Wednesday, 12 December 2012

Wednesday, 12 December 2012

Wednesday, 12 December 2012

Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

Questions for Oral Answer

Questions to Ministers

Economic Programme—Progress

1. TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made with its economic programme in 2012?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Associate Minister of Finance) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: The Government is making very good progress in the face of very significant ongoing global economic challenges. The Government was re-elected with a clear plan to build a faster-growing economy that can encourage businesses to invest and grow. We are focused on four main priorities: responsibly manage the Government’s finances so we can return to surplus and repay debt, push ahead with a wide-ranging programme of microeconomic reform to create a more productive and competitive economy, drive better results and better value from public services, and support the rebuild of our second-largest city after its earthquakes. New Zealanders can be reassured that this Government is absolutely focused on creating more opportunities to grow the economy, unlike the Greens-Labour Opposition, which is constantly—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Order!

Todd McClay: What progress is the Government making with responsibly managing its finances so it can return to surplus, start repaying debt, and build a buffer against future shocks?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Once again, the Government is making very good progress. On coming into office in late 2008, the Government was presented with forecasts showing permanent structural deficits and ever-increasing Government debt. This Government has worked hard to turn that situation round by reining in new spending and reprioritising existing spending to deliver better results, and that is all despite the extra costs that have come from the Canterbury earthquakes. The Crown’s operating deficit before gains and losses was $9.2 billion in the year ended June 2012—half of the $18.4 billion in the previous year—and the latest forecast will be included in the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update next Tuesday. The Government has set a target of returning to surplus in 2014-15. That is very important so that we can reduce debt to more prudent levels and build resilience to future shocks.

Todd McClay: What approach is the Government taking in building a more productive and competitive economy?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Government is working aggressively to do everything to give businesses the confidence to invest, grow, and create jobs. The Government has taken a wide range of measures to ensure economic growth is built on a solid foundation of exports, savings, and productive investment. The programme that we are undertaking is set out in the Business Growth Agenda, which contains more than 250 initiatives for expanding our export markets, encouraging innovation, developing skills, building infrastructure, improving our natural resource use, and growing capital markets. Together they are a comprehensive agenda of microeconomic reform, which will support jobs and assist businesses to become more internationally competitive.

Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the honourable member, the House is unacceptably noisy. But I remind Ministers that if they go on with very long answers—[Interruption] Order! If they go on with very long answers the House will tend to get restive.

Todd McClay: What reports has he received on proposals that would put the New Zealand economy at risk, cost thousands of jobs, and increase the country’s vulnerability to overseas lenders?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I have seen many such proposals this year. They include saying no to responsible mining, saying no to making movies in this country, saying no to seabed exploration for oil and gas, saying no to a convention centre in Auckland, saying no to speeding up the Resource Management Act, saying no to the Government’s multibillion-dollar investment in roads and other infrastructure, saying yes to a capital gains tax and more costs on business, saying yes to printing money, and saying yes to constantly talking down the New Zealand economy. That economic prescription would cost thousands of jobs. It is called voodoo economics, and it is what the Green-Labour Opposition wants for New Zealand.

Hon David Parker: After 4 years as Minister of Finance, what does the Minister of Finance regard as his greatest failure: unemployment at its highest in 13 years, income inequality at its highest recorded level, 54,000 people leaving for Australia in the past year, 270,000 children living in poverty, a current account deficit forecast by the IMF to be the worst in the developed world, a widening wage gap with Australia, negative household savings, or external non-Government debt at 100 percent of GDP? I will accept the answer: “All of the above.”

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I think the member has inadvertently laid out exactly why the Labour Party is not trusted to be the Government of New Zealand. Most of the stuff he said was completely wrong and most of the stuff he said was actually worse under the Labour Government, including the balance of payments. And he has the cheek to sit there and pretend the global financial crisis did not happen and that the Government has not faced the Christchurch earthquakes. As long as he stays on “Planet Labour”, he will stay over there on “Planet Opposition Benches”.

Mr SPEAKER: I know it is the last day of class, but the House is just too noisy. It is no particular member’s fault. There is no way I could stop a lengthy question, because we have had a lot of lengthy answers. What I ask members to be mindful of is that we should not have too long questions and we should not have too long answers, and we just need to be a little more reasonable with interjections.

Ministers—Performance of Ministers of Finance and Education

2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his promise to New Zealanders that “I expect high standards from my Ministers … if they don’t meet the standards I set then obviously I will take action if necessary”?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes.

Dr Russel Norman: Has Bill English, the Minister of Finance, met the standards that he sets, given that the number of unemployed New Zealanders has risen by 78,000 under his watch?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes. As the Associate Minister of Finance has just pointed out, we are dealing with a global financial crisis, we have created 65,000 jobs over the last 3 years, and the New Zealand economy is more productive.

Dr Russel Norman: Does he consider it acceptable that unemployment is rising in New Zealand while it is falling in our major trading partners, and does that not point to a failed economic policy from him and his Ministers?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In relation to the last part, no, and in relation to the first part, in many of those countries the unemployment rate started at a lot higher level. On that basis, if you go and have a look at what has happened in terms of the unemployment benefit, this is a Government that has got 49,000 people on an unemployment benefit—a lot lower. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I want to hear this question.

Dr Russel Norman: Does it not come down to this: Bill English has failed to create the conditions that lead to job growth, people are losing jobs here while the job market is improving in other countries, and it is only record emigration to Australia that is preventing unemployment reaching even higher levels?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.

Dr Russel Norman: How did his education Minister meet his high standards when she unlawfully decided to close Salisbury School for disabled girls?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: What is true is that the courts have ruled that it is not appropriate to go forward, on the basis of safety. It is also true that the Minister thoroughly considered that issue. The Minister never considered having a coeducational school. She considered having a school that was co-located, and it is yet to be seen whether that transpires.

Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the member, can I say to the Labour front-benchers that when another party is asking a question, it has a right to hear the answer. Some courtesy is reasonable.

Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question asked how the Minister met his high standards, and he gave us a recitation of the facts, which is fine, but what is of concern are the standards. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am on my feet, I say to the National back-benchers. The member will recollect that in his question he asked how the Minister met certain high standards, and then made an assertion of fact in his question, about a decision being unlawful. The Prime Minister dealt with that assertion of fact in answering, which he is perfectly entitled to do.

Dr Russel Norman: Does he think that it meets the standards of New Zealand parents, let alone the Prime Minister, that his education Minister decided to close Salisbury School and send girls with intellectual disabilities to a boys’ school where their risk of sexual abuse would be seven times higher, and did she not think that the danger she was putting those girls into was her responsibility?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: A number of the assumptions the member has made are factually incorrect. What was proposed was co-locating—effectively, single-sex schools on the same site. It is an idea that has a lot of merit.

Dr Russel Norman: Putting aside the unlawfulness of the Minister’s action, does a Minister who blatantly disregards evidence about the safety of the most vulnerable girls and who abrogates her responsibility to consider their safety, and who, according to the High Court, does not even think the safety of schoolkids is her business—does that Minister still meet high standards?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In relation to the last part, yes. In relation to the first part, the member is making all sorts of assumptions that are not correct. The Minister actually thoroughly considered the issue of safety, and that issue was thoroughly discussed.

Dr Russel Norman: How can New Zealand parents have confidence in the safety of their kids at school when his education Minister takes actions that she knows will expose children to increased risk of sexual and physical violence, according to the High Court judgment that found her actions illegal?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member is just totally and utterly wrong, basically.

Dr Russel Norman: I seek leave to table the High Court judgment that shows that his Minister is totally wrong.

Mr SPEAKER: The document is a public document. Because of the controversy, though, I will seek the leave of the House. Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Dr Russel Norman: Does it not boil down to this: Hekia Parata is the person who is ultimately responsible for the safety of children at school, and she has displayed a blatant disregard for the safety of her children, and does not that make her unfit to be a Minister of Education?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No, and no.

Dr Russel Norman: Will he be writing to the parents of Salisbury School to explain to them why he continues to have confidence in a Minister of Education who, according to the High Court, unlawfully acted to put their children at greater risk of sexual and physical abuse?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No, it is not my intention to do so.

Prime Minister—Statements and Confidence in Ministers’ Statements

3. DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements and have confidence in the statements of all his Ministers?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I will start by wishing the Leader of the Opposition a merry Christmas. Yes, I stand by all my statements. I have confidence in all my Ministers. Although it may have been the case that Ministers in a previous Government had to run their statements past their Prime Minister, I do not run such an autocratic Government. I can only have confidence in those statements I have specifically seen or heard.

David Shearer: I return the compliments to the Prime Minister. Does he stand by his statement that “Yep, in the end, you know, we need to. We need to get that unemployment rate down, and that’s whatever we think of the merits or robustness of the number. We need to be printing a lower number.”, and when will he be printing a lower number?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am reasonably confident it will be before the next election.

David Shearer: Does he stand by his statement that this year has been much more business as usual, and is an additional 19,000 people unemployed over the last year business as usual?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: To the first bit, yes.

David Shearer: Does he stand by his answer in response to Labour’s claims of increased migration to Australia that “Yep, they’ve got a point, but, I mean, it’s a fine kind of conundrum in a way because we started that argument, so I’m not arguing the merits.”, and how does he reconcile this answer with his statement that this year has been much more about business as usual?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am simply making the point that a strong Australia has some real merits for New Zealand. It is the largest source of tourists to New Zealand, the largest source of our exports, and the largest source of foreign investment, so a very weak Australia does not actually help New Zealand. But, yes, I stand by the view that we want New Zealanders to stay here if they can.

David Shearer: Does he agree with his finance Minister that “child poverty rates fell in working families from around 16 percent to 8 percent,” from 2004 to 2007, the period in which Working for Families was rolled out, and how many children have his tax cuts helped out of poverty, given that hardship rates for children have risen from 16 percent to 21 percent in the last 4 years?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I simply cannot verify the facts of the last bit, because we know that they are typically unreliable when they come from Labour. If we look at the first, yes, it is true that Working for Families had a benefit in assisting children in poverty. That is true. It is also true that when Labour had 3 years—2005, 2006, and 2007—where the combined surpluses were $20 billion, there were still 240,000 children in New Zealand in poverty. The simple bottom line was it did not care enough to do much about it.

David Shearer: Given that over the last year there have been an additional 19,000 unemployed, a record 54,000 people leaving for Australia, and inequality rising to the highest level ever, and that the rate of children living in hardship has risen by 40 percent since 2007, does he stand by his statement that the low point for him was his inability to sell New Zealand’s assets?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes, that was one of the low points. There were a couple of others; that was one of them. The good news is we comprehensively won that court case yesterday.

Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 4, Nicky Wagner. [Interruption] Order! I want to be able to hear Nicky Wagner. Question No. 4.

Canterbury, Recovery—Community Engagement, Cost, and Commentary

4. NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central) to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How is the Government delivering a strong and effective recovery for greater Christchurch following the earthquakes?

Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery): The Government is doing its part to deliver a strong and effective recovery by working through the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, with the community at the heart of the vision, as expressed in the recovery strategy published in May of 2011. As the strategy states, community engagement is key to a successful recovery. We are working extensively with our communities to deliver best results, mindful that timely, clear, and decisive decision-making is essential to recovery. The Government has committed considerable resources to implementing a strong, effective recovery. Known costs to date total $13 billion, with more decisions to be made. The arms of Government at all levels have been involved, and are working tirelessly to deliver on this recovery for the people of Greater Christchurch, despite the best efforts of many Opposition politicians.

Nicky Wagner: What has been the fiscal cost of the Canterbury earthquakes?

Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The cost will consolidate across many categories, and some of the features of that cost will be $2.5 billion for the repair of the horizontal infrastructure, with $500 million spent by the end of this year. Widespread acceptance of the Crown offer by homeowners in the residential red zones has meant that over $1 billion has been spent in paying out 5,212 settlements so far. Land zoning decisions mean that red zone offers will have a gross cost to the Crown exceeding $1.9 billion. The Earthquake Commission has now paid out in excess of $4 billion; nearly $1 billion of that has been funded. Over 28,000 homes have been repaired by the Fletcher EQR project team. The total Earthquake Commission payout will be $12 billion, with over $7 billion coming from Crown funds. The final cost is not yet known. We know that it will cost the Government somewhere in excess of $13 billion, but the total economic cost is likely to be about $30 billion. I know that the people of Greater Christchurch are grateful for that and sick and tired of the negative rubbish they get—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. If the Minister was capable of answering that question properly, he would have taken far less time. He is just wasting the House’s time now. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The Leader of the House should know better than to interject on a point of order. Ministers are taking a long time to answer questions from their own colleagues. That will inevitably lead to more noise in the House, and it is not that helpful. Answers to questions should be reasonably brief. [Interruption] Order!

Hon Lianne Dalziel: Has he heard none of the concerns that have come from the people of Christchurch who have been affected by the Government’s top-down recovery process, many of these concerns having been summed up in this book, The Christchurch Fiasco; and will he describe its author, who lives in West Melton, as another enemy of the recovery, as he did the Press?

Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I listen to thousands of people in Canterbury who are very, very satisfied with the way things are going forward. If I had listened to some of the commentary coming to us—allegedly in the name of people who are upset—from Opposition politicians, we would be a long way further behind than we are at the present time. There will be people who will write books and have views, but, in the end, if we stop making decisions and stop doing things, we will stop things happening. That is what the Labour Opposition wants.

Hon Lianne Dalziel: I seek leave to table The Christchurch Fiasco: The Insurance Aftershock and its Implications for New Zealand and Beyond, by first-time author Sarah Miles.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Hon Lianne Dalziel: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Sorry, I think the Minister—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] No, order! What is the point of order about? Leave was sought and I heard a member clearly deny leave, and that is the end of that matter.

Hon Lianne Dalziel: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. A comment was made about the author by one of the members, and I take exception—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! That is irrelevant. Members are at liberty to comment on authors so long as it is not—the member is absolutely at liberty to comment on authors.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Describing someone as a loopy nutter across the House is just—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Now, look—[Interruption] Order! Look, someone will—even if it is the last day, I will not hesitate if the House does not show a little more respect for this place. That point of order was totally unnecessary. Members have referred to people outside this House by worse terms than that, and—

Hon Trevor Mallard: No, it was a person outside—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That will be the end of this nonsense. On the last day, members can show a little better sense.

David Bain—Binnie Report on Compensation Claim and Peer Review of Report

5. CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) to the Minister of Justice: What are the specific “assumptions” based on “incorrect facts” demonstrating some “misunderstanding of New Zealand law” that she alleges are contained in the report of Justice Binnie concerning the application by Mr Bain for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): I stated in my media release that “My concerns are broadly that the report appeared to contain assumptions based on incorrect facts, and showed a misunderstanding of New Zealand law.” Prior to giving examples, I need to give just a little bit of context to this. I can advise the House that an independent peer review of the first Binnie advice is being done by the Hon Robert Fisher QC, and I am considering the public request made by Mr Bain’s supporters to release both these reports—or advice to me—before Cabinet has made its decision. One of the things I am considering is whether or not it is going to be in Mr Bain’s interests or in the interests of justice to do so. But in relation to the examples sought, there are many. I will give the House two of those. The first is relying on incorrect understanding of what has been given in evidence. In this case, Justice Binnie asserts that a named scientist testified at the first trial that he had chemically enhanced the prints and later sought to resile from this. The reference to chemical enhancement was an error on a label attached to a fingerprint, and this was explained as such by the named scientist at the retrial. A second example is in relation to assumptions as to the correctness of submissions on the law. Justice Binnie appears to have assumed to be correct Mr Karam’s submission that the adverse inferences should be drawn against the Crown case on the basis of evidence that is no longer available. This is incompatible with the onus of proof being on Mr Bain in this particular case, because this is, in fact, a request for Cabinet to use its discretion, and that is very clearly wrong.

Charles Chauvel: Having summarised some of her criticisms of Justice Binnie’s report, why does she not simply release it in full so that the taxpayers, who have already paid over $400,000 for it, can assess for themselves whether those criticisms are fair; or is the prospect of dropping it in the press gallery just before Christmas in the hope of a dead news period just too tempting for her?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I am not going to rise to that particular bait and the barb, because, frankly, it does not actually do the member justice. In fact, I think it is important to consider the fact that I have already answered the question—that I am considering it. I am awaiting the advice to me from the Hon Rob Fisher QC, a former High Court judge of New Zealand, and I expect to have it either today or tomorrow. I expect that once I have it, I am going to consider whether or not to release both reports. Because of the concerns that are out in the public, and, clearly, Mr Bain is concerned and his supporters are concerned, I want to make sure that we have information that can be relied on.

Charles Chauvel: Has Robert Fisher QC received the same level of disclosure of documents and other material afforded to Justice Binnie by her predecessor, and, in particular, will he be given access to any material produced by the Crown Law Office or other officials that contains analysis that is critical of Justice Binnie’s report?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I can advise the member that Mr Fisher, from memory, has not been provided with any Crown Law advice. It is a matter that the Attorney-General has not waived privilege on. I think it is important to note that Mr Fisher’s advice to me will be a peer review of Justice Binnie’s report. It is not, in fact, under the same terms of reference that Justice Binnie was provided with by my predecessor.

Charles Chauvel: In light of that answer, what were the terms of reference given to Mr Fisher QC, and how can the public have any confidence that the fruits of that exercise will bear out the criticisms that she has made of Justice Binnie’s report, if he has not seen those criticisms, a summary of them, or the advice leading to them?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Mr Speaker, could you ask the member to repeat his question?

Mr SPEAKER: Certainly. Charles Chauvel, please.

Charles Chauvel: How can the public be confident, in light of her question, that the result of Robert Fisher QC’s review of the report by Justice Binnie can be comprehensive or satisfying, in light of the fact that he appears not to have any access to the analysis that she clearly has had of criticism of the report?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think the Hon Justice Fisher’s advice to me will be comprehensive, and I expect that the terms of reference that Justice Binnie was provided with by my predecessor either will be contained in that report or I will be happy to provide them.

Health Services—Smoking Cessation, Immunisation, and Prescription Charges

6. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Hunua) to the Minister of Health: What progress has the Government made on its national preventive health targets this year?

Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health): Very good progress. Clinicians in the district health boards and general practice continue to provide more and more patients with advice and support to quit smoking. Engaging with a clinician is internationally proven to be one of the most effective ways to quit smoking. Latest reports say there are 70,000 fewer New Zealanders smoking today than there were 3 years ago, and the rate of daily smoking for youth has fallen dramatically from 14 percent in 2006-07 to 6 percent in 2011-12. This year’s child immunisation results show that there is virtually no difference in the rates between ethnicities or family income. Immunisation rates for the richest families are the same as for the poorest families. As you know, immunisation is one of the most effective interventions to prevent against infectious diseases in children.

Dr Paul Hutchison: What further work is planned for preventative health in the new year?

Hon TONY RYALL: There were over 4,000 notified cases of whooping cough this year, of which 120 babies were hospitalised. This severe cough can cause babies to stop breathing and can lead to blindness, brain damage, and, in severe cases, death. I am pleased to announce to the House today that the Government will announce this afternoon that a free whooping cough vaccine, Boostrix, will be made available to all pregnant women in New Zealand from 1 January next year until the current outbreak finishes, to help protect their babies from this potentially fatal disease. We are advised that vaccinating mothers is the best way to provide ongoing protection for babies. On top of this, the Government also encourages parents to have their babies vaccinated again at 6 weeks.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is part of this dynamic progress being made under his administration the circumstance where pharmacies are being told that the Ministry of Health will not be financing any signs alerting people in New Zealand to the rise in pharmaceutical costs on 1 January next year?

Hon TONY RYALL: That is not correct. There is going to be a flyer that will be available in all pharmacies.

Whānau Ora, Minister—Confidence

7. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Why does he have confidence in the Minister for Whānau Ora?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Because she is a hard-working Minister who is committed to improving outcomes for vulnerable families in New Zealand.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: How can he have confidence in a Minister who allowed the Mongrel Mob to receive $20,000 of taxpayers’ money?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: My understanding is that, in terms of that, the funding largely came from another area, and on that basis the belief was that it would do good improvement.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he share the Minister’s view in respect of the Mongrel Mob receiving $20,000 from the taxpayers that “Had they utilised the funding to pay wages to themselves, then there would have been no issue in terms of the use of the money.”?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It would depend on how the money is applied and what that is for. I mean, it is technically possible for people in that situation to be applying it to a programme, but it would depend on how it works.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware that on numerous occasions this year—at least 18 occasions, in fact—Mrs Turia, in her ministerial capacity, chose not to turn up to meetings at which the media were present to deliver speeches and instead relied upon others to read out her speeches for her, and does he believe this to be an appropriate sort of behaviour for a Minister of the Crown?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No, I am not aware what meetings Ministers actually attend or not. If you want to have detailed answers about that, you are better to put the question down to the Minister herself.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: No, I am asking you. Does it concern him that 25 percent of all Whānau Ora applicants who have received funding in the past year have been from the Minister’s own electorate, despite that electorate being only 8 percent of the Māori population; if not, why not?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not have those details in front of me. If you want to get detailed answers, put the question down to the Minister.

Mr SPEAKER: Question No.—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I believe—[Interruption] Order! I am just checking on—[Interruption] Order! I apologise to the right honourable gentleman, but the member has already had five supplementary questions. He may recollect that he used one on question No. 6 and has had four on question No. 7, and I believe that does add up to five. Question No. 8, Kris Faafoi—

Te Ururoa Flavell: Supplementary.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I cannot hear members call if there is too much noise.

Te Ururoa Flavell: Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Does the Prime Minister agree with the comments in the report Solutions to Child Poverty in New Zealand: Evidence for Action that “There was support for the continuation and expansion of the Whānau Ora approach to empower families and children to identify goals and progress towards them.” and, secondly, that “The analysis indicated that the learning from this way of working could be applied across government and community to reduce child poverty and mitigate its effects.”, and what confidence do such comments give him in his support for this flagship policy?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Yes. Families from across the country had previously been receiving help from Government agencies for a range of issues, but too often that help simply has not been getting good results. Whānau Ora forms a key part of the Government’s efforts to break the cycle of dependency and dysfunction that blights too many of our families.

Police Resourcing—Regional Distribution of Officers

8. KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Police: Is she committed to all of her promises in regards to the New Zealand Police?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police): Yes.

Kris Faafoi: For which areas of New Zealand has she delivered on the Government’s 2008 election promise of ensuring a ratio of one police officer to every 500 people?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Under this Government we have delivered an extra 600 police officers, who have been trained and are out working around New Zealand doing a fantastic job.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Let me just check. Is the honourable member quite finished? [Interruption] Order! I can understand the point of order being raised because the question actually asked in which regions has the undertaking of one police officer for every 500 people—or something along those lines—been achieved. The Minister gave information, but she did not actually answer that question. She may not have that detailed information, which is not her fault.

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: That was no promise of this Government. We promised, and delivered, an extra 600 police across New Zealand.

Kris Faafoi: I seek leave to table a document from the Parliamentary Library showing that the ratio of sworn police to people for the South Island in 2012 was 1:573.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.

Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Kris Faafoi: Is she or the police considering the shifting of 200 to 300 constabulary or non-constabulary positions from the South Island to the North Island in the next few years; if so, what is being considered?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: That member well knows that the disposition of staff is an operational issue. The Policing Act that was passed by the Labour Government made that very clear. But what I can guarantee and I have promised as Minister of Police is that there will be more front-line policing hours under this Government continually, year on year, than there ever were under Labour.

Kris Faafoi: Can she assure South Islanders that between 200 and 300 constabulary or non-constabulary positions will not be shifted from the South Island to the North Island in coming years?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: That is not my undertaking to make. That is a decision made by the commissioner on where those police would be best used in order to create safe communities. Under this Government we ask for more front-line hours, that they stick to their budget, and for a safe community.

Kris Faafoi: Has she been briefed by the Commissioner of Police or police officials about the shifting of 200 to 300 constabulary or non-constabulary positions from the South Island to the North Island in coming years?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: No, and I would not expect to.

Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 9, Tim Macindoe—[Interruption] Order! I want to hear this question.

Better Public Services Targets—Justice Sector

9. TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) to the Minister of Justice: What progress has been made towards achieving Better Public Services across the justice sector?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): Excellent progress has been made. The crime rate is at the lowest level in 30 years, the justice sector has developed a range of projects to further reduce crime and reoffending, major steps have been taken to improve support for victims of crime, and for the first time in two decades, the Government has legislated to reduce the availability of alcohol by restricting rather than relaxing the laws on the sale and supply of alcohol. I would like to thank those members who voted for the Alcohol Reform Bill last night. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Tim Macindoe: What further results are expected?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: In the past year alone there have been more than 21,000 fewer crimes reported, with 3,000 fewer violent offences. That is thousands fewer victims. For the first time in decades, the justice sector has an opportunity to focus on improving and streamlining its service delivery. Our accessible justice programme will modernise our courts with the greater use of technology and better customer service.

Schools—Food Programmes

10. HONE HARAWIRA (Leader—Mana) to the Minister of Education: Does she accept the finding of the Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty that a government funded food programme in low-decile schools is a simple, do-able, and low-cost solution to help children in poverty learn and achieve at school, and the recommendation that Government design and implement such a programme; if not, why not?

Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): No; because it is neither simple nor low cost. The National Government is already doing a lot in this area. We increased the amount spent on hardship by almost 50 percent from 2008 to 2011. In 2011 we spent $46 million on grants for food parcels. KidsCan has received funding from the Government. That has resulted in 4,500 children a day in 223 schools receiving food. We provide a Fruit in Schools scheme, which is available to all decile 1 and 2 primary and intermediate schools, which results in about 97,000 students receiving a piece of fruit each day, and we fund $174 million per annum through decile-based resourcing policies.

Hone Harawira: How does the Minister respond to the comments in the latest report of the Children’s Social Health Monitor highlighting the fact that tens of thousands of children are being hospitalised for poverty-related illnesses, and does she agree that addressing the root causes of poverty will help address the problem she has identified as the one in five children not achieving their full potential at school?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: We know that the two best investments that can be made within schools to raise achievement for five out of five children are the quality of teaching and the quality of leading, and, of course, other causes outside of school must also be addressed, and that is why our Government is working on both.

Hone Harawira: How, then, does the Minister respond to the views of the 300 children consulted as part of the expert advisory group’s work who listed as their top priority the issue of hunger and the importance of food in schools to enabling kids to focus and achieve at school, and the very strong support from the 1,800-plus individuals and groups who gave feedback to the expert advisory group also recommending Government-funded food in schools programmes?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: I respond by saying that of course it is a concern to our Government, and that is why we are working hard in education to raise achievement. That is why my colleague is working really hard in social development to support those families that need support. That is why the rest of this Government is focused on how we build a strong and resilient economy so that we can have sustainable responses to these issues.

Jacinda Ardern: Does she stand by the reason she gave for not supporting food in schools that “The Government is playing its part. In 2011 the Ministry of Social Development spent $62 million on food parcels.”, and does not this just prove the point that many families simply do not have enough to get by, and are reliant on capped food parcels to survive?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: I stand by my statement that in 2011 $46 million was spent on grants for food parcels, and in 2010 it was $60.2 million. I am advised that those are the figures. The point it proves is that our Government is prepared to make additional support available to those families that find it difficult to meet these needs. So, yes, I do stand by my comments.

Schools, Residential Special—Consultation and Judicial Decision on Proposed Closures

11. CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) to the Minister of Education: Does she believe that her consultation process around the possible closure of residential special schools provided all those affected with an opportunity to have a meaningful say and have that say properly considered; if so, why?

Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Yes, I do; because the opportunity was offered over several months. That response was given in the form of surveys, reports, forums, hui, and fono. I took the opportunity to read all of the submissions that were provided. It was the issues of the availability of coeducational provision at Halswell Residential College and of sufficiency of safety that have resulted in the High Court decision. I do not intend to appeal this decision. To provide certainty for the current pupils and their parents at Salisbury School I can confirm that Salisbury will remain open for 2013.

Chris Hipkins: Did she ask for or receive any advice to contradict the research put forward by the board of Salisbury School showing that girls with intellectual impairment are more vulnerable to sexual abuse in coeducational settings than they are in a single-sex school; if not, why did she not ask for that information?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: I did ask for advice from the Ministry of Education and received it. Moreover, the research that the member is referring to, which is a report by Professor Briggs, was not submitted in full to me, nor was it submitted as part of the consultation process. In fact, the High Court indicated that I could not have taken account of it, because it was not submitted.

Chris Hipkins: Why did the Ministry of Education not provide her with that research, which was available prior to her decision making, if she asked for all of the relevant research and information on this issue?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: I did ask for that advice, and I get the advice that is given to me. Now I have asked for the ministry to provide further advice on this important issue, because, of course, safety is paramount in my considerations.

Chris Hipkins: Why should the public have confidence that she executed her decision-making responsibilities appropriately, given that Justice Dobson concluded that it was “common sense” that the risk of sexual abuse for girls with impaired intellect was likely to increase, that “No great leap in logic is required to recognise the validity of concerns …”, and that her arguments amounted to “an abrogation of the responsibilities involved in making a decision”?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: In the first instance it is an existing requirement that no residential home may take on placement in that residential home any child or young person who has a previous sexual history. Secondly, I was assured by Halswell that it was making professional and clinical provision. Indeed, I think that in an emotional issue as this is, it is very unfortunate that Halswell boys, their parents, and the professional staff there are being impugned because it suits the defence.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The rules about bringing High Court judges into disrepute, saying that they are impugning people, and criticising this court are quite strict. She is meant—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I did not interpret what the Minister said as doing that. She has not directly criticised a judge at all. The member is correct that she must not do that, but I have listened carefully and I do not believe that the Minister did that. A general reference to the approach being taken here as impugning the reputation of people managing that institution I do not think can be interpreted as being a direct criticism of the judge.

Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister’s comments can be taken only as criticising the judge or as criticising me. If that reference was directed at me, I take offence at it. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Implied in the member’s questioning has been quite severe criticism of the Minister, and for the Minister to—[Interruption] Order! For the Minister to imply some criticism in her answer back I do not think is totally unreasonable. For the member to believe that that is offensive to him—at the end of the day, if the member has seriously taken offence, I obviously must ask the Minister to withdraw her comment. But we have got to be careful. I have sat here today listening to interjections where I have heard members of this House accused of being liars, and it just troubles me that members think that they can abuse each other across the House, and then get all worked up over something that is far more mild. I just think we have got to be more consistent and more reasonable in the way we respond to situations. If the member, having reflected on it, has taken serious offence to it, then I have got to respect his view, but I ask members just to be more reasonable. As I say, I have heard today members accused across the House of being liars. I have done nothing about it, because I do not want to draw attention to these kinds of things. I just wish that members would be a little more respectful. So I come back to the member. If he has taken serious offence, I will—supplementary question, Chris Hipkins.

Chris Hipkins: Why did she ignore the advice of Peter Campbell, a trustee of Salisbury School and chief executive of a residential facility for young people and adults with intellectual disabilities, who advised her in a meeting on 16 October this year that when that facility had operated as a mixed-sex residential facility for a brief period, the incidence of abuse increased markedly?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: In that very same meeting the Salisbury School board put forward a proposal for its own provision of coeducational schooling at Salisbury. Moreover, we have 29 day special schools in New Zealand. They are all coeducational. We have residential homes for those with disabilities that are run by a number of non-governmental organisations, and they are coeducational.

Chris Hipkins: Why should the public have any confidence in her ability to reconsider the matter, given that she was presented with clear evidence that the risk of abuse, including sexual abuse, was likely to increase if she went ahead with the plan to merge single-sex residential schools into a coeducational facility, received no evidence to contradict that claim, despite asking for it, and yet went ahead with the decision anyway?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: Because I hold the providers of residential schools in very high regard. Halswell is staffed by professionals and clinicals, and had made it clear what the provision would be: separate accommodation, secure systems of security, student advocates, full awareness of parents and their involvement and influence, the availability of individual education plans—all of these were traversed and taken into consideration. So I think that I do show a commitment not only to excellent provision but to how we might expand it to include even more young people into the system.

Chris Hipkins: How does she reconcile that statement that she has just made with the statement of Justice Dobson that it was exactly that line of argument from the Minister that he described as “an abrogation of the responsibilities involved in making a decision”, and that she should not place all of the responsibility for those matters on to the school board of trustees?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: My regard for residential schools was supplemented by the advice I received from the Ministry of Education, which is responsible for the delivery of special needs to children all around the country. This includes taking into account all of the submissions made by the parents, students, whānau, aiga, teachers, principals, and clinicians.

Chris Hipkins: Does she stand by the statement in her affidavit to the High Court that “If for whatever reason it is no longer possible to close the school, effective from 27 January 2013, I am open to considering a different effective date of closure.”; if so, what confidence can that community have that she will reconsider her decision with an open mind?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: I do stand by that statement. In fact, as I answered in my primary response, the board has already been advised that the school will remain open for 2013, that I will meet with the board at the earliest possible opportunity in the new year, and that we will together work through what the best outcome will be.

Welfare Reforms—Progress

12. MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister for Social Development: What progress has the Government made in 2012 to shift the focus of our welfare system to one that is active, work focused and delivers better outcomes for New Zealanders?

Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development): There has been a substantial year for those who are on welfare, and we have been making a fundamental difference for them. We are backing people into work and we are seeing evidence of that happening. Let me give you an example. In the 4 years from November 2008 to now, 305,000 people have left the benefit to start work. This compares, of course, with just 280,000 in the previous 4 years, under Labour. People are getting into work under this Government.

Melissa Lee: How are the Government’s changes making a difference to those receiving welfare? [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I apologise to the Minister. She has not even opened her mouth yet and the level of interjection makes it impossible to hear. This is the last question for the year and I just ask that we can hear the answer.

Hon PAULA BENNETT: I understand their jealousy of me, and that they just cannot quite pull off animal prints, as I can. I have been getting a sense of that from them today, but that is OK. I think what we need to be proudest of is actually the difference that we have made for young people. That, in fact, is a fact. What we have seen is that youth on the unemployment benefit is 12 percent lower than this time last year and 33 percent lower than 2 years ago. Youth are getting the best go under this Government. Happy 2012 and merry Christmas to the Opposition.

Question No. 8 to Minister

KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): I seek leave to table a statement from the Prime Minister from 2008 that says: “We will boost overall New Zealand police numbers so there is one officer for every 500 people,”.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Is this a speech or a press statement or a—

KRIS FAAFOI: I believe that the original source document is a press statement.

Mr SPEAKER: But it is from 2008?

KRIS FAAFOI: Yes, it is.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Adjournment

Sittings of the House

Sittings of the House

Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I move, That the House do now adjourn until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 29 January 2013 and that the sitting days in 2013 be as follows:

January 29, 30, and 31;

February 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 26, 27, and 28;

March 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 26, 27, and 28;

April 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, and 18;

May 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 28, 29, and 30;

June 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 25, 26, and 27;

July 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 30, and 31;

August 1, 6, 7, 8, 20, 21, 22, 27, 28, and 29;

September 3, 4, 5, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, and 26;

October 15, 16, 17, 22, 23, and 24;

November 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, and 21;

December 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 12.

As the parliamentary year draws to an end can I take this opportunity to offer my best wishes for a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year to all members. Mr Speaker, can I wish you the very best for your Christmas. I hear these endless circulating rumours that this may be your last Christmas as Speaker of the House. If that proves to be the case, then can I not only wish you the very best for your time in other roles but also say to the House that I believe that you will go down in history as one of the greatest Speakers who has presided over this Parliament in a fair and meaningful way.

