Questions for Oral Answer

1. to the Minister of Finance: In light of the Prime Minister’s announcement yesterday that money taken from some families getting Working for Families would be used to help low-income New Zealanders, will the changes to be made in his Budget next week make the Alexander family, who appeared on Campbell Live on Monday night, be better or worse off?

The Prime Minister has said the scheme will be better targeted to low-income families and it will be a little less generous to families higher up the Working for Families scale. In relation to the Alexander family, I simply cannot comment on the family’s individual circumstances. What I can say is that the Government has a strong track record of protecting the most vulnerable families, and I would expect that family has benefited from increases in Working for Families payments and tax cuts.

💬 Hon Annette King: Will a family with a baby and on one income, who received an $11-a-week tax cut from the Government’s tax switch, and who are receiving Working for Families, have more or less money from Working for Families if the changes foreshadowed yesterday are implemented?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The House will just have to wait for the Budget to get the details of that. But the Prime Minister has stated that the scheme will be better targeted towards lower-income families.

💬 Hon Annette King: Will the one-income family, with four children, paying mortgage, rates, insurance, power, gas, telephone, and car expenses, who have told Campbell Live that they have $50 a week left to feed and keep their family and that without Working for Families they would be lost, be better off after his Budget; if so, when?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again, the member will have to wait for the details. But as she will know, in respect of both types of families it depends crucially on their level of income, because those with higher incomes get lower Working for Families payments. I might say, with regard to the family who is paying off a mortgage, that they have the benefit of the lowest mortgage interest rates in 40 years.

💬 Hon Annette King: If the commitment is to redirect Working for Families from higher-income New Zealanders to low-income New Zealanders, does he intend to release tables outlining exactly how much better or worse off people who currently receive Working for Families will be before the election, so they can decide whether the policy is fair; if not, why not?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: This Government will continue with the same way that it handles these kinds of policy issues, and that is being considered, responsible, moderate, and totally transparent.

💬 Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was very specific: about whether the Minister would release tables outlining who will be better or worse off before the election.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I accept the member’s question was totally free of any political content or innuendo, but I think the Minister indicated that the Government will handle it in the way that it has previously handled it. It would be a bit precious for me to force him to say whether that would include a table. The member does have further supplementary questions in which to put more heat on that issue, if she wishes.

💬 Hon Annette King: In light of the Prime Minister’s statement that low-income families have a much greater need for assistance, in what form will that assistance come—for example, greater access to budgeting services, so that they can make, as John Key said, better lifestyle choices?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Assistance to low-income families comes in a number of forms. Working for Families is in the form of cash payments. In terms of access to education, of course, it is in the form of funding directly to schools and to salaries. Families are enjoying the benefit of having a Government that is very focused on lifting the achievement for their children in the health services. The assistance comes in the form of better, sooner, and more convenient health services. The Government has done a reasonable job of protecting our most vulnerable families through what has been a very difficult time for Government finances and for New Zealanders.

💬 Hon Annette King: Why did he recently reduce the additional funding that was to be given to budget advisory services following the promise from the Minister for Social Development and Employment that they would be adequately funded, when she said they were doing invaluable work and she considered them to be local heroes, and when many of them now face a 70 percent increase in their client numbers in just the last year?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Government has provided what we believe to be adequate increases in social assistance and social services. There have been a number of changes for particular grants and particular services. We often find that when the increase is not as large as some people expect, the Opposition calls it a cut—and I think that basically sums up its economics.

💬 John Boscawen: Is it correct that if New Zealand had not had the previous Government’s spend-up between 2004 and 2008, the Government would not have to borrow over $180 per week on the Alexanders’ behalf?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The answer to that is yes, particularly because the social assistance programmes that the previous Government put in place had very considerable increases built into them, and this Government decided to continue to fund those programmes through the recession.

Budget 2011—KiwiSaver

2. to the Minister of Finance: What changes is the Government making to improve KiwiSaver and make it more sustainable?

As the Prime Minister confirmed yesterday, the Budget will include a package of measures aimed at ensuring that KiwiSaver is sustainable into the future, reducing the need for extra borrowing, and contributing to national savings. In addition to reducing the amount provided through the member tax credit, more will go into KiwiSaver from both individuals and employers, and the $1,000 kick-start payment for new members will remain as it is.

