Collins Judith: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Collins Judith: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:645;Page:14190] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 We have just heard from Labour’s chief strategist. This man was in charge of the Kyoto Protocol. He turned the $500 million credit that we were promised into a $1 billion debit. So he has done a good job. That member has talked to us today about all of the achievements of the Labour Government which are not many. As Minister of Energy what did he do? I do not know. We are facing an energy crisis at the moment. We are telling people to prepare for brown outs. We are telling them that we are all hoping and praying for rain. 
When that member was the Minister of Transport he could not even give Helen her tunnel. 
Hon Member 
: Is that right? 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: It is true; she could not even get her tunnel. When he was the Minister of Fisheries he mucked up the whole Maori Fisheries Act. What happened when he was the Minister of Health? Everyone was sick and he got sacked. He has been replaced by David Cunliffe and that says it all. David Cunliffe is running the show now and everything will be great. When the member was the Minister of Research Science and Technology—which I think he still is—what did we have? We had a brain drain in sciences. And tertiary education? Well we now have universities saying they are in a crisis of funding. So that is the record of that Minister Labour’s chief strategist. 
I support the motion of John Key that this House has no confidence in the Helen Clark-led Government because it has failed to make significant improvement in the areas of real importance to New Zealanders because it lacks ambition because it is tired and bereft of ideas because it has lost touch with the people who put it in power and because under its lead our country has become a story of lost opportunities. I represent some of the ordinary people in New Zealand—a lot of the ordinary people in South Auckland who do not want to be told by Helen Clark that if people do not have a university degree they are not worth much and might as well give up. That is what she says. She says that they might as well go off to Australia. 
Helen Clark would rather have yet another person with a university degree than she would a plumber or tradesman. I would say to Helen Clark that she should think about what sort of civilised country it would be without tradesmen. I ask her to just think about that. I say that she should try to have a civilised country without plumbers electricians mechanics and the people who do the work—those who clean the floors and who work in the hospitals. Helen Clark should try to have a country like that with a whole stack of people sitting around in academia gazing at their navels. She should just think about that. [ 
Interruption 
] I am sorry for the previous member for Whanganui who lost that seat to my colleague Chester Borrows so badly. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Yes badly. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: She has never got over it. I am sorry for her that she has lost touch with ordinary Kiwis. I will tell her what ordinary Kiwis want to talk about. They do not want to talk about Helen Clark’s UN-sponsored trips around the world. They want to talk about why the Labour Government is more interested in its own survival than in ordinary New Zealanders who care. 
Kiwis want to know why a $2.5 billion tunnel is going under Helen Clark’s electorate when right now on State Highway 2 at Maramarua we have Kiwis going through an utter death trap on the most unsafe highway in the country. Why does this Government care more about Helen Clark’s tunnel in Waterview than it does about the Kiwis who are killed almost every week on State Highway 2 at Maramarua? Why is that? The reason is that this Labour Government is interested only in its own survival. 
Labour Government members have absolutely squandered New Zealand’s economic inheritance. They have allowed us to squander the best times that we could have had if only they had taken advantage of the fact that we have had good commodity prices and a dollar that would actually work for us. We had a lot of things going for us and Labour has squandered them. 
That is why the Salvation Army this week brought out a report on social services. The report pointed out that in the last 10 years social services spending—taxpayer money—has gone from $23 billion a year to $39 billion a year. That is a massive increase in 10 years. The Salvation Army said that the result of the Government’s spending had “contributed very little to our social progress” and that in fact the gap between rich and poor had got larger. That is what the Salvation Army said. 
When we look at the Government today and at Ruth Dyson standing up and crowing that the Government would give the social services sector some more money we see that she forgot to say that for the last 9 years the Government has sat down and put all its money into bureaucracy. It has bled dry people in the social services sector like the Salvation Army. It has bled them dry. The Government has got them to do all these projects for it it has underfunded them underpaid them and added more bureaucracy. 
I say to those members opposite who do not want to come out door-knocking in Papakura—I certainly want to and I do—that people in Papakura are not fooled by this nonsense from Labour. They know that the crime rate has gone up in South Auckland. We live and work in South Auckland. George Hawkins was absolutely spot on when he said that Manurewa has the highest crime rate in 25 years. He is right. This Government thinks that it should put a whole lot of extra money into the sort of nonsense that it does—talkfests social policy statements and rubbish like that—instead of actually getting shoes on kids’ feet and getting kids into school and keeping them there. 
Let us look at another issue. Why is it that after 8 years under Labour—almost 9 years—we have the second-highest interest rates in the developed world? Why would that be? 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Why? 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: I do not know. Why have they doubled? Why have they gone from 4.5 percent to 8.5 percent? Why is that after 8—almost 9—years of a Labour Government? People who have mortgages care about this. People who are in debt care about it. Why has beneficiary debt gone from $300 million to $760 million under this Government? Why has that happened? Why are more poor people poorer under this Government? Why is that? Why have all those social indicators got worse? 
The Government really hates it when we talk about Australia. Why under Labour are more people—800 people a week; 800 ordinary Kiwis every week—now leaving and moving permanently to Australia? Why is that? I think this Government should just accept that it might as well not have a Minister of Immigration; it should have a “Minister of Emigration” because so many people are leaving this country. That is exactly what is happening. They are becoming political and economic refugees. 
Why under Labour can we get a tax cut only in election year? Gee that would have nothing to do with Labour wanting to be re-elected again. What happened to the last tax cut? Oh I know; that went as soon as the election was over. 
Why can our ordinary hard-working Kiwis not afford to buy their house? Why is that? It is because every single housing policy the Government puts out puts up the cost of housing for ordinary Kiwis. Every single time the Government plays around with planning law and resource management law it puts up the price of houses for ordinary Kiwis. 
Why is the Government’s answer to youth crime—I should actually say “street crime” because some of it is led by 30-year-olds in South Auckland—that it was really hot and that the sun and moon were not in alignment properly? Why is that the answer to people who actually have to live with it? I would ask those Government members who are supposed to represent those people—the very ordinary Kiwis—why they care so little. I tell them that the people who suffer most from violent crime in this country are the people without choices. Those people cannot ever just say they will sell up and move. Those people do not get choices. They are the ones who suffer. Those Labour Government members dismiss those poor victims and the people who have to put up with graffiti every day of their lives. 
By the way why does the Labour Government not support George Hawkins’ Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill? Why is that? It is because George Hawkins is telling it right; graffiti is absolutely part of crime. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Because it fixes it only in Manukau; it doesn’t fix it in Manurewa. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: Mrs Chadwick sits there and says it is all about Manukau. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: It’s a nonsense. 
JUDITH COLLINS 
: And she called it a nonsense. I tell her that the people in Manukau will learn that the Labour Government thinks they are just a nonsense when they want to stop graffiti in Manukau. I represent the Papakura people as well. I tell the member that we want to see the Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill go through. We want to see it go through we want it to be successful and then we want to help get it to the rest of the country where people want it. We want it in Papakura but we are not like those members opposite; we do not sit around and say: “Because we have not got it they should not have it.” No we want that legislation to be a success and we want to see it come into Papakura because people should be safe in their own homes.