Questions for Oral Answer

1. to the Minister of Finance: What signs of progress, if any, is he seeing of the economy rebalancing from borrowing and consumption to savings and exports?

There is no doubt that we are seeing some early signs of progress. First, we have had five consecutive quarters of growth in the past year and GDP has expanded by just under 2 percent. Secondly, growth is being reflected in a steady improvement in the jobs market, unemployment has fallen from a peak of 7.1 percent to 6.4 percent, and there are 40,000 more people in jobs today than there were a year ago. We expect the steady rise in new jobs to continue next year.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the honourable member, can I just ask members, please, to keep the conversations down a little. The background noise makes it very hard to hear.

💬 Michael Woodhouse: What factors are driving the recovery?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: First, growth is being driven by exports rather than debt-fuelled consumption or excessive Government spending. In the past year the value of New Zealand’s exports increased by 15 percent. Secondly, New Zealanders are choosing to pay down debt and increase their savings rather than borrow for consumption or housing speculation. It is encouraging that the recovery is being built on savings, investment, and exports rather than consumption, housing speculation, and wasteful Government spending.

💬 Michael Woodhouse: What impact is that shift towards increased saving having on New Zealand’s economic and fiscal outlook?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Increased household saving will create a stronger platform for faster growth further down the track. However, it means that the recovery will not be driven by sectors like retail and housing. So there will be a flatter domestic economy in the short term. This trend, along with the weaker global outlook, is likely to mean a lower growth forecast for the year ending March 2011 in the half-year fiscal update before the economy rebounds further in the following year. Combined with the impacts of the Canterbury earthquake, it also means slightly higher deficits in the short term before the deficit starts improving.

💬 Michael Woodhouse: What implications does the economic outlook have for Government spending decisions?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Government has continued with a high level of spending to support the economy through the recession. In particular, a large-scale spend on infrastructure is supporting thousands of jobs around the country. But these figures remind us that there are risks in this recovery, because of the nature of the New Zealand recession and then the global recession that got Government finances in trouble, and we will have to reinforce consistent discipline for the next 5 or 6 years at least in order to get the Government’s books back to surplus.

💬 Hon David Parker: Will next month’s half-year Economic and Fiscal Update from Treasury show higher than forecast economic growth for the year ending March 2011, or will he once again be forced to acknowledge that the economy is doing worse than he predicted just months ago?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: It has been clear for some time now that the economic recovery has been a bit flatter over recent months, for the reasons that we have talked extensively about in the House. New Zealanders are paying off debt and saving more. That is good for the economy and good for them. But it does mean there is not the same flush of spending on housing and construction. I have to say that if there was a flush of spending on housing and construction, I would be concerned about it.

💬 Hon Sir Roger Douglas: How does the Minister expect to increase savings and thereby help rebalance the economy when the real rate of return on bank deposits is currently less than 1 percent after allowing for tax and inflation?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: It is difficult to encourage people to save considerably more if they are getting less than 1 percent real return on their savings. This is one of the issues that the Savings Working Group is dealing with. We need to take a view of national savings, not just Government or household savings. We need to look at, for instance, the interaction of the tax system with our savings instruments to see whether we can do better.

💬 Hon David Parker: Has the Minister seen the Reserve Bank’s Financial Stability Report, which shows that business lending has fallen by $9.3 billion since November 2008, while housing lending is up by $8.8 billion, and does this not show that his measures to rebalance the economy are not working?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have seen the report, and, no, it does not.

💬 Hon David Parker: Given that the wage gap with Australia continues to grow, business lending is down, the Government deficit is up, and New Zealanders are more indebted than ever to the banks in the rest of the world, when will he admit, as Bernard Hickey said this week of the Government, that “The grand plan is in shreds.”?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: I certainly disagree with Bernard Hickey, who, like that member, is too focused on month to month economic figures and not strongly enough focused on the long-term shifts that this economy needs to go through. In fact, that member should be apologising for squandering the best decade of economic growth that this country has seen.

💬 Hon Sir Roger Douglas: What issues is the Minister taking into account in his consideration of the tax treatment of savings?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I apologise to the member, but because of the level of interjection across the front of the House I could not hear the member’s question. I ask him to repeat it, please.

💬 Hon Sir Roger Douglas: What issues is the Minister taking into account in his consideration of the tax treatment of savings?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: We are taking into account some arguments, which I do not necessarily agree with, that say that our tax system inherently favours debt over savings, and that that is one of the reasons that New Zealanders borrow more and save less. The solutions to that are all a bit messy. The Australians have looked at some solutions, and I understand that the Savings Working Group is considering those.

