Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement, “we had an expectation that testing was happening in day 3 and day 12 at the moment we went into alert level 1”; if so, on what factual basis was that expectation formed?

At the beginning of June, my office sought to confirm the testing that was taking place at alert level 1, including high-risk areas. On 5 June, the Ministry of Health emailed a response stating, “Testing of people entering New Zealand will commence in the week of 8 June 2020. These people will be tested at day three and day 12 of their stay in the managed isolation facilities. Approximately 3,000 tests will be undertaken of these people, including those who are already in the facility.” On 8 June, the same advice was provided to Cabinet in an update from the Ministry of Health. On 9 June, the Ministry of Health released a press release which stated, “From today, everyone in managed isolation will be tested twice for COVID-19 and will require a negative test before they leave. Those in quarantine were already being tested as they had shown prior symptoms.”

💬 Todd Muller: Did her Government have the authority to require someone to have a COVID test in quarantine or managed isolation when the policy was announced on 8 June?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes.

💬 Todd Muller: Why, then, has testing been voluntary between 8 June and the issuing of a new public health order yesterday?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I’ve made very clear, the instruction of the Director-General of Health was not being correctly deployed at the assisted isolation facilities.

💬 Todd Muller: When did the Prime Minister get informed that, despite her expectations of mandatory testing in quarantine and self-isolation from 8 June, that in fact was not happening?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member will be aware—as the rest of New Zealand is aware—that that happened last week, at the time of the case being identified of the compassionate leave being granted without testing being deployed. So whilst I don’t want to give a precise figure, it was roughly sometime thereafter in the last seven days, but as the member can see from the reassurances we were being given directly by the Ministry of Health and also the public statements being made by the Ministry of Health, up until that point it was certainly our view that people were being tested twice and being tested before departure.

💬 Todd Muller: Why, then, has testing been voluntary between 8 June and the announcement of the public health order yesterday?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The clear point is that it shouldn’t have been. The order was an enabler, and enabled testing to take place. The clear view of—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I think all of us know that this is important, and I want to be able to hear the response.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: And, as I’ve clearly stated, there’s multiple points at which the Ministry of Health itself was issuing statements claiming that was what was happening in managed isolation facilities. So, clearly, what was meant to be happening wasn’t, and that is something that we’ve been very open about and have worked decisively to correct.

💬 Hon Dr Megan Woods: Is it the Prime Minister’s understanding that nobody has left a managed isolation facility since this weekend, despite the health order not coming into play until yesterday?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That’s exactly correct. The point that the Minister is making there is that the order clearly always created the environment where that mandatory testing could take place. It wasn’t happening; that has nothing to do with the order. It was very clear from the director-general two tests were meant to be taking place, and certainly one before exit.

💬 Todd Muller: Why did a person in managed isolation on 18 June receive a Ministry of Health form saying that they had the right to refuse a COVID test, with a stapled overlay saying that testing was now compulsory?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: And it always was.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Does the Prime Minister believe that devolving the management of quarantine arrangements to individual tertiary education providers, as advocated by the Opposition, would increase or decrease the risk of non-compliance with quarantine measures?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Increase. In fact, I have heard countless members, including the Leader of the Opposition, talk about opening up the borders. I absolutely stand by the position of this Government that the border is an area that we must be absolutely cautious around. That has not been the position of the Opposition.

💬 Todd Muller: Could the Prime Minister please explain how it is possible to announce alert level 1, saying testing now will be occurring in day three and day 12, yet emails from the Ministry of Health on 19 June state “consent is required before a test is taken”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That is not what the order states, so that is incorrect.

💬 Todd Muller: Sorry, I’d just ask the Prime Minister again: is she disputing the Ministry of Health email on 19 June stating—and I quote—“consent is required before a test is taken”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The order at that time: “I require all persons arriving in New Zealand to report and submit themselves as soon as practical after their arrival for testing and for medical examination.”

💬 Todd Muller: To the Prime Minister: are you disputing—are you disputing—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Todd Muller: Sorry—sorry.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: New member.

💬 Todd Muller: New member—yes.

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Todd Muller: At least three off.

💬 SPEAKER: Mr Hipkins.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Oh, we’ll take five. [Todd Muller points downwards]

💬 Todd Muller: To the Prime Minister—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Right—no, no, the member will sit down. The people on my right will just—I’m trying to think of an appropriate set of words—behave themselves.

