Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): There are very few points in New Zealand history when this House has come to consider the days on which we will mark our nationhood. We can point to 1899 when this House made a decision to honour Labour Day as a public holiday. We can point to 1920 when this House decided that Anzac Day was a day befitting of a public holiday to mark out who we are as a people. We can point to 1973 when this House decided that Waitangi Day 6 February was a line and a mark in the sand that we should put as a nation to mark out who we are as a people.I find it deeply saddening that given the opportunity this House cannot lift—on the other side of the House—the debate beyond squabbling over the issues of the day: of the minimum wage increases of the cost of fuel brought on by a war in Ukraine. What we are debating here is about marking out who we are as a people in 21st century New Zealand. I am immensely proud that we as a Government are doing this; we are taking the time to consider what it means to be a New Zealander in the 21st century.By training I am a New Zealand historian and I value that education that I received. At school I learnt about Tudor and Stuart Britain: good knowledge and an education I am pleased I received. But one of the things I am so pleased about is that this Government has taken the moves to ensure that New Zealanders at school will learn their own history. And celebrating Matariki is an important part of acknowledging the unique place in which we live here in Aotearoa located in the Pacific where we pay our respects to the land where we pay our respects to the people and where we pay our respects to our history.It is a time for us to reflect—traditionally Matariki was a time for planting and planning activities—for valuing our past and importantly preparing for our future. I think us given a chance as a Chamber to put into legislation—into the statute book—a day when we cannot only celebrate our past but plan for our future is something that we have a duty as parliamentarians to take the debate up a notch on.What we've had is cries from the National Party to have a more neutral day. They want to have a more neutral name—that Matariki somehow is loaded; it is not neutral. So what we have heard from Simon O'Connor is that we should indeed look to the name of an 18th century French astronomer to name this day after—this would be more fitting for a country at the bottom of the South Pacific celebrating a day rooted in the Polynesian traditions of the stars; this somehow would be more fitting.As a footnote I think it is important to note that not only did Messier also give the name to the star cluster but he also in 1769 published what today would probably be called a hagiography memoir where he was attempting to curry favour with the emperor at the time—Napoleon—when he linked the sighting of the great comet with the birth of the emperor. A neutral name in New Zealand? This is more relevant to us as a nation in 20th century Aotearoa New Zealand? This is where the National Party have taken the debate. They've also said that not only should we name it after 18th century French astronomers or that we should name it according to Greek traditions rather than our own Māori and Polynesian traditions—that somehow that is more relevant for us as a nation here in Aotearoa—but they've also shown just how small-minded they can be.Let's have a look at the facts. This is way more than a holiday and I want to acknowledge the kōrero that my colleague Kelvin Davis had about this. We cannot reduce this to just being about a holiday in the same way that Waitangi Day becoming a holiday on 6 February was not just about a holiday and a day off. It was a stake in the ground of who we are as a people and what we choose to celebrate. We do not begrudge other nations with their national days. I have never heard the National Party begrudge Independence Day in the United States—a day that is important to that nation for reasons within itself. And that is what this is about: days that are important to us as a nation.But I think we all know that New Zealanders could do with another public holiday in winter. We do have a much-needed gap in that midwinter area where it will be important not only for people's wellbeing but also for the economy. I think one of the things where we've heard ACT and we've heard National railing is that the sky is going to fall in from an economic perspective. I ask them to look at some evidence to look at the facts; let's have a look at how we figure within the OECD for public holidays. Well we are in the low to middle range for public holidays with 18 countries having more than us and 12 countries having fewer. So I do not think this makes us an outlier—that we are still only at best in the low to middle of the pack of the countries to which we would compare ourselves in terms of public holidays.We also can see the analysis that accompanies this bill is that actually this could indeed have a net benefit impact on the economy because public holidays are when people go on holiday public holidays are when people tend to go out and public holidays are when people tend to spend money. So let's have a grown-up conversation about this. Let's think about who we are as a people who we are as a nation and not belittle this House and the opportunities that it gets only every few decades to consider matters such as this and nationhood.I've really enjoyed the let's sub it out" game that we've seen from the National Party and ACT on this. So Labour Day according to many members of the National Party is no longer relevant. Obviously the fact that we celebrate working people the fact that we celebrate the eight-hour day the fact that we celebrate those crucial wins—that's not relevant anymore; that is not relevant! We've heard from ACT that maybe we could take New Year's Day or the day after and I thought Paul Goldsmith got dangerously close to literally being the Grinch and suggesting Christmas in his contribution to the House.I do not think that the Opposition parties have given this bill the serious debate that it deserves. It will be a shame and a blot on this House when people come to read the Hansard of the debate around this. When we look at the Hansard around the establishment of Anzac Day I may not agree with everything that was said in those debates but I read those speeches and respect them for the thought that had gone into them. When I read the speeches around the establishment of Waitangi Day or New Zealand Day as it was called—the debates in 1973—again I do not agree with everything that was said in those debates but I do not see people not taking it seriously and not giving it the due regard that it requires. Lifting the debate after whether or not we are going to steal Labour Day and whether or not we would rather name the day after an 18th century astronomer is not befitting of our nation."