Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Finance: What progress is the Government making on the $32.5 billion infrastructure programme over the next 4 years identified in Budget 2017?

The Government is making good progress with what is the largest infrastructure plan New Zealand has been involved in. For example, we are very busy investing in a range of transport projects. Yesterday KiwiRail rejoined the Main North Line between Christchurch and Picton. We are also currently working on the highway there. In Auckland we are working on the Southern Motorway corridor, which is a 50 percent expansion. The Waterview tunnel also opened recently, delivering massive time savings to Aucklanders travelling between the west and south of Auckland and also between the airport and the city. Just last week, the Government officially opened in Wellington the $43 million Haywards Interchange project, which delivers significant benefits to Hutt Valley motorists by smoothing traffic flow and reducing accident risk.

💬 Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How does Budget 2017’s transport investment benefit Auckland?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Government is making a significant number of transport investments in and around Auckland, across all modes. These include the East-West Link, the new motorway linking the Southwestern Motorway with the Southern Motorway, electrifying the commuter railway line between Papakura and Pukekohe, and our intention to construct the third main line. Of course, there is also the Northern Motorway corridor between Constellation and Albany, and the extension of the busway. The Government, in partnership with Auckland Council, is considering further investments in areas like the Mill Road corridor and the Northwestern Motorway busway as part of a comprehensive plan to unlock land for housing development projects around the city.

💬 Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How will these investments flow through the construction sector?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The investment programmes in Auckland and around the country are giving the construction sector the confidence to make many long-term commitments. The independent National Construction Pipeline report released last weekend shows that the building boom we have been experiencing is forecast to continue for at least another 3 or 4 years. That is because Budget 2017 is also funding new programmes like the Housing Infrastructure Fund and Crown Infrastructure Partners, which are able to open up land to build up to 83,000 houses in fast-growing parts of the country. This construction pipeline shows that the Government’s plan to invest in key infrastructure for a growing country is working for New Zealanders.

💬 Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: How is the Government able to deliver on this infrastructure plan?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Government delivers by involving private sector investment and private partners, as well as the Government’s investment. For example, we have a good track record in areas like ultra-fast broadband, which has been supported by around a $2 billion investment from the Government and has been more than matched by co-investments from the private sector. As a result, New Zealand has already moved up the OECD broadband rankings from 26th in the world 5 years ago to 11th last year. Once complete, the ultra-fast broadband will probably put us in a top-five spot in the OECD, and that is a true public-private partnership delivering for New Zealanders.

Māori Development—Wage Gap, Employment Rate, and Ministerial Responsibility

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. When this question was lodged, it was directed to the Minister for Māori Development, whose responsibilities include numerous pieces of legislation and policies that impact upon Māori economic well-being. On this issue in particular, Speaker’s ruling 194/4 says: “Ministers have a responsibility to the House, and through the House to the country, to account for the public offices they hold.” The question asks for his view on the wage gap that affects Māori, and it is his view that my constituents and Māori around Aotearoa are interested in, not the view of the Minister to whom the question has been redirected. He has responsibility to this House to give a view on this critical issue for Māori.

I think the summary of that point of order is that the member is objecting to the transfer. Can I refer the member to two Speakers’ rulings that have guided me in this regard. Speakers’ ruling 167/5 says that Ministers not only have a right to determine who will answer but, in fact, have a duty to pick the Minister who can most responsibly answer. I also refer the member to Speakers’ ruling 168/1, which says that the Government has the right to transfer questions, but if it was doing so in a way to dodge the issue, then the member might have a point. In this case, I think the justification for the transfer is clear to me. The member can proceed to ask his question; if he prefers not to, we will move straight to question No. 3.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I suspect it is well too late to do anything about it in this case, because the transfer has gone ahead and I suspect it will be the Minister of employment answering the question. But the issue comes when there is, for example, a population Minister who represents an advocacy agency, effectively, because almost any question to the Minister for Māori Development will overlap with the responsibilities of another Minister. Therefore, about the only question that we could lodge to the Minister that we could guarantee he would have to answer would be “Does he stand by his statements?” or “Does he have confidence in his department?”, and any indication from us of the topic that we wish to question him on therefore leaves open the possibility for transfer. So I wonder whether at some point you could consider—there are a limited number of ministerial portfolios that would be in this situation, and the Minister for Māori Development is one—whether there is a way that Opposition members can lodge questions to that Minister and be clear that it is going to be that Minister who is answering them, because almost anything else gives rise to a potential transfer.

I thank the member for his point, and I did take particular interest and it was my final decision as to whether this question could be transferred. I was conscious of the very point the member is making now. In fact, in my time as Speaker, on two occasions I have refused transfers because I thought they had not got to the point the member was trying to get to with those particular questions, and I suspect those are the only two times that has happened in probably the last 20-odd years in this Parliament. I look at this matter very carefully. I think the way forward is that if the member really wanted to direct it to a particular Minister, he could have done so with a different wording of that question. I advise all members that as they are formulating their thoughts on questions, if they want to seek any advice at all from the Clerk of the House, that is probably their best option.

