Mahuta Nanaia: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMahuta Nanaia: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 09 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8778. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato):Ka tika me tū ki te tāpiri atu i āku kōrero tuatahi i Te Whare nei mō tēnei tau ki ērā ā Te Minita i waihotia rātou kua wehe atu aua ingoa kua whakahuahua mai ki roto ki tēnei Whare. Tēnei anō ka whakatakoto i tērā ingoa o te kuia ki Taranaki arā a Mereiwi Broughton ā ki tērā ki Ngāi Tahu ki a Linda Gwennell. E kore e warewaretia rātou katoa kua hipa ki tua o te ārai. Ko te tūmanako kia whai whakaaro ki ngā whānau pani i noho i raro i te kapua pōuri nō reira e te hoa e Rāhui tēnei te mihi atu ki a koe me tō whānau kei runga i Te Marae o Pōhara. Nō reira tēnā tātou katoa.[It is fitting that I rise to add my first sentiments in this House for this year to those that the Minister for Māori Development left here in regard to those who have departed and those names that were mentioned in this House. I also put forth that name Mereiwi Broughton elderly lady at Taranaki; and that one of Ngāi Tahu Linda Gwennell. All of them will never be forgotten. They have passed beyond the veil. The hope is that we think about the grieving families beneath the gloomy cloud. And so to you the colleague Rāhui I acknowledge you and your family there on the marae of Pōhara. Therefore acknowledgments to us all.]For those listening to the debate they could be forgiven for being really concerned about what the year ahead holds for them. The tone of the Prime Minister’s statement was reiterated at the first political meeting at Rātana which many of us turned up to. He was dismissive and defensive and there was an 8-year creep of arrogance in the tone of his presentation there towards issues regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. But more significantly if in the last 8 years prosperity has been seen throughout many communities in this country why is it that the Prime Minister did not mention the growing rates of inequality and poverty?At the hui at Waitangi—although it was the Prime Minister’s decision not to turn up and for whatever reason that was the case—when we talk about the sovereignty of New Zealand and what is important to us as a country there is no better place than Waitangi to actually demonstrate that New Zealand has moved on. And yes Waitangi is a symbol of where our nationhood began but it is also a place where we can say as a Parliament that New Zealand has moved on in its thinking about that partnership relationship. However that has not been the case simply because of the way that the Prime Minister has treated that whole discourse about sovereignty and the Treaty. I am really concerned because the tone of the Prime Minister’s statement has not provided the level of balance that is required and that all New Zealanders deserve. On the one hand there is the promotion of a growing economy and the lowering of an unemployment rate yet the reality in many communities is that it is very difficult to find a job and to hold a job beyond 90 days. There is growing youth unemployment.The issues around the TPP agreement are significant and cannot simply be dismissed as a group of Māoris protesting. In fact on 4 February over 20000 people rocked up to say that they were not happy with the process that the Government had undertaken which had diminished any sense of public consultation or information and it was only at the last minute at the end of last year that the documents were released. The national interest test will be debated before the select committee but those people who turned up to protest were nurses they were doctors they were workers they were grandparents and parents they were teachers they were academics and they were employers. They were not just a bunch of Māori who are unhappy about the Treaty and it was wrong of the Minister of Education to try to classify and diminish the broad-ranging interest and concern about the TPP.This is why it matters. This is why the concerns about the process matter and how New Zealanders will ultimately judge whether or not the Government is acting in its best interests. Why is it OK to spend $26 million on consulting on a flag but not on a trade agreement as significant as the TPP? It is not OK. The process will matter when many New Zealanders walk towards 2017.If you have a Government that rides roughshod over the interests of New Zealand that spells trouble because it is a blatant dismissive treatment of legitimate concerns of a broad range of New Zealanders who are just saying: “Look we need to know how this agreement affects us.” For the Māori sentiment yes there is a Treaty clause in there. Yes it is based on the China free-trade agreement. But for example when the Minister talks about these young children learning about mānuka honey and all the pharmaceutical benefits of it I ask her this. Will the intellectual indigenous property rights of Māori be protected through that Treaty clause? Will mātauranga Māori be protected through that Treaty clause? Can Steven Joyce quantify what the benefit to the Māori economy is?Even if you talk to Māori who are actively involved in exporting what they will tell you—many of their relationships are with Korea; take ginseng and the production of that from a small business in Maniapoto—is that that benefit was really forged on a relationship and it took a lot of hard work. Simply saying that the reduction in tariffs will deliver to the Māori economy is again not the full truth. So the Government needs to be accountable if it is to convince New Zealanders that this TPP will deliver the types of benefits that they are happy to promote in a very glib way in a public forum. But when you drill down to the detail exactly explaining it and how that happens it is very very difficult—very very difficult.I am really concerned about the way in which the Government is treating New Zealanders through poor process but it does not stop with the TPP. Take for example the Minister of Māori Development outlining some of the key issues ahead of the Government that it is wanting to put through—Te Ture Whenua Māori. If this was such a good process why is it that Māori have had to take the Government to the Waitangi Tribunal and hold it accountable again on another poor process and on being totally dismissive of concerns of Māori landowners with regard to what the impact of that law will have on Māori landowners on the Māori Land Court and on a range of many issues that affect those Māori landowners? Poor process—another poor process—again in the domain of the Minister for Māori Development. Te Reo Māori bill—well he did not start that bill and to some extent he could have had a way out but he persevered. That is his choice. But the poor process has meant that through the prolonged effort of trying to promote something that all Māori would want to do which is to preserve and uphold Te Reo Māori you have got a mishmash of a process. He has badly handled this.Water—I was at Waitangi and heard a number of interests from the iwi leaders group with regard to how they thought they were acting in good faith with Ministers on progressing an agenda that at its forefront challenged the “first in first served” consenting regime. Underpinning some of the Māori concerns is that the first allocation should be back to the environment—back to the water system. They worked with farmers and with all users. The Ministers gave many undertakings of what they would do yet did not deliver. So here is a Government that has the full process in the TPP Te Ture Whenua Māori Te Reo Māori and water reform. There are some significant issues this year.But Labour wants to look to the future because it is important. We do not want a future of indebtedness. We want to tackle the issues of inequality and poverty. I am really pleased with our Working Futures Plan which sets out and opens up the pipeline and the horizon for a number of young people. It says that the first 3 years of tertiary education will be free. It will provide a range of opportunities to those young people who never ever thought that post - secondary school education would ever be achievable and affordable.The Minister got up and glibly said that so much is being achieved in the education space. She has omitted to address the issues of those young people not in education employment or training. There are significant numbers and that is the hardest group to get to. This policy which Labour has alongside the rest of the pipeline of educational opportunities looks at challenging how we invest in that next generation to lift their skills invest in their opportunities and open up their pathways to education and training so that they can participate in a modern economy.Andrew Little did well when he promoted this policy. He said that we are not afraid to tackle this head on. We are not afraid to change priorities. We believe that investing in the next generation will be a signature of the next Labour Government. Kia ora.