Can I take a moment on behalf of all MPs to thank the parliamentary staff who do so much to help all of us, and that includes security, the messengers, the Visits and Ceremonial Office, IT, the Parliamentary Library, the Clerk’s Office, the select committee staff, Hansard, all of the executive assistants who work for MPs, and our electorate agents. Can I take a moment to acknowledge Cabinet and, in particular, the Deputy Prime Minister, Bill English, who has done, yet again, a fantastic job of assisting us through. I say to the National Party caucus that I wish you all the very best for a very merry Christmas and a wonderful time back in your electorates. Of my office staff I thank Wayne Eagleson, in particular, and Emma Holmes, who look after me so well. I thank the staff in all the Ministers’ offices and the people who look after me through the year, of course: the drivers of the VIP Transport Service, the Diplomatic Protection Squad, and, at my electorate office, Mel and Genelle, who do such a great job.

The year has ended where it started. The National Party caucus is united, focused, and delivering a brighter future. That is in contrast to the Labour Party caucus, which, once again, is divided, disillusioned, and pondering its future. In a way, Grant Robertson summed it up best. He is 100 percent behind David. Aren’t they all? The question, though, is which David? That is the one we are worried about. That will, of course, be the question that David Shearer will be pondering as he cuts his turkey on Christmas Day. Does he have the numbers or is he in more trouble than Skippy in a bushfire? That is roughly where he is going. David Shearer knows one thing: David Cunliffe is not happy being just the MP for New Lynn. He is plotting, he is scheming, he is ringing the unions, and he is having barbeques all over the show, and, unlike David Parker, he can count to 14. He knows the magic number, and there he is.

But I must say, as we go off to the parliamentary Christmas drinks tonight with the press gallery, can you imagine what it would have been like at the Labour Party caucus drinks? Goodness knows what happened when they started sending each other Christmas cards. What on earth did David Shearer write to David Cunliffe in his Christmas card? “Thanks for all your hard work, DC, and support during the year. Your loyalty means a lot to me.” Still, it could have been worse. Labour could still have Chris Carter in its caucus, and the truth is that Parekura Horomia thinks he still is in the caucus. Mind you, Parekura Horomia thinks Helen Clark is leading the party, and most of them wish she was, including David Shearer. In February we have a real treat coming up, and that is the Labour Party equivalent of The X Factor. We know that one of them is getting voted off, we just do not know which one.

But let us give credit where credit is due. Labour ended the year with one policy. There was only the one policy, and the fact that it did not add up or make sense is fair enough. Labour’s policy was to build 100,000 homes for $300,000 each, mainly in Auckland. Not to worry that David Parker thinks it is 700,000 homes—that is OK. There is a minor possible drawback, and that is that the home does not come with a section—as long as you are happy with that—or the section does not come with a home. They will be clouds floating above Auckland. Those homeowners will walk off the steps and they will think they are Felix Baumgartner. They will be falling 60,000 feet to terra firma. There will not be anything there, but there you go.

Then there were the Greens. Well, the half-whiff of a decent poll and there was Russel Norman down at Working Style getting a new suit. You would think he would be a bit reasonable. He wants to be the Minister of Finance. No wonder David Shearer thinks it is a good idea. It is because David Parker cannot add up, and that is the basic prerequisite for a Minister of Finance. It took me a year—I am prepared to accept that—but I have finally worked out what green growth is. It is this: printing $20 bills. That is green growth under a Labour-Greens Government. You can only imagine it, Russel Norman as the Minister of Finance ringing Bellamy’s: “I will have a mung bean burger with double alfalfa. Add in a bowl of fries and $5 billion and get it to my office by this afternoon.”

Then there is New Zealand First. That party ended the year with a lovely caucus singalong. It went a bit like this: “Eight in the bed and Winston said ‘Roll over, roll over.’ So they all rolled over and one fell out. There were seven in the bed and Winston said ‘Who’s next?’.” That is the question—who is next? We really do not know. But my advice is do not ring the TAB and do not go to the Wingatui races on Boxing Day. Other than that you will be exactly fine. I will not start with the Mana Party, because let us be honest, Hone did what he does best. He got arrested in 2012 and that was it.

In the worst of economic times this National Government continues to deliver for the people of New Zealand. [Interruption] Labour does not want to hear it. Those members want to pretend they live in a world where all these things have not gone on, but let us have a look. The deficit is half what it was last year, and we are on track to be in surplus by 2013-14. There were 65,000 more jobs over the last 3 years. Labour and the Greens went out there—[Interruption] That is right. Apparently, there is a manufacturing crisis, yet sales by volume are up 5.4 percent for the year to September. Homeowners across New Zealand are paying the lowest interest rates for 50 years. Real wage growth is taking place for New Zealanders, and, yes, the real after-tax wage gap between New Zealand and Australia has narrowed under our watch. We have a 90-day probationary period, which has allowed lots of New Zealanders to get a job, and now a youth starting-out wage will do the same. There are time limits for large consents on projects, so that we can start seeing, as we have, the likes of roads of national significance being rolled out, just like in Te Araroa, where I was the other day. We have a new system for processing oil and gas permits so that we can take advantage of those natural resources in an environmentally friendly way that is fair. The roll-out of ultra-fast broadband has begun across the country for New Zealanders. Yesterday this Government comprehensively won its court case for the mixed-ownership model, and next year we will see those shares going to the market. The negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free-trade agreement worth US$3 billion a year to this country, are well and truly under way, as are the negotiations now for the ASEAN Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and many other free-trade agreements—something a Greens-Labour Government does not want a bar of. That is what is happening economically.

The health system—you do not see it on the front page every day. Why? Because Tony Ryall is doing a magnificent job with the health system in New Zealand. These are not times where there are New Zealanders consuming miles and miles of debt, and on the back of that making their own balance sheets worse but paying the Government of the day extra tax on this. These are tough and difficult times, and yet, under those conditions, we have extended free doctors’ visits to under-6-year-olds right across the country. We have rolled out rheumatic fever prevention programmes to 148 schools across the country, helping 28,000 children, and by next year it will be 50,000 children. Elective surgery—35,000 more operations a year are taking place under this National Government than when we inherited the place in 2008. For that tragic and terrible disease that so many New Zealanders suffer, cancer, the waiting times for cancer treatment in this country have gone down considerably under a National-led Government. There is a lot to be proud of in health.

Mr Speaker, you are giving me the message that it is time for me to sit down, so very quickly let me just say the following: in welfare reform amazing reforms are taking place under this Government, the crime rate is down, hundreds of thousands of homes are being insulated, and national standards are being bedded in and information is going to parents.

Can I wish you all the very best for a merry Christmas. To the National caucus I say have a great time and see you in 2013. Be proud of what you have achieved. We have ended where we started the year: beating those guys and leading New Zealand to a brighter future.

DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition): Can I—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I apologise to the Leader of the Opposition. Order! I ask that courtesy be shown, please.

DAVID SHEARER: Can I also start by wishing everybody here a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year, and also by thanking you, Mr Speaker, for the way that you have handled the goings-on in the House over the past year with dignity and patience. I wish you all the very best with your future, whenever that might be. We know that whoever is going to fill your shoes, whether it be Maurice Williamson or Tau Henare, will have big shoes to fill—that is, when Steven Joyce makes up his mind who is going to be the Speaker. So thank you for your time in the Chair.

Thank you also to all of those people in and around the Parliament who make this place work: to the staff in our offices, who work the long hours working for our MPs and supporting them; to the messengers, who keep the information flowing; to the cleaners, who make our offices livable; to the cafe workers, who keep us fed and caffeinated; and to the security guards, who keep a watchful eye on us all. I would also like to thank the parliamentary staff in the Office of the Clerk for their work on research and on legislation. All of those people do their job with good humour, with patience, and with grace, putting up with us politicians.

Thank you also to the other leaders of the Opposition parties. We are like a family in many ways. We do not always agree, but usually we make it work, although, thankfully, like some families, it is probably a good idea that we do not spend Christmas together.

Finally, thank you to the press gallery for what can be described only as fair and balanced reporting of my first and honeymoon year. I love your work as much as you say you love mine.

For the Government this is the year its members would like to forget, and many of them have tried very hard to do exactly that. The year 2012 will be described as the year of the brain fade—the year that the PM’s memory suddenly went “Dot-gone”. It is the year that has spawned a whole new lexicon of one-liners like, if you can recall, “I can’t remember.”, “I don’t recall.”, “I haven’t read that report.”, “I don’t have that piece of paper with me.”, and, my personal favourite, “That’s one person’s recollection.” I have another movie idea for Warner Bros and it is called Partial Recall.

It started with John Banks and John Key having that cup of tea together over a year ago. Both could not remember the conversation. But it later turned out that they were actually talking about New Zealand First and senior citizens, including one senior citizen whom they knew very well together, Don Brash. John Banks continued the theme. He did not remember meeting Dotcom, despite being flown to his mansion in a helicopter for dinner and meeting Dotcom’s wife, whom he described as the most beautiful woman in the world. I can tell you that if I had said that to another woman in the presence of my wife, she would never let me forget.

John Key caught that brain fade bug. He did not want to read about Banks, because he would need to remember what he said about ethical standards and to answer questions. He did not recall hearing about the new resident of the largest mansion in New Zealand—in his electorate. He did not recall that Kim Dotcom was wanted by the highest levels of the US establishment. He did not recall knowing about the Government Communications Security Bureau, his own spy agency, listening to Kim Dotcom’s conversations. He could not recall speaking to the bureau staff about it either. He did not know that his Deputy Prime Minister signed a once-in-a-decade ministerial certificate to try to hush up that spying. The reality is not that he did not know. The reality is that he did not want to know.

Yes, this Prime Minister has forgotten a lot this year, from how he voted on the drinking age, whether he did a backroom deal for more pokies with Skycity, to exactly who it actually was who landed at the Wellington Airport just last week from the intelligence agencies of the United States.

But I am sure that there is one thing that we can be quite clear about: he is unlikely to receive a Christmas card from the Beckhams this year. Remember too that David Beckham spent years at Manchester United wearing a gay red shirt every week. I recall that it was after the comments that the Prime Minister made, about a week later, that he was seen alongside other world leaders in one of those pink, shiny numbers with shoulder pads, strutting his stuff. And I thought: “Karma gets you in the end.”

Hon Member: Carmen!

DAVID SHEARER: Or Carmen. The National Party might want to forget, but New Zealanders, as they go into the barbecue and the Christmas season, will not forget. What is it that this Government would like you to forget? Well, unemployment is at the highest level in 13 years. In fact, it is at the highest level since National was last in Government. Exports are down by 11 percent. Inequality increased by the highest amount in the OECD to the highest level in our recorded history. The current account deficit is the highest in the developed world, exceeding that of Greece. And, as one member of our party likes to say, we have the worst economic growth in 50 years. Each week 1,000 Kiwis are just giving up and going to Australia. Why? Because they cannot see an economic plan. Because the economic plan that this Government has is basically about selling stuff.

When you look at what is being sold, you realise not only that it is a bad idea, but actually the price for what you are going to get is going to hit an all-time low, whether it be Mighty River Power, Meridian Energy, Solid Energy, or Air New Zealand. But that is OK because we can sell rural land! Our agricultural land can still be flogged off. Or you can reach into the pockets of problem gamblers and subsidise Skycity—another great economic idea. When you run out of all those ideas, then comes the big idea, which is about rebuilding Christchurch. When that is the big idea that the Government has for economic growth, then you know there are no ideas that this Government really has for creating economic growth in this country.

Then it would like you to forget a number of other things, the number of times that sensitive data made it out into the public: ACC, the Ministry of Social Development, the Inland Revenue Department, and I could keep on going. Then you come to education, and this is what you would like to forget as well. Education—remember those class sizes that were going to be increased to actually enhance teacher quality? Then there were charter schools. You did not actually have to be a qualified teacher in order to teach in a charter school, to make that even better. Then there is the idea to close down the schools in Christchurch even if they do not need to be closed down. By the way, you do not need to talk to anybody before you actually go out there and do it. It used to be that when you criticised the education ministry you still got paid at the end of the month. Not any more. No, there is no guarantee of that either.

So as we go into Christmas we reflect back on the year and we realise that it has been a dismal one for New Zealand. But there is an upside—there is an upside. And the upside is that it has been a year of opportunity for the Opposition. So I would like to give credit where credit is due, and thank the Government for the help it has been giving to the Opposition all year, providing those easy targets, setting the bar to new even lower levels, and achieving none of its goals and promises. It is a year that it would love to forget, and some of it, it already has. I would like to encourage it to keep it up as we go into the holiday season.

Finally, I would just like to say once again to everybody here, because I do not believe people appreciate sometimes how hard everybody works, a very merry Christmas, a happy New Year, and please have a restful and safe holiday. Thank you very much.

METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): Tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou katoa e te Whare. Ngā mihi o te Kirihimete ki a koutou katoa.

Hon Member: Kia ora.

METIRIA TUREI: Kia ora.

Where will you go these holidays? Are you lucky enough to have a bach that is close to the sea somewhere, a place that you and your family have been going to now year after year after year, for as far back as you can remember? Or maybe you have a favourite motor camp to stay at—the kind of place where you have to muck in with other families from all over the country, pitching your tents, peeling the spuds, herding the tribes of children, and all done to the soundtrack of the cricket that is playing on your neighbour’s radio.

The Kiwi summer holidays are something pretty special, especially when you are a kid. You can escape those pesky grown-ups and go on an adventure, often with a brand new, day-old bestest friend ever. Those long, hot summer days seem to stretch on for ever and ever until you can hardly keep your eyes open, and then before you know it you are asleep to the sound of the moreporks calling. But then the new day breaks, cool and full of potential, and you get another chance to master your skateboard or go fishing for kai moana with your nanny and your koro and your cousins, or you are being asked, yet again, to go and search for that extra cup of flour to help your mother, who has run out for making her cake that day. These are the kinds of moments that we live for and work hard to provide for our children and the children of our friends and our neighbours. This is what Christmas is for many of us, and this is what makes us truly rich as New Zealanders.

But this is not the Christmas story for an increasing number of New Zealand’s children, and it was not mine. I had a lot of freedom as a child in the summer holidays, but we did not get to go away. Most of my holidays were spent wandering around those dry, grassy paddocks of Ashhurst, dodging the thistles in our bare feet, trying not to get electrocuted by the farmer’s fences, and waiting for our dad to come home from a day at work so he could take us all down to the river for a swim.

Those were some of the best times of my summer holidays. We would mob our dad when he drove up the driveway. Then there was the ride down to the river on the back of his Holden Kingswood—can you remember those—with the door down and our legs hanging off the edge so that we could jump off and be the first to race to the cold, cold water. My cousins and I, and my friends, and anyone else who was around would join in to spend our evenings there doing dive-bombs off the bank of the river, hunting for bullies and for freshwater crays, and squealing about the eels that might come out and bite us on the bum, and all under the watchful eye of our dad, who was usually having a good wash after a hard day’s work at the bread factory.

Our swimming hole at the Pohangina River was our place to forget about everything. Down there it did not matter whether you were rich or poor, Māori or Pākehā, a boy or a girl. The river brought us all together, and it gave us some of the happiest moments of our childhood. We did not have much, but I did have a whānau who loved and nurtured me in a country that made sure that I had enough to eat, a good school to go to, and a safe, clean river that I could spend my summer holidays swimming in.

That is a country to love. That is a country to fight for—a country that protects its vulnerable, loves its beautiful environment, and empowers all of its children, rich or poor, Māori or Pākehā, boy or girl, to become the best that they can be. That is a country I want my kids and grandkids to grow up in, and I want my neighbours’ kids to grow up in it too, no matter who they are. I believe that this is a vision that we can achieve only if we work together. I believe that this is actually the only way to live with dignity and grace in this country. I believe that this is what we, as New Zealanders, in our modest ways quietly yearn for.

But our lucky country is slipping away from us from right under our feet. Our country has never been wealthier, yet the swimming hole of my childhood is now at risk of being too polluted and unsafe to swim in, just like more than half of our lowland rivers that are already so polluted. Our country has never been wealthier, but we are living at a time when the differences between us have never been wider. We are rapidly becoming one of the most unequal countries in the developed world, where once we were one of the most equal.

Our country has never been wealthier, but it is hard to remember a time when it was so difficult to find an ordinary job that paid a decent wage—enough to save up some money and to be able to afford to take the kids away on holiday this Christmas. It is like we have forgotten what it is like to stand alongside one another and remind ourselves that we are each our sister’s and our brother’s keeper. But it does not have to be this way if we choose to live with compassion and generosity—in the spirit of Christmas, no less.

In this spirit, the Greens will continue to work with others across this House to realise our inclusive vision for our beautiful and abundant country. With the National Government we have delivered what is turning out to be the smartest investment in our infrastructure that a Government could make: spending $340 million to insulate 240,000 homes, creating 2,000 jobs, saving the country money, saving lives, and keeping us warm and dry.

It is good to be able to work across the political spectrum with the National Party and with the Labour Party to deliver for our New Zealand families. With the Labour Party we have worked together on a citizens initiated referendum that will give the public a vote on the sale of State assets. These are the assets that were built by our grandparents for our grandchildren. With Labour, New Zealand First, and the Mana Party we are working together to protect the manufacturing jobs that remain—few as they may be—and to find new tools to support more.

In this spirit of working together I want to finish by thanking all of those who enable us to do our work here in the Parliament through their dedicated service. I am thinking now of all the party staff that we each have in our offices, the Office of the Clerk, the Select Committee Office, parliamentary security, the cleaners, the caterers, the travel office, the call centre, the library staff, and the Chamber and gallery officials who are here with us today. You all make this place work. You go largely unnoticed by us MPs and certainly by the public, but without you this democratic institution can simply not function. I know it has not been an easy time for you over this last 12 months, facing cutbacks and redundancies, so please know that the Green Party stands in solidarity with you. To you, Mr Speaker, thank you for your assistance and for your many years of service to this Parliament.

May you all have a Christmas where your bellies feel full and your hearts feel content. May you have a Christmas that is alive with hope and rich in compassion. May you share the many gifts given to you this holiday season, knowing that we can live very well together in this spirit, helping others so that we may all live with dignity and grace here in our beautiful country, Aotearoa New Zealand. Ngā mihi o te Tau Hou ki a koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): It is a great pity that “Ronald McDonald” is no longer in the House, because he could have learnt something from this speech—

Maggie Barry: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I thought it was a tradition of this House that the absence of a member should not be referred to by another member.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, that is a valid point, but no member of the House was named, which brings me to another point, that we should address members by their appropriate name. Let us all just take a deep breath, and the Rt Hon Winston Peters will start again.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: It is a great pity that since she has been here Maggie Barry has learnt absolutely nothing at all. The easiest way to catch her out is just to say something, and, like a wanton shark come to summer beaches, out goes her tongue and, bang, that is it. She bites it every time.

