Oral Questions

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

Yes, especially the work we are doing to support those regions, individuals, and businesses most exposed to the global impacts of COVID-19. Ministers will be meeting this afternoon as part of the COVID-19 Cabinet committee that has been established to meet outside of the Cabinet cycle so that we can stay in front, as much as possible, of some of the impacts that we’re seeing. This will enable us to discuss further options that we can enact in order to support those who are feeling the direct effects, alongside those initiatives we’ve already rolled out.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Is New Zealand heading into a recession, and what’s her plan to deal with it?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That has not been the advice that we have received thus far, but it is very clear that the global impacts of COVID-19 are likely to be significant, and that is something that Treasury has openly acknowledged—significant, but they have not at this stage said that it will necessarily be long term in the effect. None the less, we are prepared and continuing to work hard alongside those affected industries to get ahead of the impacts that are being seen. In fact, I think it’s interesting to look at what Stephen Toplis, head of research from BNZ Markets, said today. From a Government perspective, he says, the things it needs to do are: educate folk about the impending risks—clearly, from a public health perspective, that’s exactly what we’re doing; “Focus aggressively on bolstering resources to the health sector”—also what we’ve done with our pandemic plan; “Provide short term assistance to businesses with cash flow difficulties by ensuring government payments to suppliers are timely”—this was something we discussed with BusinessNZ on Monday, and we’re looking to bring forward prompt payment. Also they talk about selective tax holidays. Inland Revenue has been proactive in the advice they have put out around, for instance, the possibilities of instalments for estimates of provisional tax, and even if people are unable to pay, the kinds of serious hardship measures that are available. Mr Speaker, I realise this is a long answer, but if I may continue: “Ensure that folk who lose their jobs or who can’t attend work for an extended period of time, have access to benefits … in a timely fashion”—this is one of the agenda items for the COVID-19 Cabinet committee today; and “Ensure that the infrastructure of government is maintained.” I think you can see from this list that we are being proactive in all of those areas.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does she believe New Zealand will face recession this year?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m not going to make a prediction that no other economist is currently making or, indeed, Treasury. We are not predicting, but we are planning and preparing, because that is what we, of course, need to do in order to support those regions, in particular, that are most likely to be affected. We know those are likely to be—Gisborne, Hawke’s Bay, Tasman, and Marlborough are amongst the most exposed, particularly looking at the—

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: It’s every small business in New Zealand.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: —impacts in China. But some analysis, obviously, Mr Bridges, demonstrates those impacts are particularly acute there, and then across the board for the likes of tourism and hospitality. In each of those regions we are looking to create tailored packages of support. That’s something that our Minister for Economic Development is currently working on.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: How will she reassure New Zealanders economically in light of our slow growth and very low business confidence leading into this crisis?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Actually, I refute the premise of that question. In fact, I believe it was the ANZ business confidence survey that demonstrated that, actually, off the back of the big New Zealand upgrade, there was a significant uptick in the confidence levels, particularly in those in the construction industry. Also, our growth levels—and, in fact, that’s been a reflection of many economists, that we were well placed; the momentum in the economy was good. That is exactly the position you want to be in if you’re going to have to weather a storm like this. I do at this point want to reach out to the Opposition. If they feel that they would benefit from more frequent briefings on this issue, we are happy to provide them. If they have suggestions, my understanding is that that is being provided to the health spokesperson, but if they’d like that increased, we’ll look to do that within the resource we have. But, equally, if there are specific measures that I have not listed in this House that members believe we should be exploring for regional New Zealand or businesses, we are open to those. This is a New Zealand issue amongst a global issue, and we should be working together on it.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: In light of her first comments in that last supplementary answer, is it in fact the case that the Reserve Bank and Treasury have contacted the commercial bank economists and told them to be less negative?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have no such advice on that.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: When will we see a light rail announcement from her Government?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As soon as we’re ready to announce one.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: When will we see an announcement on the resolution of Ihumātao?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, when an announcement is ready to be made. But, again, I make the same comment that I have many other times—that this has actually been an incredibly complex issue. What we, of course, have been focused on is making sure, amongst the three different areas, that Treaty precedent isn’t created, that the issues that have been raised by mana whenua are adequately addressed, and, of course, that the current private land owner is a party, obviously, to the solution.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Has a deal, in fact, been struck; and, if so, why isn’t it being announced?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Because there is no resolution to be announced at this stage, but I’m sure the member will be very pleased when, eventually, a solution is found, because it will be in New Zealand’s best interest.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: What is her Government’s position on the electric vehicle feebate; is it dead or not?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, I can tell the member that unlike his position, which seemed to be to support and then to say he didn’t like it—which, to me, actually undermines his position on the whole entire Paris Agreement and, frankly, climate change.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: So what’s her Government’s position on it?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, we consulted on proposals around clean car standards and also a regime to incentivise and create disincentives around the highest-emission vehicles. Once we’ve finalised that work, we’ll be making announcements.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: So was her Deputy Prime Minister wrong when he said it was “dead”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I think what the Deputy Prime Minister pointed out was that the Opposition continually claiming that they had achieved particular outcomes from the Opposition benches was farcical.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Is all of her Government fully supportive of giving back prisoners’ voting rights?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Actually, this House, when it debated this issue as a member’s bill, demonstrated that there were plenty of individuals who felt deeply uncomfortable with the fact that for pure politics we are now having to face an adverse finding from our courts, an adverse finding from the Waitangi Tribunal, all because of misguided politics in a member’s bill.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Are these the same voting rights that real leaders like Holland, Holyoake, Muldoon, and Marshall supported when they were leading the National Party?

