Chadwick Steve: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations  and State Enterprises — In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations  and State Enterprises — In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21304] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I am pleased to speak in this State-owned enterprises debate because this is a Government that has incredibly strong leadership. The important issue as we go into the election is that we have financial security and that is what New Zealanders care about. This Government is committed to Crown entities and State-owned enterprises working together with industry and with the private sector to benefit all New Zealanders. I am proud of that. 
Our commitment to State-owned enterprises is not something we are going to flip-flop on or change our minds on. Our State-owned enterprises are working really well and before I talk about health I would like to talk about Mighty River Power. In my own electorate it is working with industry—Norske Skog—to look at cogeneration of geothermal power. But our State-owned enterprises are also involved in social spending. Mighty River Power is involved in a “maintain New Zealand” partnership with the tertiary sector the local college and Norske Skog and it is training maintenance engineers and has young kids doing apprenticeships. I think that is fantastic. Good on it! 
We have looked at the Opposition’s view of these State-owned enterprises. Dr Brash says that minor changes are not quite enough. John Key on the other hand knows that privatisation is a really really toxic issue. But what is more they do not know quite where or what to target. I say they will move into icons like Kiwibank and New Zealand Post. Just watch this spot. I wonder how many electorate MPs in the Opposition have gone out and seen the wonderful initiatives undertaken by New Zealand Post. It is working with communities on such things as New Zealand Book Week for little schoolkids—lovely iconic brands like that. 
I want to move on to which State-owned enterprises National will flick. I am deeply concerned about the health sector. I worked for 9 years under the National Government when it made its cuts. What did it cut? It cut the very things that made the difference to connecting communities together. National said that parenting courses were not part of maternity care any more. It said they were not part of core services so it flicked them out to the private sector to see who picked them up. It is deeply worrying to me when National members talk about tax cuts that come to $1.9 billion. I have to look at health and ask what will go next. Of course there is a very tidy package called the Working for Families package which we really love because it targets— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but this debate is about financial reviews. The member needs to come back to the question. 
STEVE CHADWICK 
: I will get back to the financial reviews although I am talking about health Madam Chair. I heard the Opposition talk about deficits. Under this Government deficits in our district health boards are better than they have ever been. It is all right to go out there and give a promise but do members know what Labour has given to this sector in terms of deficit management? It has given certainty. How did the Minister give financial certainty to the district health boards? She went out with a 3-year funding package. So for the first time for years the district health boards were able to actually get their heads around long-term security of funding. Funding was based on a population-based formula so that it did target areas of deprivation and it did target inequalities in health status. Because of this good funding in health—and it is a substantial increase in funding—we are seeing reduced mortality rates and reduced morbidity. That is important to me. I would hate to see cuts to our funding of services of the kind that the Nats did when in office for those 9 years when they said those things were no longer seen as core funded issues. They cut bits out and just funded what they believed Vote Health should actually support. 
In health I want to talk also about this “exploding public sector” myth. In health let us just see what has gone. The Crown Company Monitoring Advisory Unit has gone and the Health Funding Authority has gone. In health the size of the State spend has reduced from 33.3 percent in 1999 down to 30.1 percent. So the exploding public sector is a myth. Labour members will counter those myths when we go out there in the election campaign because we know that this sector is working well.