Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement in relation to Government housing policy that “we have to constantly make sure we are reaching those affordability goals for people”, and does she agree with the 2022 Salvation Army State of the Nation report that states “the massive increases in renting costs right throughout Aotearoa is confronting. Housing affordability for both first-home buyers and those renting is extremely worrying”?

on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes, in the context it was made. In terms of the second part of the question, yes. This Government has not shied away from the housing crisis that we inherited. Unlike the previous Government, this Government admits that there is a housing crisis, and we are working hard to address it. There is no silver bullet. However, this Government is overseeing the largest number of building consents ever, with over 48,000 homes consented last year. We’ve added over 8,900 new public housing places—removing planning rules that stop homes being built and reforming the Resource Management Act and investing an extra $3.8 billion in the pipes, roads, and infrastructure required for new homes—and we’ve grown the construction workforce by 14 percent at the same time.

Nicola Willis: Can she name a single measure which shows housing is more affordable for New Zealanders today than it was when she became Prime Minister?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister, as I said in my primary answer, there is no silver bullet. What there is is a long-term programme of work to build more houses. And yes, we are seeing supply come online, which will make housing more affordable for people. Yes, we are seeing more first-home buyers in the housing market. We are seeing the fact that the rate of house price increase is coming down. But, on this side of the House, we know that a housing crisis—decades in the making—is not going to be solved in just a short few years.

Nicola Willis: Well, isn’t it the case that, despite her enormous promises to New Zealanders, housing is less affordable for New Zealanders today, by every single measure, than it was when she became Prime Minister?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister, this Government is sticking to its commitment to do the hard work to build more houses and to make sure that we support people into buying their first homes, make sure we have more social housing, and make sure we have more emergency housing. We are taking action. The National Party have not come up with, and not supported, one good idea to actually do anything about this.

Nicola Willis: How many children are being raised in emergency motel rooms on her watch, and how does that compare to when National was in office?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister, we have invested in emergency housing so that children are not growing up in cars, which is what they were doing under the previous Government.

Nicola Willis: Why did median rents increase by a record-breaking $50 a week between December 2020 and December 2021?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Prime Minister, as the Prime Minister stated in the House yesterday, there are many reasons for why rents go up. Rents have been going up, in history, across New Zealand for many, many years. What I do know is that, on this side of the House, we have taken action to ensure that new builds are exempted from the rules that we put in place to make the housing market fairer, so that we do increase the supply, so we have more rental properties. We are taking action and, I repeat, the National Party have no policy to do anything about the housing crisis, which should not surprise anyone, because they denied it for nine years.

Nicola Willis: What does she say to the tenants of Glen, a landlord who wrote to me, saying, “I have issued my annual rent increases to tenants. This year, I had to take into account the additional $9,000 in tax we will be paying.”, and does she understand that her policy to hike taxes for landlords is being paid for by New Zealand renters who are caught in a cost of living crisis?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I say to those tenants is that they have a Government that is making sure that they live in warm, dry rental housing, that they are protected from being exploited, and that we are building more housing that they one day will be able to purchase. On this side of the House, we actually believe in supporting people who are in low-income situations—not what I’ve heard from the other side of the House, which is opposing every initiative we have taken to improve the lot of low-income people.

Question No. 2—Housing

2. to the Minister of Housing: What is the Government doing to increase supply of public housing in Wellington?

This morning, I announced funding to provide warm, dry, public homes for an estimated 900 families and individuals in Wellington. The Arlington Development, on the fringe of Wellington’s CBD, includes 300 new public houses, plus shared amenities such as a new playground, community gardens, and rooms, offices, and an orchard to help integrate the new buildings and residents into the well-established existing community. Arlington will have on-site support services that will support Kāinga Ora’s residents and the thriving community. Construction on the new homes will begin soon, with staged delivery completed between 2023 and 2025. This Government continues to deliver on our plan—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think the Minister’s answered the question.

Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Thank you.

Ibrahim Omer: How will the Arlington project provide education and training opportunities?

Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Through its cadet and apprenticeship programme, Kāinga Ora works with training and pastoral care providers, build partners, and sub-contractors to help key New Zealanders into trade apprenticeships and to support them and their employers to maximise their success. Last year, the Government celebrated getting 500 apprentices into work, with the assistance of Kāinga Ora build partners, sub-contractors, and maintenance partners. The Arlington Development provides employment and training opportunities for 40 apprentices and four new graduates, with at least 50 percent of these roles being assigned to individuals who identify as Māori, Pacific, and women, or Kāinga Ora tenants.

Ibrahim Omer: How else should the Government be building public housing in Wellington?

Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In addition to Arlington, the Government is working with the community, iwi, and Porirua City Council to deliver new, warm, dry homes in Porirua through the Porirua redevelopment. In July last year, I announced the first draw-down on the Government’s $3.8 billion Housing Acceleration Fund, investing $136 million to unlock capacity for an additional 2,000 homes in Porirua and to create up to 250 jobs. This funding is on top of an initial investment of $1.5 billion announced in 2018 to replace older State homes that are past their best with warm, dry, modern homes.

Question No. 3—Social Development and Employment

3. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How many more people, if any, received a main benefit for longer than one year in the December 2021 quarter compared to the December 2017 quarter, and what is the impact of any such increase on the children of those households?

on behalf of the Minister for Social Development and Employment: There were 62,019 additional main benefit recipients in December 2021, compared to December 2017, who had been receiving a main benefit for a year or more. At the beginning of our COVID-19 response, Treasury forecast benefit numbers would peak at 487,500 in January 2021. However, due to the Government’s quick actions and investment in things like the wage subsidy, the highest number of people receiving a main benefit was 391,227 in January 2021—96,273 fewer people than forecast. To the second part of the question, this Government recognises the negative impact of child poverty and we’re committed to addressing it. We have raised incomes for low-income workers and those on benefits more than any other Government and have invested heavily in employment and training programmes to support people back into employment. This has led to 39,916 more people moving off a benefit and into work in the year ending December 2021 when compared to December 2017, and this is the highest number of exits into work for a December quarter since electronic records began in 1996.

Hon Louise Upston: What responsibility, if any, does the Government take for the fact that almost one in five New Zealand children are now growing up in a benefit-dependent household under Labour’s watch?

Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Reducing child poverty, as I’ve said in my response to the primary question, is a priority for this Government. Since taking office in 2017, 109,000 families and whānau with children will be, on average, $175 a week better off as a result of income support changes that we have made on this side of the House. Since 2017, all nine child poverty measures have gone down, we’ve turned each one of them, and I could go on. I mean, between 19,000 and 33,000 children are projected to be lifted out of poverty on the after-housing cost measures in 2022-23 as a result of the increases—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think you’ve addressed the question. Thank you.

Hon Louise Upston: Why, as noted in yesterday’s Salvation Army report, has this Government allowed children living in benefit-dependent households to escalate to over 208,000, an increase of 37,000 since Labour came into office?

Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Given that that member seems to be quite supportive of families on low incomes and their children, perhaps she would actually support the minimum wage increases that we are bringing into effect on this side of the House and the work that we have done to increase benefits more than any other Government. I would also point out that, in fact, the State of the Nation report says we are making progress on reducing child poverty, we’re increasing the number of houses being built, and our economy is resilient due to measures that we have put in place in response to COVID.

Hon Louise Upston: Why, given one-third of all people on a jobseeker benefit have been there longer than three years, does the Government continue to blame COVID-19 for New Zealand’s benefit dependency crisis?

Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: That member will know that with the jobseeker benefit, there are those who are work-ready and there are those with health and disability issues, so conflating the two is actually quite unhelpful. In fact, 106,000 of them are work-ready. Many of those actually are in part-time employment as well, and are counted in benefit numbers and not the unemployment figure. We’ve also lifted the abatement thresholds so that people are better off and able to work as well, and also, as I mentioned in my response to the initial primary question, this Government has focused heavily or significantly on getting people back into work, as opposed to just punishing those—using sanctions, as the previous Government did.

Hon Louise Upston: Can the Minister explain what the Salvation Army could not when it said about the 185,000 people on jobseeker benefit—and I quote—“It is not clear why more of those on jobseeker benefits are not moving into employment, particularly at a time when employers are searching for both skilled and unskilled workers.”?

Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: I’d point to the response that was given previously in the House on that. We inherited a large number of people who didn’t have the skills and training to get into work that was actually there—that was actually a response that the member has received just this week on that. In saying that, we have focused on getting people into employment: 263 new front-line staff in Budget 2019 to help people into work, $150 million in Budget 2020 to help people into work, work-focused case management—something that previous Government abandoned when they were in office that we are focusing on—and we’re actually seeing results. He Poutama Rangatahi has supported over 7,000 at-risk youth into work. The Apprenticeship Boost scheme helps employers retain apprentices and has benefited over 40,000 people. This is a Government that is actually focusing on getting people into sustainable work that pays them well—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think you’ve answered the question. Thank you.

Question No. 4—COVID-19 Response

4. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What recent announcements has the Government made on reconnecting New Zealand with the rest of the world?

On Tuesday, I announced the requirements for travellers arriving into New Zealand under the reconnecting plan. That will begin with step one at the end of this month. From 28 February, travellers to New Zealand—starting with Kiwis and other current eligible travellers coming from Australia—will be able to enter without staying in managed isolation and quarantine as long as they’re fully vaccinated, they return a negative test before flying, and they spend seven days in self-isolation, taking two rapid antigen tests during that time. These actions will lower the risk of COVID-19 entering the community whilst also allowing a significant number of families to reunite. It will assist with the economic recovery and immediately help to address some of the worker shortages we’re facing.

