Hughes Darren: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Hughes Darren: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:606;Page:3405] 
DARREN HUGHES (NZ Labour—Otaki) 
: 
 It is a great privilege for me to stand in support of the Prime Minister’s statement which was made very strongly by the Rt Hon Helen Clark to Parliament yesterday. It set out the Government’s priorities for this year and outlined to the country why the Labour - Progressive Government wants to continue taking New Zealand forward in a very positive and proactive direction. There was no carping moaning or whingeing in Helen Clark’s speech. Her speech was actually a positive agenda for New Zealand that all people can look to to see that they have a Government that is there to represent all the people of this country.  
I took particular note of the Prime Minister’s reference to the economic development policies of this coalition Government which I believe are having a real impact. We often hear in this House that people are saying the Government has done nothing to assist the economy and that the good times New Zealand is experiencing are simply occurring in spite of what the Government has done not because of it. However if one focuses on the economic and regional development policies and the partnership the Government is taking with parts of New Zealand that were often forgotten and also sees that our gross domestic product figure is at 3.9 percent I do not believe that can be regarded as some sort of mistake or miracle. I believe that has been achieved through having smart and active policies which make sure the whole country grows. We then see that flowing through into low unemployment which was at 4.9 percent yesterday and growth in the economy which is at 3.9 percent. I was pleased to see the Prime Minister say that smart active economic development polices would be a priority for the Government this year.  
I was also very pleased to see an emphasis on transport through mention of the land transport strategy and our Land Transport Management Bill which is currently before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and is receiving submissions. That will pave the way for New Zealand to have an infrastructure to enable economic growth to take place and to enable our people to travel around New Zealand safely and efficiently.  
I was also very pleased to see reference to the Modern Apprenticeships scheme. There was no policy more popular on the campaign trail than the Government’s investment in skills training and the fact that 6000 young people will be working in apprenticeships right across the country. That is certainly part of being an active Government. The Supreme Court Bill shows that we are taking a view about New Zealand’s nationhood. That bill is before the select committee at the moment for submissions. It will be part of developing New Zealand and showing who we are in the world today.  
I am pleased that we will also see some real movement on the Families Commission this year. I acknowledge our colleagues in United Future at this point who are leading the charge on that. It is a very clear policy direction and goal for them and I am looking forward to working with them during our first full year together in the Parliament. I think we will achieve a lot of good things. We also see the Agenda for Children rolling out and that is very very important in an international framework. Also locally we have the youth development strategy showing that we have a vision for young people. We say that families young people and children are important.  
I am very pleased to report that the Government is being very well received in my electorate of Otaki. The policies of this Government are having a real impact and making a difference in Horowhenua and Kapiti. We received some funding before Christmas for a cluster coordinator for our apparel and textile businesses which has been about making sure those sunset industries have a sense of sunrise about them. I think that will lead to more jobs and exports as well. The Racing Bill mentioned in the Prime Minister’s statement will obviously be very important in my area. We are looking very positively at some plans around tourism. We started the year strongly with the A P and I show in Levin. Mary Davis organised a good showcase of Horowhenua talent on the agricultural side of things. We had the Manakau medieval market at the weekend as well with 20000 people in attendance. I understand that the local member of Parliament was beheaded at that occasion and what has grown back may not be too pleasant for members to see.  
In Kapiti we are working very hard on transport issues. I am really pleased to be working with Winnie Laban the member for Mana who is a fantastic local member. We are working closely with our Wellington colleagues on issues like roading and transport to make sure we open up all the Kapiti Coast Wellington and the Wairarapa. I think we will make some good gains there this year. In Horowhenua we are going through the health services review and working with the Ministry of Health and the community on a new hospital for Horowhenua. I am very hopeful that we will see some progress on that this year.  
When the Prime Minister sat down we heard a very disappointing speech from the Leader of the Opposition. We heard the usual gaffes but despite having had 4 hours to prepare work up an issue advance an idea or put a convincing case on his no-confidence motion those things simply were not there. I thought to myself: how has it come to this? Here is a man who was on the rise for all of his political career only to see it all go horribly wrong when he got the job he coveted. He was forced to come down to the House twice yesterday to subject himself to speeches from his two pretenders. The interesting thing was not his presence during the speech of Dr Brash or Mr Brownlee but how many National Party members of Parliament came to the House to watch those two auditions take place. There were 12 National Party members in the House for Mr Brownlee’s speech but only 10 for Dr Brash so I guess the smart money would have to be on Mr Brownlee.  
