Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Education: What reports has he seen in response to the Government’s reform of Tomorrow’s Schools?

The reforms have been broadly welcomed. IHC have said the announcement “goes a long way to ensure that disabled children get a fair go at school.”, NZEI Te Riu Roa have said, “What we’ve seen today provides hope, and focuses on greater support for school leaders and teachers to meet the needs of our students, while still empowering local [school] Boards of Trustees.”, and Te Rito Maioha Early Childhood New Zealand has said, “This will be a major transformative change for the education sector and will require everyone to be brave and to embrace the future.”

💬 Jan Tinetti: What response has he seen to the new disputes and mediation panel?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I was particularly heartened by feedback from the Children’s Commissioner received via Twitter yesterday that said, “Today’s announcement by Minister Hipkins that parents and students will have access to a free, independent & prompt disputes panel to appeal BoT decisions is a win for our children. We have long been advocating for this. Currently students who face exclusion can only go to the costly High Court to appeal or [to] the Ombudsman. Access to education for all is one of our top priorities and this is a great step forward.”

💬 Jan Tinetti: What response has he seen to the changing responsibilities for school property?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I was particularly encouraged by the Secondary Principals Council, who said, “Another positive is the move to the Ministry of Education having more of a support role in schools. In particular, moving property to the new Education Support agency will let boards focus on governance rather than red-tape.”

💬 Jan Tinetti: What response has he seen to a local approach to enrolment schemes?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have seen one or two principals who have said that this is a step too far. However, I have also seen the Auckland Secondary Schools Principals’ Association, who have said that, if anything, the changes don’t go far enough in discouraging out-of-zone enrolments. So I think we’ve probably got the balance about right.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Has the Minister seen any knee-jerk negativity in reactions?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Sit down.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Yes, particularly our policy to scrap NCEA fees, which means students across the country are currently sitting exams without fees for the first time. More than 145,000 households are estimated to benefit from the removal of the $76.70 NCEA fee that families pay every year for around 168,000 secondary students—more good news for families and efforts to reduce the cost of living by this Government.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she accept that fees-free has not increased student participation and, in fact, there are fewer learners in tertiary education since the policy has been implemented?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Looking at what we had in terms of enrolment across tertiary education under the last Government, we saw a decline from 458,000 to 404,000 enrolled in tertiary education. We had a decline right at the time when we had a skills shortage. We are trying to stem that tide. It’s also worth profiling the fact that we had the burden of debt and a barrier to entry into post-secondary education. So fees-free has meant that more than 30,000 fewer students borrowed to pay tertiary fees last year compared with 2017, saving them $194 million. Those are the benefits of fees-free.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she accept her Cabinet forecast 80,000 enrolments in the first year of fees-free and there have, in fact, been only 50,000?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Our goal has been to remove the barriers to tertiary education and trade training, making sure that we stop this massive skills gap that we have in New Zealand. What I find somewhat confusing is that the National Party discussion document today seems to propose retaining fees-free whilst, at the same time, spending all of the money that it requires to make it a reality. So I’m not too sure what the member’s policy is on fees-free any more.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Was there $50 million in wasted expenditure last year on students who got fees-free and didn’t even complete the year?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No. I don’t consider any investment in education a waste of money. We have a skills gap in New Zealand. We need to be training and educating our young people. I note that what the member is proposing, if it is indeed to scrap fees-free, means that people who are accessing apprenticeships for two years for free will no longer be able to do that.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Is fees-free an expensive failure that should be scrapped for more effective education investments?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’d be interested if that’s the member’s position, because his discussion document suggests retaining it for the final year of study.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Will the Government extend fees-free to the second year of tertiary education, like she’s previously promised?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Our commitment for this term of Government was for the first year, and that’s what we’ve done.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Will she look to implement the full fees-free package more rapidly, given she promised that she would if conditions permit?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: What we said we’d do is make the first year free. That’s what we’ve done. I’d be very interested to know if the member himself is going to bring in fees-free, because I note Judith Collins has already spent the money with some of her proposals, and Nikki Kaye already spent the money for some of her proposals. Fees-free has been spent about three or four times over by the Opposition, and now they seem to be proposing to keep it.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You may have had a chance to observe, as we did, that after the Leader of the Opposition asked that question, he then interjected four times, as loud as he possibly could. If he’s going to ask any other questions, he should be asked, please, to have some respect for the procedures of this House.