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Oh, too weird.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will withdraw and apologise.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a farcical supplementary question. I just wonder why he wasn’t pulled up on it.

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, can you say that a little bit more clearly?

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I’m just inquiring why, when it’s a farcical supplementary question, the member’s not pulled up on it.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think there’s an assumption in it that leaders of the National Party of the past had made farcical positions, and I’m not sure that that’s been established.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question asked the Prime Minister, in terms of the history and knowledge bringing a conclusion to where we are now in this House, whether or not that position was supported by such leaders as Holland, Holyoake, Marshall, and Muldoon, because it was, and that was my point. To call that farcical is ridiculous.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I mean, I don’t want to criticise the Deputy Prime Minister, but that point of order was totally unnecessary because I had just made that point.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It’s quite clear that the Deputy Prime Minister and indeed the Government has no responsibility for now deceased leaders of the National Party, and yet he asked that question with no reprimand.

💬 SPEAKER: If one looks, one, at the question, to which almost any supplementary could be asked—you know, the member doesn’t have the exclusive right to ask supplementaries on his own question; other people can as well. That question is so broad that almost any supplementary could be asked on it, and, actually, asking a supplementary following up a Government policy position, or not—whether it is or not I’m not aware—based on the comments that the Leader of the Opposition himself made, I thought is exactly what supplementaries are for.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Speaking to the point of order—

💬 SPEAKER: A further point of order, Gerry Brownlee—it’s been dealt with.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Well, just to make the point that it would have been helpful, as you’ve just suggested that it was about finding out a Government position, if there had been a statement of Government position in answer to the primary question. There was not. There was just obfuscation from both the Prime Minister and then the Deputy Prime Minister.

💬 SPEAKER: I let the member run a bit longer than he should have. I thought the answer to the primary question, in fact, was far too long.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: But not relevant.

💬 SPEAKER: Oh, look, Mr Brownlee, I’m getting more than a little sick of you chipping, and I will say that when you have a question “Does she stand by all her Government’s statements and actions?”, almost everything that the Prime Minister says is relevant, and it was. It might have been extensive, it might have been too long—she apologised for some of it being too long—but when such a question is asked, anything by way of reply or supplementary question is relevant.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Is all of her Government fully supportive of giving back prisoners’ voting rights?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, a bill cannot come before this House unless that is the case, but what I want to point out to the member is that we would not be in this position where we are having to reinstate what has been a longstanding convention off the back of what I understand was a commission instated decades ago to establish that, where appropriate, civil liberties in that respect should exist, and that was undermined by one single member’s bill—that should never have occurred. We are having to fix this issue because a court of law has established that this Parliament made a decision it shouldn’t have.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: So if I could ask the Prime Minister: has she got no objection to members of her Government lining up with Holyoake, Holland, Muldoon on this principal issue?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No. In fact, I would have thought members on the other side of the House may wish to reflect on that.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Has she spoken to Shane Jones yet about his comment that there are more Indians than Mongrel Mob members in our courts?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member has followed my commentary on this, he will know the answer is yes.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