Both of those numbers came perilously close to the 14 votes one needs to lead the once-great National Party. It takes only 14 people to take control of a party that once boasted 67 MPs in this House. That was when Mr English first became a member of Parliament. Now that he is in charge of that great machine National is down to 27 members. His brilliant political management has resulted in that number. Mr English did not look like a proud leader when he listened to those speeches—he appeared as though he was looking at able lieutenants. Rather he looked like a man forced to preside over a succession duel despite the fact that rumours of his political death are still only partly exaggerated.  
Dr Brash’s speech simply lacked credibility in a modern world. It was a policy prescription that was more about the past than about the future. He promotes an alternative vision based on policies that have been comprehensively rejected in this country. I find National members’ sense of reverence for Dr Brash truly unusual. I think it is bizarre that they have put him in charge of policy review when their publicly stated aim is to try to rise above 20 percent of the vote. He seems to be regarded as a kind of elderly uncle who has returned from war full of stories of battles never won and who is held in high esteem.  
Mr Brownlee was determined to give a big-picture speech. He was determined to show that he had given it some thought. He even went as far as quoting a book. I have listened to lots of Mr Brownlee’s speeches in this House before and I have never heard him deliver a researched contribution until the speech he gave at the beginning of this year. That is because this was a speech that he desperately wanted to be noticed. I know that because at the end of his speech he helpfully gave us an executive summary of what he had said just so that some of his slower colleagues would get the message that he was a man on the move with a broad understanding of the issues on New Zealand’s political landscape.  
So we will watch with interest as these two men position themselves because I am sure that by the end of the year one of them will be in charge. In the meantime though they are stuck with Mr English and his hapless deputy. Mr English’s speech yesterday should have been his finest. He knew word for word what Helen Clark was going to say. It is the only time in the calendar year that Bill English is 4 hours ahead of Helen Clark. It is the only time that he is ever in advance of her in any way shape or form. But rather than use those 4 hours to set to about the Government Mr English used them to take a nap. He used the 4 hours to take a sleep for his energy levels and came down to the House and gave a reheated joke from last year tacked on a bit to add bones to it and when that fell flat his colleagues cringed and that set the scene for the next 20 minutes.  
The most remarkable statement he made was his very conservative timid view that the Labour Party was only a three-term Government. Now we have to watch Mr English attempt the final refloating of his career on the back of code language over the Treaty of Waitangi and the relationship between Maori and the Crown. I find it fascinating to watch Mr English do that because I do not think that deep down he believes it. And that is part of the problem for the National Party. Mr English did not come into politics to ride race-based politics in an attempt for a double-digit preferred Prime Minister rating. I believe that that is anathema to him. I think he hates giving the “one standard of citizenship” speech because he knows what it is code for. He knows what buttons it is attempting to push in the community and I think he feels highly uncomfortable about it.  
I think that as Minister of Health he did a good job of recognising the difference between Maori and Pacific communities and that what he is doing at the moment is something that he will reflect on very sadly when his political career is at an end. But Murray McCully got hold of him with a strategy to target Maori and for the sake of the job he wants he has held on to it. That is despite the fact that every time Murray McCully has been in charge of strategy for the National Party—and that has been at the last four elections—at each of those four elections under his strategy National has lost votes. National’s vote share has fallen from nearly 48 percent when Murray McCully took over to just over 20 percent now. Under the great strategy of the brat pack and Mr McCully National members have watched 27 percent of their vote shaved off. Now in order to try to refloat the ship National they have moved their party right where nobody in New Zealand is anymore. It is hardly a way to win back middle New Zealand. Bill English is now as Marc Alexander said the leader of the party in name only. He is no longer in charge of the policy agenda; he is no longer in charge of the personnel. He is in charge of a ship that is heading right when the rest of the country is in the middle. It is going to be a long sad year for the New Zealand National Party.