💬 Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: What role will KiwiSaver play in the future?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The first source of retirement income for all New Zealanders will remain New Zealand superannuation, which remains unchanged. KiwiSaver is an important supplement. It has 1.7 million members, and the number is growing by 20,000 a month. Projections show that with the changes the Government is intending to make, total KiwiSaver funds will grow to $25 billion by 2015, and almost $60 billion by 2021.

💬 Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: How will these changes lift national savings?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: It is important to understand that national savings are not the same as retirement savings. National savings are the sum of private savings—in KiwiSaver but also, of course, in housing, in investment in business, and so on—and Government savings. So far, just over half of all KiwiSaver balances has been contributed by the Government, which is now in effect borrowing from abroad to make those contributions. As the Prime Minister has said, borrowing from one bank to deposit in another is not saving, and it is not what Kiwis do.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Does he accept that the changes he is proposing to make to KiwiSaver will amount to an extra $10-a-week tax increase for 1.7 million KiwiSavers, or does he think they should take refuge in the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, which he has just refused to pre-fund for a decade?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, Kiwis have the security of national superannuation for their retirement. In respect of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and KiwiSaver, the Government has made decisions that reflect the circumstances we find ourselves in—that is, with a record $16 billion to $17 billion deficit, which has been the price of supporting this economy through the recession and facing the costs of rebuilding Christchurch. Taken as a whole, the changes to KiwiSaver and the reductions in the deficit will put the whole New Zealand economy on a stronger footing without affecting people’s retirement savings significantly.

💬 Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: Will the intended changes to KiwiSaver endure over time?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: I believe that the intended savings will endure over time, partly because Labour has indicated through its leader that it will not reverse the changes that the Government will make. That is a pretty good vote of confidence in changes that Labour members have not yet heard all the details of. No sensible future Government will want to borrow to subsidise private savings.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Referring to the Minister’s previous answer, how much of the $16 billion deficit he is forecasting for this year’s Budget is driven by the $23 billion of tax cuts he has handed out in the last two Budgets, and is he now prepared to agree that much of that tax cutting was misdirected, and that, overall, it was unaffordable for a country that has failed to grow as he projected?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. As we have pointed out to the member a number of times, and as he can verify through looking at the figures, the two tax packages implemented by the National-led Government have been fiscally neutral. In fact, Labour’s estimates show that those tax packages will have the net effect of increasing tax revenue over the next few years. So the Opposition’s assertion that tax cuts have cost the Government revenue is simply wrong. Those changes were designed to change the incentives in the economy, and they certainly will have a long-run positive impact on the New Zealand economy.

Budget 2011—Advice on Changes to KiwiSaver Tax Credit

3. to the Minister of Finance: Has he received advice on whether a reduction in the KiwiSaver member tax credit would raise or lower private savings; if so, what was that advice?

Treasury forecasts to be published in the Budget will show that private savings, taking into account the impact of the KiwiSaver changes, will lift substantially over the next few years. Of course, that will not be difficult, given that the savings rate reached minus 10 percent of household income during Labour’s term in Government.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Does he stand by his earlier statement that lifting private savings will be the centrepiece of his 2011 Budget; if so, how does he square that statement with indications that the benefits of private contributions to KiwiSaver will be reduced again, amounting to a $10 tax on 1.7 million KiwiSavers?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member needs to understand that KiwiSaver is only one vehicle for private savings. There are others—for instance, there has been quite strong growth in bank deposits, which are not subsidised by the Government. Other people reinvest in their businesses and see that as a form of savings. We believe that the combination of the tax changes made in the last Budget and the changes that will be announced next Thursday in this year’s Budget will push New Zealanders further in the direction in which they are already going, which is to significantly increase their savings. That is good for the economy.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Given that he campaigned on not reducing the benefits of KiwiSaver, at all, and then hacked into it in two separate Budgets, why should 1.7 million KiwiSavers place any more weight on his integrity than they have on the Prime Minister’s promises to not raise GST and to catch up with Australia?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The fact that 1.7 million people are in KiwiSaver tells us that they have confidence in the system. There is a little event coming up later in the year called an election. New Zealanders will have the opportunity to look at a prudent and responsible programme from this Government, or a mad borrowing spree from Labour, and they will make their own decision.

