall with the dairy prices and we see as the result of this farms carrying nearly $60 billion in debt with dairy farms carrying $40 billion of that debt. Nearly one in 10 farmers is under financial stress. The Government’s single-minded focus on bigger more intensive farming endangers our fragile ecosystems. It pressures farmers into intensifying and it undermines New Zealand’s No. 1 strength: our “clean green” reputation.This Government claims to have provided Better Public Services. It has certainly been very good at delivering public services to further private interests—to places like Serco Skycity and let us not forget charter schools—and it has certainly been very good at replacing democratically elected bodies in favour of appointed cronies. We see this with the Southern District Health Board and governance in Christchurch. But the facts speak for themselves. National’s approach is not working.Currently there are 129 days of waiting time to get a State house if you are in urgent need. One in three people needing a house is turned away and taken off the waiting lists to help the Government fudge the books with its creative accounting. The Government’s hard-line ideology is pressuring our hard-working public servants. Our nurses and doctors are having to cope with nearly $2 billion—$2 billion—in underfunding our universities are slipping in the world rankings and our Department of Conservation is struggling to fulfil its core responsibilities due to budget cuts.The reality on the ground was exposed a couple of weeks ago by the Salvation Army’s report. In it it says—and as we know—that there are still 220000 kids living in poverty there are still 150000 notifications for potential child abuse this year and there are over 55000 food parcels being provided by the Salvation Army. Only on “Planet Key” can the number of kids remaining in poverty increase despite the economy growing 12 percent since 2010.The reality about our Public Service is that it cannot continue to struggle with underfunding. Political reporter Andrea Vance was correct: instead of having Better Public Services we have “Bitter Public Services”. Despite the Government’s glossy public relations our hard-working teachers nurses doctors and police are bearing the cost of having to do much much more with less and that means that our most vulnerable—our kids kids living in poverty regional New Zealand and our new migrants—are bearing the costs of these stealth cuts.Let me just talk a little bit about Christchurch and the promises there. My colleagues from Christchurch have already touched on this but allow me to ask the question once more: how can the Government be listing its rebuilding of Christchurch as an achievement and then several days later slash the funding for mental health services in the area? Rebuilding is more than replacing bricks and mortar. It is about supporting people who have been hurt and are facing losses it is about wrapping support around the vulnerable and vulnerable communities and it is about acknowledging that the loss of friends family businesses and ways of life can be painful and difficult and that it requires help. I pay tribute to the incredible resilience courage and fortitude of the people of Christchurch and I condemn this Government which by its actions is failing the people of Christchurch and the people of New Zealand.The Government has repeatedly promised a brighter future for New Zealand but it has always talked a better game than it has been prepared to deliver. For ordinary working New Zealanders we have gone backwards in terms of rights at work we have gone backwards in terms of the work climate where lots and lots of public servants feel bullied and fearful and we have gone backwards about zero-hour contracts. The Prime Minister promised a brighter future for New Zealanders but actually he has left every New Zealander in the dark. The recent increase of the minimum wage to $15.25 an hour and the gap between that and the living wage of $19.80 reflect that reality. Since 2009 the highest-paid third of New Zealanders have seen their incomes increase eight times as much as the lowest-paid third.Last year the Government promised to outlaw zero-hour contracts but instead of moving on that what it is doing is attempting to legalise them. Last year the Government promised a gold-plated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement but we are being sucked in and stuck with an agreement that will cost 5000 jobs and leave us open to being sued by big corporates. There is a better way—there is a much better way.It is interesting to note what the Prime Minister did not talk about. Not once did the Prime Minister mention the word “inequality” or the word “poverty” not once did the Prime Minister address the growing gap between the haves and have-nots in this country and only once did he mention climate change—and then only in passing. A progressive Prime Minister would have talked about child poverty and supported measures to fix it like our breakfast in schools bill—the Government could have supported that—and like maybe decent incomes for families. A progressive Prime Minister would have talked about how climate change is the greatest challenge we face but it is also an opportunity for New Zealand to become world leaders in a new high-value cleantech low-carbon economy. A progressive Prime Minister would have talked about how we can have an economy that works for everyone not just the very rich and a progressive Government with the Greens in it would do more than just talk and spin.We would act on these issues and make sure that every single child in New Zealand is cared for and lives in a warm dry home. We would make sure ordinary New Zealanders would get a fair deal at work and a fair share of the benefits of a smart thriving green economy that works for everyone. We would make sure that we have rivers we can swim in and vibrant green cities and townships with fast affordable clean public transport. An Aotearoa with the Green Party at the heart of Government will be a much kinder place and certainly we would deliver a lot better than what this Government has.Hon NIKKI KAYE (Minister for ACC): I am very pleased to speak on the Prime Minister’s statement. If you are listening to this debate you would have heard a lot of slogans but actually when I read the Prime Minister’s statement I see a very clear vision for New Zealand. It is very clear and it is very clear that there is a very big contrast in this House between the Opposition and the Government. The vision is an open democratic nation that is connected to the world where we live in a place where every young person has the ability to have access to decent health and education services. Let us look at what has actually happened over the last 7 years and where we are going.Let us take the first issue: our economy. We hear a lot from the Opposition about how much it cares about business. Those members turn up they have the cocktail functions but when it comes to the crunch—one of the biggest things that will affect so many of our exporters—where are they? They have gone. They have ditched our exporters. Because the reality is that the emails that were coming in to me in Auckland Central—yes there were those people who were opposed but there were a whole lot of exporters who understood the basic concept of a deal that would reach 800 million people and 11 nations that would lead to if not signed a whole lot of businesses small and large having tariffs on them that other countries would not have. It was inconceivable to them that we would not sign it. In fact I think it was one exporter who said to me: “We would literally have our hands tied behind ours backs.”So the Labour Party talks a good game but when it comes to the crunch it cannot sign the deal and actually it is all over the place. We know where former Prime Minister Helen Clark sits on this and I do want to acknowledge her. You know she quite clearly understands the issue for New Zealand if we were to not sign this thing. We understand where Phil Goff sits on this. He is a former trade Minister. He quite practically understands a $2.7 billion deal for our country and what that means. We actually understand where David Shearer sits on this but he has been muzzled by his leader. The reality is that half of the Labour caucus support this deal but because of petty politics they have not been able to step up and do the right thing for New Zealand.We are a Government that has a Prime Minister who is outward-looking and who is walking the talk and signing deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I want to acknowledge the Hon Tim Groser. When it comes to the economy we are a Government that was handed billions of dollars of a hole in the ACC books. I am the Minister for ACC. We now have a situation where we have been able to put $1.5 billion back in New Zealanders’ pockets. We have got $450 million coming back. That is from motor vehicle levies being cut that is businesses levies being cut—that is actually real. In contrast we were handed a complete shambles in terms of the books.When it comes to other areas of the economy the reality is that—if you listen again to the Opposition you will hear a completely different level of slogans and a completely different world—the average wage in New Zealand has gone up $10000 under our Government. It is now at $57000. But again our vision is more than that. It is not just about the economy.When it comes to infrastructure we were handed a massive deficit. I am Associate Minister of Education. Let me walk you through the numbers. We were handed leaky buildings and we were handed old buildings. More than 60 percent of the buildings in New Zealand were over 60 years old. What happened? There were $2.7 billion in 7 years under Labour; we have put $4 billion in. We are literally fixing these schools all across New Zealand more than ever before. No Government has undertaken such a social infrastructure upgrade of our schools as this Government has. So if people want to talk about a Government that cares that is one example.Let us talk about the other examples. When it comes to health we have a whole lot of young people who we want to ensure get access to the doctor. Which Government was it? It was our Government that said: “Right we’re going to give free under-13s visits to young people in New Zealand.” We have delivered that. When it came to the issue raised by the Green Party of breakfast in schools it was our Government that has put in millions of dollars enabling those schools that want it—not compulsorily not making sure that every school has to have set times for their particular breakfasts. We actually said to schools: “It’s up to you if you want it but we will enable those young people to get access to breakfast.” When it came to insulating houses—we are now 350000 insulated houses later.Again this is set out in the Prime Minister’s clear vision for New Zealand—a country that is focused on opening up our many businesses to the world having access to those markets having access to decent incomes but also enabling some of our most vulnerable to get better support. And our record in those areas that I have just outlined is very clear.When it comes to infrastructure spend let us look again in Auckland. Again we hear a lot of slogans from the Opposition about the Kiwi Dream and all of these things and we hear a lot of slogans about the fact that we should not be investing so much in roads but here are the facts around rail in Auckland. It is our Government that has put $1.5 billion into the electrification of rail and I was very pleased to be with the Prime Minister when we confirmed that we are looking to bring forward the City Rail Link. What is that about? That is actually about Prime Minister John Key being responsible for delivering the vital artery in Auckland’s rail system. That is a project that will lead to not just the people of central Auckland benefiting; it is the people of west Auckland and South Auckland who are literally going to have their journey times slashed in half.That is a compassionate Government. That is a Government that is investing not just in roads but also in public transport. Again we are spending billions of dollars ensuring that our young people are connected to the world and that it is a connected nation. Whether it is the ultra-fast broadband programme which has been a couple of billion dollars we are one of the only countries in the world—and this is something that I am most proud of and when I leave Parliament this is one of the things that I will be most proud of. We said when we came in that we were going to do everything we could to connect New Zealand schools. And we have not only said that we are going to put the fibre in the ground we are going to enable every school that wants it to have access to fast connections reliable connections funded by the Crown. We are we believe one of only a couple of countries in the world that are delivering that. We are roaring ahead with that programme. More than 90 percent of New Zealand schools have been connected to that and that is paid for by us because we believe in a nation that is globally connected where every young person gets that opportunity.So again we hear a lot from the Opposition about the Kiwi Dream. The Prime Minister’s statement was very clear: an open nation connected to the world where every young person gets better access to equality of opportunity. And it is our Government in so many areas—from education to insulating houses to free under-13s visits to investing in infrastructure and catching up with the massive deficit that we have been left in areas like rail in transport and in ultra-fast broadband. That is incredibly significant. And we have done this at one of the most difficult times in terms of our history with the global financial situation but also with the Canterbury earthquakes.As the Minister of Civil Defence can I say this. There is a lot of talk around the Canterbury rebuild but I have had the good fortune of meeting Ministers from across the world and I do want to say this about the Hon Gerry Brownlee: it is one of the most complex processes to basically try to rebuild a city. I think that we have not only the Prime Minister’s leadership on pretty much day one in saying “We will rebuild that city.”—and we have spent $17 billion on doing that—but also the dedication and the huge amount of work that the Hon Gerry Brownlee does every day to ensure that we are rebuilding that city. But the reality is that there are many situations across the world where we can see that this does take a bit of time and we acknowledge the people of Canterbury and their patience through this period. But at the end of the day we have put up the money and we are absolutely committed to working through that.This is a Government that not only has compassion and has the right policies from a fiscal perspective but actually is walking the talk when it comes to the Kiwi Dream. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. The Hon Clayton Cosgrove—5 minutes.Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour): If you look at Kiwi society Kiwis do not ask for much from their Government or from their nation. They ask for a fair go they ask for a future they ask—and they want—some hope; not just for themselves but for their families for the future generations and for their loved ones. New Zealanders know what they are about.The last speaker Minister Nikki Kaye talked about the Prime Minister’s statement and the vision and the great words and the great slogans that were in it. She talked—and I wrote it down—about “a Government that cares”. She talked about “a compassionate Government”. But there was one word and one phrase that did not appear in the Prime Minister’s statement yet was evident today and that was the word “Keytruda”. We had a display today in Parliament where members of the public presented a 45000-person petition. People sat in the gallery watching the to-ing and fro-ing of question time and they are people who are fighting for their lives quite literally. We had a couple of individuals come to our caucus meeting this morning to talk about the fact that in both cases they were effectively told it was lights out—they were not coming back. As my colleague said to go home and die was the message: “There is nothing that can be done.”And we had people on the front lawn of Parliament: people who have done sausage sizzles; people who have raised money through Givealittle websites and on Facebook; people who have mortgaged houses for their families—not because they have a choice to do so but because they have to literally in the case of the melanoma disease try to keep their loved ones alive because the Government refuses to fund Pharmac to produce literally a lifesaving drug.As Annette King has said there is no first-line or front-line treatment like chemotherapy or radiotherapy for this disease. These people require a lifesaving drug to survive and this is not you know the old green-lipped mussel sort of magic potion stuff that we had a few years ago. No these are people who were told “Go home and die.” who funded this medication themselves and are now living today. So when that member talks about compassion and when she talks about a caring Government she should reflect on those folks who sat in the gallery today and who were on the front lawn of this Parliament begging in many cases for this Government to save the lives of their family. That might sound a bit dramatic over there but it is a medical fact. It is a medical fact.The Prime Minister talks about aspiration. Well it is hard to have aspiration if you are dead. It is hard to have aspiration if your whole life as you move to retirement is about mortgaging your home going on Facebook to beg the public for some money going and running galas and other things because that is what you literally have to do to ensure that those you love who are victims of this awful disease can have their lives saved. I am told people are dying daily from this disease and these are people whose lives can be saved. I ask the Minister of Health—as he says “Pharmac might get some more money” or the Prime Minister as he says “We’ll have to wait and see until the Budget”—to act. And every day that we wait and every day that we procrastinate or the Government procrastinates people literally die.So when we talk about vision and when we on this side talk about the Kiwi Dream and the Prime Minister talks about aspiration—and when we hear 10 minutes of lofty speeches about roads and all sorts of other infrastructure and the wonderful opportunities available to New Zealanders who do not ask for much—those New Zealanders sitting in the gallery and out on the front lawn will never be able to exercise those aspirational goals because they might not be here.Government inherently is about choices. Ministers make choices every day. They choose to fund a flag referendum at 26 million bucks. They choose to fund charter schools and Novopays that fail. They choose all these things and today is an opportunity for them to make a choice and literally—literally for those people—save their lives.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Stuart Nash—5 minutes.STUART NASH (Labour—Napier): What I would like to talk about is equality of opportunity and the Kiwi Dream in the 21st century. Nikki Kaye stood up and she talked about an aspirational Government and what it was doing but the facts speak for themselves. At the moment in New Zealand there are over 300000 Kiwi children living in poverty our jail numbers are at a record high and there are over 150000 New Zealanders who are unemployed. The world that Nikki Kaye speaks about is the world of people who have succeeded; they have had opportunities and I celebrate them and I say: “Well done. Good on you. You’ve worked hard. You’ve got to where you are by getting out there and really making it happen.” But I have grave concerns for those without hope without opportunity or without aspiration.Equality of opportunity is my reason for getting into politics and my underlying philosophy. Equality of opportunity means it does not matter what your postcode is what your parents’ income is where you live or what your last name is. It is about allowing Kiwis to reach their full potential and it starts with education.Education allows people to reach their potential—to be as good as they possibly can be. We are not talking about everyone becoming Oxford dons but what we are talking about is people achieving and becoming part of society. A generation ago if you were not so academically inclined there were jobs in the freezing works in the wool stores at the forest service at the ports in the Ministry of Works and in the post office. There were jobs for everyone. In fact they used to joke in the 1950s that the Minister of Labour knew the name of every single unemployed person because there were only about 11 of them. That has changed.These days if you want to be even a grunt in the army you need National Certificate of Educational Achievement level 2. Education is where it starts and education is a way forward. It is the way that Kiwis can reach out and make that Kiwi Dream a reality. It has never been so important in providing young Kiwis with the right to a life that we have had and that our forebears have had but at the moment it is just out of reach of a generation coming through because they have not got that ability. Education is so important that it cannot be underestimated. It was why the Labour Party a Labour Government and Andrew Little have really trumpeted education as a way forward as a transformational policy to allow Kiwis to achieve to their potential.We are going to enter into a referendum on the New Zealand flag. Sir Roger Douglas in this House—you know we disagree on certain fundamental philosophy—said that he had never ever seen a Prime Minister come into power with so much political capital as John Key and completely waste it. I simply cannot understand for the life of me why Mr Key is burning so much political capital on something like the New Zealand flag when there are so many things that he could go incredibly hard on that would change the lives of good hard-working Kiwis and that would transform this country from one where we have begun to almost accept that child poverty is just the way it is.When you think that this is a country founded on such egalitarian principles that people moved from London from the UK and from around the world to come here to have a fresh start and to start again in a society that valued everyone. The thing is that a Labour Government has always been the Government of transformation of social evolution that is not social revolution and it will be again. There is a different way. I know this; New Zealanders know this. There is an alternative. We cannot keep going the way we are. If you are doing really well life is good but for more and more and more Kiwis life is a struggle and life is a challenge. As mentioned I celebrate those