Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement that “when we’re talking about infrastructure, it’s not just about the projects we in the Government are responsible for, we also have the opportunity to partner with communities, with iwi and local government. That’s what the $2.6 billion worth of shovel-ready projects we announced earlier this week were all about”?

Yes. I also went on to say “Things like Home Ground, a project by the Auckland City Mission that will provide 80 apartments with wrap around support and care, or the Poverty Bay Rugby Park Grandstand … right through to the Invercargill inner city development. Collectively these projects are estimated to create over 20,000 jobs in the next 5 years.” These projects demonstrate our commitment to infrastructure that creates jobs, contributes to our communities, and achieves more than roading projects alone. I am very proud to be of the Government of infrastructure.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why is the Government not releasing the full list of projects and starting work when it has been reported that 45 percent of engineering consulting firms are now considering cutting staff?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: First of all, it would be wrong to assume that the sum of the Government’s infrastructure announcements are the COVID response and recovery infrastructure projects. In fact, the New Zealand upgrade, announced in February, is $12 billion worth of infrastructure, which, in education alone, $249 million worth of projects have already been approved for 2,400 projects. Secondly, when the COVID pandemic hit, we moved straight away to generate jobs through infrastructure. On 1 April, we created the Infrastructure Reference Group. On 17 May, we received over 1,900 potential projects; that was then provided to Ministers. We worked through a shortlist of 800. On 29 June, very quickly, they were signed off, and on 1 July they started to be rolled out. We’ve already had hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth announced. Some we continue with due diligence, but we are moving as swiftly as we can.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does the Prime Minister acknowledge that there are 200,000 construction workers in receipt of the wage subsidy and there is a crying need to get shovel-ready projects under way faster than she says her Government is capable of?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: One of the issues with making sure we have shovel-ready projects is that we had an infrastructure deficit left by the last Government. In health alone, we had projects that we have had to wind up as a Government because DHBs did nothing to prepare for their capital works because they were provided with no support from the last Government to do it. That is why we’ve had a deficit of shovel-ready projects. Though, to come directly to the answer to the member’s question: again, it is wrong to say that, solely, we are reliant on the COVID response projects to provide a pipeline of work. In fact, we are the Government that established the Infrastructure Commission to determine that pipeline as well. We already have $750 million worth of projects announced. We are moving quickly, but we are ensuring due diligence as well.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Can she explain why her Government’s programme has resulted in industry leaders stating “The current situation is incredibly frustrating. We know the work is out there, but unless we know where, what, and, most importantly, when projects will start, contractors are left totally in the dark. They will have no choice but to put workers off or face the risk of companies going under.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, as the Government of infrastructure, this is the investment of this Government in infrastructure, and can I point out that this is actually the generous graph—this is the one that includes the Future Investment Fund, where the last Government sold assets in order to put a paltry amount into infrastructure. This Government is a Government that has acknowledged that we had a deficit, but not only in projects but in skills, and that is why we have invested over $1 billion to make sure that we overcome that deficit and the legacy of that member’s Government as well.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Is it true that her Government’s processes have led to industry leaders stating, “The problem now was that no one could see six to 12 months ahead, so they were taking risks [even] retaining staff on assumptions that work would appear or [else they have to cut back the] hours.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have read the full context of that exact article the member quotes from, and I’d like to, again, point out, actually, another part of that article. It says, “We’ve seen this happen before. [In] the early 90s, thousands of jobs were shed, creating a capability crisis lasting a decade,”—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Turn the volume down.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: —“whose ripples remain today. The loss of skill and capacity in engineering and construction meant under-investment”. We are still having to repair from the under-investment—significant under-investment—of the last Government. We are doing that: $1 billion into skills, $12 billion into the New Zealand Upgrade Programme, and, in the last Budget alone, $45 billion in infrastructure and an infrastructure commission to create the pipeline of work that that member’s last Government did not.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Is she concerned that projects are being rolled out over coming weeks by ministerial visits—as confirmed by Shane Jones, who said, when asked, he “wouldn’t want to break a habit”—when there are so many jobs dependent on those projects being announced and they could be announced now, not waiting on a ministerial visit?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What is her response to Infrastructure New Zealand chief executive, Paul Blair, who has said companies are running out of time: “It’s very stressful, it’s increasing costs and it’s completely avoidable. The full list and timing of shovel ready projects”—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I am going to interrupt the member. The quotes that the member is using are getting unreasonably long. We were relatively liberal with the first quote from the Prime Minister, but I think the member does know she’s got to summarise.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Could I do it again?

