Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s statements and actions?

Yes.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: When she was asked whether proposed employment law changes would allow a union representative to enter the property of a business without the business’ permission, does she stand by her answer “only if the person in question they are visiting is a member of the union.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m glad the member’s asked that question again; it gives me a chance to clarify. The example that he gave related to farmhouses, and I know that section 19 of the Act and the proposal that is included in this bill specifically precludes going into a dwelling, which means that the example that the member used would not have been accurate. So thank you for the opportunity to clarify.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Can she confirm that the Government’s changes actually give the power to union representatives to enter the premises of a business without their permission, even if there are no union members on site, so that unions can recruit new members or distribute the union information?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The first principle I want to point out is that this legislation that is before Parliament at present, essentially, brings back employment legislation that existed right up until 2015 in some cases, and I have to say that unless the member is now saying that there was a dire economic situation for the six years his Government was last in as a consequence of that legislation, then that’s for him to argue. We personally do not believe that this is the case with these changes. To come back to the question that the member raised, for the purposes of perhaps signing up directly a union member, which is quite a specific circumstance, then that would be the case. But, again, I point out that section 21 of the Act means that the union official has to comply with all reasonable health and safety and security procedures and must access the workplace in a reasonable way, having regard to normal business operations in the workplace. There are plenty of protections in place.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Has she seen comments by the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety in relation to her answers in the House last week: “If the National Party really wanted to debate the detail of the bill, they would be asking me questions, because it is my responsibility to understand the detail of this legislation. They should be talking to me, not trying to catch the Prime Minister off guard.”, and, if so, does she agree with her Minister that she was caught off guard?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I know the point that the Minister was making was that if this was such a significant issue for the economy, why has the spokesperson not asked the Minister directly about this issue?

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she think it’s her responsibility to know the detail of a policy that business says is their number one concern with her Government?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As much as it is the Opposition leader’s responsibility to know that a union official can’t enter a farmhouse.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: To be really clear: can the Prime Minister confirm that under the Government’s proposed employment law changes, a union representative will be able to enter the premises of a business without permission from that business?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The person in question has to comply with the rules and obligations of that workplace, including the health and safety obligations. So if that means reporting in at the gate because there are health and safety obligations, then they must comply with that law.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Why will union representatives not be required to gain consent from an employer before entering the premises of their workplace when even a police officer has to ask a judge for a warrant?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I pointed out in my last answer, if there are health and safety obligations that require them to do so, then they would. Again, I come back to this issue that these are changes that existed, in many cases in this omnibus bill, right up until 2015. These are changes that allow employees to have a voice, to be well represented in the workplace, and I’m surprised that the member considers that this is going to have such a dire impact on the economy.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Using the member’s previous question, does a policeman in hot pursuit of a highly suspected murderer inside an office situation have to spend all the time to go and ask a judge for a warrant to pick that person up?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I had called for order before, but I think we’ll just leave it there.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Can the Minister confirm that we are giving unions the powers that we give police officers when they’re in hot pursuit of murderers?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The point that the Deputy Prime Minister was making was that the member is being alarmist and dramatic.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Can she confirm that under the Government’s proposed employment law changes, business owners will now have to pay workers for time spent undertaking union activities?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes, in the same way that they have to, under the legislation, also allow them to have rest and meal breaks.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: So, to be clear, can she confirm that under the Government’s proposed employment law changes, businesses will now be responsible for funding union activities while workers should otherwise be doing their job?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I would encourage the member to have a long conversation with the likes of Air New Zealand, where, through their framework of working collectively with their employees, they have improved the productivity, the health and safety, and they have a high-performance workplace. Unlike the member, I don’t believe that excluding employees is the way to become a productive company in a productive country.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Will the law changes make private businesses responsible for undertaking and funding union membership drives?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, as I say, this is legislation that existed under the last Government, and at that point—unless they’re starting to argue that under the first six years of their reign the economy tanked, they might want to change to a new line of questioning, because we on this side of the House believe it’s possible to empower employees to have a voice in the workplace and it won’t endanger business or the economy.

Economy—Business Confidence

2. to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Treasury that “weaker confidence, in conjunction with other data, highlights the risk that growth over the coming fiscal year may be weaker than forecast in the Budget”, and the Reserve Bank that “with surveyed business confidence falling and continued softness in the housing market, GDP growth may not recover as expected”?

