Oral Questions

1. to the Minister for Crown/Māori Relations: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions?

Yes, in the context they were made.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Did he consult with David Parker or any other Minister in relation to the Te Ārai exemption in the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill; and if so, when?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! That is not an area of responsibility for this Minister.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Repeatedly, over the last two days, the Hon David Parker has advanced the case that his proposing this exemption was to protect a Treaty right granted to iwi. Now, clearly there must have been some advocacy somewhere, and it’s not unreasonable to expect and to ask the Minister who has responsibility for Crown/Māori relationships whether or not he was part of that advocacy group.

💬 SPEAKER: And if the member wanted to consider it in that way she would have asked the Minister responsible for that area, and that’s the Hon Andrew Little.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Does the Minister expect the Minister for Crown/Māori Relations to be consulting with other Ministers on multimillion-dollar legislative exemptions for iwi?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Regardless of the topic, my role as the Minister for Crown/Māori Relations is to ask about the impact on all Māori in all the work we do.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Would he expect the Minister for Crown/Māori Relations to be consulting with other Ministers on multimillion-dollar legislative exemptions for iwi?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: As the member well knows, Cabinet colleagues have discussions with our colleagues on a range of issues. What she’s trying to imply is that there’s some sort of conspiracy in any discussions that I as a Māori Minister might have with my colleagues.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I made no allegations of a conspiracy. I simply asked a question.

💬 SPEAKER: And the Minister’s answered it.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: If Te Ārai development exemption is all about not reducing the value of a Treaty settlement asset, did he consult with the Minister over the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill?

💬 SPEAKER: That’s ruled out for exactly the same reason that the first supplementary was.

💬 Hon David Parker: Did I, as the Minister responsible for the bill, consult with him in his capacity as Minister for Crown/Māori Relations on the issue as to whether there should be a general exemption for Treaty settlement land?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Yes. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: It’s a question of who did what, just to make it clear—who did the consulting, whose responsibility it is.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Does he think that the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill as currently drafted will give rise to post-settlement Treaty claims?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Mr Speaker, Cabinet made a decision on this bill, and I support that you have subsequently ruled it out, and we accept that.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Does he believe there should be exemptions in the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill to give rise to post-settlement Treaty claims from the likes of Ngāi Tahu or Tainui?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I stand by the Cabinet decision we’ve made in regard to this bill, the OIA Bill. We’ve accepted your ruling that there shouldn’t be exceptions for specific groups and we accept that.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: What would be the value of a Treaty claim if a Treaty grant was given and then taken away by the same party, namely the Kermadecs issue?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! No responsibility.

Overseas Ownership of New Zealand Property—Exemption for Te Ārai Development

2. to the Associate Minister of Finance: Has he received any advice about the exact nature of iwi ownership in each Lot of the Te Ārai property development land as described in the exemption in the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill reported back from the select committee; if so, what was that advice?