who have done well—good on you—but for those for whom life is a challenge we also need to work hard for them. Thank you.JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): The previous speakerStuart Nash was talking about the time when somebody said there were 11 unemployed people in the country. I can remember that time back in the mid-1970s. It was just down on Pipitea Street not far from this Parliament where I watched a gang from the Ministry of Works dig a hole. There were 13 workers there. Each had a spade or a shovel and there were 12 watching and one digging.Back in the 1970s this country was very wealthy because we had a great relationship with Britain. We were able to sell all of our goods no questions asked but then Britain joined the EEC and suddenly our markets evaporated and disappeared and this country has to live in a different way than it did in that period of time. We have to be far more productive we have to be sharper we have to be leaner we have to be competitive and we have to be productive on the world stage. That is what this Government has brought to this nation—productivity edge competitiveness on the world stage. That is why this country this nation and this Government are respected all around the world.Back in 2008 National became the Government with 45 percent support. We went into 2011 and we won with 47 percent support. We went into 2014 and we won again with 47 percent support. In October 2015 we were receiving 47 percent support and at the beginning of this year once again. So what that shows is that there has been consistency of support because there has been consistency of policy and consistency of output and achievement for this country. After returning to Taranaki in 2008—after living for 22 years in Auckland—what I have witnessed is the credibility and consistency of this Government in its support for the people of Taranaki and regional New Zealand. It is a good thing.What we receive from members of the Opposition is a continual—as would be expected—undermining of the achievements of this Government. I remember when the Leader of the Opposition commented and was quoted in September last year on the number of visits to New Plymouth by Government Ministers. He said “When the town was booming there were Ministers here every couple of weeks. Now you can’t see them for dust.” referring to the time of challenge and hardship that two particular sectors in the Taranaki economy were facing—obviously dairying and the petroleum sector. He said: “It’s not enough to stand on the sidelines cheering during the good times then turn your back when times are tough. Taranaki and the rest of New Zealand deserves more than that.”So he said they were there every couple of weeks. I went through the list of Ministers who came to my electorate my region and I wanted to find out the level of support this Government gave regional New Zealand particularly in my electorate. I went through and I counted them up. There were 18 ministerial visits in 27 weeks which is a visit every 10 days. So we were very much on the map and I think what regional New Zealand appreciates and understands about this Government and about our Prime Minister is the fact that there is commitment and consistency. So that was the September comment.Last week on 23 February the Leader of the Opposition accused the Government of abandoning Taranaki. He said during the oil boom Ministers touted Taranaki as the golden province. He said: “Now they’re nowhere to be seen. It’s not good enough to turn their back when the going gets tough.” So once again I went through and I looked and counted the number of my colleagues who had come through to support not only myself but the people of Taranaki and the people of New Plymouth. At the end of last year the Prime Minister was there. Nikki Kaye the Associate Minister of Education came to look at school buildings. Paula Bennett came at the end of last year to open the new Novotel hotel and to look at areas of economic development in our region.Just over a week ago Amy Adams came to celebrate the completion of the roll-out of ultra-fast broadband in my city. Steven Joyce came last week. Judith Collins came last week to support the business community and to visit the New Plymouth police station and the Department of Corrections where there is fantastic collaboration taking place. Maggie Barry was in town. So even in the last month since Parliament has been sitting we have had a considerable number of ministerial visits with them coming to our region every 4 to 5 days.So what I am saying is that regional New Zealand continues to be on the agenda and to have the attention of this Government but we would be told differently. In fact the people of my region shake their heads they scratch their heads and they wonder at what they hear being so different to what they see. This is why despite the rhetoric this Government and our Prime Minister continues to receive support from New Zealanders—nearly one in every two. What they see is consistency. What they see is consistency and a tremendous gap between us and the Opposition obviously as well.Then of course we have—I will not tell you what is happening and coming up. But the previous speaker came and visited Taranaki not just recently but let me just talk about his visit last year—when he came with a number of his colleagues to visit the Stratford power station. I think this is a great example of why people question the validity of the members opposite to govern. My colleagues across the way Mr Nash and Carmel Sepuloni and of course Mr Grant Robertson came and they had a good look at some of our assets. There was an article in the Taranaki Daily News that was quite perplexing. So I wrote a letter to the editor because I wanted to know the answer about the difference between what they said and what I saw. I think New Zealanders all the time want to know the difference between what they see and what the Opposition says.So I wrote a letter to the editor. The article on 8 October by Hannah Lee is titled “Labour Bigwigs”—that is you Mr Nash—“Visit on Regional Outreach”. It has Grant Robertson Labour’s finance spokesman saying “there was an increased interest in the Stratford power station now that Contact Energy had shut down their Ōtāhuhu power station for good on 30 September … It’s a bit of a boost for Stratford.” So that is pretty good. He knows Contact Energy is permanently closing the Ōtāhuhu power station therefore Contact Energy’s other assets such as the Stratford power station are going to be in higher demand and higher need. I can see why Andrew Little made him finance spokesman. Then he went on to say: “However the power station like other regional infrastructure was in need of desperate upgrades to bring it into the 21st century.” If I was Mr Nash at that point in time as the energy spokesperson I would be saying to Mr Robertson: “Grant please don’t say that. Don’t say that.”So needing to understand his sublime commentary on energy generation and infrastructure I wrote a letter to the editor seeking the paper’s wisdom. In terms of Grant Robertson’s referring to regional infrastructure needing a desperate upgrade I was not sure which of Contact Energy’s power stations in Stratford he says needs upgrading. Could it be the 377-megawatt station that Contact Energy describes as a large efficient and modern plant being one of the largest gas turbines in the world housed in a single building? Could it be that one? Or perhaps it is the other power station needed to be to be brought into the 21st century Contact Energy’s 200-megawatt gas-fired station the one that Hekia Parata Chester Borrows and I accompanied the Prime Minister to which he opened on 31 May 2011?Just as I close what I want to say is that credibility is the most tradable commodity in politics. Just last week we had Mr Little telling all of Taranaki that the Government has abandoned them. Just 2 days before the Minister for Economic Development the Hon Steven Joyce was there meeting with all the civic leaders of the whole region putting his finger on the pulse finding out what is going on.This is why this Government is credible and can be trusted. We have not abandoned—in fact we are committed and we work hard to support—regional New Zealand and we work hard to ensure that the economy of this nation continues to be strong and will continue to grow even in places such as Taranaki where the commodities of milk and oil are receiving far less than they used to. What we see is a region that is resilient working hard pulling together and that is going to come through this with flying colours. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call. The Hon David Cunliffe—5 minutes.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): The member Jonathan Young who has just sat down was half right. The Labour caucus committee was in Taranaki this last week and here is what the good people of Taranaki told us about National’s regional development efforts: they are arrogant they are out of touch they have lost their way and they are a tired third-term Government that needs to be retired. They gave us three specific examples and I will mention them.The first one was the so-called regional growth studies. They are nothing but studies. People told us that the studies simply recite and package what the locals are already doing. There is study but no money study but no action study but no plan and people are deeply cynical about National—a waste of space in regional development. It is like a New Year’s resolution that you are going to go on a diet: “We’ll have regional development this year.” Well it does not happen under National because it does not do action and it does not do a strategy.The second example that comes to mind is the famous Ōpōtiki harbour development in my colleague’s East Coast area. It is an economic and financial no-brainer. It has been proven to officials and Ministers multiple times. What happens? The Government does a kind of public relations sham and gives $3 million out of $30 million for yet another study maybe to announce a grant in an election year. The people of the Eastern Bay of Plenty are not that stupid. They know when there is a con under way and that con was Steven Joyce.The third example that the member actually raised is the problem with white gold and black gold—oil and dairy. Well we cannot control the oil market and we cannot control the global dairy market and that is the problem. We have got all our cows in one basket. Labour has been saying for the last 6 years: “We need a plan for economic development. We need a plan to diversify our economy. We need a plan to add more value in science and innovation through research and tertiary education to the God-given natural resources that we do so well in.” What did National do? It converted everything into dairy farms and then it wondered why things looked pretty ropey when the price collapsed from 8 bucks to 4 bucks and now of course there are calls to socialise the problem after it privatises the profit. You just watch this space because there will be a lot of farmer pressure to say “Well we need a free pass from the banks.” the same banks that are announcing record profits—billions upon billions of dollars.Let us talk about the Kiwi Dream. You know half of New Zealand is enslaved to mortgages making those Aussie banks really really rich with those record profits. The other half is trapped in a rental poverty trap struggling to keep up and struggling to get their kids through tertiary education but not getting ahead—middle-class Kiwis never getting ahead—of the fortnightly or monthly pay check. A country of aspiration we used to be.Hon Judith Collins: Like leadership.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: A country of winners we used to be. Oh ho! There is Judith Collins arising from the crypt talking about leadership aspiration. Pots kettles—yeah. The Kiwi Dream is worth campaigning for. The Kiwi Dream is not about lofty goals. It is not about spin. It is about the absolute basics: a roof over your head that is warm and dry whether you own it or you rent it; some security of tenure for people who are renting.The Kiwi Dream is about having a good job and the education available to keep up with the changing workplace. That is why Labour’s Working Futures Plan gives 3 years of free tertiary education for any type of training from apprenticeship to PhD at any time of your life from post-school to pre-retirement. Our children are never going to do one job all their lives; they might do 10 jobs and they are going to need to move into and out of the workforce. Here is the choice. When you boil it all down we have got a choice between two futures: a dumb economy that is vulnerable to those commodity price cycles or a smart economy where we invest in knowledge and invest in each other close those widening equity gaps and protect our environment. If we do that that is a dream worth making real. That is what a Labour-led Government is going to deliver with our colleagues here for a truly better future for all New Zealanders.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Clare Curran 5 minutes.CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): The Prime Minister’s statement is an opportunity to get a bit philosophical about why we are politicians and about why we are all here why we are all committed to a set of values what we actually came in here to do and whether or not we have managed to achieve any of it. So I am going to start with a quote from A A Milne who as you all know wrote Winnie-the-Pooh: “Pay attention to where you are going because without meaning you might get nowhere.” Well this National Government has not only lost its way but it is turning our political system into a fake democracy—a fake democracy where there is no Kiwi Dream and where there is not much meaning.Just a month ago New Zealand slipped down again in the global transparency rankings. We are no longer the least corrupt country in the world. Transparency International’s 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index ranks us behind Denmark Finland and Sweden. This is our worst ranking since 1998 which was the year before Helen Clark became the Prime Minister. Our Public Service works hard to be open and impartial but this Government is doing damage to our reputation whether it is through the Saudi sheep saga whether it is the Oravida scandal whether it is handing out payments to MediaWorks or whether it is cronyism and dodgy deals. But of course that is not all.Jonathan Young talked about the Opposition undermining the achievements of this Government. Well what has really been happening since 2009 is that we have seen a steady erosion of democracy in this country. There are some glaring examples of this. Some of the most glaring include the freezing of funding and the gutting of public broadcasting in this country the stifling of reasoned debate—public debate—and the scoffing at and belittling of those who have attempted to keep debate alive in this country.As I said we have been embroiled in scandals around handouts to MediaWorks and editorial interference in Māori Television.We have seen questionable appointments to the board of Radio New Zealandthe freezing of funding to Radio New Zealand New Zealand On Air and Māori Television the killing off of TVNZ 7—I could go on and on. It is just the tip of the iceberg but there are more. There are increased central government powers at the expense of elected regional and local government—of course the suspending of the elected council at Environment Canterbury is the glaring example of that.There is the withholding of information under the Official Information Act—delaying or releasing documents that are mostly redacted. This is not a Government that is committed to transparency and openness which we saw late last year when the Ombudsman released a report into the Official Information Act that showed Government departments being encouraged by Ministers’ offices to withhold material for political reasons. It was incredibly disappointing. That report also contains some disappointing information from the Ombudsman with her suggestion that media and politicians could be charged for information which would set a dangerous precedent. It is a longstanding convention that agencies do not charge media or politicians because it would stifle the free flow of information that is in the public interest. So what happened? In January we had the first sign that agencies are charging for Official Information Act requests with the Reserve Bank charging a Fairfax business journalist as part of that policy.Then we have got hard evidence of Government inaction on transparency and accountability with the Open Government Partnership report released just a couple of weeks ago—New Zealand is part of an Open Government Partnership consisting of 69 Governments—which found a huge lack of consultation and ambition in opening up the Government and an action plan that consists of programmes that are already under way and are not designed to improve Government practice. That report does not practise what it preaches.We are seeing a lack of openness and transparency. What New Zealanders want is a sense of meaning from their Government; instead we have a Government that has lost its way.SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I am not sure whether one would call that last speech philosophical or just sort of a litany of woes that really just have not I think got any impact whatsoever. I have to say when I go around my electorate and other parts of the country it is funny that nobody but nobody raises or mentions those issues at all. In fact if you are talking to people out in the electorates what they talk about is very much what we heard in the Prime Minister’s statement and I will come to some of those bits later.I thought though to start—I just want to very briefly touch on Cyclone Winston. The primary reason for that having lived and worked in Fiji and in fact gone through a cyclone a few years ago there is to just speak I suppose in solidarity somewhat with the people there to say to them: Ni sa bula vinaka na kai viti e vanua viti. Having been through a cyclone—it literally came up the driveway where I lived and blew the place apart—I can say that the people of Fiji are incredibly resilient. We often attribute great smiling faces to them as a people and despite this adversity I am pretty sure those smiles will still be there.The one thing about cyclones is—obviously you have a few hours of terror if you will but it is the damage that continues to be done afterwards. I suppose in using a few minutes of this speech it is to encourage New Zealanders and Kiwis to continue to be generous. The cyclone itself might destroy the buildings but it also rips up the crops particularly the dalo plant. It turns it into a little helicopter and literally pulls it right out of the ground. So the first week you would actually go as we did and harvest some food and eat. But in the weeks after it begins to rot and of course you begin to run out of food. Where we were we were cut off for about a month and so your food supplies begin to run very low. The other thing—and those who have lived in the Islands will know—is that all the sea salt gets blown up on to the land and actually scorches the land and the trees and everything goes brown. It is not actually that they have been ripped out of the ground in that case but again scorched.So an encouragement to those listening and to New Zealanders as a whole and to this House—continue to support the people of Fiji. The cyclone is not just simply an activity of a few hours but is something that goes on for weeks and months. In fact even after I had left after a couple of years the damage of the particular cyclone that I went through was still being felt. Again to the people of Fiji I want to wish them well and strength at this time.This remains a very strong and positive Government. As said in the Prime Minister’s statement there has been a whole list of activities where we have performed incredibly strongly. We have heard everything from the increase in wages unemployment which is falling and is expected to fall even further and of course an area of interest to myself is around health care—an incredibly positive story to be told there. I think that is reflected in a couple of ways. First and foremost we know that more elective surgeries are being done. I note that a couple of constituents this week sadly have had to go to hospital. I am thinking of Valerie in particular—if she is listening in—who wrote in and told me: “Six days in hospital but a remarkably excellent experience through the Auckland DHB.” So we know that not only are surgeries going up but also the quality of surgeries is seen as very positive.We know that extra funding is being put into the likes of palliative care. I think that it is particularly good to acknowledge the good people of the Eastern Bays Hospice. Once again those from Tāmaki will know the Eastern Bays Hospice or at the very least the Dove shops which raise an enormous amount of money for hospice care in our community. One thing that I always like to stress to the House is that hospices like Eastern Bays Hospice are actually about where people are able to be at home and be supported. It is not like this little mini-hospital filled with morphine and other drugs; it is actually a life-giving dynamic and I want to thank all of those who work in hospices particularly those within my own electorate. We have got a whole lot of these new pain management teams out now. There is a lot of support particularly for people with orthopaedic pain. Again a really good news story.I think that is somewhat reflected in the work of the Health Committee at the moment. It is and remains an incredibly incredibly busy Health Committee. Over the last year—and again I think it is indicative of just how well the Government is doing—we have seen more funds made available to assist carers. There was a bill we just passed 2 weeks ago in this House with unanimous support—a bill under a National Government—to actually pay those providing care for the cost of transport for the first time. We are also updating the Radiation Safety Act and I think later today actually we may have a chance to complete that piece of work. Last year we updated legislation around health practitioners. In other words we are looking at the health industry in New Zealand and saying: “How do we increase the scope of practice for various professions?”. The best example is things around death certificates or sick leave certificates which are primarily the purview of medical practitioners but we are saying: “Actually scopes of practice have changed now so why not see nurses and others being involved with that?”