Paraone Pita: Budget Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Paraone Pita: Budget Debate 
[Sitting date: 16 June 2004. Volume:618;Page:13681. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 Tena koe tena koutou. This Budget has been described as a large one and I suppose $2.4 billion in spending during the next year rising to $3.8 billion by 2007-08 can rightly be described as a large Budget. But that comes as no surprise because this Budget really is one to bribe constituents. It is described as being one of working for families but its description goes on to say “when fully in place.” Therein for me lies the rub particularly as most if not all those low to middle income families intended to benefit from this Budget will not do so until 3 years down the track. If their plight is so needy—and Government would have us believe that it is—then why is the benefit not kicking in immediately? Families will have to wait the full 3 years before they get the benefit of this Budget. I know that one or two of my caucus colleagues who have already spoken in this debate on another day inquired why those families have to wait so long. I do not accept the response given by both Government and United Future spokespersons that day and I still do not. 
There is a saying that where there is a will there is a way. And the way was for the Minister of Finance to go back and do the numbers again. When it comes to increasing taxes this Government can certainly find the way to ensure that that increase takes effect within a 24-hour period. However with the way things are now all working New Zealanders will have paid for this so-called increased spending by the time the full effects intended by this Budget actually kick in. The present surplus will not have been touched in any way. In fact I would be bold enough to say that it will be even greater than it is now after the 3-year period. 
It is no secret that many of the families regarded as beinglow and middle income families are in fact Maori families. I want to focus on that particular group in our society. Recent reports indicate that homeownership is becoming more like a pipe dream to that same group of families. That is shameful in New Zealand in 2004. Shelter is a basic need and right but in this country the ability to buy one’s own home is rapidly becoming a privilege. Well under half of Maori families are living in their own homes compared with 72 percent of the rest of the community. That is shameful. I can recall in the 1950s in the 1960s in the 1970s and even in the 1980s in the days of the former Department of Maori Affairs Governments of the day could guarantee that each year 500 of the families under the responsibility of that department would move into their own homes and gain homeownership. Perhaps the time has come to revert to that programme. 
I note from the Budget notes on Vote Maori Affairs that nothing seems to be there for kohanga reo—and that is in spite of the utterings of the member for Waiariki. Perhaps the reason the words “kohanga reo” are not mentioned in this document is that the Government has put aside $21 million to promote its Budget. I also suggest that in relation to a number of the families involved who have been described as low and middle income families I can understand why the Government has to put aside $21 million to promote its Budget. A great number of those families will not avail themselves of what it promises. 
I note that funding has been made available for a hui taumata. Might I suggest that those funds could be better utilised in the areas of social and economic development and that the hui will be an opportunity for those who attend to tell this Government only what is already known. 
Jill Pettis 
: Will the member answer a question? Why did his former colleagues vote for market rents? 
PITA PARAONE 
: Why would Maoris want to vote for a Maori party? Given that the emergence of the new political party is clearly born from the frustrations of Maori with this Government I would have thought that the need for a hui taumata would be the last thing the Government would want. 
Another programme that has been budgeted for is local-level solutions. I would be very interested to know just what local-level solutions are but I do know that they were a Budget item in the last financial year. I also know that that same budgetary item was underspent by hundreds of thousands of dollars. If that is the case why do we have another Budget item for that activity? 
Mahara Okeroa 
: It’s your fault. 
PITA PARAONE 
: That member across the way should know. Although he accuses me of being part of the responsibility for that under-expenditure he knows very well that he in Government is more responsible than I am. 
The Minister of Maori Affairs has waxed lyrical on the value of this Budget to Maori. I say that Maori and other New Zealanders have been misled. It also came as quite a surprise to me to be watching the  
Marae 
 programme on Television New Zealand on 30 May where the Minister was interviewed. He was asked about the amount in the Budget that had been allocated to his portfolio and I was really surprised by his response. He said that it was actually more than he expected. So what did he ask for? Obviously he must have asked for less and if he asked for less is that how important he feels his portfolio is? That has to be the question. 
Jill Pettis 
: The member has obviously never been in Budget negotiations. 
PITA PARAONE 
: The member is quite right but I can assure her that I would have done a better job than the present Minister of Maori Affairs. 
In the statement of intent for Te Puni Kokiri there is a programme called “Maori Succeeding as Maori”. I wonder whether a Government member could take a call and explain to us what is meant by “Maori succeeding as Maori”. It is all very well to have these slogans and catch phrases but if they do not produce or mean anything then why have them? More important why allocate funds to a programme that quite clearly is not understood by the people it is aimed at? 
Jim Peters 
: Another high-sounding nothing! 
PITA PARAONE 
: It really is another high-sounding nothing as my colleague says. 
At the end of the day I do not believe that this Budget has delivered to Maori in the way that the Minister and the Government are leading us to believe. I suggest that those Maori members over there ought to have some concern about the emergence of the Maori party because if they had obtained the required budget to see their people develop socially and economically in the way they want there would be no need for the emergence of a Maori party. Tena koe.