Draft transcript - Tuesday 21 July 2015First draft - subject to correction.Draft transcript - Tuesday 21 July 2015Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North)Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I get up to speak particularly about the economic development spend that we examined in the estimates hearings. What we learnt and what was affirmed for us again is that this is a Government that is failing to deliver on its central plank and that was in the economic development area to grow exports as a proportion of our economy from 30 percent up to 40 percent. The Minister for Economic Development has been forced to admit that they are dropping. They are projected next year to go from the 27 percent they are already down at down to 26 percent. This is a Government that is failing to deliver on its central objective of growing exports as a proportion of GDP. This Minister talks about the Business Growth Agenda. That is his target. He is a Minister who is failing to meet his own target. He is a Minister who is meddling in his department—meddling and creating a failing ministry. Treasury said it was always going to be an uphill battle and that the efficiency gains projected to be gained by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment would never be realised. But what it did not count on and what it did not brief on was a Minister who was meddling in the ministry; a Minister who was choosing the layout—whether portrait or landscape—of the glossy brochures that go out; a Minister who was in there wordsmithing his own previous documents and correcting them and trying to make them sound better even though they had already been in print in his name; and a Minister who was in there choosing the colour of the brochures. The front cover the back cover—what colour should they be? That is where the Minister is. There are 40-odd spin doctors in there trying to clean up after the Minister. They have got an uphill battle because this Government is failing to achieve the central target of the economic development agenda and that is to grow exports as a proportion of GDP. In the estimates hearings we looked into the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment’s spending which we all know about now as taxpayers. We looked into the fact that it had spent $60000 on a sign out the front of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment advertising where it was. We looked into the fact that it has a $140000 TV screen in its foyer. We looked into the fact that it has a $260000 sun deck with barbecues on it. We looked into the fact that it has a $23000 fridge. We looked into the fact that it has a $74000 reception desk which is curved—a curved reception desk. It had to be because the $140000 TV is curved and the desk had to match it. This is the kind of spending this Minister is presiding over. He is the one who signed off the budget with all of these items in it and hair straighteners to boot. This is a Minister failing to concentrate on the big targets he set himself and instead is focused on spending and spending and spending. This is a Minister out of touch if he thinks ordinary New Zealanders think that that is OK. Of course as the Minister he will claim his job is to set the general tone. Minister Joyce will say: “My job is to set the general tone.” Sure he signs off the budget; sure he is accountable to this Committee for the spending. I would say: “How many small and medium enterprises around the country have $140000 TV screens in their foyers?”. How many have $260000 sun decks?Carmel Sepuloni: Not many if any.Dr DAVID CLARK: Not many if any my colleague says. That is true. I think that when the Minister said to the Commerce Committee that he did not have that information in front of him he was fudging. I bet he has looked into it. When he has answered questions in the House he has conveniently not had that information in front of him either. I think he knows that he is failing to deliver on his targets and he is failing to meet the expectations of the small and medium enterprises that need to be grown if we are going to have a diverse economy. That leaves us vulnerable as the dairy prices have tumbled. They beat up on the farmers but actually it is the Government’s fault for not diversifying the economy and not making sure there are others who can shoulder the burden of growing our economy. Leaving it all to the farmers and then beating them up when times are bad is not a good strategy Mr Joyce and New Zealand is not fooled by it. Of course there are plenty of other things that we canvassed in there and there are so many that it is hard to bring them into this Chamber because this Minister is failing in so many areas. The real median weekly wage—well this Minister led of course the campaign in Northland that failed so spectacularly. Since then we have had statistics out that have shown that the real weekly median wage which used to be higher in Taranaki is now lower than it is in Northland. It used to be higher and now it is the same roughly in Taranaki. In Gisborne and in Hawke’s Bay it is now lower than in Northland. These are the kinds of statistics that keep coming out and show how this Government is failing the regions around New Zealand. We cannot afford for the regions to get behind. We need everybody to be succeeding if New Zealand is going to get ahead. The forgone growth is costing us all. And of course unemployment in Northland has gone from 7 to 8 percent under this Government. In the Manawatū and Wanganui it has gone from 3 to 9 percent. Actually plenty of regions are hurting. It will try to pretend Northland is an isolated case but this Government is failing all around.[Continuation line: Steven Joyce]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development)Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): Well with the greatest respect to our dear friend opposite David Clark that speech made a word cloud seem coherent in its analysis of the New Zealand economy. I have never seen such a string of platitudes incoherently brought together in such a way to not achieve a single thing but that is Dr Clark. The fundamental challenge for the New Zealand economy is to grow faster than other parts of the world. Since this Government has been in office no matter what Mr Clark says this country has performed better than most developed countries in the world. Why is that? Because this Government and the agencies that support it are doing the job of encouraging businesses to grow invest have confidence and hire more people. There have been 74000 additional new jobs in the last year and actually a growth rate of 2.6 percent in the year to March—2.6 percent growth compared to 2.3 in Australia 2.4 in the UK 2.7 in the US 2.1 in Canada -0.1 in Japan and 1 percent in Germany. Fundamentally the Opposition members go on about diversification of the New Zealand economy. Well it is happening in front of their eyes and they hate it. They talk the New Zealand economy down. They cannot bring themselves to look at the information and communications technology industry which is growing flat out across New Zealand to the point where we are adding 2000 or 3000 new jobs a year. They cannot bring themselves to look at the wine industry which is growing dramatically. They cannot bring themselves to look at the kiwifruit industry which has recovered incredibly well. They cannot look at the apple industry which is also growing well. They cannot look at the beef industry. They cannot look at the high-tech manufacturing industry. The BNZ - BusinessNZ Performance of Manufacturing Index the indicator for growth in manufacturing was 55 last Friday. Services today was 58. They cannot bring themselves to look at that. The tourism industry grew 9 percent in the last month. In June the coldest month of the year it grew 9 percent. The international education industry is growing dramatically and is now at $2.85 billion. The construction sector is also growing dramatically. The only person who does not believe us is Mr Clark sitting over there with his eyes firmly shut. So yes it is a challenging time for the dairy industry but the good news is that New Zealand has a strong and diverse economy as a result of the confidence that the businesses express because of such things as the management of the New Zealand economy by Bill English and the Business Growth Agenda which is the most comprehensive programme of work in the New Zealand economy in decades—350 different initiatives. Weirdly 3 years in the Opposition still has not read it but then that probably indicates its level of depth and analysis of its approach. So the export sector the free-trade agreement with Korea the World Trade Organization’s Government procurement—that stuff is not going to make headlines but I tell you what it means a lot of manufacturers all over New Zealand. I talked about information and communications technology.[Continuation line: On the tourism side such things as the national cycle trails]Hon STEVEN JOYCEOn the tourism side there are such things as the national cycle trails which Opposition members have gone a bit quiet on because they know that regional New Zealand knows that it is working for them; things like the convention centre which they are opposed to and will still be opposed to but they will still turn up at the opening that sort of thing; and there is investment encouragement of investment encouragement of skills. We talked about the information and communications technology graduate skills today; the research and development tax losses that we have cashed out the research and development growth grant programme which is growing—that is in the innovation space. In the natural resources sector there is a lot of work going on there. There are the regional growth programmes which again they do not want to talk about. So if you forget all the industries that are doing well if you forget all the Government initiatives if you close your eyes to all the regional growth programmes if you determinedly sit there and say that it is the worst economy in 25 years then Mr Clark may be able to convince himself that nothing has happened but he is wrong.[Continuation line: Phil Twyford.Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū)PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū): The story of this National Government’s transport policy deserves to be told and it goes something like this. This Government under Steven Joyce’s leadership as a transport Minister in its early years took the transport budget which amounts to about $3.5 billion a year and decided to politicise it and treat it as a party political slush fund for the National Party. That is what it did. It was an act of supreme cynicism and it made the decision against the advice of officials against the advice of all of the best benefit-cost ratios all of the analysis to pour billions of dollars into a handful of handpicked motorway projects that had not even been subject to the most basic economic analysis when this Government committed the money for those projects—a handful of urban motorway projects. It was pork barrel politics on an industrial scale and that is the defining quality of this Government’s transport policy. The result of that has been that every other category of the transport budget whether it is urban public transport or local roads in regional New Zealand has been cut and squeezed and neglected for the last 7 years. This Government has been willing to run down and neglect a multi-billion dollar asset that belongs to the people of this country in the form of the local roads and State highways. It has been content to neglect the transport needs of our country’s biggest city making itself this National Government a brake on Auckland’s economic growth and prosperity. We did the figures when the Government policy statement on transport came out and then again when the National Land Transport Fund came out and what those numbers show is that for regional New Zealand outside of the main urban centres spending on roads has dropped by 13 percent in real terms between 2008 and 2013. That amounts to a real cut of $163 million. That is a reduction in the spending on local and regional roads by this National Government during its 7 years in office so far—13 percent cut in real terms. What is the upshot? The consequence of that cut in funding to regional New Zealand’s roads is that the roads themselves fall into disrepair and pose a threat to the safety of people using those roads in regional New Zealand and this National Government having blamed councils all around New Zealand for the last 7 years for being profligate spenders all this Government’s transport policy has done is load more and more pressure on to the ratepayers in regional New Zealand. Take Southland—about 10000 ratepayers—they have had a massive dairying boom there over the last decade or so. They have the largest roading network outside of the Auckland super-city and yet they have had successive cuts to their local road funding. Eric Roy the former member for Invercargill was in the Southland Times explaining to his constituents why their road funding was cut by this National Government. He was very candid—that is what I liked about Eric Roy—and he said that until we have built all the roads of national