2. to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Does he believe it is a sign of success that after nine years of this Government the wage gap between Māori and Pākehā now sits at $213 a week?

on behalf of the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: No, we are not happy. We will not be happy until there is no gap in wages between Māori and Pākehā, and indeed other groups, as well. That is why the Government is focusing on a range of initiatives to increase training and skills for young Māori, particularly enrolments and graduations in tertiary education, programmes like Grow Kaikohe in Northland as well, for the Māori “neets” in areas like Northland, and a range of programmes that will ensure that this gap continues to close. Tell you what, what we will not be doing is putting a tax on regional—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! We do not need to go there.

💬 Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Where a question is transferred, is there some obligation on the Minister to whom it is transferred to be the person who answers the question? The Minister to whom the question was lodged is in the House, but the Minister whom the Government has transferred it to is not in the House, so the case for saying that the Minister to whom it was transferred to is in a better position to answer is significantly weakened.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Speaking to the point of order—

💬 Hon Members: Sit down.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: No, I will not sit down. Speaking to the point of order, I note that that point—[Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order and I expect it to be heard in silence.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Speaking to the point of order, I say it is ultimately very simple. The Minister for Māori Development does not have responsibility for the wage gap that the member is asking about; the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, and Employment does. That is why it was transferred. Then, who answers if that Minister is away, is entirely for the Government. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I appreciate the points raised by both members. This issue I canvassed with the two Speakers’ rulings I referred to earlier. If a decision is made to transfer, then it is the Government’s decision as to whom it transfers that to, and, as I pointed out earlier, I think the Government must accept it has a responsibility to give it to the Minister whom it thinks can best answer the question that has been asked.

💬 Kelvin Davis: Can he confirm that this wage gap represents a 30 percent increase since his Government came into power?

No, I cannot, and it all depends on how the member counts it. But in terms of the gap, I agree with the member that it is higher than we would like, and the way we deal with that is to focus on ensuring that we have the tertiary education opportunities and success for young Māori so that this gap can be closed over time. It has never been closed before, and I think that is something that we all in this House need to reflect upon. But I can report for the member that the number of Māori, or the proportion of Māori aged 25 to 64 who now have, for example, a Bachelor’s degree or above has increased from 9 percent in 2008 to 17 percent this year, and that is good progress.

💬 Kelvin Davis: Nōna rānei te hē mō te rerekētānga o te pūtea ā-wiki ā Te Pākehā ki tā te pūtea Māori ā-wiki; ki te kore, he aha te take kua hūkukuhia mai tenei pātai i Te Minita Whanaketanga Māori, ki a ia i tēnei rā hai whakanui i Ngā Iwi Taketake o Te Ao?

[Is the fault his for the difference between the Pākehā weekly sum of money and that of the Māori weekly sum of money; if not, what is the reason for this question being shifted from the Minister for Māori Development to him on this day celebrating the indigenous peoples of the world?]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The Hon Steven Joyce, if he feels he has heard enough of the translation.

Everybody in this Government takes responsibility for the performance and success of New Zealanders. In the case of tertiary education, skills, and employment, one of the key paths forward to close the income gap between Māori and everybody else is actually through employment and training. That is why it is appropriate that the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment takes a strong interest in the skills achievement of Māori.

💬 Marama Fox: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I was actually very interested in the answer from the Minister—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Can I have the point of order, please.

💬 Marama Fox: Well, the point of order is that the lack of positive interjection from the left has inhibited my ability—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I appreciate the point the member is making. There was significant interjection, but I could still manage to hear the answer.

💬 Kelvin Davis: Does he believe that the huge wage gap between Māori and Pākehā has anything to do with the fact that the number of Māori who are now homeless under his watch sits at 14,000?

The Government does not agree with that characterisation of the homeless population, which the Opposition keeps running but is not correct. Nevertheless, the key point is the achievement and participation in the economy of Māori of all ages. That is why it is important to lift education levels, and, as I say, I am pleased to report to the member the number of Māori completing a Bachelor’s degree each year has increased 64 percent since 2008. The number of Māori involved in programmes that we have—for example, the Māori and Pasifika Trades Training Initiative—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! Bring the answer to a conclusion.

—is increasing. But, again, I think it is really important that a lot of Māori are in regional New Zealand, and what you would not do is actually put on an additional tax to affect them.

💬 Kelvin Davis: He aha te take kei raro i a ia, kua eke te nama o ngā Māori e kore mahi ana mā te 60 paihēneti, ko te pai hēneti Māori, e 11.1 engari, 3.4 pai hēneti noa iho tā Te Pākehā?

[Why is it that under his watch the number of unemployed Māori has climbed by 60 percent, the Māori percentage being 11.1 but the Pākehā percentage being only 3.4?]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Can I ask the member to repeat the question because the interpretation has not come through on my earpiece.

💬 Kelvin Davis: He aha te take kei raro i a ia, kua eke te nama o ngā Māori e kore mahi ana mā te te 60 paihēneti, ko te paihēneti Māori 11.1 engari, 3.4 pai noa iho tā Te Pākehā?

[Why is it that under his watch the number of unemployed Māori has climbed by 60 percent, the Māori percentage being 11.1 but the Pākehā percentage being only 3.4?]

I would have to check those figures for the member. Of course, we have had the global financial crisis, which has affected every community and every group. We have been getting improving results for Māori since 2012, but, again, the longer-term solution is increased educational achievement, particularly in the tertiary and trades areas. I suggest the member has a look at those numbers and actually congratulates Māori on achieving those results.

