Dyson Ruth: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Dyson Ruth: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:660;Page:8828] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 The member who has just resumed his seat Gerry Brownlee spent 10 minutes trying to justify mining in national parks and not once did he mention his or his Government’s commitment to any job creation. That is because his Government does not have any. There is not an ounce of commitment in that whole member’s body to doing anything towards addressing the fact that we now have 168000 people in New Zealand who want to work get up in the morning want to go to a job but do not have a job to go to. The other thing that member did—which I was surprised at because in the past I have heard better contributions from him—was resort to a tactic that I do not think this Parliament should accept. When a member runs out of decent policy debate the member attacks the person. The member introduces red herrings starts mocking the Opposition and totally avoids having a serious policy debate. In my view this Parliament should be better than that. Kennedy Graham took exception to it on behalf of the Green Party. Well I think every single person in the country who was listening to that speech would have taken exception to it. 
I have a message for Mr Brownlee: I am not opposed to mining. I enjoy the benefits that mining gives to us as individuals and as a nation despite the fact that the mining industry actually loses money in New Zealand—most of the money goes offshore. We still have a lot of benefits from it and I enjoy them as well. But I am opposed to mining in precious areas of New Zealand that not only are viewed as precious but have been designated as precious by this House. There are some parts of our country that should be kept precious because that is what they are. There is no such thing as restoration of untouched land once it has been touched. We do have rare-earth minerals in New Zealand but we also have places of rare beauty. When those two coincide we have a moral responsibility to ensure that that rare beauty is protected for future generations. That is the message that I want Mr Brownlee to hear. 
The message that the public of New Zealand wanted to hear on “Big Tuesday” of this week on the day we had all been hyped up to hear the big plan the big message and the big salvation from our Prime Minister was the message about a step change. The public wanted to hear about a commitment a plan and some action from the Government about employment. There was not any mention of employment in the whole statement. It was not a step up; all we got was tiptoeing around the issues. “We’re going to consider that we’re going to review that. We’ll set up a committee.” I think this year will be a competition as to how many reviews considerations and committees can be done compared with last year. Last year was full of them. We did not have any step change in the statement; we just had tiptoeing. 
The Prime Minister’s statement was confirmation as has been speculated in the House and in the media that there is no plan for the future of our nation from this Government. There is no leadership from John Key and no plan. There is no plan to catch up with Australia. Up and down the country the National Party paraded the statement that we will catch up with Australia. There is no plan to do that. There is no plan for growth in our nation. Does the National Party believe in growth any more? Perhaps it does not. If it does not I am happy to hear that but there is no plan for anything. There is certainly no plan for job creation. It was a bit like my colleague Grant Robertson the member of Parliament for Wellington Central said. He said that it was like watching TV in January—repeat after repeat. How many times has the Kopu Bridge been opened? It is just extraordinary that we can hear over and over again re-announcements by the same Minister. Sometimes he makes re-announcements of things that the previous Labour-led Government had introduced. 
I will have a closer look at the tax package. We had some very solid attempts by David Cunliffe today to get some answers out of Bill English but he was totally unsuccessful. Bill English slid around. It was like watching someone try to pick up mercury with chopsticks. Bill English was sliding all round the bowl unable to answer any of the questions. We know that people on lower incomes people on benefits people in low-wage jobs students who are working part-time and superannuitants—people who have given more to their country than most members in this House ever will—spend a larger proportion of their income on things they have to spend it on. They have to spend a large proportion of their income on things that attract GST. They do not have a choice. People in this House have a lot of income left over because we get very high salaries. Increases to GST will hurt the lowest income earners because they have to spend a higher percentage of their income on things that they have no choice about. So they will be the most disadvantaged from the National Party’s proposal to put GST up to 15 percent. 
But Bill English makes it sound like we all will be better off. That is what he is saying—[ 
Interruption 
] No sorry he is implying we will all be better off. What he actually says is: “Most people won’t be worse off.” I am not sure what “Most people won’t be worse off.” means but he is deceiving the public by not explaining that people on low incomes pay more on goods that will sell for a higher price now—because they will have a higher level of GST—and also that they will get nothing out of a lowering of the top tax rate. If the top tax rate is lowered as was floated in John Key’s speech people who earn less than $48000 a year—and that is a lot of people in New Zealand—will get not one cent. Lowering the top tax rate will not give them one cent and if they do not have children if they are not on a benefit and if they are not superannuitants then I ask how they will have that increase in GST compensated for. There is no compensation at all for those people. 
If the top tax rate is cut John Key will get $509 more a week. Paul Reynolds—I am not having a go at him personally—and anyone else who is in Paul Reynolds’ position will get over $2500 a week. I ask who needs more money in their pockets. Is it people who are on a pension people who are on a benefit students who are working part time and trying to put themselves through university or polytech—people who are on $48000 or less—or somebody who is on $250000? The National Government is proposing to make the lowest income earners pay more in GST and give the highest income earners the biggest tax cuts. 
I will just make some comments about the other broken promises that have been confirmed this week. In addition to the broken promise on GST we have also had confirmed in the House today the broken promise on cuts in front-line health services. The 2008 National Party health policy document states: “Less bureaucracy more frontline care for patients.” But day after day we hear the anguished cries particularly from the most senior members of our community about the savage health cuts that they are having to bear. An 86-year-old who cannot hang out her own washing change her sheets or do her cleaning wants the dignity of remaining in her own home. She got a phone call from somebody who said: “I am ringing to see how you are doing. I am from the health board.” Then at the end of the conversation when this woman said: “I am doing very well. Thank you for ringing.” she was told that her home support was cut. Where is the respect for that elderly person where is the dignity that she deserves and where is the support that will enable that woman to stay in her own home? Her home support is what is keeping her independent and in dignity in her own home rather than going into a rest home where she does not want to live and which would actually end up costing the State more. 
Health cuts charges in public hospitals and GST increases—that was probably the most disappointing speech that I have heard from a Prime Minister in my time in the House.