. We have also modernised elements around health protection. This was around regulation of sunbeds but also dealing with how we I suppose monitor infectious diseases. So again it is a busy select committee but I think it is indicative of actually what is a very positive Government making positive changes.I say though that it is busy—it was something I was sharing with some members of my constituency last week around the select committee because petitions often come up. I thought I would give an indication of just some of the topics that the Health Committee is looking at at the moment and acknowledge those who have put these in. There are quite a number of petitions before the committee. We are dealing with everything from surgical mesh to transgender operations female prophylactics to tube-weaning—so that is for young people babies mainly who have to be fed by tube and how you wean them off that. It is quite a difficult process. We are looking at adrenalin autoimmune-injectors or EpiPens if you have an anaphylactic shock. We have been looking at petitions around public health and disability pharmaceutical waste assisted suicide and the district health board in Northland. And services—pathology services. We are looking at maternity services and smoking and—just when you think that we had not actually covered all the topics moral ethical medical and otherwise—we are also looking at the whole element of cannabis Sativex as well. So it is a rather busy and I would like to think hard-working committee with all members—but I certainly say that of our Government members—working incredibly hard.So for me we are a Government that remains incredibly focused a Government that is incredibly busy and I think one that remains very much in touch with New Zealand. One of the best gauges for me is being in the electorate. It is where I derive most of my strength and energy working with the good people of Tāmaki and they continue to talk about the things that matter. Most of what we have heard from the other side today is really just superfluous in many ways. It is not what really impacts on people: health absolutely; education for sure; and crime and law and order are incredibly important—knowing that they are safe in their homes. And of course the economy is something important too.But the people of Tāmaki have also understood that the Government is behind them and so in the last year in particular we have had a number of successes again building on the good work of the Government. So there has been money for a cycleway. I know the member for Auckland Central is very proud of her—I think—bright pink cycleway. Ours is not going to be pink I understand but we have a wonderful cycleway going from Glen Innes through to Tāmaki Drive. We have had about 45 new classrooms for our schools promised and more money for Mandarin teaching.So there is I suppose a positive amount of real positive work going on particularly in the education field. I am very conscious that today in the gallery there is a young lady who is now out of school but was formerly of Glendowie College here to grace us and that actually we have got amazing young people who are in our communities. I see that day after day and I certainly see it when I go to the high schools and colleges in my electorate be it Selwyn Tāmaki Glendowie or Sacred Heart—remarkable young people doing remarkable things. This Government is behind them it is behind our education system and also—as I was indicating earlier—it is really strongly behind the health sector.So I think we have a very proud record as a Government. I think the Prime Minister himself has articulated things very well and clearly in his statement. We are a Government that talks about the things that matter. We are a Government that remains very much in touch with the people of New Zealand. We are a Government that is going to continue working hard because we are doing that listening. And if we need no better proof it is just to look at the polls of where we are and where the Opposition is.Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections):What a pleasure to be able to take a call on the Prime Minister’s statement. I must say I am so delighted to be back as the Minister of Police and the Minister of Corrections as well as obviously being the MP for Papakura. I have to say in the last couple of months when I have been coming back into the role it has been so good to go and visit the police and the Department of Corrections and also to have a look at some of the other work that is going on but also to be back helping to make decisions around where we go to from here because we have had some amazing achievements in the whole justice sector in the last 6 or 7 years.When I think about the fact that we are now at the lowest recorded crime rate since 1978 we have reduced the number of offences—“we” as in the whole of Government and all of the wonderful agencies working with us—by 100000 over the last 5 years. It is a tremendous achievement and I would just like to sing out basically a bit of praise for the policethe Department of Corrections and all the other agencies and NGOs as well as the Government agencies working together to bring that about. We have crime rates down. We have youth crime down. We have all of those areas down but one area thatI think we have all felt the need to get better progress in is family violence.If we look at family violence—and I know that this is a real topic in our entire justice sector. The reason is that family violence actually leads to more violence. One of the things that we have done today is to make some announcements—my colleague Anne Tolley and I—around gangs. In my particular announcements around the Gang Intelligence Centre which is based in the police but works across a whole raft of agencies from the Ministry of Social Development to the Department of Corrections to Immigration New Zealand to the Customs Service and to others as well—what the centre does is it really goes after and targets gangs.You might ask why we would do that—why I am saying that in the same breath as I am talking about family violence.Well actually there is a very good reason.Sixty percent of children who grow up in gang homes are the victims of family violence—so that is 60 percent—so much so and so violent that Child Youth and Family are involved. We are not talking about a smack on the hand; we are talking about children being abused and/or neglected so much so that Child Youth and Family is involved. That is a pretty staggering thing to say is it not?Igo to the prisons and talk to the prison directors—who used to be called prison managers but they are prison directors now and I did that just the other day—they say to me that they believe that 90 percent of all of the prisoners in our jails have themselves been victims of family violence as children. When I was first the Minister of Corrections and I went and visited the women’s prisons I found out a little bit about some of the prisoners there and I realised—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable Minister. The time has come for me to leave the Chair.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Tēnā koe e Te Whare tēnā koutou e te whānau o Te Pāremata. Kia ora mai tātou tēnā tātou katoa.[Greetings to you the House and to the family of Parliament; thank you and acknowledgments to you all.]Members when we adjourned for the evening meal break the Hon Judith Collins was speaking. She has 6 minutes and 30 seconds remaining to speak.Pita Paraone: She was in her stride too.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Yes that little break can actually stop the flow but let us get back into it. I was speaking I think from memory about visiting our two women’s prisons and realising after discussing some matters with some of the prison staff as well as the prisoners that actually what they had in general—and obviously there are always exceptions—were some of the most abused women in the country. They are abused because the vast majority of them are gang women and they live in a culture of abuse. Yes some of them have gone on to commit dreadful crimes against their own children and some of them have been involved in the methamphetamine trade—they are not there just because they were abused; they are actually there because they have committed very serious crimes—but there is a huge relationship between abuse of children and those children choosing at a later stage to go on to abuse others.That is not to say for a moment that all people who are abused children who are abused or victims are going to then become perpetrators but there is a very serious connection between abuse and that person going on to become an abuser. I think one of the issues that we have learnt is that the abuse of children the abuse of people can lead to trauma. If it is not recognised as a trauma and it is treated as “Well this is what happens in this family. This is what we do. I know let’s put them back with the grandparent who by the way used to abuse the parent.” we are going to continue to have kids being killed in their own homes.In my electorate in Papakura we are a very diverse electorate. There are a lot of gangs there are a lot of really great people and there is a lot of every mixture you could think of but what I also know too is that there are some kids who never get a chance. They never get a chance in life because their own families are so dysfunctional that dysfunctional is simply a word and is basically a platitude because the families are so bad that for their kids home for them is the least safe place that they could ever be. There is a reason that these kids are out on the street at 2 o’clock in the morning as 9-year-olds or whatever. Primarily it is because home is so unsafe. It is not because mum and dad are at work. It is not because something is happening there. It is because home is unsafe and that is what we are dealing with.So when Anne Tolley and I today were discussing and announcing some of the initiatives being put together and announced on the gang initiatives it is not about cracking down it is not about banning and it is not about whatever but it is actually about these kids. If we can try to stop these kids being abused if we can try to stop some of those behaviours we will actually make a difference when it comes to those kids growing up and becoming violent angry people—but mostly angry men—and going on to commit further acts of violence.I also heard tonight that someone said that methamphetamine is not a problem now. That is piffle. Last year in 2015 334.3 kilograms was seized by customs and police. That is three times more than the year before in 2014 when it 98.8 kilograms. We have got a big problem here and this trade is being fuelled by and fuels gang activity. In prisons they say it is more dangerous now for staff because gangs are now working together and they are working together against corrections staff.What I would say to this House is that we have done really well in the law and order area. As a Government we have done great work. Our agencies have worked together. We have worked together for some common goals for the people but I would also say we have got a long way yet to go and we have not solved the problem and we will not solve it until kids can be safe in their own homes and men and women can be safe in their own homes. That is a really sad thing to have to admit—that we have kids growing up in homes where there is no such thing as safety unless dad or mum’s partner is actually put in jail and that that is the best that we can do for some kids. That is just not good enough. We do have a big issue there and we are taking steps to address it.We have dealt with issues before that have been hard. When we first came into Government illegal street racing was a big issue. In 2009 we had six people die 49 people were injured and we had a total of 69 crashes involving illegal street racing. We brought in the laws around vehicle confiscation and crushing. In 2014 there were no deaths 23 injuries and 33 total crashes for that year. This problem has been hit on the head. Yes it still occurs but not anything like it did occur.I would love us to be able to say as a Parliament that we took some steps one day and we actually sorted out family violence in this country. It is a big ask. It is not easy. If it was easy it would have been done. It is a really hard job and I would like us all to work together on it. Thank you.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is a split call on behalf of the Labour Party—5 minutes Poto Williams.POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): Kia orana. That is a really good note on which to start my contribution because I do want to respond to some of the comments that the Minister has made around family violence.Much of what the Minister has said I agree with. In fact most of what she has said I agree with. I agree that family violence is a huge huge problem in this country and I agree that many people in New Zealand will concur that dealing with the issue of gangs and gang families will go some way to dealing with the issue of family violence. However when you have the situation where you have over 100000 family violence call-outs by police in a year the gang portion of that statistic is minor—is minute—compared with the impacts that it has for every single community in this country. Whether they are low socio-economic communities or whether they are in the leafy suburbs every community is impacted by family violence.Although this measure goes some way to addressing a portion of it here we are yet again debating the use of targeting resources to a particular group versus taking some universal steps to address the issue across the country. A hundred thousand family violence call-outs by police: that would mean that there were at least 95000 families who are not gang affiliated who are still going to be impacted by family violence and whom the measures that the Minister has announced today will not touch—they will not touch. There are 62000 family violence investigations where at least one child is resident or present in a home where violence has occurred. The measures that have been announced today will not impact 60000 of those children.The Minister did touch on a very important point and that is about the trauma that is experienced by these children. It may not necessarily be that they are experiencing the violence themselves in the sense of being physically abused; the fact that they are in a home where violence is present even if they are not physically abused is traumatic enough for them to be damaged and to have huge impacts on their future life outcomes—negative impacts.The Minister I want to reiterate was also the Minister who reformed the Family Court and the impacts of that reform have had a negative impact on family violence. It is now harder to obtain a protection order to keep yourself safe. The reductions to the threshold for legal aid mean that fewer and fewer women in particular are able to obtain those protection orders. How are they able to keep themselves and their children safe when the key legal mechanism with which to do that is withdrawn from them because of changes that that Minister made to the Family Court? Also included in that reform was the reduction in access to Family Court counselling where many issues for families were resolved before they became major concerns for the country.So although I concur with much of what the Minister says yet again this country is headed down a very very dark passageway for when we are dealing with targeting small groups of people and when the problem is so epidemic. I was not going to speak specifically about family violence; I was going to address some other issues of trauma that exist in my community in Christchurch East. But I must respond to what the Minister has said in this regard.Family violence is a scourge on our society when 100000 incidents are reported and they are only a fifth of what occurs. We need to be looking away from targeting and to doing some specific work with those NGOs with the refuges with the police and with Child Youth and Family to contain this epidemic and not just look at specific and small targeted areas. I think that is not a good use of our taxpayer funding. Thank you.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A second 5-minute call for the Labour Party—Louisa Wall.LOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa):Kia ora e Te Māngai o Te Whare tuatahi aroha ki te whānau o Dr Ranginui Walker moe mai rā e te rangatira.[Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. Firstly empathy to the family of Dr Ranginui Walker. Sleep esteemed one.]I am actually really pleased to take a call in the debate on the Prime Minister’s statement and I really want to focus on two points that he made. The first was that he said there will be a $17 billion hole in the economy—so the Government is already anticipating that our revenue will be short $17 billion. The other point that he made which I just find incredible was that in spite of that this Government is 100 percent focused on tax cuts.The fact that it is 100 percent focused on tax cuts as part of its fiscal strategy got me thinking about what that means. What that actually means is that there will be spending cuts and as such there will be service cuts. So I was thinking about the services that will be cut because of the Government’s obsession within that context to give tax cuts to the people they have traditionally given them to—wealthy New Zealanders who quite frankly do not need them. So what does that do to undermine our public service: the provision of hospital services social services—services that New Zealanders need actually to keep them healthy and to keep them well.I found it really interesting at the beginning of the year on 9 January actually that there was quite a big write-up and media focus on the rheumatic fever prevention programme in South Auckland which is now is in its fifth year. It is actually a $45 million investment because this Government rather than provide houses so people did not get sick actually said: “What we’ll do instead is we’ll go and test the kids.” So they are working in 61 South Auckland schools and last year 20000 cases of group A streptococcus were detected through that programme. That is incredibly commendable because what that meant is those kids could get antibiotics. Why? Because if we could prevent group A streptococcus turning into something else—that is rheumatic fever—then that was the Government’s solution to addressing this whole issue of poverty and the lack of quality housing provision in South Auckland.So I was incredibly surprised to see on 9 January this year that the funding that Counties Manukau District Health Board is receiving for this programme is going to be cut by 50 percent. On 1 July 50 percent of that $9 million annual investment will go so it is the district health board’s responsibility to keep funding that programme that has proved effective and has found 20000 children who need access to antibiotics to stop them from getting rheumatic fever. Wow!The Counties Manukau District Health Board is one of all district health boards around the country except for the Southern District Health Board or one of the boards in the south that does not have to cut funding. But actually Counties Manukau District Health Board is part of the $138 million—what would I call it? The hospitals are being directed to save money—$138 million—this year. Counties Manukau District Health Board has to save $20 million. So not only does it have to save $20 million it is also going to lose $4.5 million for an initiative that this Government has been trumpeting and has been very proud about because it is stopping South Auckland kids from getting rheumatic fever. Those are the challenges and those are some of the decisions that it has made because of the obsession of this Government to cuttaxes.It has meant cuts in mental health services in Canterbury and I know that my colleague Denise Roche talked about this earlier. Within the context of the increased need of people in Christchurch calling out for help—we know that the helplines for young people have been oversubscribed for 5 years—what has the Government decided to do? It is going to cut funding for mental health services in Canterbury. It is ludicrous. It is ridiculous. We are supposed to govern in the best interests of all New Zealanders and meet their needs—and this Government supposedly has put Canterbury as a big priority—but actually its obsession with tax cuts means that it is cutting funding for rheumatic fever it is cutting funding for mental health services it has cut funding for Women’s Refuge and actually the list could go on and on and on.I think that this Budget actually is a dark day—Hon Members: It’s not a Budget.LOUISA WALL: The Prime Minister’s priorities which actually will translate through to the Budget will be incredibly interesting to see. Kia ora.