THURSDAY, 6 AUGUST 2020
The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
Karakia.
MOTIONS
Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—75th Anniversary
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister): I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate to mark the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being taken? There appears to be none.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I move, That this House mark the 75th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the 50th year since the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty entered into force, by urging all nuclear-armed States to make real progress toward a nuclear weapons - free world; and that it urge all States to maintain the global norm against nuclear weapons testing, and all who have not yet joined the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons do so at the earliest opportunity to ensure a world finally free of the threat of nuclear weapons.
Motion agreed to.





ORAL QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Housing
1. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister of Housing: Is she satisfied with all aspects of quarantine and managed isolation management, and what, if anything, has she learnt from the Australian experience of a second wave of COVID-19 infections?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): In answer to the first part of the question, yes, but as I outlined on Tuesday, this is a process of continuous improvement. While the systems are robust, we cannot always prevent human error. In answer to the second part of the question, what I've learnt is the importance of good Government oversight and robust procedures to ensure we keep COVID out of our communities. In New Zealand, the Defence Force have the responsibility for operating our facilities with the assistance of police, aviation, and security staff. What we have seen in Victoria in the wake of a community outbreak is a transition to a publicly managed system similar to ours, because poor management of private managed isolation facilities through private providers resulted in a second wave of COVID-19 and an extended lockdown. But the most important lesson I've learnt is that under the brilliant leadership of our Prime Minister, we prioritised a public health response. Because we went hard and went early, we are now in a strong position to bounce back from the effects of COVID-19.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: With such glowing testament to the Government's brilliance, can she guarantee—
SPEAKER: Order! The member will ask a question that is in order.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Is her glowing testament to the Government's competence a guarantee—
SPEAKER: Order! The next time, the member will lose his supplementary.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, you'd better instruct me. Point of order—point of order.
SPEAKER: If the member can't recognise his ironic tone himself, everyone else can. Ask the question.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Can the Minister guarantee that the Government's management of quarantine and managed isolation will not result in a second wave of COVID-19 infections in New Zealand?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: This is a question that I've spoken about on numerous occasions, as the member will be aware. What we will guarantee as a Government is that we will prioritise setting up robust managed isolation and quarantine facilities that protect New Zealanders and the gains that we have made. What I have also talked about is that there will be human error, but we are putting in place a significant risk mitigation strategy to ensure that we are protecting all of us.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: What risks are posed by security guards at quarantine facilities in New Zealand falling asleep on the job?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Private security guards who are subcontracted through the Aviation Security Service (Avsec) are one part of the layer of security that exists in our managed isolation and quarantine facilities. Of course, the operational lead of our facilities lies with the New Zealand Defence Force. We also have Avsec, we also have police, and then we do have subcontracted security guards. Obviously, it is not acceptable to have security guards falling asleep on the job, and this is the subject of an investigation that we are carrying out with site security assessments of all of the 31 managed isolation facilities. But the guarantee I can give New Zealanders is that we aren't putting all of our faith in one simple layer of security, that we have multiple layers of security within our facilities, and that is why they are doing the job they were set up to do, and that is to keep COVID inside of our facilities and not in our communities.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Is she aware of reports that similar incidents of security guards falling asleep in the state of Victoria could have led to the increased community transmission of COVID-19 in that state?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I am aware of some nocturnal activities alleged around security guards in the state of Victoria, but what I can tell that member is that, actually, what has been publicly identified as the biggest risk that was posed in the state of Victoria with the facility was the outsourcing of the management of the managed isolation and quarantine facilities, and the lack of robustness that came through that. That is why our Government has made a commitment to ensure that we brought in early the New Zealand Defence Force to be the agency that was operating our facilities.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Has the Minister checked to find out if security guards who are working in a private capacity or through private contractors at the 31 managed facilities are working shifts of less than 12 hours and do not have second jobs?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As I talked about, we are currently carrying out site security assessments of all of the 31 managed isolation facilities. As well as the number of hours, the pay rates that people are being paid is also something that we are interested in. We are also interested in whether or not they are licensed security companies that are being employed in these facilities. So not only have I asked the questions, we have also met with unions who represent these security workers.
Hon Stuart Nash: Did the Minister ever uncover any evidence of Casper the homeless ghost—I mean guest—as reported by the Opposition—
SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Order! The member will stand, withdraw, and apologise.
Hon Stuart Nash: I withdraw and apologise.
Hon Louise Upston: No, mean it—stand and look like you mean it.
SPEAKER: Order! No, the member will sit down, and the Hon Louise Upston will stand, withdraw, and apologise.
Hon Louise Upston: I withdraw and apologise.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Has the Minister just told the House that there may well be unlicensed security guards acting as one of the lines of security at some of the 31 quarantine centres?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As that member is well aware through the engagement of security firms through a number of his portfolios, there are a variety of types of security companies that operate in New Zealand. Some of them are licensed; some of them have employees who are not. Part of the individual site security assessments that we are carrying out is an audit of the types of security subcontracts that are present at every site. But before that member would like to fearmonger more for New Zealanders, I would like to give the reassurance that this is a layered approach to security, and people can have faith that our managed isolation and quarantine facilities are offering a strong line of defence to keep COVID out of our communities.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Has she had any discussions with Dr Ashley Bloomfield to ascertain why he might have put a lot of fear into the New Zealand community yesterday by suggesting a second wave could be imminent?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think the only person putting fear is the person wearing the tin foil hat. But what I would like to say is that it's the responsibility of the Director-General of Health to prepare New Zealanders in the wake of a global pandemic about what could happen. In fact, our Prime Minister, three weeks earlier, had outlined what the scenarios would be if there is a resurgence of the virus. This is what a Government with a plan looks like. This is what a Government who is prepared looks like and why there is a public that has faith in our Government in leading them through this pandemic.




Question No. 2—Finance
2. KIRITAPU ALLAN (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic? 
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): This morning, Stats New Zealand released its latest data on paid jobs for the week ended 5 July. Statistics New Zealand said that by its most accurate measure, the number of paid jobs were up by 5,020 from the week before. This follows yesterday's labour market data to the end of the June, which showed that the unemployment rate had fallen to 4 percent, although underlying indicators showed some of the impact of COVID-19 is still to be felt in that data. While we know the path ahead will be difficult for some workers and firms, today's data demonstrates the continued resilience in the New Zealand labour market, thanks in part to this Government's hard and early economic and health response to COVID-19. 
Kiritapu Allan: What reports has he seen on recent labour market data? 
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, ASB released an economic note on yesterday's labour market data saying that June quarter labour market statistics were undoubtedly stronger than expected but that we will still have to wait and see how the job market settles once the economy adjusts to its post-COVID normal. ASB economists did say that they expect the unemployment rate to rise from here but that the peak may be lower than first thought. I also saw one commentator say that what he always looks for is the labour force participation rate, which is "above all else, the most important number, and in good times it's up around 70 percent. Towards 69 to 70 percent, that's what we want. That's a good number." I'm once again pleased do inform Mike Hosking that the participation rate in the June quarter was 69.7 percent. 
Kiritapu Allan: Just thinking about that, what did the HLFS, QES, and LCI say about wages—
SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will start again. 
Kiritapu Allan: And what did the HLFS—
SPEAKER: Order! If the member—that's one gone. The member can have another go now. 
Kiritapu Allan: What did the HLFS, QES, and LCI say about wages, and how will the Government's investment from the CRRF, including the IRG projects administered by the CIP, and the PDU support wage growth through the lens of the LSF and the CPF priorities? 
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: OMG! I thank the MP for the OPQ. According to the QES, wages were up 1.2 percent from a year ago, while the LCI said wages were up 2.1 percent in the year to the end of June—so not OTT. But the CRRF contains a range of investments, not only in the IRG but also in MSD, MBIE, IRD, MOE, and MPI, all to generate sustainable jobs and wages from New Zealanders. I could go on, Mr Speaker, but I thought it might be TMI. So I very much look forward to updating this House on the results of the next HLFS, QES, GDP, PMI, and CPI, but, first, we've got to duck out for an election—BRB. 




Question No. 3—Veterans
3. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister for Veterans: What recent announcements has he made regarding support for veterans? 
Hon RON MARK (Minister for Veterans): On 27 July, I announced that the coalition Government had approved a one-off grant of $2.53 million to be made to the Royal New Zealand Returned and Services' Association (RSA) from the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund. The RSA's fund-raising had been hard hit by COVID19's pandemic, with the annual Poppy Day appeal having been cancelled this year because New Zealand was at alert level 4. This has affected the RSA's ability to maintain its delivery infrastructure and the amount of support it has available to deliver to veterans. The Government grant will help the RSA to maintain its current level of support to these vulnerable citizens and to deliver its services to them in the face of the COVID-19 challenges. 
Jenny Marcroft: What recent declarations have been made related to qualifying operational service? 
Hon RON MARK: Last week, as part of an ongoing review of the post-1974 deployments, I announced that 11 new declarations of operational service had been made. These primarily affect those who served in certain times and certain places, such as Cambodia, Somalia, the Sinai Peninsula, and on board HMNZS Canterbury and HMNZS Waikato in the Indian Ocean. This means that those who took part in these deployments will now qualify for support and services from Veterans' Affairs. Our people in the New Zealand Defence Force serve or have served their country in a variety of ways overseas, often in very difficult and dangerous conditions, and these changes will be welcomed by our veterans and will positively affect around 1,300 service members. 
Jenny Marcroft: What will the recently passed Veterans' Support Amendment Bill (No 2) mean for veterans and their families? 
Hon RON MARK: I want to start the answer to this question by thanking the House, Mr Speaker, and yourself for the way in which this bill was expedited through. This bill has made a range of very meaningful changes that will make life easier for veterans and their families, and I thank all members of the House for their unanimous and timely support last week. To highlight just a few of these changes, it will enable Veterans' Affairs to fund mental health services for veterans with acute needs before eligibility has been formally established. It will extend some services to families, such as counselling, where this is necessary for the veteran's wellbeing. It will abolish the five-year restriction on childcare assistance. It will enable Veterans' Independence Programme household support services to continue for 12 months when a veteran goes into care, to assist their spouse or partner and their family. It will better recognise psychological illness conditions that are attributed to or aggravated by a veteran's service. 
Jenny Marcroft: Has there been any progress on the out-of-scope recommendation made by Professor Ron Paterson in his report on the legal definition of a veteran? 
Hon RON MARK: Yes, I can report some progress. A wee while back, Cabinet approved my going out to the nation asking the question of the nation: what do they believe an appropriate definition of a veteran should be? We have had tremendous feedback. I have that report, and I'll be releasing the results of that very soon. 




Question No. 4—Finance
4. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Finance: What was the extent of fiscal and economic stimulus during the June quarter, and what is Treasury's best estimate of the stimulus since then?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Fiscal and economic stimulus comes from a range of sources in terms of the Government, but also the wider economy. In terms of monetary policy, in March the Reserve Bank lowered the official cash rate from 1 percent to 0.25 percent and committed to keep it there for at least a year. The Reserve Bank is also keeping long-term interest rates down by buying up to $60 billion of New Zealand Government bonds, New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency bonds, and New Zealand Government inflation-indexed bonds in the secondary market. It's also announced the total size of its large-scale asset purchases programme is $60 billion over the next 12 months. To date, it has repurchased about $22 billion of these bonds on the secondary market. In terms of fiscal stimulus, according to the Treasury's monthly Crown accounts, total Crown expenses in April and May were $30.286 billion. In terms of the month of June and the second part of the member's question, the Government accounts for June and July and the first 5½ days of August have not yet been finalised. But the Treasury estimates that Crown expenses would be about $30.792 billion across June and July.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: How much borrowed money has the Government put in to hold up the economy since the COVID crisis began?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As the member knows, the New Zealand economy was robust, there was some money in the kitty, but, given the substantial amount of spending that has been done over the last few months, much of it has been borrowed. If the member cared to put that question down in writing, he would have had a chance to have it answered more fully than that.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: Well, isn't it critical during these extraordinary times to have a clear sense of the extent of stimulus holding up the economy right now?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It is, and I outlined to the member the numbers that Treasury are able to provide at this time. I think the stimulus that's gone into the economy is the very thing that's ensured that New Zealanders have been able to stay in work, that we've been able to support small businesses, and it's very important that the Government continues to take the attitude of supporting New Zealanders, not heading down a path of austerity. 
Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he agree that the current state of the New Zealand economy rests more on the size of the stimulus than it does on the "brilliant leadership" that his colleagues refer to?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I've said before in this House, it's the team of 5 million that is responsible for the position that New Zealand finds itself in today.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he agree that the historically unprecedented level of stimulus has so far masked the true economic consequences of COVID-19, but that the 67,000 additional New Zealanders who have gone on to Government unemployment support since March know those consequences only too well?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: If the member, by saying "masks the true economic consequences", means a Government that actually is prepared to stand alongside New Zealanders, help them stay in work, help them put food on the table, help them support their families and their communities, then the wage subsidy scheme worked, in that regard.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: How has his Government used the time that this historically unprecedented stimulus has bought us to prepare for a stronger economic recovery?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, Mr Speaker, I'll be at risk of incurring your wrath, but quite clearly a Budget that concluded $15 billion of new spending designed over the forecast period to help create 300,000 jobs is a good start, in that regard.




Question No. 5—Education
5. MARJA LUBECK (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What is the Government doing to make it easier and more attractive for employers to train people?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): We're supporting employers to keep New Zealanders working, keep them training, and to help them find work, particularly in areas where there are skills shortages. We recognise that apprentices need more support from employers in their first two years, while they're in training and they're developing their skills. That's why the Apprenticeship Boost initiative, which commenced yesterday, will provide cash support to employers to help to keep their first- and second-year apprentices employed and training towards their qualifications. We've also provided extra funding to ensure that people in apprenticeships and other targeted areas of training don't have to pay fees until the end of 2022.
Marja Lubeck: What initial take-up has there been for the Apprenticeship Boost initiative?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Shortly before question time, I was advised by my colleague Carmel Sepuloni, the Minister for Social Development, that the Ministry of Social Development are implementing this programme, and that as at 10 o'clock today, 798 businesses have already commenced the application process for the Apprenticeship Boost initiative, which, of course, was only officially launched yesterday.
Marja Lubeck: Have these initiatives had any success in broadening the range of employers taking on apprenticeships?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, very good news. For example, in the first six months of this year, the Building and Construction Industry Training Organisation signed up 301 new employers who had never trained before. Compare that to since 1 July, when they've signed up 246 new employers. In other words, 45 percent of the new employers in the building and construction industry taking on new apprentices have joined and signed up for that since this initiative was first announced. For the skills organisation, that number from 1 July is 149. From the primary industry training organisation, that number is 49 new employers. These are all employers who have not previously taken on apprentices and who are now going to be doing so.