On behalf of New Zealand First we want to thank all of the people whose commitment, integrity, and professionalism ensure that Parliament runs in a smooth way: everyone in the Speaker’s office, the Clerk’s Office, the Hansard reporters, all the library staff, and the telephonists. I acknowledge especially all the messengers and their cheerful manner around this precinct. We thank also the security guards for their hard work in keeping us all safe, and the cleaners, who deserve a special thanks—and a pay rise. They, like so many others, are not getting a fair go. Imagine how difficult it is to clean up after these people. It cannot be an easy job. They deserve a much better pay round and remuneration than they are getting. If we have forgotten anybody, our apologies.

We appreciate all who enable us to operate as an effective political party, and an effective political party we are. The support and dedication of our staff have made this year for New Zealand First a successful one. We have been effective. We have been firm in opposition. We have been constructive. We have tried to help those in need, such as the elderly and the young, and even farmers, who are being robbed blind by the banks with swaps deals in this country—

Hon John Banks: What about grandma’s money?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —and all manner of people, in particular. And our grandchildren—that is true. We have opposed the massive cuts in all sorts of departments made for no sound reason and, worst of all, the disastrous treatment of our No. 1 agency abroad, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. It has been a disgrace, an abysmal disgrace—hundreds of millions of dollars lost. Our representation overseas is second rate nowadays. We have become an international joke, and the Government wants to say that it is doing something for this country!

Hon John Banks: You’re losing it. You’re losing it.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I know why Mr Banks is laughing. It is because he has never been held to account. This is the man, who is laughing over there, who told Parliament and told the country that the police’s secret report was secret because the police requested that. That is demonstrably and palpably not true. Mr Banks, is it or is it not true that you requested the secrecy?

Hon John Banks: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I hear the honourable member saying “you this”, “you that”, and “you did this”. I do not know what you have done, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I am sure you have not done what he says you have done.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Technically, the member is correct, and that point of order is upheld. Members should be just a little more careful about pronouns.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Mr Banks, this is the question: did Mr Banks request that the police report be secret? Yes or no? [Interruption] I cannot hear him. Yes or no?

Hon John Banks: Where’s the money? Where’s grandma’s money?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes or no? When we had a question about grandma’s money—unlike his leader and unlike him—we dealt to it. We dealt to it. We did not stand around making accusations. Remember, Mr Horan’s mother made the allegations in the codicil; we did not make them. We acted. And here is Mr Banks, who forgot 42 cheques and a man who is unforgettable, a man whose place he went to on a helicopter, whose wife he said was the most beautiful woman he had ever met, and then he said he did not remember him. Mr Banks, was it Mr Banks who requested the police secrecy? Yes or no?

Hon John Banks: What about natural justice?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes or no? Look, the last thing Mr Horan needs is natural justice. I tell you, when he gets it—[Interruption] No, no, hold your tongue. Hold your tongue, lad. Do not get carried away. When he gets it, he will find that it is the last thing he wants. We are totally confident of our actions. Is Mr Key confident of his? No. He does not want to see the report. He does not even want to ask Mr Banks a question. He does not even want to examine what he has been saying. Mr Banks, as a Minister, what was told to the Prime Minister by the leader of the ACT Party was not true, was it?

Hon John Banks: Grandma got run over by a reindeer.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Oh, there you are. There you are. He will not answer the question. Look, I would have thought, even at Christmas-time, the member could be more overt, more open. No, no, no, he hides behind parliamentary secrecy and a useless, incompetent, and non-transparent leader, “Mr Spray and Walk Away”.

The other thing we did this year was to get up a Reserve Bank bill that almost got passed, and we thank those parties that helped us. It would have helped New Zealand, not the paper-shuffling speculators that Mr Banks and others in the National Party love—you know, the internationalists sitting over there in New York, playing against our currency at 35:1. We would have stopped those people, but, no, no, the men who call themselves the nationalists in the National Party—no, no—would rather be globalists and forget their people. The wonderful news, I must say, is that every day now we are getting phone calls and letters from former National Party people who have had a gutsful of them.

Hon John Banks: Name one.

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I could name hundreds—I could name hundreds. We are getting all sorts of calls, because they know that the sell-out has been going on for far too long.

I want to make something very clear to our supporters out there, to whom we wish a very happy Christmas, as well. To every New Zealand First supporter and worker and to all those legion who are thinking of joining us, let me say this: the next election is not going to be in 2014. It is coming much sooner than that. So have a good holiday, have a good Christmas, but before the one after this Christmas, there will be an election. Mr Banks cannot hang on now. He cannot hang on the moment he gets exposed in court—goodnight nurse. Goodnight nurse. There goes the ACT Party—no replacements, no replacements.

I want to say that we also were lucky last week. We drew two bills from the ballot that symbolise our ideals and policies. One will help children; the other will target criminals who commit crime in the presence of a child.

So what has happened with the economy? Emigration from New Zealand is our shame. Immigration into New Zealand is a shambles. Unemployment is rising. The economy is reeling and staggering. Indebtedness is soaring. Incompetence and bungling is that Government’s abysmal record—Dotcom and Banks, scandal after scandal after scandal—and very soon it will be goodnight nurse, and not too soon.

What is those members’ greatest pride at the end of the year? They are going to get—if the court does not stop them—to sell the country’s heritage. It is the asset sales. “Mr Spray and, giggling like a schoolgirl, Walk Away”—Mr Key, giggling like a schoolgirl—thinks that that is a great accomplishment. “We’re going to sell the birthright.”, he said.

Anyway, let me just say this here. This is where he should give in, because the National Party used to always go on about the nanny State, but this is how bad things are. I have heard there are dreadful reports coming into my office about the treatment of Santa Claus, also known as Father Christmas, at North City Plaza in Porirua. On the evening of 5 December, it was noticed that Mr Claus, or Santa as we know him, was thin and the cheeks of his face were pale. Mr Claus revealed to my office that the health authorities warned that they would no longer tolerate employing a Santa Claus who was obese with high blood pressure. He has been forced to starve himself for months and take medication for high blood pressure, and he can hardly, barely, go “Ho, ho!”, let alone “Ho, ho, ho!”. That is the kind of state that these little—I cannot say the word, of course, but they were in Germany in 1935. That is the kind of country we have come to, and there is worse to come.

It has been revealed that the “Ministry of Sexual Equality” has warned it will no longer tolerate sexual stereotyping of the spirit of Christmas. That is right. Santa Claus, as the case may be, is now going to be called “Person Christmas” as from next year. Throughout history Sinterklaas, as he is known in his native North Pole, has been a jolly, fat man with red cheeks. Now he is skinny, miserable, and pale.

New Zealand First is the party of traditional values. We stand firmly alongside Santa Claus and his inherent right to be a jolly, fat man with red cheeks. We remind the health police that Santa has been around a lot longer than they have, despite his obesity and high blood pressure. New Zealand First’s MPs will be hanging up their stockings as usual. We will be leaving out food and drink for Mr Christmas, and it will be high in sugar and saturated fat, and there will be a Christmas cake and port wine. We wish every member in the House and their families a safe and enjoyable Christmas and—just to make sure Mr Banks does not leave this Parliament as confused as ever—able to write their own speeches, unlike him.

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki): Tēnā koe. Kia ora tātau katoa i tēnei ahiahi i a tātau e mihi nei i tētahi ki tētahi, tātau ki a tātau. Kua tū ake hai waha kōrero mō te Pāti Māori ki te tuku i ngā mihi anō hoki. Tuatahi ki te Rt Hon Lockwood Smith, ahakoa kāre ia i te noho ki tērā Tūru, ka mihi rā, ka whai haere i te āhuatanga o ngā kōrero ki a ia, me tāna whakahaere i te āhuatanga o te Whare Pāremata.

I tēnei wā ko te nuinga o ngā tāngata i roto i te Whare Pāremata, e mihi nei ki tēnā, ki tēnā, kei te kī atu: “Goodwill to all men and women.” Koinei tētahi kōrero ka puta i te waha o wētahi. Ia rā, ia rā ka haramai tātau ki roto i tēnei Whare Pāremata me te whakarongo ki te karakia e mea ana, kia ngākaunui te tangata, tētahi ki tētahi. Kia kaua tētahi e whiu i te kupu a tētahi ki tētahi, “nek minnit”, ko taua āhua anō rā. Kua whiu i aua kōrero anō hoki i tētahi, pēnā i tērā tangata e amuamu nā i te taha i a tātau e whakarite nei i te huarahi ki te Kirihimete.

Ko tā mātau ko te kī atu, me hoki ngā mahara ki te hunga kua ngaro i te tirohanga kanohi, ko rātau e mihia ana i runga i ō tātau marae, i a au e tū nei, pēnei i te āhuatanga i runga i ō tātau marae, ka hoki ngā mahara ki te hunga kua ngaro. Ko Jacqui Te Kani tētahi, ko Jean Puketapu tētahi, ko Timi te Heuheu, ko Maruhaeremuri Stirling, ko Wally Papa, ko Kateia Burrows, ko Rēnā Savage, ko Doreen McCorkindale, ko Tākuta Hone Kaa tonu, ko Tākuta Joe Pere, Rev. Rau Kapa, ko Māmā Tere. Tae atu ki tērā o ngā mate inā tatanei ki a Cassidy Tangaere, a Rāwiri Te Whare, a Tākuta Arnold Wilson, a Rata Pue, a John Nyman, a Tā Pita Tapsell. Arā noa atu wētahi, nō reira, ka huri ki te reo Pākehā mō te wā poto nei i tēnei wā.

[Thank you. Greetings to us all as we wish each other well individually and collectively this afternoon. I rise to speak on behalf of the Māori Party and to express complimentary remarks as well. Firstly to the Rt Hon Lockwood Smith, even though he is not in that Chair, I commend him and follow on in the tenor of the accolades expressed about how well he has conducted the business of Parliament.

At this moment, the majority in the House who are wishing this one and that one well are actually saying: “Goodwill to all men and women.” This is a statement that will emerge from the mouth of some. Each day we come into this House and listen to the prayer saying that people should treat each other kindly, then, “nek minnit”, it is back to that situation all over again. Those disparaging remarks are tossed around once again at one, like that person complaining over there as we give due consideration to the approach of Christmas.

We say to take the minds back to the ones who are no longer seen, to those ones who were acknowledged on our courtyards. I stand here before you, in very much a similar manner as one does on our courtyards. And as I stand here memories go back to the ones who have gone. Jacqui Te Kani is one, Jean Puketapu is another. Timi te Heuheu, Maruhaeremuri Stirling, Wally Papa, Kateia Burrows, Rena Savage, Doreen McCorkindale, Dr Hone Kaa, Dr Joe Pere, Rev. Rau Kapa, Māmā Tere, and Cassidy Tangaere, who passed away just recently. Rāwiri Te Whare, Arnold Wilson, Rātā Pue, John Nyman, and Sir Peter Tapsell. There are many others, and so I will turn to speak in English now at this point for a short time.]

We have farewelled a number of those people, and I have mentioned their names, but this complex has also had its share of tragedies and losses. We think of Anne Roberts and Dave Allanson and other staff who are no longer with us. Me waiho rātau kia moe, kia okioki. Ko rātau tētahi rārangi tokoiti nei o te hunga kua ngaro, me whai whakaaro tātau i a tātau e mihi nei, tātau ki a tātau.

Arā anō te kōrero mō tētahi kaupapa hōu kua whakaarahia ake e te Pāti Māori ko tērā e pā ana ki te new normal. He aha tēnei mea ko te new normal? Me kī e ai ki tā wētahi, ko Mitt Romney tētahi i rongo nei i te ngau o te new normal. Ko te new normal ko tērā e kōrerohia ana ko te tuku i te rerekētanga o te tangata ki te ao, arā ko te unleashing the power of diversity. Ko te āhuatanga o tēnei kaupapa ko te nohotahi o te tāne me te wahine, o te nohotahi o te tamaiti me te pakeke, o te whakaaro ake o ngā tamariki, ā, e tika ana kia noho au i waenganui i tētahi kāhui o tērā iwi o tērā takiwā o te motu, kia taea ai te kī, kai te tika tērā momo noho. Ā-wairua, ā-karakia, ā-hāhi, he aha rānei. He mea pai kia tau te noho ki roto i tēnei huihuinga. Ko te āhuatanga o te economic growth, me te economic justice, ēnei āhuatanga katoa. Engari, ko te mea nui o tēnei mea o te new normal, kia kaua tātau e mataku ki tēnei mea o te mataku. Me kī, me titiro ki te paerangi, ki mua i te aroaro.

Ko tā mātau ko te kī atu, he wā tōna ka whakahōnoretia te Tiriti o Waitangi. He wā tōna ka noho tonu tātau i raro i te marumaru o tēnei mea o te whanaungatanga, o te honotahi a tētahi ki tētahi. Arā, ahakoa ko te rerekē o te noho a tēnā a tēnā. Kia whakatinanahia ēnei kōrero katoa e kōrerohia ana, ko te whanaungatanga, ko te kotahitanga, ko te kaitiakitanga. Kia kaua e kōrero engari me whakatinana i ērā kōrero. Nō reira, ko tētahi kaupapa kua whakahaerehia e mātau i tēnei tau ko tērā e pā ana ki te Whānau Ora. Ka mutu, ko te tikanga o tērā he whakamana i ngā whānau kia kitea mai ai i tētahi huarahi hei whāinga mō rātau ake. Kia kaua e waiho mā te Kāwanatanga rātau e aki, e pei atu ki tētahi huarahi kāre i te tino pīrangitia e rātau. Nō reira, kua eke.

[Allow them to rest and sleep. They are a small list of the ones who are gone, and so we must pay our respects to them.

That aside, there is a new initiative that the Māori Party has raised that relates to the new normal. So what is the new normal? According to some, Mitt Romney was hurt by the new normal. The new normal is about unleashing the power of diversity. It is about a diverse range of people living together in harmony. It includes economic growth and economic justice. However, the main feature of the new normal is that we must not fear it for what it is. We need to focus on the distant horizon in front of us.

In time, the Treaty of Waitangi will be honoured. In time, we will all live in harmony despite our differences. Positive relationships, unity, and guardianship will be realised. We must walk the talk. One of the programmes we have managed this year is Whānau Ora, which is about empowering whānau to find their own solutions, not just the Government providing them with pathways that do not really suit them. And so, it has made it.]

Whānau Ora, as I have been saying, is obviously a key focus that we have had plenty of interest in as a key, essential platform of the Māori Party. We have got to some 34 provider collectives, with over 180 providers involved, directly impacting on 33,000 New Zealanders who are focused on a better future. Whānau Ora facilitates transformation within whānau, helping them to move from a state of dependency to independence and, finally, interdependency. It is all about the development of solutions by whānau themselves.

In this House we have had one politician who has been hell-bent on creating a myth around Whānau Ora, but actually the reality is vastly different. It was great to see the Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty confirm support for the continuation and expansion of the Whānau Ora approach to empower families and children to identify goals and progress towards them. Its analysis also indicates that the learning from this way of working could be applied across the Government and the community to reduce child poverty and mitigate its effects.

At the same time as Whānau Ora has been gathering and garnering support, so too have we seen the rise of Māori economic development. The launch this month of Hei Kai Kei Aku Ringa—The Crown-Māori Economic Growth Partnership had unprecedented support from across business. The Māori Asset Base report identified a $36.9 billion Māori economy, and the strategy works on the basis that the entrepreneurship and innovation of the Māori economy is not only good for tangata whenua but also good for the nation.

We recognise the huge progress that has been made in Treaty settlements, and the Māori Party has been pretty honoured to be taking a role in those across the length and breadth of the country. We refer specifically to ones like Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua ki Ōrākei, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Mākino, Ngāti Manuhiri, Rongowhakaata, and Waitaha to name a few, and there are more coming. What we do know is that every one of the whānau, hapū, and iwi have a marae at their very hearts, and our commitment to marae has been such that we have been working to test an idea called Marae CBD, using marae as hubs for education and employment opportunities for local communities.

One of the pieces of legislation that has made a particular impact in my rohe this year has been that of the Mokomoko (Restoration of Character, Mana, and Reputation) Bill. It certainly reinforces the view that we have as a party of knowing our histories and knowing about ourselves. This is the basis behind our push for cultural competency in the health and education sectors, and we have been pretty proud to see the progress made by Tātaiako, which is having an impact in schools. It is bringing about the best in ourselves in the education sector.

Unfortunately, far too many of our children have suffered over the years through rampant neglect, the savage effects of poverty, the compounding disadvantage of institutional racism, and restricted access to services. The Māori Party has absolutely dedicated itself to the task of supporting every whānau to be the best that they can, and we have attempted to do this throughout the year. We have fought for the $24 million to confront rheumatic fever—a Third World disease that has no place in Aotearoa. We have consistently tackled through the tobacco reform a killer disease that takes the lives of 5,000 New Zealanders every year. We have negotiated for 20,000 low-income homes to benefit from home insulation, and we have made great progress across a number of areas. But there is still much to do. Our eyes are always on the state and health of the future of our mokopuna and what they will do into the future, so things like environmental kura are important, as well.

As we wrap up I want to absolutely acknowledge and endorse the other comments of support for the team within the parliamentary precincts: the Office of the Clerk, Mary Harris, the Deputy Clerk, the Table Office, the library team, Hansard, of course, the interpreters, the security team—the fantastic security team—the fantastic cleaning staff, the staff of Copperfields and Bellamy’s, the IT team, which has really come to the fore this year in giving us support, the buildings and finance staff, the messengers, the telephonists, the Parliamentary Service staff, and, of course, our own Māori Party team. We miss some of the personalities of the place, of course—those who have left this year, including Beverley, and the likes of Clarrie, Raymond, Justin, Shirley, and Ernie. Each of them and many more have done so much to make this such a fine establishment and to preserve the protocols to support the MPs and, most of all, to do their best for Aotearoa.

