Maharey Steve: Appropriation (2007/08 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Maharey Steve: Appropriation (2007/08 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:641;Page:11058] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I tell Mr Woolerton who has just sat down after speaking on behalf of New Zealand First that there is nothing like a good solid partnership. There has been one between Labour and New Zealand First over the last little while and when we lead the next Government I am sure that that partnership can continue and that Mr Woolerton will undoubtedly play a good part in it. 
In talking of people who have come closer together I will just take us back to Mr John Key’s speech earlier and going on his tradition of not using the names that we are asked to use in the House I will just call him “John”. He called Michael Cullen “Michael” so I will just call him “John”. Now I ask John: when did Mr Key leave New Zealand? Under a National Government—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh we do not like it now. 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. It is the normal practice to address members by the name they put down. If the Government did not pull up Mr Key when he was speaking that was its fault. It is not incumbent on the Speaker to do so. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is quite right. It is up to the House. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Madam Assistant Speaker I am glad that we do agree on that basic principle. So when did Mr Key leave New Zealand? I think it was in the time of a National Government. He went offshore to make a few dollars around the world— 
Dr Jackie Blue 
: Oh make it up! 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Well the member says I should make it up. Mrs Tolley says I should make it up. Did he leave under a National Government or not? 
Hon Annette King 
: No no. It wasn’t Mrs Tolley; I think it was Jackie Blue. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Oh it was somebody over there. When did he leave New Zealand? 
The question of when Mr Key came back is even more important. When was he attracted back to this country? When did he decide that he had had enough of currency trading enough of making vast amounts of money enough of jetting around the world and enough of living in New York—one of the most wonderful cities in the world—and wanted to come back to this country? It was under Labour. He came back like many other Kiwis when attracted by a country that was finally working finally growing and finally reaching its potential. That is when Mr Key came home as so many other New Zealanders have done. 
But Mr Key came home wanting to help to lead this country and I think that is a great thing. I think it is a great thing that people come home and say they want to take up the cudgels and do something on behalf of this country. But you know Winston Churchill once said there is nothing more cruel when one is a leader than to raise hopes and then not deliver on them—nothing more cruel than to raise hopes and then not deliver on them. Labour knows that. We came to power back in 1999 and people had gone through the 1980s and the 1990s and they were saying to themselves that they were fed up with politicians. They even changed the system to MMP which is why Mr Woolerton is in this House today. New Zealanders said they did not like the political system. They did not like the way that things were being done. People in power were not keeping their promises in terms of saying what they would do and then doing it so people wanted to see a change of Government. 
In 1999 this Labour-led Government had its first incarnation and do members know what was the first thing it did? Helen Clark directed that if we said something we would do it: if we said something we would carry it out; if we had a policy we would implement it; and if we said we would spend some money we would do exactly that. And for 8 short years we have done exactly that. If New Zealanders want to know what is to come next from the Labour Government they can just go to its manifesto turn to the next page and see what is to happen. Labour has had success in the economy and success with regard to families and the national identity of this country. It has had success in policy after policy after policy. 
David Bennett 
: “Chewing gum tax cuts”—you delivered those didn’t you mate? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: But there is one person I tell Mr Bennett who is right at the heart of that success and that is Dr Cullen. Over eight Budgets that man has produced surplus after surplus. Mr English over there produced deficit after deficit when National was in Government. I do not think that the National Party knows what a surplus is. It is no wonder that it has done nothing about tax cuts. It was never able to afford to implement tax cuts. Under the National Government the country was broke; under Dr Cullen the country has had a surplus. But all that National members ever talk about is the hope that if they can just get into power one day they would like to spend the surplus that the Labour Government and Dr Cullen have built up—a surplus that is solely Labour’s claim to fame. 