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call on behalf of the National Party—Paul Foster-Bell.PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National):E Te Mana Whakawā Tuarua tēnā koe; tēnā koutou katoa e ngā mema o Te Whare.I take pleasure in speaking in support of the Prime Minister’s statement in this debate on his statement in the House. I will be sharing my call with my colleague Ian McKelvie the honourable member for the Rangitīkei so I plan to cover the town issues and I will leave it to Mr McKelvie to cover the country.Here in Wellington we have enjoyed a wonderful summer. Not only has the weather been superb and allowed us to enjoy some great cricket on display but we have had some extraordinary events here. The hotel beds have been full. In fact we have had a record year for tourism in Wellington and everything from that Sir Peter Jackson Gallipoli exhibit at Te Papa through to The Great War Exhibition at the National War Memorial museum—and I want to pay tribute to Christopher Finlayson and the input he had into that wonderful attraction—has been awash with tourists and visitors spending their money here in the capital. Similarly Weta Workshop—when I had some relatives staying over the summer I decided to take them out to Weta Workshop to see the Thunderbirds Are Go exhibit where they can see the sets used to recreate that iconic 1960s TV series—also enjoyed large numbers of visitors. Wellington has benefited from record tourist numbers.We have also seen significant Government investment into the capital. I would point to the ICT Graduate School which will upskill our workforce with those modern technical capabilities that they need to be able to earn those good incomes. That will be implemented here in Wellington hosted by Victoria University over the coming year.If I can turn to another issue it is that this year is the 30th anniversary of the legalisation of homosexuality in New Zealand. I want to put on record that I enjoy working cross-party with colleagues including the member who just resumed her seat Louisa Wall. We will be hosting an event here at Parliament on Saturday that kicks off Pride Week here in Wellington and I am looking forward to doing that. But later on this year there will be events I think in the parliamentary precinct to commemorate the decriminalisation which was a significant event in New Zealand’s history. I am proud to be a member of a Government that also looks out for the interests of all members of our community not just the majority.I had an interesting discussion recently with a constituent here around refugees and I would point in the Prime Minister’s statement to his comments around the threat posed by Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and also the refugee problem that the world is facing. This person with whom I was chatting was a Polish migrant—one of the Pahīatua Poles. She was an orphan who after her family was treated horrendously by the Soviets—she and her mother were deported to a gulag in Siberia—then came to New Zealand via Iran actually of all places. They stopped there for a few years on their way to New Zealand. In the discussion with this constituent a very clear point came across. She was pointing out that actually the last thing that the refugees who are coming to New Zealand need is pity. Pity is not what will help them to integrate into our community. It is not what will help them to get jobs to become educated and to make a contribution to their new home New Zealand.I am proud to be part of a Government where there will be an additional number of refugees accepted into New Zealand but that is being done in a controlled way unlike what we are seeing in Europe. We will have the health facilities the transport the housing the social development and the educational services in place to make sure those people are properly looked after. I look at the approach taken by some of the parties in this House and by some of the lobbyists in the community who are promoting either what I would describe as the hard-hearted approach—that is to reject all even those who are fleeing from some of the worst atrocities in the world; fleeing for their very lives—or the soft-headed approach where we want to open up the doors in such a way that we would take numbers that we are not able to properly support. I am proud to be part of a Government that is actually taking the right course of action which will be looking after those who are escaping from real danger but we are not opening the floodgates to New Zealand. I fully commend the Prime Minister’s statement to the House.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call on behalf of the National Party—the honourable member Ian McKelvie.IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): I am like the off-course substitute Mr Deputy Speaker. For those who do not know what that was in the old days at the TAB the off-course substitute was the one that replaced the one that was there before—Jami-Lee Ross thank you.I come from the Rangitīkei obviously and I have always prided the Rangitīkei on having the most intelligent part of New Zealand in my electorate. Of course the piece of Palmerston North that has got the most intelligent people is in my electorate.Iain Lees-Galloway: No they live in my electorate—they go to work in your electorate but they live in my electorate.IAN McKELVIE: You can imagine my absolute amazement when I read the other day that Whanganui is one of the world’s most intelligent cities. In fact it is in the top seven in the world.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am not surprised.IAN McKELVIE: I immediately thought of Mr Deputy Speaker—well that is where he comes from of course. Just to appease the member for Palmerston North the Rangitīkei electorate also has more sheep than any other electorate in New Zealand just as a matter of interest including Southland.I want to talk briefly about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement and its effect on an electorate like mine. It will have a positive impact on our challenged communities and the reason it will is that as we move into the increased incomes as a result of our trade agreements and the TPP agreement the trickle-down effect will significantly impact on those electorates through things like dairy sheep beef and timber. I want to talk particularly about timber in the Rangitīkei electorate and around New Zealand because the change that I envisage coming and I think we all envisage coming as a result of the TPP agreement in the timber industry for example will be to encourage a lot more manufactured products to leave New Zealand. That will be good for the New Zealand timber industry.The other point about the timber industry of course is that we have so many pine trees in New Zealand we probably do not have the infrastructure to get them all out in as quick a form as we might need to. So that will be a challenge for the future and of course it is going to moderate the number of trees that are cut down at any one time just because we need to get them processed and out of the country. So that is an interesting issue.The Government over the last 7 years has moved to significantly improve our tourism opportunities. Of course the north end of my electorate has a great reliance on tourism. The Whanganui River and the changes that have happened to the ownership and the development of tourism opportunities around the Whanganui River—what is going on with cycle tours river tours via jetboats canoes and other means. They are all very busy. Recreational walking cycling fishing and climbing are attracting people from all around the world to our country to our region. The critical thing that will enable this to continue of course is our work with the environment. I think it is really important that Minister Smith who has worked very hard on a lot of the issues around our environmental stuff is now moving again to further our opportunities to clean up our waterways. I think that that is a challenge and I guess in a way it is a nervous challenge for many in rural New Zealand but none the less it is a challenge that we need to face up to. It is hugely important for our tourism and agricultural industries that we take that opportunity and make sure it works.The policies of this Government are now creating jobs in regions and areas that for years have struggled. This is evidenced by the much-improved unemployment figures—a 3 percent turn-round in 12 months in my region—and the fact that 175000 new jobs have been created in the past 3 years. Over the last 7 years the average wage has increased significantly and the announcement just yesterday of the new minimum wage of $15.25 an hour will again make another difference to those people who are paid at that end of the scale.It is a challenge for our rural towns to survive and to continue to grow but it is important that we do. I think this Government is supporting them in a manner that will enable more jobs to be created and will enable more young people to stay in those areas. I think in the future we are going to see significant growth particularly around the tourism industry and particularly in the north of the Rangitīkei electorate and in many other parts of New Zealand as we move further down the path of developing our environmental opportunities and developing our tourism opportunities.Our challenge as a small trading nation is to sell more to the rest of the world than we do now. We need to go into these trade agreements and move ourselves along as quickly as we can. We need to create new products and we need to create new opportunities for the producers of those products and I think this Government’s policies are moving those along pretty quickly. So I have a great deal of pleasure in supporting the Prime Minister’s statement. I think we are on the right track and I look forward to the next 12 months of our Government working very hard for New Zealanders. Thank you.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call on behalf of the National Party—Parmjeet Parmar.Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): It is with great pleasure that I take this call to support the Prime Minister’s statement. I would like to start by congratulating our Prime Minister on his strong commitment to New Zealand and on keeping on delivering what he promised to do. This year just like the last year is going to be a great year under the leadership of the Rt Hon John Key. I am saying it is going to be a great year because wages are rising faster than inflation. In the last year the average wage grew by 3.1 percent and inflation stayed at 0.1 percent. My hands cannot demonstrate the scale but the difference is obvious—3.1 percent versus 0.1 percent. Business confidence is high and there is strong activity in all sectors including the manufacturing sector. We know we have come through significant challenges and we have stayed on top of our spending. That is evident from us receiving a surplus for the 2014-15 year.This is a Government that is a sensible manager of the Government’s finances. But the Opposition has started coming out with some irresponsible spending pledges. Its education policy shows that it lacks fiscal understanding. It lacks the understanding of what New Zealanders want. I am saying that is an irresponsible spending pledge because Kiwis do not need a reminder about the significant challenges that we have come through. That is why on this side of the House we are focusing on the economy. We are focusing on growing our businesses so that they can invest more create more jobs and create higher-paying jobs so that we can continually keep investing sensibly in different sectors.To support our economy we need free-trade agreements. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement is in the best interests of New Zealand. As the Prime Minister the Rt Hon John Key keeps saying in very very simple words we are a country of only 4.5 million people. Our businesses cannot grow by just selling goods and services to each other. We need access to bigger markets. What has shocked me is the Opposition members’ stand on the TPP agreement. It has shocked me that they are unable to comprehend the importance of the TPP agreement even when explained in such simple words. It is a pity that they do not see the importance of the TPP to our businesses and households. [Interruption]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It is always ironic to note that female members from the Opposition always talk the loudest while a female member of the Government is on her feet. I suggest to members to take a breath and allow the member to complete her speech.Dr PARMJEET PARMAR: Thank you. This side will continue to focus on—Clare Curran: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take offence at that remark.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member may well take offence. I do not believe that the observation of the Speaker in respect of that is a matter that the member can take offence to. I look to the Clerk—I am sorry if the member has taken offence; I will not withdraw the comment.Iain Lees-Galloway: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think this raises an interesting issue and I appreciate the Clerk’s advice that there is no Standing Order relating to when a member takes offence to something that the Speaker has said but I think that on this side of the House we would appreciate it if you would perhaps give some thought to this and come back with a ruling. Clearly a member has taken offence at a comment you made relating to interjections that were being made. There seems to be a gap in the Standing Orders and I think it would be helpful to the order of the House if we had some ruling on what members should do if the Speaker has caused offence.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member will be pleased to know that I have reflected in the time that he has been making his point of order and in the spirit of cross-House collaboration I withdraw and apologise.Dr PARMJEET PARMAR: On this side we will continue to focus on getting free-trade agreements. We have achieved a free-trade agreement with Korea and we have started negotiations with the EU. Now in the second year of our third term as per the Prime Minister’s statement we will continue to invest in our families and households. And we are seeing results. Unemployment figures have dropped to 5.3 percent. There were 21000 jobs created in the December quarter and that figure carries a very important significance because after working for the whole year people evaluate analyse and see whether they want to change jobs. So 21000 jobs being created in the December quarter is very good news. There were 175000 jobs created in the last 3 years.To support that kind of growth we need investment in our infrastructure especially in Auckland because Auckland is our largest commercial centre. That is why the Prime Minister has already announced bringing forward the start date of the City Rail Link. And of course we have our roads of national significance. Victoria Park Tunnel is a great tunnel and riding through that tunnel is a great experience. Commuters are saving a lot of time going through that tunnel. We have finished digging the Waterview tunnel and when the boring machine Alice finished boring that tunnel I was there just next to the Mt Roskill electorate’s boundary with our two Ministers the Hon Simon Bridges and the Hon Paul Goldsmith. I can tell you that the excitement there was huge.We will continue to invest in our transport system and our motorway system to make it reliable safe and efficient. We have accomplished a lot yet we will continue to invest more in our infrastructure in different sectors. We will continue to listen to the people of New Zealand and we will continue to create opportunities for our current and future generations. Thank you.JONO NAYLOR (National): It is a real pleasure for me to rise in support of the Prime Minister’s statement which will be of no surprise to the House. It has been an interesting debate thus far. A comment that I heard from the other side of the House referred to the thinness of this statement. I thought it was only appropriate for me to go back and have a look. I suppose from a distance this does look like a rather thin document but when I looked at it it has got quite small type to be honest. But it is 10 pages long and on average there are about 10 paragraphs per page.There are a hundred—at least—different things that this Government proposes to do over the next year. This is not a tired Government; this is not a Government that in its third term is running out of ideas. This is a Government that is working hard for all New Zealanders. It is working hard to ensure that New Zealand is the kind of place that we all want to live in.I am proud to be associated with a Government that puts people and families first. This is a Government that over this time period has increased the minimum wage—as the Minister of Finance said today—I think by 27 percent while inflation has been only 11 percent over that time period. There have been significant increases in minimum wages. We are increasing the amount of paid parental leave and we have decreased ACC levies. We have been the first Government in 43 years—43 years—to actually put up the real amounts of benefits to families with children.This is a Government that puts jobs the economy and increasing opportunities at the centre of economic development. We are moving forward; we are moving on with new ideas. We are taking an innovative approach to solving some age-old problems over this time period over recent times and we are going to continue to do this as outlined in the Prime Minister’s statement. We are going to continue our investment approach to public services.This is a Government that cares enough about the poor of our communities those who are most vulnerable in our communities to ensure that we are looking at the causes of those things that will potentially lead them into long-term benefit dependency and other things. If we just simply say we are going to throw money at this or we are going to continue doing things the way we have always done and somehow expect to get a different result we will be fooling ourselves. And so what we are doing is ensuring that we take innovative approaches an investment approach to ensure that those people who are at most risk of long-term welfare dependency who are at most risk of suffering harm those who are at most risk of not achieving educational standards—we are going to provide better more targeted services to them to ensure that their needs are met.We are doing it through the social housing reforms. We were debating them last week. It was good to see some of those bits of legislation go through that will ensure we can provide better social housing for our people—that we are not sitting back and simply saying that because someone came up with an idea in the 1930s that that is the only good idea you could ever have about social housing. No—we are moving forward we are trying to be innovative and we are looking for new ways to do even better things for the people of New Zealand. But this document is I think particularly good because it is not a narrow-focused document. The Prime Minister’s statement to Parliament for this year is wide ranging.I have just talked about our social investment strategy. We are also committed to the regions of New Zealand. We are committed to a regional growth programme. We have seen regional growth studies across a number of communities in New Zealand and that is going to keep happening to others as well. This is about setting a blueprint for regional development and regional growth. I am privileged to live in a community where we can take by-products from animal slaughter and turn them into pharmaceutical products—it is fantastic to see the innovation that is happening there—that can take New Zealand’s pāua crop the majority of it and can it and export it to places around the world.We are moving forward economically we are moving forward socially and we are moving forward environmentally. We are committed as a party to continue to clean up New Zealand’s rivers. That is why we have got our new freshwater consultation document out. There has been great work done I know in my own backyard in the Manawatū where $5.2 million from the Fresh Start for Fresh Water Clean-up Fund has been invested. The community is working together alongside the Government to clean up the Manawatū River. We know that the progress is slow in these areas but we are going to see progress. This is a great statement from our Prime Minister it outlines exactly what we want to do over the next year and it will be better for New Zealand.PITA PARAONE (NZ First):Tēnā koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Engari i mua i te haere tonu o tēnei wāhanga e tika ana kia tū ake tēnei ki te tautoko i ngā mihi i mihingia e tēnā o ngā rōpū tōrangapū ki a Whakatōhea ā me Te Waka o Mātaatua i te hingatanga o tō rātou rangatira a Ranginui Walker. Ko ia te tangata hei tauira mō tātou o Te Ao Māori puta noa ki te iwi whānui o Aotearoa. Mēnā e hiakai ana koe ki te kai i ngā mātauranga o te ao kāore kau kē koe e hinga atu. Nā reira e kara e Rangi haere haere hoki atu. Takahia e koe i runga te ara whānui i kawe atu i a koe ki te kāpunipunitanga o ngā wairua. Nā reira kua ea te wāhi mā koutou e noho nei i roto i te ao wairua ka hoki mai ki a tātou nō te ao tūroa nā reira tēnā koutou tēnā koutou huri noa ki tēnei o tātou Whare.[Greetings Mr Deputy Speaker. But before this session continues it is fitting that I rise to support the tributes accorded by that one of the political parties to Whakatōhea and the Mātaatua canoe at the death of their esteemed elder Ranginui Walker. He is the person who is a model for us of Māoridom and for the public throughout New Zealand. If you crave to feast on worldly knowledge you will never perish. So to you dear friend Rangi depart farewell. Walk upon the broad path that will take you to the gathering place of the spirits. Our part in regard to the spiritual world is therefore fulfilled and I come back to us of the real world to acknowledge greet and salute you throughout this our House.]Can I say that just listening to the comments emanating from the other side of the House I wonder sometimes whether I am in the same country given that those members continue to extol the virtues of their Government and of their leader and how they have addressed things like housing health unemployment and education and yet where I come from in the electorate that I am responsible for at this time on behalf of the New Zealand First Party Whangarei the statistics particularly in terms of Māori are not that good. That is in spite of the Government extolling the virtues of having the Māori Party sitting at the same table. So I need to ask myself: is this is another world or am I just imagining things?Can I say regarding Māori in the labour market that national Māori unemployment is still sitting at 12.6 percent. Findings from both the 2014 and 2015 surveys identified the exact same issues within Māori unemployment. Māori unemployment may have fallen marginally in both 2014 and again last year but it still remains twice as high as the rate for all ethnic groups. I have not heard from that side of the House what the Government has done in that regard. I look at education. In 2015 Māori with degrees or higher qualifications had the highest employment rate 86.3 percent. Māori with no school qualifications had the lowest employment rate 42.4 percent. So it does pose the question whether in fact the education that has been provided for our people is relevant to them getting a job. There used to be a time when they would get their qualifications and head off overseas. However it is not so good now particularly in Australia where they used to go because of the mining industry and the decline in work in that area.I want to touch on something that I have had to face year in year out and that is the question of Waitangi Day. As the chairman of the organising committee that puts together a programme for that day we can always as a committee ascertain before Waitangi Day whether the dust will fly using a Māori paraphrase or whether it will be calm and everyone will enjoy themselves. Unfortunately the Government chose to sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement 2 days out from Waitangi Day. One should not be surprised at the reaction not only from Māori but from people across the nation. Although we might say that we have trade agreements that are good I think the nub of the protest is essentially about what the detail is in those agreements. Although we have been assured by the Government that the Treaty will not be infringed on we do not have any evidence that in fact that is the case. So one should not be surprised: although it has been said that Māori do not know what they are objecting to they certainly know that they have not been told the detail. Likewise for the rest of the country.Can I suggest to the Government that in spite of the comment about consulting the people the very people who were at Waitangi who protested certainly were not consulted. The Government may have consulted some of its friends from the “Browntable” who are in fact behind driving a lot of the amendments to legislation that will help strengthen their position at the “Browntable” but the ordinary Joe Bloggs—they have not been consulted. So one should not be surprised.The other thing I am a little bit annoyed about is that every year we have a large number of protesters who come to Waitangi do their protest and leave their crap behind for those at home to have to deal with. To have a former leader of the National Party and the ACT Party say that the person was not charged because they were Māori is an insult because the person certainly was not a Māori. The person was from Christchurch and I would like to tell her what she has caused at home and the fact that we are now becoming a laughing stock of the world because of such activities. We should be concerned.The other thing is the question of the flag. Again we have people protesting about that and probably there may be a need for change but did the people of New Zealand ask for it? How often have we from this side talked about the need to have more funding for particular social programmes and been told that there is not enough money? Yet at the whim of the Prime Minister we can find $26 million to try to make a flag change that the majority of people do not want. The question has been asked: why should Māori not ask for a change? Well can I just remind this House that part of the present flag includes the Union Jack and if we go back to the Treaty of Waitangi who was that covenant between? Māori and Queen Victoria. So the Union Jack is a reminder to all of us that the Treaty of Waitangi does have a part not only in the history of this country but in the future of it as a whole. I just want to say those things and to say that in spite of what Government members have said about how good their party is how good their Government is the facts certainly do not show that.The member from Whangarei Shane Reti made comment about the different roadworks and he started off by listing the roadworks on the Brynderwyns. Can I tell you that what has been done is not roadworks; it is probably more earthworks. It is creating four lanes going into one lane at the top. So what about the other side of the hill? He also used the Hikurangi bypass as an example. Can I remind the member that it was only a few years ago that that bypass was put in so already either it is out of date or the work that was done at the time has become irrelevant. So let us not get carried away with what we think we might have done given that there is still an unacceptably large number of our population our fellow citizens who are living in poverty. Nā reira tēnā koutou.