Of course, in closing, across the House we want to acknowledge everyone’s views, diverse as they might be, and our passion and determination to contribute to the well-being of the nation. Although we may not necessarily agree with each other’s stance, the general view that I would accept is that we are here for the best interests of Aotearoa—including those who hold ministerial portfolios and, indeed, select committee inquiries. We thank everyone who has formed a part of this Whare. We wish everyone all the very best, a whānau-focused Christmas, time to relax, to be with loved ones, to revitalise all of ourselves, and to have a very merry Christmas. Ka kite ā te Tau Hōu. Ngā mihi nui o te tau.

[See you in the New Year. Huge greetings of the year.]

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just before I call the next speaker, I have quite a complex arrangement of split calls and in order to try to keep this as seamless as possible I will just call the member and give them their time—it will be either 5 or 10 minutes. If the whips want to liaise with me they can do that, but I think that is the easiest way to go. The next call goes to Hone Harawira—5 minutes.

HONE HARAWIRA (Leader—Mana): Tēnā koe. Tēnā koutou katoa e te Whare. I know that this is a time when MPs traditionally say nice things about one another and wish peace upon the world, but 2012 has been a nightmare for a growing population of desperately poor people in this country who have little to celebrate. So I want to dedicate my last words this year to highlighting the plight that they face, to challenging a Government that doles out favours to the rich while destroying the futures of those with little future and fewer prospects, and to posing alternatives that we might all live with.

This Government’s commitment to the free market has not just allowed but actively encouraged businesses like Ports of Auckland and AFFCO to attack unions, reduce safety standards, and cut wages in their ruthless drive for even greater profit margins. Unemployment has continued to rise. Māori and Pasifika rates continue to be three times higher than those for Pākehā. More and more people are being forced on to benefits as they struggle to cope, and the Government’s response has been to cut youth benefits, cut assistance to young mums, cut unemployment benefits, cut off ACC to those with genuine injuries, cut back on assistance to those needing a house, cut back on State housing in communities like Glenn Innes, arrest people for daring to hold those communities together, evict families from State houses in communities like Ōtāngarei, force people already living on the margins into ever greater levels of poverty and desperation, and bully beneficiaries into jumping through hoops designed to shame and humiliate them. Then Government members make smart alec remarks in this House and snigger about their wittiness, as if poverty and hunger and homelessness and desperation and despair and suicide were things to celebrate, rather than problems to alleviate.

Yes, things may be tough, but clearly not for everyone. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and working people and those who cannot find work have responded by simply upping sticks and leaving this country for a new life in Australia. The real scary thing about that is that this Government is showing by its policies that it simply does not care enough about the future of its own citizens to take steps to reduce poverty, to create employment, to build homes for its people, or to provide a positive educational environment for our children.

In the face of massive public opposition, as shown by the 300,000-signature national petition and a legal challenge to stop the sale of State assets until Māori interests in water have been settled, this Government remains committed to the sale of New Zealand - owned power companies. In the face of Petrobras’ forced withdrawal from an unsafe and untested deep-sea oil drilling programme off the coast of Whānau-a-Apanui, this Government not only remains committed to its strategy of exploiting fossil fuels but also has opened up the Reinga Basin off Northland’s coast for more oil and gas exploration programmes, regardless of the disastrous safety records of potential bidders.

In the face of overwhelming evidence from the Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty, the 2012 Children’s Social Health Monitor, the Child Poverty Action Group, unions, teachers associations, and health providers about the disastrous impact of this Government’s policies on the children of the poor, the Government refuses to accept that a comprehensive food in schools programme will reduce the impact of poverty and improve educational outcomes for children in low-decile schools. Instead it offers up a pointless tax credit regime that is destined to fail because poor people have no awareness of how such arrangements work, and will not apply for them if it means having to go through the humiliation they are subjected to every time they have to go into a Government agency.

That is why I am hugely proud of the efforts of members of the Mana movement all around the country, and grateful to them for their commitment to change, their willingness to lay their bodies on the line, and their steadfastness in the face of a cold-hearted Government. I am proud that Mana members have been on the front line in the battle to stop State asset sales, to support the New Zealand Māori Council bid to protect Māori interests in water, to help keep our seas free of dangerous deep-sea oil drilling programmes, to stand against the takeover of New Zealand’s sovereignty by multinational corporates, to stand alongside those fighting to keep their homes, to support workers’ demands for safe working conditions and a decent living wage, and, of course, to promote the notion that feeding kids in schools is not an issue of cost but one of justice.

So, as we come to the end of the year, let me just say thank you to everyone who helps us around Parliament, and to all of my parliamentary colleagues a simple message: enjoy your break, enjoy your whānau, share your good fortune, a Mana Kirihimete to you all, and a simple request for 2013 that we all commit ourselves to ensuring that every child in Aotearoa gets at least one decent meal every day. Tēnā koutou, kia ora tātou katoa.

Hon JOHN BANKS (Leader—ACT): The hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who tune in to their crystal sets every afternoon at 2 o’clock, and the hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who watch Parliament on the telly every afternoon and are riveted, will be saying to themselves today thank God that John Key, the ACT Party, and the coalition are on this side of the House, and the coalition of losers is on that side of the House.

I want to thank David Cunliffe. I want to thank the Opposition leader, David Cunliffe—or is it David Shearer? On behalf of David Shearer I thank David Cunliffe for all of the publicity that he has had in the last 3 months, because it is more than he has had in his total time as leader of the hapless Opposition.

Also this afternoon we heard from the party that used to be known as “Winston First”, now known as “TAB First”. I want to say thank you to the ageing leader of that party for making me feel so good every day. When I look at him, I understand how important it is to look after yourself for 65 years.

To the Green Party, the party that wants to print money, to the old dudes and young fogies of the Green Party, all I can say when I look at the leader of the Green Party every day is that I simply cannot understand why Australia is richer than New Zealand. When you look at the leader of the Green Party you say “How can it be that Australia, great Australia, is wealthier than New Zealand?”.

The ACT Party has had a great year in Parliament. No leadership spills, no dissension, no waka jumping, and a united caucus—no waka jumping, no leadership spills, and a united caucus. It is called stability for a John Key - led Government.

I want to say thank you very much to all of those people who make this place tick. I want to thank the Speaker for his great role-model leadership. I want to thank you, my old friend, for your role as Deputy Speaker of this Parliament. None of us can do our jobs without the officials around here and we thank them for the smooth running of Parliament.

The member for Epsom works hard for Epsom every day. On behalf of the people of Epsom, can I thank my Epsom staff—Priscilla, Brian, and Styan—for the great work that they do. In the last 12 or 15 years 20,000 constituent inquiries have been dealt with by that team, over the MMP period. To my Wellington team of Chris, Trish, Shelley, David, Clodagh, Mark, Ella, and Louise, thank you very much to them. I was just reflecting the other day how old I must be getting. I was in the 1990 Jim Bolger Government and now Jim Bolger’s granddaughter works in my parliamentary office here in Wellington. So it is a land of opportunity and there is a place, as the leader of “TAB First” will attest, for ageing politicians to make a difference in this Parliament.

Finally, I would like to say thank you to the ACT Party President, Chris Simmons, my deputy leader, John Boscawen, and the thousands of ACT Party members up and down this country.

I would also like to thank the Prime Minister for his generous consideration this year. I have enjoyed working with the Prime Minister and his Cabinet team on those significant Cabinet committees. I have very much enjoyed coming back and working with the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, my long-time friend Wayne Eagleson, and I thank all of the Cabinet team for their support.

Thanks to the people of Epsom and thanks to the ACT Party, we have no capital gains tax, no printing money, no Soviet-style housing projects, no Russel Norman as Minister of Finance, no 1970s national award - style labour laws, and we no longer have the world’s most expensive emissions trading scheme. That is what we do not have. This is a great achievement. But that is not just what we are about; we have achieved much more than that. The ACT Party has introduced legislation for partnership schools, which will give those kids at the bottom 20 percent a chance to have the dignity of work. We are pushing hard on the Resource Management Act, the job killing machine that is stopping development and creating a tenant generation of young people. We will have a much better Resource Management Act reform thanks to the ACT Party and thanks to the leadership of Amy Adams and her team.

Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch, I look forward to 2013 as we have much more to do. I wish you and everyone in Parliament, their friends, their family, and the wider community—particularly the Epsom voters—of electors a very happy Christmas.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call the Hon Peter Dunne—5 minutes.

Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future): At times like this, one often forgets that the real purpose of this type of speech is not so much to have an end-of-year slanging match on the political issues of the year—although that happens—but to acknowledge the support and give thanks to the people who make it possible for us to be in this place and to do the job that we do. So I want to begin immediately with my votes of thanks, and then I will move on to some of the other issues as time permits.

Let me thank all of the people who work in my office. I am not going to name them all, because I have not got time to, but they do a great job, they are well appreciated, and I value their support. I thank my electorate staff, who handle many, many hundreds of inquiries each year, many of which I never get to see because they are satisfactorily resolved. I acknowledge also the work of the various Government departments around this city, which help clear the backlogs and break through for so many of those people in terms of the help that they need.

I want to thank all of the people who make this Parliament run, Mr Assistant Speaker: you and your fellow presiding officers, the Clerk’s Office, the select committee office, the Cabinet Office, the Cabinet secretariat, the messengers, the security guards, the people who run the catering service, our VIP drivers, our library people, our research people, and all of our officials. Every single one of them makes an important contribution to the smooth running of this place and makes it possible for us to be here representing the people of New Zealand.

I think that this year could be described as a typical first year of a second-term Government. The gloss of the first 3 years inevitably dulls somewhat. The real challenges of Government become much more apparent, and the mettle that Governments are tested on is their ability to withstand those challenges and to forge a path ahead. I think that this Government has done that admirably in extraordinarily adverse circumstances this year. I think that one of the other features of this year, because of some of the particular events that have unfolded, has been a rise in media responsibility. I have usually been one who has been very critical of the media in New Zealand. I thought that they have been superficial, but in reality I think that this year on a number of issues they have performed their role admirably. I hope this might be the start of a more permanent transition.

In terms of where New Zealand sits at the end of 2012, we are still coming to grips with the consequences of the worst economic depression since the Great Depression. Every day one hears more adverse news, not from New Zealand so much but from the countries external to us that will have an impact on us. For people to say that this depression, this economic situation, is an excuse manufactured by the Government, just like they say the earthquakes in Christchurch were an excuse—oh that Governments were so powerful to manipulate these things! The reality is that when you get news out of Europe in the last week of fears of a triple-dip recession occurring within the European Union, the bounce-back and flow-on to economies like New Zealand’s cannot be avoided. That does not mean you give up the ghost. It does not mean you say it is all beyond us. But what it does do is temper the level of response and temper the reality within which Governments can operate.

This Government has done extremely well in those adverse circumstances. Look at our debt-GDP ratio. Look at our unemployment, which is too high but by world standards is still very much on the low side. Look at a number of the key indicators. We are getting there, and the thing for New Zealand to remember, as 2012 draws to a close, is that the way forward will not be achieved by abrupt changes of path, and will not be achieved by the implementation of policies that will actually shackle people’s opportunity rather than create it. In respect of the debate about poverty at the moment, the one point that is being ignored is that growth and opportunity are the way out of poverty, not simply pouring more in the way of handouts.

So as we head off for our Christmas break, I want to conclude on this point. For many New Zealanders this will be a tough Christmas. I think we should acknowledge them and just give them some space and some support at this time. For the rest of us, I want to acknowledge the support and the encouragement—wry at times—of all members of the House. I also want to wish them and their families, whatever their political persuasion, the very best of the season ahead, good relaxation, good time with family and friends, a reinvigoration so that the debate about policy and issues next year can be a full one, a charged one, a proper one, and an effective one. Merry Christmas to all.

Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Leader of the House): In this very brief 5-minute call I just want to join with others who have thanked the legions of people who make life easy for us here in Parliament, and to add my sincere agreement with the sentiments that have been expressed to this point. Anyone listening to this debate will pick up some of the vitriol that is perhaps natural. It is the time of year when you reflect on a year gone, and there is a great willingness and eagerness on the part of everybody to separate out the differences between us all as politicians working for the betterment of New Zealand. But I want to, just for a moment, put my hat on as Leader of the House and make some comments that are about the way in which the House has operated this year. I think what many will not understand is that although there will be fierce debate on issues that we have clear policy division on, there is a great deal of work done in this place that is simply for the betterment of New Zealanders, and there is a lot of legislation that has passed through the House that adds to the quality of life and to the ease of doing your daily business in this country that has agreement across the floor of the House.

There has been a lot of criticism over many years about the way in which urgency has been used, and I will not go into that, other than to say that at the beginning of the 2008 Parliament I put a notice of motion on the Order Paper proposing that there might be some change in the way in which some of that agreed business that the House deals with could be handled. The Standing Orders Committee picked up that idea, and parties from across the House wrote it into the Standing Orders for this Parliament. So we now have this capacity for extended hours. The result of that this year has been that the House has had only one session of urgency, appropriately around the Budget. It finished at 6 o’clock on the Thursday night, meaning that there were no extra hours worked, but the business was concluded satisfactorily.

We have had 12 sessions held under extended hours, with agreement by the Business Committee, and one session held under extended hours by Government motion. The Business Committee is a group convened by the Speaker. It has representatives from all parties, and it works on near unanimity. In other words, if the representatives of the greatest number of parliamentarians agree on something, it can happen. I want to pay tribute to all members of the Business Committee. I acknowledge Trevor Mallard as the shadow Leader of the House for his contribution in changing what I think has been the way in which we sensibly look at business that we are not divided on. Treaty settlement bills are a perfect example. The progress that is now being made, which really is the fruition of many, many years of work across different Governments, is, I think, a splendid example of the way in which Parliament can work when these provisions are used appropriately.

It also means that Parliament this year has sat for the equivalent of 35-plus weeks. Given that our constitutional arrangements require us to sit for 30 weeks, that indicates a very significant extra commitment from members. So this has been a year when the maturity of Parliament has come to fruition, and that is due to the senior members who sit on that business community—

Hon Trevor Mallard: Committee.

Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —and I think the whole Parliament should be proud of them. I am not sure what Mr Mallard is saying, but he may be allowed 5 minutes at some stage in this debate to make his thoughts clear. Then again, in a party that is so divided as the Labour Party, a true parliamentarian like Trevor Mallard just does not get a go.

Instead, we have to listen to the sort of drivel that we got from David Shearer. I want to know how much the Labour Party paid to have that speech written. It was not his material, he hardly knew it, he stumbled over his words, he did not get the punchlines, and he had an audience behind him like a group of trained seals, clapping and laughing out of sequence. It was like watching a movie where it just sort of misses that cog in the wheel, and you get the language and then the action coming in behind it.

Then there is poor old Winston Peters. I want to say this to his group who were there chanting behind him. We have seen two Parliaments full of New Zealand First chanters, and not one of them is still here. So that is basically saying to the world “We’ll have Winston.”, which means “We’re out of here.”—gone. I now have to conclude, but I want to thank you, Mr Speaker, as a presiding officer, and all presiding officers and the Clerks for everything they do, as well.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The Hon Steven Joyce—5 minutes.

Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): Could I also add my thanks to all the people who work around this place for the work they have done in the year that has just gone. As we head into Christmas, I think we should help the Labour Party members ponder the big political imponderable of the year—that is, if 2012 has been such a bad year for the Government, as they say it has, then why is it that at the end of this year this Government is as popular as it was at the start of the year? I think you should ponder that over the barbecue at David Cunliffe’s over summer.

Actually, I can tell the Labour Party members why they have this problem: it is because they have no political credibility. They have no credibility with the public and they have no economic credibility. They think the public are gullible, and the reality is the public are not gullible. The Labour Party members think they can argue that black is white one day and white is black the next and nobody notices, but they cannot. They are completely politically inconsistent. If they sold used cars they would give used-car salesmen a bad name. They are in complete denial of the worst economic crisis the world has seen for 80 years. That is their starting point, to deny that. As long as they keep doing it, they are still going to keep falling over with the public. They act as if the Government is not dealing with an earthquake. They say our growth record is poor, yet it is faster than most countries in the OECD—in fact, it is a lot faster than when they were tossed out. They say New Zealand has a balance of payments problem, but our balance of payments deficit is half the size it was when they were in charge.

They say New Zealand needs more savings, but we have actually got a positive savings rate for the first time in 20 years. They say the cost of living is too tough, and yet real wages have grown over the last 4 years more than they did over the entire 9 years of the Labour Government. They say unemployment is a disaster, but 5,000 fewer people are now on the unemployment benefit than a year ago. They say manufacturing is in a crisis, and yet volumes in manufacturing are up in the last year. They say exports are down, but they are up. These people are in fantasyland. And the big news for them is that the public is not buying it. They go on about jobs, and then they do not want the Government to do anything about giving businesses the opportunity to grow jobs. They say we need more houses, and then yesterday in this House they opposed the Resource Management Act reforms that would speed up consents for houses.

Then it gets worse. Labour has no credibility, and then you add the Greens and it is even worse. There is even less credibility and a lot less economic credibility. The Greens argue for jobs and growth and then oppose every single thing that would lead to real jobs and growth. Agriculture? No. Oil and gas? No—there was little Gareth on the front page of the Dominion Post this morning. Aquaculture? No. New coalmines? No. Convention centres? No.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Did you hear what the member said?

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The member must use a person’s correct name. So when referring to the Green member, he must use the full name.

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: So there was Gareth Hughes on the front page of the Dominion Post this morning once again turning down oil and gas. So no new coalmines and no convention centres. They are even opposed to just building a commercial building.

