Nash Stuart: Regulatory Reform Bill — First Reading 
Nash Stuart: Regulatory Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:670;Page:16754] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 I stand in support of the Regulatory Reform Bill as does everyone in the Labour team. As has been noted this reform process was started by Lianne Dalziel. The process was well implemented and was taken over by Rodney Hide. The least that he or the Nats could do is to give credit where credit is due as we always do. 
The bill changes 13 Acts and makes doing business a little bit easier. It is one of the standard processes that go on. A lot of legislation goes through the House every year and as the nature of things changes so does the legislation need to change. It becomes slightly outdated. There is no point in repealing Acts and rewriting them a lot of the time so the Regulatory Reform Bill is the sort of bill that comes in to amend them. 
I will pick up on a couple of points made by a couple of the National speakers. Aaron Gilmore who is a man who knows a lot about business stood up here and said the bill is part of a package of Government economic reforms. I ask Mr Gilmore where National’s plan is for economic reform. I also ask whether the National Government is really working for all New Zealanders. Mr Gilmore stood up here said this bill is about National’s economic reforms and talked about how important it is. He then talked about the owner of a local video store. I pay no disrespect to the owner of Mr Gilmore’s local video store but in fact many businesses of New Zealand are struggling at the moment. One has just to walk down the main street of Napier to see how many retailers are struggling let alone manufacturers etc. To put things into perspective the Government and the country are facing much bigger much graver and much more serious issues than Mr Gilmore’s video store faces. 
Mr Gilmore then went on to talk about Mr Foss’ iPod. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: iPad. 
STUART NASH 
: Sorry; it was an iPad. It is good that the chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee has embraced technology and has an iPad but I ask Mr Gilmore whether that is really part of the economic growth and reform that all New Zealanders are looking to the Government to deliver. It has been in office for 2 years now. In the first 12 months a Government can get away with saying it is just getting its policies in place and it needs to develop the right sorts of criteria inform people and consult them. A Government can get away with saying that for 12 months. But it has now been 2 years and we have not seen a plan from National. New Zealanders have not seen a plan. 
I will tell members a story and this is without a word of a lie. A chap came into my office yesterday and told me he is a sort of swinging voter. There are a lot of swinging voters out there. He is involved in business: he is a marine engineer. He lives in Napier but he travels over to Perth to work. He earns very good money. He said Australian companies love him because he pays Australian tax and he brings his money back and spends it here. He is on a contract. He said he had been listening for 2 years and he had not heard National articulate a plan. I tell members that I sat there with a huge smile on my face and I said he would not believe how many times I had heard that. We sit in this House as Labour MPs. There are people who watch the House on television. They comb the newspapers and look for policy statements. They are asking where Mr Key’s plan is for getting this country out of the economic doldrums and driving growth forward. 
Unfortunately Mr Key leaves that plan to Mr Power to develop and Mr Power comes up and says the Government will sell State assets. I think those members call it the mixed-ownership model which is a nice bit of spin. It is a good bit of messaging but it cannot hide the fact that the only plan for economic growth that this Government has put forward in 2011 is to sell New Zealand’s public assets—to sell power companies. Then Government members stand up and say power prices for New Zealanders will not increase. Well come on! I say they should stop being disingenuous. We know that under the free-market model power prices will increase. We were told that the Bradford reforms would break up the power sector. We were told they would make it a lot more competitive and power prices for New Zealanders would drop. That did not happen. We are a country of 4.5 million people. We have a huge wide long country where the cost of infrastructure is so high that that did not happen. 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: And what did you do about it for the last 10 years? Absolutely nothing. 
STUART NASH 
: I know why Dr Mapp has decided to leave the National Government. He must have been getting a hell of a lot of gyp from his mates around the barbecue over summer asking him what he was still doing there. That member is off to pursue other options and I do not blame him. I do not blame him for doing that. He has a doctorate in law; he knows what is going on. That member does not want to sit on the backbenches—because that is where he would be—and say: “Oh goodness me! I have better things to do with my time than to go out to constituents and sell a policy of asset sales.” 
But I am wrong: there was another policy and that was to mine national parks. That was the policy of 2010. Let us forget about the tax cuts that gave people $1000 a week if they were earning over $1 million a year. The mining of national parks—that was the economic development argument and what happened? There were no fliers no posters and no radio announcements. Just through the power of the Internet the march organisers got—what was it—about 40000 people. Whatever the number was Queen Street was filled from top to bottom with New Zealanders who were saying National could not mine national parks. They said that was not a plan for economic growth and economic development. I suspect what will happen this year is that New Zealanders will line Queen Street from the top to the bottom and say National cannot sell our State assets. 
The Government can call it a mixed-ownership model or whatever it will but it is selling public assets. That is not a plan and that is not a Government that is working for all New Zealanders. It just simply is not. I look at what is happening in the Napier electorate. I am now seeing more and more people come through my electorate office who normally would not go near an MP’s office because they have no need to canvass an MP but they are doing so at the moment because they are at their wit’s end. They cannot see the plan for economic growth. There are 7000 people who are unemployed along the east coast of the North Island—7000 people. There are 158000 New Zealanders who are unemployed. Do members know what they are asking? They are asking where Mr Key’s plan is. Selling State assets is not a plan. 
Amy Adams stood up and said this Government will create jobs and drive economic growth. Well we all want to create jobs. Everyone wants there to be economic growth but there is no plan for it. There is no plan for creating jobs and driving economic growth. I ask Ms Adams the next time she stands up to please tell us what the plan is for doing this. We can take Wairoa for example. Wairoa is at the top of the Napier electorate. I was talking to a local principal. The school is 60 students down this year—60 students down—because people are leaving the region. This is the provinces. This is heartland New Zealand and there is no plan in heartland New Zealand. 
Do members know what the Government did? It took $71 million out of infrastructure in Hawke’s Bay and took it up to Auckland. On Sunday I went to look at the Matahorua Gorge open day. The Matahorua Gorge is an example of driving economic growth because it is an investment in infrastructure. The Government should be doing that up and down the length of New Zealand. It is classis Keynesian economic theory which is the sort of economic theory that most Governments around the world are following at the moment. We should invest in infrastructure; we should not spend $14 billion on tax cuts and then wait for economic growth. 
We had the Minister of Finance come to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and say the tax cuts would not promote economic growth and stimulate the economy because they were not supposed to do that. Well my question to the Minister of Finance is where is the plan? If the Government is to spend $14 billion then at least it can ensure that some of that money will go towards creating economic growth—towards growing jobs and growing this economy—and driving our economy towards export-led recovery. That is not happening. 
Mr Power is a very intelligent guy. I have a lot of respect for Simon Power. He is a hard-working Minister. That is why he was voted the top Minister on that side of the House. Mr Power must sit there sometimes wring his hands and think: “Goodness me there is more to this.” Mr Power is the only one who has come up with a plan so far but unfortunately it is to sell State assets. 
I support this Regulatory Reform Bill because it is important in the regulatory framework but there needs to be a plan for economic growth.