Oral Questions

1. to the Minister for Infrastructure: What action is the Government taking to support the construction sector and to progress shovel-ready infrastructure?

The actions have been dramatic. This morning, the Minister of Finance and myself announced a $2.6 billion package comprised of over 150 projects that will kick-start the rebuild in the post-COVID environment. Cabinet’s actual decisions on this allocation cover a range of areas within the economy that are of huge importance to all New Zealanders: urban development and housing, $460 million; environmental, $460 million; community and social development, $670 million; and a range of transport projects, including roads and ports, walkways, and—wait for it—cycleways. The investment benefits the country in a number of ways. There has been huge acclamation, and, indeed, one of those projects has turned around the fortunes of Rotorua: the $55 million housing-enabling announcement.

💬 Mark Patterson: Why have only a small number of projects been announced today?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: It will not surprise the House to know far more announcements will fill the village halls, the maraes, and a host of other places around New Zealand as the leaders within our various regions wait with bated breath. However, there are a host of very important commercial considerations and various probity considerations to be thoroughly examined by the officials, not the least of which are those located in the Provincial Growth Fund. Kiwis expect public money to be spent wisely. They expect not to be let down and that where the funds are dedicated, jobs will flow, long-term resilience outcomes can be achieved, and they know the level of boldness and the level of willingness to spend money to keep the economy going, to train people, and to upgrade our infrastructure is at a level never seen before in a long period of time.

💬 Mark Patterson: What are the time frames for delivery of these projects?

Tim van de Molen: The never-never.

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: The reference to the never-never reflects their electoral ambitions on the other side of the House. Mr Mark Binns, the redoubtable business leader, during the process that he led on behalf of the Government, identified 12 months as the period where these applicants had to be construction ready. Naturally, there are a range of projects, and as they are rolled out, we will double-check that the necessary statutory consents and a host of other potential barriers are swept away. But I’m aware that some projects will get under way immediately, such as the Auckland City Mission and the Taupō town centre. On the latter, the mayor was so overjoyed to get the news, he virtually burst into tears. It is important to bear in mind that 13 percent of New Zealand’s GDP is associated with infrastructure. Over 500,000 New Zealanders derive their livelihood in some manner or form from—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I think the member’s gone slightly beyond time frames.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has one of the first infrastructure projects his Government announced, the Waipapa roundabout down the road from the Minister’s house, been completed yet or, indeed, even started?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: Putting aside all personal and other interests, the fact that said roundabout is currently under construction, and it is near Kerikeri, reflects the need to reform the Public Works Act; accelerate the treatment of resource management issues, which Mr David Parker is delivering on; and, probably after the election, to deliver some purgative to the New Zealand Transport Agency.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why did the Infrastructure Commission not provide any advice regarding the guidelines employed to assess the submissions for the shovel-ready projects he’s just announced this morning after the Government went to so much time and energy to establish the commission in the first place?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: That body is led by Dr Bollard, a substantial New Zealand personality, and he personally was involved, along with the chairman of Crown Infrastructure Partners, in dealing with the criterion and the assessment process. To suggest that so redoubtable a New Zealander as Dr Bollard was not involved or marginalised shows a poor understanding, factually speaking, which is not surprising given the contributions that come from that member of the Opposition.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why does question for written answer No. 8852 (2020) to me from a few weeks ago say exactly that?

💬 Hon SHANE JONES: I repeat again: the reference group that was created to work with the chair of Crown Infrastructure Partners involved Dr Bollard, the chair of the Infrastructure Commission/Te Waihanga. “Te Waihanga” means to build, and we build on solid foundations.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

2. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by the statement from the Speech from the Throne, “There will be a progressive tax system where everyone pays their fair share, according to their means”?

Yes. I also stand by all of my statements regarding the COVID recovery plan of this Government, which remains our top priority at this time.

💬 Todd Muller: Is the current tax system as progressive as she would like it to be, and does she believe that everyone pays their fair share?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I will note that, in the Speech from the Throne, I was also quoted as stating, “Personal income taxes, taxes on the family home and GST will remain at the same rates as they are today.” Now, the point we were making there was that, under a National Government, they wouldn’t have; they would have given tax cuts to the top 1 percent of New Zealanders. And a progressive tax system is not just about rates but, of course, tax transfers, and we are a Government who increased the family tax credit, who brought in the winter energy payment, and who added the Best Start payment. All in all, that has meant that, on average, 385 New Zealanders are $75 better off, which, I think, does mean we have a fairer system.