💬 Todd Muller: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I repeat the question to the Prime Minister: is she disputing that I have an email from the Ministry of Health from 19 June stating—and I quote—“consent is required before a test is taken”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, I point to the language of the order. I point to the three different times at which the director-general and the Ministry of Health have said that everyone would require a negative test before they were able to leave. Though the wider point that I also wish to make: there are two countries in the world—in the world—comparable to New Zealand that are requiring this form of quarantine. We are one of the few in the world that I can find that are also requiring compulsion of testing. I stand by the stringency of our border measures. I see the member has only recently decided that the border matters.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Prime Minister: has the 18 June document with the stapled-over portion that Mr Muller referred to, or, for that matter, the 19 June document, been referred to her or the Minister of Health, or are we expected to believe these allegations without any evidence whatsoever?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Oh, there was evidence last week that members on that side of the House were not prioritising the public health of New Zealanders, but, rather, politics.

💬 Todd Muller: Does she really believe the country can take her seriously when she says that at the core of her view is a strident border, when the Prime Minister announces on 8 June there is mandatory testing, but has to wait until yesterday to formally confirm it for the country?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That is factually incorrect.

💬 Todd Muller: Does she or her Minister of Health have any idea of what is going on in the quarantine facilities and managed isolation facilities of this country when you have a clear view that it is mandatory, but for two weeks it has been voluntary?

💬 SPEAKER: No, no—there actually wasn’t a properly authenticated question in that.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Prime Minister: has she or her colleagues or the Minister of Health prepared the protocols and requirements for safeguarding the health of New Zealand’s population, should we open the border with China, as recommended by the National Party?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member is right to point out that the Opposition repeatedly not only urged us to rush towards level 1; they repeatedly urged us to open up the border. We have consistently resisted that in favour of ensuring that New Zealanders’ safety is the number one priority—that we treat the border with absolute caution. We have some of the most stringent restrictions in the world. There is no playbook for this pandemic, but I stand by the restrictions that we have in place to keep New Zealanders safe.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. What was out of order with the question that the Leader of the Opposition asked and the Prime Minister was not required to answer?

💬 SPEAKER: I won’t go through the list, but there were I think at least two assertions in the question which were not supported.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Why, then, is it appropriate for you to accept an answer to a question from the Deputy Prime Minister to the Prime Minister in which there is a totally untrue assertion made?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I did not accept an answer at all. It was an answer to the House.

Question No. 2—Finance

2. to the Minister of Finance: He aha ngā rīpoata hou kua kitea e ia mō te ōhanga o Aotearoa?

[What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?]

ASB economists this week reported that their real-time estimate of unemployment in New Zealand was a little over 6 percent, based on job seeker numbers from the Ministry of Social Development. In recent weeks, economists, including ASB’s, have revised down their forecasts of the peak in New Zealand’s unemployment rate to around 8 percent, as new data comes out on the New Zealand economy. New Zealand went hard and early with our economic plan to cushion the blow for businesses and households from the global recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. It is welcoming to see that the actions of all New Zealanders, and the benefits of opening up the economy under level 2 and level 1 earlier than expected, are contributing to better than expected economic outcomes for New Zealanders.

💬 Tamati Coffey: What reports has he seen on the international context for the New Zealand economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The global recession due to the COVID-19 pandemic has been felt around the world. The UK reported that economic activity fell 20 percent during the month of April, from March, due to the lockdown. At the end of April, the UK economy was 25 percent smaller than in February. Last week, the Australian unemployment rate rose to 7.1 percent in May, up from 5.1 percent three months ago. Forecasts by the Reserve Bank of Australia are for the unemployment rate there to peak at around 8 percent—the same as now being forecast for New Zealand.

💬 Tamati Coffey: How does the New Zealand economy compare to the UK and Australia in terms of restrictions?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: While New Zealand had one of the most stringent lockdowns around the world, our decision to go hard and early with our health response has meant that our economy has been able to open up faster than others around the world. The UK still has stringent controls in place, with the Oxford University Government response stringency index rating them at 70.37 out of 100 in terms of their restrictions. The stringency index rates Australia at 53.7 out of 100. In comparison, New Zealand sits as one of the most open economies in the world, with a score at 19.44 out of 100—better than Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. New Zealand went into the global COVID-19 pandemic with a strong and stable economy, and now we are one of the most open economies heading out of the lockdown, due to the success and sacrifice of the team of 5 million.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. Hon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura) on behalf of to the Minister of Finance: What is he doing to monitor the success of major Government spending initiatives, including the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme?

