Beaumont Carol: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Beaumont Carol: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:670;Page:16644] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the Prime Minister’s statement to Parliament. I listened to the Prime Minister present his speech and I have listened to the speakers since and I think I will not be alone in this country in asking “Is that it? Is this the plan? Is this what many New Zealanders—the overwhelming number of New Zealanders who are not the rich and who are struggling with ever-rising prices with job losses and with reductions in income—are going to get from this National Government?”. Of course the answer is that yes that is what they are going to get—not much. 
There are 265000 New Zealanders currently jobless. This document this so-called statement is an insult. It is a document full of platitudes and focus-group-tested spin. I ask this question of members opposite: does this Government think New Zealanders are stupid? Well I can assure those members that New Zealanders are not stupid and that they are increasingly seeing through the spin. They are increasingly questioning the ability of this Government a Government with no plan a Government that governs for the rich and ignores the rest. What does the so-called statement include? It has privatisation it has cuts to public services and it includes bashing beneficiaries—all the usual things. Maybe they are dressed up in slightly different language but that is what is there. 
It is outrageous that the Prime Minister and Government speaker after Government speaker have tried to blame the state of the economy and the ever-burgeoning debt on Labour and on the recession. That is absolutely outrageous coming from a Government that borrowed to fund tax cuts. It cost $2.5 billion to fund tax cuts for the top 10 percent of New Zealanders the very group who did not need that assistance and the group who would not use the money in a way that would stimulate our economy. That was from a Government that has taken a hands-off approach to economic management and that has had no plans for jobs or economic growth. I listened to the Prime Minister on  
Morning Report 
 
again spinning the same old line but the reason there is such huge Government borrowing is to cover the costs of funding tax cuts for the rich. It is simple; that is what it is about. 
The Prime Minister’s statement will give no comfort to low and middle income New Zealanders who are struggling to make ends meet. Some New Zealanders are doing it harder than others: Maori Pasifika young New Zealanders and women. We will be making sure we talk to the Minister of Women’s Affairs and raise every single issue in relation to the difficulties that people are facing in the job market in trying to make ends meet and in trying to ensure their kids have uniforms to go to school in and food in their bellies. There are many many people like that. 
There is no plan in the Prime Minister’s statement. There are no ideas to deliver growth and jobs. In fact there is quite the contrary. This statement provides a prescription for job losses in the public sector job losses for New Zealanders who work as public servants. As a consequence there will be reductions in the services for New Zealanders that those public servants provide. Those losses will be on top of the 265000 New Zealanders who are already jobless. That is a disgrace. 
But what is truly disgusting is that the Government is so obviously twisting the facts. No matter how many times it is denied the Government’s own actions have led to the need to borrow $300 million per week. The Government’s own actions have led to that and the public are getting that message. This is about priorities; it is about choosing. The Government chose to make unaffordable tax cuts that benefit a small minority of New Zealanders rather than investing in our people—in skills development job creation and economic development. In other words that was the choice the Government made. It was the Government’s priority to give tax cuts to the top 10 percent of earners. It was a choice. 
The Prime Minister and all of the National members who have stood up have asserted that the problem of Government debt is because of the previous Labour Government or the recession but they cannot really believe what they are saying. I do not believe that those members opposite really believe that. Similarly I cannot believe that they can stand up over there and talk about a tax switch and claim that New Zealanders are no worse off under a National Government. If members opposite believe that then clearly they are not talking or listening to low and middle income New Zealanders. Members across the House must spend their time with the top 10 percent of earners who are better off under this Government—the rich rather than the rest. 
I see people in my office I see people out and about in the Maungakiekie electorate and I consistently hear their concerns about how hard it is to make ends meet. I was talking to staff of one of the budgeting services near my office and they said that if people rang up and said their electricity was going to be cut off that day they would say to those people that they could see them in 2½ weeks because that is how busy they are. I spoke to staff of a church in the electorate and they said they have just had the busiest January ever with their food bank. People are hurting but members opposite seem not to care about that. That was a choice; it was a choice to put resources elsewhere. 
Housing is also a huge issue certainly in Auckland. The  
New Zealand Herald  
has recently provided some pretty good coverage of what is going on with the rental housing market in Auckland. Housing is the issue that people most often come to my office about. They have difficulties in getting into a State house. There are big waiting lists for State houses because people do not have the income to pay for private rentals. What is the Housing New Zealand Corporation doing? It is referring those people back out into the private housing market. There are people sleeping in garages throughout Auckland. This week the Salvation Army will be making its annual state of the nation report and it is my expectation that it will say that the problem has become even worse since it identified it last year. 
Why was the choice not made to spend money on housing instead of tax cuts for the rich? Why was the Government not looking at building more houses as part of a stimulus package—more Housing New Zealand Corporation houses or affordable housing options in partnership with other organisations? That could have been used as an opportunity to build our skills base to train people in building skills—skills that we are no doubt losing to Australia and will lose at an ever-increasing rate with wages being 30 percent higher there and with the demand in Australia for a whole lot of rebuilding to be done. 
I will move on and talk about skills. The previous speaker mentioned skills in passing as he was sitting down. Well the reference to skills in the statement of the Prime Minister was bland rhetoric. That is what was in there. In response to a real skills shortage and crisis in New Zealand we have bland rhetoric. Despite the needs of many who have lost their jobs or who are working in struggling businesses and the need we have in our country to lift our skill base to improve workplace productivity and to strengthen our economic performance National continues to take a limited and unambitious approach to the issue of skills development. Investing in upskilling our people would pay huge dividends for people individually for their families for their communities for their workplaces and for our economy. Significant investment needs to be made in those who are already in work or who have recently been in work. National cut over $50 million from industry training in 2010 and in 2011 it is clear that there will not be bold initiatives in this area. That $50 million could have funded 55000 more students in industry training. 
What does the Prime Minister’s statement say about skills? Well it makes reference to examining and improving existing provisions. Although no one would argue with the need to improve the quality of what is already in place the magnitude of the skills shortages and the increasing number of people becoming unemployed require a great deal more than that. This Government continues to support a low-wage economy and continues to support workplaces competing in reducing wages and conditions. That will not provide the framework necessary to lift both skills acquisition and skills utilisation. In fact there is just about more about the 90-day fire-at-will provisions in the Prime Minister’s statement than there is about the issue of skills development. Of course hand in hand we have seen the recent announcement of a 25c per hour increase in the minimum wage. 
I just want to say there has to be a commitment to provide more opportunities to retrain those affected by the current economic situation but they will not get that from this National Government.