I agree with Treasury and the Reserve Bank that there are risks to economic growth. I also agree with them that growth has held steady and that the fundamentals of the economy are sound. In particular, I agree with the Reserve Bank’s Governor’s comment that business investment should be increasing and economic growth is still very positive. Just today, that has been backed by Craig Hudson from Xero, who has said, “Xero’s Small Business Insights data challenges the notion that the economy is in a downturn.”

💬 Hon Amy Adams: What does it say about the future of the economy that firms’ view of their own activity, which both he and the Reserve Bank have said is a measure that they look to, is now 23 points below its long-run average and 15 points below its average even under the past previous Labour Government?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Most of the businesses who are making their reports of profits at the moment are reporting big increases in profits—just today, Freightways Group, we had Hallensteins last week, the ASB. What we know is that the economy has strong fundamentals, that we have a surplus, that we have debt tracking down. There is every reason to be optimistic about the economy.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: When the Prime Minister said this morning that the Government will “focus more on bringing as much certainty around its agenda as I can.”, does he think that setting up 135 working groups, banning oil and gas without consultation, refusing to heed concerns about industrial relations reforms, and dismissing the views of business as both biased and junk are symbolic of a Government giving business certainty?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I don’t agree with the premises in that member’s question, but what this Government did have to do on coming into office was clean up the mess of nine years of neglect across almost every portfolio area. We are bringing in a lot of people to help us with that agenda, they are enjoying that exercise, and we will improve on the mess that was left for us.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: How will he adjust the Government’s programme to respond to concerns like those raised by the BNZ today—that New Zealand threatens to move into a pseudo-stagflationary environment with GDP growth likely to surprise on the downside, eating into revenue forecasts, while demands on expenditure will only increase?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I’d encourage the member to read a little further down the page, where it says, “There remains plenty of momentum in the economy. The Government is providing substantial fiscal stimulus and monetary conditions are not only stimulatory but are easing further too.”—bottom of the page.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: Well, does he share the sentiment of the Prime Minister that the reason business confidence is at a 10-year low and New Zealand has fallen from near the top to nearly the bottom of the OECD rankings is because businesses just don’t understand the Government’s policies; or is the truth that business understands perfectly well—they just don’t like this Government’s policies?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I don’t believe that’s a fair characterisation of what the Prime Minister said. What we know historically is that business confidence surveys have been more pessimistic with Governments with Labour at the centre of them. But at the same time economic growth has been solid: 3.2 percent the last time, compared to 1.9 percent under the nine years of the National Government.

Economy—Reports

3. to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the economy?

On Thursday, the Reserve Bank released its May Monetary Policy Statement, which did show a downward trend in growth rates, which began at the beginning of 2017, and looks to have bottomed out in the March and June quarters of this year. The Reserve Bank indicated that the combination of the coalition Government’s stimulatory policies and a rise in net exports are expected to contribute to growth picking up again to above trend in 2019. And it forecasts growth on average of about 3 percent over the next three years.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: What reports has he seen on how these drivers of growth are different to previous periods?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On Sunday, the Reserve Bank Governor noted how the drivers of growth over the next three years will be different to the past five years. He said, “… when you look at what are the drivers of economic activity now and towards the next two to three years, they are very different to the drivers of the last three to five years. The drivers were … recovery from the GFC, recovery from the Christchurch earthquake, very large population growth, and asset prices rising … Looking forward, it’s about driving growth. It’s about earning; it’s about the export-earning structures, the lower exchange rate, the … world growth; [and] good terms of trade. That’s about earning, producing product, and it’s about government investing and private sector investing.” It is exactly that transition to sustainable growth that this Government is focused on.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: What recent reports has he seen on economic activity?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Many, and in light of previous admonishments, I will give just one, a report on the comments of Mainfreight managing director Don Braid, who told the New Zealand Herald that “I think the business environment is good right now.” He went on to say, “At least with the change of Government there’s a different attitude to getting on and doing things and we’d encourage the Government in … the initiatives they’re talking about—at least we’re not living in a question mark.”

Provincial Growth Fund—Tree-planting Programme and Benefit to Economy

4. to the Minister of Forestry: How many jobs, trees, or other returns does he expect to be produced or generated by the $485 million from the Provincial Growth Fund so far announced for forestry, and in what years will that money be spent?