significance the roads in Southland are just going to have to wait. That is a message that he could have delivered to any town any community throughout this country because that has been the effect of this Government’s transport policy on regional New Zealand. The regions are missing out. If you look at average funding per person nationwide the average is $648 per person. In the regions it is only $566 per person. Per kilometre nationwide there is an average spend of $11430 under National. In the regions that is only $9230. The regions are getting done like a dog’s dinner under National. The second thing I wanted to say is that in the last election as we have repeatedly seen from this Government it was dragged kicking and screaming it was embarrassed publicly and then finally it threw a little bone to try to keep people quiet and it announced $212 million of regional road funding. But the following year in the Budget it allocated only $97 million for those roads but it promised $212 million. How cynical can you get? We saw this speaking of cynicism with the bridges of Northland—[Continuation line: Fletcher Tabuteau]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - FLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First)FLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First): Thanks for the opportunity. I just wanted to note the eloquence of the Minister who spoke so wonderfully just a few moments ago. What I have to say though is that it is a shame that that eloquence that wonderful turn of phrase could not be applied to his super ministry to get his staff in line in order to create those synergies that were promised to the people of New Zealand. In terms of eloquent messages at the moment as well it seems like National is putting out this wonderful argument that if anyone talks about how bad things are in New Zealand it is their fault. If you talk about how bad things are it is your fault. So apparently by talking it about tonight it is going to be my fault that the economy is not doing that great. Speaking about infrastructure and economic development though the regions have been short-changed in this appropriations round in the 2015-16 appropriations round. Economic development without a doubt will be more meaningful for each and every New Zealander if this Government would actually focus on our regions and more important on the people in them. Infrastructure development—we were talking today—we have just come back from meeting with our constituents. We were talking about roading in Northland funnily enough. We are encouraging cruise ships to come to the port which is wonderful and then what they are doing is they are taking them out to wonderful tourist activities out in the kauri forest but a lot of that road—and it was spoken about before how there has been a 13 percent cut in our regions’ roading for example—is gravel. So there is absolutely no doubt that we are undermining our tourism which the Minister spoke of how wonderful it was. We are undermining it with inappropriate and lacklustre appropriations in this round. What this Government needs to do is be considered in its approach. What it is failing to acknowledge as well is the appropriations to the broadband roll-out for example.Brett Hudson: Two billion?FLETCHER TABUTEAU: No there were no appropriations attached to the broadband roll-out because the Government has not acknowledged that there is an actual problem with the broadband roll-out in New Zealand. So what we have at the moment is again another discussion with people in rural communities in our regions telling us that not only can they not connect because of structural issues with the roll-out that were inherent from the start—the problems were there and transparent from the start—but we were having some wonderful conversations about the broadband roll-out and the fibre connections and what businesses in our rural sector in our regions were telling us which is ridiculous is that as they were connecting and opting in to this wonderful option to grow their business their internet speeds were slowing down. They were measuring their internet speed and they were able to tell us categorically that it was slower than dial-up—dial up 10 years ago. That is how slow it has become because the infrastructure—the investment the lack of foresight of this Government in terms of these appropriations for infrastructure and for economic development—is just not there. National Ministers might not know this—they only seem to go rural when there is a by-election—but rural businesses only 10 minutes from the city are experiencing these problems. The lines have been upgraded but the infrastructure is not coping. It is ridiculous. Previously I have spoken in this House about the implications of the broadband roll-out for rural business. The reality is that rural businesses have fewer websites less internet connectivity and they are not bothering with this so-called online economy because they cannot take advantage of it.[Continuation line: The electricity industry—another infrastructure another ]FLETCHER TABUTEAUThe electricity industry: another infrastructure and economic development issue that seems to have been left by the by by this Government. We have had conversations put to New Zealanders from the Electricity Authority asking if regions should pay more for their electricity through line charges. They have put it that essentially it is going to be the absolute nth degree of user-pays. So we are not going to share structural costs; we cannot you know share this with New Zealanders. It is going to be the regions—[Continuation line: Hon Simon Bridges]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport)Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): It is a great pleasure and a privilege to be the transport Minister and to be the energy Minister in this John Key - led National Government. That is because this is the strongest infrastructure Government in many a decade. This is the strongest party and Government for infrastructure that this fine country of ours has had for many a decade. I can tell you that that is so for many reasons and I will do that. But I will give one anecdote: it was a great pleasure preparing before the select committee in the areas that I have responsibility for because we have such a good story to tell. They were fireside chats that we had in those committees because the story that we have in transport and that we have in energy is absolutely fantastic because we are delivering results for this country in transport. Let me talk a bit about that. The New Zealand Land Transport Plan was recently put out by the New Zealand Transport Agency—biggest ever across every single class. We are spending more where it is needed in every single class in land transport that there is whether it is the big cities where we have got the biggest project ever coming to completion right at the moment in New Zealand in Auckland the western ring route with Alice there boring through and doing a tremendous job; whether it is Tauranga’s eastern link road which very soon will be open to the public—it will be the best road when it is opened in New Zealand in the country very shortly. It is absolutely fit-for-purpose to connect up those exporters that Steven Joyce was talking about—the kiwifruit growers the productive sector of our country—to the best and biggest port. Whether it is in the provinces in the rural areas whether from the Akarama curves in Northland through to passing lanes in Gisborne through to the Normanby bypass in the centre or the Kawarau Falls bridge lane this year—many many millions in fact hundreds of millions of dollars are going into regional roads to make sure that they are fit-for-purpose and doing the job to get exports to market efficiently and productively and also to get our people around this country safely. We are multi-modal. I always love saying this for Julie Anne Genter’s benefit but it is this National Government that has delivered the biggest infrastructural investment in rail in many a decade in Auckland—$1.6 billion. There is a billion dollars for the electrification of rail. It is good to see the mayor and the council talking about this earlier this week—a real step change for that city. There has been over $3 billion in capital expenditure in rail since we have been in Government—truly significant and yet to some never enough. Bus interchanges park-and-ride—there has been significant infrastructural spend on those. Just to show the multi-modal nature of this Government’s infrastructure there will be $333 million in cycling in the next 3 years on urban cycleways. It is a real step change for literally every urban area with over 30000 people in this country whether it is Whangarei Auckland Wellington—you name it they are getting very strong investment that is going to really deliver for the people of New Zealand. In Auckland where Phil Twyford talked about of course we are engaging in an engagement process because we do want to make sure we are spending the money right on congestion and public transport. But in the meantime $1 billion a year is going into that city. We are not sitting here sitting on our hands; we are the biggest investor in Auckland bar none whether it is the Victoria Park Tunnel whether it is the western ring route I have spoken of whether it is in the Auckland-Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative whether it is the East-West Link we are getting on with the projects that we are being told are the ones that need to be focused on and really delivering for that city. In technology I am really excited about the way we are across the board in transport enabling technology and innovation to capture the benefits of what is happening around the world for transport users in New Zealand—whether it is mobility or whether it is ensuring that some of the really interesting car and ride-sharing innovations that are seeing more people in fewer cars will be enabled in New Zealand; whether it is new AVs unmanned aerial vehicles or drones that people talk about—whether it is drones in areas like that. We are making sure we have the most fit-for-purpose enabling regulations. It is going to be a pleasure working with Craig Foss the Associate Minister of Transport and to be part of seeing those new regulations come in very shortly—in fact later this week. In energy and resources I am glad Fletcher Tabuteau spoke about that because we can say with absolute clarity that today we have the most competitive and the most innovative electricity market this country has ever seen. It is the most competitive—and the Opposition say: “Well is that really so where is your proof?”. Well how about this: the latest Statistics New Zealand statistics show that the CPI figures out today on electricity prices show the annual rate of change in electricity prices paid by households—what do you think that was? What do the people of this House—the members of this House—think? There was 0 percent change in the last year in electricity prices for households.Fletcher Tabuteau: Whose electricity prices?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well let me give the members over on that side of the House a little history lesson. I do not think that has ever happened this decade. I do not think that has ever happened this century. In fact I think we would be hard-pressed to find another year where there has been a 0 percent increase in electricity prices for households and that is because in this Government on getting into office Gerry Brownlee and Steven Joyce set up the Electricity Authority and got a competitive market going. We are seeing the most competitive most innovative market we have ever seen with electricity retailers and the numbers there are at record levels. I think off the top of my head it is 14 new retailers offering 25 brands. Hot competition for customers is meaning that the big players are seeing their market’s share over time squeezed as more and more people shop around. It is a very strong record in infrastructure that this Government has whether it is in transport across the board more investment going where it is really needed in a multi-modal approach or whether it is in energy and resources where we are seeing the most competitive electricity market we have ever seen with 0 percent increases for households made clear by Statistics New Zealand today. That is why I am incredibly proud to be part of this John Key - led National Government which is making a difference in infrastructure and is the best Government in infrastructure that this country has seen in many a decade.[Continuation line: Catherine Delahunty]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green)CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): Thank you for the opportunity to talk about the labour market estimates which I had something to do with as well as my colleague Denise Roche. Just listening to the Minister of Transport the Hon Simon Bridges speaking about how fabulous everything is in terms of infrastructure it always rings harsh in my ears when I walk down Karangahape Road or Lambton Quay or all the other infrastructure lying around the country and in every second doorway there is a person lying on the ground or putting out a begging bowl which is not how I grew up. This is not the Aotearoa that I grew up in. So if the labour market is going so great and infrastructure is all so wonderful why for the last few years has it got worse and worse and worse and there are more and more people who people do not want to see who cannot survive in the labour market as it now stands with the great successful National Government of the last God knows how many years? It is very disturbing for people with a conscience to see it and it is not individual failure; it is structural failure.