Yesterday and overnight, a number of central banks around the world warned about the economic impacts of coronavirus, including in Australia and the US. The global situation fed through to Fonterra’s latest global dairy trade auction overnight, where prices were down 1.2 percent, to sit just below their long-run average. The fall was less than expected, and an ASB economist said prices were showing signs of stabilisation. This ASB economist also said that Fonterra had reported that while there had been a slow-down in processing, product was continuing to be cleared by Chinese customs and quarantine officials. This highlights how different industries are being affected differently by the coronavirus situation. It’s why the Government is working with business groups and industry organisations on our response and the support that is required to protect jobs and businesses.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: What action is the Government taking to support the economy through this period?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Government has moved quickly to put in place support for businesses and affected industries and employees as we continue to work with them on our response. This includes support for the tourism and fisheries industries, increasing funding for the regional business partner programme with local chambers of commerce, and ensuring IRD, the Ministry of Social Development, and other Government agencies are on the ground, working with affected businesses and individuals on issues like provisional tax and income support, and through the provision of temporary additional support and special-needs grants. We continue to work closely with business, worker, and industry groups. Yesterday, the Minister for Economic Development visited the Tai Rāwhiti region and met with forestry industry representatives, small-business owners, and workers. The focus was on how to support forestry companies and workers, including through supporting redeployment or the bringing forward of other work. We’ll be discussing these proposals at the COVID-19 Cabinet committee this afternoon.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: What reports has he seen on the ability of the New Zealand economy to respond to COVID-19?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Today, there have been further reports about how New Zealand is in good shape to respond to the economic effects of COVID-19. Independent economist Cameron Bagrie told Radio New Zealand this morning that New Zealand was in a “reasonable space” heading into this situation, saying that “New Zealand has had accelerating momentum.”—things have actually been picking up. Mr Bagrie said that the Government had stepped up at the end of last year with our announcements of the $12 billion New Zealand Upgrade Programme. His comments also follow recent news that the Government ran a $1.4 billion surplus over the first seven months of this financial year and that net debt is now at 19.5 percent, well below the 22.9 percent that we inherited.

Question No. 3—Finance

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

Yes, in the context in which they were made and given. In particular, I stand by my statement that the New Zealand economy is in good shape to respond to the economic impacts of coronavirus.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Regarding his statement in the House yesterday: “We know that COVID-19 will have a significant impact on the New Zealand economy, particularly in the short term.”, what is the latest advice he’s getting on its likely impact on New Zealand jobs and incomes?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The advice that we’re getting is that the first quarter activity in New Zealand will be limited in terms of growth. Clearly, that will have an impact in some ways on the jobs and incomes of some New Zealanders. Beyond that, all countries around the world are guarding themselves against a longer-term impact through 2020. What I would say is that New Zealanders—if we are talking about incomes—go into this situation with record wage growth over the last 10 years.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he had any more specific advice than some impact?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I get daily advice on this matter, but, as the member will well know, the data that is used to monitor this comes through with a time lag. But, quite clearly, from the conversations we’re having with businesses, we’re aware of drop-offs, for instance, in the tourism sector in particular. But throwing numbers around without evidence behind them is something I try to avoid.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: When will we get a clear idea of the Government’s fiscal response, if any, to the economic challenge caused by the virus?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: You’ve already seen our responses from an economic perspective. Obviously, we’re in the process at the moment of putting the Budget together, where we’ll see fiscal responses. But I would want to reiterate the comments the Prime Minister made from Stephen Toplis from the BNZ today. Not only did he talk about the list of matters that the Government is already doing—the things he thought were important—but he also finished his comments by saying “we cannot stress enough that whatever the impact it will pass. [Where it is imperative, we are] prepared to deal with the stresses that this … brings, accept what can be achieved but also be resigned to what can’t.” Then, he finished by saying, “All the while ensuring that knee-jerk [reactions] will not prove detrimental when all of this is eventually behind us.”

