There is also a strong commitment to the environment that any economic development does not impair the health of our ecosystems and that economic development reduces the demand on non-renewable resources as we try to move to a sustainable future. In our view every project must achieve all three of those objectives. No one project can go ahead at the expense of any one of those objectives. I know that there will be very much a weighing up and a juggling, because there is a degree of conflict sometimes between the environment and economic activity, and, for that matter, good social objectives. But at the very least, those three elements must be weighed up. We will be watching very closely to see that the Ministry of economic Development and Industry New Zealand ensures that those goals are applied at the time a project is being considered, and to ensure that those goals are practised and monitored.
Without a partnership, without economic growth, social responsibility, and environmental sustainability there is little point proceeding with any new activity on the part of this Government. But it is very much a breath of fresh air after 15 years of hands-off Government by the last Labour Government and, more recently, by the previous National Government. It is so refreshing that this Government recognises that facilitating development is a central government activity in partnership with the business sector, in partnership with local government, and in partnership with the community. Partnership is vital. None of us wants a "think-big" State imposing its solutions on the people. All of us want bottom-up development. As I often say, the key is 101 percent solutions, not one 100 percent solution.
National and ACT's opposition to these initiatives is predictable. Their carping criticism is predictable. But I say better to have tried and failed than to have not tried at all. In fact, there is only one thing worse than not trying and that is what National did. In National's last 9 years it dismantled the limited assistance that was available to business. For example, take the Community Employment Group. The National Cabinet imposed an exit-management strategy on the Community Employment Group's most successful projects — namely, Be Your Own Boss, Mainstreet, Mature Employment Service, and Business Grow. They all created jobs. So what did National do? National cut the funds. National kneecapped the business development boards, which were the central thrust of regional development during its time in Government. First, it axed the grants that the boards were able to deliver, and then throttled them completely by putting them out of business.
What did National do to help unemployed people try to get on their feet? It cut the enterprise allowance from $9,000 to $6,000. What did it replace all this with? The five steps to nowhere programme, and BIZ — shop windows, all style, and little substance. That was the best that National could offer. National was the party of enterprise, innovation, and initiative. It would not even let farmers grow industrial hemp.
I am pleased to hear today that the Labour-Alliance Government is heading towards allowing hemp trials in this country. As one senior businessman wrote to Max Bradford: "For those of us at the coalface watching other New Zealand enterprises pack up and cross the Tasman, because of Australian Government incentive programmes designed to produce exactly that effect - meaning a bright future - the lack of overt New Zealand Government activity was extremely frustrating." Did they leave because Australia is a bigger market? If that is the case, then closer economic relations was not doing what it was designed to do. Did they leave because they were offered a better climate in which to conduct business? I believe so.
Closer economic relations certainly has not been working, because the Australian Government supports its business sector more than the New Zealand Government has in the past. The net effect has been a massive trade deficit with Australia in 15 out of the last 17 years. In the last 5 years that deficit has rocketed between half a billion and one billion dollars per annum. So what should New Zealand do about it? Let us look across the Tasman for a start. Let us look at what we are importing from there that we should be making here ourselves. The trade figures that came out yesterday showed that total imports from Australia are up 27 percent to $6.8 billion for the year to June. Let us look at which of our businesses are now owned in Australia that we should buy back, and let us look at what the Australian Government is doing — not saying, but doing — to foster local business, job retention and creation, and regional development.
I was pleased to hear the Minister say that the Industrial Supplies Office role would be enhanced, but this Government has not given one extra dollar in the Budget for the Industrial Supplies Office to do that. Yet the Minister knows what a pivotal role the Industrial Supplies Office plays in New Zealand. For every million dollars of unnecessary imports we replace with local product, we retain or create 16 jobs, we save $160,000 in welfare payments, and the Government receives an extra $118,000 in tax. Yet our Industrial Supplies Office has only four staff. It has a budget of only $382,000. Under the last Government it serviced only 10 departments. Despite that, it achieved contracts of $11.5 million, which saved or created 215 jobs. Pete Hodgson, the Associate Minister for Economic Development, says it is one of his favourite examples of getting work for New Zealand industry. Yet there was not one dollar more for the Industrial Office Supplies in the Budget.
What do they do in Australia. Its Industrial Supplies Office has over 80 staff and it services the private sector as well as Government departments and Crown agencies. The Australians are implementing new local procurement policies as we speak. As Queensland's Premier, Peter Beattie, said in June: "The State Government's $5 billion-a-year buying power will be used to deliver a better deal for Queensland manufacturers, suppliers, and taxpayers. This strategy is aimed directly at delivering jobs for Queenslanders. It's a buy-Queensland-first policy that I expect each and every State department and Government agency to follow. What this is all about is making sure that work that can be done competitively by local manufacturers is being done by local manufacturers, so we can keep blue-collar jobs in this State." Mr Anderton says he has not studied the Queensland model yet. I hope that he does. They would not have accepted the closure of the Flemings' Oat mill or the Mataura paper mill without a fight.
Mr Anderton says that buying New Zealand product would cost more. Yes, it sometimes does up front, but it costs less in the long run. Unless the Government applies the International Organization for Standardization figures to its purchasing decisions, and recognises the enormous savings and benefits that result from that, then the Ministry of Economic Development and Industry in New Zealand will go nowhere.
Mataura can be reopened, but only if the Government takes the lead and urges councils, businesses and citizens - and, for that matter, the press gallery. I did a survey in the gallery yesterday and almost every office was using Australian photocopying paper. Everybody must join in and buy New Zealand — made paper and New Zealand-made products generally.
We are also concerned about the efforts this Government is putting into encouraging foreign investment. I see there is something like $8 million in the Budget for that. Surely they should have learnt the lesson from Goodman Fielder and Carter Holt Harvey. Let us put that money into encouraging workers' co-operatives to get going in this country instead. Industry New Zealand will also get nowhere for as long as the Government remains committed to free trade. Opening our borders means exploitation of Third World workers and New Zealand workers. Self-reliance should be another key role of this Government, and I urge it to adopt that model if it is serious about sustainable development.
Subscribe to email newsletters
