Joyce Steven: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Joyce Steven: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Sitting date: 13 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:7799. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 I think once again we are seeing a demonstration that there is nothing that Labour will not stoop to to talk down the New Zealand economy for its own political gains. Actually it is sort of ironic that the member Phil Goff referred to his role in the China free-trade agreement in which of course he had a role and yet he sits on the same side of the House as a member who late last year was criticising the Chinese company Haier for purchasing Fisher and Paykel Appliances and saying that that was not necessarily a good thing for New Zealand. So this Opposition needs to sort out its lines in terms of the role of trade in New Zealand’s future the role of our relationships with our trading partners and our role with our second-largest trading partner. But of course consistency is not the Opposition’s strong point. 
The other thing we heard in that speech was an approach that once again seeks to ignore the world in considering New Zealand’s economic progress. I am proud to be part of a Government that has worked so hard over the last 4 years to give this country a much better outcome from the global financial crisis than most other countries in the OECD as well as dealing with the second shock—which the other countries did not have to deal with—which was the Canterbury earthquakes in our second-largest city. The other side keeps trying to pretend that those twin shocks to New Zealand did not occur and of course they did. 
So we come to the start of 2013 and the state of play for New Zealand in the Prime Minister’s address at the start of Parliament. There is a huge range of things that this Government is working on to encourage the growth of the New Zealand economy and we are seeing some very good progress for New Zealand. The cost of living in New Zealand is low savings rates are up and yes we are making good economic progress. And as was pointed out by my colleague the Hon Dr Nick Smith  
The Economist 
 has highlighted the well way in which this country is being economically managed. 
There is a very clear contrast between both sides of the House. On this side of the House we understand that for more jobs and more growth you have to have more investment from the private sector. So we are out there working constantly to create those opportunities for New Zealanders by trying to remove the impact of things that get in the way of that investment and looking at things like our export markets. Again it is ironic that Phil Goff was up talking about trade when Labour’s coalition partners the Greens are opposed to probably the biggest trade agreement that New Zealand could see in the next 10 years—the trans-Pacific trade partnership. 
We also have Labour’s other putative coalition partner not doing us proud on the international stage in terms of our relationships with our trading partners but doing things like criticising high-value Chinese tourists coming to this country and having the opportunity to tour here like other countries and saying that that is something that should not occur. 
So what you have is all these Opposition parties that talk a good game around growth but fundamentally they are opposed to pretty much most things that would deliver that growth in New Zealand. I have made a helpful list. Of course Opposition parties opposed the law changes for  
The Hobbit 
—and they still oppose them even today. I am thrilled that they spend their time opposing those law changes because they keep reminding New Zealanders that they opposed a law change to help an industry grow in this country. 
And then they opposed the Resource Management Act changes—the ones that we have had and the ones that we are proposing. They do not even know what we are proposing yet but we can guarantee that they are opposed to it. They are opposed to plans to build the Auckland convention centre. They have put every single roadblock in the way of that that they possibly could. They are opposed to oil and gas exploration on the East Coast. Their energy and resources spokesperson said that gas was not going anywhere so we should just leave it there. Well tell that to the people of the East Coast who would like the jobs. And of course they have been opposed and at best in the case of Labour lukewarm to hydraulic fracturing. 
I mentioned they are opposed to the investment of Haier in Fisher and Paykel Appliances. They are opposed to speeding up Bathurst Resources Ltd’s resource consents at Denniston. They are opposed to Chinese investment in New Zealand generally particularly if they have had a focus group recently. They are opposed to tax changes to encourage productive investment. They are opposed to irrigation. The Greens are absolutely opposed to irrigation; Labour is sort of having a bob each way. They are opposed to lessening the emissions trading scheme costs on trade-exposed business. 
All those things encourage investment in jobs and growth in this country. So as the Prime Minister said at the start of this year this Government is focused on making New Zealand a magnet for investment for jobs and growth. And what are the Labour Party and the Green Party doing? They are busy trying out some new slogans. They have a couple of new slogans that they are running at the moment. The interesting one for them is one they have obviously been looking at online in a few of the speeches from the UK. This one is so-called hands-on Government. That is the sort of thing they are focus-grouping at the moment—hands-on Government. Well let me tell you this. Hands-on Government the slogan of the Labour Party means only one thing—hands on your pockets. It means hands on your money. That is what hands-on means. They are against every form of private sector investment. They want to reach further into the nation’s pockets and spend more money because they know how to do it better. That is Labour’s approach to growth and what that means is growth in New Zealand’s overdraft and growth in New Zealand’s deficit. 
Labour members have a programme called “Kiwi Broke”. It is a building scheme. It is a code for big-borrowing and big-spending Government. So they have made up a rinky-dinky taxpayer-funded scheme which just like all their other taxpayer-funded schemes will cost only a little bit—only a little bit. It will actually cost five to 10 times what they say and deliver one-tenth of the results. We had that. We threw that out in 2008 because these people know only how to stick their hands in your pockets. That is what they mean by hands-on Government—hands on your wallet. 
That is the Labour Party’s approach in 2013—or at least we think it is because the only thing we have heard from it this year was its pro tem leader backtracking on its policy. He got up and did his state of the nation speech at the start of the year and said: “Oh by the way it will probably cost 550 maybe 450 grand a house not really 300. Maybe 550.” and you are sitting there thinking: “That’s all he’s got to offer—that he has to back down on a policy he announced prior to Christmas.” And of course not surprisingly he has got a little maths problem of his own now because he started the year apparently—there are rumours—with 10 abstentions in his caucus vote it was reported. 
Todd McClay 
: Who were they? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: We do not know who they are yet although we could probably do a quick sweepstake. So the guy was the only one standing for the leadership of the Labour Party and he got nailed by 10 of his own side who refused to vote for him. That is what happened at the caucus vote and the reason is that he has not said a thing this year except that the “Kiwi Broke” policy is already broke and that is his problem. 
So on one side of the House you have a crowd that believes the solution is to dig further and deeper into people’s pockets recycle the money and look like they are doing something. On the other side of the House there is a Government that is absolutely focused on encouraging investment in productive industries in this country—and we are not confusing that with job subsidies which is the Greens’ approach. Their definition of investment is that if the Government does it it must be good. I am telling the Greens that the reality is that if you look around and you are doing something and there is nobody else there it is not an investment; it a job subsidy scheme. The Greens sit very nicely with the Labour Party because that is what it wants to do. It wants to get its hands in your pocket. We are very focused on making New Zealand a more attractive place for investment for higher-paying jobs and for higher growth in 2013. Thank you.