Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Salvation Army’s State of the Nation Report, which said that “despite some significant progress, much more needs to be done to ensure the growing prosperity of our economy is shared more fairly”

I agree with the Salvation Army report when it says—and I quote—“This report points to significant progress, including an increase in average incomes, a much needed extra spend on welfare and hardship support for beneficiaries, a decline in offending and imprisonment rates, an increase in the number of social houses, [and] new house builds at a 45-year high.” I do acknowledge that there is more that we can do, and this Government remains committed to ensuring that all New Zealanders get their fair share of the benefits of economic growth.

💬 Marama Davidson: Does he agree with the Salvation Army report that this Government has taken “the first steps towards the society-wide change that is needed”, and, if so, what are the next steps to share Aotearoa’s prosperity more fairly?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes. The Government is committed to improving the living standards and wellbeing of all New Zealanders. In this year’s Wellbeing Budget, we saw significant investments to make sure that New Zealanders see their fair share of prosperity, and I point to just a couple of those, including the indexation of main benefits to wages and lifts in the abatement rate. In this year’s Budget, there will be five priorities, all of which will support that, including the Just Transition future of work work, particularly around lifting Māori and Pacific incomes, skills, and opportunities, and reducing child poverty, and child wellbeing. We are making significant investments in all these areas, and we must continue to do so.

💬 Marama Davidson: Can people struggling in our communities be confident that this Government recognises the need to urgently increase incomes and that he’s listening to the evidence presented by experts like the Welfare Expert Advisory Group (WEAG) and the Salvation Army report about ways to achieve this?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the second part of that question, absolutely, and I have a great deal of respect for both the Salvation Army for their work in this area and, indeed, the WEAG report. We are at a time where incomes are growing. We see wage growth at its highest level. We see the minimum wage rising. We see settlements across the public sector, the State sector, that are supporting those on middle and low incomes as well. So we are committed to seeing wages rise in New Zealand and incomes across the board rise, and I believe we are seeing evidence of that.

💬 Marama Davidson: As finance Minister, will he be looking to use Budget 2020 to deliver on the Welfare Expert Advisory Group’s recommendation to raise core benefit levels?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As the member knows, we don’t comment on the Budget outcomes until they are completed, but it does give me the opportunity to say to the House today that the Budget will be delivered on Thursday, 14 May.