💬 David Bennett: What reports has he seen in reaction to the Prime Minister’s announcements about KiwiSaver?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: There have been a number of generally supportive comments. Some business commentators have said that if these changes make the KiwiSaver scheme sustainable, then they are a step in the right direction. ANZ wealth management director John Body said the Government’s plans appear reasonable, and prospective changes to the member tax credits are sensible. Even the Opposition spokesman on finance seemed unconcerned, saying yesterday that the changes were “hardly the stuff of headlines”. We could apply that phrase to most of the things he has said, but he also applied it to KiwiSaver.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Does the Minister agree with Business New Zealand’s Chief Executive Officer, Phil O’Reilly, that any move to increase employer contributions to KiwiSaver should be limited to a total rise of 1 percent to 3 percent, and does he intend to make any increase compulsory?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member will just have to wait for the Budget to see what increases the Government thinks are appropriate in the current economic circumstances.

Radio New Zealand—Funding

4. to the Minister of Broadcasting: When will Radio New Zealand’s funding freeze end?

on behalf of the Minister of Broadcasting: Radio New Zealand has been informed that it is unlikely to receive any increase in Crown funding over the next few years. Radio New Zealand has informed the Minister that it is able to operate effectively within current funding levels for at least the next 3 years. No changes in funding have been provided by the Government to Radio New Zealand. The baseline funding for 2010-11 was the same as for 2009-10 and is forecast to be the same for 2011-12. The Minister has advised Radio New Zealand that there will be no increase in its funding for the foreseeable future.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Is it not the case, as Richard Griffin, chairman of the Radio New Zealand board, conceded in the Commerce Committee last week, that the present freeze in Radio New Zealand funding, which comes at a time when operating costs such as electricity and transmission are going up, is actually a cut in funding; if not, why not?

No; because at the same time as the funding has been kept at the same level, Radio New Zealand has been able to find quite significant efficiency gains in the way it operates. The chair of Radio New Zealand in October 2010, Christine Grice, wrote to the Minister to say that clearly Radio New Zealand would be able to continue to function fully within its current funding for at least the next 3 years.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Does he agree with the present chairman of the board of Radio New Zealand, Richard Griffin, that if the funding freeze continues beyond the next few years it will erode staff morale and create havoc in the organisation, and that Radio New Zealand will “wither on the vine”; if not, why not?

One of the things I have found to be terribly unproductive around this place is to get involved in hypothetical debates about what might happen many years into the future. What will be done is on a case-by-case, year-by-year basis. The funding for Radio New Zealand will be assessed by the Minister of Broadcasting and Minister of Finance, and if, many years into the future, it is determined that Radio New Zealand requires an increase in funding, then that will be considered when it happens.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Is he concerned that Richard Griffin told the Commerce Committee that the only strategy the board has to increase revenue for Radio New Zealand is selling two grand pianos, setting up a trust so that the board can go cap in hand to the public to try to raise funds, and running cake stalls?

I would be very concerned if I thought the new chairman’s only way of raising funds was holding cake stalls. I believe that Richard Griffin has a very good view about broadcasting and has the ability to think quite innovatively about how other revenue streams and more cost-effective mechanisms can be brought to bear so that Radio New Zealand can continue to deliver the quality product it does within its current baseline.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Does he agree with the majority of the board of Radio New Zealand that commercial sponsorship of Radio New Zealand should be a no-go area; if not, why not?

I am told in my briefing notes that the current Radio New Zealand bill before the House does not allow sponsorship of Radio New Zealand, so the member can sleep calmly in her bed.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Does he support the board’s proposal to set up a charity trust so that it can go begging to the public for financial support to maintain Radio New Zealand Concert, and down the track possibly Radio New Zealand National, as well; if so, why?

The Minister of Broadcasting supports any move the board takes to increase revenue from other sources. I say good on it, and if it thinks there are ways it can get its loyal listeners to contribute in some way to help, I think that is a great thing for it to do.

💬 Sue Kedgley: Is he disappointed that his hand-picked political appointee, Richard Griffin, is telling the truth about the effect of the funding freeze on Radio New Zealand, instead of just exercising his skills in public relations and spin?

No, I can say I have never been disappointed in Richard Griffin.

Health Services—After-hours Medical Treatment

5. to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his statements on after-hours medical treatment?

on behalf of the Minister of Health: Yes, he does stand by his many statements on after-hours medical treatment, including his concern about the cost of some after-hours services, despite the fact that the Government has put an extra $144 million into primary care over 4 years. There has always been a wide variation in after-hours fee charges—for example, the Ministry of Health reported several years ago that many adults around the country were paying over $86 for an after-hours visit. Indeed, there were instances of some people in the Queenstown area paying up to $200.

💬 Grant Robertson: Does he still stand by his statement made in February that “in Auckland within the next 6 months we will have a network of 10 after-hours clinics providing lower-cost access to health services …”?

Work is under way to develop those clinics. It is proving to be a complicated task because it is a very involved task. But I can assure the member that it will be in place later this year.

💬 Grant Robertson: Will the 10 clinics be operating from 1 July 2011?

I cannot give the member an absolutely precise operating date, but it will occur this year.

💬 Grant Robertson: What guarantee can he give Aucklanders that there will be more affordable and accessible after-hours care, when the Waitematā District Health Board has expressed concern that the “total funding available will not cover a comprehensive range of services …”?

There are three things I could say in response to that. Firstly, there is $144 million more in primary care, $14 million of which will be going to after-hours care over the next 4 years. Secondly, the 10 clinics that the member referred to in his question will be in place later this year. Thirdly, the report from the Auditor-General’s investigation noted that all contractual responsibilities of district health boards were being met in this area.

💬 Grant Robertson: Have any contracts been signed for after-hours clinics in Auckland from 1 July this year?

I answered earlier to the member that work on the development of these clinics is proceeding. The timetable has shifted a little bit, but they will still be operational this year.

💬 Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I have taken your advice about asking extremely direct questions, and that was one. It was very simple—it asked whether any contracts have been signed for services from 1 July this year—and the Minister did not address that.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I think that was a very straight question. The Minister may not have the information, but I would invite him to answer it. It was a very direct question.

I think it was obvious from my earlier answer when I said that the facilities—

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Come on, “Mr Perfect”—live up to your own standards.

Perhaps the member would let me answer the question. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The Minister is trying to assist the House.

What I said in response to earlier questions was that the clinics would be operational later this year. By definition, that means it will not be 1 July.

💬 Grant Robertson: I seek leave to table the minutes of the Waitematā District Health Board community and public health advisory committee meeting on 9 March this year, where it expressed its concern that the total funding available will not cover a comprehensive range of services.

💬 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.

Earthquake, Christchurch—Availability of Skilled Labour

6. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What assistance is the Government providing Christchurch to ensure the right skilled labour is available to help the city rebuild?

The Prime Minister is at this moment announcing a comprehensive skills package for Christchurch of $42 million to help the city rebuild. As part of this we are increasing workforce skills with up to 3,000 more construction-related training places in polytechs using existing funding. We are also providing an extra $42 million for 1,500 additional funded places at polytechs, private providers, and industry training organisations as required, and we are providing accelerated training programmes, as well.

💬 Aaron Gilmore: What additional help is being provided from the Ministry of Social Development and Work and Income?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: This has been a real cross-agency focus, which has been really important. So to assist trainees into work the Ministry of Social Development is providing additional skills brokers at industry training organisations to work with employers to place those who are actually in training. The Ministry of Social Development will also receive an extra $5 million in Budget 2011 to purchase further industry partnership placements to help those unemployed young people and older people take up job opportunities from the rebuild. In addition, we are already spending $1.5 million helping those people in Christchurch into jobs as we speak.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Would the skills training assistance package be necessary if during the last 2½ years this Government had not cut industry training numbers by over 4,500 in the Canterbury region alone?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: What this Government has done over the last 2½ years is move some of that money into universities, where people wanted to be. The member knows that. There were people who wanted to study at university; there were others who were studying in other areas. We have put the money where the demand was and where it was truly needed.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I seek leave to table two documents showing the cut in industry trainees of over 4,500. They are the Tertiary Education Commission industry training quarterly performance indicators December 2008 and September 2010.