The $480 million - odd dollars accessed from the Provincial Growth Fund will lead, in a forestry sense, to at least 2,000 jobs. The actual commercial returns are the subject of confidentiality between the parties that have transacted with the Crown. In so far as the other returns, we conceive it to be nigh on $3 billion. That figure is largely made up of the heavy lifting that our policy will deliver to meet the costs of climate change, something that was neglected. It was actually Graeme Hart who brought to John Key the proposal to outline a policy of this nature, and it was killed by Nick Smith.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: That is a lie.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Who said that?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I did.

💬 SPEAKER: Stand up, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I withdraw and apologise. It was a misrepresentation.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member will stand, withdraw, and apologise for the nature of the former one—and he’s on his last warning for the day.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. There were two parts to the question, and he didn’t answer the second part—in what years will that money be spent. But he didn’t answer half of the first part, either, where I asked how many trees. I didn’t get an answer on the trees.

💬 SPEAKER: No, there was an “or”. There was an “or” in there, but the member will answer the second part of the question.

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: The second part of the question relates to accountancy. As you know, when the Crown advances capital in the creation of an asset, there is a revenue column and an expense column. The commitments from the fund will be made; however, the cash will be transferred, as is the case with accrual accounting, over a longer period of time. But an expense incurred in relation to the provincial fund will have definitely been entered into the Crown books by the time 2020 comes around.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to make a personal explanation in respect of the accusation that was made in regard to Shane Jones in my role as Minister for Climate Change Issues.

💬 SPEAKER: OK, I am going to put that, but I think the member should have either done it immediately or left it till the end of the question. But there were three people who interjected during that point of order. They might have been anticipating the leave, and that is some excuse, but the process is always that one waits until the leave has been sought. Is there any objection? There is objection. [Interruption] Order! Both of you.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Isn’t 2,000 possible jobs for $485 million a lean return, and isn’t it more likely that $485 million left in the hands of New Zealanders to invest in their own business, or whatever they thought best, would produce more jobs?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: I can’t go past the gargantuan figure of $3 billion worth of economic upside for the New Zealand economy. Now, the jobs will, largely, be based in the provinces, and I think it’s very arrogant and presumptuous of the member to imagine that he can think better than the people who are lining up to develop the forestry industry, to develop the policies that will lead to a $3 billion positive outcome.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is he saying—and I think he used the figure of 60 million extra trees being planted as a result of this $485 million—that those 60 million trees will save the country $3 billion in climate change obligations?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: The reference to the $3 billion figure—approaching $3 billion—reflects the full gamut of policies that the billion tree strategy represents: refinements to the Overseas Investment Office, refinements to the emissions trading scheme, grants, and an array of joint venture programmes. The 60 million figure that the member refers to is a paltry amount of what we will achieve over the 10-year period. Whilst it’s important, it does not represent the entirety of the Government’s commitment.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: I’m not sure I follow that. Will the money being handed out be contingent on hiring New Zealanders to plant the trees?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: There’s an insinuation that somehow I, as the Minister, am handing out the money. In politics, envy is a disease, and there’s far too much of it emanating from the other side of the House. At one level, they seek to waste me, at another level they seek to emulate me, but imitation is the worst type of flattery. I am not handing out the money. There is a robust process where partnership funding will be made available, and a part of that will actually relate to forests within the member’s own environment. So any suggestion that I’m handing out the money personally is unworthy of the time of question time.

💬 SPEAKER: Have another go—go on.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Do you want me to rephrase that question?

💬 SPEAKER: No, just have an extra supplementary.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: That’s very kind of you, Mr Speaker. Was the Ngati Hine Forestry Trust’s May 2018 newsletter correct when it said that the Crown had committed to plant a forest on their land in around 25 years’ time, after an earlier forest had been planted, grown, and harvested; if so, is he planning to pay, in the next 10 years, for work that will be carried out in the 2040s?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: A word of clarification: did the member refer to 2040?

💬 SPEAKER: I think he did.

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: Obviously a time when he will be back as a Minister. Now, I think I need to repeat myself on the question of the Ngāti Hine transaction: it is a matter of confidentiality. It is an orthodox transaction between the Crown and the hapū of Ngāpuhi. They have developed a key resource, they are developing the people, and I want the Ngāti Hine hapū leadership to focus more on growing trees than undermining Andrew Little’s settlement ambitions for Ngāpuhi.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: How do we know it’s an ordinary commercial transaction when he refuses to release any detail about the transaction; and is he surprised that confidence in this Government is falling to such low levels when we’re seeing a Government that’s prepared to spend half a billion dollars, with such a loose idea of what it’s getting for the money?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: Mr Speaker, was that the additional supplementary?