More Chinese tourists? This one is courtesy of Winston—no. Johnny foreigner investing in New Zealand? No, that is not allowed. International education is not allowed. Green jobs? Apparently, yes. So what is a green job? It is a giant make-work scheme. Here is a clue for Labour and the Greens. It is not an industry if there is nobody wanting to invest in it except the taxpayer who is being forced to. It is not an industry; it is a Ponzi scheme. It is giant make-work scheme, and we know where those end up. They end up on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea with Governments that have no money. But that is all right; they can print the money. They just set up the printer and they can print some more.

Labour members deny it, but actually they are the junior partner in this coalition with the Greens. If it is such a good idea to print money why do the Greens not just go and print off some carbon tax credits and solve climate change that way? It makes just as much sense.

New Zealanders understand that this Government is delivering in a tough world. We are growing New Zealand. We are clawing our way out of the global financial crisis, and in fact we are doing better than most OECD countries. New Zealanders also know that members on the other side have not acknowledged the reality that the world is in today, and they are never going to trust them while they do not acknowledge that reality. New Zealanders are also saying that these people have no solutions. Their solutions are exactly the same as the old solutions, which is to promise all sorts of free stuff with borrowed money.

Actually, the world has changed since then. You cannot promise free houses and pretend you do not have to borrow money. It is the same old bankrupt visions. Frankly, it is even more controlled by the political wing of the public sector unions. It is all about the politics of patronage. The public are not buying it. Ponder that at David Cunliffe’s barbeque this summer—the public are not buying it, and if you keep going the way you are going, they will not buy it for another year. Merry Christmas, Mr Speaker.

Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour): This year has seen a decline in the National Party’s credibility. It has also seen a rise in the credibility of the Labour Party and in particular of David Shearer. David Shearer’s credibility has grown during the year and most forcefully in the last month. I thought that was apparent in the speech he gave in the House today. It was a mature speech. It had humour in it. It was not forced. It the sort of speech you would expect of a senior politician. It was not, as the National Party has tried to characterise it, some sort of jokey speech that was addressing trained seals behind him. That was John Key’s attempt at humour, which, by contrast, was shallow.

I was asked earlier in the month what I thought of David Shearer’s performance this year. They asked me what his score was out of 10. I did not have quick answer at the time, so I did really give a smart-arse answer. I am not especially good at those. But I did think about it afterwards. I thought: “What is the proper score for David Shearer out of 10 this year?”. Well, I think it is between seven and 11, because that is the narrowing of the gap between National and Labour this year. If we look at the worst of the polls, the gap between National and Labour has narrowed by seven points. If you look at the better polls, the narrowing of the gap between National and Labour is by 11 points. The gap is narrowing.

Why is that? Why is the National Party in decline in its credibility? Well, it has been a year of poor political management. It has been a year of scandal and mishap. The Government has been diverted from paying attention to the proper management of the economy, and, as a consequence, we have a stagnant economy and we have record numbers of people going to Australia. The list of scandals and mistakes is longer than I have seen it since I have been in Parliament, and I have been here for a decade now. Just a year ago we had the tea tapes. We had the Prime Minister using the power of the State, disgracefully calling in the police against the media during an election. Lo and behold, a month or two after the election they did not want to proceed with the prosecution, because it would have been so embarrassing for the Prime Minister and John Banks to turn up in court and pretend that their public stunt gone wrong was somehow an illegal action on the part of the media, against whom the police were used. Then we had the Prime Minister deeming Mr Ambrose guilty in a way in which he would never even do with John Banks, despite a written record showing that Mr Banks broke the law.

Then we had the ACC debacle. We had Nick Smith having to resign because he as ACC Minister wrote a letter on behalf of Bronwyn Pullar advocating for her, and then he misled the Prime Minister about having done so. So he had to fall on his sword. Then we had mayhem in ACC. We had Judith Collins kicking out the chair and losing the chief executive. Most of the board went. We had privacy breaches—another scandal.

What was next? We had the centrepiece of the Budget being improved student outcomes through larger class sizes. What a nonsense! That was the end of the reputation of Hekia Parata, whose ignominy has been added to every time she stands up in the House and fails in her duty to act competently as a Minister. Yet she stays on as the Minister of Education. Bring back the Minister of Police into that role is what—

Grant Robertson: I never thought I’d hear you say that.

Hon DAVID PARKER: I never thought I would say that, Grant. But I saw that in a column from one of the commentators recently, and I thought about how far the star of Hekia Parata has fallen. That also besmirched the reputation of the Minister of Finance, because he was the other driver for that policy.

Then we had Murray McCully. Murray McCully and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade—what a disaster that was! It was well brought to light by Phil Goff, who showed that he is more than a match for Mr McCully.

Hon Simon Bridges: It’s a disgrace—maligning people in this House.

Hon DAVID PARKER: I am maligning people in the House. I am maligning Mr McCully because he was terrible.

Then we had pokie machines being traded for a convention centre. Then we had John Banks, who sought donations, asked for them from Skycity, was given them personally in an envelope, knew that they were from Skycity, and said they were anonymous. Then, of course, we had the link with Dotcom and the fact that he said that he did not know he had donations. That has already been covered by someone else. But the Dotcom link then comes through in the next scandal that beset the National Party. A spy agency, despite the fact that the residency for Dotcom was celebrated in the largest display of fireworks ever, not just in Auckland but in the whole of New Zealand, and that it was paid for by Dotcom, like the Keystone Cops, under Mr Key, missed it. Then John Key forgot about it, and forgot about it again and again.

Meanwhile, what is happening to the economy? Well, the centrepiece of the Government’s economic programme for this 3 years, asset sales, went off the rails. Asset sales were meant to be the biggest part of the economic plan for this country, for this 3 years.

Hon Simon Bridges: We won. You lost.

Hon DAVID PARKER: That is right. He says: “We won. You lost.” That is Simon Bridges. New Zealanders lost. That hubris on the part of Simon will come back to haunt him. Asset sales were never a cure for the economic malaise of this country. Changing who owned what already existed did nothing to increase the output of New Zealand. It did not create one extra new job. All it did was, over time, increase power prices—we know that, because that was proven at the select committee—and increase assets inequality over time as those assets, instead of being owned by all New Zealanders, would end up owned disproportionately by the same 10 percent of New Zealand that this Government always acts for.

At Budget time we also had disclosure for the first time, which again showed Steven Joyce to be the chief spinner for the National Party. He was rolled out at the time of the last election to say that the Labour Party was telling lies when we said that we were accounting for the proceeds of the asset sales, but were not accounting for the loss of share of profits. Sure enough, come the Budget the Government had to admit it—a deficit that was $100 million per annum worse because of asset sales.

In the meantime what has happened to the economy? Well, the Government promised that people could say goodbye to higher taxes, not their loved ones. That is what the National Party was elected on in 2008. What has happened since? There have been record levels of people leaving New Zealand for Australia—the highest ever in the history of New Zealand. More than 175,000 have left since National took office. That is more than the population of Hamilton, it is more than the population of Napier and Hastings combined, and it is more than the population of Dunedin and Invercargill combined. Some areas have lost 4 percent of their population—4 percent of their population. Despite that record loss of people, we have got unemployment at the highest rate in 13 years—over 7 percent. What did the unemployment numbers do? They surprised the Government. Government members said that they thought that it was inconsistent, yet the banks had already forecast it going to over 7 percent. The quarterly employment survey had also shown an increase in unemployment.

We have had an increase in child poverty and inequality. I do not have time to cover that, but I am sure my colleague Jacinda Ardern will do that justice. We have had exports down. The Government says there is no crisis in manufacturing. Well, it is true that primary manufacturing holds up when terms of trade go against you—that is true. But non-primary manufacturing really suffers, and that is what is suffering. We are losing jobs in that sector. This Government refuses to pull the levers of power that are open to it. The Government says that the Labour Party stands for nothing. We stand for a neutral investment signal that is fair, through a capital gains tax, and that also improves the economy. We stand for universal KiwiSaver and changes to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act so that the Reserve Bank does not give primacy to inflation targeting over things like the exchange rate and full employment.

The last thing I would say is that the messaging of the Government is now becoming desperate. For years it said that we in Labour were fiscally irresponsible, then just this week we have got John Key saying there were $20 billion of surpluses in 3 years under Labour, and because of that we did not spend enough on child poverty. Despite the fact that we lifted many people out of child poverty through Working for Families, the truth is we were responsible fiscally. We have partially rehabilitated our reputation in respect of fiscal responsibility this year. We left the lowest Government debt in the world and the lowest unemployment in the world, and this Government has squandered that advantage.

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police): I am proud to stand here as a member of the New Zealand National Party caucus and a Minister in a National-led Government. Why? Because this Government delivers. Despite some of the most difficult economic times since the 1930s, the New Zealand economy is in better shape now than it was in 2008 when we took over from that lot over there. Why? Firstly, because we have a fantastic leader who, by the way, can write his own speeches, and we have a united caucus.

Hon Simon Bridges: We’ve got a fantastic finance Minister as well.

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I was just going to say we have got a fantastic finance Minister. He can add up, and he can subtract and multiply, which is more than we can say for them over there. Will you stop taking my lines, Mr Bridges.

We have got strong, clear plans to strengthen our economy. We are supporting Christchurch and the rebuild of Christchurch. We have supported the elderly and some of New Zealand’s most vulnerable through these tough times. We are focused on delivering Better Public Services. In other words, we are working hard for New Zealanders, but we are working smarter and better.

What a great year our New Zealand Police have had. There is a 5.9 percent drop in the crime rate, and that is on top of a 7 percent drop in the crime rate last year. What a fantastic job they are doing, rolling out Policing Excellence, which includes things like Prevention First, which is getting out and working in the communities. There are 33 neighbourhood policing teams working in some of our most hard-hit crime areas, working with communities to stop crime from happening. The better use of technology sees our officers not having to go back into the station so much, and that is how we are delivering more front-line policing hours than ever before, and that is making a real difference in our communities. I would like to thank all of our police staff, sworn and non-sworn, up and down the country. They are brave people. They are extremely patient people. They are ultimate professionals. I wish them all a very merry Christmas.

What about the Department of Corrections? Well, it has seen a 5 percent drop in reoffending rates. What does that mean? That actually means this year we have seen 3,700 fewer victims of crime, and about 925 fewer offenders. I think that has made a big difference in some of our communities. We have rolled out more education, more training and skills, and more alcohol and drug rehabilitation to more prisoners than ever before. Even in these tough economic times we have been putting education in front of remand prisoners, which has never been done before. We are making a real difference to turning round the lives of some of these prisoners. I think our prison officers and our corrections staff have done a magnificent job this year. I want to put on record our thanks to them, and wish them a merry Christmas too.

In addition we have the Serious Fraud Office. Its job is to bring those white-collar criminals to justice. It also has had a fantastic year with prosecutions and cases before the courts. Serious Fraud Office staff are the ones who are getting those guys into court and making them take ownership and be responsible for all those people out in New Zealand whom they have scammed out of their life-savings. They have got those white-collar criminals brought to justice. I want to thank all of those staff who work in Auckland in particular, and wish them a merry Christmas.

While we are wishing everyone a merry Christmas, can I wish Mr Speaker, the Deputy Speaker, and the Assistant Speakers a merry Christmas. Thank you for your presiding over this House throughout the year. Can I add my thanks to all the staff who work in the precincts of Parliament, the Clerks, the Hansard people, the messengers, the cleaners, the security people, and the people who work in Bellamy’s and down here in the cafeteria. Can I thank my fabulous staff. Can I wish to all the members of this House safe journeys, safe celebrations, safe swimming and boating, and enjoy a New Zealand summer. Kia ora.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Todd McClay—5 minutes.

TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): Um, um, um. Ah, ah, ah. Um, um, um. Anybody who is listening to this on the radio at the moment probably thinks the Leader of the Opposition, David Shearer, is on his feet speaking again. This is the year that he has limped from one um and one ah to another, all the way through the whole year.

Do you remember at the beginning of the year when they were about to have their caucus meeting not far from Taupō? He stood beside a dairy farm and he ummed and ahhed and said that no longer would these farms be able to be sold to foreigners. Then when he was asked about the details he ummed and he ahhed some more, and of course we do not see a bill in his name before this House that is going to deal with this issue.

Just a very short time ago when he was asked whether or not he had the full support of his caucus I thought he was counting them on the ums and the ahs because there were so many when he was put in front of the television cameras. But what we do know is now absolutely he does have them all. Another um and another ah there. He came forward with the big strategy to turn round the wayward direction of the Labour Party at its conference this year. What happened when he was asked about how the houses would come about? All we got for those poor New Zealanders who want a house was more ums and more ahs.

Can I say this has been a good year for the Government because the Government is focused on what is important for New Zealanders and what the really important things are that we must do for this country. This is a year when a hard-working Government has done more and achieved more than any year that many in this House can remember. Do you know what this year is? This is the year of The Hobbit. The Green Party has been here almost every year saying to us in this House that it is in favour of labelling. Well, that is a film that is going round the world—released in cinemas this week—that has a label on it that says “Made in New Zealand”. This is the year of The Hobbit. Thank goodness that Gerry Brownlee and John Key secured that film and future films for New Zealand. Thank goodness they secured 3,000 jobs for New Zealand and work for 3,000 businesses. Members opposite in the Labour Party laugh and scoff because they wanted this to be the year of the Hobbit-haters. They did not want the film to have “Made in New Zealand” on it. They did not want that film to be made here. They wanted to back their union mates and Australian unions so 3,000 New Zealanders would not have jobs and 3,000 businesses would not have work to do on this important industry. I say again thank goodness for John Key and Gerry Brownlee and the work they did for everyday New Zealanders, who are proud that film has been made here.

What has this Government done this year in an extremely hard-working year? We heard from the Prime Minister earlier that the deficit has been halved over what it was last year and we are on track back to surplus, something that would not have happened under a Green-Labour coalition Government if it was on this side of the House this year. We have got the lowest interest rates in New Zealand for 50 years. Again members opposite scoff and laugh, but mums and dads out there who are paying mortgages on houses—that actually are real houses, not the 100,000 those members are pretending they will magic up from thin air—are glad about this because of the economic management of Bill English as the Minister of Finance.

Since we have been here in this Parliament there have been 60,000 new jobs. Some of those jobs have come with Australian companies to New Zealand. The Opposition, the Labour Party, stood up in New Zealand and said that they are the wrong types of jobs and they do not pay enough. Well, here is the thing: if you look around the world a job is a job and it is a good job. This Government backs New Zealanders and backs those jobs. We are glad that Australian companies have brought jobs here because they have confidence in the direction the Government is going in.

I turn to roads around New Zealand and infrastructure. I was horrified to hear a member of the Opposition who is in the Waikato area—I think in your electorate, Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch—saying that she was against a very important road in the Bay of Plenty, the Te Puke bypass, which goes from my electorate through Tony Ryall’s electorate to the Port of Tauranga in Simon Bridges’ electorate. That is what—

Hon Simon Bridges: What’s it called?

TODD McCLAY: They say it is the Te Puke bypass. That is what they are saying. They do not back important roads anywhere in New Zealand. They do not back important roads in the Bay of Plenty that will add productivity and jobs to our local economy.

In crime, there has been a 5.9 percent drop in crime rates in New Zealand. That is a fantastic job on the part of our Ministers and our police.

In the moment, the minute, I have got left I want to thank the staff of the Finance and Expenditure Committee, which I get to chair. I want to thank the staff of Parliament. I want to thank the members of the committee. I want to thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, and to Lockwood Smith I wish him the very best for a successful holiday period and 2013. I will end here, Mr Assistant Speaker. A little bit of advice—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry to interrupt the member, his time has expired.

JACINDA ARDERN (Labour): I am not sure just what happened there in that speech, but I want to start at the beginning of mine by adding my thanks to all the wonderful staff who make this place what it is, who keep it ticking along, and who, basically, put up with all of us existing in this space, particularly the forbearance of those who have to listen to all of our speeches here in this Chamber. I want to add my special thanks to the Labour team and extended whānau and all the work that they do—our research unit, our media team, the leader’s office, and all of our executive assistants. They are very special people, and I know I speak for my colleagues when I thank them sincerely for their work.

John Key stood up as Prime Minister in this House and in his adjournment debate speech claimed that he had ended the year as he had started. That literally, actually, cannot be true. Based on some of the facts that we have before us, things are actually much, much worse than even when he started this year. And you know that things are bad, things are terrible, when a Government starts, in order to try to prove that things are OK, comparing its statistics and its figures with the 1990s and the last time that it was having an absolutely dismal time in Government. Not for everyone has this been a positive year. In fact, for the majority of Kiwis, particularly those who are most vulnerable, including some of our youngest members of society, this has been a very difficult year, and there is no bright light on the horizon.

It is telling that on the forecourt of Parliament today, this last sitting day, the Child Poverty Action Group’s youth wing—and I congratulate it on its initiative and its work—organised a rally on Parliament called “Bare your soles for child poverty”. It asked that for a brief moment politicians take off their shoes and experience what many Kiwi kids are experiencing on a daily basis: basic material deprivation. I do not say that in a flippant way. We know the figures. Material deprivation has gone from 15 percent to 21 percent under this Government. Those are basic enforced lacks—not having enough money to go to the doctor and fill your prescription, so forgoing doctors’ visits when you are sick. That would explain the increase in preventable hospitalisations that we have seen in this country, and the Children’s Social Health Monitor released this week showed us that.

The shame that this Government needs to face up to is things like Third World diseases, rheumatic fever, infectious skin diseases, and kids ending up in hospital because their eczema has got so bad, or because they have things like scabies but do not even have enough hot water or power in their homes to do a hot wash to get rid of it. This is Third World stuff, and this our national shame—the National Party’s shame. We have 270,000 children living in poverty. These are our most vulnerable children, despite what Ms Bennett said when she produced her white paper that was meant to help vulnerable children, then narrowed down the number she wanted to help to a few, 10,000 or 20,000. There are 270,000 children who need this House’s attention—270,000. One in five children is growing up in the homes of parents who are reliant on Government support, of parents who are on benefits because they cannot find work and they have an inadequate income to survive on. That is this Government’s legacy. That is how it is ending this year, and I see no bright light in the forthcoming years to remedy that. For our kids, it has been an epic fail of a year.