💬 Marama Davidson: Does the Minister understand that some people had hoped to see more action from the Government to reduce income inequality, given unemployment is at a record low and the Crown’s accounts are in good shape yet too many families are still doing it tough?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It’s always my expectation that the public will have high expectations of the Government, but I am extremely proud of the record of this Government in delivering to low- and middle-income New Zealanders, and I can’t think of anything better to evidence that than the Families Package, where we turned around a set of tax cuts that would have disproportionately benefited the highest income earners in New Zealand to ensure that we delivered to low- and middle-income earners.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Yes, particularly the Government’s $12 billion New Zealand Upgrade Programme, which will see road, rail, schools, and hospitals built or upgraded throughout New Zealand. Even though we only recently made the announcement, for schools in particular I’m hearing about projects that are already under way.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Can she name one project that’s already under way from that $12 billion spend up?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I just mentioned, the $400 million that has gone into schools. We’re already seeing individual schooling projects I mentioned. Grant Robertson’s electorate is one. I’ve heard from Chris Hipkins in his area. In fact, if the member cares to ask members on his side, every single school in their areas will have a project that they will be delivering with that funding.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: What advice has she received on the economic effect of coronavirus on New Zealand?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The advice that I’ve seen thus far has said it is too early to make any assumptions, because much of what we’re seeing could well be temporary. In tourism, the question is whether or not the 13 percent of tourism we see come in from the Chinese market will postpone their visits or whether or not they will indeed turn into cancellations. Regardless, we’re not waiting. We are looking at, within tourism for instance, packages that may help redirect some of those tourist dollars into other parts of the market, even our domestic market. We are asking tourism to work with IRD, for instance, on provisional tax relief as a way of easing the burden on the some 100 small to medium sized enterprises that rely directly on tourism that comes in from the Chinese market, predominantly into Auckland, Rotorua, and Queenstown. We’ve also, as the member, if he’s listened to my post-Cab, will have heard, taken a sweep across forestry, the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), particularly the rock lobster industry. Those that are seeing direct effects now we’re working closely with, and in the education sector we’ve already worked with education to extend visas for students that may be affected by the border controls.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: How significant does she believe the effect of coronavirus will be on our economy both now and in the future?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I have said, actually, whilst it is difficult for us to quantify it now, it is almost inevitable. In fact, I’ve already said that, in June when we receive the GDP results that cover this period, I absolutely expect for us to see that reflected in our GDP numbers. As you can imagine, as a trading nation, one that receives a lot of tourism from China, one that has an education sector that has a lot of students coming in from that market, and given China themselves have already reflected in their forecasts for GDP a downgrade, inevitably we will see impacts in New Zealand, but we’re working to mitigate that to the best of our ability.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: What does she believe the Government’s response to the economic effects of coronavirus should be, not just in tourism but in education and primary exports?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I have said, at the moment the most direct impact we’re seeing for exports is in the live export industry. MPI have worked closely with the rock lobster industry to allow them, for instance, where pots are in the sea, where they’ve been collected, they’re able to be released and in alternative situations MPI are working in conjunction with the industry to give permissions where appropriate for release. At the moment, the Minister of Fisheries is consulting on whether or not their take should be carried over into the new year. So that’s something that’s been consulted on. When it comes to wider exports, at the moment logging is probably the area where the next biggest impact is. That’s not just coronavirus; there’s a beetle incursion in Europe which is causing a large amount to logs to be exported into China. The supply chain there has a backlog because people are not necessarily unloading at the port. We’re working in the areas most affected, particularly Tai Rāwhiti, on ensuring that the Ministry of Social Development is catering for needs that we might see from contractors who are in harvesting but also on whether or not we can marry up those who might be feeling those impacts with others parts of our forestry industry. Te Uru Rākau are working on that as we speak. We are seeking to be as proactive as we can.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Given the consensus reports of about a half a percent off GDP at the moment, that being about $1.5 billion and half a billion less in revenue, what will that lower revenue have in terms of effect on this year and the budgetary process?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, those are just some of the estimated and assumed impacts. As I’ve said, at this point in time it is just too early to say. For instance, we have really until through to April for some parts of the education sector to see whether or not that will have a long-term impact. Roughly, 59 percent of the overseas education market have their students already in New Zealand. Of course, we expect for the university sector that, even if delayed, students are most likely to still come in if border restrictions lift in appropriate time, and so really it’s just too early to say at this point what those wider impacts will be.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

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

Absolutely, particularly the 18-page comprehensive statement that I released today, which includes a long list of significant achievements I’m incredibly proud of and couldn’t possibly pack into a mere 20 minutes.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: How much of that Prime Minister’s statement has been done, then?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member had actually read the report, he would have seen that it is a reflection of all the things that we’ve delivered, and includes, for instance, a snapshot of our economic record: 2.7 percent growth, unemployment at 4 percent. Of course, we’re also debt-down 21 percent, lower than what we inherited, and that’s even when you take into account, of course, going out with the Upgrade Programme of $12 billion, that we still have debt at lower rates than what we inherited. There is a long list in there of achievements, all of which I’m very proud of.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: What is her Government currently doing in relation to the dispute at Ihumātao?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’ve reported on this many times in this House. The member will remember that in July there was a dispute on that land. Essentially, what happened was agreement between Fletcher’s and mana whenua that nothing would happen there until a solution was found. We’ve simply played a role in assisting to try and broker that solution. I would like to think that that’s what leadership is.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: When she said last year she hoped it would be resolved by Christmas—has that come to pass?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: It’s currently 12 February. The member will well be aware we have passed Christmas, but it’s obvious that it’s been our aspiration to see a dispute like that resolved as soon as possible. That’s in everyone’s interest, and I would include in that New Zealand’s interest, and if the member had an eye to the kind of relations that we want to foster in this country, then that member might look for a solution as well, rather than stoking cheap politics.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Did she resolve it by Waitangi, like she said she would?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That member, unfortunately, has a poor understanding of the situation if he believes that there is only one party involved in this. There is mana whenua. There is the private company, in Fletcher’s. And, of course, the role we’re trying to play: to broker a solution.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Will taxpayers’ or ratepayers’ money be spent on the Ihumātao dispute?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, as I’ve said many times in this House, a solution is still yet to be announced or a resolution announced. What has been key in all of this was keeping in mind that there is a proposed heritage order over the land. That puts Fletcher’s in a very difficult position, and I ask the member, who I would imagine would have an interest in that, what would he do in this situation for a company, after the bumbling decision of a housing Minister had left them in this situation by calling it a special housing area? What would that member do in this situation?