GST Increase—Effect on Low-income Families

2. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What reports, if any, has she seen on the impact of the recent GST increase on low-income families?

on behalf of the Minister for Social Development and Employment: I have seen reports from today’s Dominion Post that state that recent tax cuts, which are part of the tax package that includes an increase in GST, have added “$30 to the national median weekly take-home pay packet in October”, driving home affordability to the most affordable level in recent years.

💬 Hon Annette King: Would a drop in income and an increase in GST have an impact on the budgets of low-income New Zealanders?

Of course, if that happened in an individual case they may be worse off. A drop in income, which I am sure is the drop the member will refer to, occurs when people, for instance, lose their jobs. A whole lot of Māori and Pacific people lost their jobs because those jobs were reliant on excessive Government spending and excessive borrowing, and they were not sustainable jobs. We are going to create sustainable jobs so that when people get the jobs, they can keep them.

💬 Hon Annette King: Can I take from that answer, then, that the Minister has seen the information from Statistics New Zealand showing that the median income for Māori has dropped by 11 percent and the median income for Pacific people has dropped by 19 percent in the 2 years under a National Government, and does she think this will impact on the ability of families to cope at present?

As I pointed out, those figures take account of all sources of income. For those who have kept their jobs, wages have gone up. As for those who have lost their jobs, Labour should be apologising to them, because those jobs were created by wasteful Government spending and a mismanaged economy. They were not sustainable jobs.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I call Jo Goodhew.

💬 Jo Goodhew: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

💬 Hon Parekura Horomia: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister seems quite clear on why things have happened. Can he give us a response as to why the unemployment rate for Māori is the same as what it was before—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I—[Interruption] There will be no comment. I am not sure what the member was trying to do—whether he was seeking to ask a supplementary question. I thought he had raised a point of order, and that was why I came back to the member after I had called Jo Goodhew. If I had that wrong I apologise to the member. Was it meant to be a point of order—

💬 Hon Member: Yes, it was.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Well, it certainly was not. I accept that I was bit slow in dealing with it.

💬 Hon Rodney Hide: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I will make a quick comment through you to help the member. I am sure that if the member Parekura Horomia sought leave to ask a question, we on this side of the House would grant it.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: We will not do that.

💬 Jo Goodhew: What support has the Minister seen for the reversal of the Budget tax package, including the GST increase and across-the-board personal tax cuts?

I have seen no support for a reversal of the Budget tax package, even from the Labour Opposition, which has had the national focus of a by-election to promise to unroll the policy, which it keeps opposing in the House.

💬 Hon Annette King: In light of the Prime Minister saying New Zealanders would be better off after the tax switch, how can that be the case for Pacific people, whose inflation-adjusted median weekly income has dropped by $89 per week, and for Māori, whose same income has dropped by $60 per week, in the 2 years under a National Government? It has nothing to with a Labour Government; it occurred under a National Government, according to Statistics New Zealand.

As I have explained, the drop in the median income has occurred because Māori and Pacific unemployment has gone up, and it has gone up because of the recession induced by the Labour Government through its damaging economic policies, and a global financial recession. The wages of Māori and Pacific people who have kept their jobs or found new jobs—if they are among the 40,000 who have found new jobs—have gone up. We will create sustainable jobs for those on benefits.

💬 Hon Annette King: Do I take from the Minister’s answer that he is saying that the job of a Pacific Island woman—a job she has lost—providing home care to an elderly person under the Labour Government, which was providing such care, was a waste of money and time?

No, I am not saying that. I am saying that the promises made by the Labour Government to Pacific Island communities that it had performed some magic and created jobs for them turned out to be false promises. This time round, we will manage the economy properly so that sustainable jobs are created, and so that once people get new jobs they will keep them.

Kiwifruit, Pseudomonas Syringae pv. Actinidiae—Government Response

3. to the Minister for Biosecurity: What recent announcements has the Government made in relation to the kiwifruit disease Psa?

Today I have announced that the Government is committing $25 million to fund an urgent, aggressive containment strategy to fight the kiwifruit disease Pseudomonas syringae pv. Actinidiae (Psa). This will be matched dollar for dollar by the industry, resulting in a $50 million Government-industry plan to tackle the spread of Psa and minimise its impact on New Zealand’s $1.5 billion kiwifruit industry. The rapid response made by the Government to this issue is a great example of the industry and the Government working together, and, in the words of Zespri itself, it demonstrates this Government’s commitment to the New Zealand kiwifruit industry.

💬 Todd McClay: What are the details of the response package announced today?

💬 Hon DAVID CARTER: The response package announced today reflects the compelling proposal put to the Government yesterday by the industry. If approved by growers, it will see an aggressive programme of management action, such as pruning back infected canes and vines, awarding compensation to affected growers for loss of income, and continuing research into the disease. Once the initial stages of response are complete, and infection rates are minimised, the industry will put together a long-term, self-funded pest management strategy. The aim is not eradication, but doing the utmost to minimise the impact of Psa on one of our brightest primary sector industries.