Dr Liz Craig: What will be required for travellers prior to departure and upon their arrival in New Zealand?

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Before flying, travellers will have the option of three different types of pre-departure test: the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 48 hours—which people are now used to—or they can do a supervised rapid antigen test or loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) test within 24 hours of their departure. From the end of March, a New Zealand traveller declaration will require travellers to complete an online declaration prior to travel and upload their evidence of vaccination and negative pre-departure tests. In the interim, travellers will be manually checked by airline and Customs staff. On arrival at the airport in New Zealand, vaccinated travellers will need to download the NZ COVID Tracer app. They’ll be given three rapid antigen tests. They will then travel directly to their accommodation, avoiding visiting people or entering shops and businesses. They’ll wear a mask until they reach their accommodation and ensure that anyone picking them up wears a mask as well. They’ll sanitise their hands regularly and maintain physical distancing as much as possible.

Dr Liz Craig: What will be required for travellers while they’re self-isolating?

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The settings for self-isolation reflect the public health advice that arrivals to New Zealand have a similar risk profile to close contacts in the New Zealand community. As a result, they’ll be subject to similar protocols as community contacts. These things include an isolation period of seven days and reporting the results of two rapid antigen tests: one on arrival—day zero or day one—and one on day five or day six. A positive result will need to be followed by a PCR test to monitor for any new variants. Isolating travellers will be able to form a bubble with their family or with friends that they’re staying with, who will be able to continue to go to work or school, but they’ll need to minimise contact with others as much as possible. So, for example, no visitors to the place where they are isolating will be allowed.

Dr Liz Craig: How do these measures balance public health risks with the need to reconnect with the world?

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Having managed isolation and quarantine, or MIQ, for every traveller was a temporary setting while none of us had protection. When we established it, for example, there was no vaccination and there were few treatments for COVID-19. That situation has changed significantly, and so now is the time when New Zealand should be reconnecting with the world. Our plans carefully balance the return of New Zealand to a greater normality whilst also smoothing, as best we can, the spread of Omicron within our communities. When we start to reopen, we’ll be one of the most boosted countries in the world, the COVID-19 Protection Framework will be well established, and returning travellers—at least over the next few months—will still need to comply with these measures, which will provide an additional layer of protection.

Question No. 5—Health

5. to the Minister of Health: Why did he reject my call to urgently convene a young people’s mental health summit in response to early signs of increased mental distress as a result of the pandemic, and what does he say to student Jiya Rana, who said in response to my call, “It was actually good to feel acknowledged. It was the first time I felt it had been really addressed in this pandemic and it felt spot on with the conversations I’d been having with my peers”?

I received a letter from that member on 25 January this year at 1.55 p.m., suggesting a summit on youth mental health. At approximately 2.30 p.m. on the same day, my office started receiving queries from journalists asking what my response was to the member’s letter. I have not before received a letter with a proposal for a course of action which has been so swiftly followed up by media queries. I drew the conclusion that the member’s so-called call was a political stunt and not a serious request. To Jiya Rana, I say that this Government inherited a mental health system in crisis because of the years of neglect by that member’s party when it was in Government. This Government, on the other hand, has made the single biggest investment in mental health, with its $1.9 billion four-year programme of improvement. This has seen more than 850 front-line roles added to our mental health system, in particular addressing the needs of those with mild to moderate mental health issues. This includes funding 103 youth-specific roles within the primary and community sector. Specifically in relation to the pandemic, amongst other things, we have funded the following for young people: a $5.6 million funding package that provided extra resources to the Auckland district health boards for mental health and addiction services; funding for the Mental Health Foundation’s targeted mental health promotion campaign; and enhanced peer support through telehealth services. Also, we’ve provided $2.5 million of grants to support 36 grassroots community-based youth and kaupapa Māori initiatives that are working with children and young people most affected by COVID-19, and invested in more than 20 community-led projects through the $1.4 million youth mental wellbeing fund. This is a Government that takes mental health seriously, especially the mental health of our young people. The member’s suggested summit was an act of political cynicism.

Matt Doocey: Does he agree with recent research from the University of Auckland which confirms a pandemic-related increase in demand for eating disorder services for young people, and, if so, what is his plan to ensure young people with eating disorders and their families get the timely support they need?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The health system has been well across the further impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused on young people and their families, and I’ve outlined the additional support given in relation to eating disorders. The DHBs and the Ministry of Health are well aware of the pressure being put on the system, largely because of a shortage of specialists because the system was so badly run down in the last few years. This is a Government that is investing more and more in our mental health services, both at the mild to moderate end and at the acute end, to pick up and recover from the catastrophe left by the previous Government.