Many—and I understand this—have asked us on this side of the House, and have asked the Greens and asked the Mana Party, “Why can’t you collaborate with the Government to try to resolve this situation for our most vulnerable kids?”. I answer them sincerely and frankly that we cannot lower our sights as low as that Government has set the bar. We cannot aim that low, and until that Government raises the bar for what it will do for those children, we cannot and will not collaborate with such low aspirations for children. But I know what that Government will say. I can hear it now. It will say that it has brought in its welfare reforms. That has been its response to child poverty. Show me how the Government has helped one child with its welfare reforms. I will tell you what they do. There is not one extra training opportunity in that bill. There is not one new job. There are more sanctions. We have already seen them. They have doubled under this Government to 57,000 per annum, and 377 families have had their benefits cut by this Government. How has that helped child poverty, I ask it.

There is more work testing, but no more work. There are more obligations, but again no response from the Government as to how it is going to improve people’s chances of getting employment. It is contracting out medical assessments. We have already got a chief medical assessor, who likens Government support to a drug. Where is the dignity in social security when you have someone who uses references like that? It has put in what it calls its social obligations, yet as a Government it shows no obligation to help Kiwis find employment—the most basic of roles for a Government. I imagine that what the Government will also throw up is that it has had the odd target in health. Well, that is all very well, but the Government continues to treat the symptoms and not the cause.

Dr Cam Calder: A huge improvement.

JACINDA ARDERN: Why try to swab for rheumatic fever, Mr Calder, when you could spend a few thousand dollars insulating a house and save yourself tens of thousands of dollars down the track? Why not treat the overcrowded housing and the poor provision of social housing in this country? In fact, let us go back to basics. Why not measure poverty? Why not measure poverty? This Government has refused to do even that. When you have a Prime Minister who says that what gets measured gets done, and that you will not know whether you are successful unless you measure it, you know there is no intention to deal with our national shame, because the Government refuses to measure poverty. Unicef, the OECD—everyone else seems to manage it, but, as Richie Poulton from Otago University has pointed out, we have Third World diseases and we have Third World data. That needs to change.

That brings me to my final point. If that Government does not want to help vulnerable children as a moral imperative, maybe it will look at it as an economic one. We spend $6 billion to $8 billion per annum on child poverty, yet the Government will not reprioritise what we spend in order to prevent children from having a miserable start in life as a consequence. There are things we can do, and Labour has already presented part of its plan. Firstly, let us demonstrate our accountability. Let us legislate a requirement to measure the five measures of poverty: relative measures, static income measures, material deprivation, severity, and persistence. Let us measure it. Then let us set targets to reduce it. I have a bill that the Government could pick up tomorrow if it wanted. I am not telling the Government how much it has to reduce it by; I am just telling it that it should at least aspire to do it. It is as basic as that. We should also be transparent about how much we have achieved: tell the public; report on child poverty. What a difference, I have no doubt, that would make. We urge the Government: surprise us, take up that bill in its name, and legislate to be accountable on child poverty.

Secondly, put food in schools. It is basic. It is a no-brainer. For the Government to claim that it is doing its part because it has got food parcels shows how desperate things are. Put food in schools. There is no reason, regardless of whether that Government wants to blame parents or others, that children should suffer as a result of the Government’s principle on food in schools. Thirdly, adopt our policy of warrants of fitness for rental properties. Not all of the kids living in poverty are in State houses—in fact, the majority are not. They are cold, they are damp, and they deserve better from us, and we can and should set some standards for them. Finally, income matters. You will not solve child poverty unless we look at income. The minimum wage needs to go up, and we need a living wage. These are just the beginning of things that Labour would do in Government on behalf of kids.

Next year must be the year for our kids. Despite Maggie Barry’s standing orders—we may not have experienced poverty in this House—it is absolutely our responsibility to do something about it. This Labour Party when in Government will. Until then, we watch shamefully as that Government stands idly by and does nothing.

Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Consumer Affairs): Mr Speaker, my very merry Christmas wishes to you and everyone in this precinct. I am sad to say that that is about as much Christmas cheer as you are going to get out of me this afternoon, because the reality is that we have heard some appalling speeches from the other side of the House. We had an angry little speech from Ms Ardern over there, who seems to have absolutely no concept of where money comes from or the fact that we have had a global financial crisis. We have been dealing with that as best we can, and, actually, our numbers are holding up exceptionally well. We have had from Metiria Turei over there a rendition—the long version—of her Christmas holidays over the years. I have not quite worked out the actual reason for that. We have heard from David Parker, who has given us his score of his leader, between 7 and 11. I am not quite sure why he gave a range, but I think it is because he is no longer sure of his numbers.

But I think the real story this year politically inside this House is an absolute contrast between a party on this side that is soberly and correctly getting on with the business—

Hon Trevor Mallard: Soberly? Isn’t Maggie Barry on your side?

Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well, I am not talking about you, Trevor. It gets on with the business of Government, in the worst economic times for many, many years, with good numbers, and there is a shambles on the other side over there, the Opposition, which cannot work out what is going on and which seems to be caught up in sideshows, personality disputes, and egos.

Let us start with the Labour Party. Of course, we know that it has had a leadership contest between David and David. I do not want to dwell on that. As interesting as it is, it is old ground. But here is the real issue: Labour Party members changed their rules, they had a vote, and they have entrenched a loser as their leader. They have entrenched a loser as their leader. That is what they have done. The real story is that they hated Cunliffe so much—they hated him so much—that they decided they had to stick with the loser that they have got.

Hon Annette King: You wait and see.

Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Annette King says: “You wait and see.” Well, here is what Labour Party lovey Judy Callingham—who is married to one Brian Edwards and who is a friend, a personal friend I would say, to the members opposite—said very recently, as quoted by the New Zealand Herald: “… broadcasting guru Ian Fraser has ‘done wonders for his speech-making’ ”—this is about David Shearer—“ ‘but no voice or media coach can change the brain patterns, and that’s what’s affecting his non-scripted material.’ ” It is the brain patterns, the synapses going between his brain.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Does Simon have any of those? Any brain patterns at all?

Hon SIMON BRIDGES: What was Judy Callingham talking about? Let me put this simply for Trevor Mallard. Labour Party lovey Judy Callingham was painting the real picture when it comes to David Shearer: he is thick. He is thick, and they are stuck with him, due to their hatred of Cunliffe. So I say to the Labour Party: “Look, do anything. Do something in February. Change your leader. Go Grant. Go Annette as a caretaker leader. But don’t stick with the loser that you’ve got, because he is a loser who’s got problems with his synapses.”

While we are on it, let us go to some of the other parties. There is the Green Party, and the real leader of the Green Party is Russel Norman, ladies and gentlemen. He is doing so well with his “bluewash”—with his sensible, moderate, and financially literate discussion. But the hubris got to him, he could not help it, and suddenly he is talking about the funny money—he is talking about the funny money. Then the real beauty that will come back to that party is that he decided in the thrill of the moment that he would make it quite clear that he wants to be Minister of Finance. He wants to be deputy leader. He had a dream and that is what he wanted.

Grant Robertson: The angry Simon won’t get into Cabinet.

Hon SIMON BRIDGES: What is very clear to me is that that soft support in Mount Eden and the Khandallahs—probably where Grant Robertson lives—and the middle-class housewives will be scared by this guy as Minister of Finance. That is the way it is going.

Then, of course, we have the New Zealand First Party—

Le’aufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor: What a good party, that one.

Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —and the issues with Brendan. We will see where that goes. Brendan Horan says he represents the people of Tauranga. Well, let me tell you, Asenati, he does not represent the people of Tauranga, OK? The people who voted for him, they voted for him because they thought he was Winston’s son, OK? They thought he was Winston’s son, but that is not where it is going. So on this side we have a party that is focusing on the real issues and getting on with business, and we have sideshows, personality disorders, and egos on that side.

NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central): After a couple of tough years the people of Christchurch, at the end of 2012, are feeling increasingly positive about our future. We know that, because in a recent survey Christchurch people are leading the way in wanting to stay in their home town. Ninety-seven percent of Christchurch business people and 88 percent of Christchurch residents want to stay in Christchurch, which compares with only 86 percent of people across the country.

We are very optimistic, and it is not surprising. We have the biggest growth rate and the lowest unemployment rate in the country, and 78 percent of our business people say that Christchurch is going in the right direction, as do 61 percent of our residents, against 51 percent of the people across the country.

Of course, we are deeply sad for those whom we have lost and for what we have lost, but we now have a strong vision for the future and are determined to make the most of every opportunity. We are proud of how our communities have responded to the disaster, and although we know there is still a long way to go, we feel challenged and energised by the work ahead.

Most of us now know the fate of our homes. Many of us are already on the path to repair, rebuild, or replacement, and some are already through the process. In fact, at least 30,000 homes have been rebuilt or repaired, and often those outcomes are much better than we ever expected or dared to hope for. Earthquake Commission and insurance problems are still challenging for many. The Earthquake Commission is an organisation that we love to hate, but we are all grateful that because of the commission, 99 percent of New Zealanders are insured, $4 billion has been paid out in Christchurch, and all of the 620,000 earthquake claims will be met.

Local community plans are working forward, and new suburban shops, cafe, and community buildings are going up across the city, and in the central business district the Christchurch City rebuild and blueprint based on the city council’s Share an Idea consultation has been very well received. Awareness of the plan is high and, for those who are well informed, 82 percent of business people and 66 percent of residents approve it and support it.

I want to take the opportunity right now to thank the Prime Minister and Gerry Brownlee for their support and to thank the Government for its total commitment to the rebuild of Christchurch, especially the $13 billion that is going to be invested in our future. We are incredibly fortunate that the Prime Minister came from Christchurch, because he understands our community absolutely. He understands it is important as a gateway to the South Island and understands its contribution to the New Zealand economy.

But it is actually Gerry Brownlee’s day in, day out leadership, his integrity in making difficult and complex decisions, and his ability to think clearly and realistically in an emotionally charged and ever-changing environment that have delivered so well for Christchurch and Canterbury. Again, Gerry has been the figure that we have loved to hate, but as time goes by, more and more Cantabrians are understanding and appreciating his tough but fair decision-making.

In the future I believe that Christchurch people will look back on the great earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 and will thank Gerry and this Government for a steady hand and intelligent and compassionate solutions. As the member of Parliament for Christchurch Central, an electorate that was hard hit in the earthquakes, I am proud of the progress that we are making and of the recovery of our city, and I am enthusiastic about our future. We will build a stronger, more sustainable, fabulously people-friendly and prosperous city. Happy Christmas to everyone and a great New Year, and no earthquakes, please.

DENISE ROCHE (Green): Ngā mihi nui ki a koe. Ki te Whare, tēnā koutou katoa. It is my privilege to take this last call of the year in the House for the Greens, and I am delighted, because today is a very auspicious day. Today it is the 12th of the 12th of the 12th, and today the asteroid Toutatis will buzz the Earth, coming to within 4.4 million miles of the planet. This asteroid appears every 4 years and you can see it with a telescope. Apparently, it has nothing to do with the Mayan calendar and the predicted end of the world next week, but more about that later.

It does not sound that close, at 4.4 million miles, but actually that asteroid is probably closer to Earth than the Government’s economic policy is to improving the economy. Here on planet Earth we have got a Prime Minister this year with memory lapses and brain fades, who describes his most desirable place, “Planet Key”, as having no toilets. As a woman who has had a couple of children, all I can say is that I am in awe of that man’s pelvic floor muscles.

Of course, the Prime Minister is not the only one who has had memory problems this year. The entire parliamentary caucus of the ACT Party—the Hon John Banks—forgot a lot of things, including two very large donations from a very large, German-born New Zealand resident with the very memorable name of Kim Dotcom.

But back to the number 12. According to numerology—and I qualify this by saying that although I do have long hair and I do play the guitar and I do live on Waiheke Island, I am not a hippie, and I do not believe in numerology. However, according to numerology, the number 12 is very auspicious. It is the number, and I quote, “attributed to the government of the world or the cosmos.” Go figure. I believe that, for me, the number 12 is very auspicious, because I am number 11 on the Green Party list, and, as well as that, we got just under 12 percent of the vote at the last election.

These are very auspicious times because next Friday, 21 December 2012, marks the end of the Mayan calendar. I consulted the oracle, Google, and what it says about it is that “The Ancient Mayan calendar speaks of 21-12-2012 as being the end of times as we know it, and the beginning of a new cycle of evolution for planet earth, humanity, and the cosmos.” You know, it is worth noting that the predictions from the Mayan calendar have been shown to be more accurate than the teachers’ payroll system. Anyway, according to the oracle, Google, Mayan elders say that “the Ancients were informing the modern world to be ready for a giant transformation for the human race. Interestingly, traditions across the world including Buddhism, Tao, Hopi and Vedic knowledge predict a ‘Golden Age’ … in their calendars around the same period.”

I was stoked when I read that. I thought: “Yay! We’re coming up for another election.” Or maybe it means there is something spiritual that is going to happen in the House. Will the Minister for Economic Development be suddenly overcome with a fit of compassion? Will the Minister for Social Development begin to recognise and care for needy children? Will the Minister responsible for digging toxic stuff out of the ground and polluting the air with it suddenly find fulfilment in his soul from organic gardening? Will the Minister of Local Government wake up and find he actually does believe in local government? Will the earthquake Minister finally give the people of Christchurch a fair go and maybe some of their democracy back? Maybe the National Government will finally do something about climate change.

In the new enlightenment and the season ahead, we the Green Party will welcome the newly enlightened into the fold, after a suitable period of re-education in the forest with someone wise and knowledgable—perhaps someone like Jeanette Fitzsimons. So, from the Greens, we wish everyone all the best for this coming season of peace and goodwill, and we are hoping for a more enlightened Parliament next year.

Mr SPEAKER: Dr Cam Calder—5 minutes.

Dr CAM CALDER (National): As the waves of the ongoing financial turmoil continue to lap relentlessly on the shores of New Zealand, New Zealanders give thanks to this National-led Government. They recognise that we provide the prudent, pragmatic, and fiscal financial management that these troubled times demand. IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde has urged policy makers in all countries to maintain crisis management mode as the global economy experiences a wide decline of confidence and problems mount in the eurozone and beyond.

Just last week US Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner warned that the domestic dithering continues and that he could not guarantee that the fiscal cliff would be averted. This could lead to a potential hit in the US GDP of 3 percent to 5 percent. President of the European Central Bank Mario Draghi has said he would do whatever it takes to hold the eurozone together, but the eurozone’s recession shows no signs of easing. In China, growth appears to have slowed to just over 7 percent as politicians struggle to accelerate the shift from an export-driven economy to one that relies on domestic consumption. Globally, then, growth could stutter in 2013, should any of the Opposition be concerned.

Here in New Zealand we are reducing our exposure to overseas debt markets as much as possible, while still cushioning vulnerable New Zealanders from the harshest edges of the ongoing financial crisis. New Zealand’s economy, it should be noted, is performing better than the economies of the US, Japan, Germany, France, and the UK, and growth in the last quarter is on a par with that of Australia. We have focused on growth that is sustainable and built on higher savings and earnings, rather than ever-increasing consumption and debt, as exampled by the previous Government.

Our policies to navigate this fiscal fog of uncertainty are prudent, practical, and precise, and have received a ringing endorsement from Peter Orszag, more recently US President Obama’s Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Orszag praised New Zealand as standing out in the world as the only country that has coupled additional economic stimulus with medium-term fiscal consolidation. Not surprisingly, huge numbers of New Zealanders suffer nightmares at the thought of our measured approach being replaced by an economy managed by a coalition of Green, abacus-hugging, parallel universe, ersatz economists and their spendthrift, lacklustre, Labour union lackey colleagues.

Our astute financial management has led to our being able to cushion the most vulnerable from the worst effects of this ongoing crisis. Nowhere is this more evident than in the health and social development portfolios. As a member of the Health Committee I had the pleasure of attending a global health forum recently where many delegates complained about the effects of the global financial crisis on their health budgets. In 2009-10 in this country, whilst other OECD countries were reducing spending, New Zealand had a 3.4 percent increase in real health spend—the third-highest of 27 nations.

In my maiden speech I spoke of how a country is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable, and I observed that a Government cannot legislate aroha and a Government cannot legislate love. The White Paper for Vulnerable Children sets out this Government’s commitment to identify, support, and protect the 20,000 to 30,000 most vulnerable children in our society. Decade after decade the deaths of up to a dozen of our most vulnerable kiddies annually has been a stain on our nation’s escutcheon. This Government is doing something about it, informed by 10,000 submissions on a green paper. The white paper sets out how this Government will address the appalling incidence of these tragic events.

In the last week I have spoken in nine towns and communities all over New Zealand, from Napier to Invercargill, on this multi-stranded initiative. The implementation of the Children’s Action Plan will be driven by key Ministers in Wellington, and implemented by the chief executives of social development, health, justice, education, housing, Te Puni Kōkiri, and the police. They will work together to be jointly accountable for achieving results for our vulnerable children. The joint accountability is hugely significant. No longer will these tragedies be swept under Child, Youth and Family’s front door. Key features of the plan are a Vulnerable Kids Information System, a risk predictor tool, and the development of a stand-alone, neutral Child Protect line. These initiatives are crucial, long overdue, and possible only because of our prudent and thoughtful fiscal rectitude.

NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central): I am very pleased to speak in this adjournment debate. Can I start by acknowledging you, Mr Speaker. I do believe that you have been one of the best Speakers in the history of this Parliament. I want to acknowledge you for your consistent patience, your grace, and your good humour. I want to wish the parliamentary precincts a merry Christmas—even the media. I also want to acknowledge some of my constituents in this House: David Cunliffe, Denise Roche, and Winston Peters. My office is always open, if you have any issues that you want to chat about.

We are 4 years into this National Government, and what is clear today? We have heard many a speech about credibility. But what credibility is about is not rewriting history; what credibility is about is delivering for New Zealanders with costed policies that will make a difference to this country. We were handed “Mission: Impossible”. In Labour’s last year of office we were handed an economy with high inflation. We were handed unemployment that grew by 30,000. Labour had committed us to badly costed policies such as hundreds of millions of dollars paid for KiwiRail, and ACC blowouts in terms of liabilities. We then had the deepest recession in a generation, and then we were hit by several tragedies, including Pike River and the Canterbury earthquakes. Canterbury alone hit our country—$30 billion has been the cost so far.