💬 Hon Damien O’Connor: How much would it cost to rehire the 54 front-line Biosecurity New Zealand job positions that he cut in 2009, and will this be part of the response package so that future disease incursions will have a greater chance of being stopped at the border?

💬 Hon DAVID CARTER: I cannot answer with accuracy on that figure, but I am certainly aware that the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry faced a $4 million deficit associated with a dramatic fall in cargo volumes of 45 percent.

💬 Todd McClay: Why did the Government decide to make such a large commitment to the kiwifruit industry?

💬 Hon DAVID CARTER: Today’s announcement of a major funding commitment was a decision not made lightly by the Government. It recognised the compelling case put forward by the kiwifruit industry to ensure its future viability, and the major contribution that kiwifruit makes to the New Zealand economy. It also recognises this Government’s commitment to our biosecurity system and to New Zealand’s primary sector.

Health Policy—Progress

4. to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied with progress in achieving his health policy?

Yes, because overall we are making progress. However, we inherited significant problems, such as a serious workforce crisis, a decline in real access to elective surgery, many patients travelling to Australia for cancer treatment, and a health sector on track to financial crisis.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: When, if ever, will he step in to save the Ōtaihape health services, where the midwife is losing her job and the rest home residents have been told to pack up and move out, despite the staff taking a massive pay cut in August of this year; when will he help the 40 staff, the 27 older people in the hospital, the 130 women who use the midwifery services annually, and the 3,500 people registered with the primary health service?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: I have been in regular contact with the chair of the Whanganui District Health Board, Kate Joblin, and she chaired a meeting of residents in Taihape last night. The district health board is working to ensure the continuation of those health services in Taihape other than aged residential care. This includes primary health, maternity services, community nursing, and allied health services. This is expected to be determined within the next week. There are no questions over home-based support and palliative care services, which are not provided in Taihape through the Ōtaihape Health Trust.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: When, if ever, will he step in to ensure that doctors’ visits remain affordable, given that we have just seen an increase of $7.50 per visit for an under-17-year-old going to their general practitioner in the Mana electorate, especially after he said in July that a $1 increase was justifiable?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: Practices that do put up their fees are required to notify the district health board and their primary health organisation. Neither the Capital and Coast District Health Board nor Compass Health have been advised of any increase of the magnitude of that claimed opposite. Eleven practices in the Mana electorate have increased their fees since April. Ten of those have increased their fees for the 6 to 17 age group; eight of those 10 have increased fees by $1 or less; one has increased them by $1.50.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: When, if ever, will he acknowledge the true situation in health, with chief executives and district health board chairs leaving, saying they will not cut front-line services further; parents who cannot afford to take their children to the doctor because of the $7.50 increase; and the thousands of people in Taihape who are threatened with not just a cut but the complete closure of their residential hospital, midwifery, and primary health services?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: The fact is that some of the claims made by the member are unable to be supported by evidence. What can be supported is the fact that 20,000 New Zealanders are now getting elective surgery that they never got under the Labour Government; 99 percent of New Zealanders are getting their cancer treatment within 6 weeks; and more and more New Zealanders are getting speedy treatment in our nation’s emergency departments.

💬 Dr Paul Hutchison: What progress has the Government made in improving services in Kenepuru Hospital in Mana?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: What a timely question. In the last 2 years, under the National-led Government, the number of surgical procedures carried out at Kenepuru Hospital has increased by 57 percent, and the number of outpatient consultations carried out has increased by 30 percent. On top of these unprecedented increases in services, in the past 2 years at Kenepuru the new Government has introduced new services, including neurology clinics, general surgery and breast clinics, newborn hearing screening clinics, a four-bed observation unit in the surgical ward, anaesthetic pre-assessment clinics, pain management clinics, a psychiatric liaison service, and haematology and chemotherapy outreach services.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: When, if ever, will he support people in Manawatū with diabetes, and their families, who are this week, in Diabetes Awareness Week, describing the cuts to their diabetes support as reprehensible and incredibly short-sighted; and what is he going to do about it?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: I have spoken to the MidCentral District Health Board about that change. This is as a result of a contract coming to its natural conclusion. The services provided under that contract will now be provided under primary care, which is being funded accordingly. The MidCentral District Health Board has had a $13 million increase in funding this year under the National-led Government.

Roading, Tauranga—Eastern Link Road Progress

5. to the Minister of Transport: What progress is being made on the Tauranga Eastern Link road of national significance?