No.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: When he told the House in answer to question No. 3 on Tuesday that, as far as he knew, stakeholders of Te Ārai were a New Zealand citizen, a New Zealand resident, and then yesterday that it was a Politik article of 21 June that alerted him to the extent of iwi involvement, was he saying that the iwi involvement was not part of his original decision to advance the exemption?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Then, given his answer today that he did not seek information about the ownership of the various lots noted in the exemption and that iwi was primarily, effectively, the reason for his advancing the exemption, then what was his reasoning for not taking some other legislative step to advance the iwi?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: What we do in the future is yet to be determined. The exemption was ruled out of order. In terms of the breadth of the exemption, the previously proposed transitional exemption would have only applied to a small proportion of the land nominated in the bill. That is residential lifestyle land, which is neither coastal-sensitive land and which is less than five hectares in area. Golf courses, forestry land, and the like were never proposed to be covered by the now defunct transitional exemption.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: In his consideration leading to the Cabinet paper seeking the exemption, did he ever ask the question: who will benefit most from this exemption; and, if so, what was the answer?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No, I didn’t ask it in those terms, but I did inquire who would be the beneficiaries of the exemption and I was advised by Treasury that the iwi would be. I was aware that by the end of the process, the other developers would get a benefit, who were developers with the iwi. And, of course, the other beneficiaries would have been the people who got the benefit of the exemption as overseas people who would have been able to acquire that land as overseas people, when they would not have been able to but for the exemption.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Why, then, did he decide to seek the exemption when Treasury advice that he received on 19 March advised against it, he had not sought clarification on who would benefit most from the exemption, and he knew that Te Ārai Ltd did not record iwi as shareholders?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Because, after discussions with my Cabinet colleagues, the Government thought that it was appropriate that although there’d be no general exemption for all Treaty settlement land, a transitional exemption was justified in this case.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Did any of his colleagues or officials tell him during his consideration of the exemption that Ngāti Manuhiri’s 2016 annual report states: “Four hundred and seventy-two hectares of the land in question was sold in the 2015-16 year to Te Ārai South Holdings.”, which the iwi have no shareholding in and only retained 200 hectares of lower-value sand dune land intended for sand mining?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No, they didn’t. I think it’s fair enough for the Opposition to question whether the select committee or I perhaps should have looked into further, in respect of some of those details. We, of course, would have had the opportunity to do that and, if there were changes necessary, could have made them at the committee stage of the House. But, of course, that is now not open to us. I made the decisions that I recommended to Cabinet based on the information I had at the time.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Did the Hon Shane Jones ask him to advance the exemption, and, if so, did he explain that the iwi had very little to gain from this exemption?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I had discussions, as I’ve already said, with the Hon Kelvin Davis and with Shane Jones and my other Cabinet colleagues.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Did the Hon Shane Jones ask for the Minister to have regard to some exemptions, and the driving force behind that request was the former National Party leader, Sir John Key?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No, he actually didn’t raise the name of John Key with me. In fact, I wasn’t aware of that until Tuesday evening.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: During his consideration of the exemption, did he hear—and I quote—“Why do Kiwis, going about their lives as best they can, have to fight every step of the way to preserve what is their right against a billionaire developer from another country and a complicit Government?”, and if he did, how did he respond to the Rt Hon Winston Peters, who I’ve just quoted?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No, I wasn’t aware of that quote. I am aware of the discomfort that the Rt Hon Winston Peters has with the sale of land to foreign buyers. The reasons why we thought a transitional exemption was necessary in this case have previously been explained.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister whether, when Shane Jones approached him, he also apprised him of the fact that not only was Sir John Key, the former National Party leader, in favour of these exemptions but so was Steven Joyce, the former National Minister of Finance?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Well, again, actually, at the time, I wasn’t aware of that. I’ve subsequently become aware of that because someone showed me a Hansard transcript. What I was aware of was that the National Party have advocated for broad exemptions for the wealthiest foreigners to buy land, exemplified by Hamish Walker’s proposition that Queenstown should have an exemption for sales to foreign buyers of $5 million or more.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does the Minister now accept that the iwi in this case have very little, or never had much, to gain from the exemption and that he was, by and large, hoodwinked by his Cabinet colleagues from New Zealand First into making what is, ultimately, a—a—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: A—a—a—a what?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I’m sorry, I was impersonating the Acting Prime Minister—my apologies. Mr Speaker, can I start that question again because I was interrupted?

💬 SPEAKER: I think it’d be a good idea. We’ll sort of take off the penalties from both sides for the interjections on that, and we’ll start from zero, and the Hon Gerry Brownlee will start the supplementary again.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Thank you. If in fact he, as he now says, understands that the iwi had very little to gain from this, does he believe he was hoodwinked by his New Zealand First colleagues into promoting this exemption?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No, and I said nothing of the sort. In fact, on a number of occasions, I’ve said that I was advised, and have still been advised, that this is the largest asset of those particular iwi.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister as to whether or not it’s also a fact that not only Sir John Key, the former National Party leader, and Steven Joyce, the former Minister of Finance, but also the National Party’s number one apologist, Michelle Boag, is involved as well?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Look, in terms of the National Party advocates on behalf of exemptions, I can’t keep up.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: How soon does the Minister intend releasing all of the Official Information Act requests around this matter, as he said he would do on Tuesday?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I’m endeavouring to do that as quickly as possible. I was advised that there is a large volume of papers that have to go through the normal redaction process—not to redact any details relating to the Te Ārai development but in respect of other proper redactions. When I was advised that that would take some time, I requested the ministry to concentrate on the Te Ārai - relevant Cabinet papers and advice so that they could get it out early, and I’m expecting that that will be early next week.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: That long to redact it?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: What was that? I didn’t hear that interjection.

💬 SPEAKER: No, I think it was a facetious interjection on the part of the Hon Gerry Brownlee. Has the member finished?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Yes.