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Hon Maggie Barry—a 5-minute call.Hon MAGGIE BARRY (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage): Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. Just a couple of weeks ago I was with many of my esteemed colleagues who are gathered around me here tonight at the Bluegreens Forum in Tekapō. It is a wonderful part of the country and I think it is good for politicians to get out of the rarefied atmosphere of the Beehive. Having heard several of the calls from Opposition members tonight I think it would behove them well to get out and about a little bit more into the community because far from sitting braying about what might have been and fantasising about what they are not doing it would be useful if they got together as we did a few weeks ago. My colleague here Alfred Ngaro is of course an ardent Bluegreen as are many of my colleagues here because what we tend to do as a Government is unite behind our Prime Minister behind our leader in stark contrast to Labour. We do more for the environmental and conservation movements than the Greens would ever imagine and I also think David Seymour made a couple of excellent points.There seems to be a bit of braying. Maybe some of the people across the other side of the House might have had a little bit too much sun in the dinner break. They are a little flushed and unreasoned. I have heard tonight about the struggles some of my colleagues have had to be heard above the cacophony so I am going to rise above it because I do feel that there are some important things to say about the vision that we have around conservation in particular. I am sure David Seymour will be paying close attention with his new-found love for sanctuaries and eliminating pests and ensuring that the things we love—the taonga species—are protected.Let me talk to you about a broad big hairy stretch vision—that is a predator-free New Zealand. I am not talking about the Opposition at this time. I am focused instead on rats stoats and possums primarily. Aerial drops of 1080 are working and will continue to be used. I would request that the Greens stand up and actually come out a little bit on this one and support—Eugenie Sage: We have.Hon MAGGIE BARRY: —1080 in an obvious way. Keep up the work then Ms Sage. It would be really useful if you joined the chorus of approval rather than carping from the sidelines. We will leave carp to another time of course in their substance.The thing about having a predator-free New Zealand is that what you need to do is kill the things that are killing the things you love. So we take pre-emptive strikes. We have the technology to rid a valley or a peninsula of pests as at Zealandia here and in other parts of the country but we do need to have a longer-term vision that really is about eradicating these exotic pests. They have come here from different lands made this place their own and now of course they need to be dispatched. It is costing the economy $3.3 billion a year the eradication of these exotic pests. I hope I am not disturbing any of my colleagues who are a little squeamish about extermination but I do think it is important to address these issues.The vast habitats our native animals need will be heightened and they will be safe and the regions will also enjoy better tourism if we can embrace this vision. Take Taranaki—the Project Taranaki Mounga partnership which was announced in December is an example of how big goals can be achieved region by region and you need to involve several partners. The Department of Conservation is contributing about a third of the cost of the $24 million project in Taranaki. I was there on Thursday for a very exciting launch along with my colleagues the Hon Chester Borrows and Jonathan Young—if he is here—as well and Barbara Kuriger and others. We were talking about biodiversity in Taranaki. It is a very important thing to think about collaboration—an unknown for the Opposition of course. Project Taranaki Mounga with its biodiversity vision has the ability to change the face of conservation in New Zealand. I think that it is incredibly encouraging and it will be the start of what we hope to roll out over the next few years.Wilding pines—and I commend my friend and colleague Nathan Guy on this. The Ministry for Primary Industries is leading the charge and we are very focused on getting rid of these wilding pines because we cannot afford to back away from the problem. The Government regional authorities community groups businesses philanthropists and the forestry sector itself need to combine forces. Wildings for those of you who are not up to speed with it already cover about 1.7 million hectares of land and they are advancing at a rate of around 6 percent a year. If we sit back and do nothing wildings will cover about 22 percent of our country within the next 20 years and that is totally unacceptable. Most of the land that they would colonise is arable land. It is good productive farming land and it is land that we need to use for other things.The wilding conifers do not respect the boundaries. They seed widely and freely—up to 20 kilometres in fact with some of this very fine pollen—so we really need to be on top of this issue and the New Zealand Wilding Conifer Management Strategy is something that we as a Government have bought into. We at central government level will take a leadership role in this and we will work with others to achieve the goals. That is what this John Key - led Government is all about: fine leadership a strong united caucus and Cabinet and strong united thinking and philosophies that will deliver a vision.Sue Moroney: That got leaked eh Maggie?Hon MAGGIE BARRY: Again the Opposition members are incredulous. These are unknown territories for them.War on Weeds is another element of our vision that is not to be underestimated. It seems to me that while we focus on the birds and while we focus on our creatures—a very important part of our biodiversity—we cannot forget the plants. The War on Weeds which we declared about 6 months ago has rolled out the dirty dozen which are common or garden plants that have got away on us a bit and we need to pull them back—“a bit” is actually understating it. We spent something like $1.2 million from the Department of Conservation Community Fund to help community weed control groups with Weedbusters and the Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust and I commend a lot of these smaller groups. Up and down the country they are united.I was visiting a place in Taranaki on Friday as the Minister for Senior Citizens and I would have to say that it was incredibly heartening to see a group of about 40 people in their 70s getting together to weed to plant to destroy pests and to create habitats for our creatures. It gets them together doing something with great purpose and meaning and it is good exercise. That is another of our programmes which we call Healthy Nature Healthy People which is where you get people into the great outdoors. They are doing something for themselves but also—in the case of the people in Taranaki and so many groups up and down the country I have seen in the last year—they are working for the good of our nature. They are working together in a cause that they believe in. We help them out with funding.We also encourage through the Kiwi Conservation Club and a successful bid for new money that we got across the line in last year’s Budget of over $11.2 million—we have invested that in the future of our national bird. The number of our national birds is declining at about minus 2 percent a year. That is a decline that we need to reverse. We have a target we have a name and we have a vision. That is how you measure what you do and that is how you manage the problem—again unknown territory to the Opposition members who have fallen very silent because they are completely at sea with these notions.When it comes to Kiwis for Kiwi the turn-round has begun. We are working with New Zealander of the Year nominee Rob Fenwick to help community groups to protect the birds and protect their habitats. We are boosting the Department of Conservation’s own funding by more than $6 million a year—and that will be from 2018 onwards—expanding breeding programmes such as Kiwi Creches Kōhanga Kiwi and pest control as well as monitoring all of the existing populations. The whole game really around this is to protect the birds—the kiwis in particular—so that they get to a stage where they can help themselves and at the time when they are about a kilogram in weight they are then able to. They can fight off anything actually kiwis. That is why they are our national bird I think. They are fierce. They may not look the most elegant birds. They do not fly but they have commendable character. They are extraordinary birds at looking after themselves but they need a bit of help along the way.So if we turn that minus 2 percent decline into a plus 2 percent increase we will have about 7000 more birds and that means they will be able to proliferate in the wild. My dream is to ensure that they are audible—that they keep people awake at night in the suburbs around New Zealand. We want the bird numbers to go up. We need to be able to work with the tools that we have in nature and conservation.Just going through some of the issues that we have been dealing with in the arts culture and heritage area tonight I signed a co-production agreement with the Israeli Government so that we can have films and television—shared projects and shared collaboration between our countries. That is the 17th co-production agreement we have signed over the past few years and it means that the ties that bind the countries that we have cultural links with will only increase at a stronger level.The Ministry for Culture and Heritage is working with a lot of different regions to mark the anniversary as well—WW100. This year we are moving away from Gallipoli and into commemorating the battle sites of Europe and we are opening plinths and telling the New Zealand story internationally.I would like to finish my call tonight on seniors which is the third portfolio responsibility that I have. Leading the fight against social isolation—which is a newfangled way maybe of describing loneliness—we need to get rid of that corrosive element and stop the lead and decline of loneliness and social isolation into elder abuse which is a big problem in New Zealand. Around 2000 cases are reported currently and that is probably a real underestimation. There are closer to 18000. So the challenges continue but I think this Government under John Key’s strong leadership is well up for the programme.You will see that I am wearing the alternative flagon my lapel. I will be voting for that and I would urge others to look beyond the—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am sorry to interrupt the member. Her time has expired.DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert): I just want to spend 5 minutes—but I want to pick up where that woman Maggie Barry has just left off. I spent my holidays in Northland this year and I did not hear the birds. I did not hear the birds and I will tell you why—because pest control in Northland is so abysmal that the birds are being killed off. The conservator up there in Northland did not even have the guts to be able to ask for any more money—which is less than $1 million a year—to ask the Government for more money to preserve those birds because she knew that she was going to get turned down. That is the legacy of this Government. The legacy is that it has got no money it has cut the budgets and now our forests—certainly in Northland—are at risk.So that is where I wanted to start off but I want to talk about a meeting that I had yesterday with a young guy called Sudhvir Singh who is from Generation Zero. He spoke at the Auckland Council meeting a few days ago. He talked about pulling up the ladder. What he meant was that while he was trying to get things that we all want—a house a job and everything else—the well-heeled people and everybody else around the Auckland area were pulling up the ladder. He was booed and hissed at as he gave evidence to the Auckland Council about the need for more housing in Auckland.We all want the same things—the same things that I want he wants. He wants to be able to have a piece of that Kiwi Dream that I have which is about getting his own house. But inequality in New Zealand has grown wider and wider. I am talking not just about the inequality between the rich and the poor; I am talking about the inequality between young and old. Today the younger people come out of university with a huge student loan. They have to pay that off and then they are confronted—if they are living in Auckland—with average house prices of $900000-plus. Who could possibly afford that? These people are being priced completely out of the market.I want to say that this Government does not look forward. It does not look to those people who need their help. It is not like the Labour Party which has just recently put up its proposal to have 3 years’ free tertiary education. At least there is a plan there to address the intergenerational inequality that exists in this country. Not only that but this Government will not address—will not even look at—the issue of superannuation. Right now this year we are spending more money on superannuation than our entire education budget and it is still going up. That is something that is a legacy once again that these younger people are going to have to pull up.Sudhvir Singh is wanting what a lot of other young people have been asking for but this Government defends the people who booed and hissed. Basically those people are desperate to hang on to their privilege and desperate to keep their property prices high—desperate to pull up the ladder so that young people do not get a chance any more. That is something that we in the Labour Party detest—we detest unfairness. We want the best for everybody.We do not want to see the inequality gap growing in terms of poverty and also in terms of intergenerational equity. So we are willing to put our money where our mouth is. We want to see people going on to tertiary training and getting it for free so that they are not burdened down with great big loans and so that they get a proper leg-up and a proper chance in life and we want to see them get affordable housing. That is why we have always supported the building of 10000 affordable houses a year. Those are two bold initiatives about addressing what we need to be doing in the future and that is something that this Government has nothing to say about because it allowed the property price to go to an average of $900000 in Auckland. It has nothing to say to those younger people who want to get a chance in life.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call—Rino Tirikatene.RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga): I am pleased to respond to the Prime Minister’s statement and naturally I am standing to oppose the statement. But before I launch into that I would like to just join with my colleague Mr Shearer there in responding to Ms Barry’s waxing lyrical on the big goals of biodiversity in her portfolio. I always pause—because Mr Shearer said that he could not hear the birds in Tai Tokerau and that is a sad fact—and I think of the slaughter by the Deerstalkers Association of the four takahē on Motutapu Island under this Minister’s watch. That is another reason. It is not only about underfunding but we had an incompetent Minister bring in amateur deerstalkers who wiped out 30 percent of one of the most endangered species there in one fell swoop. So that is the great achievement from that Minister right there.But I would like to switch to the Prime Minister’s statement. If people sitting at home are confused as to what was in that statement they have got a very good point because we have got a chorus line here waxing on with their pre-scripted lines but what I would say is that the Prime Minister gave two speeches. There is a very thin document that is the actual statement but what he actually delivered in the House was just his normal court jester routine. So no wonder the public at large are confused by this Government.I think there is so much spin going on that we need to really break through. We need to break through the spin from this National Government. We hear things like “a better Public Service” and “a sharper leaner more competitive Public Service” and what that really means is—and I want to give an example from my own portfolio area. In customs what that really means is understaffing under-resourcing and a front line in disarray at our border. That is what that really means and I can give examples. We are seeing front-line customs officers taken off duty. They are actually there to screen passengers but what we are seeing is hundreds of passengers coming through Auckland Airport and only seven customs officers are there to process 2000 passengers an hour. That is an example of mismanagement not only from the department but also from the Minister.But it gets even worse than that because what is happening—and we had Mrs Collins talking earlier on about the great achievements in the law and order arena now that she is back on deck. But what that actually means is that not only are we under-resourced at the border but we are seeing a flood—a flood—of illicit drugs coming into our country. Mrs Collins herself said that 330 kilos of methamphetamine was intercepted last year. What is actually happening is that that is what was caught but actually only one in 10 is actually caught at the border.So we could extrapolate that number out and say that there were 3 tonnes of methamphetamine that came into the country and we can actually back that up—true. So that is an actual failure of this National Government. National came in after campaigning in 2007 about how it wanted to crack down on P—crack down on the scourge. Well that is an actual failure there and the Government itself has admitted it. The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has admitted that the availability and the usage and the purity of P is on the rise so there is a complete failure there and the Ministry of Health is also saying that the usage among average Kiwis has not changed. It is right up there and it is above the international average. So there is a failure right there from the Government and we are seeing that.What that does though is it cuts across and it is damaging to our communities. It is prolific and that is one more thing that is hurting our communities at large. People want to feel safe and people expect to have the Kiwi Dream of being safe in their communities and safe in their households but what we are seeing is actually the opposite from this Government. It does not care about the communities at large. It does not care about the people who are struggling to buy a house. People are being turned away by our health system which is overstretched. The thousands of children who are in poverty—that is really a sad indictment on this Government and that is what our country is subjected to today. I oppose the Prime Minister’s statement.