I am pleased to report that we will be turning the first sod on this $455 million project tomorrow, more than 6 months ahead of schedule. This is a very significant infrastructure project for New Zealand and an important building block in the Government’s plans for real export-led growth. All those involved in the project have worked hard to bring it forward. We will now have elements of five of the seven roads of national significance under construction, those being the Victoria Park tunnel, the western ring route, the Christchurch motorways, the Waikato Expressway, and now the Tauranga Eastern Link.

💬 Simon Bridges: What economic benefits will this project bring to the Bay of Plenty?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Tauranga Eastern Link will dramatically reduce journey times across the Bay of Plenty, leading to significant productivity and economic benefits. It will especially reduce journey times between the cities of Rotorua, Whakatāne, the Bay of Plenty hinterland, and New Zealand’s largest export port at Mount Maunganui. It is estimated that the new road will shave up to 24 minutes off travel time for a return journey between Paengaroa and Te Maunga. Construction of the project is expected to employ 200 to 250 people at any given time over the next 5 years, with more jobs being created or sustained in support industries and in the wider regional economy.

💬 Hon Darren Hughes: How can we have confidence in the figures that the Minister has given us about this road of national significance, when the New Zealand Transport Agency website makes it clear that the volume of traffic on the Pūhoi to Wellsford road of national significance is between 10,000 and 16,000 vehicles per day, and yesterday during question time he tried to assert that it was 24,000?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The numbers are different depending on whether one uses Warkworth and Wellsford, or Pūhoi to Warkworth, when looking at the numbers. As the member will also know, I talked about the number of people travelling on those roads, and that includes, of course, a multiplier for the number of people in each car, because quite often there is more than one person per vehicle. Of course, Mr Hughes may have trouble with that arithmetic.

Police—Front-line Officers Deployed Since December 2008

6. to the Minister of Police: When she said “New Zealand streets are safer with the addition of 384 extra frontline police officers deployed since December 2008”, how many of those 384 new police officers were part of the third tranche of 407 police officers that the previous Labour Government had funded for deployment within the 2008-09 year?

on behalf of the Minister of Police: I am advised that the premise of the member’s question is incorrect. There was not a third tranche of 407 police officers.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Does she think that the people of Mana will feel any safer because of her claims of additional police across the country, given that police documents tabled in this House show their police district will actually have 46 fewer front-line police officers by the end of next year than it did when the third tranche of 1,000 additional police across the country came into force in mid-2009—information obtained from the Minister’s own department?

The answer is the same as that to the question that the member asked the other week. The fact is that compared with when this Government came into office, there will be more police officers throughout New Zealand: 600 additional police officers.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I seek leave to table two documents from the New Zealand Police showing that the crime rate in the Kapiti-Mana district, where police numbers are dropping, increased by 6.5 percent between 2008-09 and by a further 0.2 percent in the year to July 2010.

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

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: To the Minister—

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Stop misrepresenting.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member has been called to ask a supplementary question.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I have just been accused by that member of misrepresenting the facts, and I take offence at that.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member knows that those sorts of interjections go across the House all the time. I heard the member sitting right beside him use some very unparliamentary language to describe something that the Minister of Finance was saying a short while ago. It was far more offensive that what the member interjected just now.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I take offence at being accused of being a liar.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: If the member wishes to ask a supplementary question, he will just do that. He was not accused of being a liar.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Does she believe that New Zealand streets are safer, when she hears reports from a Hastings sergeant, Kevin Stewart, that his section is attending fewer jobs due to the workload and a lack of staff and that “even as recently as six years ago, I was arresting 100 people a year. Now the top arrest rate in my section is 50 a year.”?

Of course, the Minister is always concerned if a police officer feels that way. What the Minister is doing about it is putting tens of millions of dollars of extra money into the New Zealand Police. By the end of our first term in office there will be 600 additional front-line staff, including 300 in Counties-Manukau, to make the streets safer for our nation.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Does he believe that New Zealand streets are safer, considering the comments of a police supervisor: “if the public knew the real numbers of GDB”—general duties branch—“staff policing the streets they would be shocked.”, and the comments of Christchurch sergeant Craig Prior: “We are not giving the public an acceptable level of service the way the GDB is run now.”?

Those comments are being made, I think, with the complete lack of awareness of the tens of millions of dollars extra that the Minister has put into the police service, and the fact that within the end of our first term there will be 600 additional front-line officers. The police know that they have a Minister who will support them strongly.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: How can she claim that New Zealand streets are safer, when police resources are seemingly so stretched that Auckland resident Pamela Percivalle called 111 late on Friday night, when she was at home alone, to report at least two men were banging on her windows and doors and apparently trying to break into her house, but no police officer was sent to her aid because she sounded “very calm”?