💬 SPEAKER: Thank you.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Oh, no, well, not entirely—I mean, next week’s another week.

💬 SPEAKER: Yes. No, I think I’ll leave the obvious rejoinder to that one.

Families Package—Impact and Eligibility

3. to the Minister for Social Development: What will be the impact of the Government’s Families Package?

The extra support provided by the Families Package will increase the income of 384,000 families by an average of $75 per week, and will lift 64,000 children out of poverty by 2021; 26,000 additional families will be eligible for Working for Families and 65,000 families will benefit from Best Start in the first year of the Families Package alone. On top of that, 1 million households will receive support for heating costs over winter through the winter energy payment. The Government is proud to be taking immediate action to provide more support for low and middle income families in New Zealand.

💬 Anahila Kanongata’a-Suisuiki: How will people know what they are eligible for?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: One easy way to check what families are eligible for is through the new eligibility guide which I launched on Tuesday. This will make it easier for all New Zealanders to see what support they may be able to get. This website is check.msd.govt.nz. People can also check their eligibility for Working for Families through the IRD website. The Ministry of Social Development is also notifying clients of positive changes which will occur automatically such as the winter energy payment for those on a main benefit or superannuation.

💬 Anahila Kanongata’a-Suisuiki: Will the impact of the Families Package have an effect on the economy?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Yes, it will. In the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update released last month, Treasury says that the coalition Government’s fiscal policy, including the Families Package, is forecast to have a stimulatory impact on the economy. The Treasury says that, “This reflects strong growth in capital and operating expenditure including infrastructure investment, the Families Package and other expenditure on public services.” This Government’s plan supports hard-working families, and supports growth while putting in place the foundations for a more productive, sustainable, and inclusive economy.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Could the Minister tell the House if she considers the opt-out provisions on the winter heating payment to be either simple or confusing?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Absolutely simple. A letter has gone out to all those that are eligible to inform them of the winter energy payment and how it will be applied. In that letter they are given information on the fact that they can opt out and how they opt out. They are also asked to inform the Government if they will be travelling during that period as that may impact on their eligibility for the payment. We are very much looking forward to this winter energy payment that will benefit over 1 million New Zealanders.

Business Confidence—Actions and Reports

4. to the Minister of Finance: Does he still hold the view that recent falls in business confidence surveys reflect “an issue around perception”?

on behalf of the Minister of Finance: Businesses will always have issues that affect their confidence. For example, in the latest ANZ survey the number one issue for businesses was access to skilled staff, which this Government is committed to addressing. My reference to perception was in regard to periods of high economic growth that occurred at the same time as low levels of business confidence. Analysis by the economist Ganesh Nana shows that business confidence was pessimistic in 82 of 99 months between 2000 and 2008 but that the economy grew by an average of 3.2 percent a year over that period. In contrast, business confidence was optimistic 87 of 95 months between 2009 and 2017, but GDP grew at just an average of 1.98 percent per year.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he believe that the ANZ’s own activity index, which measures firms’ expectations of their own activity, provides a useful gauge of future GDP growth?

Yes, in referencing that positive measure, I point the member to this comment from the ANZ economists that “Going forward, we expect tailwinds in the form of fiscal stimulus and strong terms of trade will see the economy continue to grow at about par.” So here we have economists saying the economy will grow at par, which, if reports I’ve heard are correct, has obviously upset the National Party so much that they’ve doubled down on their efforts to talk down the economy.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: What message does he take from the latest Own Activity Index figure being at the same level as 2009, when the New Zealand economy was in the middle of the global financial crisis?

I think history will say that the economy did grow after that period, so the confidence that people had in 2009 was well placed. But, going forward, as the economists have said, we expect tailwinds, in the form of fiscal stimulus and strong terms of trade, will see the economy continue to grow about par. I can do no better than to repeat the experts on this matter.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is he concerned at all that in yesterday’s ANZ business confidence survey, business confidence fell by a further 12 percent, bringing the net figure to negative 39 percent, and the Own Activity Index fell by a further 4 percent?

I’ll note that the Own Activity measure is still positive, and also that all of the conditions that contribute to economic growth are strong. Business investment: in the GDP figures released last week, business investment grew by 5.5 percent in the year to March 2018, compared to an annual growth rate of just 3.9 percent in the year to March 2017. Unemployment is forecast to keep falling, wages are forecast to rise faster than before the election, and business investment is forecast to continue to grow at nearly 5 percent per year.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he think his Government bears any responsibility for these falls in business confidence?