💬 Todd Muller: Are the current personal income tax rates and thresholds fair?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, our belief was that it was not going to be any fairer with that Government’s proposed changes under National. The National Government’s proposed tax changes would have meant that the top 1 percent were better off. We cancelled those. We kept our existing system. We added additional transfers to try and create greater fairness in the system. I’ll also add the fact that we did extend the brightline test. We have closed tax loopholes for property speculators. We added the low-value goods tax, which I know is something that Judith Collins championed but was not introduced by the last Government. Base erosion and profit sharing has also been introduced, and we’ve continued work on a digital services tax, which we’ve consulted on. All of that would add greater fairness to our system, as well.

💬 Todd Muller: Does she support policies to make the income tax system more progressive, such as the Green Party’s policy of taxing higher incomes at higher tax rates of 37 percent and 42 percent?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have no responsibility for the Green Party’s tax policy, and I would remind the member that the 2017 election I think was one of integrity and decent debate, which all New Zealanders deserve, under the leadership of Bill English. I would hope, given the misinformation campaign I have seen led by that Opposition, that they would revert back to what was a standard of care that all New Zealanders deserve in an election, and I hope it is not a sign of the way he chooses to campaign.

💬 Todd Muller: Will she rule out increasing personal income tax rates while she is Prime Minister?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I stand by everything I said in the Speech from the Throne. I stand by everything we have done as a Government—

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: Answer the question.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: —and when we release our tax policy—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Which member was that?

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: I said, “Answer the question.”

💬 SPEAKER: Right, the member will stand, withdraw, and apologise. He’s on his formal warning. That’s the fourth time he’s been warned in the last two weeks for that interjection.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: To complete my answer, I am happy to debate fact and our actual policies with the member, not the misinformation he is currently spreading.

💬 Todd Muller: Will she rule out increasing personal income tax rates while she is Prime Minister?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: In this House, I am responsible for every statement and policy we have announced, and I am happy to answer questions on that. I am not responsible for other parties’ tax policies, and neither has Labour released its own. When we have, I’m happy to debate it. In the meantime, I urge the member not to continue to spread the blatant misinformation to New Zealanders that he has to date.

💬 Todd Muller: Does she stand by the other statement from the Speech from the Throne that—and I quote—“Building a truly prosperous country means sharing the wealth generated by our economy with a wider range of New Zealanders.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Which is why we cut and cancelled that member’s unfair tax cuts, we increased the transfers through the family tax credit, introduced Best Start, increased minimum wages, and made sure that those on the lowest income do have a higher income. Again, I am happy to debate our record, happy to stand by my statements in this House. What I’m not happy to stand by is the misinformation from that member.

💬 Todd Muller: Does she therefore support the Green Party policy of introducing a wealth tax?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I am happy to clarify for that member again, because he seems to have missed this in all the advertisements I’ve seen the National Party put his name and reputation on: that is not our policy; it is another party’s policy. Just in the same way that ACT’s flat tax rate, I only assume, is not the National Party’s policy.

💬 Todd Muller: Will she rule out a wealth tax while she is Prime Minister?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, members only need to look at our reputation in this House. We have not introduced any such tax. I am not responsible for any other party’s tax, and in this House I therefore will not be answerable to another party’s tax policy.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Prime Minister as to whether she intends to increase public debt eight times whilst giving tax cuts to her mates?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: A reflection again on the National Party in Government, who, again—I’m happy to reiterate that we did not believe what they were willing to introduce did equate to a progressive tax system, which is why we cancelled their plans.

💬 Todd Muller: How fair or progressive is it to increase petrol excise taxes by 12c and an 11.5c regional fuel tax since becoming Prime Minister, costing the average household hundreds of dollars extra every year despite getting almost nothing in return?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As fair and progressive as it is to increase it by 17c, which is what that member did when they were in Government.

💬 SPEAKER: I will remind the Prime Minister of the definition of “Government”. That member has never been in Government.