There are a number of ways the Government monitors major spending initiatives, including through regular reporting by agencies and Treasury as well as the Auditor-General’s process. Given the significant amount of funding allocated for the response to COVID-19, I receive regular updates about major initiatives, including the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme. Individual agencies have plans and milestones for projects, which I also monitor, and a team has been established to do this specifically for the COVID response and recovery fund.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does he consider it a failure of his that the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme, which he established, has only delivered $86 million in business loans when it was originally budgeted to deliver $6.25 billion?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No, that was an envelope of funding provided. The scheme is still open.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Is he disappointed, then, that the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme has only delivered 1.4 percent of the lending it was supposed to, a lower rate of delivery than even KiwiBuild?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I said in my answer to the previous supplementary question, the scheme is still open. In the meantime, we have opened the Small Business Cashflow (Loan) Scheme, which has given out well over $1 billion to small businesses, and there are a range of other initiatives available as well. The concerns I’ve had with the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme have been documented in this House, and where there are specific concerns for specific customers, they’re followed up.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why did the Government require banks to apply normal lending criteria to loans made under the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Government underwrote the scheme to the extent of taking 80 percent of the risk, given the economic uncertainty that was at play when the scheme was established. From our perspective, banks will interpret their own rules around lending. Some of them have applied much more liberal rules in terms of lending criteria; others have provided tighter rules. That is up to them. We are underwriting the scheme to 80 percent.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What does he say to a business owner in Tauranga who was hoping to benefit from the Business Finance Guarantee Scheme but was told by his bank manager that “it was just too hard to get the applications over the line because of the Government’s red tape and recommended they go for an overdraft instead.”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I can’t speak for the specific case, other than to note that—from the same article that the member is reading from—the business owner had to provide paperwork, including cash-flow forecasts, plans for how the business was coping with the crisis, and how it would pay back the loan, which seem to me to be fairly reasonable elements of a loan.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why would he think businesses would want to take on additional debt in the middle of a crisis when they have been calling for direct cash support, such as the $100,000 GST refund proposal put forward by National?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Direct cash support has gone to businesses in the form of around $11 billion through the wage subsidy scheme, which many of them have written to us to say how important that has been in maintaining their business. Other schemes and funds are available.

Question No. 4—Housing

4. to the Minister of Housing: How many people left quarantine or managed isolation between 23 May and 16 June, and how many of those people, if any, left without a COVID-19 test being taken?