💬 SPEAKER: I was actually contemplating intervening because of the repeated shouted interjections from the Leader of the Opposition. The Deputy Prime Minister might have seen that I actually rolled my seat back in preparation for so doing. At about that point, I think it’s fair to say that, for whatever reason, the Leader of the Opposition stopped, and I decided to let it run on. So the Deputy Prime Minister is, of course, correct that people shouldn’t try and shout down someone answering a question immediately after the question is asked, but in this case, I think it’s fair to say that, on balance, I was correct not to intervene.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Does the Prime Minister believe that increasing the cost of tertiary education and training will help or hinder the skills shortages the country already faces?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I would expect that kind of proposal to come from the very party that presided over a decline in those continuing their education and training. We are facing a massive skills shortage. We have a huge infrastructure deficit. We need skilled people in construction and the trades. Fees-free provides that with two years of free training for apprentices. I’m dismayed that the Opposition would propose getting rid of that.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Has she recently made a statement that she will not go on radio shows unless there is “something like another March 15th”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have absolutely no idea what the member’s talking about.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she have a policy that she gave to her press secretary that she will not go on Chris Lynch’s show unless there is “something like another March 15th”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I do not know what the member is talking about.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Why did her press secretary tell Chris Lynch’s producer that the Prime Minister wouldn’t go on his programme unless there is “something like another March 15th”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’ve already answered that question twice. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! If Paul Goldsmith wants Nikki Kaye to have a question, he will zip his mouth.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was in response to huge prevarication from the Hon Grant Robertson, who was yelling at him repeatedly.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I wish that Grant Robertson had prevaricated.

Question No. 3—Education

3. to the Minister of Education: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions?

Absolutely. I particularly stand by the fact that 80,000 students in post-secondary education and training have benefited from the first year free in tertiary education, I stand by 2,000 more teachers being supported into schools after inheriting a 40 percent reduction in those training to be teachers, and I also stand by this Government making the largest ever investment by a New Zealand Government in school property and the first national plan for managing student growth in classrooms.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: Does he stand by his statement in 2018, regarding reducing teacher to student ratios in primary schools, that the Government will consider any changes as part of future Budget rounds, and why has he not delivered on this?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We’ve still got plenty of Budget rounds to go, and I’m sure there will be many Budget rounds to go. The biggest impediment to lowering class sizes at the moment is that we’re struggling to find enough teachers to fill the vacancies that we already have. I note that it takes three to four years to train a teacher, and this Government has been in office for only two years. It will take some time to repair the damage that we inherited from the nine years of neglect of the last Government.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: Has he apologised to the Prime Minister, given, under his watch, early intervention times have increased by nearly 50 percent when the Prime Minister promised to reduce waiting times?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Again, the biggest impediment to reducing early intervention times is a lack of a skilled workforce to do so. That is a problem that we inherited from the last Government. We are taking action to deal with that. Early intervention times are unacceptable—they’re utterly unacceptable. They were on an upwards trajectory under the last Government. They’ve continued on that trajectory because we haven’t had the skilled workforce to be able to deal with that. It’s not good enough. We will do better. This Government will do better. We will repair the damage done by the last Government.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: Does he stand by his decisions regarding his donation schemes, given statements by principals that are calling his scheme confusing and inequitable?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: What has become abundantly clear is that despite the denials of the last Government, a number of schools haven’t been following the law when it comes to what they can charge fees for and what they can ask donations for, and that is actually part of the issue that this policy has highlighted. I stand by the introduction of the policy because for the vast bulk of schools who are taking it up—and there is a significant number who are—they’re going to end up significantly financially better off.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: Does he stand by this Government’s decisions regarding the roll-out of learning support coordinators, given that educators have recently said it has failed the test on delivering to the children that needed it most first?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The learning support coordinators won’t actually be in place until the beginning of next year, so I think it’s a little premature for the member to be making that judgment. I absolutely stand by that decision to roll out the learning support coordinators. It was something that Labour, New Zealand First, and the Green Party committed to when we were in Opposition, when we did the detailed work on what was going to be required to undo the damage to learning support that was done by the last Government.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. When we look back at the Hansard, what I actually said was “given educators have said that it failed the test”. I’d be happy to seek leave to table—

💬 SPEAKER: No, no, I think that question has certainly been addressed. Some would argue that it’s been answered.

💬 Hon Nikki Kaye: Does he stand by his actions which include overseeing a failed first-year fees-free policy, longer intervention times in early childhood, the decision to strip—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member has had her supplementaries.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I absolutely stand by the introduction of fees-free. For the 80,000 students who haven’t had to borrow for their first year of study, it has been a significant boon to them. They have certainly welcomed it, their parents have welcomed it, and I look forward to the National Party coming up and telling those students and those parents what their policy is, because, at the moment, they don’t seem to have one.