I know that the Minister of Police was shocked that that happened. She has raised the matter with the police and demanded an immediate report from them. The Minister is concerned that that might happen, because we simply do not want our Police Commissioner to appear before a select committee, under a National Government, and say that if people dialled 111 they had to scream to get help, which they had to do under Labour.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I seek leave to table a data table from the New Zealand Police showing that the third tranche of the 1,000 additional front-line police promised and funded by the previous Labour Government totalled 407, and came into force during the 2008-09 fiscal year. It is from the Minister’s own department.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Where was it published?

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: On its website.

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

Question No. 4 to Minister

I seek leave to table “Capital and Coast GP practice fees”, which includes the latest increase of a general practitioner practice in Mana, which has gone up by $7.50.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Would the member indicate the source of the document?

It is the Capital and Coast District Health Board’s own publication.

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

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

Conservation Land, Public—Renewable Energy Generation on Islands

7. to the Minister of Conservation: What is the Department of Conservation doing to provide renewable energy to remote areas of public conservation land?

The Department of Conservation has recently completed a 60-kilowatt solar project to provide power to Motutapu island, at a cost of $715,000. This is only the first stage of an infrastructural upgrade of the island. Once we upgrade the grid and water reticulation system, we estimate achieving annual operating savings of $188,000.

💬 Dr Cam Calder: What other initiatives is the Department of Conservation doing as part of its sustainability programme?

💬 Hon KATE WILKINSON: The department is installing renewable energy at a number of islands it administers, with a focus on off-grid sites because of the high cost of supplying electricity via diesel generators. The Mana Island solar system, for example, will cost $100,000 and save $567,880 over 20 years.

💬 Hon Steve Chadwick: When was the Department of Conservation’s renewable energy retrofits programme established, and under what Government?

💬 Hon KATE WILKINSON: I am aware that the previous Government had many strategies and plans, but it is actually the action that matters. We are making sure that we get action in the Department of Conservation.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was very specific. It was not about plans, strategies, or actions; it was about a very—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I hear the member. The question was very clear; I invite the Minister to answer it. First, I invite the Hon Steve Chadwick to repeat her question.

💬 Hon Steve Chadwick: When was the Department of Conservation’s renewable energy retrofits programme established, and under what Government?

💬 Hon KATE WILKINSON: I must admit that I do not know the exact date. But it is a very good strategy, and if it was established under the Labour Government, then I certainly applaud Labour for it.

Employment Legislation, Changes—Effect on Women

8. to the Minister of Women’s Affairs: What advice, if any, has she received on the possible consequences that labour law changes proposed in the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Holidays Amendment Bill will have on women?

on behalf of the Acting Minister of Women’s Affairs: Mr Speaker—[Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I want to hear the Minister’s answer.

The Acting Minister of Women’s Affairs was appointed only very recently, and I understand that no advice on these bills has been received by her.

💬 Carol Beaumont: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That question asked was on notice. I would assume it would be possible to find out what advice the previous Minister had received, if the Acting Minister has not been in the role very long. Surely the Acting Minister is responsible for the work that is going on in that portfolio area.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I think, in fairness, the Minister did answer the question. It may not have been quite the answer the member wanted, but the Minister did say that under the Acting Minister’s watch no advice has been received on that matter. The member has further supplementary questions to probe that answer, but I believe that it was a fair answer to the question.

💬 Hon Pete Hodgson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It seems to me that if a question is addressed to a Minister, the personage of the Minister does not matter; the office of the Minister does. That is to say, it does not matter whether a Minister changes person every day of the week; the obligation on the Government is to answer the question on behalf of the Minister—the office. In that respect, if the Minister answering the question on behalf of the Acting Minister was referring only to a day or two of activity, that cannot be seen to be addressing the question.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member will have heard me just require a Minister to answer a question that was, in my view, not answered. So I am not averse to requiring Ministers to answer questions. But I believe that the Minister did answer this question. The member has supplementary questions available to her, and the first supplementary question is patently obvious. That is what supplementary questions are all about. I accept that it is marginal, but on this occasion I have ruled that the Minister has answered the question, and there are supplementary questions to probe that answer.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think we are going somewhere we went yesterday, but this question, when it was originally lodged, did say “or her predecessor”. When your office—whether on the basis of objection or off its own bat—takes out “or her predecessor”, what you have done is substantially narrow this question away from the issues that my colleague was attempting to address. I agree with you: as this question has been read, there is no doubt that the Minister has addressed the question. But if, in fact, it was as it was lodged, I think you would have been requiring the Minister to answer in a different way.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I hear the member’s point. I was totally unaware, obviously, of that exchange that took place in the lodging of the question, and I am somewhat troubled by that. I think in the circumstances, given that this is a primary question, I will ask the Minister to answer it in a more fulsome manner.