💬 SPEAKER: I think the member should answer it. I think the last time I clarified a matter for the member, he was naughty.

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: The policies pertaining to yesterday’s announcement—the amounts that were announced in the Budget—are wide open for all members of the public to see. It is not reasonable when the Crown enters into a transaction with a private party to create a commercial venture—we are not going to violate the covenants of that transaction. That is not unusual. It’s something that happened at considerable frequency under the last regime, and, as a member seeking to create a reputation of being a regional development expert, he should know better with these paltry, trivial questions.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.

💬 SPEAKER: No, before the member does, I think we’ve had enough of the characterisation of the quality of the questions. I’m just going to advise the Minister to focus on answering the question rather than playing the man.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister: is the Ngāti Hine forestry venture and trust, which was launched near Ngāwhā some time ago, the one that he and I attended, or is there a trust called “Nattay Hinnay” that we are not aware of?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: He’s got no responsibility for that.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I actually think he does—the first part of the question, at least.

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: The transaction that the member is referring to is the announcement that the right honourable member and I attended to. I would say that other Ngāti Hine forest transactions already exist between the Crown, and they were subject to decision making under the last regime. There is nothing unusual and there is nothing strange about the Crown transacting with Ngāti Hine, a hapū of the Ngāpuhi tribe.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Well, how can we know there is nothing unusual when we know from a newsletter from the trust that the Crown is going to pay all the costs, and on a much more favourable basis than they would have received from the private sector, and that they’re not only going to pay for one lot of forests to be planted and chopped down and harvested; they’re also going to pay for another forest to be built and handed over 100 percent to Ngāti Hine? How do we know that that is a normal, ordinary transaction and we’re getting good value for money out of taxpayers’ funds?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: I think that’s a reasonable question, and I don’t mind assisting the member gain tuition from the forestry industry. There is no shortage of examples in the forest sector where parties transacting to grow forests absorb an obligation to replant the forest. Not only is that very important in this case; it’s importance will grow as climate change obligations increase. Any suggestion that this model is somehow off the provincial fund reservation is, I think, unfair.

Education—Industrial Action in Primary Schools

5. to the Minister of Education: How many primary schools have notified the Ministry of Education that they will be open for instruction or supervision, or will close tomorrow?

I’ve been advised that as of this morning, 1,264 schools, including intermediates and contributing schools, have notified the Ministry of Education that they’ll be closed tomorrow. The ministry’s continuing to monitor that. Schools have been asked to give parents and caregivers as much notice as possible as to whether the school will be open for instruction or supervision, or will close. The New Zealand School Trustees Association is working with school boards to help them prepare and plan for strike action, and advice was sent out two weeks ago to school boards providing guidance on potential strike action and how to communicate about that to parents.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: In light of the fact that he does not have a firm number of exactly how many schools will close, can he confirm that there have been complaints to the ministry and his office about the adequacy of communication to boards of trustees about their responsibilities regarding the strike tomorrow?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I reject the first part of the question. I gave her a specific number—it’s 1,264.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: So can he confirm that he has received an answer from every school in New Zealand as to whether they are closing or remaining open?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That wasn’t the question. The question was “How many schools have notified the Ministry of Education?”, and 1,264 have.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: Why has the Government not offered additional support to parents who may be struggling where schools may be closed, and they do not have access to adequate supervision arrangements for their children?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: What school boards do in response to the strike is a matter for school boards of trustees.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: In light of the fact that he does not have an answer from every school in New Zealand as to what is happening tomorrow, if children are left unsupervised due to late decisions by schools, bad communication on the part of the ministry, will he take any responsibility for his hands-off approach to the strike tomorrow?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I absolutely reject the entire premise of the member’s question. Advice was sent to school boards of trustees two weeks ago.

💬 Jan Tinetti: What steps is the Government taking to address the concerns raised by the primary school teachers?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We are listening very carefully to the concerns primary school teachers have raised throughout these negotiations. We’ve already taken steps to reduce teacher workload by abolishing national standards. We are taking steps to restore teachers’ democratic representation on their governing body. We have introduced an emergency supply package for teachers prior to Christmas and expanded it in this year’s Budget. And we are working constructively with unions to deal with pay equity issues for the lowest paid in our school system, because we know that we’ve got a lot of work to do in that area.