Question No. 4—Finance

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

A number of recent reports show how the New Zealand economy is in good shape amid global headwinds. The ANZ bank recently released its full-year results for 2019, with the acting CEO, Antonia Watson, saying, “The New Zealand economy, while growing at a slower pace, is fundamentally in good shape which is promising for businesses moving into 2020.” She added, “Demand for commodity exports is healthy, construction activity is firm, … lower interest rates and an easing NZD are supporting activity. Growth is expected to start lifting as easier monetary conditions make an impact.” It is good to see further agreement that the New Zealand economy is indeed in good shape.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: What reports has he seen on how infrastructure investment is contributing to the economic activity?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The ANZ also recently released its ANZ anecdotes report. It said that infrastructure investment was supporting the mood in many areas of the country and the construction sector remains very busy in most areas. Specifically on infrastructure, the report said, “There is a large amount of road improvement under way and more is planned. This is being supported by the Provincial Growth Fund. Staff shortages are a limiting factor, but there are some reports of a big uptick in tenders for infrastructure work recently, particularly in new commercial premises, with the pipeline looking very solid into 2020.”

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: What other recent reports has he seen on the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Reserve Bank has very recently released its November Monetary Policy Statement (MPS). The MPS reflects that New Zealand continues to have solid economic growth amid a slowing global economy. The report highlights strong exports, improving terms of trade, and strong wage growth, alongside some capacity constraints. The bank expects growth to increase next year above New Zealand’s long-term trend growth rate. These are solid results amid the global headwinds that we face.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I wonder if I can ask the Minister of Finance as to how conversations and discussions are going with his colleagues—and ministerial colleagues, at that—on future fiscal stimulus investments?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I have had many interesting conversations with my ministerial colleagues, particularly in the build-up to Budget 2019, where we significantly increased operating and capital spending. I look forward to further conversations to identify opportunities for the Government to continue to contribute to strong, productive, sustainable growth.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. to the Minister of Finance: What responsibility, if any, does he take for the slowdown in the New Zealand economy since his Government took office?

I take responsibility for the New Zealand economy growing stronger than Australia, the UK, the US, Canada, Japan, the EU, and the OECD average. I also take responsibility for an economy where wages are rising at their fastest rate in a decade, and we have jobs growth even while the economy is close to full employment. I take responsibility for an economy where 81,000 jobs have been created. I take responsibility for the increase in wages in the economy. I reject the premise in the member’s question. GDP is growing slower than it previously has, but it is growing, and it’s forecast to grow. Jobs are being created, wages are rising, and the economy’s in good shape. The member needs to cheer up.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why does he think growth fell from an annual rate of 3.2 percent in the June 2018 quarter to 2.1 percent in the latest quarter?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As we’ve traversed many times in this House, the global economy has been slowing down. When the Mood of the Boardroom survey was undertaken, where the member joined me on the stage, most of the top concerns of those CEOs were international issues. What we do know is that growth rates in New Zealand continue to outstrip those of our trading partners.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: So why does he blame international headwinds when, as the governor says, export prices have been “robust”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Export prices have been good. There are a number of factors that weigh upon that, including things like swine fever and so on, in terms of what’s improved our prices overseas. But the overall global environment is affecting confidence—there is absolutely no doubt about that. That is something that is happening across the world, but what the member should do is focus on the positives in the New Zealand economy. We have debt at low levels, we have unemployment at historically low levels, we have exports going well, we have house prices moderating, and we have consents going up. This is an economy that’s doing well. The member needs to look at the full glass.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: If New Zealand’s doing so well compared with the rest of the world, why has the net outflow of New Zealand citizens tripled since 2017 under his Government, and is that not one of the simplest measures of confidence in this Government’s economic performance?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I would note that, actually, it was in 2016, under the policies of the last Government, that net permanent and long-term migration of New Zealand citizens started to rise again. Yes, we have seen I believe it is around 13,000 New Zealand citizens moving away from New Zealand in the year to September, but I would note that under the previous Government, that figure averaged 19,000 a year.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister of Finance, is not the real test that against comparative economies, this country is growing faster than others as opposed to growing slower than others, with the administration that we inherited?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Absolutely. As I’ve said consistently, over previous quarters in the last year, we’ve been growing stronger than Australia, the UK, the US, Canada, Japan, the EU, and the OECD average. There is a global slowdown under way, but New Zealand is well positioned to deal with this. The economy is in good shape.

