Budget 2013: Good - But Not Great
I rise on behalf of the ACT Party and the people of Epsom to support the Appropriation (2013/2014 Estimates) Bill. ACT will support this Budget and associated legislation.
The Budget is a good budget in difficult circumstances.
But it’s not a great budget.
On the OECD’s measure, the government sector is spending about 43 per cent of everything that New Zealanders produce.
That’s 43 per cent. In Australia it is 34 per cent.
Government is taking too much. And it’s making us poorer.
We have lost many of our productive young people to Australia because their economy offers a better future.
The 2025 Taskforce found the income gap with Australia was 35 per cent in 2008. Stats for 2011 indicate that it has risen to 41 per cent.
This gap is unprecedented.
Unless we close it we can expect more and more New Zealand grandparents crossing the Tasman to visit their grandchildren.
There is no mystery. They are richer in part because more of the wealth of Australia is left in the hands of its people.
Yet the Labour Party wants even more spending. You would have to go back to the 1970s to find a Labour Party less ready for Government. They are not serious about addressing the challenges faced by New Zealand.
The future isn’t about outbidding the old dudes and young fogies of the Green Party.
When I first came to Parliament the Government was trying a command and control approach to the economy. It didn’t work then and it won’t work today.
How does this Budget measure up in terms of getting government off-the-backs and out-of-the pockets of hard pressed taxpayers?
Well first the good news.
The size of government is set to decline under this Minister of Finance providing we continue to restrain expenditure.
Spending growth has been reined in, despite the Christchurch earthquake. This Budget continues that trend.
The Government has not blown out the fiscal deficit like so many other countries and the last Labour Government.
The Government has stayed the course on partial privatisation, despite Court action and the dodgy referendum by Labour and the Greens.
There have been significant welfare reforms. We are starting to tackle the culture of dependency and hopelessness.
There is no tampering with the Reserve Bank Act.
There is a willingness to improve the quality of regulation.
We will have a regulatory standards proposal for the House to consider.
There will be meaningful change to the RMA.
The Government recognised that house prices are too high because land values are too high. The Government is moving to free up the supply of land which ACT has long called for.
In education, Partnership Schools are on the way. The Budget provides just under $19 million over the next four years. I want to thank Cabinet and the Minister of Education for making Partnership Schools happen.
The Government will spend $9.7 billion on education in this Budget. The annual funding for Partnership Schools makes up less than half a per cent.
From 1999 to 2008, Labour increased spending on education by 47%. They spent billions and had no significant impact on the tail of underachievement in our schools.
Partnership Schools are a new and innovative option specifically focused on raising achievement for our most disadvantaged students.
Anyone who claims that spending less than half a per cent of the total education budget on a new initiative to raise achievement for our most disadvantaged students is playing petty politics.
Now for the not so good news.
The macro outlook - growth and unemployment - is still mediocre. We look good because most member countries of the OECD look bad. We will not close the gap with Australia without lifting growth and productivity.
The balance of payments outlook points to an international competitiveness problem.
Taxes are too high because of wasteful and unnecessary government spending.
The more expensive the government, the poorer the citizen.
The Government needs to roll back Labour’s poor quality programmes - interest free student loans and Working For Families.
Here is what ACT will be urging National to do in a great Budget.
We regard $78 billion dollars of gross public debt to be too high. So we need to reduce debt through less spending.
We need to put the avgas into the assets sales programme.
I welcome the announcement that Meridian is up next.
Air New Zealand is performing well. Running an airline is a risky and tough business. We don’t need to issue a prospectus. Why not sell all the Government’s shares?
National should dump the Cullen Fund. Let’s use it to pay off our debt. Progressively raising the age of eligibility would help make superannuation more affordable.
We have stopped the growth in Government spending. It is time to start tackling the size of Government.
We have to aim for around 30 per cent of GDP on the OECD measure. That means confronting middle class and corporate welfare.
The 2025 Taskforce found that given the surpluses at that time, reducing core Crown operating expenses to 29 per cent of GDP would allow a top personal, company and trust tax rate of 20 per cent.
The Budget projections through to 2017 start to make this lost opportunity available again. That’s a long haul but it’s a goal worth pursuing.
Spending reductions and partial use of surpluses could fund tax cuts.
Tax cuts would improve economic growth and international competitiveness. The risk with future surpluses is that they are simply used to expand the size of Government.
Finally, this House needs to be braver on regulatory reform.
Further regulatory reform would help New Zealanders to understand how dopey policies like the nationalisation of electricity would be.
Regulatory reform would highlight how poor policies lead to poor laws and that results in poorer citizens. We have a Regulatory Standards Bill on the Order Paper that would help.
The ACT Party and the people of Epsom back this Budget.
We say it’s a good Budget in difficult times.
But in order to tackle the challenges New Zealand faces we need a great Budget.
Unfortunately the most significant risk we face is from bad policy and bad politics generated from the Opposition benches. Labour has debased itself by entering into a bidding war with Russel Norman and the Greens.
My job, indeed my duty, is to ensure they don’t get their hands on the levers of power.
ENDS
Education Amendment Bill - Second Reading
I rise to speak in favour of the second reading of the Education Amendment Bill.
The Bill provides the legal framework for Partnerships Schools | Kura Hourua.
I want to join with the Hon Hekia Parata in thanking Dr Cam Calder the Chair of the Education and Science Committee and the members of the Committee for their hard work.
They have improved the Bill. The first change is to require the existing independent review option to now be a mandatory term of all sponsorship contracts.
I can advise the House that officials are working on some default dispute resolution options that will be focused on the educational needs of the student. These will be superior to arrangements in most state schools.
The second change is a partial extension of the jurisdiction of the Ombudsmen to suspensions, stand-downs, exclusions and expulsions. This change both protects the students and ensures sponsors who are non-government organisations have their status preserved.
I want to acknowledge all those who took the time to make a submission to the Committee. Even when we disagree, I know that our education system can only improve with the passionate engagement of learners, parents and educational professionals.
This Bill as it relates to Partnership Schools is drawn from a proposal in the ACT and National Confidence and Supply Agreement. That proposal was given life by the Partnership Schools Working Party ably led by Catherine Isaac whose work shaped this Bill.
Partnership schools spring from the values of the ACT Party. In education we believe in parental choice and the funding following the child whatever the school type.
We know that in education, one size does not fit all.
In essence we believe in the transformative potential of education.
That is why we backed Aspire Scholarships last term and why we promoted Partnership Schools this term.
Every child has potential however humble their origins.
Every child has inherent value.
And every child deserves the opportunity to get a world class education.
No member in their heart-of-hearts can say that New Zealand is delivering on that.
So this Bill is important. It will determine whether this House is on the right side of history.
I believe we will stand with young Māori and Pasifika who deserve to discover the spark of learning.
We will stand with those with learning difficulties or from low socio-economic backgrounds who yearn to achieve.
We will stand with the dedicated educators including Māori and Pasifika educators who are able to inspire and lead and achieve for our most vulnerable learners.
We will stand with the proposition that greater freedom to educators should be coupled with higher levels of accountability.
Partnership Schoolswill help to address the endemic problem of underachievement of our most vulnerable leaners.
The good news is that the current education system works well for the majority of our young people. Our best students are best in the world.
There is more good news. There have been significant recent gains for Pasifika students and slight gains for Māori.
The bad news is that still too many of our vulnerable students are being left behind. In terms of equity, which is the size of the gap between our highest and lowest achievers, we are among the worst of OECD countries.
The good news is that Partnership Schools are on the way.
Being a first world nation means five out of five students gaining the knowledge and skills to be successful citizens in the 21st Century.
This country has huge potential. However we waste that potential because of the continuing disparity that characterises our education system.
Partnership Schools will help target the problem of underachievement.
In the Partnership School model, the Crown enters into a contract with a sponsor, who operates the school.
Sponsors vary from school to school and could be, for example, groups of parents, not-for-profit community groups, businesses, churches, Iwi or Pasifika groups, or Trusts.
The term ‘partnership’ captures the essence of what these schools represent – a partnership between the Crown, the business sector and the community.