Matt Doocey: Does he accept recent St John Ambulance data which showed a disturbing trend of a 36 percent increase in mental health and suicide attempt call-outs in under-14-year-olds, a 77 percent increase in the last two years of the pandemic, and, if so, what is his plan to reduce the number of suicide attempt call-outs in under-14s that our emergency services respond to?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I just caution that member to be very careful about the data that he has referred to. So when the St John data that was released referred to mental health call-outs and attempted suicides—those two things are not the same thing. There are people who can be anxious and distressed and depressed who are not suicidal. There has been an increase in demand and in need, and those services are being provided because this is a Government that takes mental health seriously, takes youth mental health seriously, and has put considerably more into just that part of our mental health services than has ever been put into it before.

Matt Doocey: Does he accept the findings of the Salvation Army State of the Nation report released yesterday, which concluded that mental health pressure on young people had increased last year, with a third of teenagers facing moderate or high levels of distress, and, if so, what actions has he taken to support young people to get the support they need?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: This Government has been aware all along that the responses to the pandemic that have required many schools to be closed or operate on a sort of partial basis have put severe strain and pressure on young people and their social networks and, in many cases, their mental health. That is why, as I outlined in my answer to the primary question, this Government has invested more, specifically in services to support and assist young people and their families, and we are continuing to do so. It is also why this Government was determined that when the school year started recently, we did everything we could to get young people back to school to restore their social networks, to restore their socialisation, and to improve their mental health.

Matt Doocey: So when the Minister said—when he rejected my call for a young persons’ mental health summit—that the Government is across the issue because he was hosting a conference at the end of the year, why does he think it’s acceptable to wait until October to respond to the issues instead of a summit right now, or is it because he is playing politics?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: As I said before, the member’s letter was a stunt, and that’s why he ran off to journalists the minute he sent it to me. He has not seriously committed to a summit at all. It’s interesting that his leader says publically that he wants National and Labour to collaborate on mental health issues, but he’s got a spokesperson who is not simply capable of doing that. We have committed to hosting an international summit later this year, specifically on youth mental health issues. That’s an opportunity not only for New Zealand to relay its experiences to experts from around the world but for those around the world to come and share theirs with us, and we are committed to seeing that happen.

Question No. 6—Social Development and Employment

6. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What announcements has the Government made about supporting Māori into employment, education, and training?

on behalf of the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Today, alongside the Minister for Māori Development, we launched Te Māhere Whai Mahi Māori, the Māori Employment Action Plan. Across Government, we’re committing to 32 actions, spanning three key pou, over a period of five years to support better outcomes for Māori in the labour market. Te Whai Mahi underlines our commitment to supporting kaupapa Māori and working kanohi ki te kanohi and in partnership with whānau, hapū, iwi, and wider hapori to improve employment outcomes for Māori—wider hapori; we’re talking about the community there. The action plan is one of many tools in our Government’s toolbox to secure our recovery from COVID-19 and to support Māori as the employees, employers, and drivers of the Māori and wider economy.

Shanan Halbert: Why is this announcement important?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: On behalf of the Minister, we know that some Māori face a number of barriers to gaining meaningful employment and are commonly overrepresented in roles that involve lower pay and skills, fewer advancement opportunities, and less job security. A high number of Māori workers are also underutilised. Māori have the potential to excel in employment, and there is an opportunity to see Māori move into quality, higher-paying and skilled work with greater advancement opportunities and job security. These opportunities have the potential to improve intergenerational wellbeing for Māori, their whānau, and wider communities. This action plan sets out the ways this Government will support Māori employment aspirations and positive labour market outcomes, and also ensures the Government is meeting its Tiriti obligations.

Shanan Halbert: How were the actions of the plan developed?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: On behalf of the Minister, Te Ara Mahi Māori was appointed as an independent reference group to help inform the development of the Māori Employment Action Plan. Te Ara Mahi Māori was made up of leaders in their fields and provided representation right across the Māori community. Te Ara Mahi Māori held 11 hui in total, travelling across the motu, from Kaikohe and Tāmaki-makau-rau to Ōtautahi, to Ōtepoti, engaging with over 150 people: rangatahi, mana whenua, training and education providers, community groups, employment services, local government employers, and unions. Through the engagement undertaken by Te Ara Mahi, we’ve been able to capture as many perspectives as possible, which have gone on to inform and develop the actions in the plan announced today. Can I say, in finishing, some of the emphasis, particularly on Māori women, who are at the bottom end of those statistics, makes me very happy, and I know it has got a lot of support from Ministers and people right across the House.

Question No. 7—Broadcasting and Media

7. to the Minister for Broadcasting and Media: Does he accept all the conclusions of the Sapere Report on Media Plurality in New Zealand; if not, why not?

The independent report the member speaks of was commissioned by the Ministry for Culture and Heritage to consider the state of media plurality in New Zealand. There are some recommendations that I think have merit, and some that have less. For instance, there is a recommendation that advertising restrictions for Christmas Day, Anzac Day, and Easter be lifted; I have trouble with that as I don’t think the community would want to see that.