Question No. 6—Transport
Hon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): Thank you, Mr Speaker. To the Minister of Tourism, does he stand by his decision not to provide support to outbound tourism operators—
SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! I don't think that you're Mr Bishop.
Hon Todd McClay: We look a lot alike, but you're right.
SPEAKER: Well, I don't think that's kind to either of you. Mr Bishop.
6. CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South) to the Minister of Transport: It's certainly not kind to Mr McClay. Does he think that there have been failures in the transport portfolio in this term of Parliament; if so, what are they?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): In this term, we uncovered that Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) failed to properly regulate the transport sector going back many years. Safety is our Government's top priority, and we're getting the Transport Agency back on track after the last Government failed to. This term we also had to fix the failure to properly invest in Auckland by filling the $6 billion hole that Simon Bridges left in the Auckland Transport Alignment Project. Another failure that we uncovered this term was the flat-lining of road maintenance spending which has meant more potholes for drivers. We're investing $5.5 billion to play catch-up—that's $1.3 billion more than the former Government did—to fix up New Zealand's roads and bring them up to scratch. In this term, we fixed a number of failures, as well as getting on with getting New Zealand moving.
Chris Bishop: Does he consider it a failure that, after three years, when light rail was meant to have been built to Mount Roskill from the Auckland CBD, the project hasn't even started?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: No. As the member knows, parties couldn't agree and Cabinet's asked the Ministry of Transport to do more work on the Auckland light rail project to be ready for the new Government to consider after the election. But, in the meantime, we're actually getting one with rapid transit in Auckland by building things like the Eastern Busway, extending the Northern Busway, electrification of rail to Pukekohe, and two new stations at Drury. All the last Government did in Auckland was leave a $6 billion hole. 
Chris Bishop: Does he consider it a failure that his State highway funding cuts caused what the Prime Minister's Business Advisory Council called "an infrastructure crisis"?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, I don't know how the member can say that we cut State highway funding when, in January, we announced more than $5 billion of new fully funded State highways on top of the record spending on roads that we were already doing.
Chris Bishop: Is he denying that the 2018 Government Policy Statement (GPS) on transport, and the subsequent National Land Transport Programme that arose from that GPS, cut the State highway improvements activity class over the 10-year period?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The fact is, in the 10-year period, we were spending more on roads than the former National Government ever did. Now, the member likes to suggest that this Government hasn't built any roads, but I suggest he talks to his colleague Mark Mitchell, who was an enthusiastic participant the other day at sod-turning on the Matakana Link Road. In fact, he was so enthusiastic he took credit for the project—in the local newspaper—which was funded, consented, and had been constructed under this Government.
Chris Bishop: Does he consider it a failure that after three years, the East-West Link re-evaluation has not even been uploaded to the NZTA website, and no progress has been made on the project?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: No, actually I consider it to be an act of fiscal prudence on the part of this Government that we pulled the plug on a project that would have been the most expensive roading project in world history. Now, I know the member thinks he can tunnel his way to victory by promising unfunded roads and unfunded tunnels, but surely he has learnt the lesson from the bridges of Northland.
Paul Eagle: Does he think that there have been successes in the transport portfolio in this term of Government; if so, what are they?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: As a matter of fact, we've secured $196 million for our Wellington rail package; we've started getting rail back on track after it was left in a state of managed decline under the former Government, investing $4.6 billion in our rail network; there are $6.8 billion of transport projects for our six high-growth cities under the New Zealand Upgrade Programme; we gave the green light to the Manawatū Gorge replacement project; we've made sure that our regions have been connected during the COVID pandemic—
SPEAKER: Order! Order! Enough.
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Oh, sorry, Mr Speaker.
Kieran McAnulty: What more can the Minister say to enlighten the House on the successes of this Government's transport package?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, surprisingly, Mr Speaker, there is more. We've negotiated the landmark Let's Get Wellington Moving project, the biggest investment in Wellington City after a decade of no action; we've doubled the funding for New Zealand Land Search and Rescue, we've extended the expiry of drivers' licences, warrants of fitness, and certificates of fitness during the COVID pandemic—and there's so much more.
SPEAKER: OK, thank you. 
Chris Bishop: Just in relation to his last comment about tunnelling, what correspondence, if any, has he received from the member of Parliament for Rongotai about bringing forward the Mount Victoria tunnel to deliver what the eastern suburbs of Wellington actually want?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, the member for Rongotai doesn't have to write to me about these issues; we talk about transport issues constantly, because on this side of the House, our members advocate for their electorates constantly and effectively.
SPEAKER: Julie Anne Genter.
Hon Members: Oh!
SPEAKER: Order! Both of you.
Hon Julie Anne Genter: Does he consider it a failure or a success that this Government has more than doubled the funding for road safety improvements and increased the number of roading police relative to the previous Government?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I thank the member for that question, because she's quite right to raise the issue that the former Government allowed the number of deaths on our roads to blow out by 50 percent, way in excess of population increase or vehicle kilometres travelled. This Government is now investing a billion dollars a year in saving lives on the roading network, because safety is our top priority.
Chris Bishop: Does he consider it a failure that after repeated urging, he failed to release the Associate Minister of Transport's—or Green Party transport spokesperson's—secret letter to him about the Mount Vic tunnel?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: No, the member likes to quibble with conspiracy theories. On this side of the House, we're getting on with getting New Zealand moving.
Hon Julie Anne Genter: Does he consider it a failure or success that this House passed unanimously the first reading of a bill to introduce random roadside drug testing, which the previous Government failed to do in nine years?
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well—
SPEAKER: The member can answer the first part of it, but he's not responsible for the second.
Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, I do consider it a success, because that's been an issue that's been outstanding for too long, beyond this term of Government. Our Government has done it, we've done the policy work, and we've—
SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member got a clear instruction.




Question No. 7—Tourism
7. Hon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) to the Minister of Tourism: Does he stand by his decision not to provide support to outbound tourism operators as a part of his $311 million tourism relief package?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Tourism): Yes. I also stand by the statements I made in the House yesterday that Minister Faafoi and I have asked officials to engage with the outbound tourism sector to gain a better understanding of their current situation so Government can make decisions on what support might be required to assist with Kiwis accessing refunds they are owed.
Hon Todd McClay: Does he agree with Grant Robertson, as reported in Travel Today, that the outbound tourism sector falls within the tourism portfolio, and, if so, why has he not done anything to support travel agents who are about to lose their businesses and jobs so far?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I disagree with the member's assertion that I'm not doing anything to help them. Minister Faafoi and I have asked our officials to engage with the outbound tourism operators.
Hon Todd McClay: Why has he given $20 million of support to inbound tourism but no support for outbound operators, and does he not think that travel agents are just as deserving of support from his Government?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I acknowledge the role that outbound tourism operators have played and the effects they're feeling from the closure of borders because of COVID19. That's why the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and I have asked for options and advice on their situation in order to help them.
Hon Todd McClay: Why did he say in the House on Tuesday that no travel agents applied for the strategic asset fund, when Tour Time in Auckland did submit an application, and how many other travel agents applied and were declined funding?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I've been advised that four companies that are both inbound and outbound tourism operators applied, and, as the member is aware, the $311 million package did allocate support to inbound tourism operators.
Hon Todd McClay: What does he say to a travel agent named Nicola who has emailed saying, "Today's question 9 session with Kelvin Davis was vile and disgusting, an absolute insult to myself and all travel agent industry colleagues. The comments made by Mr Davis were incredibly disrespectful and sickening"—
SPEAKER: Order! The member has enough for a question.
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I have acknowledged in the House that my tone was not as it should have been, and I would say that I acknowledge all the hard work that they are doing to process refunds for New Zealanders. I'd say that I understand that COVID-19 has had a huge impact on her industry and that the Government is looking at options.
Hon Todd McClay: Will the Minister, therefore, take the opportunity in the House today, on our last day, to apologise to Nicola and all travel agents he has offended?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I stand by the answers I gave in the House yesterday to the questions on the same issue. As mentioned, Minister Faafoi and I have asked officials to engage with the outbound tourism sector. We understand that New Zealanders are still awaiting refunds and that agents are working through that process. We need to better understand the challenges travel agents are facing with regards to refunding customers before making decisions around Government support.




Question No. 8—Māori Development
8. RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) to the Minister for Māori Development: What has the Government achieved for Māori?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister for Māori Development): So much progress has been made by this Government to support Māori aspiration, partner economic opportunity, and make some real gains on the issues that transform lifetime outcomes. Let's look at jobs. He Poutama Rangatahi is a community-led employment programme working with rangatahi who would otherwise slip through the gaps to get the chance to train and work towards a secure job, getting the support they need and making their whānau proud. Mana in Mahi is helping rangatahi considered at risk of long-term unemployment to take up a job or gain an apprenticeship or formal industry qualification. Māori cadetships are supporting existing and new employees of all ages into full-time permanent jobs. Oh, and now we're making significant traction on free apprenticeship training for so many more people. Then there's our commitment to whānau and Te Reo, with the audacious goal to have one million New Zealanders speaking basic Te Reo by 2040, and over 1,000 graduates of Te Ahu o Te Reo Māori made up of teachers and staff to help integrate Te Reo Māori into our schools. We've invested in Te Kōhanga Reo so that they can pay their kaiako and upgrade their buildings. There is so much that we've done—there is more.
Rino Tirikatene: What about the economic and social gains for Māori?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: During these unprecedented times I want to thank our Māori health professionals and service providers, community workers, iwi and Māori entities, Māori wardens, social and mental health workers, supermarket workers, rubbish collectors, and kai producers, who are our essential workers, alongside many others. That effort certainly changed the way we are working with Māori to recover and rebuild through initiatives like investing $100 million to unlock the potential of whenua Māori; investing in iwi projects to help revitalise the regions, create jobs, and grow the Māori economy, in partnership with the Provincial Growth Fund; boosting Māori- and community-led development to strengthen long-term capacity for whānau; more funding for Whānau Ora; the highest number of Māori on DHBs across the country; partnering with iwi to improve housing outcomes and flow-through benefits like training and employment locally; and strengthening the capacity of Māori community housing providers to support our response to homelessness.
Rino Tirikatene: Of all the Government's achievements for Māori in these three short years, what are the highlights?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: It's so difficult to try and pick out only a few, but let me try: New Zealand history in schools by 2022; a wonderful statue honouring the achievements of Dame Whina Cooper; a Māori language strategy that has set a bold, audacious goal of one million New Zealanders speaking basic Te Reo by 2040; a strong programme of action in Māori housing to do more repairs and maintenance so they are warm and dry, and—
SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Enough—enough! 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Mr Speaker? 
SPEAKER: Enough. 




Question No. 9—Justice
SPEAKER: Before we get to question No. 9, I just want to inform the House that this question has been subject to some ongoing negotiation between myself and the father of the House, and we agreed it will be asked in a form slightly different from what appears on the Order Paper. Agreement was reached at about 10 past 2.
9. Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of Justice: Does he agree with the comments relating to the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill's explanatory note and repeated in the referendum brochure in the New Zealand Medical Journal of 31 July "These are inflated and unrealistic political promises for policy impacts that are unlikely to be achieved as stated"?
Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That is not the question as placed down on the Order Paper for today. He deviated from it, and he should be asked to come back.
SPEAKER: Well, Mr Peters, if you had been listening to what I had said immediately before the question was asked, you wouldn't have taken the point of order.
Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I'm happy to answer the question on behalf of the Minister of Justice, but the issue is that the question as you have now agreed it with the member doesn't actually make sense, because there is no referendum brochure in the New Zealand Medical Journal. The lack of punctuation in the question means that it doesn't actually make any sense.
SPEAKER: I apologise for that, for my letting it through in that form, but I just want to indicate to the Minister that it is not a surprise to him that it be of that shape, because that was the form in which it was originally put to his office, or close to it, earlier, before I intervened. There was a subsequent intervention, which gave me a copy of authentication that wasn't previously available, and I have approved it. I take responsibility for the lack of sense in the member's question, but I also indicate to the Minister that I do not believe he can't answer it.
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education) on behalf of the Minister of Justice: No.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why did he question the credibility of the author of the New Zealand Medical Journal article from Professor Fischer at Auckland University Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, when he said the study—and I quote the Minister—"claims to the science-based review of the draft legislation. It is clear it is not."?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The article the member refers to is an opinion column; it is not a peer-reviewed scientific article.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does he accept that the article in the New Zealand Medical Journal written by Professor Fischer is science-based?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I accept that it reflects Mr Fischer's opinion.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why should New Zealanders have confidence in the information provided on the legalisation of cannabis referendum when the chair of addiction research at New Zealand's largest university says the information in the brochure is inflated and unrealistic?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In any referendum campaign, people will all have opinions. That's the point of a democratic process. The information in the brochure in question was finalised by the Ministry of Justice.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why is the information campaign being conducted by the Ministry of Justice, which is accountable to him and not to the Electoral Commission or an independent panel, as has been the case in every previous referendum?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Because that's the decision the Government took.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why does the information brochure sent to all electors set out all the arguments for legalising cannabis but none of the arguments against?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It explains what the bill that is the subject of the referendum question would do.




Question No. 10—Housing (Public Housing)
10. SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki) to the Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing): Can he confirm that the social housing wait-list is nearly at 18,000 people in the last reported quarter; if so, has the wait-list been rising every quarter since his Government took office?
Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing)): Kia orana, Mr Speaker. Social housing is and has been a top priority for this Government, and that's why, in three years, we've boosted the number of public housing by over 5,000 to deal with the demand that the member speaks of. We've housed over 18,000 households from the waiting list and also assisted thousands with emergency and transitional housing. Not wanting to be a pedant on the last day of school, but as the member's question suggests, it is not my Government; it is the Prime Minister's, and she has asked me to remind the member that her Government has added over 5,000 public houses, ended National's mass sell-off of State housing, and passed the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2) and the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill, just to name a few. I must also note that if National had built the 30,000 State houses that Jacqui Dean thinks that they did, then the wait-list would obviously not be an issue.
Simon O'Connor: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Twofold: firstly, I didn't actually hear a confirmation of the number, and, secondly, it's Her Majesty's Government and always will be.
SPEAKER: Well, I'm not going to address the first one, but the second one anticipates decisions of this House, and we're not going there.
Simon O'Connor: When the Prime Minister said last year that she stands by her "proactive work to fix the housing crisis.", did that proactive work contribute to almost 18,000 New Zealand families being on the social housing wait-list?
Hon KRIS FAAFOI: That proactive stance has meant that we've built over 5,000 public houses over the last three years, and we've proudly invested in 8,000 more at Budget 2020.
Simon O'Connor: When former Minister of Housing and Urban Development Phil Twyford talked about the Labour-led Government "paddling the waka as fast as we can to provide better housing choices.", did he expect the waka would need to house 18,000-plus families?
Hon KRIS FAAFOI: We've got many passengers on our waka, and this Government, as I have said, has proudly invested in social housing over the last three years, which has meant that we have now more than 5,000 public housing places than when we came into Government and have committed to 8,000 more. This Government is building houses. We are not waiting list deniers and cutting the list in half arbitrarily, like the previous Government.
Simon O'Connor: How does he reconcile the comments of his colleague the Minister of Housing saying last year, "We will get people off the public housing register as quickly as possible", with said register increasing every single quarter since this Government took office, and now over 18,000 families are on the waiting list?
Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Well, one of the first statements that this Government said is that if people needed housing, we would help them. That's why people have come forward and see hope in the Government in supplying housing for New Zealanders that need it, which is why we now have more than 5,000 more public houses than we inherited. We have committed to 8,000 more. I would point out, again, that we have built them, and in the last couple of weeks, National has, again, promoted 30,000 "ghost homes".




Question No. 11—Police
11. GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of Police: What reports has he seen about the impact on police diversity of the growth in recruitment over the past three years?
Hon STUART NASH (Minister of Police): Reports that I have seen confirm that the roll-out of new police has smashed all sorts of recruitment records. There are more women, more Māori, more Pasifika, and more Asian police officers on the front line, and that includes 266 new constables deployed in that member's Wellington district alone. Almost half the growth in the police workforce is made up of female officers. As at the end of June, there were 1,193 Māori officers, an increase of 22 percent; 605 Pasifika officers, an increase in 41 percent; and 462 Asian officers, an increase in 85.5 percent. This marks a generational shift in police recruitment, training, and deployment. It has changed the face of modern police and created a more diverse organisation that better reflects the communities our fine police officers serve.
Ginny Andersen: What reports has he seen about how police are supporting the cultural diversity of new recruits?
Hon STUART NASH: With greater diversity and a 14.5 percent increase in front-line police officers comes a responsibility to ensure the wider organisation has support structures in place for new recruits and constables in the workforce. Following the precedent set in 2008, when a Sikh turban became part of police uniform, in 2020 female Muslim officers will, for the first time, have access to a hijab as part of their uniform. Police have collaborated with the Christchurch and Auckland Muslim women committees to design a bespoke hijab for female Muslim officers. Police have already smashed records with the first female Muslim district commander in Waitematā, and this new uniform affirms that diversity is celebrated by all.
Ginny Andersen: What reports has he seen about the police recruitment pipeline?
Hon STUART NASH: With a new wing every month in the Police College and 4,000 applicants currently being processed, there is no shortage of Kiwis who are putting up their hands to join the police service. A report I've seen on the most recent wing—No. 341, inducted into the Police College just recently—is that this wing is one of the most diverse in New Zealand Police history, with 53 percent female, 25 percent New Zealand Māori, 16.3 percent Asian, and 6.3 percent Pasifika. The youngest in the wing is 19 and the eldest is 56 years old. Recruits in this wing hail from a number of employment backgrounds, including farmers, stable hands, swim instructors, stay-at-home parents, and also includes an applicant who was recently made redundant as an Air New Zealand loader. There are also 20 different languages spoken fluently in this wing, such as Te Reo Māori, Croatian, Mandarin, French, Spanish, Punjabi, Japanese, Korean, Macedonian, and Italian. I'm extremely proud to be part of a coalition Government that has invested over $500 million in police recruitment since Budget 2018. We have delivered.