[Continuation line: However there are two issues I want to address]CATHERINE DELAHUNTYHowever there are two issues I want to address in terms of Vote Labour Market. One is a small phrase that was in one of the reports on the labour market estimates—I think it was under “Minimum employment standards”—that talked about reviewing the Equal Pay Act which put a little chill down our spine. Since Kristine Bartlett took it to the Crown and won in a number of courts of law proving that aged care workers should be entitled to equal pay and that women-dominated occupations are unfairly paid—and we have a gender pay gap of 14.1 percent which is again another failure of the labour market that definitely become worse in the last few years—the Government is now talking about changing the Equal Pay Act 1972. How it might change that as a result of a court decision that finally was able to show in law that women are not fairly paid is a worrying thing because the decision has real meaning and therefore there is real risk. It may mean the Government will change the law to prevent us from doing what is right. I had a bill that would have had the Equal Pay Act amended to make it more transparent which did not go far but when it got introduced it became famous due to the meltdown by the Employers and Manufacturers Association chief executive officer which some people will recall with horror. But what is the Government going to do to equal pay now that it has been proven that the law is not working that women are not being paid fairly and that something has to change? So we are very concerned about that and we are very concerned to see that in the Vote Labour Market estimates. The other issue from the Vote Labour Market estimates that I want to talk about in terms of the Minister and I was at the select committee when he spoke about this is issue of refugees. Basically our country is in a pretty shameful state. We are now on the United Nations Security Council; we are now trying to hold our head up on the international stage. Yet we have a Government that refuses to lift the quota and whenever we talk about lifting the quota it just starts talking about the rehabilitation of refugees and how much we are doing to make sure everything is fine. But in reality we are unfortunately following one of the worst role models we could possibly follow at the moment in terms of refugees and asylum seekers and that is Australia. Australia is taking a totalitarian approach towards refugees and is treating asylum seekers in a way that is pretty unbelievable and now our own Minister for labour and for refugees is refusing to say that anything is going to change when clearly everything needs to change. So at the select committee I questioned him about the refugee quota and he spent a lot of time avoiding the issue of improvement in the quota. The Greens and others in this House—a number of parties; virtually all of them except the Government—are asking for the refugee quota to be improved to only 1000 a year but the reality is that the Government is more influenced by the scare tactics and totalitarianism of the Australian Government’s attitude towards refugees than it is by the voices of reason from all the other parties. That is what the Minister of labour has said in the Vote Labour Market report—that there is no indication of improvement there—and only in the last few days something really disturbing has come to light about that.[Continuation line: Tracey Martin]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First)TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Mr Chair. Thank you very much for the call. I was going to take a call on science and innovation in this particular part of debate but there are a couple of things I want to address that have been previously spoken about by the Minister in the chair and a previous Minister. I challenge the current Minister in the chair to outline for me where the northern border of the Auckland super-city is because the Minister in the chair said that inside this Budget there are some amazing transport dollars being spent inside of Auckland City. That may very well be true for central Auckland  but I have first-hand accounts of people in Wellsford who are in the super-city of Auckland—they happen to sit in the Northland electorate; perhaps that is the problem but they are in the super-city of Auckland—who are having to fill their own potholes in their own roads with lime that they have bought themselves Minister because there is no funding from this Government for those rural roads. So I challenge the Minister to outline for me where the border of the super-city of Auckland is.[Continuation line: I am not very confident that]TRACEY MARTINI am not very confident that the National Party understands exactly where it is. That is the first thing. The second thing is that Minister Joyce stood up and talked about the wonderful things that were done in this Budget with regard to international students. It may very well be true that schools are saying that they actually have to fund 60 percent of their operations grants on international students because the funding from this Government is so low and that is probably a topic we will get into in the next part of this debate around education. Let us talk for a moment about science and innovation which is part of this particular debate. I want to talk about the Performance-based Research Fund and the fact that this Government and Mr Joyce have said that the Performance-based Research Fund is the next big thing with regard to science research in this country and the way it is funded. That is what they say it is. The Performance-based Research Fund has $250 million and the Government is going to raise that amount to $300 million by 2017. Fantastic—the problem is the unintended consequences. What have we got going on because there is a 100 percent competitive model with regard to research in this country? There is 100 percent competitive model with regard to scientific research. This is the worst thing that has happened to science in this country since the blimming shake-up of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research  which I believe was done by a National Government as well. That member would not know it because that member probably is not old enough to actually understand what happened in New Zealand then but some of us are and some of us learnt from the mistakes that were made. When the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research closed we lost scientist after scientist after scientist to Australia. It put us behind the mark internationally for years on end and it is one of the reasons we need the Performance-based Research Fund supposedly. We have to encourage scientists to come back. But what is happening with the fund? The unintended consequences are that staff are being persuaded to resign on the understanding that they will be rehired after the round for the Performance-based Research Fund is completed. Staff are being put on fixed-term agreements to avoid them being counted in the fund’s measurements. Staff are being offered shorter fixed-term agreements to avoid counting in the fund’s measurements. Potential staff are not being employed to avoid them being counted in Performance-based Research Fund scores. Does the Minister know about this? Does Minister Joyce know about this? Yes he does. He sat at the Education and Science Committee and he said: “Yes we are aware of the rorting.” Are they going to change it? No not quickly. Why not? Because it is that commercial model which the Government believes is all that is important. Where is the public-good science? Where is the interest-led science that actually led to inventions that this country is now known internationally for? It is gone because this Government does not believe in funding public-good interest-led science that adds to New Zealand’s future. This Government believes in funding only those who have some sort of pre-proven economic benefit. How does that affect every business in let us say Wellsford or let us say Te Hana and let us just say Kerikeri? Do you know how it affects them? It affects them because they do not even know it exists. They do not even know that dollar for dollar research investment exists. They do not even know what Callaghan Innovation does. Yet they are in the super-city of Auckland. They are sitting in a city that this Government under legislation only 2 years ago purchased the FoodBowl in Auckland to help food manufacturers and food production go from there to there and to packaging to send it overseas. Yet inside the northern borders of the super-city of Auckland they do not know a thing about it. That is because this Government is urban-centric. This Government does not see the regions.[continuation line: Wagner]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Hon NICKY WAGNER (Associate Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery)Hon NICKY WAGNER (Associate Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery): Supporting the rebuild for Christchurch and Canterbury remains one of the National-led Government’s main priorities. We want to make sure that Canterbury and Christchurch are even better places to live to work and to raise a family. Since the earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 we have appropriated $12.4 billion towards the recovery the rebuild and regeneration. In the appropriations this year 2015-16 there is $314 million for anchor projects; $60 million for red zone property acquisition and demolition costs clearance and management; and $80 million for managing the recovery and regeneration. We expect to spend $16.5 billion in the Canterbury community by 2019.[continuation line: The enormous amounts of money time energy]Hon NICKY WAGNERThe enormous amounts of money time energy and hard work that have been expended over the last 4 years in the rebuild makes this one of the most expensive and ambitious undertakings in New Zealand history and 4 years on Canterbury and Christchurch are mostly in good shape. Despite the gloom and doom forecast our population has increased and that is because we acted decisively to retain the population and employment immediately after the earthquakes. About 540000 people live in the Canterbury region now and that is up 18000 since the 2006 census. And the rebuild is going well. This March an estimated $13.4 billion worth of earthquake construction has been completed and that represents about 42 percent of the progress through the physical rebuild. Our gross domestic product has risen. It was over 10 percent in the last calendar year and the unemployment rate is 3.4 percent. If you compare that with the national rate of 5.6 percent in the last year Canterbury has increased jobs by 15500. So our city is coming alive at the same time and I think there is real excitement about the activity in the centre city. We see the trend of Christchurch retail sales which is continuing to increase and our nightlife including the restaurants the bars and the clubs are back to about 95 percent of pre-earthquake levels. Recently the bus exchange opened office blocks and retail developments are being completed daily and by the end of 2016 1700 public sector workers will have returned to the central business district. As a central city resident myself I am delighted that the Government has signed agreements with Fletcher Living for the construction of 191 new homes on two new inner city sites in the housing accord with the Christchurch City Council. Twenty percent of those new homes will be priced at or below $450000 so that they are eligible for the Government’s new KiwiSaver Homestart loans scheme for first-home buyers. But we are also increasing the number of houses in the city at a huge pace. There is an $800 million East and North Frame residential precinct which will complete about 940 townhouses and apartments and that will provide living accommodation for up to 2200 people. I think this project is fantastic for Christchurch. It will bring residents into the city centre. It will provide a mix of housing to encourage people at all stages of their lives and they will literally be able to live to work and to play within the four avenues of the city. That will provide a great community spirit and a quality of life that will help families and businesses flourish. So our rebuild is well under way but how are the people of Canterbury feeling? We have been through some very tough times as you all know and we have certainly learnt that people deal with trauma differently. Every year we undertake the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority well-being survey and in September 2014 77 percent of the people surveyed rated their quality of life as good or very good and 20 percent of them reported an improvement over the previous 12 months. This is the first time that these results have been comparable with the quality of the surveys about Christchurch pre-earthquake so that indicates that we are getting back to where we were prior the earthquakes.