Melissa Lee: What response does the Minister have to criticisms the Sapere report makes, including submitters to the research calling the Public Interest Journalism Fund a “‘giant game of musical chairs’ and was leading to salary inflation”?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: They are expressions of people who submitted to the report, not the conclusions of the report. I would also say that at a time when we are losing a number of journalists from our newsrooms, it’s important to make sure that, as an important part of our democratic infrastructure, we’re supporting our fourth estate. We are doing that by making sure we fund New Zealand On Air to make decisions to support our fourth estate.

Melissa Lee: Did the Minister influence or instruct the Ministry for Culture and Heritage to write to the Commerce Commission on 4 February 2022, asserting that a media bargaining imbalance exists in New Zealand, when the ministry’s own advice from Sapere in a November 2021 report stated that—and I quote—“no one thought there was a crisis for media businesses or the state of plurality in New Zealand”?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The independent research came to their own conclusions; I don’t agree with it, and therefore, I think the Ministry for Culture and Heritage was expressing the Government’s opinion.

Melissa Lee: Point of order. The question was did the Minister influence or instruct.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, the problem is that you added an extra leg on the other end, which he has addressed. So you might want to ask that bit again.

Melissa Lee: Noting that the Sapere report states New Zealanders are currently well served by plurality in the media, will the Minister continue with his plans for the disestablishment of Radio New Zealand and Television New Zealand and the creation of a new public media entity?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I think if you look at audience trends—how they are watching and listening and consuming media—that our public media entities also have to make sure that they are fit for purpose. The Government is intent on doing that. It was a commitment we made at the last election.

Melissa Lee: Considering the Sapere report states there is not a compelling case for a structural intervention by the Government to address the potential future risk of plurality in the market for national news, and the Government spent over $300 million on media and broadcasting in 2021, will the Minister commit to the abolition of the Public Interest Journalism Fund and all publicly funded political reporting; if not, why not?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The Sapere report is independent, and on the point that the member first made, I disagree with it, considering the answer that I gave earlier. If the member is saying that they want to get rid of all the funding that New Zealand On Air uses to support the fourth estate at the moment, which makes sure that we have programmes like The Nation and Q+A and other shows that she has actually, in her previous life, taken advantage of, then I think the media would want to know about that.

Question No. 8—Justice

8. to the Minister of Justice: What action has the Government taken to end harmful conversion practices in New Zealand?

On Tuesday, the Government successfully passed the Conversion Practices Prohibition Legislation Bill. Parliament voted with near-unanimity to support the bill, which will prevent harm towards our rainbow community and encourage open and respectful discussions about sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. We made a promise during the 2020 election, and we have delivered. We have banned conversion practices in Aotearoa, and I commend all of the Kiwis, past and present, who have worked to make the ban on conversion practices a reality.

Glen Bennett: Why is a ban on conversion practices important for our rainbow community and in particular our rainbow rangatahi?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: There is absolutely no evidence that conversion practices work. What there is evidence of is the real, serious, and life-altering harm that it can cause. The practices have contributed to mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts and attempts. Conversion practices are based on myths that a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression can and should be changed, and I thank the 112 members of this House who voted in favour of it.

Glen Bennett: How does the ban on conversion practices ensure open and respectful conversations about sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The aim of the new law is to encourage open and respectful discussion around sexual orientation or gender identity. I acknowledge that some submitters during the select committee process and indeed some members of the House were concerned that the bill could prevent parents, health professionals, and religious groups from supporting individuals in exploring their sexuality or gender expression. I would also like to reiterate to the House again that a safe and respectful conversation is not captured in this bill.

Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: Does he agree with the Government’s statement in the departmental report for the Conversion Practices Prohibition Legislation Bill regarding a rights-based approach to the issues facing intersex people, including best-practice guidelines for healthcare; if so, when will this work start?

Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I acknowledge that point that the member made—and also during the committee stage of the bill’s progression. That work will be taken as part of a wider review of the Human Rights Act, which we hope to make sure is started before the end of this term.

Question No. 9—Police

9. to the Minister of Police: Does she believe New Zealanders are safer under this Government than they were four years ago; if so, how does she explain the Salvation Army’s 2022 State of the Nation report which shows violent crime overall has increased since 2017?

Firstly, can I ask members of this House to thank our women and men of the police who are out there right now endeavouring to keep us safe from an extraordinary event that’s occurring out there. We welcome the findings of the Salvation Army State of the Nation report and as a Government we’re committed to keeping New Zealanders safe. That’s why this Government has invested $450 million into police since we came into office in 2017, including $45 million into front-line safety. As a result of this investment, the police workforce is the largest it has ever been, with 15 percent more cops on the beat than in the last five years. In answer to the second part of the member’s question, the violent crime reported by the Salvation Army is primarily due to an increase in reporting of serious crime—in particular, family harm—following legislative changes made in 2018. The changes made in this area have created more awareness and encouraged more people to come forward and report crime. I would also note that the State of the Nation report shows the number of offenders has declined and the estimated offending levels have remained relatively unchanged over the past year. I’m confident that the record investment this Government has made into resourcing our police is making communities safer.