Mana in Mahi - Strength in Work—Programme Launch

6. to the Minister for Social Development: What response to recent employment-related announcements has the Ministry of Social Development received from businesses and industry?

Last week the Prime Minister, Minister Jackson, and I launched the Mana in Mahi - Strength in Work programme. Mana in Mahi will give thousands of young people the opportunity to learn and gain qualifications while in meaningful employment. Since the announcement, we have had considerable positive feedback. Ten new businesses have registered their interest with the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), from a variety of industries, and MSD is engaged in a programme of work to further grow and develop industry partnerships in order to provide an array of apprenticeship opportunities for our young people.

💬 Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Why is the Mana in Mahi programme important?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Mana in Mahi will support the participation of, and improve the employment outcomes for, all young people including Māori, Pacific, and disabled young people. MSD has already had interest from young people via their dedicated MSD industry partnerships in-box and received calls and emails from work brokers saying they have clients interested in the initiative. Mana in Mahi will also help address skills shortages in sectors that provide sustainable employment opportunities. Already, businesses from sectors with skills shortages such as building and construction, tourism, hospitality, and agriculture have contacted MSD to see how they can be involved.

💬 Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What types of apprenticeships under Mana in Mahi will be available in the construction industry?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: This Government is committed to increasing our construction workforce. That’s why I’m pleased that the Downer Group and their subcontractors have already committed to participating in this programme. Downer have already achieved great results in their work with MSD, with over 1,000 MSD clients being placed with Downer and 70 to 75 percent of clients still in employment after 12 months. In the Mana in Mahi programme, Downer will coordinate and run training courses for their subcontractors not only providing innovative opportunities for the apprentices involved but also providing excellent support for smaller businesses.

💬 SPEAKER: I must say that was a very long answer, and I’m not sure that it answered the question, but anyway.

Police—Deputy Commissioner of Police, Inquiry into the Appointment Process

7. to the Prime Minister: Does her Government expect high standards from all Government departments and Ministers?

Yes.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Will the terms of reference for the inquiry into the appointment process for the Deputy Commissioner of Police include consideration on whether or not the appointee is a suitable candidate, or is it still the case, as per the Cabinet paper, that his suitability will not be considered?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I have outlined in the past when I’ve been asked such questions, this inquiry will look at whether or not all relevant information was properly provided to or gathered by the State Services Commission during the appointment process. That would, of course, include appropriate reference checks and information you would usually expect to be included in those reference checks. At the conclusion of that inquiry, if it’s found that we were not properly furnished with all of the information that we should’ve been, then it would be up to, potentially, the State Services Commission or Solicitor-General to look into the suitability of the candidate in the aftermath of that first inquiry.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Does she have confidence in Deputy Police Commissioner Wally Haumaha?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I have previously outlined, we’re undertaking this inquiry to ensure that we go through a proper process, that we were furnished with all the information we should’ve been to make a judgment as to the suitability of the candidate. If we find that that information was not properly passed on, then I’ll look at whether or not it needs to go to the Solicitor-General or the State Services Commissioner.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: So does she believe that he should stand down, at the very least, temporarily, while this inquiry takes place, since she either cannot or will not currently express confidence in him?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member is referring to the issues around bullying in the workplace, that is a matter for the police to look into. I have seen that they’ve made this statement—the Commissioner of Police—that they will be investigating those complaints and are currently seeking further information around what has occurred then, and it is perfectly proper that they do so.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I am going to ask the Prime Minister to have another go at answering the question that was asked. Repeat the question.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Certainly. Does she believe that he should stand down, at the very least, temporarily, while this inquiry takes place, since she either cannot or will not currently express confidence in him?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I consider that an employment matter for the police, and my understanding is that they have given assurances that they are investigating that issue, and if they believe that’s the appropriate step, that would be for the commissioner to take that step.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Is it appropriate to leave someone in the very senior and very powerful role of Deputy Police Commissioner when the Prime Minister herself cannot express confidence in him at this time?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: This is an incredibly serious matter. It is an employment matter. We are making sure we’re going through a proper process that includes the ability for someone to investigate whether or not we were furnished with the information we required to make the appointment in the first place. If there are allegations of bullying in the workplace, that is for the employer to look into, and it’s perfectly proper that they do so.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Is she concerned that after 11 years of police working incredibly hard to change their attitude and their culture towards victims, particularly of sexual assault and intimidation, that the current fiasco could mean distrust in police rises and victims don’t feel like they can come forward?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I absolutely reject that assertion. In fact, the very reason that we are undertaking this inquiry is so that those groups can have faith that we have heard the concerns and that we are undertaking a proper process.

