Mackey Moana: Address in Reply 
Mackey Moana: Address in Reply 
[Volume:652;Page:1205] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I have already congratulated you Mr Deputy Speaker on your elevation to the position of Deputy Speaker but seeing as you are doing such a good job I feel the need to congratulate you again and of course the Speaker Dr Lockwood Smith and the Assistant Speakers. 
Before I start out I feel that I really need to remark on the comment made by Dr Paul Hutchison that John Key’s achievements are like those of Nelson Mandela. I think that is an extraordinary statement to be making in this House. First of all we heard that John Key was just like Barack Obama; now he is like Nelson Mandela. Where will it end? Gandhi is my next pick; John Key’s achievements are like Gandhi’s. What an extraordinary statement to make. 
Hon Member 
: Jesus? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Then Jesus perhaps as my colleague down the front says. Who knows? 
I also want to congratulate my friend and colleague Catherine Delahunty on her maiden speech tonight. I have worked with Catherine for many years in Gisborne. We have done many election campaigns together and it is great to finally have her here. She was always the one who just missed out on the night. I am very pleased to see Catherine here and I am sure she will do good work. 
We are at about day 90 of the 100 days of action—apparently. But if we calculate it based on working days we are actually at about day 5. I think we are in serious danger of not reaching 100 days of action in this term of Parliament. Colin King said that Cabinet worked overtime during the summer break. I say that if that is working overtime God help us if Cabinet ever takes a holiday. 
What was clear to those of us who were watching what was going on in the United States at the time was that every other country in the world is progressing at a rate of knots. I talked to some of my friends in the United States and they said the hope they get from President Barack Obama is not because of his rhetoric and not because he gives great speeches. It is because he is doing things and he is doing them quickly and transparently at a time when we need to see that our Government is doing things and this was before he had even been sworn in as President. This came from a friend who is not a Democrat but who is a registered Republican. I could not but help compare that with what we are seeing here in New Zealand. 
We have seen the Australian Government on its second stimulus package and the United Kingdom Government on its second stimulus package. But what do we have here in New Zealand? It is a rolling maul. We know what that means; it means that we want it to fit in with the news cycle. We want to get as much media coverage for what we do and we do not care if we are not actually doing what is right for the economy. We just want to make sure that what happens is good for the National Party not good for the New Zealand people. I think that is a shameful position to take if we look at what the Secretary of the US Treasury said: “Given the scale of the economic crisis the policy response has to be comprehensive and forceful. There is more risk and greater cost in gradualism than in aggressive action.” What are we seeing in New Zealand? It is gradualism. What are we seeing in every other country in the world? It is decisive action. I think for that reason we should say we have no confidence in this Government within the first 100 days since the election. 
Let us be clear that despite the spin from the other side of the House—the spin from the Government—we left the country in a very good financial position to weather this economic crisis. That is not what we said; Fitch Ratings said: “The long-standing record of fiscal prudence marked by reductions in general government debt and net public external debt will leave us well-placed to weather the economic downturn.” This is not the Labour Party talking; this is from economic commentators and if they had said that about the National Party it would be forced down our throats every 2 seconds because it would be proud of it. And this country should be proud of what the previous Government did. We should be able to say that it did a good job rather than throw our hands up in horror at the prospect that National might have to give the credit to someone else other than itself whilst it goes about its public relations strategy of drip-feeding policy to make sure it gets the maximum benefit while our economy is in danger of disintegrating. People are losing their jobs and our Government is sitting on its hands. 
Of course National backbenchers are desperate to believe that spin. I watched them during the first few weeks of urgency sittings and I saw the looks on their faces as if to say “What are we doing? Are we really doing this? Can it be true?”. They are desperate to believe the spin that is coming out from their caucus. Of course all we have seen so far is Prime Minister John Key largely re-announcing existing Labour policy. So far we are meant to believe the huge infrastructure policy that was released today which brings forward some projects by a few months— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: 3 months! 
MOANA MACKEY 
: —as if projects that were already in the pipeline will save us. These projects were earmarked last year during the Budget and Labour—going into the election—said it would have another Budget before Christmas because things had changed so much. The National Government’s response to that has been to move up a few infrastructure projects by a few months. National says this will create 2000 jobs. That will be great but we have lost 10000 jobs while this Government has been sitting on its hands and it is telling us there are more job losses to come. The Government will not put any bills on the Table of this House so that we can see them before they are debated and likewise it does not think it has any requirement to tell the people of New Zealand who are really worried about losing their jobs what it wants to do because that does not fit in with its media public relations strategy. 
The first 100 days that we have seen so far have not only been slow they have been worrying and shameful. An announcement has been made that the minimum wage is effectively to increase by only 9c an hour. I want to pick up on something that happened in question time today concerning the Minister of Maori Affairs Pita Sharples which I thought was rather disappointing. He was asked by my colleague Parekura Horomia whether he agreed with the factual statement that National lifted the minimum wage by only 86c in the 9 years it was in Government in the 1990s and Labour lifted it every year in the 9 years it was in Government. Mr Pita Sharples said no. Well either he does not know which is very worrying for a Minister of Maori Affairs because he should know or he just thought it was funny to have a bit of a laugh with his National Party mates while the poorest workers out there are getting increases of only 9c an hour. I think that is disgraceful as my colleague has said. 
I had a ride in a taxi the other day. The taxi driver told me that she owned the taxi company—it was a small business—but she questioned whether the Government understood that minimum wage workers were also its customers. These people do not own cars and they will often get a taxi home from work. Jacqui Dean thinks it is funny. Of course she would because that is how the National Party treats low-income workers. Does she not realise that the buying power of low and middle-income workers is incredibly important to small businesses? We can have provisional tax breaks which are great but if no one is buying their services it does not matter. We need to make sure that those companies are able to get the products. 
Jacqui Dean 
: So bitter! 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Ms Jacqui Dean says I am bitter. Does she know why I am bitter? It is because in the last 2 weeks before Christmas that member’s Government raised taxes on the poorest families in this country in order to give tax cuts to the richest people in this country. Am I bitter about that I say to Jacqui Dean? Yes I am because it is the wrong thing to do for our families it is the wrong thing to do morally and it is the wrong thing to do economically. Ms Jacqui Dean might think it is funny but as my colleague Chris Hipkins said the only mauling that is going on here is the mauling of poor families the mauling of low-income workers and the mauling of our economy as we go into very very difficult times. 
What else happened? In the 2 weeks before Christmas this Government raised taxes on our most innovative companies the ones that we would think we would rely on to pull us through this crisis. The National Government raised taxes on low and middle-income families to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest people. It raised taxes on our most innovative companies. It repealed every major piece of environmental legislation that has been put through. It repealed the biofuels legislation—and that cost jobs. A plant was closed because of the repeal of that legislation. The Government has stalled the emissions trading scheme which has cost jobs and the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in this country—the forestry industry has told us that. It scrapped the $1 billion Healthy Homes fund which has cost jobs and it will cost money in terms of health and education for the families who are living in those homes. 
The Government is lumbering our schools with extra compliance through legislation that did nothing but say that the people of New Zealand now have no right to challenge the Minister of Education on what she does when it comes to literacy and numeracy. I want to read a little bit out of another column written by the Opotiki College principal whom I quoted before the election—he has done another blog: “I accept the National Party is now in Government and has the right to introduce policies. However I would have expected that such a major policy would have been debated through the select committee process. The result is that schools from primary to secondary are having imposed on them a programme of regular testing against targets without any consultation with schools. I would like to know how the research supports this.” The United States introduced such a programme several years ago called No Child Left Behind.