They will introduce more choice, and more flexibility, into our education system.
More choice for parents – who will have greater freedom to choose the education that best suits their children’s learning needs.
And more flexibility – as Partnership Schools will have greater freedom around how they operate.
They will be given more autonomy from the usual rules and regulations under which state schools are required to operate.
This includes the freedom to offer a different curriculum so long as it can be mapped against the New Zealand curriculum and its principles and qualifications framework, and adaptable operating hours.
They must employ teachers who are trained and qualified in their fields, but they may, in certain, limited circumstances, be teachers who are not registered with the Teachers’ Council.
This flexibility will allow them to do things differently. They will be allowed to use new and diverse approaches to teaching and learning, and property and school organisation.
They can focus on specialist areas of learning, such as art, music or sport, and they can answer a particular need in their community, such as for faith-based schooling or holistic development.
In exchange for this flexibility, Partnership Schools will have higher levels of accountability with a unique evaluation framework.
I’m pleased to advise the House that we have received 35 applications from potential sponsors for Partnership Schools.
They are currently being considered by the Authorisation Board, an expert panel of independent advisors.
The Authorisation Board will make recommendations to the Minister of Education.
No final decisions will be made, or contracts with potential sponsors entered into, until this Bill is passed. Contracts are expected to be in place by the middle of this year.
This ensures successful sponsors have enough time to prepare their schools to open in 2014.
Can I once again express my appreciation for the work of the Select Committee. Can I also place on record my appreciation for the support of the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister of Education and the Maori Party for Partnership Schools.
Roll on day 1 term 1 2014
Pacific Issues Debate
Much of this debate has been about New Zealand’s relationship with our Pacific neighbours. The ACT Party acknowledges the importance of those relationships.
We celebrate the contribution that Pasifika communities have made to New Zealand; they have enriched our society and added to our cultural vibrancy.
In my contribution, I want to focus on the obligation we owe to Pasifika in our education system.
Every New Zealand child deserves a world class education. We have much to do to make this a reality for all your young people.
First the good news:
Pasifika education outcomes have improved in all parts of the education system.
The latest data shows that the number of two to four year old Pasifika enrolments in early childhood education increased by 16.5 per cent between 2009 and 2011
The proportion of all Pasifika learners achieving NCEA Level 2 qualifications or equivalent increased from 55.7 per cent in 2009 to 63.1 per cent in 2011.
Pasifika learner take up of the Youth Guarantee initiative was 20 per cent of all young people participating.
Pasifika learners with NZQF Level 5 have increased from 18 per cent in 2006 to 28 per cent in 2011.
I would like to acknowledge the efforts of this National-led Government, and in particular the Minister of Education for her efforts in raising achievement for Pasifika learners
I would also like to acknowledge the efforts of our teachers and the wider Pasifika community for their efforts in helping to raise learner achievement
Now for the bad news:
Despite these improvements, significant challenges remain.
While New Zealand performs well on average in the OECD’s PISA study we rate poorly on equity (24th equal with the US).
If we were to take the results for Pasifika, on their own, we would be 35th.
Although Pasifika participation in Early Childhood Education has increased, it is still the lowest for all population groups
Significant disparities remain evident in literacy and numeracy achievement
Disparity in achievement levels for Pasifika students are significant at the NCEA level and widen further at higher qualification levels
However returning to the good news:
Partnership Schools are coming.
They can innovate.
They can focus on creating a learning environment where every Pasifika learner succeeds
They can employ teaching staff who understand and embrace cultural differences
In short - they can make a real difference to Pasifika learners
I would like to thank the Partnership Schools Working Group, and, in particular, Dr Margaret Southwick, a significant Pasifika educator for her contribution in this policy design.
This Government is absolutely committed to accelerating achievement for Pasifika learners through the Partnership Schools initiative and the Pasifika Education Plan.
The benefits of this extend beyond the individual learners to the families, communities and to future generations.
ENDS
Support for Marriage Equality
The privilege we have to be in this House is counter-balanced by the need to stand up and be counted.
I am one of a handful of Members that was here in the early days of these debates.
After three decades, and ten Parliaments, I have had time to reflect.
To reflect on what I said, and what I did.
If I knew then, what I have learned since, I would have acted differently.
I see this as a debate more about human rights, predicated on the basis that we are all entitled to live our lives to the fullest extent of human happiness, while respecting the rights and beliefs of others.
I believe New Zealanders should be free to pursue their own happiness.
ACT’s principles of freedom and choice go to the heart of this issue.
Freedom gives each individual the right to determine, for themselves, their happiness for their life.
I want my political career and public service to recognise the value and potential of each New Zealander.
My gay friends know that my vote is not needed to pass this bill. But they tell me that my support is important to them.
I received a text from a friend who heard that this bill had my support.
The text said, “Thanks Banksie. This Bill won’t have any impact on your marriage, but it will mean a great deal to me and my relationship.”
I think that sums up the argument well.
I know many people have strong views on this issue.
I hope my comments tonight give an insight for my friends who don’t support this bill and can’t understand why I have chartered this course.
I respect their right to hold their views and I uphold their right to practice their faith. In turn, I expect those people to let me hold to my own faith.
When making this decision I had to ask myself:
Will New Zealanders have more freedoms as a result of this bill? Yes.
Will freedom of religion be preserved? Yes.
Will anyone’s freedoms be taken away by this bill? No.
Would the God that I believe in think any less of me for voting for this bill? No.
That’s why I support this legislation.
The Case For Partnership Schools: Giving choice to those who otherwise don’t have it
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Welcome to ACT’s regional conference for the lower South Island. I acknowledge ACT Scenic South board member, Guy McCallum and deputy board member Colin Nicholls and I thank you both for your efforts in organising this conference today.
I also acknowledge and thank ACT Leader John Banks for his attendance.
When Guy first asked me to speak on the subject of ‘why I support ACT’, I thought that’s easy. ACT has been the only party in New Zealand that has constantly elected into Parliament a group of MPs who all agree on free trade, the Reserve Bank Act, flexible labour laws, the importance of private property rights, one law for all and the rule of law.
There are many reasons to support ACT.
However, the focus of my speech today will be Partnership schools and the announcement yesterday about the establishment of the Partnership Schools Authorisation Board by John Banks in his role as Associate Education Minister.
At last week’s national conference in Auckland, I stressed the need to rejuvenate and rebuild ACT. We need to take our message directly to ordinary kiwis by direct mail, social media and public meetings. I mentioned that I first joined ACT at such a public meeting in May 1995.
However, what I didn’t mention were the two significant events prior.
Firstly, in February 1995, I sent away a cheque for $5 for a copy of ACT’s founding document – the 100 page ‘Commonsense for a Change’. This laid out ACT’s policy prescription and I could immediately see that ACT was a new kind of party offering new solutions to the country’s problems and was unlike any other political party at the time.
In particular, I was attracted to ACT’s proposals to have people paying part of their taxes directly into their own retirement savings accounts, rather than as general taxation - making them less dependent on the government at retirement age.
ACT also proposed providing greater choice in education by allowing alternative independent schools to establish and compete on an equal footing with the state education system – thus driving up standards for all through competition.
Secondly, in March 1995, I attended a public meeting – the first ACT meeting I ever attended. It was at the property now known as the ASB Showgrounds in Greenlane, Auckland and there were close to 1000 people.
The featured speakers were the joint ACT founders, Sir Roger Douglas and the Hon. Derek Quigley. I also heard for the first time, Rodney Hide and Muriel Newman – both of whom went on to become ACT MPs.
However, the speakers who left the biggest impression on me that night were Donna Awatere-Huata and Iritana Tawhiwhirangi – founder of the Kohanga Reo movement in the early 1980s and ACT’s first Education spokesperson.
Iritana, now Dame Iritana, gave an inspired, uplifting speech as she explained how ACT’s policies to provide greater choice to parents, particularly those from lower socio-economic areas who didn’t then have choice, would do more to address Maori under-achievement in education than any other single policy change.