Question No. 3—Finance

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

Yes, in the context in which they were made.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: How does he reconcile his statement from February last year, “There are elements of the tax system that aren’t fair and aren’t balanced” with his comments on the AM Show this morning where he talked about “the fair and balanced tax system … That’s what we’ve had in New Zealand for many decades.”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On this morning’s show, we were talking about the importance of a progressive tax system which, actually, both major parties in this House have been the stewards of over time. The area where I do think more work does need to be done is around multinational tax avoidance, which the previous Government did very little work on. We have produced work on that with base erosion and profit shifting legislation, and there is more to do in that area, including in the work that we’ve done already around digital services taxes.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: So is the tax system fair and balanced or unfair and unbalanced?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I’ve said on many occasions, by and large it is fair and balanced but there are always improvements that can be made.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he really given up on his desire for a new tax on capital or wealth, as he expressed it in February?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: A lot’s happened since February, and in this House the Prime Minister has been extremely clear that we’ll not be introducing a capital gains tax.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: How does he reconcile his claim in the House yesterday, “This Government has been very clear and our record shows over these months that we’re interested in putting money into the pockets of New Zealanders” with yet another fuel tax increase today, which is taking money out of the pockets of New Zealanders?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I was making reference there to a number of changes that have been made to the tax system through the COVID period, including increasing the provisional tax threshold, increasing the small asset depreciation threshold, restoring depreciation on buildings, the changes to loss continuity, the loss carry-back scheme—all of which have been about putting money into the pockets of New Zealanders.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he think New Zealanders would be happy to pay their higher fuel taxes if they received more than just announcements of good intentions such as we’ve heard again today?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I think what the member needs to consider there is that it is a hypothecated tax. It goes directly to the transport needs of New Zealand, and if the member is going to campaign around the idea that the tax increases in fuel and road-user charges that have come through today will be removed, he has to find $2 billion to take out of the roading programme. He might like to have that discussion with his colleagues.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: What recent announcements has he made about Government investments to support workers and families?

Today marks the first day that a host of initiatives come into force as a result of the investments made by this Government. These policies include an extension of paid parental leave to 26 weeks and an increase in the amount paid; free apprenticeships; pay boosts for early childhood teachers; the new farm debt mediation scheme; and a cheaper building levy, saving homeowners and businesses money. The Government’s plan to recover and rebuild from COVID-19 is focused on creating jobs and supporting households through these difficult times. These policies demonstrate progress on both our economic response for the global pandemic and for the long-term challenges we were tackling before COVID-19 hit.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: How will these policies support New Zealand’s recovery from COVID-19?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The policies coming into force today will play an important role in our plan to recover and rebuild. Apprentices in any industry or people wanting to train in targeted areas will have between $2,500 and $6,500 in costs per year paid for them, making it easier for New Zealanders who want to train in industries where demand is expected to grow as the country recovers from COVID-19. Tens of thousands of New Zealanders are eligible. From today, Budget 2020 comes fully into effect, which will see investments in New Zealanders staying in work and creating new jobs, including in construction, infrastructure, conservation and nature, small businesses, and sectors like tourism, the arts, and sports. I am proud to be part of a Government that is ensuring that all New Zealanders have a place in our plan to recover and rebuild. We’ve made the investments necessary to do that and support that plan, and the policies coming into force today represent a key marker on our road to recovery.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What other recent announcements has he made about Government investments to support workers?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: This morning, alongside the Minister for Infrastructure, the Hon Shane Jones, I announced a new package of infrastructure investments that will help create jobs right across New Zealand as part of our recovery and rebuild from COVID-19. The infrastructure fund—part of the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund—will see $2.6 billion invested in more than 150 projects in sectors including housing and urban development, the environment, transport, community, and social development. The investments are expected to help create more than 20,000 jobs. This package will provide Kiwi workers with the confidence that the Government is backing them in this challenging economic environment and will support the construction industry with certainty.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: Would it have been possible to increase the—make the investment that you’ve talked about in your supplementary answers if we—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Kieran McAnulty: Oh, I apologise, Mr Speaker—the Minister—

💬 SPEAKER: Start again.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: Thank you very much. Would it have been possible to increase paid parental leave and make the investment in infrastructure that the Minister outlined if the Government did not cancel the legislated tax cuts that were made by the previous Government?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It is absolutely true to say that if a Government wants to invest in public services, then it needs to make judgments about what is important. Is it important to invest in paid parental leave, or is it important that members of Parliament here get tax cuts? We made the right decision.

Question No. 5—Health

5. to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the Prime Minister, “If you even have a sniffle or the slightest sore throat, get a test”, and is that statement consistent with the case definition for COVID-19 published on 24 June?