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: In light of the lack of legal significance around the heritage status, why is she considering spending taxpayers’ or ratepayers’ money on the Ihumātao dispute?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member’s reflection of the heritage status and its effect is inaccurate.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she believe resolution of this dispute with taxpayers’ money will encourage more protests around New Zealand?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That’s a hypothetical.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she mean that the dispute is not going to be resolved?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I’ve said many times in this House, once there is a resolution, I would happily debate it with that member. But I’d like to see what his proposals would be and if he believes the solution for New Zealand is to see protest, violence, and a dispute continue after that side of the House declared this a special housing area, without any plan on properly managing that—if that chaos, protest, and violence is their response to that situation and if that’s their version of leadership, they are welcome to it.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: So when will this be resolved by the Prime Minister?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, I don’t take such an arrogant view of my role in this situation.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he seen on the economic impact of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme?

I’ve seen a range of reports from business leaders emphasising the significant impact that the Government’s $12 billion New Zealand Upgrade Programme will have for the economy and for businesses. Business New Zealand chief executive Kirk Hope said the additional spending on roading infrastructure will be positive for business, while money for commuter rail services in Auckland and the Wellington region will also help build efficiency and productivity. Fletcher Building CEO Ross Taylor said, “This isn’t just planning. It’s targeted projects that are real. Often there’s quite a lot of plans and options for projects with price tags that might be years away. I can see this is the infrastructure which is needed and it will happen.” I’m pleased to be part of a Government that is getting on with the job of addressing years of under-investment in New Zealand’s infrastructure.

💬 Dr Deborah Russell: What reports has he seen on the economic impact of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme from the infrastructure sector?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Infrastructure New Zealand CEO Paul Blair said that the Government’s $12 million infrastructure programme is a fantastic start towards building the infrastructure New Zealand needs to realise its potential. The additional spending and multi-year nature of the package should provide the sector with the confidence to ramp up recruitment, training, and capital investment, with more yet to come. Along the same lines, the New Zealand arm of global engineering and design consultancy WSP has said it will dramatically increase its recruitment staff, hiring hundreds of planners, designers, and engineers to support its role in projects within the New Zealand Upgrade Programme. It is great to see the sector getting behind this package.

💬 Dr Deborah Russell: What reports has he seen on the impact of the Government’s increased investment in the economy on the Crown’s finances?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: According to forecasts in the Treasury’s Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update, net core Crown debt is expected to peak at 21.5 percent of GDP in 2021-22 as a result of the investments made in the Upgrade Programme. This is well below the 22.9 percent we inherited from the previous Government. In the last few weeks, following our announcement of higher investment levels, Fitch Ratings revised its rating for New Zealand to AA+, reflecting the New Zealand Government’s sound fiscal management and low Government debt, which, to quote them, “enhances the country’s resilience to economic and financial shocks”.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: What reports has he seen on the economic impact of his Government cancelling or postponing National’s road projects two years ago?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The premise of the member’s question is utterly wrong, because it’s not possible to cancel ghost roads.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. to the Minister of Finance: What steps, if any, has he taken to ensure the integrity of ministerial decisions in the major spending programmes announced in the previous two Budgets?