The Government will accept all praise for the growing confidence in the economy and the forecasts, which show that unemployment will keep falling, that wages are forecast to rise, and that business investment is forecast to continue to grow at nearly 5 percent.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Other than simply stating that he wants to “transition” to a more “sustainable, productive, and inclusive economy”, what actual policies does he have that will resuscitate dying business confidence?

I reject the member’s characterisation at the end, but I’m happy to talk about the Government’s plans and actions, because I would note, as I have at the outset, that the respondents said their biggest concern in that survey was finding skilled staff in the ANZ survey. That didn’t happen overnight; it took years of inaction for New Zealand’s skills deficits to appear. We are dedicated to closing the deficits we inherited, and I want to congratulate my colleague the Minister of Immigration, Iain Lees-Galloway, who yesterday announced the creation of a KiwiBuild skills shortage list. The Government is also prioritising trades training and apprenticeships with our fees-free policy. And today we’re announcing a record 10-year investment strategy for our nationwide transport infrastructure, which is fully funded and will give the construction sector certainty about our long-term commitment to using transport policy as a key component of our economic plan. We delivered a fiscally responsible Budget and a healthy surplus, which sets aside money for a rainy day—

💬 SPEAKER: OK. That’s enough, thank you.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he not consider that the uncertainty that this Government is generating is a driver of falling confidence—and he mentioned the access to skills? That uncertainty flows from a clear promise from this Government to substantially reduce immigration, which has now been overturned, leading to uncertainty as to whether there is any relationship between what the Government promised and what it actually does.

Of course, I reject the member’s characterisation of all of that and point to the indicators ahead of good, sound growth. This is a Government that manages the economy well. It’s got a track record of doing that, and it will continue to do so.

💬 Hon James Shaw: Would he agree that if the Opposition is correct that there is a causal relationship between business confidence and economic growth, and if the Minister’s figures are also correct that in times of higher growth, under Labour-led Governments, when business confidence is low, but in times of lower growth, under National-led Governments, confidence is high, then currently low business confidence is surely a sign of continued high economic growth in the future?

💬 SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. [Interruption] Sorry, I’m just dealing with the ruling. I think it was a good attempt, but I don’t think the member asking the question quite got to an area of clear ministerial responsibility.

💬 Hon Iain Lees-Galloway: Is immigration the only source of skills for the New Zealand labour market, or is it important that Governments invest in providing people who are underutilised, such as the 12 percent of New Zealanders who are currently underutilised—

💬 SPEAKER: Question not a speech, please.

💬 Hon Iain Lees-Galloway: —with the skills they need to engage in the labour market?

I agree with the member that we need to build skills, and that’s why this Government is prioritising trades training and apprenticeships with the fees-free policy, and I congratulate the member on his own initiatives in that regard.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Was the Minister saying in his primary answer that it was both a matter of perception and bias, to the extent that the previous administration was borrowing at six times the level of their inherited debt, the economy was going to hell in a handbasket, and still confidence was going up?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! He might be responsible for what he was saying, but, again, I think it’s inviting the Minister to stray into areas outside his responsibility.

💬 Hon James Shaw: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This is just a point of clarification in relation to your ruling, Mr Speaker, which is that the primary question to the Minister was about the Minister’s understanding of issues of perception around the causal relationship between business confidence and economic growth, or the lack thereof. My supplementary question was directly about the Minister’s views on the causal relationship between business confidence and economic growth, or the lack thereof.

💬 SPEAKER: And what I am saying is that I’m not convinced that the member was actually asking a question as opposed to making a political statement.

Health Services—Counties Manukau District Health Board Review

5. to the Minister of Health: Has he read all correspondence and briefings provided to him relating to the Counties Manukau District Health Board?

I have read all the briefings provided to me. My office has received a large volume of correspondence relating to Counties Manukau District Health Board (DHB). I have not personally read every letter and email, but my staff do read all incoming correspondence.

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: What action did he take when the Office of the Auditor-General raised a significant audit matter with him on 29 January this year about specific issues relating to past financial practices discovered by the Counties Manukau health board chairman, and the chairman of its audit, finance, and risk committee?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I have received that letter from the Auditor-General alongside the other 19 DHB audit letters, and I note that one paragraph—on page three, I think, of a six page letter—does cover this issue. It is one of 21 specific significant points raised by the Auditor-General, and I took comfort from the indication that an independent external review into these issues was taking place.

