Hipkins ChrisCHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): This bill is yet another example of the National Government sticking it to future generations of New Zealanders because while Government members puff their chests out and talk about giving a couple of bucks extra a week to people on low incomes what they do not say is what they are cutting in order to pay for that.For the eighth year in a row they have cut funding from early childhood education in New Zealand. On a per-child basis early childhood education has been cut every year that National has been in Government.National has cut funding for those in tertiary education. Every single Budget that this Government has passed has cut the level of financial support available for tertiary students. It has done something in this year's Budget around the accommodation supplement for tertiary students—the vast bulk of tertiary students will not benefit from that. Not one cent extra will go to most tertiary students who are struggling to pay the rent. The amount of money they get from their allowances and from their loans does not even cover the rent let alone give them money to live off. They cannot eat because this Government has cut the level of financial support they get every single year. They are the ones who are paying for this Budget. They are the people who are missing out because of this Budget which does nothing for them.While the National Government members puff their chests out and ask how we could oppose this my question to them is: why not more? Why not cut tax more? Because it is a question of affordability. This is not affordable. It is the next generation of New Zealanders who is going to end up paying for this. It is the students in schools who are finding that their schools' funding is being cut. The teacher aides are being laid off because the schools cannot afford to pay them anymore because the operations grant was frozen last year. The funding increase this year does not even compensate for what they lost last year let alone catch up at all with the increase in costs in the meantime. It is future generations who are being robbed in order to pay for this.What is it that they are actually getting? What is it that families are actually getting? I think that that is really important so let us talk about that. It is a typical smoke-and-mirrors exercise on the National Government's part. Government members say they are trying to do something for low-income earners but actually we know that the people who are benefiting most are those on the highest incomes.Let us talk about Bill English's tax changes. You get an extra 35 bucks a week if you are in the wealthiest income tax bracket. If you are the lowest-paid New Zealanders you get an extra five bucks a week. Someone on the average wage gets just $11 a week. But ah! Hang on there is a catch to the extra 11 bucks a week they get because the Government then takes away the minimum wage tax credit that they currently get—the independent earner tax credit—which was 10 bucks. Suddenly they are down to $1. We call it the One Dollar Bill Budget". Remember these? This is what a $1 bill used to look like. Funnily enough $1 bills were taken out of circulation the first year that Bill English became a member of Parliament and he has not had a new idea since then. He went and got the Treasury lobotomy he came to Parliament and he has not had a new idea since the $1 bill was taken out of circulation. That is the amount of money that people on low incomes minimum-wage earners will get from this Budget: an extra $1 a week.Let us take a single hospitality worker who is on the minimum wage. Once they have had their $11 given with one hand and the $10 taken with the other hand they will get $1 a week from this Government. What is Paula Bennet's argument? Paula Bennett's argument about that is: "Oh they should work for tips." So the Government is giving them their first $1 tip. This is the first example of Paula Bennett's tipping culture in New Zealand—a $1-a-week tip from Paula Bennett for the hospitality workers who are earning the minimum wage. That is the best that they can get under the National Government. If they cannot make ends meet they can rely on the charity of the customers coming into their establishment. Because they cannot make ends meet Paula Bennett's attitude to low-income earners is: "Well work harder and you'll get tips." Forget about being paid properly you will just get tips from the people there!I will tell you what talk to any hospitality worker in the United States or in the UK where the tipping culture is common and they will say they barely make ends meet. Tipping culture drives down wages. That is the type of culture that this National Government wants to introduce which is why it is giving hospitality workers on the minimum wage an extra buck a week—because it is not willing to back people in low incomes and give them something that would be meaningful.Let us take the Government's Working for Families changes then. The Labour Party introduced Working for Families. We support it but here we go again there is a catch. It lowers the thresholds for Working for Families but then it increases the abatement rates. Give with one hand take with the other hand—that is the typical response of the current National Government.Let us then go back to the tertiary students. Anyone earning less than $14000 a year gets nothing as a consequence of this change. That is 800000 New Zealanders who will get not one cent extra from the Government. In fact for many of those New Zealanders life gets worse. Tertiary students will be disproportionately represented in that 800000 figure because they will be working part-time often in minimum-wage jobs. They will get nothing from the tax changes or the changes to Working for Families but what will they get? They will get increased costs for their tuition they will get increased costs for their accommodation they will have increased costs for their cost of living and this Government does nothing to back them—nothing at all. Those students are instead relying on credit card debt on loans from families and on loans from banks because they cannot get enough money just to live on. They are the ones who are bearing the brunt of this year's Budget under a National Government just as the tertiary students of future generations of New Zealanders have borne the brunt every year for the 9 years that National has been in Government.Let us talk more about Working for Families for just a moment. Let us rewind the clock back to 2011 when the National Government cut $500 million out of Working for Families in one of its earliest Budgets. When those members say that they want to give low-income families a bit of a break—that was not their attitude in 2011 when they went and cut $500 million out of Working for Families. This is a Government that simply thinks there is an election around the corner so it better appear to do something for low-income families when actually it is not. Those low-income families—Jono Naylor: Interest-free student loans.CHRIS HIPKINS: Oh interest-free student loans—very proud of interest-free student loans introduced by a Labour Government that actually cared about tertiary students that actually cared about future generations of New Zealanders and that was actually embarrassed that future generations of New Zealanders were leaving their education with the highest levels of debt. They were unable to buy a house they were putting off decisions about having families because of the level of debt they were in. We wanted to do something about that and instead this Government has made their plight worse.The Labour Government made it better. The National Government has quite proudly made it worse. That generation of New Zealanders is unlikely to ever be able to afford to buy a house under the National Government. They will leave with record levels of debt—higher levels of debt than any other generation—because National has allowed the fees to go up their cost of living to go up and it has done nothing absolutely nothing to support them in their studies. That is because National does not actually care about education.Let us just presume that everything National says is correct—which of course we know it is not—and that families are going to get some extra money in their back pocket. The Government will then take that away again. Take families with kids in early childhood education—early childhood education services have had their funding cut every year that National has been in Government. Where do the centres make up the shortfall? They ask parents to pay for more. What about schools? They have had their funding frozen or going backwards for the last few years. Where do schools make up that money? Parents end up paying more. What about the tertiary students? They have had their support cut or reduced or frozen every year National has been in Government. What happens there? They end up having to make up the shortfall.Give with one hand and take more with the other—that is the approach of the current National Government. New Zealanders will not end up better from these changes. In fact the people who most need additional support are the ones who are going to end up worse off who are going to end up paying more. It is the future generations in particular who are being done over by this Government because it is interested only in the next 4 months not the next 4 years or the next 40 years. It is interested in getting through to September and trying to win an election. It is not interested in what happens after that.All the Government members care about is preserving their backsides in ministerial limousines rather than actually delivering for New Zealanders. Chris Bishop would have loved to get his backside into a ministerial limousine but he has got the talent squad of people like David Bennett and Jacqui Dean ahead of him in the line so he is unlikely to ever make it around the Cabinet table under the current National Government.This legislation is another example of the National Government sticking it to future generations of New Zealanders. I have got no hesitation in opposing it."