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why can’t we get a clear sense now of precisely what the Government plans to do over the next couple of months?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I think if the member is watching around the world he’ll be aware that this is a rapidly evolving situation. In my previous answer I ran through what we are already doing—ranging all the way from the direct support given to the tourism industry, the regional business support partner programme with chambers of commerce, the direct support being provided by the Ministry of Social Development and IRD, and the work we’re doing getting alongside employers and employees right around New Zealand. That is what New Zealanders expect. They also expect that this is dealt with in the first instance as a public health issue, and that is where it is vitally important we have strong public services. I’m very proud of the fact that the Government has rebuilt those over the last two years.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Regarding his statement recorded in Stuff yesterday that “infrastructure spending could be brought forward to stimulate the economy if the coronavirus worsens”, does he acknowledge the frustration of many that most of the key infrastructure projects have been delayed two years already by his Government?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I do acknowledge is the frustration of those all around New Zealand that the previous Government made claims that they had funded things that they had not funded. And I would also say that people around New Zealand are delighted that this Government is now fully funding those infrastructure projects.

Question No. 4—Housing

4. to the Minister of Housing: Does she stand by the target she set on Radio New Zealand on 4 September last year that she would have a $400 million progressive home ownership scheme up and running this year; if so, exactly when this year will it be up and running?

Yes. I refer the member to my answers to oral question No. 6 yesterday, when I made it abundantly clear that a paper went to Cabinet in December, as was planned, and an announcement on the scheme will be made in the next couple of months.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When she said she would have a progressive homeownership scheme up and running this year, what did she mean by “up and running”?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I know that member was part of a Government that never managed to get a progressive homeownership scheme up and running, so it’s probably worth explaining what that is. What I meant by “up and running” is that there would be people who would be given assistance to purchase a house.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she then know in which month it will be up and running?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: An announcement will be made in the next couple of months. I know the member is a latter-day fan of progressive homeownership and she was a member of a Government that never managed to do anything, but there’s not long to wait.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Has the Minister not heard of the excellent up-and-running progressive homeownership scheme at Waimahia Peninsula then?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: This is run by community housing providers. This is actually about a Government getting in behind and putting $400 million into a progressive homeownership scheme. This is a quantum shift in the number of people that will be helped into homeownership because this is a Government that is putting serious effort into this area.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why did she repeatedly tell media in September last year that the scheme would be up and running when she can’t even tell us which month?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I repeatedly told media it would be up and running this year because it will be.

Question No. 5—Environment

5. to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has he received on the quality of water in New Zealand’s rivers and its impact on beaches?