Question No. 12—Women
12. BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country) to the Minister for Women: What has she done to support women in employment?
Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Minister for Women): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I'm very proud of the work that I have done alongside of my ministerial colleagues in this Government to support women in employment during this term. We have amended the Equal Pay Act to rewrite the rules so workers in women-dominated sectors can get paid what they deserve. We've extended paid parental leave by six weeks. We significantly increased the pay for workers in female-dominated workforces, like midwives, nurses, teacher-aides, care workers, and mental health and addiction support workers. We've reduced the imbalance in pay between men and women in the public sector, resulting in the biggest improvements since data collection began. Women now make up 50 percent of public sector leadership roles. We've made flexible work the default in the public sector. We're on track to fill 50 percent of public sector board positions with women by 2021, and we've introduced domestic violence leave to support survivors so they won't be at risk of losing their job while they're dealing with a violent situation. 
As the member will be aware, the global economic slowdown caused by COVID-19 is having a disproportionate impact on women in New Zealand. The wage subsidy has helped many women in female-dominated sectors like retail and hospitality weather the storm—but, obviously, not all. That's why, as Minister for Women, I'm working across Government with other Ministers to respond to employment issues that have arisen due to COVID-19, including through our $1.6 billion trades and apprenticeships training package and the $121 million for He Poutama Rangatahi. It's why we have support available for women to retrain, and I note that compared to this time last year, 20,000 more women are participating in formal training.
Barbara Kuriger: Has she seen the latest unemployment figures for women, released by Statistics New Zealand yesterday, showing that women made up more than 90 percent of the fall in employment; if so, what is she doing to address this?
Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: Yes, I have seen those numbers, and it is concerning. As I stated in my answer to the primary question, we have a work programme right across Government to respond to COVID-19, and we're taking into account in particular the impact on women, on people aged over 50, and on Māori and Pasifika, who are more at risk of being hit by this economic downturn.
Barbara Kuriger: What is she doing to address the growing unemployment gender gap, given that women fared worse in every field of the Statistics New Zealand labour market survey released yesterday?
Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: As I said in my answer to my primary question and the previous question, the Government is well aware of the gendered impact of the COVID-19 slowdown, and we are taking steps right across our Government policy with investment in infrastructure, and there are opportunities to target women, particularly the women who are most likely to be hard hit—Māori and Pasifika women and women over the age of 50.
Barbara Kuriger: Has she had any discussion with the Minister of Agriculture in regards to attracting women to jobs in the food and fibre sector through the Opportunity Grows Here campaign, and, if she did, what was the outcome of those discussions?
Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: I haven't spoken with the Minister of Agriculture about that, but I'd be happy to do so.
Barbara Kuriger: Does she think it is acceptable that women make up a mere 11 percent of the construction industry; and, if not, what steps has she taken to get women into jobs in the construction and infrastructure sector, given that a shovel-ready infrastructure programme is a key plank in the Government's COVID-19 response?
Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: I welcome the member's suggestion. The Government has had—just like the previous Government did in the response to the Christchurch earthquakes—a focus on attracting women to the trades. The Ministry for Women has been involved in supporting those initiatives by the building and construction industry training organisations, and I think there's a real opportunity, with the focus on trades and apprenticeships, to remove the barriers to women entering these workforces. 
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern: Can the Minister confirm that the Minister for primary industries is frequently raising with primary industries—including the likes of horticulture—the importance of flexible hours and hours that take into account caregiving arrangements in order to attract women to the workforce, and that the Government has considered specific initiatives, like food in schools, as those that we can invest in—
SPEAKER: Order!
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern: —that are more likely—
SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: Yes, I can, and I'm sure that these conversations between all of us will be ongoing. We're well aware of the challenge. I'm really proud of the response this Government has taken. Going hard and early against COVID-19 has given us the best opportunity to ensure that we do continue to have employment. Our focus on women has been successful this term of Government, and I imagine that it will continue to be successful in the next term of Government.
 





ADJOURNMENT
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime Minister): I move, That the House do now adjourn until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 18 August 2020.
Kia orana and kia ora koutou katoa. It is a privilege to be able to speak in this adjournment debate and to mark and acknowledge the fact that we are now two years and 10 months into the conclusion of a parliamentary term that has been extraordinary in so many ways. Two years and 10 months is a very short period of time, and yet a remarkable amount can happen. We started as three parties campaigning in the 2017 election, often on very separate issues but often on areas for which we could all agree, and from the moment that we emerged from negotiations with our confidence and supply agreement and our coalition agreement, it was clear to New Zealand where those issues were, where the consensus was, for this Government. We believed in regional economic development. We believed in addressing the housing crisis. We believed in swimmable rivers and turning them around within a generation. We believed in tackling child poverty, decades worth of issues that compound inequality, and we believed that we could be world leaders on the issue of climate change.
This Government was formed because we believed that New Zealand could be and should be better and kinder, and two years and 10 months later, here we are having passed, I understand, close to 190 pieces of legislation. If there's proof of considerable consensus in a Government, it's the fact that we've passed more legislation than comparable Governments over the last four terms, as I understand, and, along the way, prompting a lot of interest from the Opposition given they asked us 111,600 questions—and I understand about 100,000 of them went to Shane Jones alone.
Despite being one of the purest forms of MMP Government that New Zealand has seen for some time, we have made landmark decisions. We passed the zero carbon Act and set up a framework for the future, carbon budgets that I know will make a difference for generations to come. Early on, we made a decision to look forward, to set a path around fossil fuel extraction in New Zealand that said there would be no further offshore oil and gas exploration. We invested in Taranaki and their transition plan, opening a new energy research centre and investing in a hydrogen roadmap for the future of New Zealand. We came to a landmark agreement with primary producers over dealing with some of the biggest contributors to our emissions profile in New Zealand. No one else in the world has been able to do what New Zealand has done. We passed child poverty legislation, and much more than that: of the nine child poverty indicators in New Zealand, seven out of them are now improving under this Government. We know material deprivation is one of the hardest to turn around, which is why we're investing in things like food in schools to make a direct difference to those families. We passed essential freshwater reforms, and I acknowledge the efforts of David Parker, because that has been an intensive, generation-changing piece of work that will make a significant difference for many, many years to come.
We are building more houses than any Government since the 1970s, and not only were we on track and are on track to meet our goal of 6,400 public housing places, we've now extended ourselves and said with the COVID recovery and rebuild, we want to build another 8,000 houses to house our families. We are investing in regional infrastructure up and down the country. You will find projects that are making a difference to communities. Whether it's the pool in Naenae, the surf club in Tai Rāwhiti, or the rugby club for Poverty Bay, these are projects that create jobs and contribute to community wellbeing. We have made the most significant changes to mental health this country has ever seen. We not only have invested over a billion dollars in mental health, we've started the roll-out of new front-line services and training those individuals who will make a difference to make sure that people, when they need that help, can get it at their iwi provider, at their GP, wherever and whenever they need. We've increased paid parental leave. We brought in the winter energy payment. We have indexed benefits to wage increases. The Children's Commissioner said some of these changes would make the biggest difference to child poverty that we have seen in decades.
Even alongside that, we've seen in this House abortion law reform, changes to make sure that every single child in New Zealand will learn New Zealand history—the things that make a difference to people's lives. We have done all of that whilst also, pre-COVID, getting our debt down to under 20 percent relative to GDP, getting our unemployment levels down to some of the lowest levels in a decade, and some of the highest private sector wage growth we had seen in a decade. All of that had prepared us for what was to come.
In many, many ways, this term will be remembered for what was unplanned as much as what was planned, and in acknowledging that, I actually want to acknowledge, first and foremost, the community of Christchurch and, of course, our Muslim community across Aotearoa New Zealand; I want to acknowledge the community of Whakatāne, because those tragedies, 15 March and Whakaari / White Island, first and foremost, were tragedies that happened in those places to those communities, and we will never forget that.
Through all of this, though, has been our coalition partner and our confidence and supply partners. We would not be here without you. Of course, during this campaign, there will be lots of sprinkling of dust and glitter and whatever else we may choose to call it. There'll be lots of shovelling of other figurative things. None of that, for me personally, will ever diminish what this Government and these three parties and these leaders have achieved, and so I say to the Deputy Prime Minister, I say to Marama and to James, thank you. Thank you to New Zealand First, and thank you to the Greens. I'm immensely proud of what we have collectively done for Aotearoa New Zealand. I also want to pay special tribute to those members of those parties who have not been Ministers but MPs. I know sometimes your positions have been amongst the hardest, and I want to acknowledge that your contribution has been as important in this Parliament as any of ours.
I now wish to finish with words of thanks. I start with my own team. They are exceptionally hard-working, they are grounded, they are here because of their community, and they are strong. I acknowledge all of you, my Labour team. To the people who work in this place—to the Speaker; to the Clerk's Office; to those who work in our parliamentary offices, from Hansard to libraries to Bellamy's—we'll have a chance to come back and say thank you, but for all of this term and keeping this place powered and your democracy working, you have our thanks.
Finally, this election is not what we had planned. It is fair to say this campaign that we're about to embark on is not the campaign that we planned and prepared for six months ago, nor will our manifesto be the same as it would've been had we released it in January of this year, but that is the reality of politics and the reality of this world that we're living in right now. But I can tell you this: the values that we campaigned on in 2017, the aspirations that we had coming into this place, remain unchanged. Our plans to keep creating high-wage jobs are as important now as they ever were. On supporting our job creators; on ridding this country of child poverty; on making a transition to a clean, green, carbon-neutral economy—we've started that journey, and now we want to finish it. Let's keep moving.





Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Leader of the Opposition): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Firstly, I'd like to turn to acknowledge those who are here today and I wish to start—not to end—with thanks. Those thanks are to yourself, Mr Speaker, for the job you do, even though sometimes I'm sure it's quite difficult—we certainly find it quite difficult, actually. Can I also thank all the other parliamentarians who are here and for those who have decided to leave us at the end of this term, thank you for your contribution—
Hon Chris Hipkins: Too many to name.
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: —and for helping making this such a good place. Of course, there's a lot of members of the Labour Party, as the Hon Chris Hipkins is just mentioning, who will be leaving. They may not be planning it, but they'll be going their way home. Thank you very much.
Can I also thank all of the National team. Thank you, team; it's about time. It's about time. Thank you for putting your faith in me and thank you, particularly, to the Hon Simon Bridges and Todd Muller for the support that they have been able to give me in helping us through to this transition. Your efforts are greatly appreciated.
Can I also take the opportunity to thank all those who work in Parliament and around the precinct. Can I particularly thank the Clerk of the House, the Office of the Clerk staff, the Table Office, the Bills Office, Hansard, select committee staff, the messengers, security, the catering and, particularly, the cleaning staff who often work in hours when we are not here. Can I thank the amazing team at the library and all of my staff who, I must say, recently have grown to such an enormous number I can't remember everyone's names, but that comes with the office. 
Can I thank everybody who has kept Parliament running through the COVID-19 lockdowns, making sure that we could actually have some form of democracy, even though it seemed extremely limited at the time. And a big thank you to the National Party team, then led by the Hon Simon Bridges, who made sure that there was actually an Opposition voice despite the best efforts for there to be otherwise. So thank you for everybody for doing that. 
I've just heard the Prime Minister make what I think is going to be one of those speeches that we're going to look on and we're going to say, "Well, that was very interesting, wasn't it?", because she is going to be more famous than usual and that is going to be because she will be a one-term Labour leader. And that is what I'm here to tell her today. I'm here to tell her today that the last one was Bill Rowling and, good for her, she's about to join him.
Now, I think it is really important that when we look at our energised and extremely, extremely united team, which is full of extraordinary talent—
Hon Phil Twyford: Where are they? Where have they gone?
Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I look instead, I look instead—Phil Twyford's asking, "Where have they gone?" Well, Phil Twyford, he's clearly one of the best performers of Jacinda Ardern's Government, now promoted to No. 4. Well, what does that say about the rest of them? What does it say about the rest of them when they've got Phil Twyford at No. 4 and he's ahead of Dr Megan Woods and Chris Hipkins and just about everybody else? What does that say, and what does it say about the excellent work of the Hon Kelvin Davis at No. 2? Isn't that amazing, wonderful—when there's so much talent, so much talent!
Let's just have a look at what, though, is facing New Zealand. This is going to be an extremely important election because it's about who is going to be best able to manage what has been described by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand as the biggest economic downturn in 160 years. That is even older than our dear friend the Rt Hon Winston Peters. That is 160 years, and what did I just hear from the Prime Minister, the leader of the Labour Party? What did I hear from the leader of the Labour Party? A whole lot of pixie dust and talking about how everything's just going to be fine. That's what I heard. An awful lot of dust; dust—that was all it was. 
Let's just look at this. Let's look at the numbers that Jacinda Ardern did not wish to say. Let's look at the 212,000 New Zealanders who are now receiving the unemployment benefit—212,000 New Zealanders. Surely they need a bit better than being told, "It's all fine. We're in charge." They need something better than that. And how about the 450,000 New Zealanders who are having to receive the wage subsidy? There are 450,000 New Zealanders whose jobs are being kept in place because of the $13 billion that the Government has borrowed in order to keep them in employment.
We agreed with it. We agreed with it because we had to do something. We had to do something. But in that time, in that time, a good finance Minister—a good finance Minister—would have thought of a plan to take us out of it, because it's really easy to close the border. It's really easy to close the border and to say to people, "Well, we only live so far away for the rest of the world." Of course, it's easy to close the border. It's easy to close down the economy. 
The hard thing is to get that economy back going again, particularly when two of our biggest export markets, like international tourism and international education, have been, effectively, closed down. And who have got in charge from the Government to look after international tourism? Well, we've got the Hon Kelvin Davis, so what could go wrong? What could possibly go wrong? I can't even remember who's in charge of international education from that side because we've never heard of them. 
So we've got the one shining light in the New Zealand economy, which is agriculture—agriculture, an industry that has been in a sector that has been bagged for years by that Government. They hated agriculture. Remember that? They put Damien O'Connor in charge, which shows you how much they thought of it. Absolutely hated it. Remember that, the farmers with the dirty dairying—dirty dairying, all this sort of stuff? Now, suddenly, farmers are back being trendy. Now, suddenly, farmers are woke. Actually, thankfully, farmers will never be woke. They'll always be on trend. And the trend is National. That's where they're going to be. 
I want to say to this Government: Resource Management Act (RMA) reform. We're getting rid of it. Now, suddenly, after three years, they say, "Oh, a working group told us it was a bad thing." A working group told them it was a bad thing. I wrote to David Parker last year about this time and I said, "The two biggest parties in Parliament should agree on RMA reform. Let's sort it out together." He sent me back a letter, on his letterhead, with, basically, a one-fingered salute. That's the sort of response you get from a Government like that—a nasty, nasty little response. So we will be getting rid of it. We will get rid of it. We will be putting in place an environmental standards Act and we will be putting in place a planning and development Act. And they will not be the same that that lot would—they're entirely different. 
I would like to say too, let's just think about some of the shovel-ready projects we've been hearing about. Where are they? Where is this list? Poor old Phil Twyford—the Hon Phil Twyford—and Shane Jones put out a letter, a press release, on April Fool's Day this year, saying to the local councils, "Give us your shovel-ready list and we'll get you the funding. We'll be there with you. We'll help you." What's happened to that shovel-ready list? Not much at all. Seventy-five percent of them haven't been announced and dear old Shane Jones has gone and announced to us all the reason they're not announced is it doesn't quite work with either his schedule or the Prime Minister's schedule. Well, that's a bit of a shame, isn't it?
How about getting people back into work? Not only do we have 212,000 people on the unemployment benefit at the moment, but we've got 200,000 highly skilled people, most in the construction area, who are under-employed. That means there's not actually enough work for them. Why wouldn't we have those people in work? They should not be reliant on a ministerial visit to tell them they've got a job. That is not good enough. That is absolutely washing your hands of the situation, Mr Jones.
And what are we going to do? Well, I'll tell you what, we're not going to stick up taxes, not like that party will. Why didn't the Prime Minister talk to us about her secret tax list: the asset tax, the wealth tax, or, dare I say it, the death tax? I mean, having to pay a tax just because you die, that's a terrible thing. 
Now, let's have a look at this little track record that she's talked. KiwiBuild—was that good? KiwiBuild, she went to the last election promising 100,000 houses in 10 years, 16,000 the first term. How many have they got—380; oh, 385, apparently. How about roads? What happened there? They stopped. Electric cars—remember, they were going to electrify the fleet, the Government fleet. I understand they've got 45. They've got 45. And then we had light rail. Remember where that is—somewhere stuck on the ghost train up Mount Roskill. 
And talk about New Zealand First—I know the Rt Hon Winston Peters wants to talk. He'll tell you he's a handbrake on them. No, he's not. He's the enabler. There's only one reason the Greens are in Government, and that's because Mr Peters went their way.
So let's just say this. The Prime Minister may wish to give us all a "sweetness and light" talk, but actually it's time for reality. The New Zealand people need to know they have a Government that needs to know what to do. And this Government on this side does. And my message, my final message, to the people of New Zealand is this: there's one way to take charge of life—two ticks blue.





Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister): Thank you very much. That was eyebrow-raising stuff—and I don't use Botox! All that criticism, for almost 10 minutes, and not one new idea. Out there in the provinces, in the hamlets of this country, all those people who were expecting something at least now, at the start of this campaign, from the leader of the National Party just got carp, cant, and criticism, but no vision, no plan, no policy. Worse still, after nine years of doing nothing about the Resource Management Act, she says we're at fault. Extraordinary. This is somebody who's a trained lawyer saying that sort of stuff. [Hon Judith Collins stands] Don't go now—this is your best chance to learn something!
Can I say to all the staff here—the cleaners; the caterers; the guards; the drivers; library and Hansard, and many office staff; and you, Mr Speaker, and your staff, who have been of great assistance to us, sometimes not as much as usual but usually of great assistance to us—thank you very, very much. And can I say to my colleagues in New Zealand First that our caucus has been united by consensus decision-making—
Hon Member: Goodbye.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —hard work, and civility. I'll be around long after you're gone, sunshine, and I was here for decades before you arrived. Don't you feel bad?
The quality of our caucus has been very, very good, so thanks to you, as well as to our parliamentary and ministerial staff. And to the seventh floor of the Beehive, thank you for your—in inverted commas—"frank" advice. It's been an excellent office to work for, the very best, and can I say that coming up to night time, at about five to six when we stop for a quiz, they are absolutely brilliant, as Grant Robertson can attest to.
Can I say, we made the right decision on 19 October 2017.
Hon Member: You don't sound very enthusiastic.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: You know, I cannot believe that you'd be so youthful in shouting out these shibboleths when you know nothing or you're the living proof for what George Bernard Shaw said: "He knows nothing and thinks he knows everything."—which truly points to a career in politics. Good God.
It was a tough choice for caucus—
Hon Member: You've been telling those jokes for 40 years.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —and for our board colleagues, but three years—well, not as big a joke as you are, my colleague. But three years on and we have no regrets. National had run out of answers. It was making and framing the wrong questions, and only a change of course was going to allow the policy transformation that we sought.
When this term began and through the first months, you can remember the cacophony of sound from some in the media that the Government wouldn't last. Well, last we have. Providing stable and constructive Government again is now an undeniable fact, and we're proud of our record. We recall the media trepidation, Prime Minister, when you said that you were going to have a baby. Well! The sky was going to fall in. "The Government will hit the rocks."—that was the basic refrain of the proletariat. But the ship of State didn't flounder; it kept on sailing calmly throughout until you came back.
We stand on our record in office for what we've achieved, for honouring the commitments, for leaving the country in a better position after inheriting nine years of neo-liberal neglect. What's worse with these neo-liberals is they don't even understand the philosophy. It shows up every day, because so many of them have never been in business, and their chief articulator wouldn't know what a business was or is, and that's the truth. No less than the New Zealand Herald, though, just recently said—and it's not one of our most vocal fans, the New Zealand Herald, but they trumpeted our 80-plus percent success rate in getting our coalition agreement policies delivered. It's because of our steady focus on delivering the coalition agreement, and we've never softened from it. If you doubt that, ask some of my colleagues on this side of the Chamber.
We're here to get by and to work hard with two other parties: the Labour Party, being our coalition partner, and also the support party for the Labour Party in terms of the Greens. We were never forced to agree. If we did, we wouldn't be three separate parties. We wanted the narrative to be more intelligent, more wise, and more factual and actual. The Prime Minister announced that we've got over 190 bills passed. That suggests that we have got by on agreeing on most of the things, or, if we couldn't, that we got to a compromise and got there in the end.
A hundred and ninety is a staggering testimony to progress. History will judge the coalition agreement as one of the most significant agreements in modern political history, and here's why: we signalled a long-term strategic plan to rebuild our country, and we had the audacity to demand it—to demand that we had things like a billion trees, which was unthought of; to demand that we spend $3 billion out in neglected provincial New Zealand, the places we go to and get elbowed aside every day by National Party members, whilst they come down here and use the clown—sorry, I can't say that; use the MP from Epsom—to downgrade with a cacophony of envy every time, as though Epsom and he know anything about the Kaitāias, the Invercargills, the West and East Coasts of this country, the very people who drive the economy to pay his salary. He dumps on it.
And the "Prime Minister" said they're going to go out and give two votes for blue. Well, I've just been to Tauranga recently and the Bay of Plenty, and guess what I saw—guess what I saw. I saw the photographs, the posters up there, of three National Party leaders: Mr Bridges, Mr Muller, and Judith Collins—there all up in the same province, in the same area in the Western Bay of Plenty. No wonder the people down there are confused—terribly confused.
Chris Bishop: One of them is the one who beat you.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Mr Bishop, leave it alone. I mean, that member's got a long way to go before he's going to be front-bench material. He just hasn't got the learning capacity. He doesn't seem to be able to absorb that the most fundamental thing in this business is to do your homework and get the facts right—be impervious to attack because you got the facts right. Let me say, when the Provincial Growth Fund came under attack, guess what they tried to do about it. They tried to say it was a slush fund.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: It is.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: There is Gerry Brownlee saying it is a slush fund. Well, you know, the people of Christchurch would have wished he'd have done something too, because he was in charge of its rebuild, and I've never seen someone so incompetent. Of course, people don't realise that Gerry Brownlee's experience in business is five weeks running an illegal casino, before Winston Peters outed him and the president of the National Party, one Goodfellow. Five weeks running an illegal casino, and a colleague across the House, namely yours truly, outed him, and that's his total business experience. Those National Party people up in the gallery who were cheering don't know that, do they?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Yes, they do.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: They're not cheering now. Oh, they do.
Can I say that in this time, we preserved the SuperGold card. We got it improved. We got over 5,000 new business, 130,000 people using the app, and we've got another improvement coming in the future. But on top of that, in the last Budget we secured one eye test for superannuitants a year—that will save 5,000 to 7,000 people from going blind, by early identification—and one free doctor's visit. If only one of those people in the hundred doesn't go to the hospital as a result of that test, it's fiscally neutral. These are the far-sighted plans that New Zealand First has, and we thank the Labour Party and, dare I say it, the Greens for ensuring that this was maintained.
It's critical, but we know for whom the ferry will call if they get into power, because their last outing when it came to super wasn't very good. They promised to get rid of the surtax, and when they got in, they put it up to 92c in the dollar. That fellow in Epsom—that's exactly what he will do, because he's going to save $82 billion of expenditure. I can see why you people aren't smiling any more—because they're seriously shaken. If he's going to save $82 billion of expenditure, guess who's going to feel the pain for that—and it won't be Gerry Brownlee. It won't be their front bench—no, no. It'll be all those people who were fooled to go and vote for them in the first place. Every economist has said that's impossible.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: No, they haven't.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Oh yes they have. Well, if the number one spokesman for the National Party is a woodwork teacher, you can see what their problem is.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: That's right—that's right. Winston hates the workers.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Hear that? He thinks that noise and bluster substitutes for policy. Excuse me. The National Party may be making a comeback sometime, but it's not any time soon. I'm saddened by that, because the people of this country need a sound, strong Opposition. They need people of talent and capability, and they need far better than what they're getting now. So to our people out there, our message is: hang on. The campaign starts on Saturday morning, and help is on its way. Thank you very much.





Hon JAMES SHAW (Minister for Climate Change): E Te Māngai o Te Whare, tēnā koe. It's always a pleasure to follow the Rt Hon Winston Peters in debate. I'll miss it, to tell you the truth. Here we are at the final hour of the final day of the 52nd Parliament—our business for the moment complete. I know everybody here is champing at the bit to get out and campaign around the country; trying out their new election slogans. There's Labour: "Let's keep moving", New Zealand First: "Let's not". You could almost see the advertisements, can't you: "New Zealand First: you can stop progress." ACT are making a serious play for the assault rifle vote: "The ACT Party: more deadly than serious." National, of course, have settled on a new leader with a new slogan: "Why vote for the lesser evil?"
Now, it's not all slogans, of course. Parties will be laying out their policy platforms in advance of the election—or maybe they won't. But it is important, as we think about the post-COVID rebuild, that voters are aware of the political philosophies that are on offer. National want to grow the pie, Labour want to share the pie, ACT want you to get your own goddam pie, New Zealand First want a billion pies, and the Greens, of course, say that the growth of the pie is constrained by the size of the oven, and whilst you're making pie, perhaps you should keep your oven clean, otherwise your tamariki will get really sick. Look, I know that's not exactly bumper sticker material, but we reckon there's at least 5 percent in it.
Speaking of which, I did ask my colleagues for the privilege of giving the Greens' adjournment debate speech at the closing of this Parliament, partially so that I could deal with the PTSD I have from election 2017. You see, I also gave the Greens' adjournment debate speech at the closure of that Parliament too, and about 15 minutes before I had to come down and speak, I got that evening's TVNZ poll result, which had us under the threshold at 3.5 percent. The whole time that I was delivering that speech, the thought weighed on my mind that it might well be the very last speech by a Green Party member of Parliament ever. Well, 10 weeks later we were in Government, and four weeks after that I met the Pope. So I'm just saying, a lot of things can happen in the final six weeks of an election campaign, and I am mostly saying that to give the National Party a good dose of false hope for themselves, but also, honestly, because the reality is that there is a non-zero probability that this speech could also be our last—speaking statistically. Actually, no I was going to tell another statistics joke, but it isn't significant. [Interruption] Thank you, I'll be here all night—I actually will!
Actually, I do think that the most likely outcome of this election is that the Greens will be back in Parliament and in Government after the election, but if we aren't, every one of us—current MPs, former MPs, current and former staff, volunteers, members and supporters—can be tremendously proud of the contribution that we have made as a partner in this, our first Government. We laid down the path to a zero carbon future for Aotearoa. We made sure that more of our loved ones, our friends, and our neighbours have warm, dry, and safe homes in which to live. We've given people all over the country better, cleaner, and safer options for getting to work in the morning and home again at the end of the day. We've expanded conservation and put more people to work restoring and replenishing our native birds, forests, and fish than ever before. Our Government has put an end to new sources of fossil fuels. We championed changes to our democracy and we reformed the way that we tackled domestic and sexual violence. Standing here today, I can proudly say that because of the progress that we have made, a better, a cleaner, and a more equitable future for Aotearoa New Zealand is closer than it has ever been before.
Now, that is in large part due to the seven committed, passionate, and highly effective Green MPs working alongside me. To each of them, I would like to say thank you. Thank you for making the last three years as fun, as successful, and as weird as it has been. To Gareth Hughes, our friend and colleague, we bid you farewell. Everyone here is going to miss the wisdom and the passion that you bring to this place.
It is because of who we are and what we stand for that after just three years in Government, with only eight MPs, more people up and down New Zealand can make ends meet, our economy is greener, and nature is healing. In those times when we didn't get everything that we wanted, we didn't give up, we didn't get disillusioned, and we kept working, because for thousands of people all across New Zealand, having the Greens in Government shows that we can keep making life better for everyone. The only way to make sure that the next Government does everything it can not just to navigate ourselves through the present crisis but to build a better world for future generations is to make sure that the Greens are a part of it. We know that we need to get every vote that we can—we know that.
Right now there are thousands of volunteers working tirelessly in their communities, knocking on doors, picking up the phones, talking to people about where the Green Party wants to take New Zealand in the wake of the pandemic crisis. They keep at it every single day—even amidst all of the nonsense that accompanies every election. To every single one of you, I say thank you. Because of you, I am more optimistic than I have ever been that together we can change the world.
In the three years since the Green Party helped to form this Government, we have never forgotten that every action that we take, future generations are watching. Young people don't look at this place the same way that others do. They don't see the political point-scoring in what we do. They don't see the one-liners and the headline grabbing antics; rather, our ideas and our actions are the prism through which they see their future. When the polls open in four weeks' time, that is what we are deciding; not which individuals will fill these seats, but who together will have the power to shape the kind of country that our children and our grandchildren will grow up in.
I do want to thank the Labour Party and New Zealand First for your partnership and your hard work over the last three years—in particular, the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern and the Rt Hon Winston Peters—thank you. Everything that we have done, we have done together. Thank you to all of the people who make this place, especially those who work the longest hours for the least pay. Thank you, Mr Speaker. As I said in 2017, we'll see you in six weeks. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.





DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Not in living memory has our country entered an election against such a backdrop of global uncertainty. The medical, economic, and geopolitical impacts of COVID-19 remain unpredictable, but we know that these impacts are on New Zealanders' businesses, on their household finances, on their jobs, and on their mental health. We politicians enter this election campaign with a job to do. The world is changing all around us, and our small island nation must find its place anew in that ever changing world.
At the same time, people's faith in our politics in this Parliament is at an all-time low ebb, and it's not just the most recent, highly publicised ructions that have led to that low ebb; it is a long period over the past three years of poor-quality delivery and poor-quality lawmaking. We all know the examples: KiwiBuild, light rail, child poverty, the gun buy-back, the oil and gas exploration ban, the Provincial Growth Fund. It's been one disaster after another. I think it's fair to say that we have a disaster Government led by a disaster Prime Minister, because, if it wasn't for the disasters, what we would have is a long series of let downs, where everything the parties over there promised in 2017 has been a failure.
Let me say that that's not a personal critique; I happen to like our Prime Minister as a person, and I admire what she's done holding people together at critical times of disaster. That's not the problem. The problem is that the world is changing, and a different style of leadership is required. We require problem solving. We require an open debate about what exactly New Zealand's public health strategy is, because, at the moment, the Government would have it that we can either remain physically isolated from the world and borrow to paper over the cracks or we can open it up and people will die. In other words, they want us to be either dead broke or dead. I believe that this country deserves an open debate, not a state of fear; asking what we can do, not what we can't; going country by country when it comes to the border; working together with, not against, the private sector; and embracing technology to augment our public health response. Those are the principles of a smart public health response, and when we've done that, we can start being honest about the debt, because my army of 14-year-old Instagram followers have been sending me messages saying, "David, who is the Government borrowing all this money off and who has to pay it back?" You know, if 14-year-olds can figure out that the Government borrowing $140 billion is a problem, and it is for them, maybe we in this Parliament need to start being honest about this country's fiscal track.
If we can do those things, then we can seize the opportunity of a lifetime: an island nation on a pandemic planet that actually, for once, is the place that skills and capital want to go to—if only we're prepared to seize the opportunity and stop being so hostile to foreign investment and wealth-creating activity in this country. That is what New Zealanders need out of this election debate, and that is what the ACT Party brings: a consistent, constructive critique and contribution to the challenges that our country faces at this time, about the challenge of a country finding its place in a world that is changing around it. That's what New Zealanders need out of this election debate. That's what the ACT Party will be bringing, and I look forward to a group of independent-minded, thoughtful ACT MPs sitting across here, on the cross benches, supporting a Government far more competent than the one that we have now. That is why you give your party vote to ACT. That is a positive future for New Zealand. Thank you, Mr Speaker.





Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National): Well, anybody who was in the House this this afternoon couldn't help but feel the hot heat of hubris coming from the other side of the House. Not for one moment was there any possibility in their minds that the public of New Zealand might totally embrace them and return the whole House full of red, full of Labour members, after this election. Well, it's that attitude that always gets up the backs of New Zealanders. When we were talking this afternoon about unemployment and the debacle over the stats that were released yesterday, Grant Robertson was laughing. When Grant Robertson was asked a question by one of his own members about what all the stats meant, he made a joke about it, as if the lives of New Zealanders don't matter to him, because, apparently, they're so silly they're not even going to look at what he's offering. They're just going to vote because they think they're being kept safe from COVID-19. 
Well, let's go back to the start of this year. Overwhelmingly, voters were rejecting the coalition arrangements for government. They were rejecting them. They didn't like what they were doing. They didn't like all the nanny State stuff. They didn't like having their hands held. They didn't like being told what to do. And then there was, without a doubt, the circumstances around COVID-19, that were well handled. There is no doubt about that. But that's grist for the mill. It's what Governments do. It's what people expect. It does not mean that they are going to be in their droves turning out at the ballot box to say, "We want more of that.", because what they'll be told about is the more that was there before and they didn't like it. 
Let's be clear too that right now 212,000 New Zealanders are on the jobseeker benefit, and 452,000 New Zealanders are in supported work—the wage subsidy—and then, tens of thousands of others, like the one that Barry Soper wrote about yesterday, cannot get on the jobseeker benefit and are not being caught up in the stats. It's not hard to see that figure in a rapid period of time going to astronomical levels. The reality is, and let's be clear, the Government chose the 4 percent yesterday because it was a good figure. They could have asked for some kind of mathematical ripple on the actual stats they got that showed 6.2 percent unemployment. And they could also answer the question—
Dr Duncan Webb: Oh, come on!
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Oh, there he is, over there, the member for Christchurch Central, retiring shortly. He's the one who just said, "Oh, come on." [Interruption] Not fair? It's in here—the Government's own document. The Government made a choice about what was put out yesterday. No question. And then there is, of course, the issue of the joblessness in here among women.
How can that Government sit there for a moment and laugh, as they did this afternoon, about 90 percent of the jobless in this particular set of stats being women? Because what that tells us is that they are second jobs that have been lost to families. That's why kids aren't getting music lessons. That's why kids aren't getting opportunities for sport. That's why schools are going to suffer a little bit more than usual—because families can't afford those school outings, if they have them with COVID-19; it's all so difficult. Perhaps it's just been wiped. Those are the sorts of things that start to drag a society down really quickly. And when that projection earlier for an 8.5 percent unemployment rate was put out there by Treasury and the Minister had to talk about it in the House back in late April of this year, that's what sparked the second tranche of the wage subsidy—because they knew they couldn't go into an election with 8.8 percent unemployment. So that's masked. 
Now, I say that it's good for those people who are getting it. They need it, but it will not last. And if anyone wants to know, this country is currently borrowing, just for the wage subsidy, $600 million a week—week in, week out. Six-hundred million dollars—and when the wage subsidy comes off, large numbers of those people will transfer on to the special COVID benefit, and that will only drop the borrowing by a small amount, because the tax effect gives you a net around $600 million a week.
These people have got no idea. That's sitting over there saying, "Well, we're going to grow the economy." Well, how? Where is there one initiative to help people get into work? There is the member for Wairarapa laughing. He doesn't care about that. He couldn't give two hoots. It's all very well saying, "We're going to train people into new jobs.", but look at the numbers. They're pathetic compared to the numbers who are going to be so badly dislocated in a very short time to come. 
Then we look at some of the achievements that some parties like to talk about. The Green Party must be living in a totally delusional world if they are able to stand up, as their leader was today, and say that so many New Zealanders are better off than they were three years ago because of them. Well, what about all the people who are in work but are suffering salary sacrifice at the moment, people who have had their wages cut, people who have had their hours cut, people who had a chance of overtime that's now gone? How are those people better off for anything the Green Party has done? Totally delusional. And have they done one thing for the environment? Have they done one thing? Just tell me one thing. Any of their members could just yell out one thing they've done. Not a jot—not a jot—because they've been too busy worrying about the general sort of social engineering aspects of their party, which generally dominates them.
And then we've got our friends in New Zealand First. 
Hon Julie Anne Genter: Plastic bags.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well, that's the first. There we had Julie Anne Genter calling across the House, saying—what have they done?
Alastair Scott: Plastic bags.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Oh, there we go. They got rid of plastic bags. Well, what an achievement! Wonderful. Then we have the New Zealand First Party, who today had a leader who, I think, spoke in his speech a little bit about the Provincial Growth Fund. [Interruption] There we have Poto Williams over there saying, "Don't mention him. He was out of it. We couldn't understand him." And I agree with the member. I totally agree with the member. Three billion dollars for their fund—that was Winston Peters' big claim. What a wonderful thing it was to go around New Zealand dispensing the cash. And they've gone everywhere, and he's blamed National members for turning up and saying, "Well, this is good." Well, I tell you what—if you can get it for your electorate, why not? Why not? It was free cash. It was going out everywhere. If there's a lot of slush around and a bit splashes on you and it's good for you, then why not?
But let's be very clear. That slush fund is nothing like it's made out to be. They've made lots of announcements—lots and lots of announcements. They haven't come anywhere near spending the $3 billion but for every dollar that they've announced, how much has been delivered? The sum of 12.9c—12.9c in a dollar. What a fraud. What an absolute fraud. And these are the people who say, "We're looking forward to coming back into this Parliament to tackle the biggest economic crisis that this country has ever faced." It's the biggest economic crisis the world has faced since those Bretton Woods - type conferences back in the late 1930s. It is not a happy time for this country, and they're going around saying, "Aren't we lucky! Haven't we done so well!" and we've also got them saying, "Stand by. There could be a second wave. Just keep yourself close. Put a packet of face masks in your back pocket. You never know when it might come over the radio that you've got to start wearing them." If that's the case, then where is the success? Where is the success?
What we have is a Government that has a very poor delivery record—a very poor delivery record—and they can sit there smugly saying, "Oh, but we've done so well." No they haven't. No they haven't. Name one thing, one social indicator, one of the eight social indicators that's gone in the right direction in the last three years. None. Absolutely none. There's a bigger waiting list for State housing. There are more children in child poverty. You can go through them all, and every one of them is a massive, massive negative. Well, in the next few weeks, the National Party will be on the hustings. We've already announced a lot of policy that they won't know about. They won't know about it because they don't care about putting people into work, and those fallacies will resonate with New Zealanders, because the one thing that New Zealanders fear most is debt. They know that debt is the way for them to have a more impoverished life, and they have a Government that is saying, "This is all good, it's all manageable, it's all fine. We'll clock it up at $600 million a day or more." Do you know that just in the last couple of weeks they've spent $120 million a day on other initiatives, and does anyone know what they are?
Hon Scott Simpson: No. Not one.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No. No one knows, because they don't know what they're doing either. So it'll be "Two Ticks National" on the 19th and a big chance for New Zealand.





Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): If this, the adjournment debate, the final debate of the 52nd Parliament, is setting out the terms for this year's election campaign, I say bring it on. Because one thing has been very clear from every comment from the members opposite and on this side—this election campaign apparently is all about the Labour Party. Because listening to the members opposite—and I've sat through plenty of adjournment debates during my time as a member of Parliament, and the one thing you get to do as an Opposition member, when the adjournment debate finally rolls around, is you get to stop being the Opposition and you get to set out your shingle for the campaign. You get to say what you would do differently for the country. Not one single new policy idea from the National Party. Gerry Brownlee mentioned the fact that they've been up and down the country announcing their policies. You'd never know that, listening to the debate in the House today. They did not mention one single policy, one single thing that they would do differently. 
I remember what it's like to be in Opposition, and I do remember that. On your dark days, you wake up thinking about how you're going to trip up the Government, how you're going to bring down the Government, and you forget, in the midst of all of that, that you've got to give New Zealanders a reason to vote for you and for your party. That is exactly the hole that the National Party have fallen into. They're so busy trying to criticise the Government, trying to bring down whatever it is that we are doing, that they're giving New Zealanders no good reason to vote for them. And it's the reason they're looking so glum over on that side of the House—because they know it and because they can feel it. Been there, done that, don't want to do it again. 
That's the reason why my message in this debate is "let's keep moving", because the message that we're getting from the members opposite instead is "let's go back". Although for Mr Brownlee, it's more "let's just stand still", because, as he has proven over his entire parliamentary career, if you stand in one place for long enough, eventually you become the deputy leader. He's proven that not once but twice, and it hasn't worked out for them either time. 
Gerry Brownlee's right about one thing, though. This is an incredibly difficult time for New Zealand and a very, very difficult time for the world. And what are people looking for in such a difficult environment? They are looking for leadership. They are looking for positivity. They are looking for hope. And they are only finding that on one side of the debating chamber today, and that is this side of the Chamber. 
We have an opportunity to build back better, and that is exactly what our Government is focused on. We've set out over the course of the last few months a comprehensive plan to rebuild our country, to get New Zealanders back in work, to keep them in work, and to tackle some of the long-term challenges that New Zealand has avoided for far too long. When we came into Government, it became abundantly clear that our infrastructure was ageing, it was creaking, and it was desperately in need of investment. And that is what our Government has been committed to doing over the last three years.
By "infrastructure" I don't just mean roads. Infrastructure does not start and end with roads. Roads are an important piece of infrastructure, but so are our schools, so are our hospitals, so are all the social services that we rely on, so are the community facilities that we rely on that over decades have been run down and that our Government is investing in rebuilding, and we're putting Kiwis into work while we do that. But we're not just investing in infrastructure. Most importantly, we are investing in people.
After the global financial crisis, the National Party, the then National Government, cut investment in both of those things. Government capital investment was reduced after the global financial crisis when that was our opportunity to increase it, and our investment in people was reduced. The amount of money spent on adult education and training and on tertiary education reduced in the midst of the global financial crisis. At exactly the time when we needed to focus on upskilling our workforce, the National Party went the other way and cut the funding and pulled the ladder out from in front of people so that they could not prepare for recovery. And we suffered for a decade as a result of that neglect. 
It meant that when the building and construction industry started to recover, when the infrastructure industry started to recover, they did not have the skilled workers that they needed to do the work that was in front of them. And the National Government's response was simply to say, "Bring it in from overseas.", when actually our Government is saying, "Let's invest in our people. Let's train them up for the jobs that are available." Here's a shining example. In the wake of the global financial crisis (GFC), tens of thousands of on-job trainees and apprentices lost their jobs. We suffered for that, because it meant that we didn't have the skilled builders, the plumbers, the electricians that we needed for the economic recovery after the GFC. So what's our Government doing? Well, we are backing our apprentices. We're putting money into subsidising apprentices. And instead of that number reducing, we are seeing it going up, and that is something that we should be proud of because it offers hope for our economic recovery post this huge shock of COVID-19. 
We've heard a lot of comment from the Opposition about COVID-19, so let's just be clear about that. Look around the world, I say to the members opposite, and see the devastation that COVID-19 is continuing to wreak around the rest of the globe. We went hard and early in New Zealand and all of us—all of us—played a role in that and all of us should own that success and feel proud of that. But we now need to bring the same focus and leadership that we brought to the health response to the economic recovery, and part of that focus has to be: don't take our eye off the ball. The health crisis rages around the rest of the world, and New Zealand is not immune from that. We have to stay vigilant if we don't want to go backwards, and that is exactly what we will do, and we will do that right up to election day. We will not take our eye off the ball. We will keep focusing on keeping COVID-19 out of New Zealand. That's not scaremongering. That's dealing with facts, that's dealing with science, and that is exactly what responsible Governments do. And that is what our Government will continue to do. 
So while we get a whole lot of insults and vitriol from the members opposite, what New Zealanders are looking for from their Parliament, from all of us here, is leadership and that is exactly what our Government is going to continue to offer. That is the shingle that we are putting out for this year's election campaign, because we know there are tough times ahead, but we've got the plan, we've got the people, and we've got the ideas to continue driving the country forward.
Finally, I want to offer a few words of thanks of my own. I'd like to thank all of my parliamentary colleagues in the Labour Party for their support. I can tell you that, as the Leader of the House, they have been unflinching in their support for the Government's legislative programme and I do want to thank them for that. I want to thank my colleagues in New Zealand First for the very constructive working relationship that we have had over the last three years. They said it wouldn't last. Not only has it lasted, it's lasted with a great degree of strength. We've passed more legislation in this term of Parliament than in any term that the National Party was in Government, and we can all be proud of that. So I thank my colleagues in New Zealand First. I'm loath to single out one person, but I do want to single out my colleague Tracey Martin, Associate Minister of Education, who I have thoroughly enjoyed working with, and I do want to thank her for that. 
I want to acknowledge the Greens, and I do want to thank them again for the very constructive working relationship that we have had with the Green Party over the term of Parliament. They have had an interesting role in the Government in being partly in and partly out of the Government over this term. They've made that work and I want to say thank you to them for that. I think they've been, to some extent, the conscience of the Labour Party in their work in this Parliament, and I want to thank them for that as well. And again, I thank all my own colleagues for the work that they have done in that regard.
Finally, to the parliamentary staff, all of our ministerial staff, the people that keep this place operating on a day-to-day basis, a very big thank you. So much of that work goes unnoticed and unthanked, except for when we do an adjournment debate or where we wrap up at the end of the year. We should thank those people more often. We could all do it on a daily basis a bit more often if we actually thought that, and we should.
The families of members of Parliament have been in the debate far too much lately. So I want to take a moment to thank the families of members of Parliament on both sides of the Chamber, but take a particular moment to thank the families of those members who have had some difficulty in recent times, on both sides of the House, and acknowledge how difficult that has been for them and the dignity that they have showed in that. Frankly, an attack on one member's family is an attack on all members' families, and I think that we should all stand together in saying that we won't tolerate that. I want to thank all of our families for the support they give us. None of us—none of us—could do the jobs we do without the support of the people who love us and care for us when we are not here, so I want to very warmly conclude by thanking all of them.





BARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would totally endorse the comments of the last speaker around families, and I'll come to that later in my speech, but earlier in Minister Hipkins' speech, he said that our leader didn't refer to any policy. She certainly referred to the Resource Management Act. She referred to the fact that infrastructure was going to start again—the stuff that had actually stopped under Labour—and I'm hoping that this list will be released soon so that we can get on with it and employ some of these women who have recently lost their jobs due to COVID-19. 
It's the last day of the 52nd Parliament, and it's been quite a year. 2020 has been a really big year, and I think, having been in this place, that if anyone was to look back in 20 years and write a book, the chapter would be about 2020. 
I want to thank my caucus for their faith in me as the senior whip. I want to acknowledge Judith Collins, Simon Bridges, and Todd Muller for having been senior whip for all of them. 
To my caucus team, you know, we've come through COVID, we've come through lockdown, and I've got two fantastic junior whips in Matt Doocey and Tim van de Molen. Look, we came out of lockdown and we could only have 15 people in this House, then we could only have 28 people in this House, and, finally, it's only in the last two sitting blocks that we were able to have the whole team in the House, and it's quite interesting, as a whip. I know it's often the front bench, generally, that comes first, but it's trying to work out who needs to be in Wellington and who doesn't, and I know it was quite a time for all whips. 
It's nearly six years ago since I came in here, and the learning curve has been really huge, and I think about the induction programme that I helped with in 2017. I thought about how much I have learnt from the time I came in, in 2014 to 2017. There's so much about this place that I don't think MPs realise until they come in, and I'm totally looking forward to the 2020 intake so that we can start that process again, but I really don't think that you learn as much about this place as you do as a senior whip. 
Firstly, my thanks to the Speaker. I would like to thank both Ruth Dyson and Michael Wood as the two senior whips that I have worked with on the other side of the House, along with Kiri Allan and Kieran McAnulty. 
Some people don't quite understand. They watch the House on TV and they see us all fighting and arguing at times over policy, and I think that's absolutely appropriate. But one of the things that we do as a whip, and also as the Business Committee and House teams—we don't always agree on what we're going to do, but when we agree, we do keep our word, and we do stick to it. 
So during the course of this time, I've been privileged to be on the Business Committee, the Parliamentary Service Commission, the Privileges Committee, the Officers of Parliament Committee, and the Standing Orders Committee, and it was great to be in the House last night, albeit in urgency, yet again—we seem to have been in urgency a lot lately—when we passed the new Standing Orders for the 53rd Parliament. 
With all of these committees, you know, there's a huge amount of work that gets done in the background, and I just really commend that process that we've had around the Standing Orders, because we've had quite a few meetings now, but they've all been really open meetings. People have been open to new ideas. 
I think the thing that will strike us about the 52nd Parliament is that if we went back a year ago and people had suggested some of the things that we are looking to change to now, a lot of people would have stood back and said, "Oh, we can't do that. It won't work." But when we went out of here into COVID lockdown, we made things work, and the virtual select committees are a big part of that. So there are things that can work, and we've made them work, and I want to thank David Wilson, Raf Gonzalez-Montero, the people from security, the library, the catering, the cleaning—I don't want to miss anybody, but there's a great group of people around here. 
Now, probably in this 52nd Parliament, something that I've often said, as a whip, to people—if they ask what a whip does, I say, "Politicians are people, too." Pastoral care is a part of it. You know, we do have people who have families who have illnesses, they have deaths, they have births, and they have all sorts of things going on in their family. But also, politicians are not infallible, and we've seen in this Parliament that that has been the case. That brought on the code of conduct discussion, and we had the Debbie Francis review. 
We spend a lot of time in this Parliament thinking about how we can all put up the principles and we can all act towards those principles every day, but we spend a lot of time in struggling to get to where the consequences might be. To be honest, the consequence, as we've seen them lately, is that some people aren't with us now and aren't going to be with us in the 53rd Parliament. 
So we live in a fishbowl and we're under a lot of scrutiny. But one thing I would endorse is—and it has been asked today—that media would respect the families. I would also say that the media were part of our code of conduct review, and we had some really good discussions. I think we can all be held accountable for the things we do in policy, for the debates we have, and for what we do in our electorates, but I, again, endorse the calls of other people to respect the families of MPs, because—as Minister Hipkins said before—it's not them that sign up for this job. It's us that sign up for the job, and family is really important. 
I think we've noticed over the last sitting block that we've had quite a few valedictories. Some of it's been quite emotional, and people say a lot of stuff in this House that they wouldn't say until they leave. But there's one thing I would like to say today, just on a personal note. From my aspect, I'd actually like to thank the media for not bearing down on my son, Tony. 
He's been through a lot in the last three years, and in his case, a code of conduct wasn't followed in another organisation, Fonterra, and that person is no longer in Fonterra. But he was at the end of his tether with severe anxiety with a problem that he couldn't fix. He put his hand up and asked for help, and that help was not forthcoming. Suffice it to say, Fonterra's now going to review its early response service to see why that failed. They're also going to look at how they treat sharemilkers in future, when you get a succession of incidents over successive sharemilkers. 
So that's great, and I trust they'll make good with Tony and put an end to the problem that he's been experiencing. I know that when we did the amendments to the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act (DIRA) in the House a couple of weeks ago—again, under urgency—we made a pact across all of the parties that, actually, we would hold Fonterra to account for looking after sharemilkers. That's really important, and the current chair, John Monaghan, shook Tony's hand and congratulated him for standing up, being the whistleblower, and taking a stand. So there's just a bit of truth that needed to come out of me today. 
We need the higher standards in our industry. Agriculture is an industry that I absolutely love, and it was a privilege to stand in the House—again, with DIRA—when we had parties in this House talking about going out into the election campaign. I remember the 2017 election campaign really well—really, really well. It was pouring down with rain. I remember that in Piopio and Āria, you could have floated a boat in some farmers' paddocks, and it was just awful. They just felt like the scapegoats. At the hardest time of the year, when their cows are calving, it's springtime and they're trying to avoid mud and trying to avoid all sorts of things to protect their animals' health, and politicians come out and start throwing things at them. 
We made a pact through most of our Primary Production Committee people—and I really loved chairing that committee; it's the best committee in Parliament—that, actually, we want to uphold the standards in this election, and we do not want to make our farmers targets. After all, in the last two years, we've actually learnt that water storage is not just about farmers. It's not just about farmers; it's about Auckland now, because we've had a massive drought, and so we can actually see this. Where's the rural/urban divide? Actually, there is no rural/urban divide. We all need water. It's been a very awakening exercise, and the fact is that the beaches in Auckland need some attention. It's not just the farmers. So let's make a pact as a Parliament to act as a whole, as New Zealand. Let's make a pact to work these problems out together. 
I want to wish all the MPs in this House a successful six weeks. I know it's a nervous time for many people, but all the best with the election campaign, and we'll see whoever we see on the other side. Thank you. 





Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): Times have changed, and the way we talk to each other has changed as well. Recently we were driving through West Auckland; I was driving, my husband was in the passenger seat. A car cut in front of us and nearly caused us to have an accident. My husband told me to drive up next to them; I said no. We accidentally did anyway. He wound down the window—I was so worried about what he'd say—and he yelled out the window, "Be kind!" That is not the type of road rage we would have seen a few years ago.
Prior to 2020, the term "lockdown" had a different meaning for me, too. I associated it with someone being incarcerated in prison, and our team of 5 million have all had our own personal experiences in our homes during COVID lockdown. Many of mine revolved around Zoom—or "Zui" or "Zono", as some people like to call it—and one of those being this kind of TikTok move that I created on numerous occasions when I had to push the seven-year-old out of the shot. Or another Zoom situation, when we had a Zoom caucus and I could smell smoke and walked out of the room to discover that that same son had thought it was a good idea to set paper on fire in the bedroom and throw it out the window—at least he threw it out the window! And, unlike Damien O'Connor, who struggled to learn how to unmute himself during Zoom calls, I, on too many occasions, had to be reminded that, unfortunately, I wasn't on mute. It was a new way of operating for so many of us. We ran the country via Zoom—at its peak, for me, nearly 15 Zoom calls in a day. By the 10th one, sometimes it wasn't coffee that my kind husband was putting in my coffee cup whilst I continued that Zoom meeting.
We, as a Government, had to act quickly, and we did. During this period, I had my own Ashley Bloomfield, and her name is Debbie Power, the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). We spoke sometimes 10 times a day—this on top of the Zoom calls. Turns out we had quite a lot to talk about. The development and implementation of the wage subsidy, implementing benefit increases and the doubling of the winter energy payment, alongside what was already in train and due to be rolled out on 1 April, which was lifting abatement thresholds, indexing benefits to wages, and getting rid of that sanction, section 192. We also had to talk about adapting our systems and service delivery away from face-to-face appointments and towards more effective online and phone support. We also had to talk about resourcing our social services, who were providing essential services to support vulnerable New Zealanders during that time. We also had to talk about the granting of benefits and hardship support to those who had lost jobs, as well as how we could build and expand employment services to help redeploy them quickly into employment. And, on top of that, we had to talk about the development of the COVID job-loss cover scheme. These are some of the things that kept me on the phone with Debbie quite regularly.
The Minister of Finance, during this time, also became quite a regular phone buddy and, unusually, was much more responsive to my phone call. Anyone who knows Minister Robertson knows that, in the months of March, April, and often the beginning of May, it's very difficult to get him to respond to any phone calls, as he prepares the Budget and tries to ignore all of our Budget bids. So things were moving at such an incredibly fast pace, and those updates were frequent.
MSD, like so many other agencies, had a critical role to play in supporting New Zealanders during this unprecedented event, and I want to acknowledge that support. I'll never forget visiting the Ellerslie MSD processing centre just before we went into level 4 alert. They were already run off their feet and I wanted to express my gratitude for their efforts. What stuck with me from that visit was the MSD staff member who told me how proud they all were to have a role in supporting New Zealanders at this time, and how they were just rolling up their sleeves and getting stuck in like any good Kiwi does during hard times.
That attitude extended to all tiers of our agency—those on the front line working long hours, into the late night, on the weekend; those in the policy backrooms working seven days a week, sometimes 12 hours a day, rolling out every response, at an unprecedented pace, that our Government put in front of them in terms of requests. It has been heartening on a number of occasions to hear the very generous praise for the MSD staff's efforts from a number of quarters, not least of which has been the Opposition, and I acknowledge the positive feedback. The fact that praise didn't extend to me as Minister doesn't hurt my feelings at all! So, again, to Debbie Power and the MSD team I say thank you.
COVID remains a threat, and we cannot be complacent, but I am reminded of our collective efforts and what we have achieved as a country every time now that I attend a gathering. On Saturday, I attended the one-year birthday celebration of an early childhood education centre in my electorate. When I looked around and I saw over a hundred people gathered—grandparents, parents, children—I felt a deep sense of appreciation for the fact that we are safe and able to come together in our west Auckland community. Each time we have sat in this House as MPs since lockdown, talking, arguing, laughing, we're reminded that there are Parliaments around the world that are still not able to meet—another reason for us to recognise what has been achieved and to never take our roles or this place for granted. A couple of weeks ago, I attended a packed-out, free New Zealand Symphony Orchestra performance here in Wellington and I was absolutely cognisant of the fact that ours at this time is one of the only, if not the only, national symphony orchestras in the world that is able to perform to audiences of this size, in this manner.
Before we could gather safely, I also recognise the ways in which Kiwis reached out to Kiwis. Our arts sector—the Royal New Zealand Ballet moved online. I think they grew their audience tenfold. There were kapa haka chats set up through social media. Musicians generously shared their talents with us on social media. DJs held online gigs. I want to acknowledge King Kapisi for providing me and my husband with the best mix of music during our end-of-week garage drinks—aka date night during lockdown. There were, of course, a number of people not known for their artistic talents who did dance numbers that kept us all sufficiently entertained—a special mention to New Zealand boxer Joseph Parker for sharing his moves with the nation. Our artists never stopped, but we do recognise the impact that COVID has had on so many of our artists—their jobs, their income, their ability to do what they love—and that's why it's been a privilege to also have the opportunity to work alongside our Prime Minister, our Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage, and also our other Associate Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage, Grant Robertson, to develop what has been a very substantial arts recovery package for this sector. We know that that will go some way towards supporting people to get off the ground.
To all our essential workers, thank you. It's unfortunate it took a global pandemic for so many people to recognise the value of the work that they do—our supermarket workers, our healthcare workers, our social services.
I acknowledge all the agencies I have had some responsibility for: the Office for Disability Issues, who, I think, punch well above their weight; the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, the Social Wellbeing Agency, ACC, and, of course, the Ministry of Social Development. To add to this, I must say thank you to my political staff and my electorate staff. They are like family to me. I'm proud of what we've been able to achieve with an eye on what has been this Government's priority, and that is wellbeing. I hope to be able to be part of a Government that will continue this crucial work.
I want now to turn to our Prime Minister. When we look around the world, it's hard to ignore the suffering that many are enduring due to this thing called coronavirus. When I look at us and our team of 5 million, I am so grateful for the fact that we are safe. Going into lockdown, some of us were concerned about New Zealand's ability to be compliant—let's be honest; Kiwis are not always the most compliant—but the lockdown worked and we are where we are because we took the risk seriously and we committed. We had each other's backs and we held and continued to hold each other to account, but a large part of why we all bought in was because of the leadership of our Prime Minister. She earned the trust of the public. At every point, she leant back on evidence to make decisions, and she communicated clearly with the nation to ensure that we were on the same waka. Without this leadership, we could be in the same distressing situation as many countries in the world. I acknowledge our Prime Minister. We hope to continue the good work that we're doing. Let's keep moving.





CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt South): Mr Speaker, thank you very much. It's a pleasure to close the debate for the National Party in the adjournment debate. I want to start, as the leader of the National Party did, Judith Collins, by saying thank you, because sometimes we don't say thank you enough in the Parliament, and we don't say thank you enough to the staff who work for us and to the essential workers, as the Hon Carmel Sepuloni mentioned.
Can I start by saying thank you to the messengers. They are, in many ways, the unsung heroes of this place, alongside the Chamber staff. To the security, who are here very late at night often, sometimes after midnight, and when we were going through the euthanasia and the abortion votes, quite a lot later than that. I frequently leave this House at about 11.30, 12 o'clock to drive home and the cleaners are just starting. They're not paid enough, probably, and they work through the night. They do a great job for us, and my office is always spotless, and the carpet in the corridors is always spotless.
Can I also thank the taxi drivers and the Uber drivers who take us around the country. We don't have VIP cards in Opposition—well, at least those of us who are not the leader do not—but I know they do a great job for the ministerial team as well. It's a sort of cliché but it's true: the taxi and the Uber drivers are the best litmus test for how things are going. The Hutt and City Taxis out in the Hutt do a great job. I always talk to the Uber drivers as well—they do a great job.
Can I say thanks to the Copperfield's team, who particularly keep me well lubricated and fed, and thanks to the Bellamy's staff. One of the things that many MPs do, I know, is auction off Bellamy's lunches and dinners for local charities in their electorates. I do the same thing. I'm significantly out of pocket from this term in Parliament, but the Bellamy's team do a great job. Of course, led by Josh Ross from the Hutt—the executive chef there—and he always does great food for us.
Can I say thank you to the press gallery. There's been quite a lot of criticism of the press gallery in the last few weeks—mainly in the valedictories—but, actually, the fourth estate is the critic and conscience of us here. And maybe sometimes they go too far, and maybe MPs have things written about them that maybe they don't like very much, but actually that's part and parcel of being in this place. We're paid a lot of money to act in the public good, or at least try to act in the public good, and we need to be held to account for what we do in this place—so thanks to the press gallery for doing that.
Can I say, on a personal note, thank you to my office team: in the Hutt, Dawn and Tanya; here in Parliament, James and Ollie. Particularly during COVID, and I know I probably speak for all members in saying, our electorate offices and list MP offices really went above and beyond helping constituents, not just essential businesses or those who wanted to be essential businesses in some cases, but accessing support through the Ministry of Social Development, as Minister Sepuloni made mention, but also immigration support. There are some really tragic cases out there—really heart-rending cases that MPs have tried to help with, but not always been able to successfully help. That's always the way with constituent cases, but you try. Most of the time, it's your office staff who do the trying for you. So thank you to them. They do a great job.
No one's mentioned the Standing Orders changes yet, as far as I know.
Barbara Kuriger: Yep.
CHRIS BISHOP: Oh, I'm sorry. I must have missed that one. But I think the new Standing Orders are going to be good for the Parliament. Now, I can't claim any credit. You, sir, can probably claim a lot—and thank you for your service to the Parliament. The new Standing Orders, I think, will improve this Parliament. Five o'clock on a Thursday sounds like a small change as a default sitting hour, but I remember about 18 months ago talking to Sarah Dowie in this Parliament and I hope she won't mind me sharing the story. She couldn't get home to Invercargill on a Thursday night because we finished at 6—it's just the way the flights work. OK, you might think that's OK, and maybe she can go on a Friday. But actually, when you add that up over a year, three years, that's a significant amount of time away from your whānau and really, really tough for her, and it really, really affected her. I remember having the conversation. It wasn't actually here; it was in Wellington—and I remember talking to her about how there's got to be a better way of doing things. So we finish at 5 on a Thursday and we cut—an hour for dinner. How many other people take 1½ hours at dinner during their normal work week? Not that many people. I think we can go down to an hour. And if it means that some of the numerous—probably too many—cocktail functions around this place have to finish half an hour early, well, that's probably good for all our collective waistlines and all of our collective alcohol intake as well. That's not the world's worst thing.
I think it's going to be good that Ministers appear before select committees more. My genuine feeling is that we do not hold Ministers and the executive to account enough in Parliament in the way that we should. If you look at overseas parliaments, they put Ministers and the executive and the public servants through the wringer. We think it's acceptable for Ministers to turn up for an hour for the Estimates and an hour for the annual reviews with the departments each year. Overseas, in Australia, they'd have the departmental chief executives in for an entire day and they go through the Budget line by line on a forensic level and they examine what's going on. We don't do that here. And actually, MMP was meant to be an accentuation in the role of Parliament and holding the executive to account and it has not worked out like that.
Palmer's vision of an empowered Parliament holding the executive to account has not actually been borne out in reality. There's a lot of different reasons for that and I'm not making a party political point against Labour Party; that goes back a long way. I think that should change. I think Ministers appearing before committees more is a good thing and I think we can do more in relation to that. No Government wants to put Ministers up before committees that much, but, actually, it's in the public interest that they appear more and that we scrutinise more and that Parliament has more power.
Joint sponsorship of members' bills—that'll be good. And I've got to say, I'm waiting on the automatic introduction of bills that have 61 members in support and advance or not. I think that's going to produce some quite interesting situations in the next Parliament, and I think people will find that interesting. 
Just in my last three minutes, let's talk about the last three years. They started with a lot of promise. I remember the night Winston made his fateful decision and I remember the few weeks before that when it was him saying, "Oh, we won't do it like I did it in '96." Well, OK, it didn't work out like that. It did happen again. And I remember I was with Todd Muller, actually, interestingly, and we sort of turned to each other and said, "OK, we're going into Opposition." I wasn't a Minister in the last Government but, you know, I really hoped that we would be returned. But we weren't. It started with a lot of promise. And I was not one who thought the Government was illegitimate, because there's quite a few people who thought they were, including those who are right-leaning supporters and voters. It is not an illegitimate Government. MMP was always going to produce an outcome when the party that polled second formed a Government. That was always going to happen. The only surprise is it took 21 years for it to happen. It's not an illegitimate Government, but I do believe it's been a Government of failure. 
Remember the openness and transparency that was the key promise at the start? It didn't work out so well. We had the secret letter. We had the Clare Curran fiasco with Radio New Zealand and the secret meetings. We had the opacity of the Provincial Growth Fund. It's not a Government that's lived up to its promise on openness. Remember the housing crisis? I remember the 2017 campaign. The housing crisis was what it was all about. KiwiBuild's been a failure. Homelessness was meant to be cured by winter 2018; 18,000 on the social housing waiting list. The State house sell-off was meant to stop. It hasn't. Hundreds of houses sold and millions of dollars spent on housing people in motels. We don't hear much about the housing crisis any more. In fact, we don't hear lots about KiwiBuild any more—the policy that Annette King came up with on the back of an envelope with David Shearer on the way to the Labour Party rally. Probably a good idea to write policy a bit more sophisticated than that. 
We don't hear a lot about fees-free so much any more because fees-free was all about increasing participation. It didn't do that. It was very expensive. So instead, we've just changed the criteria for success. Now it's about the money we spend; not about the number of people we get into our universities. Well, if you change the criteria to be about money, this Government will always win because they will always spend more. They will always spend more than National, but the question is the quality of the spend. And I think if we're going to borrow intergenerationally, as we're going to over the next few years, let's borrow for intergenerational investments. Let's borrow for things that will have an intergenerational benefit. Let's do Mount Vic. Let's do the Terrace tunnel. Let's do the four-lane expressways and let's do the third and fourth rail line and let's build rail to the airport and let's do rapid transit. Let's get on with the transport projects this Government hasn't. 
In my final few seconds, Mr Speaker, thank you for your service and thank you to the Parliament.