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: A 5-minute call—Andrew Bayly.ANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): I was going to talk about a number of things tonight but I just thought I might respond to some of the speeches particularly the last two that we have had from Rino Tirikatene and David Shearer. They followed an excellent speech by my colleague the Hon Maggie Barry who was talking about what we are doing in the area of conservation and then I heard the two speakers talking about the lack of birds up in Northland. Well I would just like to invite both those speakers to come and visit me in Hunua because we have got a wonderful programme around the kokako in the Hunua Range.In 1974 there was only one breeding pair left in New Zealand but thanks to the good efforts of the Auckland Council and also the Department of Conservation we now have 66 breeding pairs in the Hunua Range. This is a wonderful achievement in bringing back a bird from the brink of extinction into something that is viable and what is more I am raising $10000 to go towards that programme. I would like to challenge those two former speakers to put up some money and come and help our programme and come and join in and see how these birds live in our wonderful part of this country.I heard a couple of other things mentioned. I heard a little debate about superannuation. I just wish these speakers would actually spend 5 minutes looking at some facts and figures. I heard Mr Shearer saying that our superannuation is dreadful and it is out of control. Well actually the facts are that currently we pay 5 percent of our total Government spend on superannuation every year. When you compare that with most OECD countries we are well below the average. Most are about 9 percent and up to about 15 percent. Even stretching it forward many many years up to 2050 we will ultimately hit about 8 percent of our total spend. Just to put that in context over the last 8 years through the good efforts of our Minister of Finance we have reduced Government spend by near on 4 percent. When you are spending nearly $70 billion a year that works out to be roughly about $9 billion to $10 billion of savings a year. That alone is going to offset a lot of that increased cost.But what we are also doing is growing an economy and reducing debt. So even now our debt is at 27 percent of GDP which will be half of Australia’s by 2020 and England and the EU will be four times ours. The US will be five times ours by 2020. We will have modest debt. That is all about preparing ourselves so we can meet these future commitments.Finally housing—I heard that magic word about housing. Again I invite the members to come to Hunua. Come to Hunua because 12000 sections are going to come to market over the next 5 years—12000. And I heard someone saying we need 10000. Come to my wonderful electorate and you will see it. The issue we have got is we need to continue to invest in infrastructure and that is what we are doing—$4.25 billion into roading into Auckland alone over the next 3 years and all those other good things like schools that our new mayor will be able to come and open over the next few years. I am looking forward to doing it. Thank you.TODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland): A very robust act to follow there—well done Mr Bayly. I would just like to talk in support of the Prime Minister’s statement. I will start off by talking about a remark made by Mr Shearer with regard to the Labour Party’s free tertiary education policy. It is probably fair to say that I am the probably closest to that space of policy in this House. I have actually just recently paid off my student loan. But one of the things that I think is important to remember is that the Government already effectively carries the cost of about 75 percent of student loan payments. When you look at it in that context you see that 25 percent of that loan is still being paid for by the student. It is still quite considerable as part of their salary but actually the cost of appreciating that is considerable as well.I do not think that there is much in life that you get for free but if you do receive something for free many people do appreciate it. But if you are receiving a free education the ability or the incentive for you to actually work hard and study to try to get the best results that you can are not there if there is not a cost to you and there is not an incentive to complete your education. And I can tell you about that first-hand. I think that what the Government is doing with regard to tertiary education already is a very positive move. We are already incentivising students enough to study but not making it unaffordable for them to do so. If you come from a family or if you are in a position where you cannot afford to pay for accommodation or some course-related costs there are payments through the accommodation supplement and payments for course-related costs. There are subsidies there to assist people into education.Just regarding the Prime Minister’s statement New Zealand is in good shape and I say that with strong confidence as someone representing a large rural electorate at the bottom of the South Island. That progress is actually due to the hard work and positive attitude of New Zealanders but it is also because of the stability and cohesion and confidence that come from having more than 7 years of strong and stable Government under John Key’s leadership.We have got a busy agenda in 2016 carrying on from 7 years of hard work and consistent policy development. We are pressing on with social housing reforms to do a better job for our tenants. Many residents in Invercargill will hopefully benefit from that as those discussions progress over the coming years and I am sure that if my colleague Sarah Dowie was here she would be remarking on that.We are also maintaining a strong focus on law and order. To that end I want to compliment and acknowledge the hard-working police officers in my electorate. Particularly I want to name three people and they are the area commanders responsible for the Queenstown-Lakes area the Clutha area and a large part of the Southland area. They are Alastair Dickie Richard McPhail and Olaf Jensen.I also want to acknowledge the hard work of the staff of the Otago Corrections Facility and the manager Jack Harrison. It is an important part of our electorate. It is Milton’s largest employer. It has created opportunities for that town for employment and for other staff to move on. The reason why I mention those areas is that they are often thankless jobs but there are a lot of people who go out every day and protect and serve our constituents right across the country.I want to touch a little bit on some of the things that we are doing. In New Zealand we have to focus on the things that we can control. We are a small Island nation at the bottom of the world. Things that we can control are our own competitiveness and our economic performance and we are also well placed to meet external challenges in so far as we can as well.Otago and Southland as I have already mentioned are primary industry - driven communities and as well we have got Queenstown the Catlins and Milford Sound which are largely driven by tourism. We cannot forget that New Zealand is performing very well compared with most countries in these areas. Just in terms of tourism last year there were over 100000 visitors who travelled to the Catlins and there were over 600000 visitors who travelled to Milford Sound which is back up near pre-global financial crisis numbers. Queenstown was No. 1 for the international visitor spend with 14 percent market share of international expenditure. So these parts of the economy are doing very well.We had the southern field days a couple of weeks ago where 13 MPs came down including the Prime Minister the Minister for Primary Industries Nathan Guy and the Deputy Prime Minister Bill English. That has provided a lot of support for our farmers down there and I just want to acknowledge that. In closing I have no hesitation in fully commending the Prime Minister’s statement and supporting it. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Melissa Lee—5 minutes.MELISSA LEE (National): I would like to take the opportunity to speak to our Prime Minister’s statement to the House for 2016 and to commend it. I fully support his statement. We are incredibly fortunate in this country I think to have such a great leader who is working for families and supporting the needs of ordinary New Zealanders. I think it is well recognised that the people in New Zealand the public actually also recognise that in the Prime Minister.The great work this side of the House is achieving can be seen through fantastic sets of policies and I would like to kick off with the tourism portfolio which the Prime Minister has been responsible for. Since 2008 this Government has invested $700 million in tourism and tourism promotion. In the year ended December 2015 we saw a huge rise—a more than 30 percent increase—in international visitor spending. That is up to $9.7 billion—not $9.7 million but $9.7 billion—in international visitor spending which is an increase of more than 30 percent.I would also like to talk about the great achievement of our finance Minister Bill English. He got the books back in the black and that is not a small achievement considering the fact that we have had a huge global financial crisis and that New Zealand was faced with a lot of issues including the Christchurch earthquakes that devastated the economy. We recently marked their fifth anniversary.In 2015 this House saw the successful completion of the free-trade agreement with Korea my birth country. Many members have already extolled the virtues of free trade. Last month we saw the signing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement one of the biggest free-trade deals in the world and a deal that will bring huge benefits to all regions of this country and to many people in poverty and hardship in developing communities around New Zealand.It is a real shame that there are people in this House who do not actually recognise the amazing opportunity that exists for New Zealanders in this deal—a view that even the previous Labour Government saw with China. That free-trade agreement has actually boosted this economy. I see that the Hon Phil Goff is sitting over there. We know for a fact that he supports free trade and there are other members in his caucus who actually do recognise the benefit of free trade as well.This partnership is going to revolutionise our markets and the way that New Zealand companies can engage with the global market. Whether they are squash and fruitgrowers on the East Coast or deer velvet suppliers in the South Island we on this side of the House recognise their need for the reduction of tariffs and an end to trade barriers when we are dealing with international markets and we are actually selling to those markets. I recently saw and actually posted on my Facebook as well cherries that are being sold to Asia. We are seeing a huge openness in the market. Looking at Korea for example the tariff that it actually had was 25 percent—it is gone. The 25 percent tariff that it used to have is gone and it means that it actually gives access to the market without tariff.We will be able to send our world-class wines and other luxury goods to Japan without tariffs and restrictions. We also will see many New Zealanders export to our free-trade agreement partners tariff-free. This will greatly improve our market access in those countries and support more New Zealand industries across our country. I think free-trade agreements—the likes of the Korea free-trade agreement and TPP—are something that we should all support and actually welcome.The Prime Minister’s statement also shows what a fortunate nation we are to have strong leadership and the economic opportunity this country actually has. This year benefits for families with children will increase on top of inflation. This week actually saw the minimum wage rise to $15.25 an hour. We are getting more support for after-school care and more cutting of red tape to give small businesses the tools that they actually need.I am here to support the Prime Minister’s statement. This Government is in good spirits and is doing great work.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Alfred Ngaro 5 minutes.ALFRED NGARO (National): I rise to take a call on the Prime Minister’s statement in the House but before I do so—I have only just returned back to the House this evening and heard the news that Mr Twyford’s mother had passed away. Though we may be in opposition in the House and candidates and contenders in our communities the fact is that we are still people and so I do want to acknowledge the passing away of Mr Phil Twyford’s mother. I give my condolences to him and his family and his whānau as well at this time.I was away from the House because I was at the orientation week at Auckland University. I was there yesterday. I know that I saw Mr Cunliffe hiding under an umbrella heading to the school. I saw Mr Clayton Mitchell—he was there as well. He was on the other side. He did not quite have his three-piece suit on but he still had the suit and tie. He was out there talking to the students at Auckland uni. One of my sons is actually there at Auckland uni. It was quite interesting yesterday in having these conversations with a lot of the students there and talking about what the Government is doing. They wanted to know what direction the Government is going in.I had one student come up to me and I could see by his body language that—he was looking like he was coming for a fight. He came there and he stood at a distance and he said: “Oh yeah National Party eh? National Government.” I said: “Yep that’s right.” Then he said: “Yeah well what are you doing? What are you doing for our people?”. He spent the next 3 minutes telling me about all the things that we are not doing—not caring for the poor not doing enough for Māori not doing enough for Pasifika—and he just went on and on and on. So I said “Oh that’s great. Well why don’t I start by just introducing myself to you?” and he said: “Oh!”. I said: “Maybe you don’t know where I come from. Look I’m a first generation—born here. My parents came from the Pacific. My mum was a cleaner my dad was a labourer. I come from a working-class family. That’s where I come from.” He looked at me and he goes: “Well and what are you doing in the National Party?”. And I said: “Well because of this: the values that my parents gave me as a working-class family were these—and my grandmother as well and others who turned around and said this to me. They said ‘You know we’ve come here for the same opportunities. We don’t want to have anything more special than anyone else but all we ask for is this: we want the same opportunities as anyone else.’”One thing I also told this young man was the fact that I am a tradesman. I think I am one of the few tradesmen who may be in the House here in Parliament of 121 MPs. I am an electrician by trade. I started off as a Māori Affairs pre-apprentice and went to Domett Avenue Hostel. I said to him: “The fact is that I too come from a trade.” He said: “I was a painter before I came here to Auckland University and now I’m doing law.” So I said to him: “So here’s the thing right? In my background”—I said—“I don’t have political science but the thing that I like about where this Government is going and when we’re talking about our Prime Minister is this: that we basically don’t talk about stuff all the time. We get on and do the job that needs to be done.” I said: “You’re a painter. You sit here. If you look at a building over days and days—you can talk about it till the cows come home right—it won’t go anywhere.” In other words you’ve got to say “Here’s a job. It needs to be done.” and fix it and make it happen. That is the pragmatism of this Government.So he said to me: “Give me some examples. Let’s talk about this.” He talked about “What are you doing for Māori? Let’s talk about this.” I asked him “In 9 years of a Labour Government OK how many Treaty claims were completed?” and he said: “Oh I don’t know.” Well you can count them on just two hands—it is called six. Right? In 6 to 7 years of a National Government—Peeni Henare will know what it is—it is 43. So what is it? We can talk all the days that we can but we just get on and do the business that needs to be done.He said to me: “What about housing? What are you doing for housing in our communities?”. He said “Labour’s doing a lot more.” and I said: “In 9 years how many houses do you know that they actually retrofitted to make warm and dry?”. He said: “I don’t know.” It was 2000 a year 18000 over 9 years. I said: “Do you want to know what we’ve done? I’ll tell you this: over 40000 Housing New Zealand homes; under the retrofitting programme Warm Up New Zealand over 300000; if we do the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill it will be over 180000 by 2019. That will come to 500000.” I said to this young man: “What I stand for—I don’t have a political science degree. I’m a tradesman at heart. I come in here to do things that make a difference for our communities for young people like you and your family. In other words we just get on with the business. But” I said “I tell you what. Don’t just take what I say for granted. How about you let the facts speak for themselves? That’s the evidence.”I commend the Prime Minister’s statement because it is pragmatic it is practical and it gets on with doing the business the things that Kiwis respect and have voted for in the last two elections. Thank you.PEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau):Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Ko Tūtāmure te tupuna ko Te Whakatōhea te iwi. E te ahorangi e Ranginui Walker e te tohunga o te whakaiti e te ahorangi o te ao mātauranga tēnei e tangi apakura atu ana ki a koe otirā koutou kua ngaro atu ki Te Pō. Ka tāpiri atu ko te māmā o taku hoa mahi a Phil Twyford ki a ia ka tāpiri hoki ko tōku tupuna 2 wiki ki muri i mahue ake ki te pō. Nō reira koutou e te hunga wairua ki a koutou e moe e moe okioki!Ka noho ahau ki roto i Te Reo Māori. He aha te take i pēnā ai? Kia kite tātou me te whakamātautau i tēnei Kāwanatanga me wā rātau manawanui ki tō tātou Reo Māori tā te mea aianei tata ake nei ka uru mai Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori ki roto i tō tātou Whare. Nā ka kite tātou mehemea e manawanui ana tō tātou Kāwanatanga ki tēnei taonga o Te Reo Māori. E rua ana ngā take pū ana ki a tāua Te Māori. Ko te mea tuatahi i tēnei wā ko Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori ko te mea tuarua ko Te Pire Whenua Māori. Ka whakaaro ake Te Iwi Māori ko ēnei mea e rua he taonga. He taonga Te Reo Māori he taonga anō hoki te whenua ki a tāua Te Māori.Nō reira ka whakaaro ake ahau ki ngā mahi nanakia ngā mahi māminga o tēnei Kāwanatanga. Ka whakaaro ake ahau ki ngā kōrero a Ranginui Walker i roto i tana pukapuka e mea ana: “Me hui ngātahi Te Kāwanatanga me Te Māori ki runga i te marae. Me kaua Te Kāwanatanga e karanga hui ana ki roto i ngā hōtēra ki roto i ngā wāhi Pākehā. Me tae atu ki te marae ki te āta kōrero i ngā take e pā ana ki Te Iwi Māori.”Nō reira ka tukuna atu te pātai ki tēnei Kāwanatanga: he aha te take i tū ngā hui e pā ana ki Te Pire Whenua Māori ki roto i ngā hōtēra o te Pākehā? Ko reira katoa te wairua o Te Māori? Kāhore! Kāhore! Kāhore! E pātai atu ana ki tēnei Kāwanatanga e i a rātou e huri haere ana i te motu whānui i whakaae mai Te Iwi Māori ki ngā nekehanga o Te Pire Whenua Māori? E kāhore! E kāhore! E kāhore!Nō reira ka tukuna atu tēnei pātai ki tēnei Kāwanatanga: ko te aha koutou mō Te Iwi Māori—ko te aha koutou ki Te Iwi Māori? E tika ana te kōrero o taku hoa mahi a Nanaia Mahuta e mea ana: “Nō reira he aha te painga mō tāua Te Māori?”. Ka kite tātou ki roto i ngā tatauranga e mea ana: e pōhara tonu ana Te Iwi Māori; kei te ngaro haere te whenua Māori; kei te mimiti haere Te Rēo Māori. Anā kei te mauhere. Ā ko te nuinga o ngā mauhere ki roto i ngā whareherehere ko Te Māori. Anā ko ngā tatauranga o te ao hauora. Ānā ko Te Māori e pēhi ana ki raro. Nō reira ki te whakautu i te kōrero a te mema kātahi anō kua noho ki roto i tō tātou Whare ā e hoa he aha nei te painga ki a tāua Te Māori? Ka kī atu horekau! Horekau! Horekau!Nō reira ka tū au ki te whakahē i te kōrero a Te Pirimia i te tīmatanga o tēnei tau tā te mea kua kōrero ahau mō ngā tatauranga kua kōrero ahau mō ngā nekehanga māminga o tēnei Kāwanatanga. Ka whakaaro ake ahau mō te kōrero ā tōku tupuna e mea ana: “I rongo ēngari kīhai i rongo! I kite ēngari kīhai i kite.” Koi nā te mahi o tēnei Kāwanatanga ki tōku Iwi Māori. Kua kōrero ahau mo te pōharatanga. Kātahi ano au ka mutu i ngā huihuinga ki roto i te tāone nui o Tāmaki-makau-rau ā ko te nuinga o ngā kōrero e mea ana e pōhara tonu ana rātou. Ka whakaaro ake ahau ki Te Wharekura o Manurewa kua roa rawa e tatari ana mō Te Minita Take Mātauranga kia whakaae kia tū te wharekura ki roto o Manurewa. He aha te take? Ko Te Reo Māori te take. He aha te take? Ko te oranga o tāua Te Iwi Māori! Hei whakakapi ake kua kite ahau i ngā māngai o te Kāwanatanga e kore aro mai nei ki tō tāua Reo Māori. Hei whakakapi ake tukuna te poi kia rere! E hari koa ana kua tatū te whakatau mō te mahi poi a te tāne ki roto i te ahurea kā tū ki roto i ngā mārama e tū mai nei e Te Māngai o Te Whare tēnā koutou tēnā tātou katoa.[Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. Tūtāmure is the ancestor and Te Whakatōhea is the tribe. To you Professor Ranginui Walker professor of humility and professor of the world of education I lament here for you but at the same time for all of you lost to the void. I add to him the mother of my parliamentary colleague Phil Twyford and an ancestor of mine 2 weeks ago who was left behind in the void. So to all of you spiritual ones sleep slumber and rest.I will remain speaking in the Māori language. And why do I do that? So that we can see and test this Government anditsstout heartin regard to our Māori language because not too far away nowthe Māori Language Bill will be introduced into our House. We will see then just how stout our Government’s heart is to this treasured aspect of the Māori language. There are two matters that we of Māoridom place emphasis on: the first one at this point in time is the Māori Language Bill and the second one is theproposed Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill. Māoridom consider these two a treasure. The Māori language is a treasure and so is the land to you and me the Māori.And so I think about the crafty and devious actions of this Government and the statement made by Ranginui Walker in his book which stated: “Government and Māori must meet together on the marae. Government must never convene a meeting in hotels and non-Māori settings. They must go to the marae to really talk matters through that relate to Māoridom.” So the question to this Government is: what is the reason why meetings for theproposed Te Ture Whenua Māori Billwere held in non-Māori hotels? Was the Māori spirituality all there? Not at all not at all not at all! I ask of this Governmentwhetheras it went around the country at large the Māori people agreed tothe actions of theproposed Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill? Not at all not at all not at all!So this is really the question to Government: what are youthento the Māori people—what are youthento the Māori people? What my colleague Nanaia Mahuta is saying is true: “So what is the benefit for you and me the Māori?”