Educational under-achievement was leaving vast numbers of Maori marginalised and unable to read and write. Far too many were ending up in prison. Under-achievement also lead to disproportionate numbers of Maori and Pacific Islanders becoming dependent on social welfare and robbing them of their independence, their spirit and their lives.
She explained how those from lower socio-economic areas lacked the resources that more affluent parents had, to send their children to private schools. School zoning captured young Maori in poorer performing state schools.
I was so impressed with Dame Iri’s speech that I went up and introduced myself to her during the break. Over time, we became friends and we have spent hours since, discussing educational and social issues for Maori and other New Zealanders.
With the founding of the Maori Party, Dame Iri became a member and subsequently stood for them in general elections on their party list.
While ACT has clear policy differences with the Maori Party in some areas – for example we opposed the Marine and Coastal Area Bill and we don’t support separate Maori seats in Parliament – we still have much we agree on, such as providing choice in education as a means of raising educational achievement for ALL, but particularly for those in lower socio-economic groups.
The Maori Party and ACT also recognise the huge damage the social welfare system has done to Maori and the way it has created a system of dependency and a feeling of entitlement.
So I was absolutely delighted that when John Banks announced the members of the Partnership Schools Authorisation Committee on Friday, Dame Iritana was among them alongside Chair Catherine Isaac, Deputy Chair John Shewan, John Morris, Dr Margaret Southwick, Tahu Potiki and Terry Bates.
Finally, 18 years after Dame Iri stood and addressed that crowded ACT public meeting in Greenlane, she will have the opportunity to bring to fruition the vision that she saw and so strongly advocated that night and ever since.
It was also pleasing this week to see that Pem Bird, President of the Maori Party also appeared before the Education and Science Select Committee to speak in favour of partnership schools.
There has been much misinformation about Partnership Schools – much of it spread by the teacher unions in a newspaper campaign that must have cost their members hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Far from being the ‘rich party’ portrayed by the media, the ACT party doesn’t have the resources to combat it.
The first and most important thing to know about Partnership Schools is they will not be compulsory – no parent will be required to send their child to one.
It will be THEIR choice, and for a lot of parents they will actually have a choice for the first time!
However, those who choose not to send their children to a Partnership School, will have the benefit of a higher standard of education that ACT believes will eventuate as a result of competition. So everyone will win.
Secondly, Partnership Schools will be designed to primarily serve lower socio-economic areas.
Thirdly, Partnership Schools will be funded by the state, largely to the same extent that the taxpayer would fund the same child in a state school – the funding will follow the child as ACT has advocated since its inception in 1994.
Fourthly, Partnership Schools will be closely monitored by the Department of Education – far from being unaccountable as our opponents argue. Partnership schools will be bound by an agreement entered into between the state and the schools’ founders and they will be required to meet the standards jointly agreed.
Fifthly, ACT’s partnership schools will not be subject to the Official Information Act as they are run by private organisations in exactly the same way that many thousands of privately run early childhood centres who receive Government funding are not subject to the Official Information Act.
Sixth, the Labour Party has argued that private enterprise or for-profit organisations will be involved and that this is somehow a bad thing! Yes, it’s true, that private for-profit organisations may wish to be involved but why is that deemed bad? And how is that different from the many thousands of privately owned early childhood centres that have opened and been funded by the taxpayer to provide 20 hours of early childhood education?
Labour is quite happy for profit organisations to operate early childhood education but not primary and secondary schools – how hypocritical is that?
In any event, my understanding is that none of the 34 initial preliminary applications received are from for-profit organisations, albeit that overseas research shows that for-profits run the most successful schools.
Seventh, there is overwhelming overseas evidence that properly monitored charter schools, as they are known overseas have been very successful, despite the opposition’s efforts to argue otherwise.
Sweden for example introduced ‘free schools’, their version of partnership schools in 1992 and they continue successfully to this day under both ‘right’ and ‘left’ wing governments. If Labour’s claim that Partnership Schools hadn’t been successful overseas is correct, surely an incoming left-wing Swedish government would have scrapped them and they haven’t.
Eighth, Partnership Schools will have more autonomy than state schools – there will be no regulated pay scales nor set hours. They will not be required to have all of their teachers registered with the Teachers Council, however you don’t need to be registered to be qualified. I personally have a world of business experience. I taught accounting briefly at the then Manukau Technical Institute and I wasn’t registered with the Teachers Council.
Delegates, for the last 18 years the ACT Party has championed reforms to education and social welfare systems. The ACT Party has stood up for the less well-off and campaigned on providing choice for those who don’t have choice. We don’t expect there will be a large number of Partnership Schools initially, but we are optimistic that a sufficient number will open at the beginning of Term 1, 2014.
While there may not be many, the fact that there are some will lead to competition between those first Partnership Schools and the surrounding state schools and we expect the benefits will only grow as time progresses.
Each week the Opposition parties stand up in Parliament and claim to represent the poor.
The first step out of poverty is a top quality education and if the opposition were truly concerned for the poor and the less well off, rather than their Teacher Union mates, they’d support us and the vote in Parliament would be unanimous.
Partnership Schools are a fundamental part of our Confidence and Supply Agreement with the National Party and from my discussions negotiating that agreement with the Prime Minister and since, I am sure we have his full support.
Like Dame Iritana Tawhiwhirangi, I look forward to ACT implementing the vision that she and Donna Awatere-Huata so ably enunciated in March 1995.
Thank you for your attendance here today.
ENDS
The Case For Partnership Schools: Giving choice to those who otherwise don’t have it
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Welcome to ACT’s regional conference for the lower South Island. I acknowledge ACT Scenic South board member, Guy McCallum and deputy board member Colin Nicholls and I thank you both for your efforts in organising this conference today.
I also acknowledge and thank ACT Leader John Banks for his attendance.
When Guy first asked me to speak on the subject of ‘why I support ACT’, I thought that’s easy. ACT has been the only party in New Zealand that has constantly elected into Parliament a group of MPs who all agree on free trade, the Reserve Bank Act, flexible labour laws, the importance of private property rights, one law for all and the rule of law.
There are many reasons to support ACT.
However, the focus of my speech today will be Partnership schools and the announcement yesterday about the establishment of the Partnership Schools Authorisation Board by John Banks in his role as Associate Education Minister.
At last week’s national conference in Auckland, I stressed the need to rejuvenate and rebuild ACT. We need to take our message directly to ordinary kiwis by direct mail, social media and public meetings. I mentioned that I first joined ACT at such a public meeting in May 1995.
However, what I didn’t mention were the two significant events prior.
Firstly, in February 1995, I sent away a cheque for $5 for a copy of ACT’s founding document – the 100 page ‘Commonsense for a Change’. This laid out ACT’s policy prescription and I could immediately see that ACT was a new kind of party offering new solutions to the country’s problems and was unlike any other political party at the time.
In particular, I was attracted to ACT’s proposals to have people paying part of their taxes directly into their own retirement savings accounts, rather than as general taxation - making them less dependent on the government at retirement age.
ACT also proposed providing greater choice in education by allowing alternative independent schools to establish and compete on an equal footing with the state education system – thus driving up standards for all through competition.
Secondly, in March 1995, I attended a public meeting – the first ACT meeting I ever attended. It was at the property now known as the ASB Showgrounds in Greenlane, Auckland and there were close to 1000 people.
The featured speakers were the joint ACT founders, Sir Roger Douglas and the Hon. Derek Quigley. I also heard for the first time, Rodney Hide and Muriel Newman – both of whom went on to become ACT MPs.
However, the speakers who left the biggest impression on me that night were Donna Awatere-Huata and Iritana Tawhiwhirangi – founder of the Kohanga Reo movement in the early 1980s and ACT’s first Education spokesperson.
Iritana, now Dame Iritana, gave an inspired, uplifting speech as she explained how ACT’s policies to provide greater choice to parents, particularly those from lower socio-economic areas who didn’t then have choice, would do more to address Maori under-achievement in education than any other single policy change.
Educational under-achievement was leaving vast numbers of Maori marginalised and unable to read and write. Far too many were ending up in prison. Under-achievement also lead to disproportionate numbers of Maori and Pacific Islanders becoming dependent on social welfare and robbing them of their independence, their spirit and their lives.
