Cunliffe David: Reinstatement of BusinessText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Reinstatement of Business[Sitting date: 09 December 2008. Volume:651;Page:73. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): This motion is important because it proposes to carry over a wide range of bills that were before the House some of which are extremely important. The Opposition would like clarification from the Government on several of them that appear to have been impinged upon by matters announced in the Speech from the Throne.One bill—and I will relate it to another part of the motion on the Order Paper—is the Climate Change (Transport Funding) Bill. We seek clarification as to whether that bill will proceed given the proposal to set up a separate select committee to revisit I understand—contrary to the motion that appears on the Order Paper—the science of climate change in order to establish whether it is really happening. Commentators around the world will be waiting with bated breath to hear the conclusions that Mr Hide and others come to about whether the planet is actually warming. But pending that outcome will that bill proceed? It is a very important question.The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Amendment Bill is a bill integrally related to the proposal of the previous Government along with our colleagues from the Green Party to invest a billion dollars in improving the energy efficiency of our homes. Very interestingly the Business Council for Sustainable Development analysed that idea and said there was about a 4:1 return on that investment. If I recall correctly around $4.3 billion of return could be accounted for from the $1 billion of investment in improving the thermal dynamics of our homes. So will that bill proceed?The Immigration Bill Mr Speaker is one that I know you have supported in your past roles and know well and as you know it is very important legislation that commands bipartisan support and has been in gestation for some while. We hope that that bill will proceed apace.Of some interest to me in my former role was the Public Health Bill. It is landmark legislation a once-in-30-years rewrite and it has been the subject of extensive consultation. It really is important that the new Government comes clean here. There was much debate on the non-communicable diseases provisions and the ability over time and subject to due process to set standards for non-communicable diseases and in particular to target the obesity epidemic which is rife in our communities. What is thenew Government going to do with that bill? Will it carry it over? Is it going to amend it? What price has been paid for the support of the fast-food and big-sugar industries?Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Gerry will know about that.Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: I am sure Gerry will know about that.There is the Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill. When National was in Opposition it was responsible for one of the greatest double-crosses in my time in Parliament. Having at one point indicated that it would support a trans-Tasman approach to the regulation of therapeutic goods it finally said that it would not. So we have a bill in the motion on the Order Paper whose future needs clarifying. The existing legislative base is some 30 years old and is in dire need of an update. If that bill is not to proceed what then will happen?There is the Regulatory Improvement Bill. This really gives a very clear picture to the public of the very busy agenda that was being run by the former Government. It was a surprise to some to hear in the Speech from the Throne that regulatory improvement or cutting unnecessary red tape is somehow a new idea that just arose in a road to Damascus sort of way. I acknowledge the work of the member for Epsom in co-sponsoring and contributing to that bill. It was worked out across this House and contains many provisions that all members would agree to. There are times when we need strong regulations but there is no point in having regulation for its own sake and unnecessary red tape would be opposed by members across the House. If this bill is to proceed what then was the content of the Speech from the Throne on this issue about?The Minimum Wage and Remuneration Amendment Bill will be of interest to working New Zealanders. In the previous decade of a National-led Government the minimum wage was raised by some 70c. That was about 7c per annum. It was an insult to working New Zealanders and far less than the rate of inflation. Will the Government carry over this latest increase to the minimum wage? One hopes that it will because we know that even on $12.75 an hour many New Zealanders are struggling. Will Government members continue the record of the current Opposition in continuing to increase minimum wages by a substantial margin year on year? These are important questions to which New Zealanders deserve answers.I could go on but I will not in view of the time. I think this small sample of the bills that are in the motion on the Order Paper is sufficient—[Interruption]—well it will be rather a long conclusion then—to show New Zealanders that life did not start on 8 November and that good ideas in Government did not just come down as manna from heaven albeit they have been put forward this morning by our highly esteemed Governor-General. Much good work was going on which brings us to the point that the platform that the current Government inherited from the outgoing Government was one of the soundest in the Western World. I particularly wish to acknowledge the outgoing Minister of Finance the Hon Dr Michael Cullen who left New Zealand with roughly half the gross debt per GDP that we had inherited from the previous Government—from 35 percent down to 17 percent. Of course that will come up after the dinner break when we consider the scurrilous taxation bill. What exactly are the projections for that debt going forward? Will they go all the way back to 35 percent where they were the last time we hauled those members’ collective butts out of the mire? That is what New Zealanders want to know. Will those members turbocharge debt levels? Will it be mana-enhancing for New Zealanders to be so far in the shtook? That is what we want to know ladies and gentlemen.What will happen to this minimum wage bill what will happen to this taxation bill and how can the new Government in the face of this comprehensive panoply of work create the impression that somehow all things begin anew that somehow all good things came along on the campaign trail like some road to Damascus experience? What didthose members promise New Zealanders? They promised New Zealanders that every good thing in the motion on the Order Paper will continue; that everything from the previous Government that they want will remain in place just with a new face hopping from cloud to cloud as I believe some people described it. Well it will not take long for New Zealanders to realise that that hope is a faint one. It will not take long for the sheep’s clothing to slip from the wolf—I would say about 5 minutes after the dinner break. It will not take long before we get the first hints of the true agenda. Was it not interesting that the Speech from the Throne did not mention the 90-day sacking bill?Hon Darren Hughes: Why was that?Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE: Why was that bill not front and centre? Why was the issue of employment relations not on the list? I am sure that Rodney Hide proposed it. Why did it get dropped from the Speech from the Throne? I ask why it is not on the 100-day agenda but somehow it has occupied the first day of business in this House. Is it a case of favours to be repaid? Is it constituencies to be recognised? Is it a forewarning of things to come from this Government?Ladies and gentlemen I commend the motion on the Order Paper to public attention for two reasons. It shows the solid programme of work that this incoming Government has inherited. It shows the strong state of the economy which has been able to fund the minimum wage increase the business tax reductions and the investment in home rebuilding and insulation—all of those good things.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.