I understand that previous advice was provided by the ministry to the Department of Labour raising concerns about both bills. The Government considered the advice, and on this occasion did not find it persuasive.

💬 Carol Beaumont: How does she respond to advice from various women’s and employment groups that the extension of the 90-day trial period will unfairly disadvantage women because they are more likely to have broken employment patterns, and will therefore be exposed more often to the possibility of dismissal without protection from unfair dismissal?

Extending the trial period to all firms will expand job opportunities for all New Zealanders, including women, and those job opportunities will, of course, benefit women. I am also advised that an evaluation of the trial period by the Department of Labour found that trial periods were taken up in roughly equal measure by men and women.

💬 Carol Beaumont: Has she or her ministry made any representations on behalf of women who combine employment with child-caring responsibilities and are concerned that the proposal to allow employers to request a medical certificate after a day’s absence will put additional stress and pressure on them, given that they are more likely to need sick and domestic leave?

As that member will be aware, the requirement for a medical certificate is a small change. It is anticipated that not many people will take it up, and therefore women will not be affected by that change.

💬 Carol Beaumont: As the Minister of Women’s Affairs, how is she standing up for women who are paid less than their male counterparts, and are therefore more likely to feel pressured to sell off their fourth week of annual leave, meaning reduced rest periods and less time to spend with children during school holidays?

Concern was raised that if more men than women cashed up a fourth week, it was likely to increase the gender pay gap. The flip side is that if more men than women choose to cash up, it may increase the gender holiday gap in favour of women. This Government trusts New Zealanders, whether they are men or women, to make their own choices. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The dilemma the Speaker faces with that question was that it asked how the Minister has stood up for women in something. The problem with that kind of question is there no specific answer to it. The answer that was given, I have to say, did not much address the question, but my dilemma is that the question asked how the Minister has stood up for women, and it is difficult for me to put further pressure on the Minister—and I do not think I should—when a question is framed in that way. But I would ask Ministers to listen to questions, and even where there is no specific answer, as with that question, to try to address the question.

Border Control—SmartGate System

9. to the Minister of Customs: What information has he received on the success of SmartGate?

SmartGate’s success shows just how rapidly New Zealanders have taken to the new technology that the system offers. As a result, they have benefited from far quicker processing times on arrival at Auckland, Christchurch, and Wellington airports. This week the success of SmartGate reached yet another milestone, with the system reaching half a million users. That is an excellent result, given the system started less than a year ago, when the gates were first opened at Auckland Airport. SmartGate is now processing around about 17,000 people a week. Yet there is even more good news: from 1 December SmartGate will start processing departures at Auckland Airport as well.

Broadcasting—Achievements

10. to the Minister of Broadcasting: What is the one major achievement in broadcasting he would most like to celebrate?

There are a number of achievements in broadcasting under this Government, all of equal merit. Legislation is progressing through the House to repeal the failed Television New Zealand (TVNZ) charter, and to free TVNZ from its ridiculous, unworkable mandate. We have taken that charter funding—

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I apologise to the member, but in the interest of the “Champion of the Valley”, I note that the—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No, no. Because of the way the member commenced his point of order, I am not going to accept that point of order.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That is a description that you have approved for the member: the “Champion of the Valley”. You have approved that, sir.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat for the time being. If that is the case, I apologise to the member, and I will investigate the approval. But I still think the point of order was probably out of order, because we had passed that question. We are now on to question number 10. The Minister should really not have been interrupted in answering it.

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I will start from the top again, shall I? There are a number of achievements in broadcasting under this Government, all of equal merit. Legislation is progressing through the House to repeal the failed TVNZ charter, and to free TVNZ from its ridiculous, unworkable mandate. We have taken that charter funding, which was not delivering quality content, and used it to set up the $15 million—

💬 Brendon Burns: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was quite specific. It asked the Minister to name one major achievement.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: A point of order is being heard. It was very difficult for me to hear exactly what the Minister was saying, because of the noise level. The question does indeed ask that: “What is the one major achievement in broadcasting he would most like to celebrate?”. It is a primary question, so I would ask the Minister to start again, and share with us the one major achievement he would most like to celebrate.

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I guess, really, I would have to say that it is setting a clear direction for TVNZ, repealing the TVNZ charter—the unworkable mandate that that organisation was left with by the previous Government—and letting TVNZ get on and do what it does best.

💬 Brendon Burns: Does the Minister stand by his statement that “We have just been through a recession and New Zealanders would be expecting all public money to be accounted for and spent prudently”; if so, what do we take from his belated judgment when he happily attended a $50,000 celebration hosted with taxpayers’ money by NZ on Air?