What have we done? We have done everything we can, day in and day out, to be fiscally responsible and work hard for our country. Our economy is growing at 2.6 percent. We are on track to return to surplus. We have halved our deficit from $18 billion to $9 billion. There are 65,000 net new jobs, and 13,000 jobs created by the 90-day trial period. But what is clear is that Opposition members are living in a bubble, where they are divided, and they are in denial. They are still releasing uncosted policies.

David Shearer sits there, and I have a few questions for Mr Shearer. I come from Auckland. I have a lot of young people in my electorate who would like to get into a house. But what is clear is that when Labour announced its housing affordability package it was not only unaffordable but also did not even contain houses. I went looking in my electorate for tracts of land that were worth $50,000. I did find some, actually. They were the third and fourth floors of the Victoria Street car-park. That is where the Labour Party is in terms of housing affordability. We need to do more. We must increase the supply of land. We must do more around resource management processes. But what was absolutely incredible was that yesterday in the House, at the first chance the Opposition had to support some things around housing affordability, it voted them down. There were two key provisions: one around the Auckland Plan, and the other around medium consents for many subdivisions in New Zealand. We saw it have an epic fail at the first hurdle.

When it comes to looking after our most vulnerable, it has been tough for so many New Zealanders, but what I can tell you is that we have ensured that entitlements are kept, we have increased New Zealand superannuation, and we have implemented more than 30 initiatives to help some of our most vulnerable and at-risk children. We have established seven teen parent units. We have put in $15 million more to ensure vulnerable teen parents get the right support that they need. Within our welfare reforms we have established a guaranteed childcare assistance payment so that childcare costs do not stop young parents from studying. When it comes to policies being costed, whether it is from an economic perspective, Resource Management Act reform, or infrastructure investment, or when it comes to helping our most vulnerable, our record is clear in the most difficult time period in a generation. Whether it has been the deepest recession, the hit by Canterbury, Pike River, or the fact that we have had to account for all of these blowouts, we have been delivering both from an economic perspective and for our most vulnerable.

If you contrast that, you have an Opposition that is focused on slogans and on each other, and that is divided. What I am confident about is that not only do we have a Prime Minister who cares and who has delivered more for this country in a very difficult period but also we have a united National caucus with costed policies that is ready to continue to deliver and to do the best that we can for New Zealanders.

GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour): I am not going to comment much on the speeches from the Government side of the House, except to say that a vindictive, nasty, petty little speech like the one Simon Bridges gave indicates to everybody over here that he is not going anywhere near Cabinet and should go straight back to Tauranga. We have seen some good speeches today, actually, from the other side of the House. Mr Bridges did not give one of those.

I want to acknowledge all of the people who support us in our work here in Parliament. Other speakers have gone through the list. Everybody who works in this House works on behalf of all MPs to make this place a better place to work, and I thank them for all of the support that they give us.

I particularly want to acknowledge our staff outside Parliament, and that is for MPs right across the House. Our staff outside Parliament often put up with a lot of stress, meet people who are in a very stressed state, and do an incredible job for us in trying circumstances. I thank all of those people.

I also want to acknowledge the families of MPs. It is only us and our partners and our families who understand the pressure and stress that go with being a member of Parliament. Our families put up with a huge amount, day in, day out, year in, year out, and on behalf of the Labour Party I want to acknowledge all of the families, spouses, partners, and those who support MPs right across the House. You do a tremendous job for all of us.

David Shearer has already made clear that this has been a year to forget for the Government and a year to forget for New Zealand. I do want to acknowledge that for many New Zealanders this will not be an easy Christmas. For those who have lost their jobs this year, or who have their jobs under threat, this will be a difficult Christmas, and we want to send our love and support from the Labour Party caucus.

Norman Kirk, I am told, once famously said: “New Zealanders have worked hard this year. They deserve their Christmas.”, and it is in the spirit of Christmas that I thought it might be appropriate to run through the National Party’s “Twelve Days of Christmas”. My colleagues know I cannot sing, but I am sure you will get the gist of the tune as we go through the alternative to “The Twelve Days of Christmas”: “The Twelve Fiascos of National”.

So for the first day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: John Banks on a cabbage boat. The man with nothing to fear and nothing to hide decided to hide everything, and he fared very badly indeed. You have to have sympathy with John Banks. I mean, who would remember taking a helicopter ride to a vast mansion to meet an enormous German multimillionaire, who has got a giraffe, who then offers you $50,000? I mean, it would not stick with me.

That gives us, I might say, our second fiasco. For the second day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: two cheques for $25,000, and John Banks on a cabbage boat.

And 2012 has been the year for the National Government to insult people. Gerry Brownlee tops the list for that, for telling Cantabrians, who were just trying to get on with their lives, that they are carpers and moaners and declaring the major daily newspaper in Christchurch as the enemy of the recovery. But it is John Key who got right into the insults this year. Red shirts are apparently gay, but there was no problem with that, he told us, because by “gay” he meant “weird”. Well, from this “weirdo” to the PM, my message is: “You’re not a 15-year-old boy. Grow up.”

The Government moved on from insulting people to insulting whole countries. The UK press was less than impressed when the Prime Minister insulted David Beckham. But the most ridiculous thing was that he could not even get the insult right. When you call people thick, it is pig excrement. When you are talking about bat excrement, it is boring, as in “When Colin King speaks in Parliament, it is as boring as batshit.” The well-known statesman John Key—[Interruption]—keep up, keep up—said that Hungarians do not go out at night in Afghanistan, and Gerry Brownlee followed his lead, declaring that the Finns were uneducated, unemployed murderers who do not respect women. So for the third day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: three insulted countries, two cheques for $25,000, and John Banks on a cabbage boat.

This year the Prime Minister had a lot of trouble remembering things. If he had a plan for the country, he could not remember that, and the job was really getting to him. He could not remember the briefings from the Government Communications Security Bureau, he could not remember which way he voted on alcohol reform, he could not remember the discussions with Skycity about the convention centre, and he could not remember discussing a loan for MediaWorks. So for the fourth day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: four brain fades.

Then John Key told us his biggest disappointment this year was pushing thorough the sale of State assets. Well, Tony Ryall must have been too dazzled by his own tie that day to read the memo, because he keeps saying that things are on track and that delays were to be expected. Despite the fact that no other country in the world is pursuing asset sales, this Government blunders on regardless. The good news is that hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders know that the Government is wrong and that it will be selling off our future, and we have a tricky referendum ahead for the Government. So for the fifth day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: five assets a-selling.

And who can forget the gift of a dysfunctional, completely out of control ACC? It had the full cast of National Party characters: Michelle Boag, the woman who gifted John Key to New Zealand, started lurking in the background of TV shots. Meanwhile, a host of other people actually were shot: John Judge, Ralph Stewart, John McLiskie, and, of course, Nick Smith—the man who was definitely not trying to influence Bronwyn Pullar’s case when he wrote a letter on ministerial letterhead to that effect! The other casualty, of course, was Judith Collins’ credibility. So where are we up to? For the sixth day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: six ACC casualties, five assets a-selling, four brain fades, three insulted countries, two cheques for $25,000, and John Banks on a cabbage boat.

On this side of the House we always knew that once Steven Joyce got his hands on the employment portfolio, the only way was up—up, that is, in terms of the number of people unemployed. The curse of Bill English has returned, as well, as unemployment is the highest it has been since the last time he was finance Minister. A Government with its hands off the wheel has decided the people are to blame—the people who are looking for jobs are to blame. Well, my advice to the Government is if you are looking for someone to blame, look in the mirror. So for the seventh day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: 7.3 percent unemployment.

The year 2012 would not have been the year it has been without National’s unplanned open government policy. It was not so much the opening of the books as the distribution of them along Lambton Quay. Paula Bennett excelled herself with looking cross at her department, while having told the Prime Minister she would be on top of the whole thing. But she was not alone. There were at least four ACC leaks, a couple from the Inland Revenue Department, and an extra special one from the Ministry of Social Development. So for the eighth day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: eight leaks of personal details.

This year’s Budget will mostly be remembered for the genius suggestion that the best thing that the Government could do for the education of young people would be to squeeze a few more kids into our classes and cut funding for technology. But in the hurly-burly of that U-turn, it is easily forgotten what the big idea of the 2012 Budget was. The big idea to grow the economy, to turbocharge the economy, was the taxing of paper boys—that great contribution from Peter Dunne, a man who has never found an issue he did not want to be on both sides of. He got in there and he said: “Those damn kids. They’re ripping us off. We’re going to stop them. We’re going to put them in their place.” So for the ninth day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: nine paper boys a-crying.

If there is one thing we can be sure of when it comes to a National Government it is the familiar smell. And no, it is not, as my colleague Clayton Cosgrove would say, the pie warmer in Gerry Brownlee’s office, but rather the stench of cronyism: jobs for the boys and the girls of the blue brigade. Apparently, there is nothing wrong with the Prime Minister’s electorate chair being on the board of New Zealand On Air. Let us list my top 10: Stephen McElrea, Paula Rebstock, Peter Kiely, Richard Long, Katherine Rich, and two electorate chairs, Roger Sowry, Wayne Mapp, Kerry Prendergast—there are so many more. But for the 10th day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: 10 cronies conspiring.

Across the Public Service morale has reached an all-time low. Over at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, a ministry that prided itself on professionalism, it has been picked apart by a Minister who has overseen the worst restructuring ever. The leaks just keep on coming and we thank Murray McCully for that. So for the 11th day of Christmas, National’s gift to Kiwi folk: 11 diplomats a-leaking.

So, on the 12th of the 12th, what is left for the 12th fiasco? There are so many candidates. Tim Groser is very familiar with the number 12, as that is the number of disciples he believed he had at the World Trade Organization. Twelve is also the number of times John Key has asked David Carter to be Speaker, and he still does not want to do it. But there can be only one winner. From the portfolio where National’s incompetence has been matched by its ignorance—from untrained teachers in charter schools to Novopay being “no one paid”, to illegally closing special schools, and to telling a fragile Christchurch community that it would be losing its schools—these are the stuff-ups of Hekia Parata.

So here we go. For “The Twelve Fiascos of National” this year, National’s gift to Kiwis are: 12 Hekia stuff-ups, 11 diplomats a-leaking, 10 cronies conspiring, nine paper boys a-crying, eight leaks of personal details, 7.3 percent unemployment, six ACC casualties, five assets a-selling, four brain fades, three insulted countries, two cheques for $25,000, and John Banks on a cabbage boat.

MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): At the moment I am reading the autobiography of the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and I was very interested to note a quote he made about the Labour Party, which goes thus: “Today it seems completely unacceptable, ridiculous even, that the unions played such a decisive role in the selection of candidates and leader … [Labour] was formed, funded, and run by the unions, so the roots were inseparably intertwined, with, I’m afraid, very mixed long-term consequences.” Well, I think he really got that right. I read it over the weekend that the New Zealand Labour Party changed its constitution to do just that. I can imagine the terror in David Shearer as he realised that only 40 percent of his caucus would be required by Mr Cunliffe to roll him. I can imagine him running to David Parker, his erstwhile finance spokesman, and saying: “David, you’re a finance guy. What’s 40 percent of the caucus?”. And David Parker would turn around and go: “David, it’s 95.” Shearer: “But, David, are you sure?”. Parker: “Yes, I’ve checked it twice.” Shearer: “But hang on, there’s only 34 in our caucus.” Parker: “No, it’s definitely 95.”

The most amazing thing about last week was the fact that when the results of one poll that might have suggested that the tide was turning—and I suggest that that was pretty premature—had the Greens measuring up the hemp curtains in the Beehive, Mr Shearer immediately ruled out Dr Russel Norman as a future Minister of Finance. Well, I think that is a bit dodgy, really, because he might be crazy, but at least he can count. It is one of the prerequisites for being a Minister of Finance. Even Mr Parker in his speech, in the biggest suck-up of the day, said he gave Mr Shearer 7 to 11 out of 10. How on earth one gets 7 to 11 out of 10 for a performance by the Leader of the Opposition I will never know.

But I say this to the Greens: if one wants to eliminate child poverty, do not give me a family support payment. It is not going to work. It needs to be more targeted. To Gareth Hughes: if one calls for an inquiry into a method of mining and drilling, and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment comes out and says there is no evidence that it is unsafe, then listen to the Parliamentary Commissioner. Do not continue to bury one’s head in the sand, because that is all we have heard from Labour and the Greens this year. If only we could hear one word—one word. That word is “Yes”: yes, we support something that the Government is doing to grow the economy. But, no, they say no to the intensification of the agricultural sector, no to more oil and gas exploration, and no to more good jobs coming from Australia to New Zealand. Making welfare work, the 90-day probation period, any of our labour market reforms, ultra-fast broadband, foreign investment in New Zealand, and the 3,000 jobs that came from The Hobbit—no, no, no.

Well, I know why the polls are showing that the Government support has not flinched in 4 years. It is because this is a caucus united behind a leader. I want to thank my colleagues for their support through this year. It has made my job easier as senior whip. The fact is that the energy is high, the discipline is good, and we are united behind the Prime Minister as leader of this party. Those are some lessons that I think Opposition parties could draw on. But I also want to add my thanks to the staff, as has been mentioned by other colleagues: security, Hansard, the Clerks, and the many others who make Parliament work. I also want to acknowledge my fellow whips. There is a lot that goes on behind the scenes that is not seen, and I have enjoyed working with Messrs Hipkins, Hughes, Stuart, and Flavell, and Ms Fenton.

But to you, Mr Speaker, call me Nostradamus-like, but I have a feeling that there will be an opportunity in the not too distant future for some teary-eyed nostalgia. But in the meantime, on behalf of my caucus, I do want to congratulate you on, and thank you for, the manner in which you, your deputy, and your assistants have managed proceedings in the House this year. To you, merry Christmas. Enjoy a safe and relaxing break. Also to members of the public and all in this House, a very merry Christmas and a happy and more prosperous New Year.

Mr SPEAKER: My colleagues, thank you very much for your kind comments in respect of me and my team of Speakers—my excellent deputy, Eric Roy, and assistants Lindsay Tisch and Ross Robertson. They do a very committed job, and it is much appreciated. Can I also thank you for the kind support you gave all the people who make this place operate on our behalf, because there are so many of them and they do such a wonderful job for us.

I think one of the notable features of this year has been the impact of the new Standing Orders. It is interesting that in the last parliamentary term—the 49th Parliament—a quarter of our sitting hours was under urgency. This year we have sat for a total of 543 hours, 9½ of which were under urgency—that is less than 2 percent. We sat 35½ hours of extended sittings, but that is a much more measured way of advancing the legislative programme. It meant that legislation with wide support across the House could be facilitated, enabling much more focus on areas of difference and areas of controversy. I think the Business Committee used the new Standing Orders very effectively, and I want to congratulate the Business Committee, and, in particular, the Leader of the House, the Hon Gerry Brownlee, and also the shadow Leader of the House, the Hon Trevor Mallard.

I think the new Standing Orders covering members’ bills have also been pretty successful. In 2011 we had no members’ bills introduced into the House; this year there have been 34. That is a huge improvement in the opportunity for members to have their proposals considered by the House.

The changes in the Standing Orders also provided for referral to select committees of bills, where the period of referral was less than 4 months, to be a debatable motion without time limit. It is interesting the impact that has had. In 2011, 13 bills were referred to select committees with a report-back date of less than 4 months. This year only seven bills had a report-back date of less than 4 months. So there has been almost a halving of referral for a short period of time, which must be good for the ability for the public to have greater input into our legislative programme.

All together, I think the changes show that the House can make gradual improvement to its operations. So members of the Standing Orders Committee of the 49th Parliament, who did so much work on those changes, I think should be congratulated on the effort made and the thought that went into them.

This year has been a year of consistent work in the House: 125 bills received the Royal assent, five are waiting for that, 1,100 oral questions were answered, and only two members were yellow-carded. A total of five, I think, have been yellow-carded in my 4 years as the Speaker, and I think that is something of a record, because I think in the old days that would have been about the norm on 1 day.

One of the gems in the House this year passed right over me. I missed totally when Gerry Brownlee said, in answer to a supplementary question from Phil Twyford on my left, with an absolutely deadpan face, that the Government would consider hiring Lyle Lanley and associates to scope the city rail link, referring to the good work they had done on similar projects in Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook. I thought it was an unusual answer, I must say, but I did not click that Mr Brownlee was into The Simpsons and “Marge vs. the Monorail”. I guess what it means is I am getting old and it is almost time to go.

Colleagues, I am conscious that this is the last time I will speak to you in the adjournment debate, and I want to take this opportunity to particularly thank the General Manager of the Parliamentary Service. The general manager carries out quite a thankless task, and I think he does it with great commitment, and I want to express appreciation for the work he has done.

I want to pay particular tribute to our outstanding Clerk of the House, Mary Harris, and her team in the Clerk’s Office, including her gem of an executive assistant, Andie Lindsay. It is such a privilege to work with these two, and, Mary, I cannot express sufficient thanks for the wonderful job you do.

To my team in the Speaker’s office, and especially my senior private secretary, Beryl Bright, again I want to pass on huge thanks. We now run the protocol and reception area in the Speaker’s office, on one-third of the cost it used to cost taxpayers. That is a challenge to Ministers and Government departments—we run my department there now on a third, not one third less but a third, of what it once cost. I am not sure it runs that much worse. My senior private secretary, Beryl Bright, is now in her 27th year of looking after me, and goodness knows what kind of cruel punishment that is, but I want to thank her hugely.

Colleagues, do have a great Christmas. Enjoy your break away from this place. I think only those who have been here know how much this place can be a drain on your private lives. Through you, can I pass on my thanks to your spouses, your partners, and your families for all they give up to support you in this work. Enjoy your Christmas with your families. Go well.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 5.33 p.m.