With regard to ministerial decisions that I am responsible for, in terms of the major spending programmes announced in the previous two Budgets, I took steps to ensure the integrity of them in line with the regular Budget decision-making process, similar to the previous Ministers of Finance, like Bill English or Steven Joyce. That process—and I hope not to make the answer too long, but I’ll go through it—is that Budget initiatives are submitted by Ministers, in most cases, prior to Christmas. Individual initiatives are assessed by the Treasury in some instances and by secretariats of officials from other agencies in other instances. Budget initiatives are assessed according to a range of factors, including their alignment with Budget priorities, their wellbeing impacts, the robustness of their costings, their implementation readiness, and their value for money. These assessments are pulled together to give advice to Ministers on a package of initiatives that could be funded through the Budget. Ministers meet and take decisions on a package to be considered by Cabinet. Cabinet then considers it and makes final decisions on a final Budget package, and Parliament passes the Budget. After that point, there are parliamentary and other processes in place to further ensure the integrity of any spending.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has anything he has seen in the past three days caused him to question or doubt the integrity of ministerial decision-making about major spending projects has been maintained?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he been following the news since Monday?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I absolutely have been and, once again, the Government has been making announcements that benefit the New Zealand economy across the board. We’ve got a situation just today where we’ve seen our interest rates held and the Reserve Bank Governor or the monetary policy committee reflecting on the importance of the role that the Government’s fiscal investment is playing in making sure that the economy is going well. In the matters for which I am responsible, I keep a close eye on the news.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he considered reviewing major spending decisions involving New Zealand First Ministers while matters raised by the Electoral Commission and referred to the Serious Fraud Office are resolved?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, I’d have to bow to the member’s superior knowledge of the Serious Fraud Office in its inquiry work. But, from my perspective, I will await the outcomes of that inquiry like every other member. Otherwise, the Government gets on with its normal order of business.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: With respect to four matters which are sub judice, but nevertheless may have a connection with respect to Government spending, has there been any connection between those four sub judice cases put before the Serious Fraud Office to trial already or any Government Minister?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: There is no connection in those. I mean, obviously, various political parties at times will have matters that are referred to the Serious Fraud Office. There are avenues available to parliamentarians if they have concerns about Government spending. We’ve seen that in the past. I think of the Saudi sheep deal as being an excellent example of where parliamentarians, if they have concerns about matters, know what to do.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Have you spoken directly to the Deputy Prime Minister in the past three days about ways to reassure New Zealanders about the integrity of ministerial decision-making?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I’ve spoken directly to the Deputy Prime Minister on a number of occasions over the last three days, but I certainly haven’t felt the need to do it on that particular topic.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: So is he telling the House that, notwithstanding the Electoral Commission’s statement, it’s just business as usual for ministerial decision-making around large scale investments?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I think the member’s making a huge logical leap in his question there. We are getting on with the business of Government. We are positive about the future of New Zealand and we’re focused on the issues that matter to New Zealanders.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied that the response to the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak was timely and appropriate?

Yes, and it continues to be so. All the decisions we have taken have been informed by science.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Why is there no screening of passengers arriving from China who transit through another country?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: All passengers who come through from another country are being checked as they come through to New Zealand. We track who has been in China in the last 14 days, and if they are permanent residents or New Zealand citizens, then of course they are allowed into New Zealand and they are given advice on where to seek help if they have any symptoms. They are also given advice on health measures. Basic hand hygiene, of course, is one of the critical things in preventing the spread of the virus, as well as making sure that they are in self-isolation for that 14-day period. So those who are not New Zealand citizens, permanent residents, or their immediate family are turned back.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is the Minister telling the House that a passenger arriving from China who transits through, say, Seoul or Sydney and arrives at Dunedin or Queenstown international airport is given the information that he just described?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: As people come into New Zealand, they are being given the public health information in simplified Chinese, traditional Chinese, and in English. Public health staff are at the border. We are looking to make sure that anyone who has been in China in the last 14 days is in receipt of that information.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Are passengers arriving from affected areas via cruise ships being screened for the virus?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Any passengers arriving on cruise ships are being given the same information as those who arrive at airports.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Who is correct: the Minister who advises that the screening processes are diligently followed, or the New Zealander who came back from Wuhan and said, “Coming into New Zealand there was nothing. For me it was … like we got off [the] plane and walked through and no one really seemed that concerned.”

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The provision of information at the airports is the thing that we are advised by the medical experts, the science, is the best and most effective thing we can do, because it makes sure that when people have the symptoms—if they have any symptoms—they know where to get help, to call Healthline; they know how to self-isolate effectively; they know how to do hand hygiene, cough hygiene, and other things that prevent the spread of this virus. So we have taken those measures that the clinical experts, the doctors, have recommended. At every point, we have made sure that our decisions have been informed by science.

Question No. 7—Transport

7. to the Minister of Transport: In what ways, if any, will the New Zealand Upgrade Programme help futureproof the economy and get our cities moving?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The New Zealand Upgrade Programme will help futureproof the economy by providing a fully funded pipeline of transport projects over the next decade on top of the ones already funded and being delivered through the National Land Transport Programme. It will help get our cities moving by investing $6.8 billion for roads, rail, public transport, and walking and cycling in our six major growth areas. It’s proof positive that we are the Government of infrastructure.