The most recent official reliable report shows that more rivers are getting worse than getting better on five of the nine measurements. Additionally, many in a static state are degraded. A major concern is that about twice as many sites are getting worse as better on the Macroinvertebrate Community Index measure, which is of macroinvertebrates—those little critters—which is one of the best measures of the health of a waterway. The parlous state of many of our waterways also affects beaches and estuaries, making them unfit for swimming and gathering seafood. Right now, regional councils monitor 292 sites for E. coli during summer. For the sites with sufficient data to assess their quality, about half are at times below safe swimming levels. Beaches in our largest cities like Wellington and Auckland are being repeatedly polluted by sewage. The status quo is plainly not good enough, which is why we’re taking action in both urban and rural areas.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What is the Government doing to improve water quality in New Zealand?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: We believe that New Zealand is not so impoverished that we can’t afford to clean beaches and clean rivers, so in the coming months, the Government will introduce new standards to improve water quality in New Zealand. We’ve already made some announcements in the urban and more coming for rural. In summer, we believe that New Zealanders deserve to be able to put their head under water, whether it’s in a river or at the beach, without getting crook. We also need to ensure that New Zealand maintains and improves upon our clean, green reputation to maximise the value of our exports in increasingly sophisticated and discerning international markets. These standards will be the outcome of years and years of consultation and discussion over successive Governments, but it’s this coalition Government that will halt the decline and set the country on the path to clean up our waterways within a generation.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What is the Government doing to improve water quality in urban areas?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Despite a misapprehension or, perhaps, mischaracterisation by some, the Government’s freshwater plans have a broad focus on improving water quality in our large towns and cities. We do have serious water-quality problems in these areas. It’s pleasing to see that Auckland is already undertaking a massive waste-water project that will reduce sewage overflows by some 80 percent. Other urban councils also need to step up and deal with this issue. I welcome the support of one Opposition MP who recently said in the Dominion Post that—and I quote—“it’s … not sustainable to look the other way.” on improving our urban water infrastructure and it needs to happen urgently. I invite her to explain this to Jacqui Dean, who says the opposite, and to apply the same logic in rural areas.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: In his drive to advertise the need to clean up our waters, will he promise not to get into his togs and dive into the water like Nick Smith did when he was last in charge?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order!

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Togs, togs, undies! Ha, ha!

💬 SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I can just get to the point of some responsibility on the part of David Parker for not subjecting us to that. So the question might just have been allowed, but I did say “Order!” and indicated to David Parker that he should not answer, and therefore he will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I withdraw and apologise, sir.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: As you should.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, well, not the only one.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: Is he confident that the border controls in place for the management of COVID-19 coronavirus are adequate and were put in place at the appropriate time?

Yes.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Why did New Zealand implement travel restrictions from Iran only after a coronavirus-infected patient arrived and a full week after the outbreak from that country became known?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: New Zealand has consistently been one of the first countries to introduce travel restrictions. We moved in response to Iran before Australia, and our move to register people arriving from South Korea and northern Italy was above and beyond what many countries have done, including Australia.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: On that matter, why have the travel restrictions been imposed on Iran but not South Korea and Italy, outbreak countries with more travellers to New Zealand?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The decision around the Iran travel restrictions was based upon the concerns around the quality of information coming out of Iran, the sense that the health system was not able to respond in the way that the more sophisticated health sectors have responded in both northern Italy and South Korea.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Now that there is a case which has arrived from Italy, will the Government be implementing travel restrictions from Italy and South Korea; if not, why not?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: We have been looking at the scientific evidence and the medical advice regularly. All our decisions have been based on medical and scientific advice. The technical advisory group met this morning and did not make any changes to the case definition. However, they’re now meeting daily in response to the rapidly evolving international environment, and we will consider any advice we receive.

💬 Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern: Can the Minister confirm that to the best of our knowledge, the only countries that have any restrictions involving Italy, as New Zealand does, are the likes of Kiribati, Samoa, and, at roughly the same time as New Zealand, the UK?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: To reiterate, New Zealand has been very early to move in respect of other countries. Part of having these restrictions in place early has been that that has allowed us to have more time to prepare as a country. We were the 48th country to receive our first case of the coronavirus. I think the very cautious approach we have been taking has served New Zealanders’ health and safety well.

Question No. 7—Transport

7. to the Minister of Transport: How many briefings on Auckland light rail has he received that have been copied to the Minister for Infrastructure since October 2017, and has the NZ Infra proposal for Auckland light rail ever involved a 99-year contract between the Crown and NZ Infra?

The Minister for Infrastructure is a member of the ministerial oversight group for Auckland light rail and has received nine written briefings. I regularly brief my ministerial colleagues where possible on this project. And, to the second part of the member’s question, the NZ Infra proposal is confidential due to the commercial process.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has the Ministry of Transport made a recommendation to him about which of the two proposals should be a preferred partner for the Crown on Auckland light rail; and, if so, which one is it?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The Ministry of Transport’s been responsible for running the twin track process that Cabinet mandated. They have reported back, and we’re now in a Cabinet process to consider their recommendation.