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: When the Office of the Auditor-General told him that the Ministry of Health was leading an independent external review into the financial practices at the DHB, what action did he take to ensure that the former chief executive of the DHB, Stephen McKernan, who was subsequently appointed as the Director-General of Health, took no part in decision making about reviewing an audit that Mr McKernan was mentioned in?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I have no knowledge that Mr McKernan was mentioned in that audit, but I trusted Mr McKernan to manage any conflicts appropriately. That’s my experience of him.

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: Why did he take no action to apprise himself further of the audit undertaken by the district health board, which would have shown, if he read those documents, that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 Mr McKernan was mentioned seven times in the report?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Officials understand the seriousness of these matters. The Ministry of Health is working through a proper process and I’m not about to interfere with that.

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: Did he ever discuss with, receive a briefing from, or seek advice from Stephen McKernan when he was considering the removal of the former Counties Manukau chairman Rabin Rabindran and the board’s audit, finance, and risk committee chairman, Mark Darrow?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Mr McKernan, I think, has mentioned the Beattie Varley report to me at some stage over the last period. It would be no surprise to the House, I don’t think, that I’ve had plenty of conversations around Counties Manukau during my time as health Minister, but the removal of those board members, or my decision to refresh the leadership at Counties Manukau, had absolutely no connection to that audit investigation that was going on.

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: Will he, in light of the State Services Commissioner’s decision to urgently investigate the matters I raised yesterday in this House, also ask the Auditor-General to review his decision-making process in removing Rabin Rabindran and Mark Darrow from the DHB?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Mr Speaker, could the member please repeat that question?

💬 Jami-Lee Ross: Will he, in light of the State Services Commissioner’s decision to urgently investigate the matters I raised yesterday in this House, also ask the Auditor-General to review his decision-making process in removing Rabin Rabindran and Mark Darrow from the DHB?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: No. The two matters are not at all connected.

KiwiBuild—Sustainability, Unitec Development

6. to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: What steps will he take to promote sustainable urban design and energy-efficient buildings within the Unitec KiwiBuild redevelopment?

on behalf of the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: Planning for Unitec development is in its early stages. As part of KiwiBuild, the Government’s wider housing programme, we are looking at ways to improve design standards, and that work is ongoing. The Government wants to use the scale of KiwiBuild to drive a step-change in both affordability and in the quality of our homes.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Will the Minister commit to ensuring KiwiBuild homes within the Unitec development are built to a higher energy efficiency standard than are required under the building code?

We would like quality built environments that deliver urban forms that are more energy efficient, that mitigate negative impacts on the environment, that support a variety of low-emissions transport modes in environments that are accessible to all, and, in addition, to provide communities with access to jobs, services, and amenities. The planning for Unitec development and KiwiBuild will realise that vision of sustainable urban design.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Will the Minister commit to using the independent Homestar rating system and ensure all homes within this redevelopment are rated at six or above?

On behalf of the Minister for Housing and Urban Development can I say that that particular question is out of order because that is under the Minister for Building and Construction.

💬 SPEAKER: No. The Minister will answer the question. The Minister is responsible for building or for the requirements around the Unitec building. He has shown publicly that he has taken responsibility for that development and, therefore, it is a valid question.

Part of the work that is currently being done by this Government is to look at all things, including building designs, and Homestar is not something that this Government has actually committed to building buildings to right now, but we are considering all options.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When will the very first of the KiwiBuild homes at the Unitec development be available for people to move into?

That particular question—if the Minister would like to put it in writing I will make sure that we come back with a detailed answer to that.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Will the Minister commit to improving cycling connections between Mount Albert and Waterview, as part of the Unitec development?

💬 SPEAKER: No. That, I’m going to rule, is outside. That might actually be the Minister’s responsibility, but not the housing Minister’s responsibility; the transport Minister’s. It’s outside the area.

💬 Gareth Hughes: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I’m not trying to challenge your ruling, but I would point out it’s the Minister for urban development, so transport is included within that.

💬 SPEAKER: I think that would be a dangerous conflating of portfolios.

