Carter David: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Carter David: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:660;Page:8764] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 Listening to that contribution from my colleague Jo Goodhew and then hearing the interjections from the other side made me realise that 16 months on from the last general election that Opposition still has not woken up to the fact of why it lost so decisively at the election of 2008. Labour voters left in droves and decided that the then Labour Government did not have a strategy to deliver for New Zealanders. They were fed up with the Helen Clark proposals of recklessly spending their hard-earned taxpayer money in a benign attempt to buy votes simply to stay in power. Yesterday’s statement was all about the National Government led by our Prime Minister John Key putting a very firm stake in the ground as to what this National Government will be branded for. This National Government will be branded for a genuine effort to engender economic growth and prosperity for all New Zealanders. So I suggest that New Zealanders get hold of the full statement of John Key—the 9500 words—and read it carefully. [ 
Interruption 
] That member calls out “job creation”; well job creation was throughout the statement with the amount of money that we are spending on infrastructure and the progress we will make with irrigation. All of that will deliver prosperity and jobs. It seems to me when we talk to New Zealanders that the only people who have not woken up to that are the Labour Opposition members. 
Last night when I left this place I was walking home and got talking to a guy who said to me: “I didn’t vote National at the last election.” I said that that was his choice. He then immediately said: “But I wish I had.” He sees that this Government is intent on trying to do something for that sort of person who I suspect was very much a blue-collar worker and the sort of voter who traditionally would never have considered voting for any other party. But after yesterday’s statement by the Prime Minister we have got him and locked him in as a National voter and that is what the Labour Opposition has to wake up to. 
The economic plan that the National Government laid out yesterday is ambitious. It has to be ambitious if we are going to encourage our young New Zealanders both to return from overseas and then to stay in New Zealand. They left in droves during the last decade and we cannot blame them. They were driven out by policies of high taxation and reckless spending which did not deliver prosperity. To the day I die I will never forget the images of Michael Cullen on the pre-election fiscal update release gloating that he had left 10 years of deficit for whoever was to be the incoming Government. He achieved that through a period of international buoyancy. Then we came into Government and struck the worst economic conditions that we have seen since the 1930s. We spent last year fulfilling and delivering our election promises and no New Zealander can say that we did not do that. This year we outlined a strategy to deliver real growth. 
I will concentrate on the part that I was significantly involved in and that is the irrigation development that will occur in this country. I will read two paragraphs from John Key’s statement. He said: “The Government will also take action this year to remove particular regulatory roadblocks to water storage and irrigation in Canterbury. This will be in addition to the work already being carried out by the National Infrastructure Unit and the Land and Water Forum on progressing water storage infrastructure throughout the country.” The Prime Minister went on to say: “Overall the Government is committed to ensuring that water storage and irrigation projects which meet environmental standards and which are good economic propositions can happen in a decent time.” 
That is a far cry from what was done by the previous Labour Government. It is all very well for buddy MP Ruth Dyson to come in 2010 to say she supports irrigation in Canterbury. Where was she through the 9 years that she was in a Cabinet with a chance to do something? She was silent as was Darren Hughes. What did he do to develop the Canterbury water strategy? He did absolutely nothing. 
We often hear the comment that Australia is the lucky country. We have all heard that. Well New Zealand is the lucky country. We have the minerals. We had just previously never decided to use them and that will change under a National Government. But more important we have one attribute that Australia will not have and will never have and its precarious situation will get worse and that is water. At the moment in my home province of Canterbury 96 percent of that water goes down those major rivers and into the sea. We can harvest that water. We can utilise it and deliver substantial profitability productivity and buoyancy to the economy not only of Canterbury but also to the whole of New Zealand. We have identified 500000 hectares currently irrigated in New Zealand. Much of that irrigation is actually unreliable at the moment yet we also have identified potentially a further $1.9 million worth of hectares that could be irrigated. 
I think it is a crying shame that our Government had not done this many many years ago because the opportunities are there. So we are determined to unblock those roadblocks that exist at the moment. We will make sure that we deliver that profitability. In my portfolio area of agriculture when I was asked by the Prime Minister where could we quickly get some economic gains the obvious answer was water. I am pleased that the Prime Minister Cabinet and my caucus colleagues have accepted that challenge and have prepared to move so decisively on it. 
I will just touch on one other issue and that is the global alliance that the National Government delivered to the world at Copenhagen. It was the only success that came out of the Copenhagen conference on climate change last year. This initiative has been recognised throughout the world. It has been praised by everybody. It has been joined by 23 countries with the Americans giving US$90 million and New Zealand giving NZ$45 million to it. I have seen one sole criticism of the global alliance and that came from a little-known Labour backbench MP called Charles Chauvel. Charles Chauvel travelled to Copenhagen and the sum contribution from his trip to Copenhagen was to criticise the New Zealand initiative the global alliance. 
I have been at conferences last year around the world selling the concept. Every time it is spoken of it is spoken of as the New Zealand initiative. New Zealand has recognised this as an opportunity—that with money spent on science we can do something to lessen and mitigate the greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. New Zealand cannot do it alone and the rest of the world will not be able to do it alone but if we get cooperation between the scientists around the world then we can make real progress. I congratulate John Key as Prime Minister on announcing that initiative at Copenhagen and I severely criticise the Labour Opposition and particularly Charles Chauvel as being the only people whom I know of who have managed to find criticism of the initiative. 
Not only did we tidy up a number of issues around economic growth but also we clearly signalled that we are serious about reforming the tax system. There was concern about land tax and capital gains. John Key took the opportunity yesterday to say that those are not part of this National Government agenda. There is a lot of work to be done now on finalising a tax package and I look forward to being involved in that. But I was surprised by Mr Goff’s response immediately after the Prime Minister sat down when he said that he was against GST—because he introduced GST; Mr Goff was a close colleague of Mr Caygill at the time when it was introduced. He then corrected himself and said that he was against increasing GST. Well the last time that GST was increased from 10 percent to 12.5 percent guess who was a Minister in Cabinet? It was none other than Phil Goff. So it is no wonder Mr Goff’s speech yesterday had no credibility whatsoever.