[Continuation line: Dyson]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills)Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): I am pleased to take a contribution in the estimates debate on Vote Canterbury Earthquake Recovery in this new structure of bracketing portfolios as we do. I was interested in the member who has just resumed her seat Nicky Wagner and her comments. I think she is actually not being straight with Cantabrians or with New Zealanders. I think she is demonstrating an arrogance that is surprising for someone of her background and I think she is out of touch with where we are in Canterbury. The Government members have had a big push on saying how much money they are spending in Canterbury; $16.5 billion is the figure that is often quoted. Half of that money is actually Earthquake Commission cash so immediately you halve the contribution of Government. They promised $6.7 billion in what they described as core Crown contributions—that is roads sewerage schools and hospitals. Well from 2011 to the first promise until the end of 2014 there has been $2 billion spent. That is all. The handbrake has been put on the Government investment in Canterbury to try to get to the surplus but it is still did not happen in this year’s Budget—another failed promise from the Government another failed attempt at getting a surplus. Even more interestingly though when you look at the Budget and the Canterbury earthquake recovery is that the Reserve Bank says that in Canterbury there will be about $35 billion of insurance money going into the region—$35 billion. So if you look at what that sort of investment does to the Canterbury economy particularly to employment combined with the logical housing boom that we are experiencing as a result of replacement houses paid for by insurance then you will see an increase immediately: increased employment and lower number of people on benefits an immediate increase of 10 billion per annum in Crown income. Just remember that original investment figure that the Government has been trumpeting. There are additional taxes on wages that the Reserve Bank estimates at $4 billion and additional GST which they might get anyway and goes back to the business but that gives a total tax boost of $11 billion. So who is paying for the Canterbury recovery? Actually it is mostly insurance companies and the Government is likely to end up better off as a result of those insurance company investments and the growth stimulation. This is not a plan for New Zealand’s future. You cannot have a plan that is built on the back of insurance payouts as a result of natural disasters. That is not the sort of future and security that New Zealanders need. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority is thank goodness going out of existence in the very near future. Finally we have a transition plan that is being prepared looking at the handing over of the powers of the authority to relevant Government departments organisations and of course our three local authorities. In order to prepare for the winding up of the organisation the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority has recently doubled its communications budget—doubled the number of staff and doubled the amount of money it is spending. I find that really puzzling. When the chief executive and the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery were asked “Why are you doubling your budget when you are going out of existence in less than a year’s time?” they said they needed to keep people informed. Well that would be a first. That would be a first since that organisation was established. And they said there was an increasing amount of work happening with the anchor projects. Actually every single anchor project except the bus exchange—where they have had 15 accidents in less than 2 months as a result of the ingoing and outgoing traffic; that is a major success—has been delayed. The Minister came to the select committee to talk about the vote. When he was asked about the delay he blamed the media. It is all made up. And yet we had the Prime Minister at the annual tourism conference saying the convention centre in Christchurch has got a budget that has blown out and it might not go ahead and the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery said there is no blow-out in the budget. One of them is either mistaken or not telling the truth. They cannot both be right and it is really hard to figure out. I would be backing the Prime Minister on this particular point. There are a number of other issues—[Continuation line: Hudson]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - BRETT HUDSON (National)BRETT HUDSON (National): Well this Government is committed to continuing New Zealand in the direction that has seen us grow faster than most of our trading partners in the OECD. Over 190000 jobs have been created over the last 4 years and another 150000 are forecast across the next 4. We are doing this through our Business Growth Agenda. Whether it is unlocking new markets strengthening capital markets harnessing natural resources investing in innovation investing in skilled and safer workforces investing in infrastructure this Government is committed to keeping New Zealanders on the pathway to prosperity.[Continuation line: Across the way they do not even understand business]BRETT HUDSONAcross the way there they do not even understand business. From across there we witnessed just last week a trumpeted trumped up policy from Labour championing small business. What was that? It was a re-announcement of the Government’s discussion paper around provisional tax payments released in May. They are bereft of ideas bereft of leadership and quite frankly bereft of talent while we here are focused on doing the things that count to keep improving the lot for New Zealanders and their families. I just want to raise the issue of infrastructure within this ambit of the Business Growth Agenda . A few speakers ago the professor gave a lecture to us around the paucity of infrastructure investment particularly broadband. Well I do not know which library he consulted but clearly he did not avail himself of the services of the Parliamentary Library . If he had he would have learnt that in these appropriations the Government has made an appropriation for a further $210 million for ultra-fast broadband from the Future Investment Fund to raise coverage to 80 percent of the population. An additional $100 million from the telecommunications development levy is to further increase coverage under the rural broadband infrastructure and an additional $50 million is to take care of mobile black spots. This is a Government that is investing in its infrastructure and that enables Kiwis and Kiwi businesses to be better connected and to take advantage of the opportunities that are there in this increasingly more connected world. They make a real difference. For instance in Timaru the information and communications technology sector is now the third-largest sector in that area. One example is an IT development company in Timaru that had a single employee before the ultra-fast broadband roll-out began and that now has a dozen. It is able to offer its services not only around New Zealand but across the world. Or there is the doctor in Whangarei who now no longer needs to take his patients through an appointment system at the local hospital for retina scans but can do them in his practice and send the information on. Or there is the panel beater on the North Shore who can take photos of damage transmit them electronically to the assessor in the insurance company resulting in the approval coming through quicker the customer’s car being back on the road sooner and a far better more efficient business for that panel beater. It is making a real difference. The information and communications technology industry is growing at 9 percent per annum year on year. It now contributes to about 1.7 percent of GDP . That is one-third—one-third—of dairy contribution to New Zealand in one industry. That is without counting the wine industry or the beef and lamb industry or oil and gas exports or kiwifruit exports or all of the other things we are doing across the New Zealand economy. Within that information and communications technology industry exports are growing at 14 percent per annum over the last 6 years and contributed to approximately $930 million in exports in 2014. This is a Government that is focused on diversifying our economy creating opportunities for Kiwi businesses making investments in infrastructure and opening markets and strengthening our capital markets to ensure that investment flows in that permits businesses to grow and to hire more people. It is a Government that is focused on creating a skilled workforce to meet the needs of a diversifying and growing economy. I now mention particularly the information and communications technology postgrad academies in Christchurch and Auckland which the Minister announced recently and with an announcement to come soon on that study in Wellington. So this Government is committed to continuing to grow New Zealand to continuing to offer our people in our businesses brighter prospects with sound investments sound policies and sound actions.[Continuation line: Gareth Hughes]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - GARETH HUGHES (Green)GARETH HUGHES (Green): Kia ora Mr Chair. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou kia ora. In my short 33 years on this planet we have seen phenomenal technological economic and social change and without doubt I believe in the next 33 years we are going to see even more. You can see some of that innovation in a warehouse next to Auckland Airport where rocket labs are assembling world-leading electron rockets but with carbon fibre 3D printed battery-powered jet engines. You can see other companies like Xero selling from the land of the long white cloud through the cloud and competing globally. We have got some fantastic examples that highlight the potential of an innovative economy but we should not be deluding ourselves that a few innovative companies make an innovative economy. What we have seen this week is an economic slow-down in China. Two recent polls have come out showing that consumer confidence has dipped sharply. Dairy prices have plunged a further 10 percent and what we have seen in the Treasury documents is that the tradables part of the sector has stagnated. In fact it has split between the tradables and non-tradables sector as the greatest in 2000 years—concerning concerning issues. So what is the plan in National’s Budget and Budget estimates? Well when you drill past the spin what you can see is that the strategy is incredibly flawed. Under National we are working incredibly hard but our wages are in the bottom half of the developed world. Under National our costs of living are judged the highest in purchasing power. Under National our economy is simplified and will become more dependent than ever on a few raw commodities. Under National we still spend less than half of the developed world average for research and development. Basically under National we are not building those high-wage industries or sectors to compete into the future. Under National we are digging ourselves deeper and deeper into an economic hole. The plan seems to be a few token policies at the margins a few more cows on paddocks—cram them on—and hoping to find some oil deep in our seas but we are finding ourselves deeper and deeper in that hole. I believe in that old saying to paraphrase it: if you find yourself in a hole it is time to stop digging. It should be the same in a coal shaft in a deep-sea mine. It is time to stop digging. The way we have always done things is going to get us the result that has seen us slip down those economic rankings over succeeding decades. On the science and innovation aspect of the Budget we have seen some token—token—gestures from Minister Steven Joyce. What we have seen is a funding approach that keeps us in the bottom half of the developed world an approach that picks winners that finds money for special prizes for their special friends in their special industries like film. The funding models that benefit large businesses the whole Crown research institute sector is built around the old-fashioned traditional economy and we are seeing emerging start-ups that feel that they are missing out on research and development that they want to do to help get our country ahead. There is a better way to support our economy and that is to build a genuine innovative economy. My vision is one where we see Kiwis employed competing globally come out with products and services with intellectual property. There is a limit to the amount of milk powder we can export around the world. We are seeing it in our waterways. There is no limit to the intellectual property—the software the services—we could be exporting. As Sir Paul Callaghan said we need to find those niches—which are our strengths? We need to find an economy where we work smarter not just work harder because if we do not we risk what Greg Doone from PwC Digital’s strategy team argues—that if we are just a fast follower of the current speed of change we are going to be left behind following yesterday’s trends. So the Green Party stands for an innovation economy an internet economy a clean energy economy. To get there we need to adequately fund research and development to get us into that top half of the developed world. We need to support a culture of education and this starts in our schools and in our tertiary institutions. We have to make sure those students studying at universities and polytechs are getting the courses and that we are making it affordable so that they can be studying and preparing for the jobs that have not even been created yet. We need to get the settings right for the internet economy. We need to make sure we have got the right infrastructure such as an internet cable to make sure the ultra-fast broadband and the Rural Broadband Initiative are simply ultra-fast intranets. We need to make sure our teachers are being taught how to teach their kids digital skills. We need to support start-ups like the games sector. We need some thought leadership when it comes to areas like a chief technology officer as argued by Rod Drury . The Green Party’s vision is a smarter higher wage more productive economy. If we keep spending less than half the developed world we are not going to get there under National. Kia ora.