💬 Kelvin Davis: As the Minister for Māori Development is responsible for guiding him and other Ministers on “policies affecting Māori wellbeing”, is it he or the Minister for Māori Development who is failing Māori, given the wage gap is growing, as well as high unemployment?

As I said to him earlier, this is a job that the Government is very focused on: lifting achievement and participation of Māori in the New Zealand economy. That is why we are doing the regional growth programmes, that is why we are doing Māori and Pasifika trades training, and that is why we are ensuring that more Māori achieve in tertiary education, including universities. I know the Opposition is blind to that because it hates anything that disproves its thesis, but this Government is focused on achieving for Māori, and delivering higher qualifications is one of the key ways in which that will be achieved.

💬 David Seymour: Has the Minister seen any reports of organisations, such as the Iwi Leaders Forum, endorsing the policy Partnership Schools/Kura Hourua?

I am not at all surprised that the iwi leaders group would support partnership schools, because they are designed to get better results—for young Māori children, in many cases—in different parts of the country. It is about trying new things and achieving things that this country has never been able to achieve before. But, of course, the Opposition wants to take us back to the bad old days when there was only one person who was allowed to teach people at schools.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Increases, Measurement, and Reduction Targets

3. to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his policies?

Yes, particularly our 2015 policy that gave families on benefits with children a $25 a week boost to their incomes, while at the same time requiring them to meet obligations in respect of work. We found that taxpayers are happy to give people help when they are struggling, but they do expect some obligations to be met. We disagree with the Green Party’s policy that people should be paid a benefit with no obligations at all.

💬 James Shaw: Why have New Zealand’s net greenhouse gas emissions risen by 19 percent since his Government took office in 2008?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: That is a good question coming from, I think, the only Green Party in the world with no climate change spokesman this week. New Zealand has in place a comprehensive plan to deal with climate change, at the core of which is the emissions trading system, for which I would give credit to the predecessors of the current Green Party who, in the early 2000s, encouraged the development of exactly that scheme, which is so important to our climate change efforts.

💬 James Shaw: Why have New Zealand’s net greenhouse gas emissions risen by 19 percent since his Government took office in 2008?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The greenhouse gas emissions have risen partly because of the growth of the population and the growth of the economy. We are always trying to find the right balance between achieving the climate change goals we have signed up to in the Paris accord on the one hand, and on the other hand ensuring that we have sustainable communities and a successful economy. As time goes on, we are generating better and better solutions so there is not a trade-off—so that there are actually gains on both sides.

💬 James Shaw: Does he anticipate whether New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions will ever fall?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: We anticipate that the greenhouse gas emissions will meet the targets that we have signed up to in the climate change agreement.

💬 James Shaw: Does he agree that there is one measure, and one measure only, of whether a country is succeeding or failing in its fight against climate change, and that that is whether its net greenhouse gas emissions are rising or falling?

💬 Rt Hon Bill English: I do not think it is quite that simple, but we have signed up to some pretty clear-cut targets in the Paris Agreement. We would expect that, over time, New Zealand moves towards and then achieves those targets, particularly as more research occurs and better technology comes to the fore—say, in the transport area. We believe momentum will pick up.

💬 James Shaw: Has he read the recent National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research report that predicts that Wellington could be as hot as Sydney by 2090, and that the Wairarapa could be plagued by droughts and wildfires if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I think that the time for that kind of discussion has really passed. We accept that there are climate change targets that we need to achieve, we have signed up to the global agreement to achieve those, and now it is really a matter of the best tools to make progress and get there.

💬 James Shaw: In reference to his last answer about signing up to climate agreements, does he stand by his actions in 2002 when, in reference to Helen Clark ratifying the latest climate agreement then, he held up a sign saying that “the mad cow shouldn’t have signed”—does he stand by that?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I think the member is referring to a specific series of protests run by the farming community in respect of something that it referred to as the “fart tax”, I suppose. At the time we certainly had a lot of discussion with the community about that particular measure.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Members will get their chance for supplementary questions shortly.

Women—Employment and Education Rates and Gender Pay Gap

4. to the Minister for Women: What reports has she received about the progress of women in New Zealand?

This Government, of course, absolutely backs women to succeed, and the latest household labour force survey shows that we have one of the highest ever labour force participation rates for women, at 64.5 percent. This puts us fifth-highest, I must say, in the OECD and well above the OECD average of 51.9 percent. The number of unemployed women, of course, is also down to 4.9 percent.

💬 Dr Parmjeet Parmar: What progress are young women making under the National Government?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: Our young women are in a better position than ever to seize the opportunity that this country has to offer them. We have the lowest rate for young women not in education, employment, or training since we began measuring it in 2004. There are 57 percent fewer young mums on main benefits at the end of 2016, compared with 2009, down from 4,263 to 1,836, and we have seen—

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I apologise for interrupting our Deputy Prime Minister. There is just so much noise on the other side, I simply cannot hear what she is saying.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I was about to rise to my feet. There are two or three serial offenders to my left who have not, effectively, been quiet throughout question time. I do not want to have to see the end of somebody’s parliamentary career with them having to leave in the last few days of them being here, but if they are going to continue to interject, unreasonably and consistently, then I am afraid that members of the Labour caucus leave me no alternative.