I’m advised by the all-of-Government group that the total number of people who have left a managed isolation or quarantine facility between 23 May and 16 June was 4,694. The Ministry of Health have, to date, been unable to provide the number who have left without a test and are still working through that matter. The Government’s expectation was that these people completed 14 days of managed isolation, which is in line with public health advice of the most effective measure to protect New Zealand against COVID-19 spread. Relying on the 14-day period is the best defence, as evidenced by the extensive surveillance testing that has been ongoing, which has yet to find any evidence of community transmission since 1 May. But as the Prime Minister has said in the House today, Ministers were assured by the Ministry of Health that as we move to level 1, as an additional layer of assurance, no one would leave managed isolation or quarantine without returning a negative test. There have been well-documented issues with those expectations, translating into operational change, and that’s exactly what myself and Air Commodore Webb have begun fixing. Following the implementation of our plan of strengthening procedures at our facilities, no one is leaving without returning a negative test.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is it possible that every person released after 14 days of managed isolation between those days was released without being COVID tested?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: From the evidence that I have seen in terms of the number of people that left, it is not possible that that was the case.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: How can she be that confident in her answer, if she has no idea what testing occurred during those dates?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Because I have been advised by the Ministry of Health that some people were receiving testing between those dates.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does she think it completely implausible that despite finding 11 cases in seven days after quarantine testing commenced, there were no positive cases in quarantine for the previous 24 days, when there was no testing?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Surveillance testing would suggest that it is entirely plausible that we didn’t have cases. What the member needs to realise is the changing demographic inside our managed isolation and quarantine facilities. As the world opens up, we see people arriving, either transiting through Australia or coming directly from other parts of the world in a place where COVID is growing, not slowing. I am not surprised that we are seeing people who are in our managed isolation facilities with COVID. The important thing is that we are catching these within these facilities, and this is a strong line of defence to New Zealanders and the gains they have made.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: In respect of that previous answer, what was demographically different about the 4,694 people released from quarantine in that period from the more than 10,000 who went through managed isolation and quarantine prior to that?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Largely, where those people arrived from. What we have is, through the early days, when we were in level 4, a lot of people returning to New Zealand were returning from Australia, where there were much lower rates of COVID. What the member needs to understand is that now we are seeing people returning from the UK. We are seeing people returning from the USA. We are seeing people return from India. We are seeing people return from Pakistan. These are all parts of the globe where COVID is growing, not slowing, and it is our strong line of defence at the border that we have managed isolation and quarantine facilities that will protect the gains that New Zealand has made.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Has she been advised that the number of positive tests at the border in other comparable countries, like Australia, has also been increasing, and that we’re likely to see an ongoing increase in the number of positive tests at the border?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I certainly have. The whole point, when we have positive tests in our quarantine facilities and managed isolation facilities, is that the system is working—that this is part of how it is that we protect New Zealanders against quarantine. I’d like to point out it is the ability to carefully manage and robustly manage these facilities that will protect New Zealanders, not ad hoc announcements about just opening the border without any plan of how you’re going to manage those facilities.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: In respect of her previous answer to me, is it her submission to this House that New Zealanders were not arriving back from the UK, Europe, the United States, and the subcontinent prior to 23 May?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Of course New Zealanders were arriving back prior to that, but we did not have mandatory managed isolation; we had people self-isolating. If the member wants to turn his mind back to the days when we were in level 4, we had a growing number of cases testing positive that largely were coming from people returning from overseas. The difference the member now needs to understand is these people are not returning to their homes; they are in managed isolation facilities as a stronger manner of defence. What the member also has to understand is we are now at over 8.5 million cases of COVID around the world. This is growing, not slowing, and I suggest that member stop politicking and think about how it is that we protect New Zealand.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the Opposition thesis is true, would we have had those countless weeks, and even existing now, without any community transmission in this country at all?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Deputy Prime Minister should know he can’t ask a Minister what the Opposition thinks, which is the wording he used in his question.

💬 SPEAKER: I don’t think that’s what he said at all. I’ll ask him to repeat the question for the member’s benefit.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I’ll do it slowly, and I’ve got a picture if I have to show it as well.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, we’ll check in Hansard. That’s what he said.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! What I said was I didn’t think that’s what he said and I’ll ask him to repeat is so we know.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the Opposition thesis is true, then how would we have had all these weeks without community transmission in this country, even right to this hour?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The member is absolutely correct. New Zealanders can have faith that what we have in place has put them in an incredibly privileged position through their weeks of sacrifice. All we are asking of New Zealanders that are now returning to New Zealand to re-join our team of 5 million is that they make two weeks of sacrifice of going into managed isolation. We got to this privileged position by all of us making a sacrifice of five weeks. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Jacqui Dean will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Does she believe that the enforcement of the testing regime would be more or less rigorous if it was delegated to individual tertiary education providers, including the universities, who don’t think the border should have been closed in the first place?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think one of the things that everybody has to understand is the complexity of the operations that need to be run at the border.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: It’s simple—just test.

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I hear members of the Opposition say it’s simple. I’d like to point out that to the end of June, we will have spent $81 million with a workforce of over 500. It’s not simply booking a hotel. The operations that have to be onsite are incredibly complex and logistically difficult.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does she agree with the Prime Minister that “The 14 days is actually the most cautious approach. Belts and braces are testing, but the 14 days is what matters.”, and, if so, why is testing important now, when it wasn’t three weeks ago?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In answer to the first part of the question: always. In answer to the second part of the question, as we have moved into level 1, as we have moved into a more relaxed state, where we have more liberties and more mingling, our Government is determined to make sure we are putting an extra layer of defence to protect the gains that New Zealanders have made.

Question No. 5—Housing

5. to the Minister of Housing: What action has the Government taken to strengthen managed isolation and quarantine facilities?

