Groser Tim: Address in Reply 
Groser Tim: Address in Reply 
[Volume:677;Page:415] 
Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Trade) 
: 
 I suppose that I am the first member of the House to follow and operationalise this new ruling. I can assure you Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch and the House that I will not be reading from a speech but I will be referring to a document that I think will become quite important in New Zealand’s economic history over the next few years which is the National Government’s 2011 national Economic Development Action Plan.  
One of the things that I have found very amusing coming from the other side of politics—and I would say that perhaps the word “bemused” rather than “amused” is a more appropriate word—is the accusation that National does not have a plan to fix New Zealand. This is wrong on multiple levels although one is rather interested that the problem that we are trying to fix is the problem we inherited from three terms of the previous Labour Government. But I will put that aside try to deconstruct the criticism and ask what would constitute a plan.  
I mean is it some sort of hairy-chested 1950s version of it with “Commissar Cunliffe” or “Commissar Parker” working long into the night with Leontief input-output tables allocating resources in the so-called public interest? I do not suppose that is what they have in mind when they talk about an economic plan. So we would have to assume that on the basis that it is better to listen— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to the fact that members of this side of the House were referred to as commissars. I think that although the member himself has acknowledged once being a Stalinist it is out of order in this House to call people on the opposite benches commissars. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I thank the member. I just ask the member to withdraw that comment. 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: It will be the last time that I will use—even obviously in jest—the word “commissar”.  
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Order! The member has been asked to withdraw the comment. That is all the member is required to do with no further comment. 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: I withdraw and apologise.  
So if that is not the concept of an economic plan what would be the plan that Labour has in mind? One would have to assume—on the basis of the well-known principle that people should be judged by the actions they take rather than on their words—that we would look at the three terms that the New Zealand public did give to Labour the confidence of the Treasury benches in order to work out what a Labour-planned “fix New Zealand” would look like.  
So what would that really add up to? Well fundamentally the plan that Labour unleashed on New Zealand after 3 years in the late 1990s—when growth averaged 4 percent unemployment was rattling down and the deficit was coming down at the same time—resulted after 8 or 9 years in the following basic economic facts. First of all the last 3 years of that Government resulted in economic growth under 1 percent finally achieving the remarkable distinction of putting New Zealand as the only developed country in the world to be in recession before the Lehman Brothers collapse provoked the global financial crisis.  
It was an economic plan that gave us mortgage interest rates of over 10 percent costing households on a typical average mortgage $200 a week more than they are typically paying today on a structured mortgage of that nature. It was a plan that led us as we discovered in question time today to an explosion of private sector debt from around $70 billion in 1999 to around $177 billion by December 2008 causing a huge spike in New Zealand’s net international liabilities which as the Minister for Economic Development pointed out today has come down very remarkably considering how difficult it is to turn around a supertanker like that from 85 percent of GDP to 69 percent of GDP. And it led to a tanking of productivity. So if that is the plan in Labour’s mind could it please find another country to experiment on than ours.  
What we have given is a real plan which is working with New Zealanders and working with the market to try to fix some of the immediate macroeconomic imbalances facing New Zealand and to make serious progress on long-term structural reform against the background of very difficult domestic conditions caused by the Canterbury earthquake which is the second-largest insurance disaster in the history of the planet according to what I read—unbelievably—and secondly the global financial crisis. And that is exactly what this Government has done in the previous 3 years and will continue with relentlessly over the next 3 years while we have the confidence of the Treasury benches. It will address those serious structural imbalances and yes it will indeed try to lay the structural foundations for a brighter long-term outlook for our economy and for the people of New Zealand.  
First of all we have addressed many of the structural economic imbalances though I will be the first to admit there is a long way to go. We have stopped what was intended to be an endless spray of deficits and have got a plan that will have us just crossing the line into surplus by 2014-15. We have initiated on the structural side very long-overdue tax reform which involved a very much-needed shift on higher consumption— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am loath to interrupt the member who has just returned to his seat but I do seek the opportunity to table a copy of the Government’s Economic Development Action Plan noting that it contains no mention— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Sit down. That is not a point of order. You are interrupting the member speaking and we are going to hear the Minister out. If you wish to seek leave to table after the Minister has spoken you may. That was a straight-out interruption of a member speaking. 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: In addition to moving on the macroeconomic front the economic plan that the member has just referred to advances a whole set of propositions under more than 30 different headings of structural reforms which piece by piece will indeed create the foundations for improved economic performance in this country.  
This is not the first time we have moved in this direction. If one looks at our record in the previous Government one could pick many examples. One at random would be the work that we have done on aquaculture. After 8 or 9 years of not a single square metre of fresh open water space being allocated to what should be a far more vibrant export industry for New Zealand finally we have advanced the frontier of reform in this area. It is just one small example of the structural reforms that this National-led Government has advanced and intends to advance in the future. We have got the deficits under control though we have some way to go and it will be a very difficult task to continue to keep fiscal discipline at the point where we have got restoration of New Zealand into a prudent situation.  
The one thing that is very clear is that the era of beer and skittles is over. It is time now to get serious with public finances. There is any number of signals around the world telling New Zealanders telling people of all nationalities that that is the nature of the game. This Government is serious. This is a vital component of our economic plan for New Zealand. In addition to this we have got a plan for advancing structural reform under many of those headings in that document. They cover numerous different issues such as science and innovation such as broadband and communications.  
Rebuilding Canterbury is still a central preoccupation in terms of our economic plan for New Zealand as it must be given that Christchurch is the second-largest city in New Zealand and absolutely central to our export effort. I want to give credit to the people of Canterbury for maintaining an astonishing performance in terms of getting their world-class goods and services out of Lyttelton Port and out of Christchurch International Airport under the most stressful conditions. I think they have done just an absolutely outstanding job and I think it is extraordinary when I listen to the people responsible for Lyttelton telling us that actually they are almost at record levels.  
But we have a whole series of economic plans that we will be implementing including trying to move our time limits on consenting medium-term projects and freshwater reform. We are going to try to address better the planning process around assessing natural hazards. I predict that the Labour Party will oppose probably every single one of those reforms. This by the way—let me make it clear—is a prediction I would love to be proven wrong on. But I am not counting on it; I am not counting on it.  
Fundamentally to conclude this is about advancing the frontier of a wealth creation economic plan for this country and trying to capture what I think is not just a necessity but a mood shift that is there inside our community and inside communities around the world as this process of financial deleveraging should be reaching every single responsible political party in this country. Finally to put it in the metaphor that our Prime Minister put it we have indeed proven over the first 10 years of the 21st century that we can spend like a First World country. Now is the time to prove we can earn like one. Thank you.