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I thought we would be celebrating the successes of young women in this country, and I want to add to this that we have seen the percentage of girls achieving NCEA level 2 increase from 70.5 percent in 2008 to 81.7 percent in 2016.

💬 Grant Robertson: Has the Minister seen any reports of a 37-year-old woman, raised in Morrinsville now living in Point Chevalier, making excellent progress?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I may have noticed that there has been a bit of a change in the last week, but, as I say, you can change the lead singer but if the band is still singing the same old tune, nobody is listening.

💬 Dr Parmjeet Parmar: How is the public sector leading the way on promoting women?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: As Minister of State Services as well as Minister for Women, I think it is absolutely outstanding what the public sector is doing and leading by example. We now have the highest ever percentage of women on State sector boards at 45.3 percent. We have 45 percent of the top three tiers of leaders in the Public Service who are women and 12 of our 29 chief executives are women, and we are going to get that to 50 percent. We have also, of course, ensured that 55,000 women in our aged-care sector have got, on average, a more than 20 percent increase in their wages.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If any of that is remotely true and this Government is doing so much for women, why is it so prejudicial against young women trying to get equal pay in a country where they think that they have got a right to be paid equally?

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: I find that ironic, coming from the man who wants to hark back to the good old days in the 1970s where women were not even working and—[Interruption]

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

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! No. I am just trying to get some silence so that I can hear the point of order. The Rt Hon Winston Peters.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: In the interests of a fair go for young women, could the Minister just answer the question and not try to be a smart alec.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! When I consider the tone of the question that was asked, there was an element of that in the tone of the question that gives a bit of licence to the Deputy Prime Minister to answer the question.

💬 Hon PAULA BENNETT: What I will say is that in 1998 and in the early 2000s when that Minister was part of a Government, the gender pay gap was at 16.3 percent. It is now at 12 percent and we are bringing that down further.

Economic Growth—Wage Growth, Commercial Water User Charge, and Housing Costs

5. to the Minister of Finance: Is he satisfied that after nearly 9 years of a National Government, that all New Zealanders are getting a fair share of any economic growth?

The member sort of raises two questions there. The first one is around “any economic growth”, and I am pleased to point out to him that New Zealand’s economy has now grown in 24 of the last 25 quarters. It is forecast to grow a further 3.7 percent this year, and last year it was the fifth fastest growing economy in the OECD. So perhaps he could say: “… getting a fair share of the economic growth?”. In relation to whether New Zealanders are getting their fair share, I draw his attention to the Bryan Perry report, released by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) last month, which shows median incomes after housing costs increasing from 2011 to 2016 by 16 percent in real terms, or 3.2 percent per annum. The lowest decile increased 19.6 percent over this period, while the highest decile increased slightly less at 19.1 percent.

💬 Grant Robertson: Are the 67 percent of wage and salary earners who received a pay rise of less than the rate of inflation over the last year getting their fair share?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It depends on which year the member refers to, because in the last calendar year our inflation was zero, so it is hard to argue that people got a wage rise less than zero. But the member makes a good point in terms of always wanting to help New Zealanders get ahead. That is why the Government is putting in place the $2 billion a year Family Incomes Package, which through wage threshold changes, Working for Families, and the accommodation supplement will mean that the average family, something like 1.37 million New Zealand families, will get around $26 a week, and that is actually helping them with their incomes, and I know that the member is opposed to it.

💬 Grant Robertson: Is it a fair share for all New Zealanders when the cost of food, school donations, medical costs, dental costs, and housing costs all increased faster than wages did over the last year?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Again, I think the member is concerned for New Zealanders and that is good, but then you would wonder why he would then say that you would want to have a regional fuel tax, or why you would want to have a water tax, which would flow through into milk prices. If you are genuinely concerned about New Zealanders’ cost of living, you would not want to add extra taxes that would put up the costs of goods that they buy every week. That is the bit I do not understand. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will just have the supplementary question.

💬 Grant Robertson: In light of that answer, will he rule out introducing a royalty on any commercial users of water?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This Government will not be introducing a water tax—a water tax that these people opposite are actually talking about doing. People do sometimes pay charges now, but we will not be introducing a water tax across catchments around New Zealand—and, worse than that, telling people that we cannot tell you the rate until after a general election, because we are too scared to. [Interruption]

💬 Grant Robertson: In light of that answer, can he confirm—

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: He hasn’t got a clue.

💬 Grant Robertson: Shh, Simon! Shh! You will be interested.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am going to invite the member to start his question again, without the interjections from Mr Bennett.

💬 Grant Robertson: In light of that answer, can he confirm that his Government asked the technical advisory panel to consider a royalty on a commercial user of water, and is that not just kicking the can down the road until after the election?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, in terms of that, it is very clear—and I think the Prime Minister has said so today, and I have said so—that we will not be introducing a water tax on a catchment-by-catchment basis across New Zealand. And the people who are talking about introducing a water tax should tell everybody what level of water tax they are actually planning on introducing. They wrote the policy 3 years ago; they surely should have an answer by now. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order!