Noting that the Prime Minister made that comment more than two months ago when New Zealand was in alert level 4, yes. The Government’s position has not changed. If anyone has symptoms of COVID-19, including a sniffle or sore throat, they should seek advice about a test from Healthline or their general practice. Yesterday, 4,530 COVID-19 tests were completed, taking our total number of tests to 402,000.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Would it surprise him to learn that a primary care facility in Auckland reported that of 40 people presenting to the Botany community-based assessment centre with COVID symptoms last Friday, only three were tested and 37 others were turned away?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: If the member has evidence of that, I would like him to front up on it—if I can make that comment. The communication has been very clear to primary care. COVID-19 tests are free. They will be reimbursed by the Government, and I’d note that since the case definition changed—the first day afterwards, we had 9,825 tests, the second-highest ever day of testing. We have a high degree of confidence there’s no community transmission because we have a really high level of testing in New Zealand.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Given that answer, why were the COVID testing criteria changed last week?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The higher index of suspicion in the test relates not just to testing but to the requirement to self-isolate while awaiting test results. People who have symptoms but are not considered to meet the higher index of suspicion can still be tested but won’t automatically be required to self-isolate. I’d say to the member again, because we have the high level of testing we do, we have real confidence there’s no evidence of community transmission, so there’s not the same need to self-isolate.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is he saying, therefore, that the only change to the criteria last week was not who gets a test but what they have to do after they get that test?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The Government has been incredibly clear: anyone who needs a test should get a test. I’m not going to second-guess clinical decisions made by individual doctors or nurses, if that’s what the member is suggesting.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Well, if he believes that the new criteria are so clear, why does he think that the chair of General Practice New Zealand picked up the phone to Dr Ashley Bloomfield to ask for clarification on what GPs should do?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: I probably read the same article as that member, and I would note in that article that the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners medical director Bryan Betty has written to GPs to ensure the message is understood. We have a very high level of community testing. Last week I announced that this Government has put an additional $89 million aside for testing. This Government has not put in place any barriers to people getting tested if they have symptoms.

Question No. 6—Transport

6. to the Minister of Transport: How much revenue was raised by the fuel tax increases on 30 September 2018 and 1 July 2019, and how much is forecast to be raised annually by the increase from today?

From 30 September 2018 through to 30 June 2020, $291.8 million was raised by the two increases. The increase on 1 July 2020 will raise around $100 million per year, which will help fund infrastructure and create jobs across the country.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why should New Zealanders have any confidence in the ability of the Government to deliver on projects that are ostensibly funded by the hundreds of millions of dollars raised in revenue from these fuel tax increases, when his flagship project, the Auckland light rail project, has been cancelled?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Because we’ve made some great progress addressing the years of neglect that we—

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Sorry, and I apologise to my colleague. I’m just looking at the primary question, which is actually very narrow around revenue, and I just wonder how that supplementary—

💬 SPEAKER: I’m going to ask the Minister of Transport to read the last sentence of his reply to the primary question.

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The last bit? The increase on 1 July 2020 will raise around $100 million per year, which will help fund infrastructure and create jobs across the country.

💬 SPEAKER: That’s what got it in. Mr Bishop, ask it again.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why should New Zealanders have any confidence in the Government to deliver on the projects that are ostensibly funded from the increase in fuel tax revenue when his flagship project, the Auckland light rail project, has been, essentially, cancelled?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Simply because we’ve made great progress addressing years of neglect that we inherited. We’ve already improved 2,500 kilometres of State highways with safety upgrades. And in Auckland, after plugging the $5.9 billion hole that the former Minister of Transport left in the Auckland Transport Alignment Project, construction is occurring on the Eastern Busway, State Highway 20B, the Puhinui Interchange, the old Māngere Bridge replacement project, the City Rail Link, the Constellation bus station, just to name a few. And yesterday, Mayor Phil Goff and I kicked off construction on the Matakana link road, which will create 120 jobs.

💬 Chris Bishop: Will any of the increased revenue from the fuel tax increase be spent on the north-western bus rapid transit project, which has gone nowhere for the last three years?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: The member should wait and see.

