The House: Fighting over growth, forgetting to mention the plan

Parliament has sat for two weeks this year. So far, that time has been dominated by a single piece of business - a 13-hour debate on the prime minister's Statement. Most years begin this way.

The purpose of the statement is to set out the government's plan for the year. The debate that follows is intended as an examination of that plan; a careful consideration of the details and nuances of the government's legislative and policy programme. The culmination is a vote over whether the Parliament continues to have confidence in the current administration.

That's the idea. The reality is less specific.

The central question

Despite the very long debate, the House is no more informed about the government's plans for the coming year than it was at the point the debate began. The lack of details may be one reason the debate received scant media attention, but it is worth noting the major themes.

National's MP for Northland Grant McCallum boiled down the intricacies succinctly when he began his speech with, "Growth, growth, growth. I'll say it again. Growth, growth, growth."

Economic growth had been the prime minister's focus, and all National Party MPs kept to that talking point. They also spent a lot of time attacking opposition parties and lauding last year's substantial legislative workload. The remaining time was spent pointing out how focused they are on delivering that growth.

MPs from ACT and New Zealand First also focused on that theme, but tended to include some specificity. For example, Nicole McKee (ACT-list) talked in general terms about some problems she has identified in her portfolios and intends to fix; like banking identity requirements making child accounts tricky, or there being too many separate agencies trying to help business.

While governing-party MPs said only they were capable of making growth happen, opposition MPs pointed out that the economy was growing fine until the election. The opposition's core argument was summarised by Duncan Webb (Labour-Christchurch Central).

"This government has had no growth. There is more growth on my face than this government has had, and that's a fact. The fact of the matter is that we handed over an economy that was growing - an economy that had 2.4 percent growth per annum. How much growth has this government had? None. They have gone backwards for every single quarter. The economy under this government is in recession. They've been there for 18 months. No more excuses. It's your turn. Do your job."

Governing-party MPs tended towards delivering aspirational generalities. Their summarising speech was from Simeon Brown (National-Pakuranga), who declared, "This government has a huge agenda ahead of us this year." Specifics of that Agenda as outlined by Brown were sparse, but if you boil down the call-and-response he led for his colleagues, you can glean some generalities.

"Yes to… more tourism into the country… Yes to more farming… Yes to more mining… Yes to more solar, wind, and geothermal through our fast-track legislation…Yes to fast-tracking housing developments up and down our country… Yes to more concerts at Eden Park… [and] yes to more international investment."

Attack and Attack

Both governing-party and opposition MPs spent a lot of time on attack. Governing-party MPs' attacks often accused the opposition parties of being opposed to growth, or bad at it. For example, here Chris Bishop (National-Hutt South) begins a lengthy attack, including some jibes that opposition MPs might agree with.

"So the National Party and the Labour Party and New Zealand First and the ACT Party - we're in favour of growth, and most reasonable people can agree on that. But the problem with that is that it's easy to say that you're in favour of growth, but there's always a 'but'. 'I'm in favour of growth, but growth has got to be equitable' - as if that's a real thing. 'Growth has got to be sustainable.' 'I'm in favour of growth as long as it doesn't involve foreigners making money.' 'I'm in favour of growth as long as it doesn't involve trading with the rest of the world'. 'I'm in favour of growth as long as we make sure that live animal exports are not allowed.'"

For opposition MPs, the attacks sometimes followed the line of Webb (above) who pointed out that the economy was growing until the election, but opposition MPs also often focused on ground-level issues. Arena Williams (Labour-Manurewa) noted, "The legacy of this one-term government will be saying no to school lunches. It will be saying no to the 2200 nurses that we need in our health system right now, when they are asking for jobs. This government did the good work of training them up; that government sent them packing. It is saying no to more doctors."

Others counter-attacked governing-party MPs' claims about their achievements, as did Kieran McAnulty (Labour-List).