💬 Clayton Mitchell: Cheer up.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! No, before the member—I probably should have stopped Grant Robertson at the end of his primary answer, and, certainly, the interjections that I’ve had immediately from my right and one from the back far corner telling me to have a different mood are out of order and will cease.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Which of those countries that he’s just listed are growing faster than New Zealand on a per person basis?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As we’ve discussed many times in this House, there are a number of ways of measuring per capita growth. What I do know is that on some measures we inherited, I think, us being in about thirtieth place, and we’ve improved from there. I want to be absolutely clear that I would never, Mr Speaker, seek to judge the mood of you, but I do believe the member opposite needs to cheer up.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: Yeah, the member should cheer up.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does it surprise him that—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! No, the member will sit down. That’s the end of the gratuitous insults to either of us.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does it surprise him that household spending has been soft, as the governor has indicated, when his Government has cancelled National’s tax cuts, driven up fuel taxes, and—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member needs to learn that he’s allowed two legs to a supplementary.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The most recent consumer confidence surveys indicate that that’s increasing and, certainly, this Government’s extremely proud of the fact that we’ve put into the pockets of low and middle income New Zealanders $75 per week, on average. That’s where we needed to go with that, not untargeted tax cuts.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You’ve been in recent times very strict on there being only two legs to a question. I appreciate that’s in the Standing Orders. Why doesn’t that apply to Ministers when they’re replying? Why do we have Ministers standing up and listing off what they perceive to be their long list of achievements, often quite unrelated to the question?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I would say the long list of things that are quite unrelated to the questions, which have become a habit of Ministers, are a result of the very, very broad primary questions which are now being asked by many members of the Opposition, which allow an extensive list to be given in answer because there’s nothing specific about the questions. I think the member knows from his experience in the House that the rules for answers are different from the rules for questions.

Question No. 6—Housing

6. to the Minister of Housing: Does she agree with Hon Phil Twyford, who said KiwiBuild homes are “good quality, modest starter homes”?

Yes. KiwiBuild homes are subject to the same inspection and consenting processes as any other newly built homes in the implicit 10-year warranty under the Building Act in relation to building work and materials. If any defects in the building work emerge within 12 months of build completion, the builder has an obligation to fix them. While houses are being constructed to high standards, Kāinga Ora advises me that there have been issues raised by five homeowners. None of these are structural issues. It’s not unusual for new builds to have issues following build completion, and the Building Research Association of New Zealand found in 2017 that the call-back rate on brand new houses was around 80 percent. While 222 KiwiBuild houses have been built, five homeowners have raised issues, but that’s not acceptable, so we’re fixing them.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What is the longest number of months that KiwiBuild has taken to remedy defects to the satisfaction of the homeowner?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Of the five issues that have been raised with KiwiBuild, these have ranged from a few weeks to a few months while issues have been worked through.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Is a quality assurance team included in the KiwiBuild reset announced in September?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Yes. Kāinga Ora is in the process of setting up a quality assurance team, and the quality assessor will be in the role by 25 November.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why has it taken two years for there to be a quality assurance team for KiwiBuild homes?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: That’s not the case. This is the Kāinga Ora quality assurance team. Kāinga Ora has only been in existence for a few months. KiwiBuild did have a quality assurance process.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Well, if it’s so important to have a quality assurance programme, then why wasn’t that part of the KiwiBuild reset in September?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think I’m as confused as the member asking the question is. There is a quality—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: That’s right—absolutely. Most confused Minister around.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Mr Brownlee, I think that’s not that helpful for the member sitting in front of you, as well as for the Minister. So can the member just—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, it was a simple affirmation of the Minister’s statement.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think he just indicated that the member sitting in front of him was confused, and that was not helpful.

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Quality assurance is important to us. That is why Kāinga Ora is setting up a quality assurance unit within it, and there will be an assessor in employment by 25 November. I would make the point that as a Government, we take the quality seriously. I find it a bit galling to be lectured by members of a party that presided over $400 million worth of botched repairs in Canterbury that we’ve had to fix up.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Since the KiwiBuild reset was first announced in January this year, then why are KiwiBuild buyers still waiting for a quality assurance unit to be set up?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: There are quality assurance processes in place. There always have been with this. I remind the member: 222 houses built; five people have raised complaints. They have been dealt with. I would note to that member that it’s very easy not to have complaints when you don’t build any houses, as that party did when it was in Government.

Question No. 7—Environment

7. to the Minister for the Environment: What action, if any, has he taken following Local Government New Zealand’s call for legislative change to ban retail sales of fireworks?

In 2007, the firework regulations were tightened. The evidence shows that this was successful in sharply reducing the number of fireworks-related injuries. Fire-related incidents vary from year to year, but the overall trend is also down, even more so on a population basis. I have not seen evidence warranting further regulation at this stage. However, we are, as always, open to listening to the evidence.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Doesn’t the fact that since the Government last looked at this 12 years ago and we’ve seen 4,000 injuries and $3.8 million of ACC claims since then demonstrate that another look is needed?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No. Ten years ago, the average number of ACC claims was around 400 a year. In 2018, it was down to 272.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Does the Minister agree with the New Zealand fire service that the number of fireworks-related incidents are up in recent years, and isn’t it the fact that we are still seeing our maungas burnt, our animals are being injured—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member has now had three legs. The Minister may address any two if he wants, and only has to address one.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I don’t agree that there is a trend of increasing serious incidents resulting from fireworks. I further note that there are divided views around this issue around New Zealand. I know that the Auckland Council favours more restrictions, but I would note that they and other larger cities can have public firework displays that are not available in rural areas, and we’ve got to govern for all of the country.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Is the Minister aware that Auckland Council banned the use of fireworks in public spaces, including their maunga, but this year their precious maunga still burnt, and the council says the only way to stop it is for central government to act?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I’m going to remind that member that he needs to take more care in drafting his supplementaries.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Those issues do point to the need, perhaps, for more enforcement of the existing law, but, as the member points out in his question, the behaviour that is being complained of is already illegal.

💬 Gareth Hughes: What is his response to the New Zealand Police, who, in a submission released today, said, “The retail sale of fireworks to the general public represents a risk to the wellbeing of New Zealanders. Banning the retail sale of fireworks would likely reduce harm to the community.”?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I’d say two things in response. Of course no one wants to see anyone injured, but we do need to keep this in perspective. I would note that ACC claims for this are substantially down, whereas in some other areas of endeavour which we allow—and I’m not suggesting they should be banned—like scooters, we’ve got rising ACC things. We just can’t protect everyone from every harm. I would say as a personal statement, which is not the Government’s position, I personally would be willing to consider moving fireworks sales—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: You’re a Minister.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Well, I’m—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: You don’t make personal statements when you’re answering questions.

💬 SPEAKER: I’m not a Minister. Stop interjecting in the second person.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Speaking as a Minister, although the Government has not got a position on this, I would be willing to consider whether we should move private fireworks sales to Matariki in June, which would be better for families. It would address many of the issues that members of the public raise. But the Government’s got no position on that.

💬 Hon Shane Jones: Māori-works—Māori-works.

💬 SPEAKER: Has “Vesuvius” stopped?

Question No. 8—Social Development

8. to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by all her statements relating to employment initiatives for young people?

Yes, in particular Mana in Mahi, which I’m sure my colleague Minister Jackson will elaborate on later, but also the initiatives we have invested in to support young people with drivers’ licences, including the partnership between the New Zealand Transport Agency, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), and Oranga Tamariki to provide driver-licence support for up to 2,500 young people over the next three years; the partnership between Auckland Business Chamber, Auckland secondary schools, and MSD to provide driver-licence support products to secondary school students in 20-plus schools; the partnership between MSD and New Zealand Police to refer young people found with licence infringements to driver-licence service providers; and the general MSD training for work and employment placement service programmes, which now have a mandatory requirement to support clients with drivers’ licensing.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Why did she say yesterday that—and I quote—“the previous Government didn’t see fit to invest in drivers’ licences for young people” when last year her department published a positive evaluation of the National Government’s work on drivers’ licences, and does she intend to correct the record to state that this Government is following in National’s footsteps when it comes to driver licensing?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Debates in question time can become very robust. The reality is that we’re investing more into driver licensing than what the previous Government did. I read out many of the initiatives that we are currently engaged in. All of those—including the fact that it’s now mandatory for MSD to provide support for clients to get into driver licensing—started under this Government.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: When will the Minister correct her answer?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As I said, the debate yesterday, as it always is, was robust in the House. The reality is that we have invested more. I will say that the previous Government did do something in this space—that’s my correction—but we are doing more than they ever did.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Does she believe that the $50 million investment in Mana in Mahi is money well-spent, and, if so, why do almost one in five participants end up back on benefit?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I was going to leave this to Minister Jackson, but I will respond to her question. To date, 417 young people have engaged in Mana in Mahi. The member is right in terms of the fact that to date, 68 percent have stuck with the placements. That’s a really good result, in our minds. Out of the 32 percent who haven’t continued, half of them—so 16 percent in total—returned to benefit. The rest didn’t; they went on to other options. I do want to also let that member know that of those who have participated in Mana in Mahi—and this is mostly targeting 18- to 24-year-olds—39 percent of them were on benefit for over a year before they engaged with this programme, and 10 percent were on benefit for four years or more before they engaged in this programme. So I think, given those statistics and results, we are doing a good job.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: How is an increase of 5,500 young people on the dole delivering for—and I quote the Minister—“New Zealanders who need support”?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As I’ve said a number of times in this House, we have to keep the numbers in perspective. We’ve got one of the lowest unemployment rates that we have had in the last 10 years—all three of the lowest unemployment rates were under us—at 4.2 percent. With regards to young people not in education and employment, we saw with the most recent release around what’s happening with unemployment that there are less NEETs now than what there were previously. With regards to those that are currently on benefit, this Government is doing everything that we can to help them realise their potential in a constructive way, which of course means also supporting them to upskill and train so they can take up employment in the jobs that exist now and the jobs that will exist going into the future.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Why has she delivered over 10 times as many young people on to the dole as into Mana in Mahi?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The member uses numbers in a funny way—in a very, very funny way. I think that the statistics that I talked about are with respect to the young people that are engaging in Mana in Mahi to date—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: —and the fact that there were a large number that had been on the benefit for a certain period of time, but the success that we’re seeing is really positive. I will also say that the commitment has been for 2,000 young people in Mana in Mahi, that we made at the Budget. We’re already ahead of our target, and we are very proud of the results that we’re seeing to date. Can we do better? We always think we can do better, and we will continue to stick on that path to supporting young people.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Would the Minister rather we don’t use numbers any more in our questions?

💬 SPEAKER: I’m just trying to work out what I should do—I mean, the member knows that question’s out of order. The member knows that the Minister doesn’t have responsibility for the Opposition’s questions, and I just can’t understand why he’s deliberately so disorderly.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. At the start of the supplementary before mine, the Minister said that, well, she wasn’t going to respond to the questions, as if she didn’t actually need to, and I interjected to that effect and you told me off. It was entirely unreasonable, in my view, with the greatest respect to you. I’ve then asked, I think, a perfectly legitimate question because the Minister, in her answer, has, effectively, said she’s not too keen on numbers in the questions, and I thought it was right—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! No, I’ve had enough. [Interruption] Order! I’ve had enough. The member knows that he will resume his seat when I stand up. He will start off by withdrawing and apologising for not doing that.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 SPEAKER: Dealing with the substantive issue, I drew his attention to the fact that he was interjecting in the second person repeatedly, and I think the member understands what that means. I called him to order for that earlier on, not for anything else, on that occasion—I mean, obviously, the member has been disorderly on other occasions earlier in question time.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: I want to remind the member that he’s testing my patience.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I would just ask you to go and reflect on the tape when you go back, as I know you do, because it does just rather seem that your left ear is rather more acute at picking these things up—

💬 SPEAKER: Right. The member will leave the Chamber.

Hon Simon Bridges withdrew from the Chamber.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The answer that came from the Minister seemed to attack the Opposition for using numbers in questions. Now, to ask her “Does she not like having statistics put in front of her?” when she has such an important portfolio that affects the lives of so many New Zealanders I don’t think is at all unreasonable.

💬 SPEAKER: Question No. 9, Dr Shane Reti.

💬 Hon Stuart Nash: Sorry, supplementary.

💬 SPEAKER: No, too late.

Question No. 9—Education

9. to the Minister of Education: Does he stand by all his statements and actions in relation to the Fees Free policy?

Absolutely, yes. I stand by the policy that has meant around 80,000 New Zealanders haven’t had to borrow for their tertiary fees for their first year of study or training. That’s a sizeable chunk off the cost that New Zealanders face when embarking on post-school education and training, and it means that once they’ve finished, they are better placed to get on with life without a huge debt burden weighing them down.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Did more first-year university students fail all of their courses last year after fees-free than before fees-free, as stated in written questions?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I think what the member is alluding to is that it will show that, actually, overall, the number of students who passed their course versus failed their course compared to the previous year suggests that there has been a slight reduction in the number of people who have failed their first-year course. I don’t have the sector-specific breakdown of that, but it suggests, overall, actually, in terms of pass and fail, the rates are broadly the same as they were in previous years.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: In response to that question, did, in 2017, 990 first-year, fees-free students fail, and in first-year fees-free, 1,080 failed their first-year papers?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I said, it’s about the same, and, actually, if you look at overall numbers of people participating in fees-free, to include all of the sectors, in fact, it’s a slight reduction in the number of people failing their first-year course.

💬 Marja Lubeck: Did he give consideration in deciding the fees-free policy to make making the final year free, rather the first?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, we did. It would be a very university-centric view, and it would mean that a number of people would be excluded from the fees-free policy, particularly those who are undertaking shorter-form courses in polytechnics or institutes of technology or private training establishments or wānanga, and it would, of course, have a detrimental impact on those undertaking apprenticeships or industry training study, which is the reason why we went to first-year fees-fee—because it meant that everybody, a much larger proportion of students, would actually benefit.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Did more first-year Māori students fail at least one course after fees-free last year than before fees-free, as stated in written questions?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I’ve said, the overall number of people who have failed a course—now, bearing in mind that a course and a programme are different things, so people might undertake a number of different courses. Based on that metric, unfortunately, I would be in those statistics, had I had I had my first year free, because at my first year at university, I failed one of my papers because I didn’t actually show up to any of the classes in it, and I didn’t withdraw in time to get my money back. Many people will actually complete a programme of study but may fail one course or may not withdraw from one course in time to get the refund. That doesn’t mean that they’re failing their programme of study.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I confirm from the Minister that the reason why the third year wasn’t chosen over the first year, which was, was that the third year would be snobbish and elitist, and that’s why we didn’t go down that course?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I said, making the third year free rather than the first year free would be a very university-centric view of fees-free education. We want to make sure that those who are undertaking training in things like the trades, for example, benefit from this policy, and that’s why we went with the first year free.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What is the total underspend in the fees-free policy this year to date?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Of course, that’s subject to change because the numbers do move around a little bit, and we’ll release those details once they are finalised.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Is the stated $197 million underspend in fees-free part of a deliberate policy to underspend in fees-free to fund the reform of vocational education?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No. What it does recognise is that for several years pre-dating this Government, the polytech sector has been on a downwards trajectory in terms of the number of people who are undertaking study or training in polytechs. Whilst it has levelled out, that has not rebounded. Partly, that’s a result of a very strong labour market at the moment. There are very attractive job opportunities for people, so they’re going directly into those rather than into study. But it has put our polytech system under significant financial pressure, and that’s one of the reasons why the Government is undertaking that reform programme. We’re not willing to abandon our regional polytechs to financial rack and ruin, which was what was happening.

Question No. 10—Building and Construction

10. to the Minister for Building and Construction: What recent evidence has she seen of a growing workforce in building and construction?

The Government is investing in apprenticeships, and I was honoured last week to congratulate Mr Tiorangi Smith of SLC Builders for being apprentice No. 13,000 for New Zealand’s largest apprenticeship provider, the Building and Construction Industry Training Organisation (BCITO). Mr Smith, like thousands of other apprentices actively training with BCITO, has made a great choice to train as a tradie in the face of the huge pipeline of work that we have. We inherited a large deficit in this area, and Tiorangi is one of thousands of Kiwis who will contribute to building the homes, the hospitals, and the schools that we need. Supporting apprenticeships is just one way the Government is ensuring we have the skilled workforce we need in Aotearoa New Zealand.

💬 Paul Eagle: How is the Government supporting training in building and construction?

💬 Hon JENNY SALESA: We need tradies of all types from all different backgrounds to help deliver the $43.5 billion of projected construction activity expected over the next five years. That’s why I’m delighted to state a few numbers. The number of our Māori apprentices in active training with BCITO has increased 11.6 percent since this Government came into office, the number of women apprentices has gone up 42 percent, and the number of Pacific apprentices is up by an impressive 46 percent with BCITO in the last two years. I congratulate BCITO on their progress. Clearly, the Government’s support for the trades is helping to see more women, more Pacific, and more Māori pick up the tools in record numbers.

💬 Paul Eagle: What other ways is the Government helping grow the building and construction workforce?

💬 Hon JENNY SALESA: We know that within the next five years, we’re going to need an additional 80,000 workers in building and construction. That’s why the Government has looked at tackling the issue head-on through the Construction Sector Accord. We have a construction skills action plan, we’re committed to a centre of excellence for vocational education in construction, and the Prime Minister has also created the Prime Minister’s Vocational Excellence Award, which acknowledges our best and brightest going into the trades with an award of $2,000 through our high schools right across Aotearoa New Zealand.

Question No. 11—Immigration

11. to the Minister of Immigration: Is he concerned that visa processing delays are having a negative impact on the tourism industry in New Zealand?

There’s no evidence to suggest that the current visitor visa processing times have any impact on tourism numbers or on the tourism industry. For the benefit of the member and the House, Immigration New Zealand is currently processing 92.4 percent of low-risk visitor visa applications within 15 days and 85 percent of high-risk applications within 30 days.

💬 Stuart Smith: Has he requested Immigration New Zealand undertake an assessment of the negative-impact economic costs that visa processing delays are having on the tourism industry; if not, why not?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: No, because, as I said in the primary answer—the member, obviously, wasn’t listening—there is no evidence that visa processing times are having an impact on the tourism industry.

💬 Stuart Smith: Interesting. Why are tourism operators losing significant revenue as a result of visa processing delays despite an $11.7 million injection into Immigration New Zealand—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I’m going to ask the member to rephrase the question without the unauthenticated bit at the beginning.