💬 Chris Bishop: At a time of huge economic uncertainty for many Kiwi families, does he really think it is the right time to put up costs on households?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Yes, because we have a hypothecated funding system for transport in New Zealand that we can thank the Hon Annette King for when she was transport Minister. Every cent raised through the fuel excise duty is spent on transport, infrastructure, and services, and right now that stimulates the economy and boosts jobs. If the member wants to cut the transport budget, he should know he is cutting the jobs of New Zealanders.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why are road-user charges increasing by 5.3 percent today, and what message does this send to our trucking industry that the Prime Minister, himself, and other Ministers have lauded as getting us through the lockdown?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: Well, simply because, as the national road carriers have pointed out, New Zealand roads have been deteriorating due to a lack of proper maintenance. That’s no surprise, because under the former National Government, there were real cuts in road maintenance that left the highways in a mess. Under this Government, along with the council, we’ve put half a billion dollars extra into maintaining our roads in this country, and pre-COVID the New Zealand Transport Agency was on track to deliver a 60 percent increase in road maintenance. That’s why we need a transport budget, and if the member wants to cut the budget, that’s what he’s cutting.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister as to whether or not the evidence of what he’s saying is attested to by Mainfreight paying back $10 million of the wage subsidy because they were doing far better than they thought?

💬 Hon PHIL TWYFORD: It’s true that Mainfreight have reported that their business has returned much more quickly than was earlier expected to the freight flows around the country. I will point out also that Mainfreight, who’ve moved more freight around this country than anyone else, are very strong advocates not only for investing more in transport infrastructure but investing in rail, the very thing that that party wants to cut.

Question No. 7—Education

7. to the Minister of Education: What changes to support for trades and vocational education come into effect today?

Today, the Government’s Targeted Training and Apprenticeships Fund comes into effect. What that means, in practical terms, is that apprentices will not have to pay fees from today until the end of 2022. It also means that New Zealanders training at a non-degree level in the primary industries will not have to pay fees, nor will those training at that level in construction or manufacturing; mechanical engineering and technology; community support areas like care for the elderly, counselling, and community health; electrical engineering; or road transport. These changes that come into effect today will make a huge difference to those needing to retrain as a result of COVID-19.

💬 Marja Lubeck: What do people need to do to apply for the Targeted Training and Apprenticeships Fund, and is there a risk of people missing out because they don’t know about it?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The good news is that people don’t need to do anything to qualify and be eligible. For anyone who is signed up as an apprentice, or who enrols as a domestic student in a programme that is fund-eligible, the money will flow automatically and they will have their fees paid. The Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) and education providers will manage this all in the back room, so there is no risk of learners doing the wrong thing or not doing enough.

💬 Marja Lubeck: What about learners who started the programme before 1 July and may have already paid their fees?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In many cases, they’ll still have part of their fee paid or refunded. The exact entitlement would depend on the structure and timing and the components on the course. But, again, the provider will work out with the TEC what the learner is eligible for, and will pass on any fee reduction without the learner needing to do anything.

Question No. 8—Fisheries

8. to the Minister of Fisheries: How many Hector’s and Māui dolphins will the new Hector’s and Māui dolphins Threat Management Plan—Fisheries Measures save annually, if any?

The member has asked about a very narrow element of the threat management plan (TMP), the fisheries measures, and I will address these. But it’s also important to consider the TMP in its entirety, which includes non-fishing measures. These cover threats like the disease toxoplasmosis and the impact of seabed mining and seismic surveys. The fishing measures are well-covered in the documentation we released last week. They are designed to mitigate risks to dolphins as fishing is only one element of the threat to these mammals. Based on our average estimates of fisheries deaths, fisheries officials estimate the new measures will save approximately 40 Hector’s dolphins a year and one Māui dolphin every 21 years. Based on our upper estimates of fisheries deaths, they estimate the new measures will save approximately 69 Hector’s dolphins a year and one Māui dolphin every 10 years.

💬 Ian McKelvie: Is the Minister aware of any deaths of Māui dolphins from fishing practices in the past 10 years?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: No.

💬 Ian McKelvie: Does he agree we have seen little or no evidence of an increase in the Māui dolphin population, despite there being only one recorded death from fishing practices?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Well, there are only 63 of the dolphins alive at the moment.

💬 Ian McKelvie: How will the Hector’s and Māui dolphins threat management plan affect small businesses of provincial communities, such as Kaikōura, Timaru, New Plymouth, and Raglan, if those fishers are unable to reclaim sufficiently to continue fishing?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Well, we have put a significant transition process in place to allow fishers to transition from methods that are now not available to other methods. Or, if they would like to exit the fishing industry, they’re able to do that as well.