💬 Grant Robertson: Ah, it is all good. Are people getting a fair share when the latest MSD data, otherwise known as the Perry report, shows that the percentage of people living in housing stress—i.e., where they spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs—is the highest it has been since records began 30 years ago?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I cannot confirm that for the member. I am always suspicious of his numbers. But can I say this—again, in relation to the matter—the member says he is concerned about these things; so is the Government. That is why we are increasing the accommodation supplement for people with high housing costs as part of the Family Incomes Package, that is why we are increasing Working for Families, and that is why we are shifting the tax thresholds—all things that will help reduce the housing costs as a proportion of people’s incomes, but the Opposition oppose it.

💬 Grant Robertson: Can he confirm that tables C.5 and C.3 of the 2017 MSD Perry report, which he did not seem to be aware of before, show that the number of people living in housing stress is the highest it has been since records began, and how is that a sign of success for a Government that has been in for 9 years?

💬 Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I have two things for the member. Firstly, as soon as we could—as soon as we could—as soon as we had the books back into surplus, we introduced the first increase in real terms of benefits in 40 years, and, of course, that is not in the Perry report. The second thing is we have introduced the changes, the Family Incomes Package, in Budget 2017—again, not in the Perry report—which will help those people. Most importantly, we do not keep loading on extra taxes that put up the costs of the food and the petrol and all those things that people need. The member, of course, pretends he is concerned, but he does the exact opposite of anybody who would be concerned.

Horticulture Sector—Outlook, Growth Targets, and Commercial Water User Charge

6. to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent reports has he received on the “bright” outlook for the horticulture sector?

Last week I spoke at the Pipfruit New Zealand conference, where New Zealand was named as the world’s most competitive apple performer for the third consecutive year. The apple industry continues to go from strength to strength, and it is set to achieve its goal of earning $1 billion in export returns by 2022. Zespri also released its annual review, showing the largest ever kiwifruit crop and record returns back to growers—up 21 percent from last year. Another report shows that kiwifruit’s contribution to New Zealand’s GDP is set to increase to over $6 billion by 2030, creating an additional 29,000 New Zealand jobs—a very bright outlook indeed.

💬 Todd Muller: What potential challenges does our horticultural sector face in achieving its aspirational growth targets?

💬 Hon NATHAN GUY: Like many of our primary sectors, horticulture depends on a very secure and sustainable supply of water. A charge on water would mean the price of fruit and vegetables would rise and affect our international competitiveness in 80 world markets. I note that Horticulture New Zealand has just issued a press release entitled “… let’s not do this”. This PR talks about how the policy that Labour has announced will make food more expensive—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! There is no responsibility from the Minister for a Labour Party policy announcement.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! [Interruption] Yes, I will come to the member in a minute; I just need substantially less interjection from both my left and, on this occasion particularly, my right.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the outlook for horticulture is so bright, how come, as of just the other day, the kiwifruit industry has taken the Government to court seeking $400 million compensation for the absolute botch-up leading to Psa, and what on earth is the local member doing about it?

💬 Hon NATHAN GUY: I am not going to comment on a case that is in front of the courts, but what I can say is that if the member takes some time and reads the Ministry for Primary Industries’ (MPI’s) response, he should be satisfied with the response from MPI’s officials.

Todd Barclay—Employment Dispute Settlement and Prime Ministerial Involvement

7. to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on the Todd Barclay matter; if so, how does he credibly do that?

I think the member may know how I am going to answer this question. Yes; because I said them.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Did he use taxpayer resources to undermine the Clutha-Southland MP Todd Barclay’s operations as that electorate’s MP?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Again, in so far as there may be prime ministerial responsibility—the Right Honourable Prime Minister.

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Of course not.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he subject to any confidentiality agreement about what he can say about the Todd Barclay matter, including hundreds of related texts from a phone paid for by the taxpayer?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Again, in so far as there may be prime ministerial responsibility—the Right Honourable Prime Minister.

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I was not a party to the settlement of this employment dispute, so I am not bound by the confidentiality of it but the people involved with it are.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: [Interruption] Oh, no, we have got him—just be patient. Why does he claim not to have any knowledge about the employment settlement agreement involving Glenys Dickson and repetitively deny that he had any involvement in its preparation, when these denials are, evidentially, plain false?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Again, in so far as there is prime ministerial responsibility—the Right Honourable Prime Minister.

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: It is quite right, I have no ministerial responsibility for it. All the relevant material has been in the public for some months, and the member seems to have found some of it lately. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will have the supplementary question.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can he confirm that the deployment of ministerial limos for him when in Clutha-Southland in 2015 involved proper ministerial reasons, and not other reasons?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Unfortunately, I do not get to Southland as much as I would like, but it is still more often than the member finds time to go to Northland.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Seeing as you have predicated every answer by saying “where there is any prime ministerial responsibility”—since you have predicated every answer with that warning, why do you allow him to get away with that false lie?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member would like—[Interruption] Order! If the member would like to look at Hansard afterwards, he will see that I did not start every answer with that particular comment, and on the last one I did not. But I am unable to help the Minister, because I look at the generality of the first question asked, the primary question, to get into the detail the member is wanting in the supplementary question. I consider that the question has been addressed. Supplementary question—the Rt Hon Winston Peters.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Yeah, well, here is the real question for you, sunshine.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. I do acknowledge he is responding to interjections that are not helpful. Would the member now proceed with his supplementary question.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If it is proven that contrary to his denials he had substantial knowledge of the confidential agreement involving Glenys Dickson and was involved in its preparation as to terms and conditions, contrary to what he has been telling the media and Parliament, then, in the event of such proof, what will he do to hold himself accountable?