Hon Mark Mitchell: Then how can she explain violent crime rising 21 percent but imprisonment for offending falling by 36 percent?

Hon POTO WILLIAMS: This Government is committed to addressing the long-term issues that cause crime. That’s why we’re partnering with communities and iwi to expand Te Pae Oranga to 30 locations across New Zealand to address the underlying factors of offending. We are also looking at additional pathways for rehabilitation to occur. We cannot simply arrest our way out of this situation; we must find alternative resolution services and additional pathways for rehabilitation.

Hon Mark Mitchell: Can the Minister explain to this House, then, how her strategy is working when there’s a 36 percent reduction in imprisonment for offending and a 21 percent increase—

Hon Kelvin Davis: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister has no responsibility for who goes into prison. That is a matter for the courts, not the Minister of Police.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: It’s been given in the context of the primary question so as long as you keep in that spectrum, I will allow it. So if you can repeat the question for members—

Hon Mark Mitchell: So my question to the Minister in relation to her last answer is: how can she support the Government’s strategy when there’s been a 36 percent reduction in offender imprisonment and a 21 percent increase in violent crime?

Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I think the member believes that every crime should then be resulting in a conviction which results in imprisonment. Actually, what we are trying to do on this side of the House is take an all-of-Government approach to look at what the key drivers of crime are and then provide alternatives. We are not going to arrest our way out of this. We are not going to be like that Government who wanted to throw the book at everyone when we know clearly there are opportunities for us to provide rehabilitation and other pathways for people, like Te Pae Oranga, which is a fantastic programme that we are rolling out to 30 sites. It is supported by Kīngi Tūheitia, who believes that this is an opportunity for us to keep our whānau out of prison.

Hon Mark Mitchell: Is there a correlation between gang membership increasing by over 50 percent and violent crime rising by 21 percent over the same period?

Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There’s no question that we’ve got to do everything we can to disrupt gangs and organised crime. The reality is that this Government has never been more active in targeting the gangs and criminal leaders and getting them off the streets. We’ve put a record number of police on the beat with a specific focus on gangs and organised crime. We’ve ramped up our efforts to hit gangs where it hurts—their pockets—and we’ve seized $500 million in cash and assets from gangs and criminals over the last four years alone.

Hon Mark Mitchell: How can New Zealanders trust this Government on law and order when violent crime is rising; and how does she respond to the Salvation Army’s 2022 State of the Nation report that clearly shows this Government is failing to keep Kiwis safe?

Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There’s something that really disappoints me about that member—

Hon Member: Just one thing?

Hon POTO WILLIAMS: No, there’s two. What really disappoints me about that member is that as a former Cabinet Minister he allowed the reduction of police on the streets. He sat there and allowed the reduction of numbers in police. The other thing that—

Nicola Willis: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK, I think I know what the point of order is but we will hear it.

Nicola Willis: It’s a long-established expectation of the House that the Minister will address the question rather than enter into a political tirade.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: That’s absolutely correct. I probably should have stopped the Minister at the time she started but she needs to address the question.

Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I stand by the record of this Government to invest more in police, invest more in their safety. And by keeping them safe, they keep our community safe. That member over there was in a Cabinet that allowed for police numbers to reduce. How can you keep a community safe when you reduce the numbers of cops on the beat? How can that former police person himself be so critical of our police?

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member’s answered.

Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Can I read that question again, please?

DEPUTY SPEAKER: No. Question No. 10—[Interruption] Order! Settle down—in the name of Damien Smith.

Question No. 10—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

10. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What impact, if any, does he believe the recent amendments to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act are having on the ability of New Zealanders to access finance, and is he concerned about the wider impact of this legislation on the New Zealand economy?

The banks, the Opposition—and I acknowledge ACT in this—and the Government are all on the same page when it comes to supporting the intention of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act (CCCFA). We want to stop vulnerable people from finding themselves in unaffordable debt. I’ve followed the concerns raised by consumers closely, and that’s why I have asked the Council of Financial Regulators to review whether the reported outcomes of the CCCFA are either attributable to the Act’s intended protections, whether they’ve come from unintended consequences, or whether they are attributable to external factors like the global economic situation. As for the economy, I’m sure the member will have read, as I did, with great enthusiasm, the Minister of Finance’s good news from earlier this morning: the economy overall remains strong and resilient. It grew 4.9 percent over the last year and outperformed most of the countries we compare ourselves with. Unemployment is at record lows and wages are rising.