Health Services—Industrial Action, Cancellation of Elective Surgeries

7. to the Minister of Health: From what date will DHBs be cancelling elective surgeries in anticipation of the nurses’ strikes, and what specialist surgeries will be cancelled first?

I’m advised that each district health board (DHB) will be managing this through their individual contingency plans, and they will be prioritising based on the clinical needs of patients. I understand the process of sending notices of postponement has already started, as too has rebooking. The specific dates and types of surgery that will be postponed in the event of a strike will vary from DHB to DHB. I would note that the DHBs and the New Zealand Nurses Organisation (NZNO) are still involved in facilitation, and I encourage both sides to do all they can to find a settlement and avoid strike action.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister’s answer talked about a range of dates, and that is certainly true. But the question was “From what date” will those surgeries be cancelled, and that wasn’t addressed.

💬 SPEAKER: I think it was addressed. It was answered, maybe not to the member’s satisfaction. It’s sort of like yes/no—you can’t insist on a particular form of answer. Is there a further supplementary?

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Has the Minister received any reports that DHBs have cancelled surgeries that were scheduled from as early as tomorrow?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: What I have had advice on is that the process of sending notices of postponement has already started, as too has rebooking. The Ministry of Health cannot provide detailed information on that at this time.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Can he therefore confirm that as the NZNO has issued notice of a second strike on 12 July, unless the nurses’ pay dispute is settled no elective heart surgery, bowel cancer surgery, and other elective complex surgeries will take place at all in New Zealand for two weeks or more?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I cannot confirm that at this stage. I’m advised that each DHB will be managing this through their own individual contingency plans, and they’ll be prioritising based on the clinical needs of patients. The specific dates and types of surgery that will be postponed in the event of a strike will vary from DHB to DHB.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Will those patients who have their surgery cancelled, postponed, or deferred be given priority over other patients whose surgery dates have already been confirmed, thus disrupting more patients and their families, or will they have to wait even longer for their surgery to be rescheduled?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I can’t speak to individual cases. What I can say is that the DHBs each have individual contingency plans in place. They’ve been signed with an agreement between the NZNO and the DHBs. They’ve signed life-preserving service agreements. The process of prioritisation will be based on need, just as happens in the hospital sector normally.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Can he give an assurance that preventable deaths won’t occur as a result of these complex surgeries being delayed?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I am advised that each of the 20 DHBs have signed life-preserving services agreements with the NZNO to ensure that the emergency services and safe staffing levels are in place. I’m also advised that DHBs have set up clinics over the weekend, on non-strike days, to provide additional services such as dialysis. No one wants to see patients put at risk, and everything is being done and will be done to keep them safe.

Renewable Energy—Security of Supply

8. to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What proportion of electricity generation was non-renewable in the March 2018 quarter?

According to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s latest New Zealand Energy Quarterly publication, 18.9 percent of electricity generation came from non-renewables in the March 2018 quarter; 81.1 percent of generation in that quarter came from renewables.

💬 Jonathan Young: Does the Minister agree with Meridian Energy, who have said power prices may need to rise substantially if the policy intent is to have all on-call generation coming from renewable supplies?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: No, I don’t, because what we do know is that some of the most expensive electricity that we generate in this country comes from non-renewable sources. Actually, it is the cost of renewable electricity generation sources that are lowering and it is non-renewables that are rising. If we want to have affordable electricity in this country, we need a Government that is prepared to put the plan in place to get those renewable sources in.

💬 Jonathan Young: Will the Minister look to battery technology to keep the lights on for New Zealand households during low lake levels, low wind levels, and low sunshine hours, and when fossil fuels are no longer part of our future, even though Genesis Energy have said trying to use them for managing seasonal storage could cost more than $2 trillion?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Clearly, at the moment the technology state for batteries is not the kind of solution that we would be looking at. But, given this Government has the courage to put in place a plan that will see us through the next 30, 40, 50 years, batteries are one option, as is hydrogen ammonia storage, as is increasing our thermal baseload through geothermal and using our hydro lakes as storage. There are a range of solutions, and I encourage that member to enter the 21st century and start looking at them.

💬 Jonathan Young: With Transpower forecasting electricity demand more than doubling by 2050 and the Minister saying extra generation will probably not come from hydro and that fossil fuels aren’t our future, is the Minister open that nuclear energy should be considered, as suggested by Transpower’s grid development manager?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: No.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Who is the person that is the head of Genesis Energy, and what political party did she come from?