💬 Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: All the statements I have made about it are correct, and the relevant material has been in the public arena for some time. I can assure the member I was no part of the agreement.

Transport, Auckland—Rail to Airport, Funding, and Government Priorities

8. to the Minister of Transport: Why is the Government prepared to wait up to 30 years before funding light rail to Auckland Airport?

The Government has never said that. The Government’s position has been, and is, clear and that is building and moving from bus to light rail, as demand requires. The Government’s focus is on protecting the dedicated corridor and moving towards construction of the corridor, which will be completed within 10 years.

💬 Phil Twyford: Does he think that waiting 30 years for light rail in our biggest city is, to coin a phrase, ambitious for New Zealand?

💬 Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I think our plan and the work we are doing with the council is truly ambitious for Auckland. It involves projects in the north, the south, the east, and the west—where the growth is happening—as opposed to relying on one silver bullet and putting everything into that, when actually Waterview has halved the time on that trip. While we know that a tram plan may, over time, have merit, it would take some 50 minutes—well over double what Waterview is taking, and will continue to take for some time to come.

💬 Phil Twyford: Why, when congestion is costing the city $1.3 billion a year in lost productivity, is he holding back the city’s growth in prosperity by refusing to back light rail to the airport now, just like Steven Joyce did with the City Rail Link?

💬 Hon SIMON BRIDGES: The truth is that the congestion is why we have got a plan of unprecedented ambition all over Auckland. It is why the East-West Link is so important, because, unlike the Labour Party, we do not live in some imaginary world where there is not freight. We do not think that mattresses, plasma TVs, and all these other things turn up to shops and people’s homes by themselves.

💬 Phil Twyford: Does he agree with Infrastructure New Zealand, which said that Labour’s commitment to solving Auckland’s long-term transport funding challenge is “a big step forward”, and the chamber of commerce, which said that Labour’s speed of action to accelerate delivery of transport solutions is exactly what Auckland needs?

💬 Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I think what it actually said was that the plan was interesting. But what it also made quite clear was that it absolutely disagrees with a plan that would increase congestion dramatically, and that involves cancelling the East-West Link. I am also not sure what they think about the dramatic rise in regional fuel taxes that would be required, when we know that the tram plan requires over $100 million a kilometre.

💬 Phil Twyford: How would he fund the $6 billion gap in the Auckland transport plan’s first decade if he is in Government after the next election? Mr Speaker, I know that is a hypothetical question, but I hope you will allow it.

💬 Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well, the same as we have already funded a plan of unprecedented ambition in Auckland and New Zealand. We have done it before; we will do it again. We have got a lot of capital that we have made clear through Budget 2017, and the National Land Transport Fund also has some headroom. What we will not be doing is adding new taxes. It will be much more than 10c, actually, and really hitting Aucklanders in the hip pocket.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister whether the real reason that he is being so slow to address the needs of the Auckland community where rail is concerned is that he has done nothing about Gisborne and Northland, Manawatū to Wairarapa, and the North Canterbury to Christchurch line?

💬 Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well, the member knows that is a load of old cobblers. He asks me written questions nearly every day and I make clear the projects happening all over New Zealand—the East Coast and the north; actually, the hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. I think that is a big part of the reason why our regions, contrary to all the stuff he says, are booming right now.

Beneficiaries—Reduction in Numbers and Reports

9. to the Minister for Social Development: What recent reports has she received regarding reductions in the number of people receiving a benefit?

The latest Ministry of Social Development quarterly benefit data shows that there are over 17,000 fewer people on a main benefit than 3 years ago. The proportion of the working-age population receiving a benefit is now at the lowest it has been in a June quarter since 1997, which also happened to be under a National Government. This Government’s strong and stable economic management has seen unemployment drop to pre - global financial crisis levels of 4.8 percent, and 248,000 more people have been employed over the last 3 years.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What groups have had particular success moving off benefits and into employment?

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: The number of people receiving sole parent support continues to reduce at levels above all forecasts and predictions. They are a terrific group of people determined to get ahead. In the last 3 years, the number of people on sole parent support has reduced by 18 percent. Even more encouraging, amongst 18- to 24-year-olds, the reduction is a massive 35.6 percent over the 3 years—a 35.6 percent reduction. Honestly, we all know it is tough to be a parent on a benefit, but their desire for a better life for their family means we now have over 61,000 fewer children growing up in a benefit-dependent home.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What changes have there been in benefit numbers in the Northland region?

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: More good news. As seen in the latest household labour force survey released last week, the unemployment rate has dropped significantly in Northland by 3.4 percent in the last year. We are also seeing this reflected in the benefit statistics for the region, which show a 5.1 percent reduction in the number of job seeker work-ready recipients in the last year in Northland. But we are not resting on these results. We know there is much more to do. That is why last month, alongside the Prime Minister and other Ministers, we announced a $50 million youth employment pathways programme to support young people who are not in employment, education, or training

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: It shows you what I’ve done in 2 years flat.