After taking ministerial responsibility for these facilities last week, I worked with Air Commodore Webb on a swift 72-hour plan to ensure procedures at our managed isolation and quarantine facilities are rigorous and robust. In the first 72 hours, there were two major objectives: (1) that we confirmed strict adherence of the rules by the returnees, and (2) that we ensured testing was undertaken and negative results returned to everybody before they leave. Alongside immediate measures to achieve these objectives, Air Commodore Webb commissioned an urgent end-to-end review of the facilities, which is well under way. I make no apologies for the strict measures we are introducing. Our managed isolation and quarantine facilities are an important line of defence against COVID-19. New Zealanders spent five weeks in level 4 lockdown. We expect those returning to our team of 5 million to play their part with two weeks in managed isolation.

💬 Ginny Andersen: What were the specific actions taken to achieve those objectives?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Last Wednesday, Air Commodore Webb and myself visited managed isolation and quarantine facilities in Auckland. This was followed by a personal briefing to all New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) operational personnel at managed facilities to reiterate our expectations. Alongside this, we doubled the number of NZDF personnel on the ground and boosted the police presence both on site and with specifically assigned after-hours support. There are now new lockdown procedures in place where cases are identified, including a review of CCTV footage.

💬 Ginny Andersen: What are the challenges associated with running these facilities?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: These operations are extremely complex and require sophisticated operational oversight, which is exactly why we now have the NZDF in control. The fundamental job that needs to be completed is carefully matching supply with demand. On the demand side, while we do have forecasts of the numbers entering New Zealand, we cannot know how many people will show up until they turn up at the airport and check in. What we’ve seen in recent times is a significant uptick in the number of New Zealanders returning home, requiring additional supply and resources to meet that demand. COVID-19 is growing, not slowing, as the rest of the world opens up and people return home from higher-risk areas. But our plan is working and our managed isolation and quarantine facilities are ensuring that we keep New Zealand safe and COVID contained in these facilities.

Question No. 6—Economic Development

6. to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by his statement of 1 April 2020, “The Government has tasked a group of industry leaders to seek out infrastructure projects that are ready to start as soon as the construction industry returns to normal to reduce the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic”; if so, when does he expect to announce those projects?

on behalf of the Minister for Economic Development: On behalf of the Minister for Economic Development, yes. To the second part of the question, announcement time frames for each project are a matter for the appropriate, responsible Minister.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: How does he reconcile his statement that the projects would be “ready to start as soon as the construction industry returns to normal” with the fact that the construction industry started returning to work on April 28 but the projects still have not been announced?

I refer the member to the Budget recently debated, which showed that, under Budget 2020, Crown infrastructure investment is forecast to be $10.9 billion, which is about 175 percent of what it was in 2017 under the last Government.

💬 SPEAKER: I am going to ask the Minister to address the question.

Well, as I said in my answer that I just gave, the member can be very confident that there is significantly increased infrastructure expenditure, as evidenced by the Budget debate that we have had in recent weeks, which showed that $10.9 billion of infrastructure expenditure by the Crown is forecast for the current year, which is 175 percent of what it was in 2017.

💬 SPEAKER: I’m going to ask the Hon Judith Collins to ask the question again.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Thank you, Mr Speaker. How does he reconcile his statement that the projects would be “ready to start as soon as the construction industry returns to normal” with the fact that the construction industry started returning to work on 28  April and the projects still have not been announced?

In addition to my prior answer, I would also note that the Minister of Education advised the Minister for Economic Development that construction has already started on approximately 200 rebuilds or expansions, with a combined value of $1.5 billion. He also advised me that at the end of May around 1,200 schools had initiated projects worth an estimated $130 million since that investment package was announced.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does he think the Government is acting with sufficient urgency to announce these projects—other than that which he’s just announced now—given that the fall in construction was the biggest contributor to the decline in GDP in the first quarter of this year?

Yes, and by way of other examples, since lockdown the following transport projects have started construction: the Clive safety improvements to State Highway 51, upgrades to the Northland line, preparatory works for the Matakana link road, the Huapai to Waimauku safety improvements, the Medallion Drive link road, and I could go on—it’s a long list.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why did the Minister state that the projects would be “ready to start as soon as the construction industry returns to normal”, when, clearly, the projects were not started as soon as the construction industry returned to normal?