Parliament—Support for Reduction in Number of Seats

8. to the Prime Minister: Is she aware of any Ministers in her Cabinet that support reducing the number of members of Parliament and removing the Māori seats; if so, who are those Ministers?

Not in their capacity as Minister.

💬 David Seymour: Is she concerned that New Zealand First might vote for my smaller Government bill, given that they have supported the same concept in the past?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No.

💬 David Seymour: Is that because Winston Peters is a lion on the hustings and a lamb in Cabinet?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! It’s getting very close to being ruled out, but we’ll just leave it now. [Interruption] No, I’m saying to the Prime Minister: it is an inappropriate question and I’ve ruled it out.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It’s worse than that, sir. It’s worse than that. He’s called into question my undoubted courage, and I do not need a member of the “Oblivion Party” to be doing that.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think that that gets to about sort of one inappropriate comment each, and, frankly, I will just say to the Deputy Prime Minister, he’s been 1-all, I think, on three occasions today, which might indicate that he needs to take a bit of care.

Police—Deputy Commissioner of Police, Inquiry into the Appointment Process

9. to the Minister of Internal Affairs: Does she stand by all of her statements and actions in relation to the Government inquiry into the appointment process for a Deputy Police Commissioner?

Yes, in the context they were given, except for one of my supplementary question answers from 8 August, which I subsequently corrected later that day.

💬 Chris Bishop: Is she concerned about the integrity of the inquiry in light of allegations revealed this morning that Mr Haumaha contacted a witness to his alleged bullying—contact which is now being investigated by the police in a bid to shore up support after the New Zealand Herald started making inquiries about the alleged bullying incident?

💬 Hon TRACEY MARTIN: No, because the inquiry I have been tasked by Cabinet to set up is into the processes of the State Services Commission and the information that was provided to the Minister and Cabinet in the original appointment.

💬 Chris Bishop: Will the inquiry, now led by Mary Scholtens QC, allow members of the police force to give evidence to the inquiry anonymously, with their identities and jobs kept confidential?

💬 Hon TRACEY MARTIN: My understanding is that that will be a decision for the chair of the inquiry. There are terms of reference, and what she needs and who she needs to speak to inside those terms of reference are fully at her discretion.

💬 Chris Bishop: Would she be concerned if senior members of the police force felt afraid of giving evidence to the inquiry for fear of their names and jobs being revealed and any possible consequences after the inquiry reports back; if so, what will she do about those concerns?

💬 Hon TRACEY MARTIN: I’m not sure I have any ministerial responsibility around that. My responsibility is to provide the administration for the chair of the inquiry, and inside the terms of reference, which are reasonably broad, then the chair can actually speak to whomever she wishes. She could make that anonymous if she wishes. I don’t have any control over that.

Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill—Statements

10. to the Minister of Justice: Does he, in respect of his Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill, agree with the analysis by the Inter-Parliamentary Union in the report “The impact of political party control over the exercise of the parliamentary mandate” that describes the power of political parties to revoke the parliamentary mandate as “political party dictatorships” and which concludes “the parliamentary free mandate remains a cornerstone of democracy”?

That Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) report was not in respect of the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill, notwithstanding the very fine sentiment that it expressed. But, in light of the sentiment that it expresses, I certainly will be voting against Supplementary Order Papers 60 and 65 from members on that side of the House, which try to amend the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill by requiring general secretaries of parties and governing boards of parties to make decisions that are properly the preserve of members of this House.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does he apply the statement he made of New Zealand’s 21 constitutional experts opposing his bill, and I quote him, “They are all wrong. They just don’t understand.” to the IPU, when this organisation represents 164 parliaments and has for over 130 years advised on these constitutional issues and is the most respected international institution on best practice for parliaments?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I think that question is asking whether or not the principle that that member outlined from the IPU report about political party dictatorship applies to the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill, and I do not accept that that principle as adumbrated in that report applies to the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Can he confirm the analysis in that IPU report that his bill’s provisions allowing a party leader to dismiss an MP with the only check being a two-thirds vote of their caucus matches most closely the provisions in the Republic of Zimbabwe, and is that country now the model democracy for his Government in what New Zealand should follow?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: No, because that member’s summary of the electoral integrity bill that is contained in that question is just completely wrong. There are more safeguards than just a two-thirds vote of a party caucus.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister: does he have regard to all manner of views and behaviours on this issue, including the Hon Nick Smith leading the charge on a whipped 100 percent vote to expel fellow National Party MP Williamson?