💬 Paul Eagle: What reactions has he seen from the industry to the New Zealand Upgrade Programme?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Civil Contractors New Zealand chief executive Peter Silcock said that the announcements showed the Government was looking at a wide range of projects, including roads, and that this announcement was a welcome one for the country’s road builders and civil construction companies. Kirk Hope of Business New Zealand said that this announcement was positive for business. It’s fair to say the New Zealand Upgrade has had glowing reviews from industry across the board.

💬 Paul Eagle: What job opportunities will be created because of the package?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The Transport Agency estimates that the package could initially create 800 to 1,000 new jobs directly in our construction industry as the first five projects get under way in the next 12 months—that is, State Highway 1 Papakura to Drury, electrification of the rail line between Papakura and Pukekohe, the third main rail line, Tauranga Northern Link, and the Wellington rail package—and that it’s designed to create 7,000 to 9,000 jobs in the wider supply chain. This is based on what happened with similar projects recently, and from NZTA’s discussions with the industry. It will also provide opportunities to upskill our workforce. Importantly, the package gives industry the certainty that they’ve been asking for: a pipeline of work for the next decade, enabling them to invest in their people.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has he received any advocacy from the member of Parliament for Rongotai about the necessity of bringing forward a second Mount Victoria tunnel as part of the New Zealand Upgrade?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, the member for Rongotai is a very active advocate on behalf of his constituents, and what he tells me is that the people who live in his electorate are overwhelmingly happy that they have a Government that’s committed $6.5 billion of multimodal transport investments to Wellington after nine years when the former Government—the only thing that they did was fail to impose a giant concrete flyover at the Basin Reserve.

💬 Chris Bishop: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: I don’t think I need a point of order. I think the member will now address the question.

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The member for Rongotai is a very active advocate on behalf of his constituents, and he wants to see all of the components of the Let’s Get Wellington Moving package moved forward as fast as possible, and they will be.

💬 David Seymour: If the New Zealand Upgrade Programme is so meritorious, why didn’t the Government announce it two years ago when it took power?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Because we have rebalanced the transport policy by spending. We’ve made a $4 billion investment in rail, we are doing 70 percent more maintenance of the State highway network, we’re investing $1.4 billion in safety upgrades on 3,300 kilometres of State highways and local roads, and after the New Zealand Upgrade Programme, we are spending more than $7 billion more on transport infrastructure than the former Government did—$7 billion more.

💬 David Seymour: Sorry, could the Minister explain how doing any of that prevented him from announcing the New Zealand Upgrade Programme two years ago?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Because it was necessary, after nine years of neglect, to address the deficit of transport infrastructure that we inherited. We had to rebalance the transport policy. We have, and, thanks to Grant Robertson’s careful financial management, we’re now in a position to bring forward and fund projects that that party promised in a press release but never funded.

Question No. 8—Social Development

Question No. 8, the Hon Louise Upston. Question No. 9, Chris Bishop.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: I didn’t hear you, sorry.

Well, I will go back to the member, but it’s up to her to listen.

8. to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by her statement that “the Government’s plan to get people off the benefit and into work is starting to pay off”?

Yes. I stand by the 42,834 cancellations into work that have occurred since July, following our investment into 170 extra front-line case managers to support people into work. There have been 6,703 cancellations into work in the last month alone—an increase of 27.9 percent from this time last year—and the highest number of exits into work for the month of January in the last five years. We have more New Zealanders in work than ever before, and the weekly average wage is up $80 since we took office. Sixteen thousand Ministry of Social Development (MSD) clients have been supported towards employment through upskilling and training in 2019. This Government is committed to supporting people into sustainable work, and these figures show that we are making real progress.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Does she accept that Labour has overseen the three lowest ever quarters for the number of people moving off benefit and into work?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As I’ve already stated, what we’ve seen is actually an increase in the number of people exiting benefit for work. Quite often in this House, the member likes to refer to the raw figures, but even if we look at the proportion of working-age New Zealanders on benefit, at the moment it’s 10.5 percent, compared to December 2014, where it was 11.2 percent.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Does she believe that the Government’s plan is paying off for the 27,000 more New Zealanders on job seeker support since Labour took office?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Do I think that we’ve got more to do? Absolutely, but, as I said, this Government is focused on supporting New Zealanders into upskilling and training and into employment. That is why we have invested in programmes like Mana in Mahi. We recognise, and particularly I, when I go across the country, that many of the jobs that are advertised within our MSD office require a level of skill—skill that wasn’t invested in by the previous Government—so many of the people that come through our offices aren’t necessarily equipped with the qualifications, skills, or experience to take up the roles. We’re committed to making sure that they have those skills, that they have those qualifications, and that they’re supported into the jobs that are available.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: If your plan is paying off, why has the proportion of people who go back on to benefit 16 weeks after completing an intervention increased every year under your Government?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: That’s an interesting question, because under the previous Government I was highly critical of the fact that they were not actually measuring whether or not the employment that they were putting people into was sustainable or not, and under them, we saw a large number of people who did exit benefit for work back on benefit within the next 18 months. Just recently, actually, I was given advice—because we are starting to look at sustainable employment—that just over the last three months, sustainable employment places have gone up month on month. So I’m really glad that as a Government we are actually measuring things that count, unlike the previous Government.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: How many more people will go on to the dole before you admit that your welfare—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! The member is going to start the question again. I’ve let her run twice with out-of-order questions. This time, she’s not going to bring me into it.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: How many more people will go on to the dole before the Minister admits that her welfare plans aren’t paying off and considers taking some advice from National about how to give people opportunities to get ahead?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I’m very confident with the plan that we have in place on this side of the House. We recognise that it is about the welfare system but also about the investment that we put into education and other areas as well. Also, I would like to say on the record that if that member ever asks me a question again in this House about a thing called the dole—which does not exist—I will refuse to answer the question.