Hon PEENI HENARE (Minister of Civil Defence): Mr Speaker, it'll come as no surprise to you I'm grounded in Te Ao Māori, and today in this speech and contribution to this debate I wish to remain in Te Ao Māori and speak in Te Reo Māori and acknowledge the leaders that have been lost during the last three years of Government.
Nō reira, ka peka atu ki tua o te ārai ki a rātou kua wehe atu ki te pō, e. 
Tangi atu te ngākau ki a koe e te kaumātua rongonui, e Piri Sciascia, kua riro atu ki te pō. 
Huri kau atu ki roto i a au, ki te tohunga tārai waka, ki a Tā Heke-nuku-mai-ngā-iwi Puhipi kua riro atu rā, e. 
Hoki wairua mai ki roto ki tēnei Whare, ki ngā mema tawhito o tēnei Whare, ki te taniwha o Waikato, ki a Koro Wētere, kua riro ki te pō.
Hoki mahara ki tōku pāpā, ki a Pita Paraone, mema o tēnei Whare, kua ngaro atu ki roto i te kōpū o Papatūānuku. 
Huri tua atu ki runga i te marae o Waitangi, ki te toa mō te mana motuhake o te ao Māori, a Kīngi Taurua, kua riro atu rā. 
Ki tōku Whaea, ki a Kahurangi June Mead, te toka o tōnā whānau, kua riro ki tua o te ārai.
Huri tua atu ki te tohunga o Te Reo Māori, ki a Huirangi Waikerepuru kua riro atu, e! Ka tangi te ngākau mō te maunga tītohea, a Taranaki. 
Huri tua atu ki a koe e te pāpā, e Te Wharehuia Milroy, ko koe te tino o ngā reo Māori ki roto i ngā tau. Kua ngū tō reo, engari ko ōu tapuwae nui ki runga i te mata o te whenua.
Hoki atu ki a koe ki te tuahine, e Talei Morrison, te toa ki roto i te ao haka, te toa mō te hauora o te wahine Māori. 
Huri tū atu ki te kuia o Pōneke nō Tūhoe, a Hema Temara, kua riro atu ki te pō. 
Ki te tohunga nānā te korowai o te manaaki i whatu ki roto i ngā tau, ko Wāna Davis, kua riro atu rā, e! 
Huri tū atu ki te maunga o Aoraki, ki Te Wai Pounamu, ko Tahu Pōtiki kua riro atu ki te pō, e! 
Ka hoki ngā mahara ki te 28, ngā hōia i whawhai i te pakanga tuarua o te ao, ko Bunty Preece kua riro atu ki te pō, e moe e te hoia. 
Huri tū atu ki te ao toi, ki a Nancy Brunning kua riro atu ki te pō, te kanohi ki runga i ngā pouaka whakaata e whakaatuhia nei Te Ao Māori ki te ao whānui. 
Huri tū atu ki tētahi o ngā kaiwhawhai wahine toa o ōna rā, a Atareta Poananga, kua riro atu ki te pō. Nāna ngā tapuwae i takahia nei i mua i te aroaro mō tēnei whare nei. E tangi nei te ngākau mōna. 
Huri tua atu ki tērā o ngā taniwha ki roto i te ao pakihi, a Tūmanako Weretā. Te kaumātua rongonui nānā i arahi nei ngā kaupapa mō te whenua te take, mō te oranga o te ao pakihi te take. 
Huri tua atu ki te tohunga o Te Reo Māori ki roto o Ngāti Kahungunu, a Lee Smith, kua riro atu ki te pō, kua ngū tō reo engari ka ora tonu Te Reo ki roto i Aotearoa whānui. 
Huri tua atu ki Pīhopa Kīngi, Maketū ki Tongariro, ka tangi atu ki tērā o ngā kaumātua kua riro atu ki te pō, tahi ake ko Tame McCausland kua riro atu. 
Ko te tini o rātou kua ngaro atu ki te pō e pīkauria nei e ngā mema Māori o tēnei Whare, ia wiki, ki roto i tēnei Whare. Nā rātou te tūāpapa i āhei mātou te kite i te rangi awatea, i whakataukīhia ai e o tātou mātua, e o tātou tūpuna. 
Nō reira, koutou o te pō, kua papā te kakau o te hoe ki te hīpapa o te waka tīwaiwai kia hoe atu rā ki Hawaiki nui, Hawaiki roa, Hawaiki pāmamao, ki te whakamaunga kekēte, kekēte mai ai te kekte ara mai ai te ara. Hāere e ngā kawa tū nuku, tū rangi, tū papai, i tū wae ā-Tāne. E moe, e moe, e moe.
Ka whakahokia mai ngā rārangi kōrero ki a tātou te hunga ora. Mr Speaker, thank you.
[I now turn to those who have gone to the long night.
The heart mourns our famous elder, Piri Sciascia, who has gone to the long night.
I turn to my own, to the master canoe carver Sir Hector Busby, who has left us.
I come back to this House, to the former members of this House, to the man of great influence from Waikato, Koro Wētere, who has gone to the long night.
My thoughts go back to my uncle, Pita Paraone, a member of this House, who has returned to the earth mother from whence we came.
I then turn to the marae of Waitangi, to that stalwart of Māori independence, to Kīngi Taurua, who has left us.
To my elder, Lady June Mead, the stalwart of her family, who has gone beyond the veil.
I turn to the master of Māori language, to Huirangi Waikerepuru, who has left us! The heart mourns the barren mountain face of Taranaki.
I turn to my elder, Te Wharehuia Milroy, the champion of Māori language in years past. Your voice is no more, but your imprint on our world is absolute.
I think back to my relation, Talei Morrison, the advocate for the world of haka and for the health of Māori women.
I turn to the elder of Tūhoe who was based in Wellington, Hema Temara, who has gone to the long night.
To the master who weaved her cloak of support in the years gone by, Wāna Davis, who has left us!
I turn now to Aoraki, to the mountain of the South Island; it is Tahu Pōtiki who has gone to the long night!
My thoughts go out to the 28th, to the soldiers who fought in the second world war, it is Bunty Preece who has gone into the long night. Rest in peace, soldier.
I turn now to the world of art, to Nancy Brunning, who has gone to the long night. She was the face on TV that showed the Māori world to a mainstream audience.
I now turn to that champion woman of perseverance, Atareta Poananga, who has gone to the long night. She left a legacy here in the House. My heart mourns for her.
I now turn to that man of great influence in the world of business, to Tūmanako Weretā, the elder who made a name for himself by leading matters to do with land and matters to do with business.
I turn now to the exponent of Māori language in Ngāti Kahungunu, Lee Smith, who has gone to the long night. Your voice is silent but the language lives on in New Zealand.
I now turn to Pīhopa Kīngi, from Maketū to Tongariro. I mourn that elder who has passed into the long night, he and Tame McCausland, who has also left us.
To the multitudes who have gone to the long night, we Māori members of Parliament will continue your work in the House, week in, week out. They have laid the foundation that allows us to see the light that was spoken about in proverb by our ancestors.
Therefore, to those who have gone to the long night, the paddle handle has touched the hull of the dugout canoe and set off to Hawaiki nui, to Hawaiki roa, to Hawaiki pāmamao to follow the path that calls out. Rest in peace, to you who walked the earth and who now walk the great heavens that Tāne scaled. Rest in peace.
I will bring my speech to us, to the living. Mr Speaker, thank you.]
Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to acknowledge the many Māori leaders who have been lost to the night. They carved a legacy and a pathway for the Māori members of this House to follow, and I think it only fitting that we all acknowledge and we look forward to the dreams and aspirations of our people in the three years ahead. I said we'd do these things a little bit differently, so it kind of falls upon me to farewell our beloved and also to acknowledge the work that's been done. I now hand to my colleague Minister Jackson, perhaps to throw a few punches and a few barbs. Tēnā koe, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.





Hon WILLIE JACKSON (Minister of Employment): Kia ora, Mr Speaker. E tika ana ki te mihi ki a koe e hoa, mō tō poroporoaki i tēnei wā. Whai muri i tēnā, ki a koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.
[It is only right that I commend you on your farewell, at this time. After that, greetings to all of you.]
I was thinking about doing something positive after I heard Minister Henare and particularly Chris Bishop, who started off so promisingly. So I was going to do something positive, but I won't.
Today, I want to talk about teams—strong teams and weak teams. On the other side, we have a particularly weak team. This myth of a strong National Party team has to be exposed, because it's a team that, sadly, is toxic; sadly, backstabs everyone; sadly, leaks information; and, sadly, can't find the right leader. Well, they had a promising team, but they kicked them all out. The wonderful Anne Tolley over there—oh, just wonderful; she should have been here for a long, long time—and the wonderful Nikki Kaye and the wonderful Amy Adams, and I wouldn't get too carried away about Paula Bennett, but whilst we had the odd argument, no doubt about the political prowess—no doubt about the political prowess. 
The point is that that could have been the team, and now who have they got? They've got come-back-from-the-dead Gerry Brownlee—who's the leader again?—Judith Collins, much better on TV than she is a leader; and Paul Goldsmith, who doesn't know if he's a Māori or a Pākehā! It is a team that New Zealanders have no faith in—that's been exhibited in every poll going. Every poll tells us that New Zealanders don't like them, they don't like their style, and they don't like their angriness.
Simeon Brown: This is an embarrassment.
Hon WILLIE JACKSON: There you go, there's one of the embarrassments. Sadly, that's the face of the new National Party—fundamentalist, right-wing, anti-community, anti-women. They're a disgrace—they're a disgrace. But this is the strong National team they talk about. 
Compare them with our team. What a leadership team we have. The fabulous Jacinda Ardern; "Chippie", Minister Chris Hipkins, leading the way there; we also have Megan Woods doing the business, managing the borders so brilliantly; and the very honest, dependable brother Minister Kelvin Davis, who our Māori caucus are so proud of. And I haven't even talked about the rest of the top 10: Phil, Carmel, David Parker, Nanaia Mahuta, and the brilliant Andrew Little—and I say he's brilliant, because he asked me to join the Labour Party, but we won't go down that track. But, anyway—
Chris Bishop: Oh, come on.
Hon WILLIE JACKSON: —this is the team—no, no, no, Bish, no; be the nice Chris Bishop instead of the horrible one. But the reality is that this is the powerful, strong team that is driving this country.
Alongside that team we have the wonderful Māori caucus that my mate Meka Whaitiri and I have had the honour of chairing. I want to honour this team, too. I've mentioned some of our people. We know how brilliant this fulla on the left is—Mr Henare. But also in the seats, we have Rino Tirikatene, we have Adrian Rurawhe in the seats also, and we have, of course, Tāmati over here in the Waiariki, who never ever says a nice word to me—did the business and got rid of the Māori Party. A mihi to all of them. On top of that, a brilliant list of MPs: Louisa Wall, who hasn't been given the kudos for all of the wonderful work she's done, Kiritapu Allan, Jo, Paul Eagle, and Willow-Jean Prime. This is the Māori caucus that has been delivering for Māori. This is the Māori caucus with the mandate; not that useless lot who's crying all over Television New Zealand. They were the losers. They were rejected by the National Party.
We have the mandate in terms of Māori—we have the mandate—and because of that we delivered $900 million at the last Budget; we delivered $500 million at the previous Budget; Kelvin Davis got Kōhanga Reo funding of $200 million - plus; Nanaia Mahuta, $100 million in terms of Whenua Māori. We are delivering for our people. Peeni Henare did the business in the Whānau Ora area. We have the successes. More Māori judges than ever before; they couldn't get up under the National Party—Joe Williams never had a chance. District health boards, we've filled them up—43 of the members there now are Māori. We are doing the business for the people, and I haven't even talked about my Mana in Mahi—maybe I can get another five minutes, Mr Speaker, but, no, I won't ask for it.
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for your work. To the Opposition, all the best; we probably won't see most of you here next time, but ngā mihi ki a koutou.





KIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I wish to start this, the final speech of this particular Parliament, with some thankyous. I'm sure I speak on behalf of all my colleagues on this side of the House to thank all those that have assisted us in our role. It is a great privilege to stand here and represent our communities, but we could not do it without the assistance of those that work here at Parliament, that work in our out-of-Parliament offices in our electorates, and, of course, our families and friends, without whom we could not do the job that we are tasked with doing.
One lesson that I learnt very early on is that this, despite what people may see in the debating chamber, is not as adversarial as one might think. I came into this House thinking it would be like a school ball—girls on one side, boys on the other, and no one talking—but I'm very, very pleased to say that that is not the case. I learnt that lesson when I was asked to attend a Probus meeting in Greytown as my first speaking engagement as a newly elected MP. After preparing a speech—a 45-minute speech, as was the request—I was told upon arriving not to talk about politics. What does one talk about? So I talked about the examples of the House working together, of National, Labour, New Zealand First, Greens, and ACT—when the time comes and when the task requires, we work together. There are examples of that in the recent Standing Orders Committee. I often cite the example of Ian McKelvie, my old mate from the parliamentary cricket team, and I working together to get livestock rustling across the line with the help of Andrew Little, the Minister of Justice, so that that can be seen as a crime in the Crimes Act. There are numerous examples, and I'm certain that the 120 members of this House each have one or many of their own. I think it is only appropriate that we acknowledge that.
It does not mean that we don't disagree. There is plenty to disagree about, and as I was sitting here listening to the rubbish that the National Party members were providing in their speeches today, I was thinking of one particular phrase: "We should be like Australia."—we should be like Australia. As I sat on the Epidemic Response Committee, the committee that we set up and asked the Leader of the Opposition to chair because we knew that it was important that particularly at that time, when Parliament was not sitting, the Government was held to account, every single day on that committee, we heard the National Party and their hand-picked experts tell us that we should be like Australia. Now, I will point out at this moment that "We should be like Australia." was not the first piece of advice that they gave us. That was "We should be like Sweden." Then that changed to "We should be like Singapore.", and then after the second wave of each country, they changed to Australia because at that time they felt that Australia was doing better in the response to COVID-19 than New Zealand.
Then enters Professor David Skegg, the hand-picked expert from the Opposition, the world-renowned epidemiologist, who said New Zealand actually needs to go harder, and the Government listened. Professor David Skegg said that if we followed the path of Australia, we would see a second wave of cases. He said that they would be in a period of lockdown months longer than New Zealand. I thank Sir David Skegg for his contribution, and I acknowledge the leadership of Jacinda Ardern and of Ashley Bloomfield and of our health officials, who listened to the science and the experts and left all the other noise to one side. I am very, very grateful, and I'm sure that many, many people are. In fact, I know that those that come and speak to me in Wairarapa tell me that they only need to look at Australia now to see what New Zealand could've been like or, in fact, would've been like if we followed that advice. Thank God we didn't.
There are many, many examples with which to compare the approach that this Government—the parties that make up this Government, in particular the Labour Party—is taking into this election. We have a plan on which to grow the economy, and that plan stands as direct contrast to what the Opposition is offering, which is a lot of bluster and not many examples of policy. We are hearing a lot of roads but no examples of how they're going to get funded and no examples of how they're going to start. In fact, I was very, very pleased to see the Leader of the Opposition, Judith Collins, come to the Wairarapa and announce their support for roads that we've already started: the Ngaumutawa Road intersection, the Norfolk Road intersection, and safety barriers along State Highway 2 between Clareville and Waingawa. Only two weeks prior, the New Zealand Transport Agency had said the work is under way—and they wondered why no one got excited about it.
We have seen examples of this all over the show. They say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The pathway to the National Party's manifesto for this election is paved with unfunded roads. That is what they are thinking—that the New Zealand public will dismiss the leadership and the plan that this Government has put forward and go along and support National because they've promised a road without any detail as to how to fund it.
Look, we've seen examples of this before. Thank God for Ginny Andersen, the real voice of the Hutt, who delivered Melling interchange after years and years of talking about it from the previous Government. Thank God for Kiritapu Allan, who turns up and within three years has seen record funding for roading on the East Coast, one of our most deprived areas of the country. These are just a couple of examples of this Government connecting to the regions and delivering what actually matters. As has been mentioned today already, we only need to see back to the global financial crisis to see how a Government can go about things and compare it to how this Government has gone about things. This Government has chosen to invest, to take advantage of the low interest rates and take advantage of the prime position that this Government, under the stewardship of Grant Robertson, got us to.
Now, we acknowledge the work that Bill English did. If only they would acknowledge the work that Michael Cullen did to put them into a position. The fact is that through successive smart managing of this economy, this Government was able to bring it down from 21 to 19 percent debt. That was the position that allowed us to be in the strong situation that we are in now—19 percent debt pre-COVID. Compare that to 40 percent in Ireland, 80 percent in the UK, and 90 percent in the USA.
They have the gall on that side of the House to stand there and lecture us about debt without offering any plan whatsoever as to what they're going to do, except $31 billion of additional roads, without details of funding, and there is talk from international analysis that they are going to have to strip $80 billion of services to New Zealand in order to meet this debt target that they have set. It is rubbish. It is austerity. It is what we saw during the global financial crisis, and that is why we saw tens of thousands of apprentices go by the wayside at that time, but that is also why this Government has said no. We are going to invest. We are going to make sure that those apprentices come out of this with the skills that we need as a country when the economy rebuilds, and we have seen examples coming out from Stats New Zealand that we are already on track.
Now, we know that hard times are coming, but it is about preparing for those. I also know that we're all encouraged to see that jobs are up over 5,000, as per the stats released by Stats New Zealand—that unemployment is at 4 percent. I see the Hon Gerry Brownlee was ridiculing that number. Australia uses a very similar way to us to measure unemployment. They are at seven. We are at four and they are at seven. "We should have been like Australia." Thank God we didn't follow the advice of the National Party during the greatest crisis that our generation, that many generations of New Zealanders, have seen. It is that leadership that New Zealanders will consider when they cast their votes at the election, and I have a sneaking suspicion that, frankly, there is no comparison. This Government has a plan. New Zealanders can see it in action.
In my final seconds, I want to thank you and, again, everybody else, including those on the other side of the House, for what, from a personal perspective, has been an utter privilege: to be a member of Parliament for the last three years. Go well. Thank you.





Hon ANNE TOLLEY (National—East Coast): Kia ora tātou. I just wanted to take a very brief call as we come to the end of this 52nd Parliament to talk mainly about the Standing Orders, because I missed the opportunity to do it last night. And I want to echo the words of my colleague Chris Bishop in that I think the changes that we're making to the Standing Orders for the 53rd Parliament will see some quite major and innovative changes.
As part of that, I want to really thank the House for going along with the changes that we made earlier on, in particular to the committee stage, because I can remember way back when I was first a Minister—and I think I got into trouble with you, Mr Speaker, because I sat there at the table while a bill was going through the committee stage, which was a very perfunctory time, actually, when a bill was going through this House, and I wrote out my Christmas cards. And when I think back now, that was outrageous. We took that whole process of that extra bit that we have in our legislative process for granted. It was perfunctory. We paid it no mind; everyone got up and made their five-minute speeches. Some people had to make five-minute speeches on a bill they'd never even read, and, worse, they had to make two five-minute speeches when you were trying to draw out a debate, and that's not good legislative process. We owe it to people to take that seriously. 
So when we trialled that new system of the Minister in the chair and, instead of making five-minute speeches, we gave members the opportunity to ask as many questions as they liked, and the Minister was obliged to answer, it meant the Minister had to understand the legislation. And the Opposition, in particular, had to resist the opportunity to get up and make speeches about a piece of legislation they didn't like. And really, I just want to thank the House for everyone really contributing to that and making it work. It was hard, it was a bit scary for some people, and it took some people a bit longer than others to get used to it. But what we saw over these last two weeks, I think, was exemplary, and I think we will get much better legislation out of it as a result. So I'm pleased to see that that is now the norm and the expectation in this House.
I also think it's great—I mean, I don't understand why we had a dinner hour, and everyone knows I argued for no dinner hour. We're not all in the House at same time. We could finish a couple of hours early and go home, and some of us could be with our families. But I think we're making a decent change, and to get out of this place on a Thursday and try to get everyone home to their families, I think, is very good.
Then, lastly, I'm delighted that we are going to create more opportunities for local employees, for backbench MPs, whether Government or Opposition, to be able to stand up and have an opportunity to talk about things that might be happening in their electorate or things that are important to them or that they've been doing in their select committee. The Standing Orders that you've adopted for the next Parliament will enable it to happen. So, actually, it's so good, Mr Speaker, I almost thought about staying on. But I'm joking—I'm joking. 
Can I thank you, Mr Speaker. It was an unusual arrangement to have a Deputy Speaker for you from the Opposition. I credit my colleague the Hon Simon Bridges with that. In fact, for a brief second there he was going to put me up as Speaker. If you remember, I remember him pointing to me. But actually, it's worked really well, and you and I have worked hard at developing a relationship that I think has served this Parliament well. I do want to acknowledge you for that. 
In my valedictory the other night, I forgot to thank my fellow presiding officers, because I think we've had an outstanding team of presiding officers that have delivered for this House fair and unbiased but consistent rules throughout the debates, and so I do want to acknowledge them. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Thank you, everyone. I'm outta here. 





SPEAKER: Thank you, members. I intend to run through a few statistics to get them into the record and make a few thanks and comments, and I will start off with the sitting days: 245 during this Parliament; 255 calendar days. We have had a total of 1,522 hours approximately, and we've had 168 hours and 41 minutes under urgency. That is about 11 percent, in my rough calculation, and is well under half what used to be the case in proportion before the reforms of the Standing Orders Committee led by that very good Speaker, the Rt Hon Dr Sir Lockwood Smith. So we've made some progress, and having extended sittings is a way of doing that. My view is that Parliament has not used them enough during this Parliament, but I think that the changes that we have made to Standing Orders will encourage us to do that more in the future.
The Government has introduced 195 bills and passed 202. There have been 55 members' bills that have been introduced; 15 of those have been passed. One private bill and three local bills have been introduced and passed. There have been 395 petitions, 209 of which have been reported back. Can I say, some of those petitions took a very long time to report back, and I think the new process of the Petitions Committee will mean that people get attention to their petitions in a way which is better than is currently the case. 
There have been 2,865 oral questions asked. Of those, five were questions to members—again, something I think the Parliament could use a little bit more than we currently do. I hate to disagree with the Prime Minister: I think she indicated that there had been something like 11,000 written questions lodged, but my figures have it up to 14,000. So whether something's happened during the day to day or in the last week, I'm not sure.
I do want to say thanks to a limited group of people, because I think if we ran through the entire list we'd run out of time before 6 o'clock. In particular, I want to thank the cleaners, who have had to do an extraordinary amount of extra work during this COVID period. They've done it absolutely wonderfully and it's made me really proud that we made early decisions to pay them the living wage. In a similar way, I want to thank the Copperfield's staff, because they have lived through some of the uncertainty that other people have lived through during this time. I want to thank the security staff for a couple of reasons. It hasn't been an easy time to be part of the security staff, but I want to thank that team for the support that they've shown to me, personally, and to members. I want to thank the office staff, both here and around the country. They have had to address this year, last year, and the year before issues of the type that one would never have expected staff to have to deal with, and they have dealt with them very, very well—I want to thank them. They do that, I think, partly because they are very well-supported by the chief executive—I think this is the first time we've said this—previously, general manager of the Parliamentary Service and a team of administration people, who I think do challenging work with challenging people particularly well. I also want to thank the Clerk and his team, who give us exemplary service, both in the House and through advice to members outside the House as well. 
Those two teams are held together by someone who I believe is the glue of the administration of these buildings, Andy Leslie—Andie Lindsay. Andy Leslie is a very old friend of mine. I actually tried to get him to run for Mayor of Lower Hutt at one stage, and for some reason Andy Leslie said he'd prefer to be the president of the rugby union. I just don't really understand why. 
Andie Lindsay is a woman who knows an enormous amount about what is going on in these buildings, and, when there are issues, she has some tremendous suggestions for solutions for them, and I do want to place that on record.
I do want to thank the Prime Minister for recognising my independence in this role. I think the only communications I've received from the Prime Minister about what's happening, or what has happened, in the House—in fact, it's only about what is going to happen in the House—have been when she's giving me notice of her intention to make a prime ministerial statement so that I can be prepared for that, and I want to thank her for that.
The communication that's gone the other way was about House matters. The only communication was in relation to the special arrangements we had on 19 March, following the massacre, when I took the unusual step of asking an imam to say the prayer and to be supported on the floor by a group of people who probably technically, according to the rules of this place, shouldn't be here. But I think we ended up with a wonderful statement of unity as a result of that. 
There are some other people who I do want to thank. Barbara Kuriger is not here now, but I do want to place on record my thanks to her for her integrity, for her kindness, for the way that she works with members who have issues and always does what she says that she's going to do. That's a measure, I think, of integrity and a very good person. I want to thank the other whips, all other whips, for working together in a positive way. The Business Committee—you know, it's been a little bit uneven every now and again. Sometimes it depends a bit on who's there and who's not there. But I think the place has run relatively smoothly over the term of this Parliament, and the understandings reached at that committee have been important. 
The Hon Anne Tolley has referred to the Standing Orders Committee and the changes there. I, too, believe that it's one of—you know, we have some Standing Orders reviews which make a little bit of change and we have some which make significant change, and I think this is one which will be significant. 
I want to thank my fellow presiding officers, the three Assistant Speakers that have been there during the time: Adrian Rurawhe, Poto Williams, and the Hon Ruth Dyson. I think it's fair to say that people from my right-hand side, because of the relatively small size of the lead party in the Government's caucus and the relatively large size of the ministry, we were a bit stretched in finding people, and I had some doubts about how the Assistant Speakers would go. But I want to say that those doubts were unfounded, and in my opinion they each did a very good job. 
I want to specially thank the Hon Anne Tolley. Members will—well, I suppose maybe they won't all know, but it's fair to say that earlier in our political career we had a relationship which was relatively antagonistic. We had different philosophies of education in some areas, and I think both of us—I'm of the view, anyway, that Anne cares deeply about education but has a slightly different approach to what I have, and for, I think, about two and a half years we opposed each other in that role. So I think the good thing about that was that I could see in her a woman who, while I didn't always agree, was someone I respected. That is why, when we were having discussions about the other presiding officers, I did make the suggestion that Anne could be the Deputy Speaker, and I'm really pleased that she agreed to do it. She has led a lot of work coming out of the Francis report. 
I can't let this all sound like it's good. There are some members of this House and some staff members who have behaved disgracefully. I hope we're developing systems to reduce the amount of that sort of bad behaviour. I don't want to get into identification, but I think it's fair to say that there's been one member who has caused me more problems than just about every other member put together. I'm hopeful that whoever is in this Chair in the future doesn't have to deal with that member. It's also fair to say that we've had a group of members who've had a bumpy start, but have significantly improved. I'm of a very strong view that coaching and mentoring, especially in regard to working with staff, is something that we must—we must—continue going forward. I think it's also fair to say that there's a relatively small group of members who may not be major offenders, but they are repeat minor offenders. But they do cause issues for staff, which are quite significant and quite unfair. I hope that we can make progress with that group going forward.
But I don't want to overstate it, because the vast majority of members of Parliament are really good people—you know, mainly driven, very hard-working, and with high expectations of their staff and good relationships with them. I think that is very, very positive. As a result of that, this is a place where people do want to be.
But I've been reflecting—you know, not everyone who wants to be here is here. The library has pulled some figures out for me which indicate that I've served with 439 other MPs during my career. About 225 of those chose to leave. Some other people left not by choice. I think we want to acknowledge the fact we are going into a relatively tough period, and it will be relatively stressful. One of my requests is that on the campaign we do focus on the issues, because it is the issues that New Zealanders want to debate. I think, going forward, people will thank us for that.
So thank you all for the support that you've shown to me. I want to especially thank members, including a number from my left, for the kind words that have been given to me, especially in the last 24 hours. I do very much appreciate it and thank you for that. Now, I understand that we might be getting a bit of support here, and I'm going to mute the mike.





Hon MEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti): If it pleases the House, we'd like to start with "Whakaaria Mai", and then the local member for Te Tai Tonga will close this 52nd Parliament with a karakia.
Motion agreed to.
Waiata
RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga): Ka īnoi tātou. [Let us pray.]
Hon Members:
Kia tau ki a tātau katoa
Te atawhai o tō tātau ariki, a Ihu Karaiti
Me te aroha o Te Atua
Me te whiwhinga tahitanga ki te wairua
tapu
Ake ake ake
Amine
[May the grace of the lord Jesus Christ
And the love of God
And the fellowship of the Holy Spirit
Be with us all
For ever and ever
Amen]
The House adjourned at 5.16 p.m.