💬 SPEAKER: Yes, the member can start again.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Thank you very much—thank you. What is her response to Infrastructure New Zealand chief executive Paul Blair, who has said companies are running out of time: “It’s very stressful, it’s increasing costs and it’s completely avoidable.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, I would correct the member and say that it is incorrect to assume that the bulk of infrastructure investment coming from this Government is solely the $2.6 billion from the Infrastructure Reference Group. In fact, the vast majority, of course, has been announced and has started rolling out prior to now. Finally, though, we are moving simultaneously. We had over 1,900 projects that we have whittled down as quickly as possible. We are simultaneously working through the final details and contract negotiations whilst announcing them as quickly as we can. It would be wrong for us to announce projects without having done due diligence; the member would be the first to point that out if that was the case.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Then why are 200,000 construction workers on wage subsidies, which are due to expire very soon?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I think you’ll find that in the global financial crisis, we saw a downturn as well. We are not going to let that happen on our watch. We are working as quickly as we can to make sure that we do not have an environment where, right when we need these projects, we see people backing away. But the member is oversimplifying. Many developers, for instance, are experiencing tighter criteria and loaning requirements from their banks. There are a range of factors at play. We are trying to counteract that with our investments.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When will the Prime Minister release the full list of shovel-ready projects to give certainty to the construction workers relying on her Government?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, for the $2.6 billion which sits within the over $40 billion or more announced from Budget 2020, $750 million has already been announced, and we are moving as quickly as we can to finalise any contractual issues and notify successful applicants as quickly as we can.

Question No. 2—Finance

2. to the Minister of Finance: Is he confident that the Government’s COVID-19-related spending is fully justified and providing industry sectors with the certainty they require?

I am confident that the spending is justified, given the one-in-100-year shock to the global and New Zealand economies. The spending has given us the ability to go hard and early against COVID19 to keep New Zealanders safe, to allow our economy to open up sooner, and to support the economic recovery by protecting jobs and investing to create new jobs. I’m also confident that we are providing certainty to industry by ensuring funding is available for the projects that we are announcing.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: So why has his Government not announced details of the so-called shovel-ready projects now, to give civil contractors as much certainty as possible?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I believe the Prime Minister covered this in some depth in the answer to the previous question. One of the issues, for example, is the issue around due diligence, and to reiterate a point that the Prime Minister has made, I am sure that if we announced projects that hadn’t been through that, the member would be the first to criticise us for that.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: So is he saying categorically that each project is being announced immediately after due diligence has been completed by Ministers?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: That is one of the factors that determines when it’s announced.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why is the Government “trickling out” spending announcements—that’s a phrase used by civil contractor industry leaders—over the next few weeks in the lead-up to an election?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again, we have covered this ground. We’re making sure the contracts are fully finalised. We’re making sure due diligence has been done. I reject the pejorative statement that goes with that, but also endorse what the Prime Minister has said: along with the Infrastructure Industry Reference Group projects, we have the $12 billion New Zealand Upgrade Programme and we have the massive, record investment in health and education infrastructure, all of which is being rolled out as we speak.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Well, what’s more important: ministerial announcements in high-vis during an election campaign, or providing certainty about jobs as soon as possible?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What’s important is actually funding the projects that we promise, making sure that the money’s there, not just relying on press releases and ghost roads.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Regarding press releases and ghost roads, there was a big press release about light rail in Auckland. How’s that coming along?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again, we covered this ground yesterday with the Prime Minister, so I don’t think we need to go over that. I did, however, see a press release that said that the first element of a $31 billion infrastructure plan was a four-lane highway with two tunnels, which turned out not to have any funding or any costings at all.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: How are the fiscals, the potentials, and the legal work going behind the Transmission Gully stoppage?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Regrettably, the public-private partnership signed up to by the previous Government is not progressing in a way that this Government would be comfortable with, and I think members on the other side may need to take a look in the mirror when it comes to whether or not projects are properly designed and properly funded.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he think that having the vision to connect 2.5 million New Zealanders who live between Whangārei, Tauranga, and Hamilton is not a good idea?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: If all the Opposition over there have got is a vision, they’re going to be over there for a very long time.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he think it’s appropriate to use scarce scientific funds to send friends of the Deputy Prime Minister to Antarctica?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! That’s not related to the question. The member knows it, and will lose a supplementary as a result.