"And we saw it again today: 'Oh, we've built 2000 houses.' - bull. Not true. Not even close to true. They have built zero houses. The only houses that have been built are the houses that the previous government paid for. Now, they are so desperate to claim some sort of win, that they are now claiming the work of other people."

The debate ended on Wednesday evening, when the House voted that it continues to have confidence in the government. The vote was a straight party-line split, with National, ACT and NZ First voting in favour and Labour, Greens and Te Pāti Māori opposed.

There is an agenda, despite a lack of detail in the debate

The debate on the Prime Minister's Statement is meant to focus on an outline of the government's policy plans - in this case an 18-page document presented by the prime minister on 28 January, before the debate began. The document can be found here.

The statement does actually include plans, so it is odd that so few governing-party MPs focused on details. The specifics are often still scant and some areas (eg. health, education) don't seem to include any plans that are genuinely fresh for 2025, but there were things MPs could have talked about.

Specific new initiatives I could quickly parse from those 18 pages (ignoring 2024 actions) are:

• The operating allowances for Budgets 2025, 2026 and 2027 will be $2.4 billion per annum.
• Appoint expert panels to consider [the 149 Fast Track] projects and decide whether they will proceed and under what conditions. The first decisions were expected to be made in the second half of the year.
• Introduce legislation to finally replace the RMA with a fairer and more efficient system, based on property rights, that makes it easier, faster, and cheaper to build while still protecting our natural environment.
• In December, the government will deliver the first 30-year infrastructure plan - ideally with bipartisan support - to ensure greater stability of infrastructure priorities to help New Zealand plan for, fund and deliver important projects.
• Legislation to make targeted improvements to the Public Works Act to make it faster and fairer to acquire land for building infrastructure.
• Implement an offshore renewable energy permit regime.
• Pass the Local Government (Water Services) Bill to establish an enduring regulatory framework for water services.
• Legislation and national direction changes to free up land for urban development.
• Pass legislation to remove barriers to the use of overseas building products to increase competition and lower prices.
• Expand the number of trades that can self-certify work to bring down costs, introduce legislation to reform building consent authorities to enhance consistency and productivity, and pass legislation to allow the construction of granny flats up to 60 square metres without the need for building or resource consents.
• Simplify financial services laws to improve access to credit, streamline the Conduct of Financial Institutions regime, and enhance dispute resolution services. Also, modernise governance and competition laws, remove barriers to company listings, and strengthen protections against financial scams.
• Pass legislation to enable data sharing in sectors like banking and energy, fostering competition and delivering better options for consumers.
• Pass the Regulatory Standards Bill.
• Introduce a replacement National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, an improved Freshwater Farm Plan system, ensure Significant Natural Areas are applied with common sense by amending the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity, and enable key productivity initiatives such as water storage.
• Pass legislation to expand the Traffic Light System, with new non-financial sanctions for keeping beneficiaries on track with their obligations to find work if they are able, including money management and community work-experience. New obligation failures will also count against someone's benefit for two years rather than one.
• Work to reform intellectual property settings across our universities and the broader science sector to ensure researchers can share more directly in the commercial success of their work, following successful models adopted by leading institutions overseas.
• Pass the Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Act, restoring real consequences for crime by: capping sentence discounts for mitigating factors at 40 percent; preventing repeat discounts for youth and remorse; adding an aggravating factor for crimes targeting sole charge workers or home-based businesses; encouraging the use of cumulative sentencing for crimes committed on bail, in custody, or on parole; Introducing a sliding scale for early guilty plea discounts, with a maximum sentence discount of 25 percent, reducing to 5 percent if entered during trial; amending sentencing principles to require consideration of the victim's interests; adding aggravating factors for exploiting young people to commit crimes, and for glorifying one's own criminal offences online.
• Introduce a Young Serious Offender (YSO) declaration for 14-17-year-olds who commit multiple serious offences, granting enhanced powers to the Youth Court and Police.
• Progress legislation to update the Waste Minimisation Act and Litter Act to reduce regulatory burdens and set clearer compliance requirements.

RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk.