Questions for Oral Answer

1. to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on progress in building a growing economy that can support more jobs and higher incomes for New Zealanders?

Statistics New Zealand this morning issued GDP figures for March. It confirms that the economy is continuing to perform well, growing by 1 percent in the 3 months to 31 March and by 3.8 percent in the 12 months up to the end of March, which is good news for New Zealanders looking for higher incomes and more jobs. Economic growth was reasonably broad-based, with positive contributions from construction, mining, agriculture, retail trade, and accommodation. It is the latest in a run of encouraging economic indicators, including higher levels of business and consumer confidence. I want to pay tribute to the strong and stable leadership of the Prime Minister, who has the unanimous support of a united caucus. This has been instrumental in the Government’s successful economic policy.

💬 Claudette Hauiti: How is the growing economy translating into real benefits for New Zealanders and their families?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Most people do not measure their economic prospects in terms of GDP; they measure it in terms of more jobs and higher incomes. In the past year alone 84,000 more jobs were created, and the Budget last month forecast an additional 170,000 new jobs by mid-2018. If we stick with the Government’s programme, the average full-time wage is expected to rise by $7,600, to $62,300, over the next 4 years. This follows a $3,000 increase in the average wage over the past 3 years.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If that answer was so compellingly valid, how come the Māngere section of the National Party rejected it when it was put to it by the questioner when she sought the nomination there?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: In so far as there may be some ministerial responsibility, the Hon Bill English.

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, I am going to be going and talking not just to the Māngere branch of the National Party but to all those former Labour and New Zealand First voters in Māngere who are starting to think about voting National.

💬 Claudette Hauiti: Kia ora. How does New Zealand’s latest economy growth compare with growth in other developed economies around the world?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: New Zealand continues to be one of the better-performing developed economies. Our 3.8 percent growth rate was the third-highest in the OECD club of developed economies. By comparison, Australia grew about the same at 3.5 percent, the UK grew 3.1 percent, the United States grew 2 percent, Canada grew 2 percent, Japan grew 2.8 percent, and the euro area grew 0.9 percent. So New Zealand is doing reasonably well, but we need to continue to work on sustaining these growth rates beyond the normal cycle so that more households can benefit from consistently rising incomes.

💬 Claudette Hauiti: How does New Zealand’s current economic performance compare with the indicators this Government inherited in late 2008?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The indicators have improved in part because of the improved economic cycle and in part because of good Government policy. The balance of payments deficit, for instance, in 2008 was minus 7 percent of GDP, and it is currently 2.8 percent. The Government is on track to Budget surplus next year. In 2008 we faced never-ending deficits and soaring Government debt. The cost of living has risen by just 1.5 percent a year. In 2008 it was rising by more than 5 percent per year, when the cost of living was out of control. Floating mortgage interest rates are a bit over 6 percent today. In 2008 they reached almost 11 percent.

Hon David Cunliffe—Immigration Inquiry on Constituent’s Behalf

2. to the Prime Minister: Is he concerned about rising inequality in New Zealand?

As the member well knows, the most recent research shows that income inequality is not rising in New Zealand. I know that members are worried about other forms of inequality, and so am I, particularly the inequality between the support for David Cunliffe in the Labour caucus—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! That may not help the order of the House.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Given those comments, does the Prime Minister stand by his statement in the United States that National has known for 2 weeks about the existence of a letter from me to Mr Donghua Liu, and how does he reconcile that with Mr English’s comments that senior National Party MPs did not know about it? [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! It may be Thursday afternoon and some members may be keen to return to their electorates early, and if the noise keeps up to this level, somebody will. I will hear the point of order from the Hon Gerry Brownlee, and I remind members it is a point of order.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My point is simply this. Although the Acting Prime Minister on behalf of the Prime Minister is happy to answer the question, it is very wide of the wickets and perhaps is an indicator of the capacity inside our opponents to deliver—[Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I reminded members to my left, before the point of order was started, that it is a point of order. So would the member please finish his point of order.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: No, I think I made the point.

💬 Grant Robertson: It was quite clear at the end of the Acting Prime Minister’s answers that he introduced this material. It is perfectly within the Standing Orders to ask questions in response to that.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The Acting Prime Minister in answering certainly extended the scope. I invite him now to answer the question that was asked by the Hon David Cunliffe.

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: I understand that the letter was in the public arena because it was requested under the Official Information Act by a number of media outlets and that prior to that, I am advised today, it came to the notice of a Minister who was answering oral questions in the House when the Leader of the Opposition was on his high horse about cronyism between Maurice Williamson and why he should be sacked because of it.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Given that the New Zealand Herald journalist concerned requested the letter that we have been referring to regarding Mr Donghua Liu only on Monday of this week, how is it that he knew about it for the last 2 weeks?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: It is apparent that the New Zealand Herald journalist was more concerned about understanding the background to these events than the Leader of the Opposition was, who had been vigorously prosecuting the campaign against Mr Liu and Maurice Williamson for about 3 weeks. He should have done the same thing—that is, find out the information himself in the same way that the New Zealand Herald journalist did.

💬 Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was a very specific question and it was not addressed in the answer by the Acting Prime Minister.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: In my opinion, and to the best of my ability to hear the answer, the answer was adequately addressed by—[Interruption] Order! The member will remain in his seat while I am on my feet. It would be helpful if I could more clearly listen to the answer. That would certainly require less interjection from the left.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Just to clarify, are you asking me to repeat the question because you were unable to hear the answer?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No, I am not. I am saying that the question has been addressed, but I am inviting the member to continue with further supplementary questions if he so wishes.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: I will. Thank you. Given that the New Zealand Herald journalist concerned requested the letter in only the last 48 hours, how did the Prime Minister know about it for the last 2 weeks?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, the member would need to ask the Prime Minister that question—[Interruption]—and I understand that he is being asked that question, and no doubt he will answer it. But that member seems to be riding flat out on his high horse towards the pet-food factory.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Does he think his Minister of Finance misled listeners on Radio New Zealand this morning when he said that senior National Party MPs did not know about the letter?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. I was speaking for myself. I was aware of the letter yesterday and, as John Campbell said, like many other New Zealanders, I was shocked, I was stunned, I could not believe it, and I am surprised that the member wants to keep talking about it.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Was it reasonable for the Prime Minister to assume that at some point, as the arguments were evolving, the Leader of the Opposition might have outed himself before the Official Information Act process did it for him?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Prime Minister probably assumed that the Leader of the Opposition, when he was vigorously prosecuting the resignation of a Government Minister, knew what he was doing and was familiar with the background to the issue. But it appears that, like Labour Party policies, it was unresearched, critical details were missing, and the Leader of the Opposition now has to take responsibility for yet another mess, which his caucus is pretty upset about.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: On which occasion has the Hon Bill English been misleading the public—when he said on Radio New Zealand National this morning that senior National Party MPs did not know about the letter or when he has just acknowledged in the House, on behalf of the Prime Minister, that the Prime Minister did?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. I was asked my view about that issue on Radio New Zealand National and I answered to the best of my knowledge, which is that I did not know about that letter, and I did not know whether other Ministers knew about it. The critical thing is that I knew more than David Cunliffe, when I knew almost nothing.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Would he advise the Leader of the Opposition to make a thorough check of his party files and other matters, to ensure that all declarations around donations are as well recorded as this particular letter?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: It is a good try, but on this occasion there is certainly no responsibility there.

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: Further to the Acting Prime Minister’s last answer, can the House take it that he now thinks “to the best of somebody’s knowledge, based on the information available to them at the time” is an absolutely right and proper answer?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Actually, I think the answer to that is yes. But, of course, when I said to the media that I did not know about the letter I was not testing the trust of New Zealanders in the way that David Cunliffe is now. He said he would not tell us where he lived. He said it was a doer-upper, and it was a mansion. He announced policies without—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] The member has a right to ask a supplementary question.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Members may not like the questions, but people are listening to them. Can he tell the House whether who knew what or when changes the fact that the Leader of the Opposition tried to hide the material facts?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Again, I do not believe there is any ministerial responsibility. [Interruption] Could the House please settle down.

Banking Sector—Anti-competitive Behaviour

3. to the Minister of Commerce: Has he received any reports on anti-competitive behaviour in the banking sector?

I am not aware of receiving any specific reports, but if the member has examples of anti-competitive behaviour in the banking sector these should be directed to and taken to the Commerce Commission.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he think it appropriate for a bank to simply terminate a company’s accounts with that bank without giving any reason whatsoever for doing so; if not, why not, as the Minister?

💬 Hon CRAIG FOSS: In those circumstances the organisation concerned has a number of remedies. It could go to the bank. It could go to the Banking Ombudsman or to some other disputes resolution service. If something uncompetitive was happening, then the organisation should take its complaint to the Commerce Commission.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Should a company called IMEX Ltd, which provides remittance services in New Zealand, Australia, and the Pacific Islands have cause for concern about anti-competitive behaviour when one of its direct competitors, namely Westpac, with whom IMEX banks, writes to it terminating its accounts without providing any reason for doing so?

💬 Hon CRAIG FOSS: I just repeat my previous answer. Those issues are between that organisation and its bank, whoever that was, and regardless of who that bank is, that bank has courses to remedy, or make complaint about, those issues that the member raises.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If it became apparent that Westpac had been engaging in anti-competitive banking behaviour, would he, as the responsible Minister and on behalf of his Government, support making another bank, such as Kiwibank, the Government’s bank rather than allow this to go on with the Government’s support?

💬 Hon CRAIG FOSS: The member is confused. He does not understand the Commerce Act. The question was primarily about anti-competitive behaviour. The Commerce Act looks after that. The Commerce Commission looks after those particular issues. So if the member has issues around that—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 Hon CRAIG FOSS: —he should go to the Commerce Commission.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have a point of order.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Rather than take that insult, I asked in particular, given that he is the Minister responsible in terms of giving advice to the Government, whether the Government would keep its account with Westpac. That is the question I want answered. Surely that is what I referred to.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I have a little bit of sympathy for the member. The question has been answered. I think it has been addressed, but I will allow the member an additional supplementary question.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Seeing that where the Government’s account is could become an issue for the Government—it is currently with Westpac—and if it was found that Westpac was engaging in anti-competitive behaviour, would he then recommend that the Government move its account to a bank such as Kiwibank?

💬 Hon CRAIG FOSS: I have no responsibility for whomever the Government uses for its banking arrangements.

Christchurch Hospitals—Redevelopment

4. to the Minister of Health: What progress is being made on the Christchurch Hospitals’ redevelopment?

Design plans are now entering the final stage of development, and construction is expected to begin in September as part of a $650 million—plus investment in Canterbury. Once complete, the new Christchurch Hospital will boast new operating theatres with around 400 beds, an expanded intensive care unit, a new emergency department, and a rooftop helipad. Canterbury District Health Board is holding a public meeting tonight to update Cantabrians on progress, and the district health board is very keen for the public to attend.

💬 Dr Paul Hutchison: What progress has been made at the Burwood health campus?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: At Burwood construction is now under way. When completed, that hospital will have 23 extra beds, an extended radiology department, and a new outpatient department able to manage 80,000 outpatients a year. The Government is committed to providing Cantabrians with top-quality health facilities.

Economy—Income Gap, Regional Economies, Growth, and Child Poverty

5. to the Minister of Finance: Which of the statements, if any, by NZIER chief economist, Shamubeel Eaqub, does he agree with most: that interest rate rises will punish the provinces, that “one of the biggest issues of this generation is the widening gap between the haves and have-nots”, or that “The gaps opening up in New Zealand are really big across geographical, race and education lines”?

I do not agree with those statements. I do agree with other statements made by the same commentator when he said: “It reeks of xenophobia … poor policy making … a populist knee-jerk reaction” and “sloppy.” That was Shamubeel Eaqub talking about Labour’s housing policies.

💬 Hon David Parker: Is the Minister aware that over the past 5 years there are 7,800 fewer people employed in the Waikato, there has been a loss of 7,300 people employed in Manawatū-Wanganui and 2,100 people employed in Wellington, and there are 6,200 fewer people employed in Southland, or is he so out of touch that he does not know what is going on outside Auckland and Christchurch?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, I disagree with that, and the member is so out of touch he cannot remember there was a thing called the global financial crisis. So when he compares numbers prior to the biggest recession in 30 years with the recovery afterwards, then of course he is going to find that in some respects some numbers have still yet to improve. But in an economy that produced 84,000 new jobs over the last year, that has closed up those gaps very considerably and probably faster than people expected.

💬 Hon David Parker: Given that two-thirds of GDP growth is coming from construction activity, which makes GDP growth other than construction closer to 1 percent than 3 percent, what is his plan to boost economic growth, aside from another earthquake?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, I am aware of the numbers around housing and it is slightly ironic that the member’s party has spent all year castigating the Government for not building enough houses, and now that they are being built apparently it is bad for the economy. Saying that we should not count the benefits of construction is a bit like saying that if you take out the tries the All Blacks scored, they did not actually win the game.

💬 Hon David Parker: Is he really so out of touch with New Zealanders that he denies inequality is rising when homeownership rates are at the lowest in 50 years and dropping and child poverty is rising?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, as I think the House has discussed before, most measures of income inequality in New Zealand show that it is not getting worse. It is simply not the case that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. When the member talks about inequality of ownership of assets, then I would hope that his party will see its way to supporting the Government’s programme to free up the supply of housing, because a fast-rising housing market is likely to drive inequality in the ownership of assets because it favours those in the market as against those who are out of it. In that respect we agree on the objective—that is, a slower-rising housing market. It is a shame we have not been able to agree on the tools, because the Government has got good tools for addressing that driver of asset ownership.

💬 Hon David Parker: Does the income inequality figure that he just referred to exclude capital gains?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: The income inequality measure that I referred to is not one measure, actually, it is a number of them. They are all set out in the document originally commissioned by the previous Labour Government, which thought it was going to use it as a political tool in Opposition to demonstrate that inequality was getting worse. But, actually, it does not demonstrate that. Any measure of income inequality shows that it is flat and vaguely falling. In respect of capital gains—

💬 Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a very simple question. It has already—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I agree with that, but the member rose to his feet just as the Minister was about to address the portion about capital gains, and I would like to hear that answer.

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: I understand that measure is aimed at income measures not capital measures, and I cannot actually tell him whether it excludes capital gains, but it probably does.

💬 Te Ururoa Flavell: Does he agree with Professor Jonathan Boston, co-author of Child Poverty in New Zealand, who suggested that the poorest Kiwi children are now no better off than some children in the slums of India, and what steps can be taken towards introducing a living wage to address the immediate impacts of income deprivation in too many New Zealand families?

💬 Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, I certainly disagree with Dr Jonathan Boston’s comments and I think it discredits the campaign that he has been part of. If his advice to New Zealand politicians is to copy conditions in Indian slums because children are better off, then we certainly feel free to reject that advice. Secondly, can I acknowledge the Māori Party’s efforts over recent years. It has lobbied hard to increase the minimum wage to the kinds of levels that the living wage has been set at. We just do not agree with it going that high; we think it would destroy too many jobs. But we do acknowledge the intent of the Māori Party to help those who are on the lowest incomes.

Child Poverty—Government Initiatives to Address and Impact on Child Health

6. to the Minister for Social Development: Does she agree with Professor Jonathan Boston that there are New Zealand children living in “houses that don’t have heating, in caravans that don’t have running water, and in families that simply don’t have enough food of the right kind every day”; if so, will she guarantee these children have immediate access to the State support they need?

I agree that some children in New Zealand are living in conditions that are unacceptable, but I do not agree with Professor Jonathan Boston when he likens the living standards of our children to the slums of India. If he thinks that this Government is going to follow the policies of India and think that that is in any way acceptable, then I would completely disagree, particularly when one looks at the mortality rates. The mortality rates for under-fives in India is 56:1000, and in New Zealand—

💬 Kevin Hague: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is a question on notice, and the Minister is speaking about Professor Boston’s comments about India, which was not the topic of the primary question at all. I have asked the Minister to address specifically some specific comments of Jonathan Boston, which she has not done.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The Minister has certainly specifically addressed the first part of the question. There is a second part to the question that I am still waiting for the Minister to address, but it is unhelpful, when members are not getting an answer they like, to then interject on the Minister before the Minister completes the answer. If the Minister then completes the answer and it requires further addressing, by all means raise the question. I call on the Hon Paula Bennett to complete the answer.

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: These children do get access to State support. There is access through a very generous benefit and welfare system. There is access to hardship grants, on which we spend over $260 million a year. There is access to Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes. There is access to numerous types of support for these children, including breakfast in schools.

💬 Kevin Hague: Given that the Minister does not appear to agree with Professor Boston, does she now agree with Otago University experts Dr Jean Simpson and Dr Liz Craig, whose research shows that one New Zealand baby dies each week from conditions associated with low income?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I agree that there are some children in New Zealand who are not living in the types of conditions that we would want them to. That is why in this Budget, when we first had money available to be giving out, we gave it to families. That is why we have prioritised those children. That is why we see a commitment to those children through the Children’s Action Plan, through breakfast in schools, and through more money for rheumatic fever, for warming up homes, for the many, many—

💬 Kevin Hague: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am reluctant to do this, but once again the Minister is not responding to the question at all, which—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! Then I will help the member. If the member simply asks the question, rather than the original paraphrase about whether the Minister does not appear to agree with something, and simply asks the question whether the Minister agrees with two Otago University experts about the death rate of young babies in New Zealand—if the member blatantly asks that question without any peripheral information, then I can perhaps try to assist the member to get an answer to his question. I will invite the member to ask his question again.

💬 Kevin Hague: Thank you. Does she now agree with Otago University experts Dr Jean Simpson and Dr Liz Craig, whose research shows that one New Zealand baby each week dies from conditions associated with low income?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: What I do agree with is that there are children living in this country who are not living at the sorts of standards we think they should be. However, we have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. We have availability of State housing. We are warming up those houses. We have breakfast in schools for all schools that want that, and that is new under this Government in partnership with those outside. We also have help for rheumatic fever. We have more assistance for free doctors visits than ever before, and that is why in this Budget we were able to give more than $500 million for further access for families and children.

💬 Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My colleague Mr Hague took your advice and rephrased the question in the manner in which you agreed—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: And I invite Mr Hague to ask the question again.

💬 Hon Member: That’s pathetic.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! That sort of comment from the Government benches will result in somebody leaving the Chamber.

💬 Kevin Hague: Does she now agree with Otago University experts Dr Jean Simpson and Dr Liz Craig, whose research shows one New Zealand baby each week dies from conditions associated with low income?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: For me to make a judgment call on that, I would have to look at the evidence behind the research. What I do agree with is that there are children in New Zealand who are living in conditions that we do not think are acceptable. However, we have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. They have access to more health facilities for children under 13 now than ever before, and our investment is very much on those children, but we cannot make judgments on everyone’s choices all of the time either.

💬 Kevin Hague: Does she deny Dr Simpson’s and Dr Craig’s findings that babies born into the most economically deprived families are five times as likely to die a sudden, unexpected death in infancy, and several times more likely to die from pneumonia than babies in the least economically deprived families?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: No, I would not deny that at all, but what I would say is that the Greens’ solution is to throw more money at those families and think that that will be the solution. I would say that it is far more complex than that. It is intergenerational. It is about violence, it is about drugs and alcohol, and it is about intergenerational welfare dependence, and those things matter also.

💬 Kevin Hague: Does the Minister believe the experts when they tell us that poverty is the cause of New Zealand’s high rates of Third World conditions compared with other developed nations?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I think it is all relative.

💬 Kevin Hague: Does the Minister agree with the Public Health Association, the New Zealand College of Public Health Medicine, and Parliament’s own Health Committee that her Government invests less than half the OECD average on young children; if not, why not?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I have not seen that to make a comment on it. What I will say is that we have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. What it comes down to is that if you are on $50,000 a year with a family in this country, you are paying pretty much zero tax. In fact, what you get back exceeds what you pay out in income tax. I think that those are the sorts of policies that make a difference.

💬 Kevin Hague: If the Minister does not agree with the expert analysis of Professor Boston, epidemiologists Jean Simpson and Liz Craig, the Health Committee, the Public Health Association, the College of Public Health Medicine, not to mention the Children’s Commissioner’s expert advisory group, and many others, can she name one expert who agrees with her and is prepared to say that the Government is doing enough to eradicate child poverty?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I agree with the fact that having a full-time work test for parents receiving benefits starting when the youngest child turns 5, as Professor Jonathan Boston suggested, is perhaps something worth looking at.

💬 Kevin Hague: I seek leave to table the document, “Hospital Admissions and Mortality with a Social Gradient”, from 2014.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The source of the document, please.

💬 Kevin Hague: It is a publication of the Social Health Monitor. In theory, it would be available to members, but it is an academic journal.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The easiest way to resolve this is for the House to decide. I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table this particular document. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There appears to be none. It can be tabled.

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

Business, Innovation and Employment, Ministry—Pay Negotiations

7. to the Minister for Economic Development: On how many occasions has he discussed the current pay negotiations for Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment staff with the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and on what dates did those discussions take place?

I thank the member for his question. I have taken the precaution of checking my records before answering the question today. I have looked back through my diary—I did not go back all the way to 2003, but I did look back—to make sure that we had the answer, because I think it is always a good idea to check your records before you respond. I can inform the member—

💬 Hon David Cunliffe: He doesn’t do humour very well—he doesn’t do humour any better than charisma.

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I would keep my voice down, if I were you, David. I can inform the member of three occasions: 17 October 2013, 5 May 2014, and 4 June 2014.

💬 Grant Robertson: Did the chief executive tell him at the meeting on 4 June that the State Services Commission had not approved the offer that his negotiating team intended to make to Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment staff?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I cannot recall that particular statement. I do not think he did say it, but I am not going to rush out and categorically lead with my chin without checking the diary, like other people would. But I do not recall him saying anything along those lines.

💬 Grant Robertson: Can I ask the Minister to search his memory from 2 weeks ago and tell the House how he responded to the chief executive telling him that the State Services Commission had not approved the offer he was intending to make to Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment staff?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Again, for the member, I cannot confirm that, but I can confirm what I told him yesterday, which is that the only advice I gave Mr Smol that day was to say to check with the State Services Commission and make sure it was informed of the progress he was making.

💬 Grant Robertson: Will he guarantee that all of his discussions with the chief executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment about the pay offer were consistent with his obligations as a Minister under the State Sector Act and Cabinet Manual?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This is the third day that this question has come up, because it is the biggest issue that Mr Robertson can identify. I can tell the member, just like I told him 2 days ago, that I am well aware of the State Sector Act and the Cabinet Manual in relation to these matters, and I can confirm that I have followed them.

Biosecurity Management—Wallaceville Biocontainment Laboratory

8. to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcement has he made regarding the biocontainment facility at Wallaceville?

On Monday I announced a $65 million high-security, biocontainment facility will be built in Wallaceville in Upper Hutt. This is another demonstration of the Government’s commitment to biosecurity. This new fit-for-purpose laboratory facility will be equipped to current international standards and have better capacity to deal with large-scale emergency situations in the unlikely event that one should occur. It will replace the existing high-security laboratory at the site and continue more than 100 years of animal disease diagnostics at this site. Work is expected to begin on the site next month, with construction planned to begin early next year.

💬 Ian McKelvie: Why is this announcement important for New Zealand’s primary industry exports?

💬 Hon NATHAN GUY: Primary industries are the backbone of the New Zealand economy, with over $20 billion worth of exports coming from animals and animal products. A major disease outbreak could halt trade, which could be resumed only through extensive laboratory testing. The laboratories and skilled personnel at Wallaceville have an essential role in responding to disease outbreaks, protecting public health, and providing international trade assurances about New Zealand’s animal disease status. I have made biosecurity my No. 1 priority. A world-standard diagnostic laboratory is not a luxury; indeed, it is a necessity.

Health Services—Health Benefits Ltd and Reducing Sugar Consumption

9. to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his answers to Oral Question No. 7 yesterday?

In relation to her question about a 4-month-old letter, yes, in context.

💬 Hon Annette King: Well, in light of that answer, had he read the letter written by the chief financial officers of district health boards, copied to the Ministry of Health, expressing their grave and collective concerns about his flagship finance procurement supply chain programme, stating that their confidence in the programme had been severely diminished and that there were mounting risks to the delivery of health services before answering question No. 7 yesterday?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: No, but I had been aware of the concerns that have been expressed, and I think the member needs to be focused on the big gains that are to be made from this programme. District health boards spend about $1.4 billion a year on medical supplies, and if we can make a 10 percent saving in that over time, that is a very significant amount of money. It is a very important project.

💬 Hon Annette King: Will the finance procurement supply chain programme be rolled out to the 20 district health boards from 1 July 2014; if not, why not?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: Parts of the programme are already being rolled out and are in place in the Hutt Valley, and a lot of work is being done to put the platform in place. I have asked or encouraged Health Benefits Ltd to slow down some of its programmes in order to ensure district health board buy in and to have confidence for the whole sector about the implementation process.

💬 Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was whether it will be rolled out to the 20 district health boards on 1 July 2014.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I will invite the Minister to add to that answer.

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: Yes, it will be rolled out across the 20 district health boards, but it has always been the plan that it would be rolled out over a number of years. I think the member is behind the eight ball here, and we have to focus on generating the savings that we need that can be reinvested back into health. One example is non-sterile gloves, where the 20 district health boards had 18 suppliers but there are only two manufacturers in the whole world. By using smart procurement, we are now saving $6 million in that area.

💬 Hon Annette King: How can he claim there is not any risk to continuing services of front-line services and district health boards, as he said yesterday, despite the warnings from the chief financial officers and the Public Service Association, who estimate up to 1,000 people will have to move or risk losing their jobs because of his flagship programme?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: Well, there are a lot of questions in that one. I would have to say that I do not think services are at risk; I think services are improving year on year. Despite a doubling of the health budget during the 2000s to 2008, elective surgery flat-lined. Under our Government, services have improved dramatically, so that 40,000 extra patients a year are now getting hips, knees, and other elective procedures.

💬 Hon Annette King: Why did he allow Health Benefits Ltd to establish its own Oracle R12 computer system at the cost of millions of dollars when the four northern district health boards already run the Oracle R12 as a shared service, which could have been used across the district health boards across all of New Zealand?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: I am sure the member will find that Oracle R12 is being rolled out across the country and is incorporated in the work of those northern district health boards because that is part of this programme. It is not all of it; it is part of this programme. It is important to be able to capture the purchasing information so you can get the big discounts. Some of those discounts that we have been able to negotiate are pretty significant. With one of the providers of catheters we have been able to negotiate a 14 percent national discount, and with another provider of infusion pumps we have been able to negotiate a 22 percent discount for some of the supplies that it provides. So this is all about releasing cash, which can go into improving front-line services like the faster emergency departments, the faster cancer treatment, and the better preventive health care.

💬 Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table a letter from a member of the public who has advised me about Oracle R12 and the waste of millions of dollars by Health Benefits Ltd.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table this particular email. Is there any objection to it being tabled? [Interruption] Just a minute, I need to put the leave. There is no objection. It can be tabled.

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

💬 Te Ururoa Flavell: Does he consider that a wise use of the additional $500 million invested in the health sector, which he reported on in yesterday’s question time, would be to identify a broad goal of eliminating the intake of sugar-sweetened beverages, as promoted in today’s policy brief of the New Zealand Beverage Guidance Panel; if not, why not?

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: Despite the commitment of the Labour Party to introduce a broad-ranging sugar tax, made at a meeting at lunchtime today—

💬 Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I require that member—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order and I will hear it—

💬 Hon Annette King: I require that member to authenticate the answer that he has just given.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. It is a debating issue.

💬 Hon Member: It’s their secret policy.

💬 Hon TONY RYALL: That is their secret policy. The Government is opposed to a sugar tax. We do not think it will work. It is a tax that everyone will pay, even though it is designed to influence the behaviour of some, and it will be very costly, as proposed by the Opposition, because it will mean people will pay more for tomato sauce, more for honey, more for jam, and more for the cost of living, whereas on this side of the House we think we should be keeping taxes under control and providing more opportunities for families to spend their own money. We do not think the nannies opposite should get their hands on the tax levers.

Public Transport, Auckland—City Rail Link and Government Policy Statement

10. to the Minister of Transport: Does the draft Government Policy Statement on transport funding identify any funding for the Auckland City Rail Link in the transport budget over the next decade?

The Government Policy Statement on Land Transport is produced in accordance with the Land Transport Management Act 2003. It covers a period of 10 years, is released every 3 years, and is released a year before it comes into effect. The first Government Policy Statement on Land Transport was produced in 2008 and was amended in 2009. The current Government Policy Statement on Land Transport was released in 2011, and the 2015 Government policy statement is now out for consultation. The Government Policy Statement on Land Transport has never mentioned funding for the Auckland electrification, the Wellington electrification extension, or the new electric trains for those networks. That funding was provided outside the National Land Transport Fund. The Government’s public statements and commitment to the City Rail Link can be relied on outside of the Government policy statement.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: If the Government is actually committed to funding the City Rail Link, why is it not included in the transport budget over the next 10 years, given the widespread benefits to Auckland commuters, especially road users, as it will free up the roads for those who need to drive?

💬 Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The Government Policy Statement on Land Transport is a document that guides local authorities, the New Zealand Transport Agency, and regional councils throughout the country in their decisions about roading, both in State highways and local roads, and also public transport provision. It does not provide funding for the sort of infrastructure that the member is now saying she would like to see in it. If that is the case, get out there, win the election, become part of the Government, and change the 2003 Act.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I understand what the Minister has said. I am not sure whether he understood my question, because my question was why it is not included.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I heard the question. I am sure the Minister—

💬 Julie Anne Genter: It is a transport project.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I heard the question, and I am sure the Minister did. It was why it is not included, and the Minister has given a very full answer as to why not.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: Does he agree with his transport policy statement when it says “Liveable, well connected cities are critical to our economic and social prosperity.”; if so, why is his Government delaying the City Rail Link when this is essential to enable hundreds of thousands of Aucklanders to get around the city and to get the full economic benefits of a livable city?

💬 Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It will come as no surprise that I do agree with my own comments in the Government policy statement. I realise that for some members of the House, agreeing with their own comments can be a very dangerous thing, but all I can say to you, Mr Speaker, is that you know me. This is a project that is bigger than both of us. I have got my team here. Get on board.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question did ask why the Government was delaying the City Rail Link—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has been here now for a substantial length of time. She asked a supplementary question that included two questions. The Minister chose to address the first part of that question, and did so.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table a chart. It is a table from the business case for the City Rail Link that shows that the majority of the transport benefits—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I need the source of the document.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: It is the APB&B. It is the central business district rail link study business case, and it shows the majority—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! On the basis that it may not be freely available to members and may be of some benefit to them, I will put the leave. Leave is sought to table this particular document. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.

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

💬 Julie Anne Genter: Is the Minister aware of the statistics compiled by his ministry that show that road use has been declining in Auckland for 7 consecutive years now, while public transport use, walking, and cycling have grown exponentially; if so, why is he still prioritising the bulk of the funding on motorways, which will make congestion worse?

💬 Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: That is a very interesting graph—no doubt produced by someone in the Green Party—but it does have to be on a scale that is fairly representative. The reality is that over 80 percent of all land transport journeys taken in Auckland are taken on the road. We are delighted that public transport is starting to be more of a part of Aucklanders’ transport choice. That is why the Government has co-invested in the electrification and the new trains for that area and is committed to the rail link from 2020.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: Does the Minister realise that the reason so many Aucklanders are stuck in their cars, and will continue to be stuck in their cars, is precisely that his Government’s unbalanced transport spend is not investing enough in modern public transport and in safe walking and cycling, and that if he did that, it would not only take pressure off the roads but it would help get the economic benefits of a liveable city?

💬 Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well, it is an interesting question because it sort of flies in the face of the previously introduced material. If road use has been falling for 7 years, then that would mean there has been less inconvenience for people for 7 years, but we all know that that is not the fact. There has to be a better roading network, and the member can talk all she likes about walking and cycling. I have to go to China to find cycles that carry the sort of freight loads that we put on trucks. I do not want to see that in New Zealand.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: Point of order, Mr Speaker. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have a point of order from Julie Anne Genter.

💬 Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table this graph showing how unbalanced the Government’s transport spend is for the next 10 years. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can sense from that that there is not even any point in my putting the leave.

Schools, Attendance Costs—Donations

11. to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied that schools receive sufficient funding to deliver the New Zealand Curriculum; if so, why?

Yes; because the Government is investing more than $5 billion to support curriculum delivery in primary and secondary education. Despite tight fiscal constraints, this Government has made year-on-year increases through the last six Budgets and is now investing $10.1 billion in Vote Education—the highest ever.

💬 Chris Hipkins: Why is she satisfied that school funding is sufficient to deliver the curriculum, when parental donations to schools have increased by over 30 percent during National’s watch, meaning parents are now forking out almost $100 million a year in supposed donations to pay for their kids’ education?

💬 Hon HEKIA PARATA: I am satisfied, because we are investing just over $5 billion. What we do know, though, is that there has to be better discussions between boards and their parent communities about what they expect over and above the delivery of the curriculum. I do not have the specific figure to hand that indicates what the proportion of those donations is, but it is a very small percentage.

💬 Chris Hipkins: Why does she believe that schools are sufficiently funded, given the latest New Zealand Council for Educational Research national survey revealed that some schools are asking parents for donations of as much as $600 per year?

💬 Hon HEKIA PARATA: I can but repeat my answer: it is because we are investing the most into education that has ever been invested under any Government, because we are getting the achievement lifts across the system, and because we are investing in the quality of teaching and learning, including the initiative the Prime Minister announced in January of an additional net new $359 million into the profession, whose members are the key contributors to raising achievement.

💬 Chris Hipkins: What action has the Government taken to ease pressure on parents to contribute to school donations, given previous comments that “It’s about time Government admitted education is not free.” and “Without fund-raising, schools are screwed.”, both of which came from Bill English when he was in Opposition.

💬 Hon HEKIA PARATA: Schooling has never been free; it has been a cost to the taxpayer. Now the cost that the taxpayer is bearing is $10.1 billion into schools. Parents have always paid extra for things they particularly want, but the Government is fully funding the delivery of the school curriculum. We are seeing more achievement, and we know that because we have data and information that tells us factually, rather than the kinds of myths that that member is keen on perpetuating.

💬 Chris Hipkins: Does she agree with Bill English’s comment in 2004 that school education in New Zealand is not free for parents; if not, why not?

💬 Hon HEKIA PARATA: I agree with almost everything that Mr English says, including that.

💬 Hon Members: Almost!

💬 Hon HEKIA PARATA: Well, the great thing about this party is that we can have robust debates about what will make the difference, and that is what we do, including the fact that the nice problem we have is a rising GDP, notwithstanding that within that we have increased the amount of funding for education. We put our money where our mouths are.

💬 Chris Hipkins: Why is she satisfied that schools are adequately funded, when there are increasing reports that schools are putting pressure on parents to make donations?

💬 Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I notice that the Minister could not actually hear anything because of her colleagues’ noise, so perhaps you might—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I invite Mr Hipkins to start his question again.

💬 Chris Hipkins: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Why is she satisfied that schools are adequately funded, when there are increasing reports that schools are putting pressure on parents to make donations, including by removing students from classes and leaving them in the school hall and giving bag labels to children whose parents have paid donations in an attempt to shame the parents who have not?

💬 Hon HEKIA PARATA: Of the 2,538 schools in New Zealand, one school did that and we dealt with that matter—we dealt with that matter. But in the meantime—you know, I have difficulty keeping track of where the member is because education is such a priority that it is on the second bench. But never mind. We have been focusing on how we raise achievement, and that is what we are doing. We have got National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2 at an average of 77 percent, we have got more Māori and more Pacific Island kids passing NCEA, we have got national standards telling us that we have increased reading, writing, and mathematics, and we are getting that for the investment that we are making.

Powers of Attorney, Enduring—Report

12. ALFRED NGARO (National) on behalf of to the Minister for Senior Citizens: What recent reports has she released relating to enduring powers of attorney?

I have recently released a comprehensive review of the 2007 amendments to the enduring power of attorney provisions in the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1998. The review found that the 2007 amendments have for the most part been effective in providing better protection for people setting up enduring powers of attorney, but it also identified areas that need improving.

💬 Alfred Ngaro: What is she doing to address the recommendations in the report?

💬 Hon JO GOODHEW: After finding that there was generally low understanding as to what an enduring power of attorney is, an information campaign will commence in the coming weeks. This targets those appointing attorneys, people taking on the role of enduring power of attorney, health practitioners, and legal professionals to understand what is required of them. Work has already begun on simplifying the forms and processes for applying for an enduring power of attorney, and I am also looking at whether enduring powers of attorney could be made more affordable, encouraging law firms to offer enduring power of attorney discounts through the SuperGold card programme.