Question No. 9—Transport

9. to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his reported comment on 10 July 2019 in relation to 12 roading projects that “If we were to do what the Business Advisory Council was saying, it would mean spending a great deal of money, more than $12 billion, on projects that have very low economic value,” and what role did he play in the selection of the transport projects in the Government’s New Zealand Upgrade Programme?

Yes, in the context it was made. As the member knows, I think, these projects have been re-evaluated to align with our Government policy statement on land transport, which includes value for money as a priority. Our State highway projects have been futureproofed to include dedicated walking and cycling paths, and with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) looking to managed lanes dedicated to freight, high-occupancy vehicles, and public transport. To the second part of the question, I worked closely with the Minister of Finance, relying on NZTA’s advice on the selection of multimodal transport projects for the Upgrade Programme, which will speed up travel times, ease congestion, make our roads safer, and give people real transport choices.

💬 Chris Bishop: Does he still think New Zealand has over-invested in roads and motorways for decades?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I stand by the full quotation, not the one that has been so selectively misrepresented by the National Party. What I said was that New Zealand has in the past under-invested in roads at the expense of other parts of the transport system, particularly public transport. I stand by that, and our Government is dedicated to a balanced, modern transport policy that serves the whole country and all transport modes.

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, I am just going to interrupt. I think the member might have misspoken right at the beginning of his quotation, and it might be good to tidy it up now.

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The full quote was that New Zealand has in the past over-invested in roads at the expense of other parts of the transport system.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why did the Canterbury region receive only 2.3 percent of the $6.8 billion transport component of the Upgrade Programme?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: So I would note that there has been substantial transport investment in Canterbury in the last few years. An entire new motorway network has been constructed. I would also say that, under this Government, the South Island is getting $3.4 billion of transport spending—another $249 million—because of the Upgrade Programme. This Government is spending more on transport than the former Government did in the South Island.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has he received any correspondence from Julie Anne Genter in her capacity as transport spokesperson for the Green Party or, indeed, the Associate Minister of Transport in relation to the transport component of the Upgrade Programme?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I have received correspondence from the Associate Minister, and I’m pleased to say that both our coalition and confidence and supply partners have been fully involved in the design and development of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme and they fully support it.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: How many of the 12 roading projects mentioned in the primary question were fully planned, consented, and fully funded when he became the Minister?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, it’s a very short answer: there were none that were fully planned, designated, consented, or funded—zero.

💬 Hon Shane Jones: Can he confirm that the four-lane stretch of highway from Whangārei to Marsden Point reflects the very strong collaborative relationship he has with his associate transport Minister?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I can confirm that. The associate transport Minister made very strong and clear representations on behalf of the people of Northland. That particular stretch of road—neglected for years under the former Government—is one of the most dangerous and busy stretches of that highway, of State Highway 1, and the response from the people of the North has been very, very positive.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is he aware if any funding was allocated to progress SkyPath on Auckland’s Harbour Bridge after Auckland Central MP, Nikki Kaye, said in 2016 she really wants the project to happen?

💬 Simon O’Connor: Four years ago you weren’t born.