💬 Gareth Hughes: Is it correct, to protect those last 63 Māui dolphins, that this Government has doubled the marine mammal protected area for Māui and Hector’s dolphins?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Yes, and I would say I’ve worked very constructively with the Minister of Conservation to come up with what I think is a very good threat management plan.

💬 Ian McKelvie: Does he consider the risk of small business going out of business because of new regulations, on top of the economic fallout from COVID-19, proportional to the risk to Māui dolphins?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Well, it was never about one or the other; it was about working together, and that’s the reason why, as mentioned, we’ve put in place a transition package, which we believe will allow fishers, if they so desire, to transition from one method of fishing to another method of fishing, or, if they don’t wish to transition, then help them exit the industry if they so desire.

Question No. 9—Conservation

9. to the Minister of Conservation: What issues, if any, have prevented the extension of the Campbell Island Marine Reserve?

It would be no surprise that, as Minister of Conservation, I supported the extension of the marine reserve in line with the recommendations of an independent review. The Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Act, which was law passed under the former National Government, when National chose to exclude 61 percent of the territorial sea around the islands despite many submissions to the contrary, also requires the consent of the Minister of Fisheries to any extension. The Minister of Fisheries did not agree to the extension because of concerns raised by Treaty partners, particularly Ngāi Tahu and Te Ohu Kaimoana. This Government pays serious attention to Treaty issues and takes Māori rights under the Treaty seriously.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she agree with marine environmental researcher Barry Weeber with regard to the extension of the Campbell Island Marine Reserve when he said, “it seems really, really odd and very disappointing that the minister hasn’t approved it.”?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The concerns of Ngāi Tahu and Te Ohu Kaimoana were raised with the Minister of Fisheries. They were the reason that the reserve extension was not agreed to, because this Government takes Treaty issues seriously.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she agree with Kevin Hackwell of Forest & Bird that “Campbell Island is a UNESCO World Heritage site and … is a really important place for taonga species”?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: Yes, I agree with that. That is why I supported the recommendations of the independent review.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she agree with Eugenie Sage, who in 2012 said, “The Green Party would see a proper commitment to marine conservation and marine protection by establishing the full extent of the territorial sea around the Campbell Islands as marine reserves.”?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The member should be aware of the statutory responsibilities of different Ministers. The law that National passed required the consent of two Ministers.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she agree with Eugenie Sage, who in 2014 said about the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill, “It does not go far enough because of the big areas that are missing around the Bounty Islands and the Campbell Island group”?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: This Government is looking at real options for a major overhaul of the Marine Reserves Act and marine protection. That work is under way with the Minister of Fisheries, and it will result in a representative network of marine protected areas around Aotearoa. We need to take account of Treaty partners and their views, and that is what we’re doing.

Question No. 10—Workplace Relations and Safety

10. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What changes to the parental leave scheme came into effect today?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Parents with children born from today on are eligible for 26 weeks of paid parental leave. This is a full six months of leave to support families in their child’s first months of life. Each year, the parental leave payment is adjusted to reflect the rise in the average wage. Today, eligible parents will see an increase in the parental leave payment from $585.80 per week to $606.46 per week before tax.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: Why did the Government decide to make the changes?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Well, the Government is committed to making sure that families and parents are supported when they need it. Along with the bump in paid parental leave, we have implemented a wide range of support for parents. This includes boosting the Working for Families payments and the Best Start payment, which provides financial support for all families with a newborn baby. Our goal is to make New Zealand the best place to be a child.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: How did the changes come about?

💬 Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Well, the changes were policy for all three parties of Government, and they are the result of many years of campaigning. I want to acknowledge the work of 26 for Babies, Tick for Kids, unions, parents’ groups, La Leche League, Plunket, and UNICEF. I’d also like to make special mention of our former colleague Sue Moroney for her advocacy for the increase to 26 weeks’ paid parental leave in previous parliaments, and I know that she is proud that we finally have a Government that made this a priority.

Question No. 11—Police

11. to the Minister of Police: How many firearm incidents involving gang members and associates have there been since the end of the Government’s firearm amnesty and buy-back, and how does this compare with the number of similar incidents for the two calendar years prior?