💬 Chris Bishop: What is his definition of light rail?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Light rail is a form of rapid transit that runs on tracks. The tracks generally run in parallel to each other from one point to another, and they’re not heavy rail. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Settle down, thank you.

💬 Chris Bishop: What a great start. Has he discussed with the Minister for Infrastructure why he is making negative remarks about Auckland light rail despite the Minister admitting himself he’s under strict instruction not to talk about light rail?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I haven’t been making negative remarks about light rail.

Question No. 8—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

8. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: How is the Government improving returns for default KiwiSaver fund customers?

The Government aims to improve returns for people who have their KiwiSaver in what is called a default fund. We are doing this by moving from the current conservative investment mandate to a balanced investment mandate. Over the decades that people save in KiwiSaver, this has the potential to add tens of thousands of dollars to their KiwiSaver balances in order for them to better provide for themselves at retirement. We’re also introducing new obligations on default fund providers to engage with their members to help them make more informed decisions about their retirement savings so they can have the best settings to suit them.

💬 Dr Deborah Russell: Why is the Government making these changes?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Just a little under 700,000 New Zealanders are in default KiwiSaver funds. They were automatically enrolled in those when they started a new job and 400,000 of them have not done anything to their accounts since they started. We want all New Zealanders to maximise the benefits of KiwiSaver and we want default providers to do more work with their customers to get them the best KiwiSaver balances for their retirement. The balanced setting might not be right for everyone, but when working with customers KiwiSaver providers can help their customers choose the right settings for their retirement.

💬 Dr Deborah Russell: How is the Government dealing with the fees charged by default KiwiSaver providers?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: We want New Zealanders to get better value for money from the fees that are charged as part of their KiwiSaver. In many cases we know fees can make a big difference to the amount of money people have for their retirement over the long term. The fees each provider charges will be factored in too, when the Government appoints the default providers later this year, and we’ll also require that fees are presented in a simple and transparent manner.

💬 Dr Deborah Russell: What other changes has the Government made to help default KiwiSaver fund customers?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The other changes are that we’re also placing responsible investment obligations on default fund providers. We know from the consultation process around this that 83 percent of New Zealanders expect their KiwiSaver investments to be invested responsibly and ethically. These obligations will include sector exclusions, such as manufacturers of illegal weapons as well as investment in fossil fuel production.

Question No. 9—Foreign Affairs

9. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Has he alerted the Prime Minister to the possibility that Hon Shane Jones’ recent comments, including “I think the number of students that have come from India have ruined many of those institutions”, might cause embarrassment and tension in our relationship with India?

No, and the Indian Government has not raised any concerns about these comments, unlike in 2012, when Mr Brownlee said that the Finns were uneducated, unemployed murderers—the Government of Finland did raise concerns. Furthermore, the Leader of the Opposition’s view that “Two Chinese are more valuable than two Indians” cannot have impressed the Indian people, either.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does he think it would be a good idea for the Hon Shane Jones to learn from the past mistakes of other politicians?

💬 Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I want to thank Mr Brownlee for a brilliant suggestion, but he would be a very busy man if he is to learn from that member’s mistakes.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: When he said yesterday—

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: They think it’s a joke.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think, in the context of that little exchange, that’s a very unreasonable action for you to take. You pulled me up for apparently chipping at various times, but we’ve had several questions in the last couple of days from the Deputy Prime Minister that have not been particularly relevant, have had no ministerial responsibility, and have taken an enormous amount of the House’s time. So I’d ask you to perhaps reconsider whether or not we might be able to get that supplementary back at some point.

💬 SPEAKER: I’ll think about it. I do say, though, that Dr Smith has a very loud voice and he was very late with his interjection.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: When he said yesterday “I’ve just recited the Indian weekend[er] newspaper as an authority.”, is that the same Indian weekend newspaper that reported yesterday, “Traditionally, a sizable chunk of Indian immigrants have stood solidly behind Labour. But more recently, particularly since this coalition Government came to power, that support has steadily wavered. Not least because of repeated pronouncements by Labour’s coalition partner [New Zealand] First, whose leaders have continually targeted Indian immigrants for one reason or another in the media.”?