She explained how those from lower socio-economic areas lacked the resources that more affluent parents had, to send their children to private schools. School zoning captured young Maori in poorer performing state schools.
I was so impressed with Dame Iri’s speech that I went up and introduced myself to her during the break. Over time, we became friends and we have spent hours since, discussing educational and social issues for Maori and other New Zealanders.
With the founding of the Maori Party, Dame Iri became a member and subsequently stood for them in general elections on their party list.
While ACT has clear policy differences with the Maori Party in some areas – for example we opposed the Marine and Coastal Area Bill and we don’t support separate Maori seats in Parliament – we still have much we agree on, such as providing choice in education as a means of raising educational achievement for ALL, but particularly for those in lower socio-economic groups.
The Maori Party and ACT also recognise the huge damage the social welfare system has done to Maori and the way it has created a system of dependency and a feeling of entitlement.
So I was absolutely delighted that when John Banks announced the members of the Partnership Schools Authorisation Committee on Friday, Dame Iritana was among them alongside Chair Catherine Isaac, Deputy Chair John Shewan, John Morris, Dr Margaret Southwick, Tahu Potiki and Terry Bates.
Finally, 18 years after Dame Iri stood and addressed that crowded ACT public meeting in Greenlane, she will have the opportunity to bring to fruition the vision that she saw and so strongly advocated that night and ever since.
It was also pleasing this week to see that Pem Bird, President of the Maori Party also appeared before the Education and Science Select Committee to speak in favour of partnership schools.
There has been much misinformation about Partnership Schools – much of it spread by the teacher unions in a newspaper campaign that must have cost their members hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Far from being the ‘rich party’ portrayed by the media, the ACT party doesn’t have the resources to combat it.
The first and most important thing to know about Partnership Schools is they will not be compulsory – no parent will be required to send their child to one.
It will be THEIR choice, and for a lot of parents they will actually have a choice for the first time!
However, those who choose not to send their children to a Partnership School, will have the benefit of a higher standard of education that ACT believes will eventuate as a result of competition. So everyone will win.
Secondly, Partnership Schools will be designed to primarily serve lower socio-economic areas.
Thirdly, Partnership Schools will be funded by the state, largely to the same extent that the taxpayer would fund the same child in a state school – the funding will follow the child as ACT has advocated since its inception in 1994.
Fourthly, Partnership Schools will be closely monitored by the Department of Education – far from being unaccountable as our opponents argue. Partnership schools will be bound by an agreement entered into between the state and the schools’ founders and they will be required to meet the standards jointly agreed.
Fifthly, ACT’s partnership schools will not be subject to the Official Information Act as they are run by private organisations in exactly the same way that many thousands of privately run early childhood centres who receive Government funding are not subject to the Official Information Act.
Sixth, the Labour Party has argued that private enterprise or for-profit organisations will be involved and that this is somehow a bad thing! Yes, it’s true, that private for-profit organisations may wish to be involved but why is that deemed bad? And how is that different from the many thousands of privately owned early childhood centres that have opened and been funded by the taxpayer to provide 20 hours of early childhood education?
Labour is quite happy for profit organisations to operate early childhood education but not primary and secondary schools – how hypocritical is that?
In any event, my understanding is that none of the 34 initial preliminary applications received are from for-profit organisations, albeit that overseas research shows that for-profits run the most successful schools.
Seventh, there is overwhelming overseas evidence that properly monitored charter schools, as they are known overseas have been very successful, despite the opposition’s efforts to argue otherwise.
Sweden for example introduced ‘free schools’, their version of partnership schools in 1992 and they continue successfully to this day under both ‘right’ and ‘left’ wing governments. If Labour’s claim that Partnership Schools hadn’t been successful overseas is correct, surely an incoming left-wing Swedish government would have scrapped them and they haven’t.
Eighth, Partnership Schools will have more autonomy than state schools – there will be no regulated pay scales nor set hours. They will not be required to have all of their teachers registered with the Teachers Council, however you don’t need to be registered to be qualified. I personally have a world of business experience. I taught accounting briefly at the then Manukau Technical Institute and I wasn’t registered with the Teachers Council.
Delegates, for the last 18 years the ACT Party has championed reforms to education and social welfare systems. The ACT Party has stood up for the less well-off and campaigned on providing choice for those who don’t have choice. We don’t expect there will be a large number of Partnership Schools initially, but we are optimistic that a sufficient number will open at the beginning of Term 1, 2014.
While there may not be many, the fact that there are some will lead to competition between those first Partnership Schools and the surrounding state schools and we expect the benefits will only grow as time progresses.
Each week the Opposition parties stand up in Parliament and claim to represent the poor.
The first step out of poverty is a top quality education and if the opposition were truly concerned for the poor and the less well off, rather than their Teacher Union mates, they’d support us and the vote in Parliament would be unanimous.
Partnership Schools are a fundamental part of our Confidence and Supply Agreement with the National Party and from my discussions negotiating that agreement with the Prime Minister and since, I am sure we have his full support.
Like Dame Iritana Tawhiwhirangi, I look forward to ACT implementing the vision that she and Donna Awatere-Huata so ably enunciated in March 1995.
Thank you for your attendance here today.
ENDS
President's Address - ACT 2013 Annual Conference
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to our conference.
This is a crucial conference for ACT and is another step in the rebuilding and the rejuvenation of our party.
Thank you for coming and for your support.
Thank you, to you Alan Gibbs, your family and staff for hosting us on your magnificent, inspirational property.
I would also like to acknowledge a number of people here today.
Firstly, I would like to thank you John Banks, for your commitment to, and leadership of, our party. You have taken on a very difficult and lonely job in circumstances you didn’t expect. A job that involves personal sacrifice, unrelenting demands of the party and electorate and constant public scrutiny.
As Associate Minister of Education with responsibility for introducing Partnership Schools, you are on the verge of achieving finally, after 17 years, what has been one of ACT’s key policy planks – greater choice in education, which we believe will significantly address the educational underachievement in some sectors of our society. You have our full support.
Secondly, I wish to acknowledge and to thank on behalf of the party our outgoing President, Chris Simmons. Chris, you have led the party through two and a half very turbulent years and have admirably overcome the many challenges that you were presented.
Thirdly, to you Rodney Hide – your contribution to New Zealand politics and ACT over five Parliamentary terms – 15 years - has been huge! You made history by winning the seat of Epsom from the National Party for the first time in 50 years. None of us should ever forget that you winning, and then retaining Epsom ensured that the party remains in Parliament today. We collectively owe you huge gratitude.
On a personal level, I’d also like to thank you for your mentoring of myself and my former Parliamentary colleagues when we entered Parliament and for your continued support when I took over from you as the Parliamentary Leader.
I also acknowledge Vice President Barbara Astill and the other members of our Board.
I have been elected to a two year term as President of the ACT Party. As President I chair the Board of Trustees, the body responsible for running ACT and in particular developing and approving policy; identifying, selecting and ranking candidates; and raising the money required to run a successful election campaign every three years.
This is not a job I sought, nor one I would have challenged Chris Simmons for, but when Chris advised me that he intended to stand down and asked if I would be prepared to put my name forward, I seriously considered it.
You should know that I regard this role as one of the most important in New Zealand politics today. It is vital that ACT be rejuvenated and rebuilt for the sake of our country. We occupy a very important part of the New Zealand political spectrum and represent views and promote policies that no other political party does.
Since our founding in 1994, ACT has been the only party in New Zealand that has constantly elected into parliament a group of MPs who all agree on privatisation, free trade, the Reserve Bank Act, flexible labour laws, the importance of private property rights, one law for all and the rule of law.
I joined ACT 18 years ago. During this time I stood for the party in Epsom in the first MMP election in 1996 and served on the Board of Trustees for seven years in total, first as a regional representative, then Treasurer and finally Deputy Leader.
In 2008 I had the privilege of being elected an ACT List Member of Parliament and was appointed Minister of Consumer Affairs and Associate Minister of Commerce in August 2010, positions I relinquished in May 2011 to focus on my new role as Parliamentary Leader.