I reject the premise of the question as evidenced by the transport projects I listed.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What reports, if any, has he seen on the number of construction jobs that have been lost due to his delay in announcing which projects will proceed?

I, again, reject the premise of that question. I think the construction industry is sophisticated enough to know that when the Government is spending more than $10 billion in this year there’s a pipeline of infrastructure projects on the way.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does he agree with Hamilton mayor, Paula Southgate, who said that the construction firms that relied on her council’s work programme needed answers on whether the Government was going to come to the rescue and fund infrastructure projects, and that “It would be ideal if we knew in the next couple of weeks and no later”; if so, when will he advise the Mayor of Hamilton, Paula Southgate?

I agree with the mayor that construction projects are an important part of the Government’s response to the recession caused by COVID-19, and I’ve already covered the financials which show that approximately 175 percent of 2017 expenditure is forecast for this year.

Question No. 7—Climate Change

7. to the Minister for Climate Change: What recent announcements has he made about New Zealand Green Investment Finance decisions on climate change?

Last Thursday, I announced New Zealand Green Investment Finance Ltd’s first ever investment. New Zealand Green Investment Finance has provided Wellington CentrePort with a $15 million green credit facility. The lending will be used to fund low-carbon projects such as electric vehicles, on-site renewable energy generation, and energy efficiency upgrades.

💬 Marama Davidson: Why does New Zealand Green Investment Finance have to invest on a commercial basis?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Developing sustainable long-term solutions to the climate crisis requires good ideas, planning, and focus. New Zealand Green Investment Finance Ltd was set up to support those businesses with the skills and outlook necessary to create lasting change in New Zealand. Throwing money around with no eye to commercial viability will not funnel support to the firms with the best plans and the best ideas. By ensuring commercial discipline, New Zealand Green Investment Finance Ltd will also be able to get their capital back and reinvest earnings into more low-carbon projects, creating a virtuous cycle of sustainable investment.

💬 Marama Davidson: What will this investment mean for Aotearoa?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Successful investment in electrification, renewables, and efficiency will not only assist the port to achieve its climate goals but will also provide an example for other firms in the port sector and beyond. Electrifying our transport and logistics sector is one of the lowest cost decarbonisation options that we have. Transport and logistics make up one-fifth of our total emissions and continue to rise. Investments like this one are a key part of the solution.

Question No. 8—Transport

8. to the Minister of Transport: Has the chair of the New Zealand Transport Agency written to him advising of a shortfall of at least $1 billion in the National Land Transport Fund; if so, what impacts, if any, would this shortfall have on transport projects due for funding through the National Land Transport Fund?

on behalf of the Minister of Transport: As you’d expect, New Zealanders did not drive as much during alert levels 2, 3, and 4 while they stayed at home. This, naturally, has had an impact on the revenue raised from petrol excise duty and road-user charges. We’re still working through the impacts of this on the National Land Transport Fund. Yes, the chair of the agency wrote to me in April and in May outlining scenarios, noting that the estimates provided were, at that point, very uncertain. Those estimates were made before we moved down to alert level 1, and given the earlier than expected move down the alert levels, I’m advised that the total impact is already likely to be less than the chair had initially indicated. I’d like to reassure the member that we are continuing to work through the implications and are aiming to avoid a hypothetical scenario where any projects may be delayed by any shortfall.

💬 Chris Bishop: Is it correct that the letter suggests that projects that aren’t road-building projects be cancelled or delayed in order to address the funding shortfall?

As I said, the letter set out a range of scenarios, and already the worst-case scenario has not happened, because we moved down the alert levels faster.

💬 Chris Bishop: Did the chair of the Transport Agency suggest any particular funding categories that should be reprioritised as the result of the funding shortfall, and if so, what were those categories?

As I said in my first and second answers, the letters contained a variety of scenarios and a variety of options. The worst-case scenario has not eventuated, because we moved down alert levels faster.

💬 Chris Bishop: Will he rule out any projects being cut from the current National Land Transport Programme?

The Government has no intention of doing so.

Question No. 9—Education

9. to the Minister of Education: What action is the Government taking to support New Zealanders to retrain for new employment opportunities post-COVID-19?