💬 Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No, but it’s the same publication that reported this, and I quote, “The co-ethnic exploitation of migrants is a very pertinent issue in today’s New Zealand. … some employers and education providers … are indulging in dubious activities [and] bringing a bad name to the Indian community. It is also hampering New Zealand’s international reputation.” That was a report by MP Bakshi on 28 February 2017, during the National Party’s administration.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Has he explained to his ministerial colleagues Iain Lees-Galloway and James Shaw, co-leader of the Green Party, why Mr Jones’ comments were not racist?

💬 Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Because the definition of racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior. Nothing that Mr Jones has said fits that, but Mr Brownlee’s description of the Finns back in 2012 had the Finnish Government and all the diplomats complaining. Can I just say also that I’ve got 19 different articles here from the New Zealand and Indian media, The Indian Weekender, The Indian News, Indian Newslink, the Migrant Workers Association, and the Indian Workers Association, who all agree with these comments.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Perhaps the Minister should table those articles—that would be helpful. He’s got them; he said he has them here. So that would be good. We’d like those tabled—they will be proved to be irrelevant. But I’d also like him to table any communication between the New Zealand Government and the Finnish Government over the comical statements made by me and reported comically in Finnish media.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, the member might want quite a few of those things, but he knows absolutely that he does not interrupt an answer to request them. The Minister of Foreign Affairs.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: No, there’s no need, “Bernie”.

💬 Hon Member: You carry on defending racism.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I answered—

💬 SPEAKER: No, the member will resume his seat. Who made that interjection?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I did.

💬 SPEAKER: The member will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 SPEAKER: The member today has been testing my patience, and that sort of interjection is probably not the wisest going past me. Right, what I’m going to do—has the member finished his supplementaries? Right. Well, I think we’ll just go on, because I think we’re going down a hole that’s not very good.

Question No. 10—Prime Minister

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

Yes, in the context in which they were given.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Does she support the inclusion of a word similar to “personal” or “recreational” in the cannabis referendum question to ensure there is no confusion with medicinal cannabis?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: My view is that there won’t be confusion. Of course, New Zealanders know decisions have already been made on medicinal cannabis.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: Then why did she say recently, and I quote, “I think there is value in making it clear that laws have already been changed around medicinal cannabis, and we wouldn’t wish to confuse the situation.”; and if so, why won’t she commit to a referendum question that makes this clear by the inclusion of the words either “personal” or “recreational” use?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The clarity is provided by the fact that the members of the public are being asked a yes/no question on something that doesn’t currently exist in New Zealand. We already have medicinal cannabis use, because we have already passed provisions for that. Secondly—[Interruption]—secondly, Dr Smith—we have a draft bill that individuals will be voting on. Thirdly, we will have a public campaign to provide information to members of the public on this issue, and we’ve been involving the likes of the Chief Science Advisor in providing that information as well. I think members of the public will be very well versed in the issues that they will be voting on.

💬 Hon Paula Bennett: When the Government’s own website, set up to inform this campaign, explicitly and repeatedly uses the term “recreational cannabis”, why will she not simply commit to putting that in the question so that we can avoid any confusion for the public?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member doesn’t seem to want to even ask the public in the first place. But, secondly—

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Answer the question.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: —we, of course, have views—Dr Smith, maybe a couple of seconds in, I will. We’ve also sought advice from the likes of the Ministry of Justice and those who have provided their expert view on the clearest way that we can communicate this issue. They, of course, went through the tricky issue of a two-part referendum on the flag, and they have some experience in framing questions in such a way that they are as simple as possible for the public to participate.

Question No. 11—Finance

11. to the Minister of Finance: Can he confirm it is his view that “the reality is fossil fuel investments are likely to be investments in stranded assets”?

