Smith Nick: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 01 March 2016. Volume:711;Page:9219. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): It is always a pleasure to follow David Parker because he is a member who wants to engage in the House and he makes a thoughtful contribution. But I would challenge him to reflect on a time when as many of New Zealand’s core economic statistics—those vital signs that say how well we are doing—have looked as good. I have to say as a member of 25 years that if I look at those core figures of GDP—growth interest rates unemployment—I would challenge members of this House to tell me a time when New Zealand was doing better. Let us go through them: economic growth—Carmel Sepuloni: Under Labour.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The member says: “Under Labour.” Well let us see how well that member is connected to the real world because one of the issues for families is the cost of living—how much it is going up each year. One of the reasons that members opposite got biffed out in 2008 was that the cost of living was going up by 5 percent per year. It is no good getting a wage increase I say to the member opposite of 3 percent if your costs are going up by 5 percent. Do you know what the inflation figures are for the last year? They are 0.1 percent the lowest level in 23 years. That is good news because that means that the costs for families of their power bills their food bills and all those other costs are constrained and are going up by diddly-squat.Then you look at a figure like wage growth—because the real gain we need to make in our community is that wages are going up faster than the cost of living—and wages have gone up by 2.4 percent in the last year. And significantly yesterday the Prime Minister announced that the minimum wage is going up by an additional 50c per hour. That is growth of 3.4 percent and it is not one of those increases of 3.4 percent; it is real because inflation is so low.In an area that is so relevant to housing the interest rates that families are paying that businesses are paying and that farmers are paying are at the lowest level in 50 years. Why does that matter? Well actually if you are a family out there in New Zealand trying to pay the mortgage we now have banks that are offering interest rates at less than 4 percent. I say to members opposite: when was the last time you picked up a newspaper and a bank would offer you an interest rate of less than 4 percent? Why does it matter to the economy? Because if you are a business out there—and I was visiting them in my own electorate last Friday and they were looking at investing an extra $2 million in a processing facility for fruit in my electorate—actually interest rates are the difference between investing in that additional equipment for that export industry or not.Of course I think all members would agree that one of the core economic statistics is the level of unemployment. We know from the last figures coming down from 6 percent down to 5.3 percent that New Zealand has one of the highest labour participation rates—the highest levels of jobs—anywhere in the OECD.We can argue figures and quote them all we like—actually do you know what one of the most important signals is of how well our country is doing? It is the fact that everybody has a choice—a choice to get on a plane and leave this country. I would remind David Parker that if New Zealand was so great in the Labour Government years between 2000 and 2008 why were there 35000 bright talented young New Zealanders who chose to vote with their feet and take their talent elsewhere? What we see in contrast today is a record period of New Zealanders actually coming home. That is putting some pressure on my job as the Minister for Building and Housing but I say I welcome it. I welcome that our country is doing so well that more migrants and more New Zealand citizens are choosing to make New Zealand their home.I also want to reinforce the message that this is a Government that is making real progress on the issues that are of concern around those New Zealanders who are most struggling. I mentioned earlier the issue of the lift in the minimum wage. I remind Parliament that on 1 April there is going to be the first increase in core benefits in 43 years. Why can the members opposite who plead so much who moan and whinge as though they are experts not acknowledge that this Government is providing that significant increase—not just in core benefits but even for those people on low incomes with families and it is giving them additional support? I look at the early childhood education participation figures—the best our country has ever had. I look at the performance of health and the best child immunisation rates that we have ever had and they are part of a picture of a country that is doing well.But the responsibility of a Government is not just to deliver and do well; it is to have a forward programme and that is some of the things that I want to talk about in respect of my own portfolio. I was fascinated at the questions today around the issue of home insulation because as I pointed out in the 9 years of the previous Government an average of 2000 homes were insulated each year. I think we in this Parliament all agree that insulating those older homes that were built before 1978 and did not have insulation is a good thing. But I do have to challenge members opposite: when your record was doing 2000 homes per year it is rather difficult to describe a bill that will require 60000 homes per year to be insulated as somehow mean and inadequate. It is simply not credible.I was also interested in the Greens criticising this Government and saying: “Oh it’s just all ‘greenwash’.” How can you describe the largest area of ocean protection in the world an area twice the size of the land area of New Zealand which this Government is committing to global marine conservation an area of the second-deepest ocean in the world an area where there are over 50 different marine species and over 6 million birds—and the legislation that we will be bringing into this House consequential to the Prime Minister’s announcement at the United Nations in creating that Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary is a part of this Government’s programme that reinforces that we are a blue-green Government. We are a Government that wants to grow the economy but also do the right thing by the environment.The last point I want to make in this debate is that I have never been in a Parliament in which Opposition parties have had so many contradictory positions. You know we started the year—and I remember if we make the equivalent time—on the issue of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). I say to the members opposite that I still do not quite understand their position. I know in my constituency where there is going to be a reduction in tariffs on fish there is going to be a reduction in tariffs on exports of processed forest products where I know there is going to be a reduction in the tariffs on the products that we export like the kiwifruit like the apples like the berryfruit—meeting with those industries they are so encouraged about that in the capacity for them to be able to grow employ more people and pay more to people. Then why is it that members opposite are so opposed to those fruit those forestry those meat those dairy industry gains that have been so successfully negotiated in the TPP? I see some Labour members are in favour some are opposed and I cannot understand the confusion.Then we take a core issue—and there has been a bit of debate today about the issue of debt. Again I have to say I am confused. I listened to Grant Robertson and he said: “The Government needs more stimulus. It needs to borrow more and stimulate the economy.” In the next minute I hear another Labour member David Parker express concerns and saying: “Oh the Government is borrowing too much.” Well you cannot speak out of both sides of your mouth; you need to have a clear position.And then we come to the issue of housing. David Parker in the speech that was just given said that the Government needs to go harder on the Auckland Council and make sure that there is intensification. Well actually only last week Phil Twyford was saying that the Government was interfering and bullying the Auckland Council to try to get intensification. Well is David Parker right or is Phil Twyford right or is this just another case of Labour being all over the paddock and not knowing what it stands for?I equally point out the area of social housing where I compliment the work that Paula Bennett and Bill English are doing. I see the members opposite railing in the House railing in their electorates opposed to the transfer of State houses over to community housing providers and then standing on platforms with Phil Twyford when he says to the community housing organisation that he supports the transfer of State houses to those community housing providers. I know of no time in my time in this House when we have faced an Opposition that has had such a confused position on what it stands for. It is a party that has lost its way. It is no surprise that it is polling so badly. It is so far from being a credible Government because it does not know what it stands for.