Because of that success in this Budget we are able to do things like giving the research tax credit a research and development tax credit of $630 million to try to produce more investment in small to medium-sized businesses. In this Budget in the education area we are able to put in place 20 hours’ free early childhood education. What a fantastic policy! Alongside KiwiSaver and the public health organisations we have 20 hours’ free early childhood education with 67000 young people benefiting from that policy now—benefiting from the steady good funding of 20 hours’ free early childhood education. In relation to employment we have the lowest unemployment rate in this country since we have had recorded figures: 3.6 percent. Everything that should be up is up and everything that should be down is down. 
In the employment area we will carry on investing in an area like the Ministry of Social Development’s Working for Families. Working for Families has meant that for the first time in about 30 years or so we have seen a proper redistribution of money to the poorest people around our society. You know that means that kids—about whom the National Party goes on a bit—who are in poor houses have finally got money coming through the door to pay for clothes for food for shoes and for all the things that lift them out of poverty. We now have the same kind of poverty profile as a country like Denmark which is one of the richest countries in the world. We are not the richest country in the world but we have made sure that people who are in those circumstances are able to make ends meet and live in dignity. That is because of the Labour Government. 
What has the National Party said? Well I will go back to leadership—leadership with no ideas and hope with no practice. That is what the National Party has and has had. Let us take an example from today. Mr Key said he wants to see State house tenants buying houses. It is a great idea a nice idea for them to buy a house. We have some policies that allow people who move up to the level of paying a market rent to move out of those houses and buy a house. What is the National Party saying? It is saying that it wants tenants to buy their own houses. On their $300-a-week incomes it wants them to buy their own houses. The last time that happened the tenants did not buy the 13000 State houses that were sold; speculators bought them—that is who got them. That idea of Mr Key’s is OK but nothing lies behind it. 
Let us take Working for Families. National says that not everybody should benefit from the Working for Families policy but it does not tell anyone who will benefit from that policy and who will miss out. Who will not get an in-work benefit? Who will not get money coming through the door for their children? Who will not receive assistance from Working for Families? We have no idea of that. Jobs are central to all of our policies but what does the National Party say? It says it will give us Work for the Dole. It had better hurry because there are hardly any people left on the dole. But National says that if it were in power and this were its Budget Work for the Dole would be the policy. 
The central point of difference here is between a Government on this side of the House that has ideas that has a policy and that says what it will do and does it and the National Party which has a different story every day of the week. Let us just run through the issues. We could go through Iraq education— 
Hon Annette King 
: Housing. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: —housing therapeutics; we could go through any issue at all. There is climate change which Mr Key says is a massive hoax one day and says is his firm belief the next day. On almost every single issue Mr Key is unable to hold the same story over a number of days. That is why I tell my colleagues the honeymoon is over. It is OK to be fresh-faced it is OK to have a new haircut—like Mr English—and it is OK for Mr Key to say he is a person with no real experience in politics but is willing to give himself over to serving the nation. That is a great thing but in the end people know one has to have experience one has to have substance and one has to have ideas. A leader has to know how to drive the political machine and has to know how to get results. That is why this Budget from Michael Cullen—one in a line of eight—has continued to deliver. That is why the National Party cannot outline a Budget and give us one single idea. 
I say to Mr English that when he has finished yawning gets up and speaks for his whole 10 minutes—he will have a little speech to give over here—one single workable policy will do for us. I want just one policy from Mr English. He is the grinder. He is not bouncing from cloud to cloud; he is down there in the engine room working it through. So Mr English should know that one single workable real policy that can be costed and implemented will do—just one. If we can have that we will say that the National members are not just a bunch of whingers are not people who are here just to complain and are not the natural Opposition— 
Hon Annette King 
: Yes they are. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: —but do have a chance of offering something to people in this country. But as Mrs King says and she is right— 
R Doug Woolerton 
: They are the natural Opposition. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: —they are the natural Opposition in this country. They are bereft of ideas and they know only how to complain. They have not come up with one single single thing that they could do. 
And I tell Mr Woolerton that I look forward in just a few months’ time to forming a new Government over here on this side of the House and to looking for New Zealand First to be our partner in that Government. I will see him then.