💬 SPEAKER: The member may answer the first part of the question.

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Ha, Ha! Mr Speaker, really? You’re going to rule that in order? I think it is immaterial which party the head of Genesis Energy comes from. But what I think is important is that we put in place adequate planning.

💬 Jonathan Young: So what is the Minister doing to ensure New Zealand households can turn on the lights when lake levels are low, when the wind isn’t blowing, when the sun isn’t shining, and when fossil fuels are no longer part of our future?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: What this Government is doing to ensure that New Zealanders can keep their lights on is putting in place a plan for the 21st century that will see what happens when the world stops using fossil fuels. What I want to know from that member and his party with its new-found action on climate change is when do they propose to stop burning fossil fuels?

Families Package—Paid Parental Leave

9. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What additional support will be available to new families from 1 July?

As part of our transformational Families Package, the Government is making good on its plan to extend paid parental leave, with the duration rising from 18 to 22 weeks. There will also be a rise in the actual payments of 4.7 percent. Better outcomes for families are one of the Government’s top priorities, and we’ll see more of that this Sunday when the Families Package takes effect.

💬 Jo Luxton: Why increase paid parental leave?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Paid parental leave plays an important role in making sure that families have valuable support at this critical stage in their children’s lives. The World Health Organization guidelines stress the importance of the first six months for babies to breastfeed and bond with their parents. The evidence is clear that these six months are crucial for infant development.

💬 Jo Luxton: What are his future plans for paid parental leave?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: The duration of paid parental leave will rise again to 26 weeks from 1 July 2020. I’m also taking advice on the merits of a wider rewrite of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act to ensure that it is fit for purpose in delivering for Kiwi families.

Prisons—Public-private Partnerships, Waikeria

10. to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by all his statements, actions, and policies regarding his corrections portfolio?

Yes, in the context they were made.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Does he stand by his answer to oral question No. 9 on 12 December 2017 that, in relation to Waikeria Prison, “we don’t generally do private-public partnerships.”

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Let’s be clear: the public-private partnership (PPP) is to build the prison, but there’s no way on earth that a public-private partnership is going to run Waikeria.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Has a contract for the public-private partnership for the Waikeria Prison rebuild been signed between the Department of Corrections and a private sector consortium, and, if so, on what date?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No, not yet.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Did he advise both Ministers David Clark and Grant Robertson that there had been a PPP signed by the former Government when they both repeated in the House that a PPP contract for Waikeria had been signed by the previous Government, and that breaking it would cost significant sums of money to the Government?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No.

💬 Hon David Bennett: What advice has he received from corrections regarding the answers provided by Ministers David Clark and Grant Robertson in the House regarding their answers to oral questions around the Waikeria Prison PPP?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: It was just really verbal advice—exactly what I said to the first question—that a public-private partnership is going to build the prison, but there’s no way on earth that we’re going to have a public-private partnership running the prison. That is the job of corrections.

💬 Hon David Bennett: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a very straight question about advice in regard to those two Ministers. Could the Minister please explain what advice he had in regard to those two Ministers and their comments?

💬 Hon Dr David Clark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, hang on, I’ve got one coming here. Is it related to that?

💬 Hon Dr David Clark: Yes.

💬 SPEAKER: Right. Well, the member always has to let someone finish their point of order before I’ll move on.

💬 Hon Dr David Clark: Just before you rule on that, sir, I fear that the member is mischaracterising the way that I spoke about that—

💬 SPEAKER: No, no.

💬 Hon Dr David Clark: —and the other—

💬 SPEAKER: No, the member will resume his seat. The Minister addressed the question. Is there a further supplementary?

💬 Hon David Bennett: No.

Families Package—Effect on Māori

11. to the Associate Minister for Social Development: Will the changes made by the Families Package from 1 July help Māori; if so, how?

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. He pātai pai taua pātai.

[That indeed is a good question.]

We know that like many New Zealand families, Māori families will be amongst the 384,000 families who will be better off by 2021. For instance, from 1 July, approximately 135,000 Māori will benefit from the winter energy payment. This will automatically be granted for people residing in New Zealand who are in receipt of a working-age main benefit, or those on superannuation or the veterans pension. Best Start tax credits are expected to also benefit 65,000 children born each year, of which 18,000 are expected to be born to Māori families.

💬 Rino Tirikatene: Why is it important that the Government support Māori through its Families Package?

