Jones ShaneHon SHANE JONES (Associate Minister of Finance): As the first-born son of the provinces it falls to me to inject some vitality some energy into what has been a host of lacklustre contributions from the other side of the House.Now the speaker that has just finished his speech Paul Goldsmith—gold" may be in his name but his feet are made of clay. The delivery the predictable criticisms they show a flaw and that flaw is widespread on the other side of the House. That is because they are caught by the green-eyed monster. Now what is the green-eyed monster? The green-eyed monster is someone who is possessed or in thraldom to jealousy. Underlying the views of the other side of the House is a deep sadness because jealousy leads to resentment and it's only a short period of time before the back-biting the nastiness and the spirit of resentment will turn upon themselves. That is the story of the green-eyed monster unlike on this side where it is sunrise politics.Now let me just go through where the sun rises. The sun rises first upon the provinces of the Tai Rāwhiti the East. What are we doing in that particular province after nine long years of continual degradation of water erosion of soil neglect of roads and forgotten people? The modest Matua Shane Jones and his able assistants have arrived with the pūtea.Now the pūtea is going to be married to the ideas the desires and the energy that has been neglected and stuck in "Strugglers' Gully" throughout provincial New Zealand. That pūtea has grown from $11 million to $1 billion—$11 million to $1 billion. Now the reality is that no one unless they came with the level of creativity vision and spontaneity—a spirit of purpose—as reflected by the coalition Government would be willing to face up to that challenge and put on the table over a three-year period that extraordinary amount of pūtea. Now why are we doing it? We are doing it because this is a transformational Government.Let's just go through a couple of simple points as to where the powers of our transformer-like approach to politics will actually be visited. Number one we're going to tidy up biosecurity. Now I have to talk about biosecurity because over the last nine years not only did the kiwifruit industry suffer through Psa; we had the stink bug—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Which arrived during the last Labour administration.Hon SHANE JONES: Ah! Green eyes he may not have but a monster he is—that be the member from Nelson. The stink bug Psa M. bovis myrtle rust velvetleaf kauri dieback—now you've got to ask yourself what was the Government doing if it could not consistently fund or lead remedies to biosecurity?What more profound purpose is there for a Government that's meant to be a friend of the provinces? It's meant to be a friend of the countryside. Hundreds of millions of dollars lost in terms of wealth in terms of cost and it comes to this side of the House now to pick up the pieces undoubtedly as the treasurer has stated at significant cost.We're going to do that not only to advance the interests of the stakeholders in the provinces but I would say one thing: that whoever the person is who thought it was a good idea to bring M. bovis into the country I hope the cops get him. I hope the police undertake a robust investigation bring a prosecution and send that person to jail. If any farmer is out there and you know the name of that person please let us know because there's one place we can name and shame and that's in this House. Those individuals have brought an enormous amount of pain and anguish not only to an industry but in cost to society.That's partly why I'm a doubting Thomas often about the quality of agricultural leadership in New Zealand. They claim they have a God-given social licence to continue with agriculture and related businesses. I was born and bred on a farm but if these problems are traceable back to delinquent behaviour from within their own sector then I'm all for ramming responsibility home in that regard.But let me continue. When my colleague has been talking about housing we're going to actually tackle the problems that Bill English gave up on. There's one thing that Bill English said—and I kind of agreed with—which was the town and country planners had assumed a greater level of power than certain Cabinet Ministers. I presume he was talking about earlier housing Ministers—that be the former member for Whangarei the current member for Nelson—where they themselves gave in surrendered and put up the white flag.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Never—never.Hon SHANE JONES: OK they never gave in. They were promising to build 7600 houses in the Tāmaki regeneration—7600 in Tāmaki regeneration in Panmure and Glenn Innes—and they built 280 houses. Divide 280 houses by 7600—that gives you a reflection of how hopeless their stewardship was. But there were some very good points that we learnt for those of us who are opposed to that development. Did they actually change the law? Did they simplify the process? Did they de-constipate the statutory process to enable land to be opened up and used? No they didn't. They already owned the land. They transferred the land from Housing New Zealand into the Tāmaki regeneration authority and created less than 3 percent of their houses—an absolute failure.Now not only did they not make progress in that regard—and our colleague will—did they make progress on the question of amassing capital for expanding housing? No. They came up with a type of alchemy believing you could create special purpose vehicles and amass capital and hoodwink the Audit Office and circumvent the international rules of accountancy. No they never made any progress. Did they put serious dough on the table as the treasurer has for housing? Absolutely not—absolutely not. What they did was they went through a type—as I've already said—of very constipated calculus which did not lead to any major development of houses.The third thing is enterprise. Did they do anything to smash the monopoly behaviour of those who sell building products? I'll say one thing for Nick Smith: he promised to do it but he never ever delivered. He's had an entire career and he's an epitome of someone on that side of the House. They have squandered nine years to take on the big end of town. We now know that the big end of town is still very robust.So on the land question in the regulations: failure. On the question of capital for developing better outcomes for housing: failure. On the question of changing the character and the composition of the enterprise part of the building industry: failure.So did they do anything on the question of the people—labour? Did they actually increase substantially the number of young men and women who have valuable skills? No they surrendered to the tide of cheap immigration. They surrendered to the tide of cheap immigration so we're left on this side of the House yes relying on vital and rare skills to be brought into the country but our labour our human capital ambitions—as articulated by the treasurer in the Budget it's going to invest in garden-variety young Kiwis and they'll get two years via the first instalment of post - secondary tertiary education for free.Was there anything New Zealand on that part of the House that emulates what we've done now? I tell you what they were going to do. What they were going to do was take $8.5 billion and hand it out as a tax cut because they don't believe in putting back into the ability of the State to deliver on public-good functions. That is one thing they don't believe in. They believe—Hon Dr Nick Smith: People should keep their hard-worked money.Hon SHANE JONES: That's exactly right. They believe that people should—especially the big end of town—enjoy inordinately expensive tax cuts on the belief that somehow it will trickle down into the very weary bleak end of town.New Zealanders had an opportunity to make them the Government. They refused to make them the Government. They made this side of the House the Government. Why? Because they don't believe the mantra of that side of the House which is very hostile to the provision of essential services social goods and public goods. That is what this Government stands for which is why we're in power."