[Continuation line: Sue Moroney]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - SUE MORONEY (Labour)SUE MORONEY (Labour): It is great to get an opportunity to focus on the labour market estimates part of this debate. In particular I want to talk about—because I do not think the National Government will want to talk about it—the shambles that the ACC motor vehicle levy system has been which it introduced through this estimates procedure. It has been like watching a slow-motion car wreck because every other day there is a new problem that arises from what should have been a good-news story for the Government.[Continuation line: It should have been a good-news story from the Government]SUE MORONEYIt should have been a good-news story from the Government but Government members will not even ask themselves patsy questions about it at question time because it has turned out to be such a shambles for them. Why has it been a shambles? It has been a shambles because the Minister has made a fundamental error in changing the model. If the Minister had not done that what she told the select committee was that every person with a motor vehicle that was petrol-driven would have got their ACC levies for their motor vehicle registration reduced to $104 a year. So everyone would have got that reduction. If it had been a non-petrol vehicle everyone would have got a reduction to $186 per annum. But what happened instead? Actually more than a million people have ended up paying more than they needed to in ACC levies for their motor vehicle registration because of a decision that that Minister made—a decision to go to a model that not only is unfair and confusing but it turns out it has been expensive to administer and has made plenty of mistakes. This is a system that just came into being on 1 July this year and already that Minister has had to backtrack and reclassify the vehicle registrations and the levies for 24 models and counting. I say “and counting” because in the first week alone the Minister had to backtrack on 18 classifications—18 models. That is not just 18 individual vehicles. That is 18 models of cars that had to be reclassified. A couple of days later that number had increased to 22 models and as of today it is sitting at 24 models that have had to be reclassified. That is utter chaos. But the worst thing about this is that it is simply a shift of the costs. It shifts the costs for motor vehicle registration from those who have the resources to buy the latest greatest car and on to those who do not have the income resources to buy the latest flashest motor vehicle. How does it do that? Well it actually gives $41 million in savings to people at the top who can afford the better cars and it shifts $41 million on to those who can least afford it. Who are those people? They are the young—our children who are buying their first car. It is the elderly—people on fixed incomes who as they come up to their retirement ages buy the car that will last them through their retirement. They are the people who are going to be pinged by this and are paying more than what they should—not because ACC made a mistake not because the ACC system is in trouble but because that Minister made a fundamental mistake. She brought the argument that somehow if people could save a few dollars every year on their motor vehicle registration suddenly that was going to give them the thousands of dollars that they would need to upgrade their car to the latest greatest model. Well Minister that is just a folly and everyone in New Zealand knows it. So we have ended up in the situation where this should have been a good-news story for all New Zealanders and for the Government. It should have been that everyone got a reduction in their levy. For most of us it would be $104 that the levy would have been reduced to. But instead we have got this complete chaos going on with a system that is fundamentally flawed. I can guarantee the Committee that this is not the end of this story. Every day that goes by more and more vehicles are going to be reassessed. And then there is the sleight of hand—[Continuation line: C MITCHELL]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First)CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): Goodness me I think I might be the final speaker in this economic development and infrastructure estimates debate. There does not seem to be anybody else jumping up for this particular—Hon David Cunliffe: No no.CLAYTON MITCHELL: Oh you have got a call to go. I might not be the last one. After the delivery that we got from the honourable member Simon Bridges I have to say that I had a little bit of sick in my mouth and felt a bit woozy from all the propaganda that I was hearing from that side of the Chamber. To be fair I think Mr Bridges would make a better job of writing children’s novels where there are candyfloss clouds lollypops for trees and of course the rest of the country is made of Cadbury’s chocolate. I would like to spend my time talking about two particular parts in this debate on economic development and infrastructure and that is about transportation. I am not going to spend a lot of time on that. There are two parts to that. There is the rail and the regional roading part. A lot of time has been taken up on that by a number of members in the Chamber because having good roading infrastructure and rail infrastructure is very very important for New Zealand. What I am going to spend a bit more time on is talking about the labour market. I think it is really important because we are right in the final stages of putting together our new Health and Safety Reform Bill. There has been a lot of passion with people delivering their messages. Some people have serious concerns and there are a lot of people on tenterhooks waiting to see the outcome of what the select committee has got through. Of course we were very close to delivering that last month and then it was pulled off the table by Cabinet and now we have got it back for the final stages. I think more important there are a couple of reports that have been written. In fact one of them I will just touch on now. It is from the Press on 19 June. The headline is “Dangers of mines and quarries were forgotten” and the article talks about mines and quarries. It states: “In the early to mid-1990s the regulations for these industries were enforced by the Mining Inspection Group or MIG. This was a group of around 10 to 12 mines and quarry inspectors who visited the sites regularly and enforced regulatory safety standards.” I think that is the key here. We all realise that there needs to be some changes with our health and safety reforms. However to throw the baby out with the bathwater as this report said previously is not the right way to go. It is not smart. It is starting from scratch and I do not think we are actually going to be teeing this off to the level that we need to tee it off to to make it absolutely pitch perfect. When we look at the current occupational safety and health legislation there are three sections that really jump out to me as being front and centre and the things that I think really need to be considered for the future well-being of our employers. In respect of the duties of employers to people who are not employees section 15 of the Health and Safety in Employment Act says: “Every employer shall take all practicable steps to ensure that no action or inaction of any employee while at work harms any other person.” That comes up in sections 15 17 and 19 of the current Act. The reason why I am talking about that specifically is that when we listened to Mr English’s Budget debate on 21 May this year he made a very strong point with regard to his comment: “The Government is also investing $32 million over 4 years to increase the number of labour inspectors and strengthen enforcement of employment law.” I have to say I thought it was quite an ambitious comment saying that for the next 4 years the Government is going to spend $32 million because of course I think there will be a big surprise if the Government gets through the next election—if there is not already going to be a snap by-election. What that means is that an increase of $8 million a year is going to be spent which is around about $153000 a week. If you average that out into an hourly rate at $100000 a year that is going to provide for around about 80 enforcement staff full-time on $100000 a year to go and do the job of ensuring that the enforcement of this Act is upheld. Goodness me. If this is the delay in getting the support and the funding I say it is a little bit too late. There has been a lack of costings versus the value of investment into looking after the health and safety of our workers. If this Government had only had the foresight to put in that sort of funding 7 years ago—and let us not take it all and put all the blame on National but Labour as well—if it had that sort of enforcement and those sorts of officers into place we would not have the problem that we have got currently with our health and safety situation.[Continuation line: CURRAN]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South)CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): If you have been listening to this estimates debate tonight you would think that there were parallel universes being described. If you believe this Government then everything is rosy. We have never had it so good. It is like nirvana. Well it is like Government members are living in cloud-cuckoo-land. It is like the Emperor with No Clothes King Canute and Pollyanna with Road Runner running through and living in this parallel universe in cloud-cuckoo-land.[Continuation line: The real story needs to be told and the real story is no]CLARE CURRANThe real story needs to be told and the real story is no fairy tale. There are too many people in this country living in Struggle Street. There are too many people who are doing it really tough. This is a Government that is pretending. It is pretending that there is no housing crisis while people cannot find affordable housing let alone afford to buy. It is trying to sell off State housing while children are getting sick frail people are getting sick and some of them are even dying because their State houses are too cold and damp. It is pretending that there are no problems with our economy while dairy prices are plummeting while our regions are suffering and while small businesses are struggling and just keeping their heads above water. It is pretending—it is not being straight with the country. It is out of touch. There is mismanagement there is waste there is looking after its mates. Corporate welfare has become an everyday phrase in this country whether companies are being bailed out— Skycity Rio Tinto Chorus MediaWorks Saudi sheep farms Oravida—with hand-outs while the everyday Kiwis get overlooked and squeezed. It is a wasteful Government—waste and mismanagement. There is enormous waste in spending—$26 million on a flag referendum while our kids are getting sick and sometimes even dying in our State houses. The real story in our regions is one of neglect. Regional development is built on strong regional infrastructure. We have heard tonight about the mismanagement and the squeeze and neglect that is happening in regional New Zealand in our roading network. In the Clutha district there are 260 bridges and bridge culverts that Clutha District Council is struggling to keep up with in order to maintain its road networks. It does not have the money to spend on repairing those bridges and bridge culverts because there is no money to fix them because there is no money that has been allocated in the Budget to do that. They were not built for 10-tonne milk trucks. They are struggling to even get fire engines over many of those bridges. There is a real problem in regional New Zealand with