💬 Tracey Martin: The Winston Peters effect.

💬 Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Listen, you might learn something for your people. This follows on from the success of grow KAIKOHE and now the Taitamariki 500 to get Northland youth currently on a benefit on the pathway to sustainable long-term employment, which is more than you have ever done, Mr Peters.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That Minister cannot break the Standing Orders and address a person in the way she did. I know she is not the brightest cog in the wheel, but she cannot get away with that. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member on this occasion is right. The last part of the answer was unnecessary to the order of this House.

Freshwater Management—Water Quality of Rivers and Lakes and Government Measures to Address

10. to the Minister for the Environment: Can he confirm that yesterday’s announcement of grants to clean up rivers and lakes was actually first promised in 2014 and it’s taken him three years to do it?

on behalf of the Minister for the Environment: No. Yesterday’s announcement builds on a $360 million commitment that is in place, and this is just the next phase of bringing that total to over $400 million. During the previous Government, supported by the Greens, just $29 million was spent, and the record is therefore clear on who takes fresh water seriously.

💬 Catherine Delahunty: How does yesterday’s announcement deal with nitrates from intensive dairying, given the fact that the elephant in the room is actually a cow?

Yesterday’s announced funding for freshwater improvement projects means that over 100 rivers and lakes across New Zealand are to receive grants of up to $44 million from the Government to improve water quality. There is no elephant in those lakes and rivers.

💬 Catherine Delahunty: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked a specific question about nitrates—how does it deal with nitrates—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No, the member then added something that gave a bit more licence to the Minister when he answered the question; the Minister chose to use it.

💬 Catherine Delahunty: What percentage of projects announced yesterday deal with improving water quality in urban waterways?

That is a good question, because urban waterways are just as important in terms of improving water quality as rural waterways. If the member wishes to put down in writing a specific question on that matter, the Minister will answer in detail.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Has the Minister read any reports on the impact of a 10c per litre charge on all commercial water users to fund clean-ups, and how much revenue would that generate? [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question is in order; it can be answered.

Yes, a 10c per litre charge on all commercial users was proposed in October 2015, and if it had been applied it would have cost the New Zealand economy $600 billion, or three times New Zealand’s total gross domestic product. In practice, such a tax would collapse our economy. The proposal came from Labour’s Stuart Nash.

💬 Stuart Nash: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This charge was levelled by a previous Minister. I challenged him to come up with the evidence, and he could not and he has not. I ask the Minister to withdraw and apologise, or provide evidence of such.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: Speaking to the point of order, from memory this has been dealt with by way of personal explanation by Mr Nash previously, where he has denied making such a suggestion. Mr Speaker, I think you are aware that once a member has done that—if the member is wrong it is a breach of privilege and that is very serious, but no member can bring that allegation up again.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I was unaware that it had been the subject of a personal explanation from Mr Nash. I may not have been in the House at that time. I think the best way forward is that I will require the Minister to stand and withdraw the final part of his answer.

I withdraw the final part of my answer.

💬 Catherine Delahunty: Why is the Government spending just $44 million on freshwater improvement projects, and $400 million on irrigation projects that will not help the environment of our waterways?

As I indicated in the answer to the primary question, the $44 million announced yesterday was just part of a $400 million package, $360 million of which has already been allocated.

Christchurch Schools Rebuild Programme—Progress

11. to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements has the Government made on the progress of the Christchurch Schools Rebuild Programme?

The Christchurch Schools Rebuild programme is a $1.137 billion programme involving 115 schools in greater Christchurch. The programme has great momentum and is on track to be completed on schedule, by 2022. In conjunction with a number of very enjoyable school and site visits in the last week, I have announced that the $26 million redevelopment of Hornby High School has commenced, the $3.5 million project at Hornby Primary School has been completed, the construction of the new co-located Avonside Girls’ High School and Shirley Boys High School at QEII Park has begun, the redevelopment at Wharenui School has been completed, and yesterday I turned the first sod—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I know it is late in this session, but surely Ministers cannot get up and tediously and boringly read out their recent agenda of what remotely little work they have been doing.

💬 Hon TIM MACINDOE: Speaking to the point of order—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: No, I do not need assistance. Unfortunately, the rules of question time mean that a Minister can, in fact, do that. Does the Minister wish to complete his answer?

💬 Hon TIM MACINDOE: I do, indeed, wish to complete the answer, because the question was about what announcements have been made, and all of these announcements have been made in the last week. I turned the first sod yesterday to mark the beginning of construction at Addington School and on the site of the new Wigram Primary School, and I have to say that is more great news in a wonderful week for Crusaders fans.

💬 Joanne Hayes: How will these projects benefit schools in the greater Christchurch region?

💬 Hon TIM MACINDOE: I think even members opposite would have to concede that it is a huge undertaking to rebuild and redevelop 115 schools in the region.

💬 Hon Member: How many?