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: He’s got no responsibility for that; it didn’t happen.

💬 SPEAKER: I’m not looking to a matter of fact; I am looking to a matter of responsibility, and I think it is a stretch.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why is his Government ignoring the advice of the IPU in respect of New Zealand’s electoral law but at the same time funding the IPU to advise parliamentary democracies in developing countries on best practice; or is this Government’s stance: “Do as we say, not as we do.”?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The IPU has not given advice on this country’s electoral laws.

Family/Whānau Violence—Safety of Children

11. to the Minister for Children: Does she stand by all her statements, including her statement that children need to be “safe, loved, healthy, and educated if they are going to live well”?

Yes, in the context in which they were given, and I particularly stand by the statement that, absolutely, children need to be safe, loved, healthy, and educated to live well.

💬 Hon Alfred Ngaro: How, then, does the Minister reconcile that statement—“feel safe and loved”—with the teenage boy who was kicked in his head by his father, when his lawyer, Chris Nicholls, told media last week that he hadn’t heard back from Oranga Tamariki since making a complaint in February of this year?

💬 Hon TRACEY MARTIN: I would ask the member to send that back directly to my offices so that I can follow up in much more detail.

💬 Hon Alfred Ngaro: How do pre-schoolers feel safe and loved in a case of suspected family violence, where they have had to wait at least six months for a family group conference?

💬 Hon TRACEY MARTIN: Again, these are very operational questions about—with 6,250 children in care, with 89,000 calls of concern in New Zealand to Oranga Tamariki. I would ask the member, if he has concerns, to please contact my office directly so that we can take immediate action.

💬 Hon Alfred Ngaro: So how does the Minister reconcile those comments with that of the Wellington regional manager for Oranga Tamariki, Grant Bennett, who said, “all cases of abuse were considered immediately”?

💬 Hon TRACEY MARTIN: If that is what Mr Bennett has said, then Mr Bennett needs to stand by his words. If the member has serious concerns in this way, please, I encourage him to contact my office directly the moment he hears of them, not to wait to bring it to this House.

Health Services—Mental Health and Intellectual Disability Services Funding

12. to the Minister of Health: What recent announcement has he made regarding care and support for New Zealand’s most high-needs intellectual disability and mental health patients?

On Thursday, I accompanied the Prime Minister to the Rātonga-Rua-O-Porirua Mental Health Campus to announce $8.4 million funding. The funding is for a new six-unit secure facility that will provide quality individualised care for some of our most vulnerable citizens. These individuals and the staff that care for them deserve fit-for-purpose facilities. The needs of these individuals were not being met in the way that we intend to meet them into the future. This announcement puts right a situation that should have been put right previously.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: How will the new facilities help improve care and treatment for those high-needs individuals?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Currently, there are no specialised accommodation facilities for these individuals, who have previously been kept in in-patient services for significant periods of time. These new individualised service units will provide greater quality of life and will allow more opportunity for rehabilitative gains and potential for reintegration, in some cases, into the community. This is great news for the small group of high-needs New Zealanders and their families.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: How does this announcement complement other Government initiatives in mental health?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: This announcement targets the needs of some of the most vulnerable New Zealanders. At the same time, the Government is extending school-based health services to an extra 24,000 students in decile 4 schools. We are putting dedicated mental health support in primary and intermediate schools in Kaikōura and Canterbury through the Mana Ake programme. We’re supporting young people with mild to moderate mental health needs by launching the integrated therapies pilot for 18- to 25-year-olds, and we’ve funded new drug and detox facilities at Auckland City Mission. And, of course, at the end of October, the inquiry into mental health and addictions will report back to me in just a few short months what I expect will be robust and far-reaching recommendations.