The Government was working to strengthen and promote vocational education options to New Zealanders even before COVID-19 hit. We’ve been focusing on raising the profile of trades and vocational education, and encouraging more people to take up those careers. Since COVID-19, we’re removing the fees on all apprenticeships and a wide range of other trades and vocational education programmes from next Wednesday until the end of 2022. We’ll be financially supporting and encouraging employers to keep their apprentices earning and learning, with wage subsidies of up to $16,000 per apprentice.

💬 Marja Lubeck: Has COVID-19 and the lockdown had an impact on the initiatives to raise the profile of vocational education?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Inevitably, yes. A number of events that were designed to connect schools, communities, and employers had to be delayed, although I am advised that most are now in the process of being rescheduled. Officials are working very hard to ensure that we can get the up to 250 events across New Zealand, to promote trades and vocational education, taking place over the next 12 months. The new regional education and employment brokers that are being contracted by the Ministry of Social Development will, of course, be more important than ever as we seek to connect school leavers with the job opportunities that are available to them.

💬 Marja Lubeck: How has the Government improved the pipeline into vocational education for school students?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The recently announced Trades and Apprenticeships Training Package included funding for a thousand additional trades academy places per year from the beginning of 2021. Those additional places build on the 2,000 additional trades academy places a year, and up to 2,000 additional trade gateway places a year that we announced late last year alongside the other initiatives to raise the profile of vocational education and training. These programmes provide an important starting point for school students to start their journey in trades and vocational education and to prepare them to move full time into vocational education and training when they leave school.

💬 Marja Lubeck: What resources is the Government making available to provide advice for job hunters?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As has been well canvassed, there are a number of people now in the job market that haven’t been in the job market, and seeking employment, for quite some time. As part of our careers response, the Tertiary Education Commission has developed a job-hunters’ workbook, in collaboration with the Ministry of Social Development, that’s available online and in hard copy, and we’re getting exceptionally positive feedback about it. As well as that, the Tertiary Education Commission are providing training for people to help their clients use the workbook and help broker them into employment, which, combined with a wide range of other options such as videos and webinars and Facebook Live sessions and town hall - style events also taking place around the country, will help people to get back into work as quickly as possible.

Question No. 10—Health

10. to the Minister of Health: What involvement, if any, does he have in setting the criteria and the assessment of the COVID-19 alert levels, and what information will the Ministry of Health use to make an assessment of whether to amend the levels?

on behalf of the Minister of Health: I, as a member of Cabinet, am involved in setting the criteria and assessment of the alert levels. Cabinet has agreed eight factors to use in assessing changes between alert levels, including the Director-General of Health’s satisfaction on four health matters, which include transmission of the virus, contact tracing and testing, isolation and border measures, and capacity of the health system. The Director-General of Health makes an assessment against these four criteria for the Minister of Health and Government to consider. This assessment is based on the latest epidemiological evidence in New Zealand and internationally, data on the health service response, and other available sources of information. It is also informed by independent scientific public health experts.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: What specific case information would be likely to trigger a finding that household or community transmission could be occurring as per the COVID-19 alert levels?

That is a matter that the Director-General of Health would advise the Government upon. If the member cares to put that specific question down in writing, we will be able to get advice from the director-general.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: Does the Minister accept that New Zealanders are now worried about a move back up the alert levels due to recent quarantine and managed isolation breaches?

I can accept that New Zealanders remain anxious about the fact that COVID-19 is a global pandemic that is growing. There is no intention from the Government to move back up the alert levels.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: Has any of the information learnt in recent days about breaches of quarantine protocols changed the assessment of what transmission might now be occurring in terms of our alert level structure?

No, and as has been already covered in the House today, the fact that New Zealand does not have community transmission and there is no evidence of community transmission is something that puts us in a very privileged position compared to the rest of the world.

💬 Hon Amy Adams: Is the Minister saying that despite repeated cases of quarantine breaches and people going into the community without testing, there has been no assessment done of the impact on that of possible transmission and our alert level?

No. The member is drawing a long bow from the answers that I’ve given. What I am saying is that we have a very robust system that involves 14 days of quarantine and isolation, which the best health advice tells us is the right thing to do. On this side of the House, we know the importance of border restrictions to New Zealand’s success. The member might want to reflect on the comments of her colleagues, who seem very keen to open the border up.

Question No. 11—Employment

11. to the Minister of Employment: What are the criteria for entry into his six employment programmes, and how is success measured?

on behalf of the Minister of Employment: Each individual programme has a different set of criteria that would take far too long to go through—

💬 Hon Members: Free Willy!