Yes, and that’s why I’m pleased our Government has announced that from next year, default KiwiSaver providers will not be allowed to invest into fossil fuel production. New Zealanders expect our Government to lead on the long-term issues facing our country, like climate change, and aligning retirement savings security with tackling climate change is an excellent example of taking action on two long-term issues together.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What reaction has he seen to the Government’s decision to require default KiwiSaver funds not to invest in fossil fuels?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: By and large, I’ve seen a very positive reaction from people who are focused on the future of this country, who are determined that we will have a sustainable economy. There have been one or two negative people with their eyes firmly focused in the rear-view mirror, but the National Party will catch up one day.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he agree with former New Zealand Superannuation Fund CEO Adrian Orr that, and I quote, “The climate change challenge [means] Traditional ways of producing [and] consuming are fundamentally changing and we have to invest and move with that.”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Absolutely, and Mr Orr, when he was with the super fund, began their journey in that direction. It’s obvious to this Government that the global economy is already changing to meet the challenge of the climate crisis, and New Zealand needs to change too.

Chlöe Swarbrick: So given that the super fund has been divesting its fossil fuel portfolio since 2016, should we expect to see the ACC fund and other Government funds following their lead, taking action on climate change?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The super fund’s world-leading approach to climate change and investment is something that we should celebrate. The responsibility for managing ACC’s investment funds lies with the ACC board, which, through its investment subcommittee, regularly reviews and approves its investment guidelines, including its ethical investment policy. While this independence is important and is governed under law, I have written to all Government investment funds to outline my expectations around investment practices. This includes regular reviews, reflecting best practice, and ensuring that we meet the highest ethical standards, as New Zealanders would want us to do.

Chlöe Swarbrick: That said, has he had a response from those Crown investment entities that he wrote to in October last year, asking them to ensure that they continue to support the overall goals of the Government as we move towards, for example, a low-carbon economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I have had a response from those agencies. They’ve all described how they take account of ethical, environmental, social, and governance factors in their investment decisions, and I will continue to take an interest in how that work progresses.

Question No. 12—Conservation

12. to the Minister of Conservation: Does she agree with the Speech from the Throne that “There will be no new mines on conservation land”?

I fully support the policy commitment in the Speech from the Throne for no new mines on conservation land, and that’s why I’ve been working hard to implement it.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: How many new mining applications on conservation land have been approved since the Prime Minister’s Speech from the Throne, when she said that there will be no new mines on conservation land?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The member should be aware that until that policy commitment has been changed into law, we go by the current law. There have been no new open-cast coalmines and no new open-cast goldmines approved under this Government—unlike Minister Nick Smith, who approved a big open-cast coalmine on the Denniston Plateau, which is now mothballed—

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member did not ask how many I had approved. The member asked—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume his seat. Responsibility for relevance is mine. That member knows that, and he knows that he is not allowed to take a point of order during a question of that type. I know the member wants to be thrown out. He’s made that obvious through his interjections now and through his interjections when I’ve been on my feet previously. I’m not going to give him his wish, but he will listen to the rest of the answer.

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The Department of Conservation has approved access arrangements for 14 new mining permits. They are alluvial gold mining on the West Coast and small-scale suction dredges in rivers on the West Coast and in Otago.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she agree with former colleague Catherine Delahunty, who said yesterday, “If Government will not honour their promise to ban mining in Department of Conservation land, the Greens should publicly challenge this failure, for every reason, including their own credibility.”, and so does she feel that her credibility is now being undermined?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: I find it ironic that we now have members of the National Party standing up here pushing for protection of conservation land from mining, when it was a former National Government that wanted to mine the national parks. I am working to get this commitment in the Speech from the Throne and continue to discuss that with the parties across this Government.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Supplementary.

💬 SPEAKER: No, no. We’ve expired the number of the questions which the National Party has. I’ve received a letter from the Hon Michael Woodhouse—

💬 Gareth Hughes: Supplementary.

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry?

💬 Gareth Hughes: I’d like to ask a supplementary, please, sir.

💬 SPEAKER: I’m sorry. The member should be quicker and louder.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Has the Minister declined applications for new mines on conservation land?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The Minister of Energy and Resources, the Hon Megan Woods, and I declined an application to mine 12 hectares of public conservation land in the Mount Rochfort Conservation Area as part of a 110-hectare open-cast goldmine called Te Kūhā.