So ACT has been a big part of my life.
When I look back over those last 18 years, I despair at New Zealand’s lost opportunities.
I despair at successive government failure to build on the reforms of the 1980s and the early 1990s.
I despair at the welfare dependency culture that we’ve created in our society where people are concerned with their rights and think little about their responsibilities back to society.
I despair at how the Resource Management Act has become a massive and costly impediment to investment and growth, how it has reduced our living standards and further delayed infrastructure that should have been built 20 or 30 years ago.
And in particular I despair about the chronic levels of underachievement amongst some of our children – disproportionately, Maori and Pacific Islanders. I cringe when I see the desperate efforts of our opponents trying to misrepresent our position on partnership schools. If this is the calibre of the Teacher’s Union, no wonder we have a problem with some of our teachers.
I have watched as governments have wasted billions of taxpayers’ dollars – your money and as a result have been unable to substantially lower taxes to provide real incentives for those who want to work, save, invest and get on in their lives.
Our problems are man-made. We have done it to ourselves. New Zealand could be so much more prosperous than it is currently.
ACT has a vision for the future but we need to learn from the mistakes of the past.
Following that first MMP election in 1996, Prime Minister Jim Bolger went on a massive spending spree – much of it poor quality! This was the price he was prepared to make you the taxpayer pay so he could remain Prime Minister in coalition with Winston Peters. New Zealand is still paying the price of those mistakes today.
Then followed nine years of Labour government and more lost opportunity!
Helen Clark’s desperate last minute bribe to students and their parents to try and win the 2005 election by extending the interest-free student loan scheme represents all that is bad about politics and politicians.
We now have a scheme where students are incentivised to borrow the maximum that they are permitted and to invest any surplus – only to repay it years later in devalued dollars or at a substantial discount.
And if they don’t trust themselves to invest it successfully, they should just put it in the bank and earn 3%! To do otherwise is simply not economically rational.
But it gets worse! National who so severely criticised the massive extension to interest-free student loans in opposition, has done little to wind it back. You won’t hear a single National MP criticise this loan scheme.
And nor will you hear a single National MP advocate what most other Western countries recognise as blindingly obvious – simple demographics demands that the age of entitlement for superannuation should be progressively increased unless we are to be burdened by heavier and heavier taxation.
Therein lies National’s problem, and ACT’s huge opportunity and in fact, ACT’s huge responsibility!
Under MMP National must position itself as a party capable of getting at least 40% of the party vote, and from National’s point of view, closer to 50%.
However, in doing this, National has been far too timid in advocating policy change for the good of the country, focusing instead on not offending anyone in their support base.
New Zealand is screaming out for leadership! True leadership would have the National Party advocating for FAR greater reform than what they are currently proposing.
And that ladies and gentlemen is the role that falls to us.
ACT can and MUST provide that leadership.
It’s the reason that this party has a future and always will have.
It’s the reason why we must rebuild our membership and our electorate organisations.
I believe that young people will be the key to the future of our party and we must find a way to really engage them – technology and social media are obvious tools but they won’t be the only solutions.
Similarly, I have always believed that Asians should be much bigger supporters of our party. They subscribe to the ethics of hard work, thrift and enterprise and a party that believes so strongly in low flat taxes should be a natural one for them to support.
ACT has always believed that your efforts should make a difference and it’s the immigrants who sacrifice so much to come here who would have so much to gain from ACT policies and philosophies.
I’m not saying that’s going to be easy! In fact, I’ll say the opposite. It’s going to be hard. Very hard! But we are fighting for our country and it is so important that we are successful.
Our goal at the next election in 2014 must be to achieve a minimum of 5% of the party vote, and to retain the seat of Epsom.
We’ve proved before that we can get 5% and more – we’ve done it three times before!
We built this party person by person. We had a vision for how great this country could be in 1995 and we went out and signed people up one by one at meetings all over the country. Jo Walsh who is here this afternoon reminded me recently that she signed me up following a Roger Douglas church hall meeting in St Heliers in 1995. For someone who went on to become an MP, a Parliamentary Leader, a Minister and now the President....that was a pretty good signing Jo!
But there is a second very important reason why ACT needs to rejuvenate and rebuild. Some would even argue it is more important.
And that is the simple fact that the National Party will need a coalition partner if it is to remain in Government. No party has gained more than 50% of the popular vote since 1951 and it’s even harder under MMP.
If ACT is not back in 2014 in even bigger numbers, National will be dependent on either the Maori Party, New Zealand First or worse still, both of them!
The country would pay a very high price for this. In fact it’s already paid a high price over the last five years and that would only get substantially higher if the Maori Party held the balance of power.
To get just a glimpse of this cost, one only has to look at the Emissions Trading Scheme. ACT is a party of principle and when we weren’t prepared to burden the country with the excessive costs of the ETS, a position vindicated by National substantially amending the scheme in the most recent term, the National Party went out and bought Maori Party support.
As part of that deal, National agreed to transfer 40,000 hectares of DOC land to four iwi with the intention that iwi would plant native trees and transfer the land back in 75 years time.
Iwi were to retain the carbon credits which in 2010 were valued at over one billion dollars. The market has subsequently collapsed and so today its value is a tiny fraction of this, but it remains a fact that that was the price the Maori Party was able to extract to support a single piece of legislation.
I have a great deal of respect for Tariana Turia and her ability to extract benefits for her people. I think Maori electors generally fail to appreciate just how successful the Maori Party has been.
Since then, we’ve also had the Marine and Coastal Areas Act – our new seabed legislation and the government’s current Constitutional Review. One can only imagine the list of demands that will come from that should the Maori Party hold the balance of power in 2014.
Having painted such a negative scenario, I should at least highlight some of the positives.
Paula Bennett has made a great start to the social welfare reforms so badly needed and so strongly advocated by former ACT MP, Muriel Newman during her time in parliament and since.
Finance Minister, Bill English has also done his best to rein in the growing government expenditure given that his hands have been tied by others with regard to so many of the entitlement programmes.
And while National has been disappointing in so many areas, the alternative of a Labour/Green government doesn’t bear thinking about.
In the last month, we have had the charade of the opposition’s inquiry into the effects of the high exchange rate on our farmers and manufacturers.
This is their attempt to pretend that they care. It was the Green’s and Labour who wanted to impose massive additional costs on our farmers by taxing them on their animals burps and farts under the Emissions Trading Scheme when no other country in the world would remotely contemplate it.
It was also the Green’s and Labour who wanted to drive up the price of our electricity for our manufacturers and all New Zealanders and then pretend in Parliament that they care for those in poverty.
Before concluding, let me specifically address some comments to the people of the Epsom electorate.
The voters of Epsom have played a critical role in the outcome of the last three elections, firstly by electing Rodney Hide over Richard Worth in 2005 and 2008 and more recently John Banks over Paul Goldsmith in 2011.
The people of Epsom have huge power and have used it very wisely.
The Epsom electorate votes overwhelmingly National with their party vote, but it remains an undeniable fact that had John Banks not been elected MP for Epsom, the National Party would not have been able to form a majority government with ACT and Peter Dunne’s United Future.
Having ruled out Winston Peters as a possible coalition partner, National would have been left with only one alternative – The Maori Party. I believe had Epsom voters not elected John Banks, the Maori Party would have held the balance of power and would have been in a position to have decided who governed New Zealand. They would have extracted a huge price for their support!
We need to constantly remind Epsom voters of how crucial their support for John Banks was in the last election, and why it will be so important that ACT retains Epsom.
I have told John that in my new role as President, I want to go out with him every week on to the streets of Epsom, into the shops and on to the doorsteps, and constantly remind Epsom voters of how crucial their vote was in securing a further three years of National government.
During the many phone calls I have made over the last week promoting our conference, I learnt that National’s MP resident in Epsom, Paul Goldsmith recently held a barbecue at his home for his supporters. I don’t know how many of those supporters actually voted for Paul Goldsmith personally with their electorate vote, but those that didn’t should be very thankful that the majority of Epsom voters did. Because if they hadn’t, Paul Goldsmith would have found himself either in opposition now or at best, part of a government dependent on the Maori Party for the passage of every single piece of legislation.