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: In spite of the enthusiasm—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Who was that? Who made the interjection then as to the date of my birth—the totally inaccurate one?

💬 Simon O’Connor: Oh yes.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, Mr O’Connor will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Simon O’Connor: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 SPEAKER: Thank you. Where were we with that? I think we’ve had the question; we’ll now have the reply.

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: In spite of the enthusiasm of the Auckland Central member of Parliament, the transport Minister at the time, Simon Bridges, did not put any funding towards SkyPath at all. But luckily for Ms Kaye, this Government has guaranteed funding not only for SkyPath but for the 3-kilometre shared path connecting the SkyPath to Northcote and Takapuna.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: How much funding in the New Zealand Upgrade package is earmarked for clean transport like rail, public transport, walking, and cycling, and did the previous Government fund any of it?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: That’s from a Minister who’s a close personal associate.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I’m going to remind members for the last time—including the member sitting next to the shadow Leader of the House—that they do not interject during the asking of questions.

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The New Zealand Upgrade will deliver approximately $1.6 billion of funding for new clean transport projects; none of which had funding set aside under the previous Government. This includes $370 million for extending rail electrification to Pukekohe; $315 million to build the third southern rail line in Auckland; and more than $100 million to deliver faster, more frequent bus services in Christchurch and Queenstown.

💬 Hon James Shaw: Is it true that the New Zealand Upgrade will deliver as many kilometres of safe separated cycleways as new State highways?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Yes. The New Zealand Upgrade will see 99 kilometres of safe separated walking and cycling facilities rolled out across the country so that people feel safe walking and cycling with their kids.

Question No. 10—Health

10. to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made about child and maternal health facilities?

The Prime Minister’s ambition is to make New Zealand the best place in the world to be a child. To support that, as part of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme announced two weeks ago, $83 million has been set aside for child and maternal health facilities. We’re investing in neonatal and paediatric intensive care units in Counties Manukau, Auckland, Hutt Valley, and Capital and Coast. We’re investing in better maternal facilities in Hutt Valley and South Canterbury, as well as new and upgraded dental vans in Hawke’s Bay, Lakes, and Wairarapa DHBs. These projects will make a real difference to families up and down New Zealand.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: How will patients at Starship hospital benefit from the New Zealand Upgrade?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Starship is home to New Zealand’s only specialist paediatric intensive care service. They do amazing work there. They look after the most unwell children from all over the country, including those who need cardiac surgery and transplantation. So I’m particularly pleased that we are investing $25 million into the expansion of the paediatric intensive care unit—or PICU—at Starship. This will take capacity at the unit from 22 beds currently to more than 30 beds, as well as provide for improved whānau spaces.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: Why is this investment needed at Starship?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Starship’s PICU currently treats around 1,100 to 1,200 children each year. Demand has grown by 30 percent over the past three years and is expected to continue to grow. We need to act now to ensure that we have enough beds to care for these most vulnerable of patients. Construction work is planned to begin in early 2021.

Question No. 11—Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media

11. to the Minister of Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media: Does he stand by all his actions and policies?

In the context in which they were given, yes. In particular, I stand by my statement that New Zealanders must have access to a strong and independent public media service for the decades to come. This will ensure that New Zealand audiences will have access to content which reflects the language and experiences of New Zealanders, including those currently underserved audiences. In Budget 2018, we increased public media funding by $15 million. In Budget 2019, we increased Radio New Zealand’s (RNZ) baseline by a further $7.25 million. This was in direct contrast to the previous Government’s nine years of funding freezing for public media.

💬 Melissa Lee: When was he first made aware of RNZ’s plan for the axing of RNZ Concert and the removal of its broadcasting from the FM frequency in favour of a youth radio station?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I’m going to let this question go but warn members that in future, when they’re asking about actions and policies, the supplementary question has to relate to that.

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I was briefed by Radio New Zealand that they were working on a youth strategy in August and October of 2019. They brought their final proposal around the youth strategy and the impacts of that to me on 29 January of this year. As has been said publicly, I raised a number of concerns with them; most substantively was the issue of moving Radio New Zealand Concert off its current frequency of 93.5 FM. I said I would go and work on making sure that their youth strategy could have another alternative frequency to operate on, and that’s what I did.