💬 Hon Rodney Hide: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am just wondering whether that question is in order, given the primary question. The question was about what the one thing would be that the Minister would like to celebrate, and then the member talked about the recession, and so on, and so forth. It does not follow.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I think it is the kind of primary question that leaves wide range for supplementary questions. I think we are all familiar with that kind of primary question. The reference to the recession was in passing, and was getting on to the question about some function that the Minister attended.

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Yes, I do; despite the impression that that member is trying to create, in what is really a thinly veiled personal attack, I was invited as the Minister of Broadcasting to deliver a speech and present an award at a function to celebrate 21 years of New Zealand music. Given a choice, most people would prefer to be at home with family in the evening, rather than at a work-related function, but I would not be doing my job if I did not turn up to give speeches and to present awards. At the function in question, I performed my ministerial duties, and left soon after. I point out that my attendance at this function where I was giving a speech and presenting an award could not be compared to Mr Burns’ attendance at the opening of the Marque Hotel in Christchurch, where he turned up, ate a gourmet meal, drank a few glasses of wine, gave no speech, served no purpose, spoke to no one, and went home.

💬 Brendon Burns: How many of the Minister’s staff—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I apologise to the member. I ask the Government benches, on this occasion, please, for a little courtesy.

💬 Brendon Burns: How many of the Minister’s staff and other National MPs also attended the NZ On Air party at the Powerstation, and what would the total cost have been, at $200 a head, for him and hangers-on to party at the taxpayer’s expense?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: As when the crowd opposite was in Government, when a Minister gives a speech they take a ministerial adviser with them, as I did on this occasion. I know there was one other National MP there, and she was entitled to be there. As a constituency MP, she had been invited, so the member can do the maths.

💬 Brendon Burns: Will we see better judgment from the Minister and some vision for the future of broadcasting before the next lavish, taxpayer-funded function he attends, or after, or is he waiting for the right speech notes to arrive?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: If the member would like to talk about vision for broadcasting, I will say we are delivering on a vision for a dynamic sector where the public has enhanced access to a full range of local and international content, delivered across multiple platforms. We are giving public broadcasters certainty in terms of funding, and clear direction in terms of expectations. I note that under the previous Government there was a real culture of excess, which was built up over a long time. We are seeing the last remnants of it now, but we are squeezing it out.

💬 Rahui Katene: Would he like to celebrate the fulfilment of the Crown’s Treaty and legal obligations to protect and promote Māori language through broadcasting, and is weakening the TVNZ charter the best way to achieve that?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Yes, why not? Send me the invitation and I will come along.

💬 Rahui Katene: Is the Minister aware that there are statutory and legal obligations on TVNZ as a result of the Privy Council’s findings in the New Zealand Māori Council broadcasting case in 1993, and what is he doing to implement those obligations?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: As explained yesterday, we are fulfilling those obligations through NZ On Air and Te Māngai Pāho, so there is plenty of money available for Māori broadcasting.

💬 Rahui Katene: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked about TVNZ’s obligations, not about NZ On Air or Te Māngai Pāho.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: That is a fair point. I invite the member to repeat her question.

💬 Rahui Katene: Is he aware that there are statutory and legal obligations on TVNZ as a result of the Privy Council’s findings in the New Zealand Māori Council broadcasting case in 1993, and what is he doing to implement those obligations?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Yes, and they are being honoured through the new statutory functions for TVNZ.

Whaling—Government Position

11. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: When he reportedly told Kevin Rudd that New Zealand would take a strong line opposing Japanese whaling this year in New Zealand’s search and rescue zone, can he explain what he meant by a strong line?

on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs: A strong line means continuing to make firm public statements about New Zealand’s position against whaling, and continuing diplomatic efforts to stop whaling. The meeting with Mr Rudd also provided an opportunity to hear Australia’s views before New Zealand makes a decision about whether to join the proceedings against Japan in the International Court of Justice. Now that we have had those discussions, a decision on joinder or intervention will be made very soon.

💬 Kevin Hague: Will he be taking a strong line in response to the investigation by Maritime New Zealand that found that the Japanese whaling boat had primary responsibility for the collision with the Ady Gil?

The Minister will emphasise what he and, indeed, Maritime New Zealand said: that this kind of activity in the Antarctic Ocean is very, very dangerous. He will be strongly warning both sides to avoid that kind of action. The Maritime New Zealand report attributed blame to both sides.

💬 Kevin Hague: Can he confirm that his last answer essentially tells the House that he will be taking no real action against the Japanese in the light of Maritime New Zealand’s findings?

No, I cannot say that, at all. I made it clear on behalf of the Minister what his position would be, and I also outlined to the member that the Maritime New Zealand report attributed blame to both sides.

💬 Kevin Hague: Why does his strong line not include sending an offshore patrol vessel into the Southern Ocean this summer to monitor the Japanese whale slaughter?