I’d like to personally invite those supporters, the people who deliver Paul’s brochures to come and join the John Banks and ACT team in Epsom instead.
Because if those National supporters really want to the see the National Party in power with a strong dependable coalition party in ACT, they should throw their weight behind us instead.
And that’s why my fellow trustees and I will need your help. My commitment to you today is to do all I can to rejuvenate and rebuild this party. Over the years I have made literally thousands of ACT telephone calls, either asking for help or money, inviting people to functions or thanking people.
Following this conference, I intend to travel throughout New Zealand to meet and talk with both our current and our past members and supporters. I want to explain to them why it is so important that they support ACT and help us rejuvenate and rebuild a party that is vital for the future of this country.
Thank you.
ENDS
President's Address - ACT 2013 Annual Conference
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to our conference.
This is a crucial conference for ACT and is another step in the rebuilding and the rejuvenation of our party.
Thank you for coming and for your support.
Thank you, to you Alan Gibbs, your family and staff for hosting us on your magnificent, inspirational property.
I would also like to acknowledge a number of people here today.
Firstly, I would like to thank you John Banks, for your commitment to, and leadership of, our party. You have taken on a very difficult and lonely job in circumstances you didn’t expect. A job that involves personal sacrifice, unrelenting demands of the party and electorate and constant public scrutiny.
As Associate Minister of Education with responsibility for introducing Partnership Schools, you are on the verge of achieving finally, after 17 years, what has been one of ACT’s key policy planks – greater choice in education, which we believe will significantly address the educational underachievement in some sectors of our society. You have our full support.
Secondly, I wish to acknowledge and to thank on behalf of the party our outgoing President, Chris Simmons. Chris, you have led the party through two and a half very turbulent years and have admirably overcome the many challenges that you were presented.
Thirdly, to you Rodney Hide – your contribution to New Zealand politics and ACT over five Parliamentary terms – 15 years - has been huge! You made history by winning the seat of Epsom from the National Party for the first time in 50 years. None of us should ever forget that you winning, and then retaining Epsom ensured that the party remains in Parliament today. We collectively owe you huge gratitude.
On a personal level, I’d also like to thank you for your mentoring of myself and my former Parliamentary colleagues when we entered Parliament and for your continued support when I took over from you as the Parliamentary Leader.
I also acknowledge Vice President Barbara Astill and the other members of our Board.
I have been elected to a two year term as President of the ACT Party. As President I chair the Board of Trustees, the body responsible for running ACT and in particular developing and approving policy; identifying, selecting and ranking candidates; and raising the money required to run a successful election campaign every three years.
This is not a job I sought, nor one I would have challenged Chris Simmons for, but when Chris advised me that he intended to stand down and asked if I would be prepared to put my name forward, I seriously considered it.
You should know that I regard this role as one of the most important in New Zealand politics today. It is vital that ACT be rejuvenated and rebuilt for the sake of our country. We occupy a very important part of the New Zealand political spectrum and represent views and promote policies that no other political party does.
Since our founding in 1994, ACT has been the only party in New Zealand that has constantly elected into parliament a group of MPs who all agree on privatisation, free trade, the Reserve Bank Act, flexible labour laws, the importance of private property rights, one law for all and the rule of law.
I joined ACT 18 years ago. During this time I stood for the party in Epsom in the first MMP election in 1996 and served on the Board of Trustees for seven years in total, first as a regional representative, then Treasurer and finally Deputy Leader.
In 2008 I had the privilege of being elected an ACT List Member of Parliament and was appointed Minister of Consumer Affairs and Associate Minister of Commerce in August 2010, positions I relinquished in May 2011 to focus on my new role as Parliamentary Leader.
So ACT has been a big part of my life.
When I look back over those last 18 years, I despair at New Zealand’s lost opportunities.
I despair at successive government failure to build on the reforms of the 1980s and the early 1990s.
I despair at the welfare dependency culture that we’ve created in our society where people are concerned with their rights and think little about their responsibilities back to society.
I despair at how the Resource Management Act has become a massive and costly impediment to investment and growth, how it has reduced our living standards and further delayed infrastructure that should have been built 20 or 30 years ago.
And in particular I despair about the chronic levels of underachievement amongst some of our children – disproportionately, Maori and Pacific Islanders. I cringe when I see the desperate efforts of our opponents trying to misrepresent our position on partnership schools. If this is the calibre of the Teacher’s Union, no wonder we have a problem with some of our teachers.
I have watched as governments have wasted billions of taxpayers’ dollars – your money and as a result have been unable to substantially lower taxes to provide real incentives for those who want to work, save, invest and get on in their lives.
Our problems are man-made. We have done it to ourselves. New Zealand could be so much more prosperous than it is currently.
ACT has a vision for the future but we need to learn from the mistakes of the past.
Following that first MMP election in 1996, Prime Minister Jim Bolger went on a massive spending spree – much of it poor quality! This was the price he was prepared to make you the taxpayer pay so he could remain Prime Minister in coalition with Winston Peters. New Zealand is still paying the price of those mistakes today.
Then followed nine years of Labour government and more lost opportunity!
Helen Clark’s desperate last minute bribe to students and their parents to try and win the 2005 election by extending the interest-free student loan scheme represents all that is bad about politics and politicians.
We now have a scheme where students are incentivised to borrow the maximum that they are permitted and to invest any surplus – only to repay it years later in devalued dollars or at a substantial discount.
And if they don’t trust themselves to invest it successfully, they should just put it in the bank and earn 3%! To do otherwise is simply not economically rational.
But it gets worse! National who so severely criticised the massive extension to interest-free student loans in opposition, has done little to wind it back. You won’t hear a single National MP criticise this loan scheme.
And nor will you hear a single National MP advocate what most other Western countries recognise as blindingly obvious – simple demographics demands that the age of entitlement for superannuation should be progressively increased unless we are to be burdened by heavier and heavier taxation.
Therein lies National’s problem, and ACT’s huge opportunity and in fact, ACT’s huge responsibility!
Under MMP National must position itself as a party capable of getting at least 40% of the party vote, and from National’s point of view, closer to 50%.
However, in doing this, National has been far too timid in advocating policy change for the good of the country, focusing instead on not offending anyone in their support base.
New Zealand is screaming out for leadership! True leadership would have the National Party advocating for FAR greater reform than what they are currently proposing.
And that ladies and gentlemen is the role that falls to us.
ACT can and MUST provide that leadership.
It’s the reason that this party has a future and always will have.
It’s the reason why we must rebuild our membership and our electorate organisations.
I believe that young people will be the key to the future of our party and we must find a way to really engage them – technology and social media are obvious tools but they won’t be the only solutions.
Similarly, I have always believed that Asians should be much bigger supporters of our party. They subscribe to the ethics of hard work, thrift and enterprise and a party that believes so strongly in low flat taxes should be a natural one for them to support.
ACT has always believed that your efforts should make a difference and it’s the immigrants who sacrifice so much to come here who would have so much to gain from ACT policies and philosophies.
I’m not saying that’s going to be easy! In fact, I’ll say the opposite. It’s going to be hard. Very hard! But we are fighting for our country and it is so important that we are successful.
Our goal at the next election in 2014 must be to achieve a minimum of 5% of the party vote, and to retain the seat of Epsom.
We’ve proved before that we can get 5% and more – we’ve done it three times before!
We built this party person by person. We had a vision for how great this country could be in 1995 and we went out and signed people up one by one at meetings all over the country. Jo Walsh who is here this afternoon reminded me recently that she signed me up following a Roger Douglas church hall meeting in St Heliers in 1995. For someone who went on to become an MP, a Parliamentary Leader, a Minister and now the President....that was a pretty good signing Jo!
But there is a second very important reason why ACT needs to rejuvenate and rebuild. Some would even argue it is more important.
And that is the simple fact that the National Party will need a coalition partner if it is to remain in Government. No party has gained more than 50% of the popular vote since 1951 and it’s even harder under MMP.
If ACT is not back in 2014 in even bigger numbers, National will be dependent on either the Maori Party, New Zealand First or worse still, both of them!