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

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

💬 Rahui Katene: What role have Māori played in working to create employment opportunities in Christchurch, and what benefits will be directly available for young Māori seeking employment?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: There has been a lot of consultation, particularly with Ngāi Tahu, and certainly Mark Solomon has been quite involved in that work. I might add that the member herself has been pretty pushy in making sure that we acknowledge young Māori people and employment opportunities there. Te Puni Kōkiri will support at least 200 Māori in the Canterbury area to enter training and, subsequently, employment in the construction sector through the appointment of an agent to work with industry training organisations, education providers, and employers, and, of course, with Māori themselves.

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Does this assistance to provide skilled labour extend to heating installers, given that as far back as last year the Government committed to having 4,500 emergency heating units installed in quake-damaged homes by winter, that as of this week MPs were advised that only 1,800 had been installed, and that, as a result of this, thousands of Cantabrians are going to be battling through the winter, living in cold, damp, and broken homes?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: Yes.

Early Childhood Education—Plans

7. to the Minister of Education: What plans does she have for early childhood education?

We have many, many exciting plans for early childhood services, including projects around the country to increase participation, plans to improve flexibility and reduce bureaucracy, and projects to ensure that children in Christchurch get back into early childhood education following the earthquake. We are doing all of this while being very responsible with taxpayer funds.

💬 Sue Moroney: What has caused the delay in the release of the Taskforce on Early Childhood Education report she commissioned, which was initially due in March 2011, was then postponed until the second week of April, and has still not been released to date?

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: The task force is doing an extremely thorough job. As I told the member just recently, I expect it to report back soon.

💬 Sue Moroney: Does she intend to publically release the work of the task force in the aftermath of next week’s Budget so that the task force’s response to the 330 submissions it received calling for 100 percent qualified staff, which she cut in February, gets buried in the bad news of the Budget?

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: As I just said in response to the question before last, the task force is doing an extremely thorough job, and it intends, as I understand, to report back soon. Of course we would want all its work to be available to the public.

💬 Sue Moroney: When was she advised that the Taskforce on Early Childhood Education had completed its report and placed it on her desk?

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I have not seen the final report from the task force. I have been advised that it is due soon.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I call question No. 8. [Interruption] Sorry—I just say to members that I have to be able to hear calls, please.

💬 Rahui Katene: Does she agree with Diana Anderson, National Manager of Evaluation Services for the Education Review Office, that Māori children learn better when their education is put in a Māori context; if so, what initiatives is the ministry putting in place to ensure widespread adoption of such an approach?

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Yes, I absolutely agree. There is plenty of evidence to show that that is absolutely correct. I would say particularly in respect of early childhood education that this Government has called a halt to the previous Government’s “build it and they will come” attitude for Māori youngsters, particularly in South Auckland. The Government is working with communities to make sure that we design services that suit their needs, that are culturally appropriate, and that deliver early childhood services in a way that each community in particular wants to see.

💬 Sue Moroney: I seek leave to table a copy of the summary report on submissions to the Taskforce on Early Childhood Education, dated 18 February 2011, prepared by the task force secretariat.

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

Accident Compensation Corporation—Financial Performance

My question is to the Minister for ACC: what progress has the Government made in improving ACC’s financial performance after the 57 percent increase in claims costs and the 109 percent increase in liabilities between 2004-05 and 2008-09? [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the Minister, I say to both front benches that discourtesy to a colleague who is asking a question is unacceptable. Both Labour and National—it was not the minor parties—were equally at fault, and that will not continue. It is very discourteous. I invite Dr Jackie Blue to please repeat her question.

8. to the Minister for ACC: What progress has the Government made in improving ACC’s financial performance after the 57 percent increase in claims costs and the 109 percent increase in liabilities between 2004-05 and 2008-09?

We have made very good progress. The large—

💬 Hon Maryan Street: Did you just learn to calm down and take a breath?

💬 Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Here is the guilty lady piping up again. The large increases in claim costs and liabilities resulted in ACC making losses of $2.4 billion in 2007-08 and $4.8 billion in 2008-09. But by better managing costs, and with a real focus on the importance of rehabilitation, ACC made a surplus of $2.5 billion in 2009-10, and I am expecting a significant surplus this year. This turn-round is good news for taxpayers and levy payers. We have been able to secure savings of $638 million for Budget 2011 over the next 4 years from lower costs in the non-earners account. I am also hopeful that if we get a good financial result for this year, we can look to see some reduction in levies for next year, which will be great news for households and businesses.

💬 Dr Jackie Blue: What are the areas in which ACC has made the significant savings in costs, and how do these compare with the claims made by Opposition parties on how the turn-round has been achieved?

💬 Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Claim costs in the last year are down by $350 million, or 15 percent, from the peak at the change of Government. The biggest share of this is the weekly compensation, which has reduced as a consequence of ACC’s significant improvement in rehabilitation rates. Claims that the savings have come mainly from elective surgery are incorrect, as those costs are down only slightly and make up only 2 percent of the improvement. Claims that the turn-round in ACC has been due to investment ignore the fact that only 10 percent of the record losses in 2008-09 came from investment losses. The primary reason for the turn-round is that ACC is getting people back to work earlier, and I think all New Zealanders should welcome that.

Find a Job Website Vacancies—Employment Standards

9. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does the Work and Income NZ “Find a Job” website require all vacancies advertised to meet legal minimum employment standards; if not, why not?

Work and Income tell me that to be advertised, a vacancy must be a legal activity in accordance with the relevant employment legislation.

💬 Darien Fenton: Does she think that Auckland builder Colin Lane’s job vacancy, which offered 6 weeks’ work with accident compensation levies, GST, tax, sick leave, and holidays excluded, meets legal minimum employment standards; if not, will she be advising Work and Income to review the job vacancies that it is advertising?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: My understanding is that the vacancy was for a contractor for 6 weeks. There are different rules, as the member knows, for those who are contracting and those who are on a weekly wage. Yes, I believe that it was within the legislation.

💬 Darien Fenton: Is she aware that the Find a Job website is currently advertising jobs paying below minimum wage, piece-rate work, jobs being paid on a rate per square metre, and even a job for a traditional Chinese medical practitioner at minimum wage; if so, how does she think that this contributes to John Key’s commitment: “we want New Zealanders to have better jobs and better incomes,”?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I suppose the difference between this side of the House and the other side is that this side thinks that any job is a good job. We do not always get to do our dream job. Sometimes we have to work hard, sometimes we have to get a bit stuck in, sometimes we have to prove ourselves to get promoted, and sometimes we have to wash dishes in a rest home for a while, or dig drains. But there are opportunities out there, and that is a great thing. Work and Income currently has 5,386 open positions, and over the last 12 months it has listed more than 65,000 positions on its website. I cannot guarantee that every single one of them is right, but I think it has got the criteria pretty strong, as much as they are.

💬 Darien Fenton: Is the advertising by Work and Income of unlawful jobs that pay below minimum wage or seek to avoid labour laws part of the Government’s plan to promote the 30 percent differential in wages between New Zealand and Australia as a competitive advantage?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: As I have quite clearly said, we do not support unlawful jobs on the Work and Income website. Inappropriate businesses are also ruled out. The issue for the member is that Labour defines jobs for contractors as not being legitimate jobs. The member has certainly expressed that she does not like to see young people delivering papers and doing jobs like that. We actually support that sort of work and think that it is a good thing.

💬 Hon Heather Roy: Which of these two options would she consider better for an unemployed 16-year-old on the Find a Job Website: first, a builder advertising an apprenticeship position for a young person, paying youth rates of $10 an hour—that is, $400 a week—or leaving that same young person on the unemployment benefit on $150 a week?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: We are always keen to see young people get into work, and we see building apprenticeships as an important part of that. So we would certainly support that.

💬 John Boscawen: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was a very simple, direct question. The Minister was asked whether she would prefer option A or option B: a young apprentice builder earning $400 a week—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: We do not need to have the question repeated. Does the Hon Simon Power wish to speak to the point of order?

💬 Hon Simon Power: The member may have missed it, but towards the end of the Minister’s answer, which admittedly did drift off slightly, she said she supported that position.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: A point of order is being heard, and there is an awful lot of noise, which there should not be. I have allowed members to contribute to this point of order, because the question was actually very straightforward. It did not contain any political innuendo. We traditionally do not ask Ministers always to give a yes or no answer or certain, precise answers to hypothetical situations. But on this occasion, because the question was very straightforward, I invite the Minister to give a more straightforward answer to the question. It does not mean it will satisfy the member asking it, but she should answer without deviation because the question was very simple. It asked whether the Minister would prefer someone to be in an apprenticeship on a youth rate—which is hypothetical, I accept—at $10 an hour or to be on the unemployment benefit at some lower rate.

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I recommend looking back at the Hansard, but I certainly said I would love to see young people in a building apprenticeship. That is exactly the answer I gave before.

💬 John Boscawen: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister was asked whether she would prefer option A or option B. She did not answer the question. A building apprenticeship under the current law has to be at the minimum wage.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I do not blame the member for raising his point of order. Let me interpret the Minister’s answer, and if I am wrong, she had better get to her feet and correct it. She preferred the first option. If I am wrong, the Minister had better get to her feet and correct it.

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: It was actually the second option. No, sorry—that was unemployment. Now I am confused.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I invite the Hon Heather Roy to repeat her question and we will start again. [Interruption] I want to hear this question clearly.

💬 Hon Heather Roy: I think that might be helpful in the circumstances. Which of these two options would she consider better for an unemployed 16-year-old on the Find a Job website: a builder advertising an apprenticeship position for a young person, paying youth rates of $10 an hour—that is, $400 a week—or leaving that same young person to stay on the unemployment benefit on $150 a week?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I call the Hon Paula Bennett—[Interruption]—and I want to hear this answer in silence.

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: Given a hypothetical choice between those two options, I would always rather see the young person in work. The building apprenticeship sounds quite good.

Retirement Commissioner—Transfer of Ministerial Responsibility

My question is to the Minister of Commerce and asks: why has the Government decided to transfer responsibility—[Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I apologise to the honourable member. It is definitely the Labour Party at fault here. It is unfair to members at the back. The interjections are totally unnecessary and unhelpful. I want to hear the question being asked.

10. to the Minister of Commerce: Why has the Government decided to transfer responsibility for the Retirement Commissioner from the social development and employment portfolio to the commerce portfolio?

The Government has decided that the functions and objectives of the Retirement Commissioner align better with the commerce portfolio, particularly as we focus on improving the financial literacy of mum and dad investors. The change will take effect from 1 July.

💬 Louise Upston: How does this change align with the wider financial market reforms that this Government has implemented to date?

💬 Hon SIMON POWER: Very well. The focus of the Government’s reforms to date has been to improve the quality and consistency of the information received by investors. We have already seen the new Financial Markets Authority act swiftly to ensure that the recipients of unsolicited low-ball offers receive more objective information about these offers. However, improving information can only ever be part of the financial literacy equation, and over the next few months I will be looking to work with both the public and private sectors to identify steps to improve investor knowledge and understanding of matters financial.

Foreign Affairs, Minister—Cost of RNZAF Flights

To the Minister of Defence: what is the total cost of the two Defence Force flights that foreign Minister Hon Murray McCully took to Vanuatu on 13 February and returning on 14 February, including fuel, salaries of staff, allowances, accommodation, maintenance, landing fees, and all other costs associated with the flights?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I apologise to the honourable member. I accept the question was not read strictly as on the Order Paper but the meaning was very clear. But because of the excessive interjection, I invite the member to repeat his question.

11. to the Minister of Defence: What is the total cost of the two Defence Force flights that took foreign affairs Minister Hon Murray McCully to Vanuatu on 13 February and returning on 14 February, including fuel, salaries of staff, allowances, accommodation, maintenance, landing fees, and all other costs associated with the flights?

The total cost for the two flights includes an aggregate—as is stated in the question, in fact—of direct costs such as fuel, and indirect costs such as staff costs. I have already told the House that the approximate fuel costs were a bit over $65,000. It is, however, not practical to break out all the indirect costs on a per flight basis, as many of those, such as salaries or, indeed, annualised maintenance, are incurred whether or not the aircraft fly. For instance, aircrew are clearly paid even on non-flying days. However, the indirect and direct costs are part of the total appropriation for the Boeing 757, which was $93.5 million. This includes all indirect costs, including salaries, a share of Whenuapai Air Base, and so forth. The total number of hours flown by the 757s is programmed at 1,450 hours. I should note that there were two flights on this particular occasion, involving firstly a 757 and secondly a P3 Orion. I did say to Mr McCully that I would guarantee that the 757 would fly without any maintenance problems. Unfortunately, that was not true. The 757 fleet incurred a breakdown that required the aircraft to return to New Zealand, and therefore a P3 was required.

💬 David Shearer: Can he advise the House why the use of military flights was justified in part because the Samoan delegation could be collected on its way to Vanuatu, but they were left in Port Vila to make their own way home when the Orion was sent there to collect the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr McCully?

💬 Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP: It is noted that the flight included the secretary-general of the forum itself and also the Samoan Minister who went up. I am not aware of further details.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think it has been well established who went there. I think the question is why they left them behind.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Sadly, though, the supplementary question asked included both bits, and the Minister answered the first bit. He confirmed that there were other people picked up on the way. He is not obliged to answer both parts.

💬 David Shearer: Does he stand by his advice to the House last week that his colleague Murray McCully had to take military flights to and from Vanuatu because otherwise “that would have meant that the Minister of Foreign Affairs would have not been able to meet Prime Minister Julia Gillard.”; if so, how does he respond to the inconvenient truth that commercial flights through either Australia or New Caledonia were, in fact, available to get Mr McCully back in time to New Zealand?

💬 Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP: I was advised that military flights were necessary to enable Mr McCully to meet all his obligations—

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: Who advised you that?

💬 Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP: Mr McCully, in fact. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Is the member quite finished?

💬 David Shearer: Does the Minister believe it is possible that Mr McCully had misled him over available commercial flights, or did he say they were all fully booked?

💬 Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP: No.

Building Sector—Licensed Building Practitioner Scheme

12. to the Minister for Building and Construction: What recent developments have been made to help tradespeople become licensed building practitioners?

As part of the licensed building practitioner scheme an online service has been launched by the Department of Building and Housing. The website will allow licensed building practitioners to register online, edit their profiles, and update their skills and expertise. Licensed building practitioners are an essential part of bringing a qualified professional workforce to the building and construction sector. Under the restricted work programme, which commences in March of next year, only a licensed building practitioner will be able to carry out and/or supervise the design and construction of restricted building work. Anybody else who does so will be acting illegally.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: How does the website help the general public, especially Christchurch residents?

💬 Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: This database will double as a tool for consumers to check whether practitioners are licensed and a means for them to obtain the latest information about them. The licensed building practitioner scheme will be important for the Christchurch rebuild. Of the 8,848 licences already issued, over 2,000 have been issued to licensed practitioners in the Christchurch area.

💬 Phil Twyford: Has the Minister heard reports that many builders are reluctant to be licensed because of the expense and the paperwork; if so, has he considered automatically registering experienced builders in the licensing regime, to shift the burden of the paperwork from the builders on to his department?

💬 Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I heard those complaints at the very beginning of the system, but we have streamlined it dramatically since those complaints were heard. I am now told by a huge number of people from the industry, including master builders, certified builders, and others, that the online registration tools, the ability to update their profiles online, and the quite significantly reduced fee structure that we brought in place have been really good steps in the right direction.

💬 Phil Twyford: What feedback has he received from builders around the country about reports that thousands of builders from Indonesia and the Philippines are heading to New Zealand since his Government slashed trade training, and will these overseas builders qualify under his licensing scheme?

💬 Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I have not heard anything about a flood of people from Indonesia of any sort, but, by the same token, if they are qualified builders, they apply to become licensed building practitioners, and they have the skills and the competence, we will welcome them because we will need those skills for both the Christchurch rebuild and a lot of work around the rest of the country.