💬 Melissa Lee: Why did he say, and I quote, “It’s not for the Government to decide what it’s utilised for.” in regards to the youth radio spectrum, when the Prime Minister has said, “[The new frequency] was always intended for youth radio and youth programming,”?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Because that question that the member herself asked me at the select committee in June of last year pertained to frequency for both Māori and youth. In my reading of the transcript, I was saying that it wasn’t for Government alone to decide how the spectrum should be used. Both of those 103 and 102 frequencies are assigned for Māori purposes, or the 102 for a youth network strategy, and in one of those, it’s not for Government alone to dictate exactly how that spectrum is allocated or used.

💬 Melissa Lee: Does he agree with the statement by former Prime Minister the Rt Hon Helen Clark that the Concert FM issue has been, and I quote, “handled disastrously”; if so, does he accept responsibility for this disastrous handling?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: It’s very important that Governments keep away from operational decisions that public broadcasters make, and the decision to run a consultation with their staff around a youth network strategy was theirs. They have subsequently taken action to keep Concert FM where it is. The former Prime Minister is entitled to her opinion.

Question No. 12—Research, Science and Innovation

12. to the Minister of Research, Science and Innovation: Is the Government delivering improved outcomes in research and innovation?

Yes. In the two years we’ve been in office, we’ve delivered across a wide range of areas in research and innovation, but there is always more to do. An edited list of our highlights of things that we have done: we have invested $1.1 billion in a 15 percent tax incentive, which we’ve yet to see the impact from; we’ve funded Callaghan Innovation’s campus redevelopment and established a National New Energy Development Centre to ensure we have world-class innovation infrastructure; we’ve signed international agreements to foster greater collaboration on research and innovation with Governments and the private sector; we’ve made significant investments into important areas of research, such as renewable energy, agricultural and climate science; and can continue to develop our space research capability, including hosting mission control for New Zealand’s first space mission. This Government has set out to lift—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! You know, that is enough. The member gets a 10-minute speech later.

💬 Dr Parmjeet Parmar: How can she say her Government is delivering improved outcomes in innovation when New Zealand’s ranking on the Bloomberg Innovation Index fell by five places this year to 29 in the world?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Bloomberg innovation survey to which the member refers is measured across seven domains out of 100, all of which are weighted equally across that. It is important to note that this is a composite survey that doesn’t only take into account innovation. The seven domains are R & D intensity, manufacturing value-added, productivity, high-tech density, tertiary education, researcher concentration, and product activity. In fact, the area where New Zealand did drop the most was in the manufacturing value-added rather than the innovation measures that are captured in that survey. In fact, in some of the innovation domains that are measured in that, we actually performed ahead of every country except for three or four that are ahead of us. What the member also should note is that the New Zealand score, the raw score on the index, has been in decline from 2015 to 2018. That decline was reversed in 2018 and stabilised only in 2019. We as a Government believe that, actually, what sits behind that is our drive to lift our very low percentage of GDP that we spend, which we as a Government have seen movement of. I seek leave to table this graph, which shows the fact that New Zealand’s score on the Bloomberg weighted average has been in decline for a number of years but has indeed stabilised over the years 2018 to 2019.

💬 SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none.

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

💬 Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Why is she blaming the last National Government, because when she came into Government, New Zealand was 18 on the Bloomberg Innovation Index ranking, and now we are on 29 under her watch?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think I gave quite a thorough answer to the initial question—that, in fact, what I’m saying is there are a range of domains that that is measured across. So I am going to go through some of those raw numbers in terms of that. So in 2013, the year in which Callaghan Innovation was established, 57.73 was our weighted number. That did jump slightly in 2014 to 75.09 but then did decline all the way through to the beginning of 2018 to 67.4. What we have seen over the years 2019 to 2020 is 68.12 and 68.08. I think what all members of this House, regardless of what side they sit on, should be dedicated to is the fact that New Zealand has a woeful percentage of GDP expenditure, and that is something that this Government has seen real movement on, unlike the previous Government.

💬 Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Is she at all concerned that New Zealand had the largest fall of any single country, making New Zealand the biggest loser in the latest Bloomberg Innovation Index?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I am always concerned about where New Zealand ranks in the world, but I will reiterate again that that is a composite index the member has referred to. In fact, the area where it had its biggest fall was not one related to innovation, but that doesn’t stop me being concerned. What I would also point out to the member is that these are proportionate to GDP, and I will remind the member that New Zealand had higher GDP percentage growth than other advanced economies that it has been compared to in that table. So while we maintain our growth in GDP—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! That concludes oral questions.