💬 Hon PEENI HENARE: He pātai pai taua pātai.

[That indeed is a good question.]

We know that Māori and Pacific people in New Zealand are much younger and better looking. The median age for Māori is 23.9 years, compared to 38 for New Zealanders overall. We also know that Māori have higher birth rates compared to the general population, particularly in urban centres. Māori will make up a huge part of our future workforce. Therefore, ensuring that they have the best start in life is important to this Government.

💬 Rino Tirikatene: How will support for Māori families support the Government’s goal of reducing child poverty?

💬 Hon PEENI HENARE: Anō, he pātai pai tēnā.

[That, again, is indeed a good question.]

Māori disproportionately experience lower incomes than non-Māori. Under the Families Package, low and medium income households will benefit significantly. We know that around half of all children in low-income households are Māori or Pacific. Putting more money into these households will support the Government’s goal of reducing child poverty.

Official Information Act—Compliance, Public Media Ministerial Advisory Group

12. to the Associate Minister of State Services (Open Government): Has she provided any guidance to State agencies and Government bodies about best practice to achieve open and transparent Government?

No, and that’s because the State Services Commissioner provides leadership to the State services on these matters.

💬 Melissa Lee: How concerned would she be if she were to learn that a Government-appointed body had decided not to minute their meetings because those minutes could be subject to the Official Information Act?

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: Well, the State Services Commissioner provides, as I said, leadership to the State services. Some examples of that: guidance is provided on the Official Information Act (OIA) to increase public access to information, there is guidance on providing free and frank advice—

💬 Melissa Lee: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: No, the member will resume her seat. There can’t be a point of order yet.

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: —and codes of conduct for staff in ministerial offices, as well as “speaking up” guidance—so a range of advice on a range of matters. So that’s good advice to the State services, and if there are instances of concern, then I suggest that she raise them with the State services.

💬 Melissa Lee: Is she concerned that the ministerial advisory group appointed by the Minister of Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media to decide the future of public media funding in New Zealand has decided not to keep minutes of their meetings because they would be subject to the Official Information Act?

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: I’m not aware of that, but what I would say is that [Interruption]—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: —the ministerial advisory group has provided reports to the Minister, which will be provided in due course publicly.

💬 Melissa Lee: Is it open and transparent for the public media ministerial advisory group responsible for millions of taxpayers’ dollars for public broadcasting to no longer take minutes of their meetings in order to avoid being subject to the Official Information Act?

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: I think I’ve already answered that, but I’ll repeat that ministerial advisory groups provide advice to Ministers—that’s what they’re set up to do. That advice is made public to the media in due course as the process goes through.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: No, I’m sorry—well, OK.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. A number of allegations have been made by that member without one shred of evidence, and surely a person coming to this House in a genuine inquiry making an allegation of that level should be required to produce the evidence. She would be if it was a primary question. Why after two or three subsequent questions is she persisting with that line?

💬 SPEAKER: Yes, I do have some concerns in the area, but it is clear to me that if the member is incorrect in the allegations that she has made, there will be a requirement on her to correct in the House. In fact, with repeated allegations it would come very close to being a breach of privilege, if the member, in fact, knew that they were not correct. I will say, however, to Clare Curran, that she was asked a—within the question there was a very specific question which she did not address, and I’m going to ask Melissa Lee to ask the question again, preferably in a slightly shortened form, with the guts of it clear so we can get it addressed.

💬 Melissa Lee: Is it open and transparent for the public media ministerial advisory group responsible for millions of taxpayer dollars for public broadcasting to no longer take minutes of their meetings—

💬 SPEAKER: That’s enough.

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: I’m unaware of any allegation of that sort. My understanding is that my ministerial advisory group is providing reports to me which will be made public in due course. I’m unaware of that matter that that member is raising.

💬 Melissa Lee: I seek leave to table a letter dated 19 June 2018 from Te Manatū Taonga, which is the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, and the 27 February 2018 minutes of the public media advisory group, released from the Minister’s office under the OIA.

💬 SPEAKER: Is there any objection to those documents being tabled? There appears to be none.

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

💬 Melissa Lee: Will the Minister be asking the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage to encourage her department, who are providing secretarial services to the advisory group for public broadcasting, to specifically advise the group that deciding not to keep meeting minutes fails to meet expected standards of openness and transparency?

💬 Hon CLARE CURRAN: I’ll certainly be looking into the matter.