.We see what the statistics state: Māoripeople are still impoverished; Māori land continues to be lost; the Māori language is diminishing. Look at imprisonment: the majority of prisoners in the prisons are Māori. Consider the statistics in the health world: there you are; Māori is down. So to respond to the address by a member who has just taken a seat in our House: shucks mate what then is the benefit for you and me the Māori? I must saynone at all! None at all! None at all! Therefore I stand to oppose the Prime Minister’s statement at the beginning of this year because I have spoken about the statistics and the nefarious actions of this Government. I recall a saying by my ancestor who said: “I heard but I didn’t hear; I saw but I didn’t see.” That is what this Government has done to my Māori people.I have talked about the impoverishment. I have just completed a series of conferences in the city of Auckland. The majority of the conversation is saying that we continue to be poor. I think about Te Wharekura o Manurewa.It hasbeen waiting a long time for the Minister of Education to agree to such a school being established at Manurewa and for what reason? The Māori language. And why? For the welfare of you and me the Māori people! In conclusion I have witnessed Government representatives who have no regard to this Māori language whichbelongs to you and me. Finally let the poi fly! Iam overjoyed thatthe question ofmales performing the poi at the festival to be held this month has been settled. Mr Assistant Speaker acknowledgments to you and to us all.]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call the Hon Phil Goff—5 minutes.Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill): In my brief 5 minutes tonight I want to focus on a very special group of New Zealanders. They make up about 35 percent of our population. They make up 35 percent of our production. Do not come to Auckland—Auckland is coming to you. These are Aucklanders and we are growing by 800 people a week—40000 people a year.Compared with the problems of some parts of New Zealand having the problem of growth is probably a good problem to have. But I would rather have growth with a Government committed to working in partnership with Auckland City to provide the infrastructure that enables that growth to be properly dealt with. Sadly that is not happening. We do not have a regional development policy in New Zealand that works. I challenge any member of the Government or the Opposition to tell me one—one—regional development policy that works other than housing unaffordability and congestion in Auckland which drives people out of Auckland. I do not think that is a satisfactory regional development policy. We do not have a policy that tries to match population growth to the infrastructure that serves it. Once upon a time we would tweak the pointing system for immigration. We would lower the threshold if we wanted more people coming; we would raise it if we wanted less. But the Government knows that the only thing that is sustaining growth in New Zealand is immigration at the moment so it is allowing that immigration to come through at the speed that it will.Now I am in favour of immigration. I think the immigrants to New Zealand—and we are all immigrants to New Zealand actually at some point in history—really add strength and diversity and make a huge contribution to New Zealand socially economically and culturally. But I worry about the impact of growth that the Government is not addressing. I worry about the road congestion that makes it almost impossible to get around Auckland at peak hours. The Productivity Commission says that it costs us $1.5 billion a year in lost time alone because of traffic congestion in Auckland—$1.5 billion. The New Zealand Council for Infrastructure Development puts it at $3 billion. That is like taking $3 billion a year and tipping it down the drain because in the lost productivity you have got nothing to show for it. We desperately need infrastructure that will match the growth.We had a number of things that were very useful. The City Rail Link was to double the amount of passenger traffic on rail lines but for 5 years various Ministers in the Government opposed that so when we get it it will be 5 years late. We had a thing called a petrol tax for Auckland which enabled the council to have the money to invest in transport infrastructure; the Government repealed it. I am really pleased to say that the Government has done a U-turn on the City Rail Link and is about to do a U-turn on road charging legislation—but it is too late. We are building a motorway up the north-west into Henderson and Te Atatū. It is good that it is being broadened but there is no busway there—no separated lane for buses yet we know that on the North Shore it is the busway that has been the most effective way of getting more people into town from the North Shore by public transport than we get by private transport. We are not thinking ahead. At the moment we have got the major Port Future Study that we are looking at to know whether or not we should move the port out of Auckland like they did in Sydney. But the Government will not participate in that so we do not have a regional or a national strategy for it.What I am saying to the Government is that we have to have that partnership between central government and Auckland City if we are to make Auckland work. Auckland is a great city. It is the only global city in New Zealand: it is the place where we can retain New Zealanders and where we can attract the best talent from overseas. For New Zealand to succeed Auckland has got to succeed. My call on the Government in housing and transport—the two major infrastructure deficit areas—is for the Government to get off the sidelines and to collaborate with Auckland City so that we can make Auckland a truly great place for New Zealand and a great place for people to live.TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I thought John Palino sounded angry yesterday when he was announcing his candidacy but compared with that effort I am beginning to think he is probably a tutor in seances and transcendental meditation. What a great time it is to be a New Zealander what a great time it is to be in Government and I have to say what a fantastic time it is to live in Hamilton. We have just enjoyed our annual Hamilton Gardens Arts Festival and it has been a fabulous experience as always. There are wonderful things happening in the electorates that David Bennett and I are lucky enough to represent. We have just had the opening of the new Rototuna Junior High School—634 foundation pupils began on 4 February. What an exciting time it is for that community. I congratulate them all. I want to acknowledge the great advocacy that David Bennett did over many years and say thank you.After the boundary changes at the last election that school is now neighbouring my electorate; in fact it is in my electorate and we are looking forward to the new senior high school beginning next year as well. While I am mentioning schools can I congratulate Pūkete School on the unveiling of its magnificent new pou by the Māori development Minister the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell last week. It is a great historical monument to our city and to that school community and I know that the children were absolutely delighted with it. I want to acknowledge Horsham Downs School which has also come into my electorate—I think Mr Assistant Speaker from your electorate recently—on their centennial. Last weekend I had the honour of opening their new multi-purpose room as they marked that wonderful event. It was great to see so many former staff and pupils there enjoying the occasion.All the schools in Hamilton West are in great heart and I am delighted with the work that they are doing. I want to acknowledge the principals the teachers the boards of trustees the parent teacher associations and in particular those wonderfully hard-working support staff in all our schools not just in my electorate but all around the country. What a great job they do and what important work they are undertaking with our young people.This year has begun well for New Zealand. The Prime Minister’s statement has highlighted what a busy focused purposeful and effective Government he is leading. The signing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement is excellent news for an export-dependent country like New Zealand. I have not met a single exporter producer manufacturer or business owner who is not excited by it because they all know that the world does not owe us a living; we have to make our own way. We have to grow our economy we have to create opportunities to invest and for new jobs to be created. Every free-trade agreement that New Zealand has ever entered into from CER right through to the Chinese and the Korean agreements in more recent times has shown just how important free trade is for New Zealand.I am very proud of the National Government’s announcement last year of the magnificent marine sanctuary around the Kermadec Islands. I am very proud that yesterday we announced yet another lift to the minimum wage because every year since we came into office we have lifted the minimum wage sustainably knowing that you have got to have a balance between what can work for businesses—you do not want to push them too far where they end up having to lay off staff—but also knowing that those at the bottom end need that extra assistance. I am delighted that we have been able to boost their earnings. Those who work 40 hours on the minimum wage will have another $20 in their pocket from 1 April. I am hugely proud that we are the first Government in more than a generation to give a significant lift in benefits and that is just around the corner as well for people who are on welfare. I am so proud that we are the Government that has introduced free doctors visits for children under 13.I am really proud of our rising standards of achievement in all levels of education. I acknowledge the great work that the Hon Anne Tolley started in that regard in her time as Minister of Education. Did she not take a lot of flak at the time but boy are not the fruits of her labours being seen now? Well done Anne Tolley Hekia Parata and all who work in the education system because it is a partnership and they are all doing it together. I am incredibly proud that unemployment is now much lower that mortgage interest rates are low and wages are rising well above the rate of inflation.I am not proud of the negativity of the Opposition. I am not proud that they cannot acknowledge any of these achievements. Soon we will vote down the leader of the Labour Party’s ridiculous amendment suggesting that the Government has given up hope on the future has no plans to prepare New Zealand for the future and is more concerned with scoring political points. Pot—kettle—black. What a ridiculous assertion that is. What abject nonsense from the Leader of the Opposition. In particular we have seen it with his decision to place the Labour Party as the “Two-position Party” on the TPP agreement turning their backs on their previously proud commitment to free trade. What a nonsense that is.And most recently his complete lack of statesmanship and integrity in failing to honour the Labour Party’s policy at the last election to support the process over the flag referendum. We should be now having a discussion leading to a vote that is above petty politics; that is what we all went into the last election with. Nobody will care who the Government is when the change happens. Do you think the Canadians talk about that? Of course they do not but they are mighty glad that they made the change and they now have a flag that they are very very proud of. We should be able to do the same. We should be honouring our war dead who have the silver fern on their graves by saying that now is the time to make the change. We should be embracing the emblem and I am wearing my grandfather’s Boer War badge tonight which is a silver fern before we even had the current flag.A lot of people say: “Oh we have got to keep the original flag.” Well the original flag was two flags back. The silver fern is the thing that our sportspeople compete under that we are recognised for when we travel around the world and it is something we can all embrace and be proud of. I hope New Zealanders will vote for it. I do not care who the Government is: let us just get on and make a change that is positive for our country because that is what this great country provides us an opportunity to do. If we do not take it now we will not get it again in our lifetime.Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): It is an honour to be speaking in the debate on the Prime Minister’s statement and it is also an honour to give the concluding speech in this long process. I cannot say that I have heard all the speeches over the last couple of weeks but the ones that I have heard from this side of the House have been positive forward-looking and celebratory honouring New Zealanders and talking about a Government that is working hard for all New Zealanders.I have to say the speeches that I have heard from the Opposition members pointed out and have shown very clearly that actually during their time in Opposition the Labour and Green caucuses have not learnt the lessons of being in Opposition. They are still working as they were in the mid-2000s judging everything on inputs. They judge everything on how much money you put into something. This Government—because it came through the global financial crisis perhaps—has been focused on getting results for New Zealanders. So it is not how much money you put into something; it is the effect of that spend and the results that you get for the people of New Zealand. This Government has learnt those lessons and that is why it has been so successful.If you look back on the achievements of this Government even through a global financial crisis we have increased the minimum wage by 27 percent since National came into Government in 2008. At the same time we have seen inflation kept to a rise of 11 percent. So that is a very real difference that those New Zealanders on the minimum wage have seen in their back pockets. Mortgage interest rates were almost 11 percent when we came into Government. Now they are down around the 4 percent mark. We have seen the economy growing—3 percent growth in the last 12 months. We have seen the average wage grow by $10000 since we came into Government. When we came in it was $47000 and now $57000 is the average wage.Youth offending and our young people—fewer young people are appearing in the Youth Court. The number is down by 61 percent since National came into Government. Under this National Government we have the lowest reported crime rates that we have seen in 23 or 24 years. Teenage pregnancies are at a historical low. Participation in early childhood education is at an all-time high. Never before have we seen so many children taking part in early childhood education and never before have we seen so many kids particularly Māori and Pasifika kids leaving school with a qualification with National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2. That has been hard work by a lot of teachers staff members and boards of trustees across the country and this Government has supported them all the way. Immunisation rates for Māori and Pasifika children are at the same rate as for European children. We have never seen that before. It is a tremendous achievement.On 1 April this year—a month from today—for the first time in 43 years people who have children in their families and who are receiving benefits will get an increase of $25 a week. Twenty-five dollars a week is going to make an enormous difference and all the families that I have been talking to have talked to me about the things that they will be able to do for their children. Then for those lower-income working families of course Working for Families is being increased by $12.50 a week and by $24.50 for those on the very low incomes.We have done the research we have got the evidence and we have based our investment of taxpayers’ dollars in the places that we know are going to make the most difference to New Zealand families. And what is more we are working together. Whether it is the Business Growth Agenda where we have got Ministers working together across Government; the regional development team which is out and about; or the family violence work that we are doing—and even today with the whole-of-Government approach to reducing harm from gangs—we are working together using good evidence and using that research. We have been open enough to set ourselves some targets publicly—targets to show the public that we can get better results for them and their families—and will report on them openly and regularly. So we are investing the taxpayers’ money wisely where we know it will have the greatest effect.Let me just talk a little bit about what we have done in welfare and I want to concentrate on two groups that we know have the highest long-term liabilities and the worst outcomes in their life. The first is sole parents. We are seeing that the number of people receiving the sole parent support has fallen by 23.5 percentover the last 5 years. There are now almost 42000 fewer children living in benefit-dependent homes. The Opposition has often asked: “Who cares? What difference does that make? Why is that important?”. Well it is important because again through the evidence and the research that we have done here on this side of the House we know that 48 percent of the children who are born into a benefit-dependent home will have a Child Youth and Family notification before they are 18—48 percent. Someone will be concerned about them being either neglected or abused. Almost half of them will not get NCEA level 2.These are children who are born into benefit-dependent homes. Forty-five percent of them will be on a benefit themselves before they turn 19 and unfortunately 5 percent of them will have either a community sentence or will be going through the courts and in jail before they turn 19. So that is why it is important that we help and support their parents get into work because that gives not only the parents but their children a better chance in life.Then with young people we have seen that the 15 to 19-year-old “neet” rate is the lowest since records began back in 2004. That has taken an enormous amount of work right across Government from education to health to justice to the police and to the Ministry of Social Development. We have all worked together to make sure that those young people get the best opportunity that they can.The Prime Minister talked about the overhaul of Child Youth and Family. Last year I appointed an expert panel to lead that complete overhaul of Child Youth and Family because those children are the most vulnerable in our communities and they deserve to have the best lives. It is not their fault that they were born into families who abuse them or neglect them. They deserve to get the whole attention of the Government and their communities to make sure that they can live successful lives.The panel has reported to me. It has identified during that time four building blocks of the new system. It has identified that we need a child-centred system. We talk a lot about it but when you talk to the kids themselves they say “Actually no one talked to me. Actually no one listened to me.” and we do not feel it is a child-centred system. We need an investment approach. We need to use that same evidence and research to know where we need to put our dollars to get the best effect long term for those kids.Carmel Sepuloni: They’re collecting some evidence and making decisions based on evidence.Hon ANNE TOLLEY: The Opposition does not like any of this because it is content to sit back and watch these kids be abused be re-abused and be revictimised and continue to live lives where they are not succeeding in life. That member smiles but actually the statistics are really bad because we know that the statistics tell us that 90 percent of those kids who live in care will end up on a benefit. The statistics tell us that 80 percent of them will not get NCEA level 2. They deserve better than this and this Government is going to deliver it for those kids.New Zealanders know that this National-led Government—and I want to pay tribute to our coalition partners because we cannot do it without them. They have been part of all the success that we are celebrating here in the House in the conclusion of this debate tonight and we welcome the input that we get from them. New Zealanders know that this National-led Government is working for them because it is actually delivering for them. New Zealanders know that this National-led Government is investing their dollars wisely based on good research and based on evidence. New Zealanders know that this National-led Government is addressing the hard issues by addressing and understanding the drivers: the drivers of crime the drivers of poverty and hardship and the drivers of economic growth and prosperity.New Zealanders have confidence in this Government. They have shown it time and time again—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry but the Minister’s time has expired. Members this debate has concluded.A party vote was called for on the question That all the words after “That” be deleted and replaced with “this House expresses no confidence in this National-led Government because this is a Government that has given up on the future that has no plan to prepare New Zealand for the future that is more concerned with scoring political points than solving the big problems facing our country and is letting the Kiwi Dream slip away.”Ayes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Noes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Amendment not agreed to.A party vote was called for on the question That this House express its confidence in the National-led Government and commend its programme for 2016 as set out in the Prime Minister’s statement to Parliament.Ayes 63New Zealand National 59; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.Noes 58New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12.Motion agreed to.Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment BillSecond ReadingDebate resumed from 18 February.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call David Seymour—5 minutes.