a lot of our roading and with a lot of our bridges. But the real story is the story of rural broadband which needs to be told. Some of my colleagues in the House tonight have touched on this issue. This is a story of absolute negligence and it is a story that is unfolding. There was $300 million promised in 2010 and a quarter of a million rural households were promised faster internet. Five years later the money has been spent but who has benefited? Well it is not the people in rural New Zealand. It is not the small businesses; it is hardly any households. Vodafone and Chorus have benefited but what about the people? In a study that was done last year in rural New Zealand 70 percent of small businesses and households surveyed said they felt extremely frustrated left behind and like second-class citizens. This is a grave misuse of Government funding—$60 million spent 8500 connections to show for it and millions of dollars being handed to Chorus to upgrade cabinets. There is no accountability on improvement in connections on the copper network or new connections on fibre. Millions of dollars have gone to Vodafone to upgrade—[Continuation line: David Cunliffe]Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn)Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): It is a pleasure to take a quick call on the innovation and economic development part of this estimates debate. The model is not working and the Government is not being straight with New Zealanders. The housing market is not working particularly in Auckland but you would not hear that from the Government. The rural economy is falling in a hole and the Government is neglecting our regions. The numbers speak for themselves. In the last quarter GDP growth came in at only one-quarter of its forecast level less than a quarter of a percent. Business confidence has gone negative for the first time since the global financial crisis recovery. Our dollar is plummeting like a rock just about as fast as business confidence—not because we want the economy to be falling in a hole; not because we want the economy to be failing. What is the Government’s reaction to this serious crisis of confidence? Well it has neglected the regions. New Zealanders are not fooled by spin—glossy publications glossy Minister Joyce. They want real projects. They want work in each region that will create jobs. They want each region’s strength to be built upon. They do not want shop fronts that are empty houses that are empty streets that are empty and polytechnics that are empty. That is not what they want. The Government has rushed out initiatives that Treasury told them were not ready. Two weeks ago Minister Joyce put out a regional investment plan that Treasury said was not ready to be funded and recommended that it be deferred. The Minister overrode that. Why? Because he knows and New Zealanders know that with dairy payouts starting with a three as in $3-something—which is a real possibility—too many farms will go close to the wall or to the wall. To bail themselves out under pressure from their banks they will take whatever cash they can get from whoever is bidding. You can bet your bottom dollar that a lot of those people will be offshore bidders—Brett Hudson: Oh here we go. Give the man a whistle.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: No this is colour-blind and it is real and if the backbench of the Government wants to ignore it they will be in Opposition very shortly. New Zealanders do not want our land sold out from under us. It does not matter whether it is going to Canberra or Cambodia—they do not want that to happen. Meanwhile the system remains unfixed. Callaghan Innovation which the Minister gave a few extra dollars to is still doling out money on automatic grant criteria for its growth grants which has seen them funding potential fraudsters foreign-owned multinationals polluters who have not had environment consents and it even funded the Oracle America’s Cup challenge not Team New Zealand. Can you believe it? What a mess. Even leaders in the sector like the Government’s Chief Science Advisor have panned that Minister’s performance. The Chief Science Advisor says that the system is too reactive and Professor Hendy from Auckland University is saying that the bias is towards the old economy. We need to be building a new economy one where we have a reasonably high level of investment in research and development; where we diversify our economy where we strengthen the smart stuff not just the farm stuff that comes raw; where we add value to our primary commodities; where we build on our primary sector just like Denmark does; and where we strengthen our manufacturing and services alongside primary agriculture so that we are adding value information and smarts; and where we are known worldwide as the highest quality most environmentally sustainable most traceable producer of fine food products anywhere in the world so that every housewife in Britain India or America who wants to be buy safe sound food for their kids knows that when you buy from New Zealand you buy quality. But we are not there because the Government is racing to the bottom. The Government does not get it. It thinks that just by reinforcing the old economy and being nice to the foreign-owned banks it will all come right. Well it is not Mr Joyce coming right. It is falling in a hole and you have only got to go around the regions to have everybody tell you that—Economic Development and Infrastructure SectorSpeech - Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn)The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Order! Otherwise that becomes another call.[PV on Vote Business Science and Innovation Vote Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Vote Labour Market and Vote Transport—Ayes 63 Noes 56]Votes agreed to.[Continuation line: Education Sector]Education SectorSpeech - Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment)Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment): It is great to have the opportunity to follow the select committee chair and talk about this as he says very very important part of the Government’s work which is growing the skills of young New Zealanders in particular for the 21st century economy. I am going to focus my comments on the tertiary education system where the Government has been delivering very very good results in terms of increased numbers full-time students increased levels of study at the higher levels and increased numbers of graduates over the last 5 years on—Hon David Cunliffe: What planet is the Minister on? Numbers are dropping.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This Government has delivered far more while maintaining its investment in tertiary education. The member opposite is now making the point that numbers are starting to drop which is of course correct. As the economy recovers there are fewer people in full-time study. But this Government has taken the decision to invest any money saved back into the system in areas such as engineering science and so on areas where we need further investment to ensure we deliver the best possible results for our students. The whole sector is working very hard on the tertiary education strategy which runs from last year through until 2019. That has half a dozen themes. I thought I would just cover them very briefly because they are important. The first one is delivering skills for industry. We have heard a lot of talk in this Chamber tonight about the importance of diversifying our economy which is absolutely correct and it is exactly what this Government is doing. In order to do so we need more people with skills in engineering information and communications technology in the physical sciences the agricultural sciences and so on. That is exactly what we are delivering with the increased investment in tuition subsidies in those areas. We have also done a major reorganisation of the industry training system which has streamlined and increased the efficiency of that system and is now delivering many more trades and people who are actually achieving qualifications rather than just being on the list that the previous Government used to have. Those people are doing particularly well. The second priority is getting at-risk young people into a career. That is hugely important. We have a number of initiatives in that space—obviously the Youth Guarantee and trades academy. This Government has put more into this space than any other. It is another of the areas where we inherited a situation where there had been a lot of hand wringing but not a lot of action and now there is very very significant action in this area. We also have action in the Māori and Pasifika Trades Training Initiative which was the latest initiative. It also coincides with priority three which is boosting the achievement of Māori and Pasifika. The Māori and Pasifika Trades Training Initiative is an innovative concept that in some ways is back to the future in that it picks up the young Māori cadetships that we had many many years ago. It supplies whanau support. In the case of Pasifika it supplies community and Pasifika church support. That is getting a whole lot of younger people in particular into jobs into industry training and apprenticeship training. The fourth priority is improving adult literacy and numeracy through the intensive literacy and numeracy fundings and the workplace literacy and numeracy. We are going through a process at the moment of assessing how those are going. We have increased the amount in those areas. We have put a big emphasis on mainstreaming if you like the literacy and numeracy at the lower levels of study. That has meant many many thousands of people have been properly assessed for literacy and numeracy training. That work is ongoing in terms of providing second-chance learners the opportunity for better skills of literacy and numeracy while they are in the workplace. The fifth priority is strengthening research-based institutions. I understand there have been some comments about the Performance-based Research Fund tonight. That has been hugely important in investing and increasing science funding. This Government has taken that from $250 million a year up to $300 million a year. The centres of research excellence have gone from I think six to 10. So we are putting in some big investments things like the Marsden Fund which is another portfolio but nevertheless those are big investments. Our total science spend has gone from around $780 million a year to $1.5 billion. You will not here that from the Opposition but actually that is what is going on.Andrew Bayly: How much was that?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Seven hundred and eighty million-odd dollars; then we came up to about $1.5 billion in the 2015-16 year. So those investments are very important.[Continuation line: Jenny Salesa]Education SectorSpeech - JENNY SALESA (Labour—Manukau East)JENNY SALESA (Labour—Manukau East): This Government and its Budget may be clever politics but it has no plans to address our long-term challenges facing New Zealand. It promised a Budget surplus and on Budget day it did not deliver on that promise. We believe that every New Zealander should be entitled to access quality public education of the highest standard throughout their entire lives. Quality education ensures that every Kiwi regardless of who they are where they come from and whether or not they are rich or poor can achieve their full potential to contribute to our society and our economy. This Government claims as we just heard from the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment that changes to tertiary education are providing results. It is great for people to get qualifications and we expect to see constant changes and improvements over the years in this particular area but what we are also seeing is universities and polytechnics being required to do so much more with much less money. National has been underfunding the tertiary education sector for far too long and the cracks are beginning to show. On Budget day it was announced—as we heard the chair of the Education and Science Committee address before—that there is $130 million worth of operating funding over the next 4 years for tertiary education but when the tertiary education Minister was questioned about this when he came to the select committee he conceded that only $7 million of this funding was actually new money. The rest of the balance was made up of reallocations and it is not new funding at all. That is not being straight up with New Zealanders. New Zealand now ranks close to the bottom of the OECD on tertiary education spending per student. We are behind Australia behind Canada Denmark Finland and France and behind Germany and a few other countries. We are well below the OECD average. Under this Government the total spending on tertiary education has fallen from $3.194 billion in 2009 to $3 billion in 2015. We need further investment in tertiary education not radical restructuring to align our universities and our polytechnics with the Government’s corporate view of the world in which it interferes with academic freedom democracy and independence. Under this Government we have around 70000 young New Zealanders who are not in employment education or training—or the “neet” numbers. This number is just way too high. It is not acceptable. Under this Government 40 percent of our total unemployed are young people. Again it is just unacceptable. This is the highest percentage of any youth population whatsoever in the OECD countries. I do not know about you but I think that this statistic is really quite shameful for a country like New Zealand. We have one of the best educational systems in the world and yet we have 40 percent of our total unemployed being young people. This surely is something that must be addressed. This Government is focused on the 1600 or so 16 to 17-year-olds but I think that this focus is wrong. The focus should instead be on the 70000 or so young people who are currently not in employment education or training. The safety of our children should be paramount and it should be the main objective when the Government considers funding for school buses not cutting costs. So buried in the details of this year’s Budget is $90 million worth of funding cuts for school transport. We remember the horror ride for Green Bay students one afternoon when they had a relief driver. The safety of our children when riding in school buses should definitely not be one of those things that the Government looks at in terms of cost-cutting. I do not know of any parent—not one—who would want their children to experience or to go through a similar traumatic experience like the one that these Green Bay students went through because of this Government’s cost-cutting measures.