Tolley Anne: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tolley Anne: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Sitting date: 30 January 2013. Volume:687;Page:7617. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mr Speaker can I begin also by wishing you well in your new role as our High Commissioner in London. You have been a very good Speaker. You have given me a very fair hearing. I just hope that you have given a few pointers to the next Speaker so that I can continue my very good relationship with the Chair. 
Prime Minister’s statements—well I have listened to a few. Some have been substantial and enlightening some have been about real policies that are to be implemented some have been about challenges and opportunities and some are believable. Then there is the other sort. There is the bluster the blatherskite the blame shifting and another word that starts with “b” that you know a lot about Mr Speaker—animal manure. Yesterday John Key in his fifth Prime Minister’s statement was in the “other sort” category because after 5 years of Prime Minister’s statements he finally got around to mentioning one of the big issues facing New Zealanders that of affordable housing. It is an issue that ordinary Kiwis hard-working Kiwis are very concerned about. Well he got 13 lines in his speech. That was all he was prepared to commit to the issue but there was no policy there was no programme and there were no ideas just a handful of meaningless words. He said this: “We need more houses built in New Zealand at a lower cost.” He said that we need more land he said that we need more streamlined processes and he said that we need to be more proactive. So you add those 13 lines up and the conclusion is a big fat nothing because there was a lot of kneading going on but not much was rising. 
I have no idea how National is going to go about housing affordability in New Zealand but he did manage to do a lot of ad libbing about Labour’s KiwiBuild policy. What I know is that we have got the National Party rattled on this policy because I have never seen the Prime Minister fizzing frothing and fibbing as much as he has been over KiwiBuild. And then we watched Bill English today. He got to his feet and he spat and he yelled and he screeched all about Labour’s housing policy. I am delighted—absolutely delighted—that we are talking about Labour’s housing policy. The whole country is talking about Labour’s housing policy. Why? It is because the public like it. They like it. In a recent survey 70 percent of New Zealanders said that they like KiwiBuild. They like the idea that there will be 100000 affordable houses built in New Zealand over the next 10 years which is going to give our young people a chance to own their part of a Kiwi dream. 
I have to tell Mr English that once again National gets all the facts wrong and it makes them up. The Government is not going to build the houses. We are not builders. We are going to have the private sector build the houses but we are certainly going to front up and stump up and be leading a building policy in this country the likes of which we have not seen in probably the last 50 years. The public of New Zealand welcome a party that is prepared to roll up its sleeves and to face head-on the issues that directly affect them that affect their lives that affect their kids and that affect their sense of security and their place in the future and where they belong in this country. They want a smart hands-on Government. 
And then we have the Prime Minister who because he is so rattled over this policy decides that he has to make up figures. He has been spinning as fast as he can. In fact he has even enlisted TV3 to help him talk about Labour’s policy while trying to keep the focus off his own pathetic and shonky response to KiwiBuild. Today was a classic. He got caught out today. You see who has been spinning the figures? Who has not been telling the truth about housing in New Zealand? Unfortunately it happens to be the Prime Minister. He does not even know that in the last few days his own building department has said that at Hobsonville in his electorate—the most expensive land in Auckland on build at the moment—it is going to be able to build four-bedroom homes 300 square metres for under $485000. What did the Prime Minister say? “That’s not our policy.” 
Well unfortunately for him it is what the Building and Housing Group says is going to be built on Hobsonville land for the Government. If the Government can build four-bedroom houses 300 square metres—that is a pretty big house 300 square metres—for under $485000 why can a Government that is doing a bulk build of 10000 houses a year not build houses for on average around $300000? Good solid first homes for Kiwis—not two bathrooms two en suites and garages for three cars but good solid homes Mr Henare—a little bit like what you may have grown up in: solid warm reliable houses that people can get into and can afford. So why can National build these big flash houses in Hobsonville for less than $485000 but it argues that this party will not be able to? Well we have caught John Key out with his own figures. 
So what is John Key’s response to our policy? Firstly to sack the hapless Minister of Housing. Poor old Phil Heatley—you know he is a nice bloke. He tried hard. He did not deserve to go because he is not the worst Minister. The worst Minister in living memory has to be Hekia Parata. There she was sitting cosily today on her front-bench cushioned seat too afraid to answer questions about education and too afraid to open her mouth because what comes out is mumbo-jumbo and bureaucratic speak. It is unintelligible. So what does John Key do? He appoints Nick Smith. But what else does he do— 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Oh that was a bit slow. 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: Yes it was a bit slow. I apologise but I do not think the Standing Orders allow the courage of a member to be debated in this House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member did not accuse the member of lacking courage or being gutless or anything; the member said “too afraid to answer questions …”. If we keep ruling out more and more words I think it is pointless. The member is being critical of another member; the member is entitled to do that. The performance of members in this House can be challenged. I think it was not done in a derogatory way and I do not want to go ruling out words. 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: Really? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is the way it is done that is important. If one goes back over Speakers’ rulings over all the years most Speakers have objected when language is used that is clearly derogatory. I do not want to be ruling out words just because they might be critical of a member because I think we end up with too few words to use. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: What was the action of the Prime Minister? Sack poor old Phil Heatley and then appoint Nick Smith. But not only appoint Nick Smith; he has appointed two Associate Ministers of Housing. Never in the history of this Parliament have you had to have a Minister of Housing and two Associate Ministers of Housing. What was interesting is that one of the Associate Ministers spoke yesterday in the debate the Hon Tariana Turia. Did she mention housing? Not a word about the most important issue that many New Zealanders face. 
So we have got Nick Smith. I have to say that Nick Smith has the opposite effect to the Midas touch. Rather than everything turning to gold it turns to something distinctly softer and smellier. So first of all we get Nick Smith then we will get his action plan. I want you to write it down and I want you to put bets on it because this is what the plan will be. First he will manufacture a crisis—think ACC think local government. Then he will lay the blame on everyone else but not the Government—think ACC think local government. And then he will use made-up figures—for made-up figures think ACC think local government once again. And then he will apply an unworkable unproven unnecessary solution—think ACC think local government. 
 Here is the crisis that he will manufacture first: it is all local government’s fault. It is too expensive it is too slow it is too useless and it is all about resource consent. And you heard the Prime Minister: “It is taking 6 to 18 months and it is absolutely disgraceful.” Well let us look at the facts. The Ministry for the Environment provides that data to the Government on resource consents. So do the councils’ annual plans. They look at the numbers the types and the time taken. What do the latest figures show? They show that 95 percent of resource consents are processed on time and 0.5 percent of applications are declined. Those are the figures not the bodgie made-up figures the Prime Minister has given us over the last week or so. These are the very figures Nick Smith will use for his made-up crisis in local government. 
Then if you search the reports over the last year—go out and research—how many reports have there been of resource consents taking between 6 and 18 months? I found four reports over a whole year. One was for a mining project the second one was for a river bridge the third one was for a power substation and the fourth was for a salmon farm—nothing to do with housing. So I say to members: watch this spot. The National Party will attack Labour’s policy with shonky figures and a made-up attack with Nick Smith leading it—mark my words.