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill. This debate has been characterised by overflowing wells of empathy from members around the House—and it is difficult not to when we recall the tragic losses in Canterbury and when that city Christchurch is still shaking anew even in the past few days. However the warmth in some members’ hearts appears to have drifted up to their heads into policy making because when you make public policy real empathy is about making it for people.The first mistake in this policy process was not to base the policy making on the risks faced by New Zealanders but to apply an arbitrary standard of 34 percent of new building code across the country.What that did from the point of view of individual New Zealanders was it meant that the costs and benefits of applying this policy were vastly different for the risks that New Zealanders face as individuals and also vastly different in terms of cost-benefit analysis between different regions of New Zealand. In fact some analysis of the initial bill said that the Auckland population would be spending 3000 times more to save a life than people in Wellington. Minister Nick Smith made a very revealing comment in his speech to this second reading. He said that even as an engineer he was surprised at how much variability there is to earthquake risk across New Zealand.With respect only a member from the South Island could say that. We Aucklanders know that although for our excesses and sins we may well one day drown in runs of lava from our many volcanoes the risk of an earthquake in our part of the country is practically nil.The Minister got pushed back hard and he introduced a differential level of strengthening for different parts of the country. He said: “It’s OK. We’ll exclude some buildings and some structures.” and that was admirable. He said that we would have more time—up to 50 years—to strengthen in low-risk areas. But it raises the question: if it is not important to do this for the next 50 years then how urgent and how important is this strengthening overall? The bill was somewhat improved but according to the regulatory impact statement for the bill in its new state the net present value for this particular piece of legislation is negative three-quarters of a billion dollars. In Auckland even just to find out whether a particular building complies with the requirements of the legislation is estimated to cost $10000 to $20000 per building.If we were making empathic public policy we would be highly focused on ensuring that the amount of money spent and the resources that go into earthquake-strengthening are commensurate with the price that we are prepared to pay to avoid and mitigate other risks. And yet in Auckland we will be spending money on earthquake strengthening when the risks that we face by being in those buildings are hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands of times lower than the risks that we face every day in the course of riding bikes driving cars and flying planes. GNS Science was commissioned by the Auckland Council and it suggested that in Auckland this legislation might reduce deaths over 10000 years by three lives. It would save only three lives.There is a very simple way that this bill could be enhanced and could be passed and that would simply be to exempt the low-risk areas that have already been identified in the enhanced bill. Take away those $10000 and $20000 costs that the Minister has admitted are not addressing any urgent concern—because he says he has got 50 years to do it—and that would be a bill that the ACT Party could support. But right now it is an unempathic bill which does not deal with the risks faced by New Zealanders but seeks to preserve an arbitrary standard at all costs. Thank you.JOANNE HAYES (National): I stand to take a very short call on this piece of legislation but before I do I just want to pay tribute to the late and great Dr Ranginui Walker—moe mai moe mai moe mai e koro.As I said I stand to take a very short call on this piece of legislation. It has some key changes in it that we have heard before but I just want to reiterate those. One of the key changes is to do with national time frames. It implements a national time frame. That actually identifies the risk level of buildings—low risk medium risk and high risk—with high risk giving councils 5 years to do the assessment on these buildings and 15 years to strengthen them; medium-risk buildings having 10 years for identification and assessment of these buildings with a 25-year strengthening period; and for low-risk buildings it is 15 years for identification and assessment and 35 years to strengthen the buildings.This bill also addresses areas around unreinforced masonry. Those are things like facades parapets and verandahs. It makes sure that once that assessment has been made those areas are reinforced as quickly as possible. Those are the areas that fell in the earthquake in 2011 and up to 35 people died because of that. We need to address those areas very quickly.The bill also identifies key buildings like schools and universities and hospitals and makes sure that those that have been assessed as medium to high risk are upgraded in half the time that other buildings in the area would be.This legislation also identifies category 1 historic buildings and allows them to have a longer period for strengthening just because of their character and the types of buildings that they are and their historic significance to the region.This is a good bill. It is a bill that addresses a lot of the issues around the earthquake-prone area that exists in this country within the Ring of Fire. So along with all my colleagues here in National and across the House I support the bill at its second reading. Thank you.POTO WILLIAMS (Labour—Christchurch East): Firstly I just want to pull up the member from ACT David Seymour on a matter of geology. He does not realise that in a volcanic region like Auckland when the volcanoes explode it will have an impact on the land. I would recommend to the member from ACT that what he should do is go to where the children of Auckland go to find out about geology and volcanology and that is the museum at the Auckland Domain. They have a very good exhibit there—Carmel Sepuloni: Isn’t Mount Eden—isn’t that in his electorate?POTO WILLIAMS: Yes. They have a very good exhibit there that actually shows you the impact on buildings of a volcano exploding. There are lots of buildings in Auckland that will be impacted if one of the many volcanoes—and let us face it there are what seven nine volcanoes in Auckland—happened to explode.However we are here to talk about the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill. As the previous speaker Joanne Hayes discussed it is around amending the Building Act to ensure that we deal with earthquake-prone buildings as a result of what has happened the earthquake sequence in Canterbury. There are some time frames in which to put that in place and also there are some definitions around risk and what types of buildings will be covered. This bill will have a huge impact on the territorial authorities; there is no doubt about that. But there are some specific issues I want to deal with.We know that it is impracticable to deal with all the buildings. However this bill actually excludes particular buildings such as farm buildings retaining walls and other such structures that will not pose a risk to human life should they come down in an earthquake. We know also that there are some things that are not covered in this bill that actually were impacted in the Canterbury earthquake sequence.One of the things that I really hope does get covered off is poor engineering. We know that with the CTV Building for example no one has really taken responsibility for the poor engineering that caused the deaths of all those people in that particular building. That was really a failure of engineering and I do not believe that we can really continue without actually having some way of determining whom to hold responsible for that. I would hope that this bill actually takes account of that.There are some priority buildings that are included in this bill: hospital and emergency facilities of course; certainly educational facilities; and parts of buildings that are reinforced—such as parapets—and that could fall in an earthquake. Actually some of these did fall and some of these did cause deaths in the earthquake sequence particularly in the 22 February quake. There are some issues that are not addressed in here that we are fully cognisant of in Canterbury and those are things such as the risks that become apparent from building materials once buildings either come down or are demolished—and I am speaking specifically about the risk of asbestos which is quite a risk when we are demolishing buildings.But what I want to do particularly is I want to honour a particular person for whom if this bill was in place and if our territorial authority had enacted what it should have done and assessed buildings—and assessed this particular building—as being risky then she would not have died. That is Mrs Maureen Valerie Fletcher. Mrs Fletcher is the mother and mother-in-law of very dear friends of mine and she was 74 when she passed away when a verandah of a cafe that she was having a cup of tea at collapsed on top of her during the earthquakes. What is particularly sad about Mrs Fletcher’s case is that she was unidentified for a couple of weeks. There were 2 weeks in which her family had not heard from her and they had no idea that she had actually perished. What had happened was her body was taken out of the building where she died but it was misidentified.There was a family in Christchurch who thought their mother had passed away and there was a family—my friends—in Auckland who had no idea that their mother had passed away. So for 2 weeks my friends were perplexed about what had happened to their mother. They travelled to Christchurch spent a lot of time on the ground and spent a lot of time with the emergency services trying to identify what had happened. When the mistaken identification did actually come to light of course it meant that another family realised that their loved one was safe and actually in a rest home in Auckland; and my friends of course realised that their mother had passed away.Why I bring this up is that this bill is about saving lives. If this bill had been in place if the Christchurch City Council had been able to assess its buildings and assess that building with the verandah as unsafe Mrs Maureen Valerie Fletcher might not have died. That is what this bill is about Mr Seymour. It is about ensuring that no one else is put at risk because we can do something about that. It is about ensuring—do not shake your head Mr Seymour—that there are no further families that have to go through the ordeal that the Fletchers had to go through while they waited to see where their mother was. It is not something to shake your head about Mr Seymour.This impacted 187 families directly who lost people in Canterbury but it also impacted the whole country. Even as recently as a couple of hours ago we are still experiencing aftershocks in Canterbury. Every time we have an aftershock or a major quake—we had a 5.7 on Valentine’s Day—what does that do to the structures that are already weakened by the severe force that has been impacted upon them? This is not a laughing matter Mr Seymour and it is an absolute responsibility of this Government and of the territorial authorities the councils around this country to make sure they get it right so that people in Auckland and Wellington and Tauranga do not have to go through the same kinds of dreadful dreadful things that have happened to the people of Canterbury.David Seymour: What with volcano-strengthened buildings?POTO WILLIAMS: We do not wish that upon anyone especially the people in Epsom if they are represented by someone who is as uncaring as you.We can do something about this and we should. I am getting quite emotional about this because people did lose their lives. This is a bill that will actually impact on the lives of people and ensure that they do not have to suffer the way 187 families have had to. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.NUK KORAKO (National): Kia ora e Te Mana Whakawā. I stand to take a short call on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill and agree with the previous speaker Poto Williams.In Christchurch we have just had the fifth anniversary. The latest earthquake was on Monday morning early about 3 o’clock and it was right under my house because that is where the epicentre was in Cashmere View Street. What we are seeing here is that there is a continuous flow of aftershocks even after 5 years. So I want to congratulate the Minister for Building and Housing because at least we are being very very considered here in this bill. It is not just in Christchurch. New Zealand is a young country; there is a lot of seismic risk right across Aotearoa. This bill does address something that people from Christchurch—those who are here now from Christchurch would never want to see anything like what happened in our city. So this bill really is a catalyst in a lot of ways to address the whole situation of earthquake-prone buildings across New Zealand.During the submissions process we heard from a lot of submitters a lot of local bodies and a lot of councils. We even heard from people like Ann Brower who was injured during the earthquakes. Listening to these submissions explains why there were a number of changes that were made. I think one of the main changes is actually about the varying timetables for strengthening the relative earthquake-risk buildings from high to medium to low. The reason for that is that we heard from councils right across New Zealand during the submissions process the fact that we needed to categorise these high-risk areas medium and low. It is in all fairness because there are obviously huge costs that are related to identifying these buildings. We had to do it and put a system in place that was really related to the various risk factors right across the country. So that was the first one.The next change was that looking at the bill before we then came up with a situation again from listening to the submissions about the prioritisation of public buildings particularly buildings used for education hospitals and emergency services. The one thing too that came out of this—and this was particularly from Ann Brower’s submission—is that there are those buildings that had facades and parapets that were dangerous and that did cause a lot of injury and in some cases death. So it was during that prioritisation part of the bill that we thought it was important to make that change. The other change was the fact that we needed to categorise also other buildings right across particularly by reducing the number of buildings covered—farms retaining walls monuments walls and all of that.Looking at this bill I say it is very timely. It is a bill that I and all my colleagues particularly on this side of the House recommend and support. Hopefully this bill can go through and become legislation. Kia ora.A party vote was called for on the question That the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.Ayes 120New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 32; Green Party 14; New Zealand First 12; Māori Party 2; United Future 1.Noes 1ACT New Zealand 1.Bill read a second time.Radiation Safety BillThird ReadingHon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Energy and Resources): on behalf of theMinister of Health: I move That the Radiation Safety Bill be now read a third time. As the House has heard during the passage of this bill it will repeal and replace the Radiation Protection Act 1965 and its regulations providing a much-needed update to our 50-year-old legislation in this area. The bill introduces best-practice principles in radiation safety into New Zealand law and enhances security measures which will provide a means for New Zealand to meet its international obligations relating to radioactive material. In doing so the bill meets the stated purpose of establishing a legislative framework to protect the health and safety of people and to protect the environment from the harmful effects of ionising radiation while allowing for its safe and beneficial use.It is fair to say that this is a carefully considered bill. Public consultation on radiation protection legislation began in 2002 and as a result in 2004 the Government decided that there was an overall benefit in developing new legislation. I am advised that many technical details including the overall scope of the 2004 decision were grappled with at this early stage. The policy informing the bill was reconsidered in some detail and in 2009 the Government agreed to a refined set of instructions for the new legislation. From there as you might imagine for a bill of this nature a considerable amount of science advice and review has occurred. In addition the emergency provisions of the bill have received input and even scenario testing from agencies such as the New Zealand Fire Service the New Zealand Police and the New Zealand Defence Force. Also during this period care has been taken to ensure that New Zealand’s requirements under the international agreements mentioned in clause 3B were incorporated into the bill.The Health Committee made considerable improvements to the bill. I would like to thank the committee for its work in grappling with the content of both the bill and the science and technicalities of the phenomenon of radiation itself. Thanks are also due to submitters on the bill and the Regulations Review Committee for their high-quality input during the Health Committee’s consideration of the bill. Supplementary Order Paper 131 which Jonathan Coleman lodged made some further minor adjustments to wording to allow the provisions of the bill to operate as originally intended.Regulations and codes of practice are being developed to support the bill once it comes into force. The bill also requires a central register of radiation sources to be established. A register and codes of safe practice are already in use under current legislation and will be upgraded to accommodate the requirements of the bill.The bill provides for a high degree of regulation insists on very high compliance standards and rates and shows very little tolerance for safety and security practices that fall short of these expectations. However at its core the bill allows for the benefits of radiation use to be made available to New Zealanders across the fields of medicine and other health services animal health science and research and industry.It is clear that all members have recognised this aim as worthy and the opportunity to update this legislation is timely. I want to thank all members for their support.There is so much more to say about this exciting bill. I do have more time on the clock and I would like to use it on this bill but I know that there are many other members who want to have their say. And so I am pleased to be advancing this much-awaited advance to our legislation and to commend this bill to the House.Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour): I realise that the title of this bill is quite boring—the Radiation Safety Bill—but that must have been the most tired weary boring speech an acting Minister has made in this House. And it was a real disappointment that Mr Bridges could not lift himself up and be as excited about the passage of this bill as those of us who have been on the Health Committee have heard the submissions and have come into this House and supported a major change that is needed in this area.You see it is 50 years since the original Act was put in place and so we are changing a law that is 50 years old. So the members of the select committee—Scott Simpson: Was the member there?Hon ANNETTE KING: No I was not there. I was not there but I have to say that the member looks like he might have been there. He could well have been there. The original legislation is 50 years old and we in the select committee have worked very hard to get the bill through our committee and into the House. In fact the genesis of this bill was not 50 years ago—when I was not there—but it was in fact when I was the Minister of Health that I started the review—Hon Simon Bridges: Some 10 years earlier.Hon ANNETTE KING: —of this Act. Oh a very good interjection comes from the Minister because it is 11 years since I was the Minister of Health although on a daily basis you would think I still had the job if you listen to Dr Coleman. If you listen to Dr Coleman everything that ever happens in health is my responsibility. But I have to say that 11 years ago when I was the Minister of Health I started the review. So now in National’s eighth year of Government we have finally got around to passing the legislation. So congratulations to us all—Chris Bishop: The busy Government.Hon ANNETTE KING: Busy committee Mr Bishop—busy committee. Give credit where it is due.This Radiation Safety Bill replaces the Radiation Protection Act 1965. The purpose of the Act is for us to meet our international obligations relating to radiation protection radiation safety and security and nuclear non-proliferation under a range of international treaties.We acknowledged that we needed to update this legislation and we needed to keep pace with technological changes because think back to 1965 those of you who can think back that far—Hon Simon Bridges: Ha ha!Hon ANNETTE KING: Not Mr Bridges. He was not even in short pants then. But in 1965—Hon Simon Bridges: Annette had already been a Minister for several years.Hon ANNETTE KING: No I think I might have just left school Mr Bridges and I can remember the first time I did see television. But think forward 50 years on and you will see that there have been a lot of technological changes and we needed to make the changes in this legislation.I think the bill has got the wrong name though and I did put forward during the Committee stage Supplementary Order Paper 140—which I know my good friends opposite on the Health Committee would love to have supported—because I think it should have been called the “Ionising Radiation Safety Bill”.I wonder whether Mr Bridges who made the previous speech knows the difference between ionising radiation and non-ionising radiation because I am happy to give a little lecture on what the difference is and on why this bill should have been called the “Ionising Radiation Safety Bill”. People do not know the difference and we found that out at the select committee when we got submissions from people who thought they were talking about non-ionising radiation. So for Mr Bridges who said he knows but he has given no indication in his speech that he understood it at all ionising radiation is high-energy radiation and includes X-rays alpha particles beta particles and gamma rays that have ionising capability. Non-ionising radiation is electromagnetic energy and includes laser lights electromagnetic fields radio waves cellphone towers Wi-Fi microwave ovens ultraviolet tanning machines and power lines.So Mr Bridges they are non-ionising and unfortunately some of those people who came to our committee thought that we should in fact be legislating for them. They are regulated under standards not under legislation. So I think it was important that in fact we gave this bill that title so that there was no misunderstanding about what we were doing. I know that given the opportunity Mr Simon O’Connor and others on the committee would have voted for my Supplementary Order Paper. But the Minister in the chair who never said a word during the Committee stage did not say a peep and did not support my Supplementary Order Paper. So—Chris Bishop: Bulldust.Hon ANNETTE KING: No it was not bulldust Mr Bishop—it certainly was not. One of the reasons I thought it was important that we did give it the proper title is that the World Health Organization in respect of the public health risk posed by non-ionising radiation has said that the evidence is very weak and that in fact if you comply with current limits it has no effects on health.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 10 p.m.