[Continuation line: Tracey Martin]Education SectorSpeech - TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First)TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Mr Chair. It was incredibly interesting earlier today at question time to see Anne Tolley stand and talk about the 50th million or whatever—the 5 millionth or whatever it was—breakfast that the National Government is now taking credit for—Andrew Bayly: 9 million over 5 years.TRACEY MARTIN: Whatever it is she was taking 100 percent credit for it but that same Minister—I went to a breakfast meeting of principals when national standards was introduced and the Minister of Education . Decile 1 and decile 2 principals said: “Minister we cannot educate these children until they are fed and until they are clothed.” and that Minister said: “Don’t give me your excuses—don’t give me your excuses.” and yet today the same Minister now in a different portfolio is now taking credit for the 5 millionth breakfast or whatever it is and lauding the fact that those children—no wait Mr Smith; wait Mr Smith—are now having better academic outcomes. Unbelievable to see that today—unbelievable. The other thing that was incredibly interesting just then was Mr Joyce standing up and saying: “In this Budget in education funding in these appropriations we have got a focus for students on 21st century education.” Not in Northland apparently according to Hekia Parata—not in Northland. There is no digital aspiration there. There are no lawyers there are no accountants there is no higher education and there is no greater reach for these students. Hekia Parata said today that the schools in Northland need to be teaching those students how they can be forestry workers and fisheries operators and how to work in tourism and marine manufacturing because they need to have an education that equips them only to go and be an employee in their local area for the low-paid wages that those areas have. Where is the aspiration supposedly out of this great 21st century economic drive towards education? Not in Northland apparently—not for these students. No no no no. Apparently in Northland apart from the fact that you can travel on roads that nobody is going to fix up at the same time the Government is going to give you just enough education so that you can go and get a job on a fishing boat. There is nothing wrong with getting a job on a fishing boat but where is the aspiration from this Government for Northland? Not in this Budget—not in these appropriations. I will tell you something else that is very interesting. This Government has an underspend—and again that member over there said: “Wait for another month to get a surplus.” What for another month to get a surplus—they certainly will. There is $205 worth of underspend in education from this Government. Why? Because it is desperate to get a surplus. It is desperate to get a surplus and it is going to short-change special needs children across this country—Paul Foster-Bell: That’s not true.TRACEY MARTIN: —special needs children across this country. There is a zero Budget for gifted and talented children Mr Foster-Bell—a zero Budget for gifted and talented children who are special needs in the spectrum of special needs but you can get it if you have got behavioural problems. According to this Government if you have got behavioural problems—if you are gifted but you are naughty—the Ministry of Education will give you some money. It will give you some money. But if you are gifted and need to be extended or need to have programmes like the One Day School or other programmes such as that there is a zero Budget in here and who removed it? Who removed the Budget spend that was there? The National Government.[Continuation line: Who took away Well Above National Standards?]TRACEY MARTINWho took away Well Above National Standards? The National Government. So you see it is very interesting for National Party members to stand up and say that they invest in education. Here is another that they invest in: they talk about the international student body they talk about these new information and communications technology schools and so on and so forth. I went to a private training establishment provider the other day. This Government has capped domestic hospitality and chef students at 300 only inside that organisation but there are 600 international students. It is a growth industry for this country with a skills shortage throughout the world and yet this Government caps domestic students. This Government will not put a budget around domestic students but will allow international students en masse into this country to subsidise the education that they should be providing for New Zealanders. There are 70000 students who are “neets” and there were 70000 international work visas given out in the last year. There are 70000 students who are “neets” and 70000 international students who got work visas in the last year from this Government. This Government does not invest in its own people this Government does not invest in its education and this Government has no aspiration for these young people unless you are in an urban area and then can you get not only some sort of spend you can get a road to it.[Continuation line: Nikki Kaye]Education SectorSpeech - Hon NIKKI KAYE (Associate Minister of Education)Hon NIKKI KAYE (Associate Minister of Education): I am very pleased to speak. That speech from Tracey Martin was a load of rubbish. I normally rate that member very highly but the facts are this: under our Government for the last 6 years we have successively increased the education budget—$10.8 billion in the most difficult financial times. Every single year we have increased the education budget. Secondly when it comes to our most vulnerable students whether that is students who have special education difficulties or whether that is those students who have had real issues in terms of numeracy and literacy this Budget is better than ever for them. Let us walk through it. If we look at early childhood education participation particularly around Māori and Pacific young people that is up. That is up by 4 to 5 percent. That is incredibly significant and that is about the future of our country. When we actually look at the facts in terms of participation around early childhood education we are absolutely on track for 98 percent. We have got more money going into early childhood education—I think there is $75 million in this Budget. That is about doing everything we can to make sure that all students in this country are successful. When it comes to special education this Budget is great in terms of special education. We have got $40 million going into ongoing resourcing scheme funding. That means 500 young people who have and need that additional support whether that is teacher aid time whether that is physiotherapy or whether that is speech language therapy we are putting the resource into them. I want to acknowledge the Hon Hekia Parata. I think this is a great Budget in terms of what she has done. She has real vision and she is investing in some of our most vulnerable students. The Budget also includes $24 million for additional class support. That is 1500—that is the first phase of another group of students who need that additional help in terms of our education system. So when that member tells us that somehow we have underfunded education well it is a 26 percent increase in special education. Under our Government there is $500 million for some of our most vulnerable students. When it comes to trade academies there is more money than ever. So when that member says that we are not aspirational for Northland that is a complete load of rubbish. What are we doing in terms of modern learning and education environments for Northland? Well the other day I found out that we are so far ahead of schedule in terms of the roll out of Network for Learning—that is fast uncapped data paid for by the Crown a real passport to the future for these students—that 600000 students are now connected. That is students in Northland. That is a Government that aspirational for those people in Northland. That is real actual resources going to those students in Northland. That is on the back of $700 million of investment in both ultra-fast broadband and uncapped data ensuring that our students are equipped for the future. When it comes to school property over 60 percent of our schools were more than 40 years old we had leaky buildings we had a range of design issues and we had a whole lot relocatables. What have we done? We have invested billions of dollars in terms of upgrading these schools and major redevelopments. I can confirm in this Budget we have got hundreds of millions of dollars as well going into not only new schools but also into ensuring that we can fix some of those really old schools. Today I announced Lepperton School in North Taranaki. We have 14 schools through our major redevelopment programme we have got more coming and this is on the back of hundreds of millions of dollars as well in terms of investing in growth. So in places like Auckland Hamilton and Queenstown this Budget is good because we are actually building those schools and we are putting those classrooms where they need to be and we are doing that ahead of the curve. From my perspective we are investing more than ever in both school property and modern learning environments but we are actually doing so much for vulnerable students. So we are a Government that is not only aspirational and focused on the future for those students but we are absolutely focused on some of our most vulnerable students. That is crystal clear in this Budget through the increase in terms of special education funding through the increase in early childhood participation funding and through a range of other projects from the gateway assessment programme which is about ensuring that 3800 needy children get access to early childhood and schooling services to the Year 9 Plus trial which is $2.2 million to educational champions. We are a Government that has a strong social conscience and is also very focused on the economy. To hear from members opposite that we are not aspirational about students and that we are not investing in them is an absolute load of rubbish. This Government has successively increased the education budget every year since we have been in Government.[Continuation line: Catherine Delahunty]Education SectorSpeech - CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green)CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): Tēnā koe Mr Chair. Kia ora tātou katoa. Great to take a call on education because I do not believe that there is anyone in the Education and Science Committee who is not interested and concerned about aspects of education. Often the public say to us: why do you not all put aside your differences and just work together? But I think listening to the debate tonight there are some underlying themes that make it clear why we do not always agree. One of those is the pedagogical vision of what education is for and I think we have heard very strongly from the Government that it is aspirational in it terms for education and that the purpose of education is to serve the economy. That is not the view of the Green Party. The Green Party believes that education is a whole lot more than serving the economy and that in fact the economy should serve its people. Education is about lifelong learning for all people and it is not about with due respect to the chair of the Education and Science Committee getting them into education earlier for longer. It is actually about acknowledging that education needs to be quality and that the goal of education is equity.