The criminals who hold these guns were warned that police have a renewed focus on gangs and other criminals who unlawfully hold firearms. Almost 2,700 firearms have been seized from gangs and other offenders since March last year during search warrants, vehicle stops, and call-outs to family harm incidents. There have been 369 firearms-related offences since the end of the firearms amnesty and buy-back, of gang members and associates. In 2018-19, there were 643; in 2017-18, there were 642 offences under the Arms Act. That compares to almost 2,000 offences in 2017-18 by non-gang members. That’s also why this side of the House voted for substantially harsher penalties for gun crime.

💬 Brett Hudson: What information has he received on why the number of firearms incidents involving gang members and associates has been increasing?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Probably because we put well over 2,000 new police into our communities and they’re doing their job.

💬 Brett Hudson: Is he saying that more police on the street creates gang use of firearms?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: I’m saying more police on the street allows us to solve more crime and go very hard against gangs.

💬 Brett Hudson: Is he concerned at reports that gang members and associates obtained firearms by offering higher prices than the Government buy-back programme?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: People who handed in their firearms during the gun buy-back received substantial compensation for those. Those who didn’t face up to five years in jail. If we find anyone who did not hand in a prohibited firearm under the amnesty, they face up to five years in prison, the loss of their licence, and, of course, the loss of their freedom.

💬 Brett Hudson: Will he now support my member’s bill to introduce firearms prohibition orders to help curb firearm crime committed by gang members?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Let me talk about police numbers for one moment. To quote the former police Minister Judith Collins, from page 260 of her new memoir, out today in good bookstores, $37: “In June 2016, I had my first discussion with the PM Key about the need to significantly increase police numbers, eight years after the Australian gangs became established.” The former Minister Collins worked incredibly hard in the police portfolio but she met constant roadblocks from her finance Minister and her Prime Minister.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I’m now going to ask the member to address the question that was put to him. I lived in the vain hope that he might have got to it.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: No.

Question No. 12—Statistics

12. to the Minister of Statistics: What recent developments have there been to ensure the 2023 Census includes questions about sexual orientation and gender identity?

I’m delighted to confirm that the rainbow community of Aotearoa New Zealand will be recognised in the next census. Statistics New Zealand has committed to including questions in Census 2023 about sexual orientation and gender identity, something that has never happened before. Tomorrow, Stats NZ will open a consultation to inform exactly how we collect and report on this data on gender identity, but the most important thing to note today is that people in the rainbow community will finally be able to respond to the census in a way that reflects who they are.

💬 Jan Logie: Why is it important that the census ask questions about sexual orientation and gender identity?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Well, New Zealanders want to see themselves reflected in our official data and statistics, and policy makers need this information to improve the decisions that they make, not least in areas like health spending. Collecting this data means that we can best describe and understand the diversity that we’re lucky enough to have here in Aotearoa New Zealand. People in our rainbow communities have been marginalised and ignored for too long, and we are fixing that. Census 2023 will be the most inclusive census we’ve ever had.

💬 Jan Logie: How will data about sexual orientation and gender identity support Government decision-making?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: The census plays a vital role in ensuring that everyone, no matter who they are, receives the services that they need. The changes that we are making will help us to make better decisions about how we deliver those services. The commitment that we have to improve Census 2023 comes after decades of work done by rainbow communities all across New Zealand to ensure that the data that we collect better reflects who we are as a nation. I’d like to take this opportunity to recognise this hard work and to thank the rainbow community for what they have done to make Aotearoa New Zealand a better place. We know that there is more still to do, but the inclusion of these questions is a great step.

💬 Sarah Dowie: Does this mean that, specifically, people who answer census questions will be able to self-identify as any gender they choose?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: The methodology hasn’t been established yet. The consultation that opens tomorrow will help to lead towards the exact nature of those questions. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order!

💬 Sarah Dowie: What implications would this gender self-identification have to the protection of lawfully discriminated women’s sex-based services?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: I’m sorry, can she repeat the question?

💬 Sarah Dowie: What implications would gender self—

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, can the member address me, and then she’ll go into the mike.

💬 Sarah Dowie: OK—all right. What implications would gender self-identification have to the protection of lawfully discriminated women’s sex-based services?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Well, the methodology hasn’t been established yet.

💬 Hon Tracey Martin: Can the Minister confirm that Statistics New Zealand is collecting biological sex as well as including questions with regard to identification of gender?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Yes, of course. We’ve collected biological sex information for as long as there’s been a census.