💬 Hon TIM MACINDOE: One hundred and fifteen schools in the Christchurch region. The Christchurch Schools Rebuild programme is also a great opportunity for schools to redesign all or parts of their school facilities to meet the needs of their current and future pupils. All 115 schools will be provided with fantastic modern facilities and learning environments, which will encourage learning to happen and pupils to achieve to the best of their potential. So I would like to thank and acknowledge the schools, the staff, and the boards of trustees of those schools for their commitment to securing the best facilities while also focusing on student achievement in their current environments.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Recently, by way of point of order, I indicated that an explanation that Mr Nash gave was by way of personal explanation. I have since checked and found out that it was part of debate, and not that. I therefore apologise to you, to the Minister, and to the House.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I appreciate that from my Assistant Speaker. The matter has been dealt with and, of course, the members always have that relatively recent Standing Order, Standing Order 359. If people think they have been misrepresented, and it does not reach a case of breach of privilege, there is a very easy process to follow. It has been followed once with success in this House, where I thought a particular person and his party’s position was quite seriously misrepresented in this House. So it is a mechanism available to all members. I suggest they become familiar with it.

💬 Hon Steven Joyce: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, I have since seen a number of articles that suggest that the member proposed a 10c a litre royalty. Perhaps—I do not know—we could table them in the House. They might be useful. Just for the House’s edification, I would be happy to do so.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Well, if the members—[Interruption] Order! I have dealt with the matter, so I am not going back on that, but if the member is now seeking leave to table an article on the basis that there has been some debate about whether it was said, I will put the leave. I need the date and I need the source of the article.

💬 Hon Steven Joyce: I will have to come back to you on the date. [Interruption]

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] I will wait till later. Supplementary question, Dr Megan Woods.

💬 Dr Megan Woods: Did the original business case for the Christchurch Schools Rebuild programme show Addington School was scheduled for completion by the start of 2016 and the new Wigram school completed by the end of 2017; if so, why is he only announcing the commencement of these projects this week?

💬 Mr SPEAKER: There are two supplementary questions there. The Minister can address one.

💬 Hon TIM MACINDOE: I do not have all of the information the member is asking for, but I know she was delighted to be with me yesterday for the turning of the sod on that property at Wigram. I can assure her that the entire community is absolutely delighted with that development.

Question No. 10 to Minister

I seek leave to table a New Zealand Herald article of Wednesday, 21 October 2015, where MP Stuart Nash called for a levy on the commercial use of water—

Order! [Interruption] Order! The article has been described. [Interruption] Order! In view of the issues that have developed in question time, I am going to put that leave. It is for the House to decide. Leave is sought to table that particular article from the New Zealand Herald. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is objection.

Health Services, Auckland—Elective Surgeries, Access, and Demand

12. to the Minister of Health: Does he take any responsibility after nine years of a National-led Government for delivering a health system where in just four weeks more than 700 elective surgeries in Auckland have been postponed, leading to clinicians saying “it’s not a sustainable system”?

Yes, including 18,500 extra elective surgeries and 48,000 more first specialist assessments across Auckland, as well as the new $39 million Elective Surgery Centre, the $9 million Waitakere emergency department, and the $10 million North Shore outpatients clinic. In regard to so-called elective delays due to winter-type illnesses, I have been informed this afternoon that there have been no elective delays at Waitematā District Health Board (DHB) due to winter illnesses, which calls into question the basic premise of her question. Be that as it may, despite 1 million flu vaccinations this year, there has been an unusually large number of presentations at hospitals. However, the district health boards have processes in place to cope.

💬 Jenny Salesa: How will he respond to the record demand and bed shortages in Auckland, which led to the Counties Manukau chief medical officer saying it is the highest and fastest rate of increase in demand for services the DHB has ever experienced?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I think the member should remember that there is $57 million more going into Counties Manukau this year as of 1 July. That provides funds for that DHB to distribute as it sees fit to meet population growth and demand pressures.

💬 Jenny Salesa: Did he check with every DHB around the country before he claimed on Checkpoint last Friday that every DHB is managing to deliver the operations that are needed?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I do not need to check with DHBs around that because it is a fact that we are delivering 50,000 more operations than 8 years ago. You only have to look at those Auckland regional district health boards, where the percentage of operations in Auckland DHB has gone up by 60 percent over 9 years, Counties Manukau DHB has had an increase of 34 percent, and at Waitematā DHB the percentage of electives has increased by 74 percent over 9 years. That is a whopping extra 8,500 operations per year for the people of the Waitematā District Health Board.

💬 Jenny Salesa: What action has he taken in the last 2 years to decrease GP fees for adults, in light of the 44 percent increase in the average GP fee since 2008, which can force people to turn up to hospitals for health services?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I have got to say these are much better questions than—

💬 Mr SPEAKER: Order! We will just have the answer, thank you.

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Be that as it may, the member knows that GP fees are actually set in consultation with the DHB, but the bigger picture is there is an extra $5 billion that has gone into health under the course of this Government to increase access to health services.

💬 Jenny Salesa: After 9 years in Government, is it now acceptable to him that patients are forced to sleep in waiting rooms in Auckland City Hospital because there are no spaces available for them?

💬 Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I would have to go and verify those claims, but I think it is pretty unlikely. The fact is that services at Auckland District Health Board have increased dramatically, and there is another $69 million going into that DHB as of 1 July this year to complement the extra $436 million that Auckland DHB has received over 9 years. But, look, there is no doubt that in health there is always more to do.