[Continuation line: That is a very different pedagogical goal]CATHERINE DELAHUNTYThat is a very different pedagogical goal and that is why we have problems with the Government’s obsession with targets and assessment which is an educational model that is reductionist and unsuccessful in other countries. The current education estimates and the Minister at the select committee were all about targets targets targets. Why is that a problem? It is a problem because early childhood education may be about to reach 96 percent to 98 percent participation but when I asked the chief executive of the ministry about quality he said: “That will come later. We are going to get participation first and then we will find a way to figure out basically how to improve quality.” So what in fact we have got is a huge push including through the Work and Income system to make parents place their children under the age of 5 into early childhood education but quality has not yet been sorted out people. So how comfortable do we feel about making sure that our little children are all getting this brilliant start in life when there is no commitment to quality? Therefore we have got the whole spectrum in early childhood education from the absolutely inspiring and wonderful—often smaller in number high ratio early childhood trained teacher centres plus the kōhanga and playcentre where they have succeeded in holding on to fantastic whānau engagement which is increasingly hard in this economy—and then we have got the opposite which are basically baby barns where people who not have a choice because they have no public transport and no resources are forced to use the baby barn down the road the large franchise the commercial model. So the education sector is torn between a genuine commitment to learning because it enhances our humanity as well as our society as well as our economy and making sure we meet targets. This Government has pushed this right through to national standards and through to National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). So national standards again another one of those measureables which actually does not deal with the unmeasurable which is children because children all learn at different rates—we have this system with NCEA as well where we are claiming going to get to the target of 80 percent achieving level 2 but again questions are being asked by academics whether we have lowered standards in order to meet the target; what the real quality is of what is happening in our secondary schools. So if we are concerned about public quality education it is not enough to spout the numbers and talk the rhetoric. It is absolutely not enough. We actually have to know whether early childhood education is quality because the most important years that we pay lip service to are our small children. We have to know that kids are getting lunch as well as breakfast which is where the Green Party has stood strong on feeding children properly and not saying that if charities and the Government want to have a bit of partnership and have breakfast that is OK they do not need lunch. Well of course if we lifted wages and had a decent economy then the parents could afford it but right now as was shown in the House today in our question on inequality we have a long way to go on that so we still need to feed our children in schools. That is why we need a decent school lunch programme. Honestly there are some inspiring programmes that schools are leading but they are paying for it themselves in many instances. Sometimes teachers are paying for it sometimes communities have stepped up but there is no consistency and there is a real need for a decent State-supported lunch programme that is flexible and school and community led.[Continuation line: Hon David Cunliffe]Education SectorSpeech - Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn)Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): It is a pleasure to take a second brief call in this debate and to focus on education issues where once again we see that we have a Government that is long on promises long on rhetoric and not delivering in the reality. Let us take members opposite at their word. I think all parents care for nothing more than the well-being of their children and I believe members opposite are sincere in their wish to see our children succeed. The question is whether the programme that they are enacting is going to deliver on that promise. Let us first look at the compulsory education sector and then at the tertiary. The Government has been known for two great changes to compulsory education: national standards and charter schools. National standards have been panned around the world. They cause people to teach to the test. They are the exact opposite of what a modern millennial economy demands which is that you can get basic education off the internet but you need to learn to think critically. That is why teaching to the test— one-size-fits-all absolute achievement rather than relative improvement—is a road to pedagogical nowhere. In my electorate where 40 percent of my constituents were not born in New Zealand—and for many many students English is not a first language—having an English-based national standards even if it were objective even if it were specific even if it were moderated objectively which it is not would make no sense at all. The Government is taking education backwards. The second great proposal of this Government is charter schools and charter schools make no sense. More money is given per student by miles but the school does not have to teach the curriculum the teachers do not have to be licensed they are not subject to the Official Information Act and in many cases the contracts the Government has entered into are so brain-dead that the assets are not even secured. For example a Whangarei charter school has $2.5 million in taxpayer funding unaccounted for. Another Auckland charter school was guaranteed funding for 160 places but maxed out at 120 with as far as I am aware no recovery. More and more costs are being passed to parents and too many parents cannot afford them because of the rapidly growing inequalities in our society. If a kid is hungry he or she cannot learn. Let us feed our kids let us give them a decent start and let us have an education system that actually teaches what kids are going to need in this 21st century. Then they go on to tertiary education and here once again the Government is sadly not being straight with New Zealanders. From the Minister’s own lips as recorded in the report of the Education and Science Committee there was no $113 million “further funding” for education. By the Minister’s own admission there was only $7 million and that is gross of an increased tax take from the Inland Revenue Department which actually makes it negative. But even if it was $7 million that is a massive real terms cut to tertiary education.[Continuation line: The tertiary system is underfunded]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFEThe tertiary system is underfunded. It has a micro-managing Minister who lacks the credibility to get the funding and he lacks the plan to deliver it. The institutions in this sector are a mess. This Government removed the strategy and policy function from the Tertiary Education Commission. They now say they just operationalise things. Where has the strategy function gone? It is not found in the Ministry of Education—it is focused on the compulsory sector. In reality what there is sits in the Ministry of—wait for it—Business Innovation and Employment . That is as others have said a reductionist’s view of education and one that is patently not working. For the individual student pathways are not there to the jobs of the future. Why not? Because the funding cuts are biting. The Government has put an arbitrary 7-year limit on student loans—the famous “7 EFTS” policy which means even 40 percent of medical students cannot get funding for their last 1 or 2 years of study. For other recognised long degrees double degrees or doctoral courses—the loans run out before the degree is awarded. Now that might be fine if you are a silver spoon brigade kid but if you are an average kid from an average family our country and you will be the poorer.[Continuation line: Paul Foster-Bell]Education SectorSpeech - PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National)PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): It is a rather intimidating prospect to follow on from that very learned and literate member one of the most distinguished alumnus of Otago University my old university but also Harvard University. Mr Cunliffe is a very literate man. Does he love words? Yes he does. Does he love the sound of his voice saying those words? Absolutely. But we here tonight are talking about Vote Education in this appropriations debate. I think this Government is doing an excellent job in improving the educational standards offered in the New Zealand public system. Mr Cunliffe asked a couple of rhetorical questions in his contribution this evening. He asked and I will concede he gave us the benefit of the doubt in thinking we were motivated from a position of taking the best interests of New Zealand’s learners and children to heart and that is the case I can assure Mr Cunliffe. But he did raise the question as to whether our policies would implement the goals of achieving what we set out to achieve and I think the added investment made in Budget 2015 in the education vote will go a long way towards providing better services and better outcomes for New Zealand learners. Take for instance the $244 million for new classrooms and schools. That is seven new schools four major expansions of existing schools and over 240 new classrooms for New Zealand schools. This will provide modern learning spaces for children in the New Zealand compulsory system. I am particularly proud of the extra $62.9 million that my colleague Minister Nikki Kaye referred to. This is for special education: those children who have the highest needs and are the most vulnerable. This will include services such as additional teacher aide support and the provision of speech and language therapy to those children who need that little bit of extra help to be able to achieve and succeed. I am pleased to see an extra $42.3 million going into school operational grants to help the smooth running of our local schools. The question I guess we could also ask is: what do people in this system actually think of this? Well I want to quote from a message I recently received. It is an email and unlike the Opposition I am not going to name the gentleman but I can assure them that he is not Gene Simmons and he is not John Kerwin who was also referenced by the Opposition this evening. This is a real person a staff member at the New Zealand Post Primary Teachers Association. I do not want to quote it in full because well I am a humble person—he is very complimentary. But he goes on to say: “Minister Parata has been great recently for her support for teachers and I am really pleased to see it is a message that others in the National caucus are taking to heart. You also showed a really good understanding of the educational success programme which as you know the PPTA supports. It is a pity that there is still people mistakenly characterising it as some form of competitive performance pay which has meant that we’ve taken flak from some of our more usual allies.” I presume they are referring to the Labour Party and the Greens. So the post primary teaching profession is in support of our programme which implements our targets of achieving 98 percent of early childhood education enrolment particularly around the 85 percent of 18-year-olds who we want to graduate with NCEA level 2—that is the equivalent of the old sixth form certificate—and also our target eventually of getting 60 percent of all 25 to 34-year-olds accredited with an NCEA level 4 qualification. That is a post compulsory qualification.[continuation line: In the local context here in]PAUL FOSTER-BELLIn the local context here in Wellington we are going to see a new information and communications technology graduate school added to the existing high-quality tertiary institutions we have: Victoria University Massey University WelTec Whitireia Community Polytechnic and other private training establishments such as the Campbell Institute which brings valuable export education dollars into Wellington and provides a useful experience to those international students who come here plus the New Zealand students who are exposed to the opportunities of having colleagues who come from China from Viet Nam from Japan from Europe—in fact from all over the world. This Government is doing a lot in the education sector. There is a lot to be proud of. There is work remaining to do and the feedback that I am getting both in the Wellington Central electorate and around New Zealand as we visit on Education and Science Committee visits is wholly positive about the efforts this Government is making.[PV Vote Education Vote Education Review Office and Vote Tertiary Education—Ayes 63 Noes 56][Continuation line: Environment Sector]Environment SectorSpeech - Scott Simpson (Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee)The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to report progress.Progress reported.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.