Damien Smith: What does he say to ASB chief executive Vittoria Shortt, who said, “we are seeing an impact of around 7% of customers that we would have liked to lend to, but have not been able to, given these changes.”?

Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: We have put the review in place sooner rather than later. These are significant changes voted for by the ACT Party, by the National Party, by the Labour Party, by the Green Party, and by Te Paati Māori. These are changes that the whole Parliament voted into existence. We acted early because we want to be sure the Act is working as it should be and we’re not seeing unintended consequences. What I would note is that the lending dropped in December, as it does every December—that’s a seasonal variation. The lending in the most recent December period was still higher than the lending in December 2017, December 2018, and December 2019. We do want to make sure that the Act is working as it should, and that’s what the review is there to do.

Damien Smith: Does he believe that a $1,000 credit card or a $1 million home loan have the same loan risk; and, if not, why are banks having to go through the same checks for two completely different risks, according to the chief executive of the ASB bank?

Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: A 2019 review into the financial sector found that around 18 percent of New Zealanders found themselves in either moderate hardship on an everyday level or severe hardship on an everyday level as a result of lending that was unaffordable for them—a significant problem. And I expect that is why the whole Parliament voted in these changes, because we wanted to make sure that vulnerable lenders are protected.

Nicola Willis: Supplementary question.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’m sorry, National don’t have any more supplementaries.

Damien Smith: What does he say to the man who applied to have his credit limit increased by $500 and was confronted with 15 pages of forms, despite never having missed a payment in the seven years he’d had that card?

Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I can’t, obviously, speak to that individual’s circumstances, nor to the individual bank’s policies on this matter. What I would have said is that different banks are putting different responses in place, as you’d expect in a competitive market, and members are free to shop around and look for a bank that better meets their needs.

Damien Smith: Does he agree with the observation from CoreLogic that new lending rules seem to be keeping first-home buyers out of the property market, as well?

Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: What I would note is that first-home buyer lending is up under this Government. I think that’s pretty critical to the question the member’s raising, and it should be noted that lending commitments usually fall in December, as I’ve previously noted, and that total lending commitments for December 2021 were higher than they were in December 2017, December 2018, and December 2019. I would also note that interest.co.nz recently acknowledged that while lending commitments dropped in December from November, as you’d expect, according to the season and compared to the previous year, the number of mortgages approved by first-home buyers expressed as a percentage of residential sales was 38.8 percent in December 2021, up from 34.4 percent in November last year, and 35 percent in the December prior.

Damien Smith: Does the Minister really believe it’s reasonable for New Zealanders to wait six months for the Government to review the impact of this legislation and the deterioration in the funding market place?

Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I’m not sure where the member gets six months from. This review started within a few weeks. It is true that Australia took a couple of years to work through their changes until they settled, and this review began within a couple of weeks of issues appearing in the media—admittedly, a lot of those media articles referred to loan-to-value ratio restrictions. None the less, we want to make sure that this legislation is working as it was intended when National, ACT, and every other party in this Parliament supported it through.

Question No. 11—Transport

11. to the Minister of Transport: What updates has he seen regarding the Government’s clean car package?

It’s been a very good week for the Government’s clean car package and I’ve seen updates informing me that it passed its committee stage reading in the House yesterday, and the third reading is expected to pass through the House this afternoon. The bill will increase the supply and variety of zero- and low-emission vehicles available for purchase in New Zealand by applying the clean vehicle standard to importers of new and used light vehicles. It will also increase the demand for zero- and low - carbon dioxide emissions vehicles by providing for the full Clean Car Discount scheme, designed to incentivise through rebates and charges the purchase of zero and low emission vehicles. Our Government has moved to prevent New Zealand from becoming a dumping ground for the world’s dirtiest vehicles by cleaning up our fleet and providing Kiwi consumers with more fuel-efficient vehicles at a lower price, and that’s good for our climate, too.

Greg O’Connor: What has the package delivered to date?

Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As of the end of January, there have been over 10,700 electric vehicles (EV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles registered since the scheme was introduced in July last year. To put that into context, 2021 saw more electric vehicles registered than the entire period from 2013 to 2018, and about one in four electric vehicles on the road today have been registered since the Clean Car Discount took effect in July. As a result of this, the new passenger vehicle segment has already achieved the standards’ 2023 target across the fleet, a year ahead of schedule. To support this increased uptake, public EV charging has also become much more accessible, with charging stations available on average every 75 kilometres over 97 percent of the State highway network. This programme is already delivering results. It’s helping Kiwis get into cleaner vehicles, it’s stopping us becoming a dumping ground, and it’s actually a sign of this Government’s commitment to not just talking about climate change but doing something about it.

Greg O’Connor: Why is it important that there is an incentive scheme in place for clean cars?