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! It’s a very old joke and it’ll stop.

Each individual programme has a different set of criteria that would take far too long to go through, but as examples: the employment programme Mana in Mahi is open to all New Zealanders who are either unemployed or at risk of long-term unemployment; He Poutama Rangatahi requires participants to be between the ages of 15 and 24, not engaged in education, employment or training; our skills hubs have no criteria for entry and will work with anyone who needs help connecting to employment across a wide range of industry. In answer to the second part of the question, these programmes are measured by a range of success measures, from the number of people now engaged directly into training or in employment, to the number of people who have been connected through jobs hubs to specific industries. We also measure success in other ways. Take, for example, the young solo mother who started the He Poutama Rangatahi programme with no confidence or family support. Not only is she now working full-time, more importantly, she’s regained her self-confidence and pride and is excited about the future, and that’s the sort of success that we should all be proud of.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: When he said last week he would look into a Work and Income telephone call telling us that those over 24 definitely cannot enrol in Mana in Mahi, has he looked into it, given a phone call today to exactly the same Work and Income New Zealand number repeated exactly the same information from last week?

Yes, the Minister has indeed looked into it. He has reinforced with all those concerned what the criteria for those programmes are. If that information is still being delivered, it is incorrect.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: When he said last week that the success of his programmes was aligned with the lowest unemployment rate for Māori over the last decade, what is the unemployment rate for Māori over the last decade?

The lowest rate over a decade—we have 7.8 percent in June 2019. The last time the Māori unemployment rate was lower was in June 2008 when it was 7.2 percent.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Why is there no documented success for He Poutama Rangatahi, given that an Official Information Act (OIA) request asking for information pointing to the success of the programme was returned with, “I am refusing your request as the information does not exist.”?

I reject the premise of the member’s question.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table an OIA request with that document I’ve just referenced.

💬 SPEAKER: I think it might be an OIA reply; is that right?

💬 Dr Shane Reti: An OIA reply.

💬 SPEAKER: OK. Leave is sought for the tabling of that document. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.

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

💬 Kiritapu Allan: What are the criteria for entry into Mana in Mahi and how is success measured?

To be very clear for those who are confused: anyone who is at risk at becoming long-term unemployed and who’ll benefit from Mana in Mahi is potentially eligible for the programme. In fact, 15 percent of participants are over the age of 25, with more than 50 people over the age of 30. In terms of measuring the success of the Mana in Mahi programme, each participant who starts a placement is in full-time employment from day one. The fact that 80 percent of people who started Mana in Mahi, 50 of whom had already spent more than two years on a benefit, have not returned to a benefit highlights the success of the programme.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.

💬 SPEAKER: The Rt Hon Winston Peters, with a warning—I’ve seen that smile.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Ha, ha! Well, for the comfort zone of some in this House, will Mana in Mahi still exist on 20 September this year?

If the parties in this Government are re-elected, absolutely yes.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Is it open for seniors though?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will leave me out of it.

Question No. 12—Immigration

12. KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) on behalf of to the Minister of Immigration: What initiatives to support refugees and their families were announced in Budget 2020?

It was my privilege to celebrate World Refugee Day with refugee communities from across New Zealand today and to celebrate the work that we have done to support the international refugee resettlement effort. Last year, we agreed to raise the annual refugee quota to 1,500 per year, and in this year’s Budget we agreed to fund greater support for refugee family reunification, to continue the refugee community sponsorship pilot, to continue to upgrade the world-class facilities at Māngere, and to increase resources for refugee claim processing. I want to make a special mention of the Green Party’s work and advocacy to ensure that we review and adequately fund refugee family resettlement.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: Why is the Government committed to the refugee programme?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Well, two reasons. First, the Government is committed to doing our part as a good international citizen and providing a pathway for those displaced by war and other tragedy to make a new start. Second, refugees are great for New Zealand. Former refugees and their families contribute to our communities culturally, economically, and socially. They bring with them their experiences, cultures, skills, and their strong desire to participate in employment, community activities, volunteering, and education.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: What message does the Government have for refugees, former refugees, and their families?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: We are proud to welcome them and all that they bring to this country: their knowledge, their skills, their talent, and their culture. Their contribution makes us a better society.