The country would pay a very high price for this. In fact it’s already paid a high price over the last five years and that would only get substantially higher if the Maori Party held the balance of power.
To get just a glimpse of this cost, one only has to look at the Emissions Trading Scheme. ACT is a party of principle and when we weren’t prepared to burden the country with the excessive costs of the ETS, a position vindicated by National substantially amending the scheme in the most recent term, the National Party went out and bought Maori Party support.
As part of that deal, National agreed to transfer 40,000 hectares of DOC land to four iwi with the intention that iwi would plant native trees and transfer the land back in 75 years time.
Iwi were to retain the carbon credits which in 2010 were valued at over one billion dollars. The market has subsequently collapsed and so today its value is a tiny fraction of this, but it remains a fact that that was the price the Maori Party was able to extract to support a single piece of legislation.
I have a great deal of respect for Tariana Turia and her ability to extract benefits for her people. I think Maori electors generally fail to appreciate just how successful the Maori Party has been.
Since then, we’ve also had the Marine and Coastal Areas Act – our new seabed legislation and the government’s current Constitutional Review. One can only imagine the list of demands that will come from that should the Maori Party hold the balance of power in 2014.
Having painted such a negative scenario, I should at least highlight some of the positives.
Paula Bennett has made a great start to the social welfare reforms so badly needed and so strongly advocated by former ACT MP, Muriel Newman during her time in parliament and since.
Finance Minister, Bill English has also done his best to rein in the growing government expenditure given that his hands have been tied by others with regard to so many of the entitlement programmes.
And while National has been disappointing in so many areas, the alternative of a Labour/Green government doesn’t bear thinking about.
In the last month, we have had the charade of the opposition’s inquiry into the effects of the high exchange rate on our farmers and manufacturers.
This is their attempt to pretend that they care. It was the Green’s and Labour who wanted to impose massive additional costs on our farmers by taxing them on their animals burps and farts under the Emissions Trading Scheme when no other country in the world would remotely contemplate it.
It was also the Green’s and Labour who wanted to drive up the price of our electricity for our manufacturers and all New Zealanders and then pretend in Parliament that they care for those in poverty.
Before concluding, let me specifically address some comments to the people of the Epsom electorate.
The voters of Epsom have played a critical role in the outcome of the last three elections, firstly by electing Rodney Hide over Richard Worth in 2005 and 2008 and more recently John Banks over Paul Goldsmith in 2011.
The people of Epsom have huge power and have used it very wisely.
The Epsom electorate votes overwhelmingly National with their party vote, but it remains an undeniable fact that had John Banks not been elected MP for Epsom, the National Party would not have been able to form a majority government with ACT and Peter Dunne’s United Future.
Having ruled out Winston Peters as a possible coalition partner, National would have been left with only one alternative – The Maori Party. I believe had Epsom voters not elected John Banks, the Maori Party would have held the balance of power and would have been in a position to have decided who governed New Zealand. They would have extracted a huge price for their support!
We need to constantly remind Epsom voters of how crucial their support for John Banks was in the last election, and why it will be so important that ACT retains Epsom.
I have told John that in my new role as President, I want to go out with him every week on to the streets of Epsom, into the shops and on to the doorsteps, and constantly remind Epsom voters of how crucial their vote was in securing a further three years of National government.
During the many phone calls I have made over the last week promoting our conference, I learnt that National’s MP resident in Epsom, Paul Goldsmith recently held a barbecue at his home for his supporters. I don’t know how many of those supporters actually voted for Paul Goldsmith personally with their electorate vote, but those that didn’t should be very thankful that the majority of Epsom voters did. Because if they hadn’t, Paul Goldsmith would have found himself either in opposition now or at best, part of a government dependent on the Maori Party for the passage of every single piece of legislation.
I’d like to personally invite those supporters, the people who deliver Paul’s brochures to come and join the John Banks and ACT team in Epsom instead.
Because if those National supporters really want to the see the National Party in power with a strong dependable coalition party in ACT, they should throw their weight behind us instead.
And that’s why my fellow trustees and I will need your help. My commitment to you today is to do all I can to rejuvenate and rebuild this party. Over the years I have made literally thousands of ACT telephone calls, either asking for help or money, inviting people to functions or thanking people.
Following this conference, I intend to travel throughout New Zealand to meet and talk with both our current and our past members and supporters. I want to explain to them why it is so important that they support ACT and help us rejuvenate and rebuild a party that is vital for the future of this country.
Thank you.
ENDS
Leader's Address - ACT Annual Conference 2013
I’m excited by the challenges and opportunities for our Party and for our Country.
An academic once wrote:
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.”
I am honoured to be here amongst a group of like-minded individuals who change worlds in their own lives.
Alan Gibbs – thank you for your staunch support of ACT and for welcoming us to your wonderful Farm.
New Party President, John Boscawen; former President, Chris Simmons; ACT Board members both retiring and new; ACT Members and visitors – thank you for your commitment and service to ACT.
Our mission and our challenge is to return a bigger, refreshed, revitalised and re-tooled ACT Party to Parliament in 2014.
I am a born optimist. I have always believed in the power of individuals to make a difference in their own lives, and the lives of others.
For me it is not what government can do for you.
Rather, it’s about what you should be free to do for yourself while respecting the freedoms of others.
At its most basic, that is what ACT Party stands for.
The seeds of my philosophy are found in my background and life experience.
At primary school, hunger set the initial course of my life; I decided that I would never go hungry again.
My first teacher at Clareville School taught me that I could be successful if I was prepared to work hard.
I believed then as I do now, that through enterprise, initiative and hard work, every citizen should have the freedom to achieve.
ACT stands for a New Zealand where even the poorest child from the most humble background should be able to get ahead.
We believe that the law should treat everyone as equal. We believe in upward social mobility through the freedom to achieve.
We stand four-square against the entitlement society.
The entitlement society is the notion individuals are entitled to live at the expense of everyone one else; that a state benefit is a right, not a privilege; that the recipient owes nothing in return to the society that provides that benefit.
Fifty years in business and thirty years of elected office has taught me that not every economic and social ill can be addressed by creating a government programme or passing yet another law.
After all, a government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.
My experience is that laws and government programmes almost always have unintended consequences.
For example, welfare programmes designed to afford independence more often than not, create dependence.
Universal benefits intended to help those who are most in need, are offered up to those who neither need nor value them.
The entitlement society empowers politicians and civil servants and disempowers individuals and families.
It destroys the belief that individuals and families can and should be able to get ahead through their own efforts.
Take housing.
We face a housing affordability crisis in Auckland.
First home buyers face housing costs almost as unaffordable as London.
It is a problem largely created by former governments through the RMA and building regulations.
Now, according to Labour and the Greens, a government created problem requires a government ‘soviet style’ housing solution.
Young people would be expected to queue up for a house chosen by David Shearer and Russel Norman.
Unfortunately Mr Shearer’s promised dream home price rose from three hundred thousand dollars to half a million in a couple of months. That is inflation of Banana Republic proportions.
Worse than queuing for one of Dr Norman’s chicken coops is that he is promising to build these fowl houses with printed money.
Labour’s solution is even worse. You won’t fix the problem of the artificial scarcity of land at its source by throwing $30 billion at one symptom.
There is not a squeak, NOT A SQUEAK, from either Labour or the Greens on the need for Resource Management Act reform to address the causes of the problem.
I have told the National Party that we have a one in 20 year opportunity to fix the RMA.
The truth is, it is now working in the opposite way to what Parliament intended.
The RMA that promised so much has delivered so little.
The RMA is the epitome of a law with unintended consequences.
The original 382 pages were intended to replace 59 Acts of Parliament.
We were told it was supposed to free up development.
We were told it was supposed to bolster the fundamental freedom to build.
And we were promised simplicity.
Twenty-three years later, it is a 900 page job destroying machine.
The RMA is now one of the major constraints on investment, growth and employment.
It is now a significant cause of the housing unaffordability. It is used to constrain the supply of land thereby creating a massive transfer of wealth from first home buyers to those who already own consentable land.