Hon MICHAEL WOOD: It’s very important. I note that this whole Parliament has signed up to the independent Climate Commission’s approach. This whole Parliament has signed up to that approach, which is an expert-led approach which tells us that we need to reduce emissions from our transport sector by 41 percent by 2035. This sector’s emissions have grown by 90 percent since 1990, and if we continue with the same policies that we’ve had, we’ll continue to have the same results. This Government wasn’t prepared to see that happen. These policies make a difference in every single country in which they are in place, and I note that every country around the world in the developed world, except for Australia, New Zealand, and Russia, currently has a standard, as we are proposing here. This is about our Government and our country catching up with the rest of the world and getting Kiwi families the cleaner vehicles that they need, which will save them a lot of money in the long term.

Question No. 12—Trade and Export Growth

12. to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: Does he agree that New Zealand has a responsibility to make COVID-19 vaccines accessible to everyone worldwide; if so, what work, if any, has the Government done with its trade partners to progress a TRIPS waiver to support equitable access for developing world nations?

Yes, I agree that New Zealand has an international responsibility to help make COVID-19 vaccines accessible to everyone worldwide. This Government supports a waiver of intellectual property protections in relation to COVID-19 vaccines under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or what is called “TRIPS” and the “TRIPS waiver”. As chair of APEC, New Zealand used its APEC host year to encourage engagement on this issue. It sits alongside New Zealand’s efforts in APEC and at the World Trade Organization (WTO) to address other elements of supply chain issues for vaccines and COVID-19 products. Following our efforts, 17 APEC economies have now either lowered or completely removed tariffs on vaccines and related products, making them easier to access.

Golriz Ghahraman: Will he commit New Zealand to a strong position to extend the waiver to all COVID-19 vaccinations, related equipment and materials, and ensure that those negotiations are transparent about the language of the waiver at the TRIPS Council meeting next week; if not, why not?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: As I said, New Zealand has always been committed to assist with the roll-out of vaccines across the world. We are not safe until everyone is safe. New Zealand has taken a position—a realistic one—that believes that there should be a TRIPS waiver for vaccines, but if the request that has come from two nations in particular extends across all medical products related to it, that will be very difficult to get through the WTO. We would rather push for and successfully get a TRIPS waiver on vaccines. It will be very difficult to go beyond that. So we believe that it’s better to get the first, rather than to lose out on all of it.

Golriz Ghahraman: Does he agree with the World Health Organization that “Worldwide access to COVID-19 vaccines offers the best hope for slowing the coronavirus pandemic, saving lives, and securing a global economic recovery.”; if so, does he consider that working toward a global vaccine equity that reduces the emergence of new variants will also ensure that trade policy delivers for all New Zealanders?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Yes, absolutely. I do agree with all of that. That’s why we will push at every international forum for those things to progress. As I said, we believe we cannot be safe until everyone is safe, and vaccines offer the best way forward. I wish that message would get outside of Parliament into some places, too.

Golriz Ghahraman: Has the TRIPS waiver been raised in discussions between New Zealand and the representatives of the United Kingdom and European Union during respective bilateral negotiations on trade agreements; if not, why not?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: The issue of TRIPS waivers is a multilateral solution, not a bilateral one. We know that most of the European countries, if not all, and certainly the UK support not exactly our position but support the view that vaccines must be rolled out across the world. Each of those countries, or some of them, have a slightly different view. That’s why we believe that consensus can be reached on a vaccine TRIPS waiver but, on some of the other products, it will be more difficult. Ultimately, it’s a multilateral decision and solution that is required.

Golriz Ghahraman: Given the significance, as we’ve both agreed, of the TRIPS waiver and vaccine equity, will Cabinet take the stances of the European Union and United Kingdom on the TRIPS waiver into consideration when it makes decisions on any final trade agreements New Zealand may reach with either; and if not, why not?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Our Trade for All policy is one that ensures that whatever trade agreements we sign up to, and we’re progressing them—and I want to thank the teams doing a lot of hard work, particularly on the UK and the EU ones—we have a Trade for All policy that says whatever agreements we sign up to and progress must benefit all New Zealanders. As I say, we ultimately depend upon the benefits, particularly of vaccine roll-out across the world, to give us the opportunities to travel once again and to engage internationally as we used to, without fear of some kind of infection.

Golriz Ghahraman: Does the Minister think that New Zealand should block the United Kingdom’s attempt to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) if the United Kingdom does not agree to support a TRIPS waiver; if not, why not?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: No, I don’t think that that’s one of the levers that should be used. We welcome the UK into the CPTPP agreement, as long as they reach the standards that the other members have set down and negotiated through some fairly tough negotiations. I’d like to acknowledge my predecessor, the Hon David Parker, in that area. CPTPP is a valuable agreement. We hope that the UK can come into that. Collectively, it will assist us to get the multilateral agreement on the vaccine TRIPS waiver that we require.