💬 Stuart Smith: Has the injection of $11.7 million to Immigration New Zealand to do with this very issue—why hasn’t it reduced tourism operators’ loss of revenue?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Look, I refute the assertion in the member’s question. There’s no evidence that tourism operators are losing revenue.

💬 Stuart Smith: Why are applicants for visitor visas from South-east Asia waiting up to 30 days in the system before being allocated to an immigration officer for assessment?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Visitor visa processing times are actually in line with the Australian processing times, and that is because at this time of year, it is visitor peak season. So what I recommend to people is that if they’re planning to come to New Zealand, they prepare and they get their application in early.

💬 Stuart Smith: Are Immigration New Zealand prioritising visa applications based on country of origin of the applicant rather than the timing of the application?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: No. Immigration New Zealand prioritises applications based on risk, and, as I said in my primary answer, low-risk applications—92.4 of those are processed within 15 days, and 85 percent of the high-risk applications are processed within 30 days.

Question No. 12—Employment

12. to the Minister of Employment: He aha ngā rīpoata hou kua kitea e ia mō te kaupapa Mana in Mahi?

[What recent reports has he seen on Mana in Mahi?]

I’ve seen reports that show that at the end of October, we’ve had 417 participants start Mana in Mahi employment since the programme started. Now, that’s more than a third—39 percent—of our people who have started in Mana in Mahi, and they’ve already been on a benefit for 12 months or more, with 10 percent of people having been on a benefit for more than four years. For these people, Mana in Mahi is transforming their lives and reconnecting them back to a lifelong pathway of employment.

💬 Tamati Coffey: He aha ngā ripoata kua kitea e ia mō te heke haere o ngā tāngata kei raro i te kaupapa nei, Mana in Mahi?

[What reports has he seen on the attrition rate of those participating in Mana in Mahi?]

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Kia ora. We always knew that there would be some challenges. That’s been pointed out in the House, I think, over the last few weeks, but for some of those who have participated in Mana in Mahi—especially considering more than a third had already spent more than a year on a benefit—it has been a great experience, which is why I’m really proud of the efforts being made by Work and Income, employers, and participants, which has resulted in only 16 percent, as Minister Sepuloni said, of participants exiting Mana in Mahi and returning to the benefits. I want to reassure the House that Work and Income continues to actively help those who have returned to benefits with their job-seeking and to support them with an alternative pathway.

💬 Tamati Coffey: Kua kite ia i ngā ripoata mō ngā momo ahumahi e whakamahi ana i a rātau nō Mana in Mahi?

[Has he seen any reports on the industries that are employing people through Mana in Mahi?]

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: To the question, I’ve seen reports that alongside our more traditional industries such as building and construction, manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, and fishing, Mana in Mahi has also opened up opportunities in other industries such as food, manufacturing, electricity, gas, water and waste services, healthcare and social assistance, information media and telecommunications, and tiling and carpeting services. In fact, 238 employers are now involved in Mana in Mahi, the majority of which are small to medium sized businesses—exactly as we intended. These industries are not only offering long-term employment pathways for our people participating in Mana in Mahi; they’re also investing in their skills and development.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister as to whether he recommends Mana in Mahi to certain political parties whose politicians will need a job shortly?

💬 SPEAKER: I’m sorry, I didn’t catch the end.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I’ll repeat it. Could I ask the Minister as to whether or not he would recommend to political parties the concept of Mana in Mahi, because some of them will need a job soon?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! That’s—

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: You, Paula.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: We’ll see, sweetheart—we’ll see.

💬 SPEAKER: Oh look, don’t encourage him, please. I mean, it’s hard enough trying—I think the member knows that dealing with the longest-serving member of the House, at times, is somewhat of a challenge for Speakers. Predecessors of mine have had similar challenges with the member, and he does not need winding up from my left.

💬 Tamati Coffey: Has he seen any reports on the outcomes for people who have completed Mana in Mahi?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Kia ora. I’ve seen numerous reports of people who have completed their Mana in Mahi placement. As an example, a young Māori man who is 18 years of age—he came on to job seeker support in mid-2018 and had advised that he was interested in dairy farming or construction work. After one month, he was matched through a work broker to a small construction company and became one of the earliest placements in the Mana in Mahi programme. He has not only maintained good attendance as well as remaining in employment but he has also completed a level 2 course with the intent of working towards a New Zealand Certificate in Carpentry. He’s been enjoying the training aspects of the position, and his employer has commented on the client’s growing level of responsibilities in his mahi as a result of his training and sustained employment.