The ACT Party agrees that we need to reform the timeframes in the Resource Management Act as National has proposed.
But we need to go further, much further, if we are serious about housing affordability.
And the ACT Party is serious about housing affordability.
We need to reverse the anti-development and anti-subdivision presumptions of the RMA in favour of the freedom to build on one’s own property. And we need much less prescriptive plans.
ACT’s Freedom to Build policy is our contribution to the housing affordability debate. It would do much to return the RMA to what Parliament originally intended.
The Freedom to Build is a presumption that you can develop your property if you respect the like rights of your neighbours.
This will increase the supply of land that can be built on.
The result would be that young people would be free to achieve home ownership if they are prepared to work hard and save hard.
In a property-owning democracy the role of government is not to build houses.
Let me tell you about three other areas where ACT is making life better for New Zealanders.
I believe in inspirational leaders. Our Partnership Schools will empower the parents of our most vulnerable learners by giving them more choice.
We will open the door of opportunity by providing a world class education to everyone, including the poorest of families and the most vulnerable of learners.
Partnership Schools will give dedicated educators the flexibility and freedom to meet the individual educational needs of their students.
In return for this freedom, there will be a higher level of accountability for the results they achieve.
Our critics don’t understand that ACT has always championed choice in education.
We have always wanted to empower parents by having the funding to follow the child.
We believe in choice.
ACT’s Aspire Scholarships introduced last term allow poor kids from low income families to go to private schools.
Partnership Schools will begin first school term next year.
As a former General Secretary of the UN has said…
“Literacy is… the road to human progress and the means through which every man, woman and child can realize his or her full potential.”
ACT agrees with that totally.
ACT will give dedicated and inspirational educators the tools they need, so that all of our young can walk the road of progress; so all have a real opportunity to achieve their potential.
I want to thank Catherine Isaac and the Working Party she leads for the excellent policy work they have done and continue to do.
ACT’s Regulatory Standards proposal will help New Zealanders to better scrutinise legislation for both intended and unintended consequences. It will create a ‘one-stop-shop’ for all critical information about a government Bill and will help New Zealanders push back on poor laws.
This Bill is a useful first step, but ACT would like to go much further by passing the Regulatory Standards Bill which would test legislation against a set of principles including better protection of private property rights.
ACT believes in private property rights.
For that to happen we will need to be back in Parliament in 2014 in larger numbers.
ACT’s spending cap proposal will require politicians to adopt a spending trend-line with a ‘please explain’ requirement for spending above that line. New Zealanders will be better able to judge the quality of government spending and the future cost of current programmes.
That will help better with decision making on Election Day.
Election campaigns are marathons not sprints.
Success in 2014 depends on what we do today, this week, this month, this year.
The campaign ahead will test our mettle, the commitment to our values and what we stand for and stand against.
Some in the media and our opponents will write us off. That’s nothing new. They did that in 2011. They did that in 2005. They did that in 1996.
That’s because the choice of Government; the choice of Prime Minister will likely depend on us.
Never in my lifetime has the Opposition been less ready to govern.
Never has the opportunity to keep nudging the National Party toward our values been more important.
Nor has the risk been greater that MMP will deliver us Russel Norman and his printing press.
Voters will clearly know what we stand for. And what we stand against. ACT’s values have not changed from the values its founders stood for. And they are not going to change.
ACT’s values are timeless.
We stand against heavy tax burdens to fund wasteful and unnecessary spending.
We stand against the stifling of freedom, enterprise and initiative with red tape.
We stand against attitude that the government must do something every time something bad happens in the community.
We stand against privilege
We stand against corporate welfare in all its forms.
Most of all, we are against entitlement. The notion that people are entitled to live at the expense of everyone else.
We stand for the dignity of the individual.
We stand for preserving the freedom to achieve.
We stand for allowing individuals to pursue goals of their own choosing.
We stand for individual initiative and enterprise.
We stand for personal responsibility, including responsibility for losses.
We stand for choice through open, competitive markets.
We stand for free trade.
We stand for price stability.
We stand for smaller government and lower taxes.
We stand for equal citizenship.
We stand for government that excels in performing its core functions.
We stand for government welfare that gives people a hand up not a hand out.
These propositions express our values. They are timeless.
What’s more they are right for the times we live in.
I want you to know that together we can and will make a difference – in taxation, welfare, law and order, equal citizenship, red tape, fiscal discipline and in education.
I want you to decide that our values are worth your effort over the next 21 months.
ENDS
The Freedom To Achieve
I rise on behalf of the ACT Party and the people of Epsom to support the Statement from the Prime Minister.
Over the summer break I have been out-and-about talking to New Zealanders - taking stock.
New Zealanders are working harder and longer for less.
What they want is the freedom to achieve though their own effort and enterprise.
They don’t want hand outs - most reject the entitlement society.
They back the Prime Minister. They rate John Key.
They don’t see Labour, the Greens and Winston First – the coalition of the Dispirited, the Deluded and the Bewildered - as an alternative Government.
They don’t see David Shearer as a Prime Minister, even less Russel Norman as Finance Minster.
I tell them that under MMP it could happen. They tell me to work hard to make sure it doesn’t.
I will be.
The ACT Party and the people of Epsom back John Key as Prime Minister. But we want him to do more to resist and roll back the entitlement society.
We want this Government to expand the freedom to achieve.
What Labour promises in hands-on-government is a government of hand outs - the sapping culture of entitlement.
In Labour’s world to get ahead is to put your hand in the pocket of the taxpayer.
It is not about the freedom to achieve through the enterprise of your efforts. It’s about taking from someone else’s hard work.
Take housing.
Young Aucklanders want to buy or build a home with a back yard. Yet the median house price in Auckland is now almost seven times the median household income.
Auckland is almost as unaffordable as London.
We know that housing unaffordability is complex. However the major culprit is central and local government – the RMA, metropolitan urban limits and building regulation.
What’s the Opposition response?
Labour promises to build government houses to fix a problem largely created by government. No word on where the money will come from to build ten thousand houses a year. Mr Shearer promised $300,000 dollar homes. Now he’s backtracked and said $300,000 is just the median value. In Auckland they will be chicken coops.
On Sunday, Mr Shearer told the country that he is going to hold a conference this year to work out his policy. That’s after he has announced it. Not good enough.
Labour have shown they are not serious. They have not uttered one word on RMA reform.
Here is my prediction; they will vote against every major RMA reform this year that will help young New Zealanders get their first home without a government handout.
Now the Greens won’t be outdone in the auction of make-believe money.
For them the Government will not only build the house but loan you the money to buy it. What they won’t say is how many houses or how much it will cost.
What we do know is that you can’t have a backyard for the kids to play in and the RMA can’t be touched.
After promising make believe houses with make-believe money, the next day the Greens attacked the dairy industry that helps New Zealand earn its way in the real world and pays the taxes they are so keen on spending.
For them wealth is created by the printing press - not by working hard, taking risks, selling things other people want and saving.
This year we need major RMA reform.
I have told the Government we have a one-in-twenty year chance to get it right and get it done.
We need to be bold. ACT will be helping.
In other areas, the Government is moving towards giving New Zealanders the freedom to achieve and away from the policies of handouts and the politics of entitlement that the Opposition are keen on.
ACT wants National to pick up the pace.
Here are three examples.
Partnership Schools are about the freedom to achieve for talented educators, dedicated parents, and for kids who need a break. It gives educators another option in our education system, a system that currently sees almost one in five students missing out.
We will have a Bill providing for regulatory standards around increased disclosure for Government Bills. This will help New Zealanders better gauge whether any reduction of their freedom is justified.
ACT’s Spending Cap will help New Zealanders better understand how much politicians spend and how good that spending is. Politicians will have to signal their spending plans in advance.
These initiatives and others will help get government off the backs and out of the pockets of New Zealanders.
ACT wants the Government to keep moving towards the freedom to achieve and away from the culture of entitlement that saps independence.
We reject Mr Shearer’s hands-on government of hand outs.
We know anything is possible however humble your origins, if you simply give New Zealanders the freedom to achieve.
ENDS