No decision has been made about whether to send a vessel at this stage. The Southern Ocean is a very remote and inhospitable part of the environment, but the Government, certainly, will be calling on the masters of all vessels to make safety at sea a very high priority.

💬 Kevin Hague: Given that he said on Q+A this weekend that he had spoken to the Japanese Government and told it that New Zealanders would be “watching what they do this year”, how might they do this if he does not send a navy vessel to the Southern Ocean for this purpose?

I repeat what I said in my answer to the previous question: no decision has been made, and a number of factors will be taken into account in determining whether a vessel will be sent.

💬 Kevin Hague: Why has not his strong line so far included joining Australia’s case at the International Court of Justice?

As I said in my answer to the primary question, that issue is being very carefully considered now. The Minister is having discussions with the Attorney-General on the subject, and a decision about joinder or intervention—there are a number of procedural paths—will be made very soon.

💬 Kevin Hague: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question asked why the Government had not done so to date.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Because the member is running out of supplementary questions I will let him repeat his question, just to make sure the House has heard exactly what he asked.

💬 Kevin Hague: It will be approximate. Why has his strong line not included joining Australia’s case at the International Court of Justice before now?

As I said, no decision has been made at this stage because the Government is still making a decision about whether to join or to seek leave to intervene. As I said, there are two procedural paths. Weighing up all the matters and discussing the matter with the Australian Government have taken until this time.

💬 Kevin Hague: When he suggested that Japan could lower the targets size of its whale catch, what number of whales was he thinking was an acceptable number to kill this season?

No number is acceptable. The Government has always made its position clear. The Minister was proffering that as a possible solution to a problem.

Internal Affairs, Department—Proposed Merger with Office of Ethnic Affairs

12. to the Minister for Ethnic Affairs: What will be the effects of the proposed relocation of the Office of Ethnic Affairs to tier three in the new structure for the Department of Internal Affairs on the services it currently provides to ethic communities?

on behalf of the Acting Minister for Ethnic Affairs: The roles and functions of the Office of Ethnic Affairs will remain exactly the same as they are now.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: Why is it, in his opinion, that staff and stakeholders expressed opposition to the downgrading of the office and were concerned that it may lessen access to the Minister and chief executive, as well as sending a negative message to stakeholders about its importance?

The director’s role is unchanged in a new policy, regulatory, and ethnic affairs branch of the Department of Internal Affairs. That member should not get hung up on tier levels. The Department of Internal Affairs’ passport operation, for instance, the member might be pleased to know, employs 170 people in New Zealand and overseas, generates third-party revenues of more than $55 million, and is critically important to New Zealand’s security, international access, and success. It is bigger than some stand-alone Government departments, and, indeed, is led by a third-tier manager.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was about the Office of Ethnic Affairs, and I asked the Minister to express his views on why stakeholders have expressed an opinion. He did not address that at all.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: When members ask Ministers to express their views on something, there is no precise answer to that. I heard the Minister explain that the role of the director-general had not changed, and that that is one of the reasons—he was expressing his view—why people should not be concerned about the change. It was an absolutely fair answer to the question.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: What is the Minister’s response to the view of ethnic leaders—for example, the Waitakere Indian Association—that the relocation of the Office of Ethnic Affairs sends the wrong signals about the importance and functions of the office at a time when the New Zealand population is diversifying significantly, and, therefore, the need for its services is increasing?

I thank those people who have made submissions through this process. That is an important part of hearing their concerns and any ideas that they have. I need to reassure the community that this will further strengthen the Office of Ethnic Affairs, and that member might be pleased to know that yesterday I was briefed by the director of the Office of Ethnic Affairs and I expect that to continue in the ongoing new working environment.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: Will the Acting Minister of Ethnic Affairs in her new advocacy role for ethnic New Zealanders step in to protect the Office of Ethnic Affairs from being downgraded and marginalised; if not, why not?

I do not believe that it is being downgraded or marginalised.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: I seek leave to table a document from the website of the Department of Internal Affairs on the organisational structure of the department, where it expresses the views of those who submitted.

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

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

Questions to Members

Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill—Submissions

1. HILARY CALVERT (ACT) to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill?

As of today, 1,109 submissions have been received.

💬 Hilary Calvert: Is he aware that a number of people have been unable to send their submissions due to an apparent fault in the online submission process, and will he extend the closing date to allow people to get their submissions in?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Before the chair of the committee answers that, the first part of the question can be asked, but not the second part. The second part is a matter for the committee, but the chair is welcome to answer the first part of the question.

It is not my responsibility; it is actually the responsibility of the Office of the Clerk. I am aware that the problems it is having are being looked after as we speak.