💬 Chris Bishop: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to test you on that ruling, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, better not.

💬 Hon Members: Ha, ha!

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The primary question was absolutely specific, and it did not relate to Antarctica funding.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic?

On Friday, Treasury released the latest New Zealand Activity Index for June. This showed economic activity continued to bounce back in June to just 0.9 percent below the same month last year, after falls of 18 percent and 6 percent in April and May. The continued recovery in June was led by growth in electronic card spending, heavy traffic movements, and manufacturing activity, all of which were up on June 2019 levels. While the index was dragged down a little by an increase in the number of people on income support, other indicators, such as light traffic movements, business confidence, and new job ads posted online, also saw a continuing uptick. While the New Zealand Activity Index does not show the full economic picture, these are encouraging signs that the economy has bounced back after a difficult past few months.

Tāmati Coffey: What reports has he seen on the resilience of New Zealand’s economy in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yesterday the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) released a report on the role that land-based industries such as livestock, forestry, and horticulture have played in New Zealand’s economic performance under the COVID-19 pandemic. The report said that whatever COVID-19 has done to other parts of world trade, it has reinforced the underlying strength and importance of New Zealand’s land-based industries. The NZIER pointed to growth in demand from China and other Asian nations, combined with our flexible and adaptable supply chains and strong and effective institutions as the key reasons for New Zealand’s strong trading results through the pandemic so far, with dairy, meat, and horticulture sectors up by nearly $1 billion for the year to date compared with this time last year.

Tāmati Coffey: What did the NZIER report say about the outlook for New Zealand’s land-based industries?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The NZIER said that the general picture for exports is one of cautious optimism, based on the continued demand for New Zealand farm products despite COVID-19. However, the report did also point to the continued persistence of COVID-19 around the world, and particularly in the UK and US, as a key concern, and one that has been highlighted in many other commentaries, including the IMF and the World Bank. The Government is keenly aware of the importance of trade to our economic recovery and of the economic risks from worsening outbreaks and associated restrictions in key export markets. That’s why we are working alongside and investing in the future of our exporters, including through the Industry Transformation Plan for the agritech sector announced yesterday by Ministers Twyford and O’Connor. The Government is investing $11.4 million in this plan to lift the productivity of the sector, commercialise new products, and establish, for example, a horticultural robotics academy.

Question No. 4—Health

4. to the Minister of Health: What percentage of New Zealanders are using the Government’s New Zealand COVID Tracer app on a daily basis, and what are its measures of effectiveness?

A total of 617,200 users have registered for the COVID Tracer app. Official statistics record the number of scans per day, not the number of active users per day. Around 12,000 scans are being made each day on average. It’s important to remember that the app is just one of the tools available to us. The work of the public health units and the National Close Contact Service remain the mainstays of our contact tracing system. The measure of the app’s effectiveness will be how quickly it can be used to support contact tracing in the event that we have cases of COVID-19 in the community that need to be traced.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What are the recent trends in uptake and use of the Government’s New Zealand COVID Tracer app?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There’s been a flurry of activity over the last week or so. We’ve seen a significant number of additional posters printed, around 350 additional posters being printed per day, which is a good sign. There have been tens of thousands—I think 20,000 or 30,000—of additional users signing up to register for the app over the last week and a bit. We still have a long, long way to go to get everybody using it, but, you know, we’ll keep pushing it.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What are the reasons for more New Zealanders not using the COVID Tracer app and how will he address this?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Of course, one of the big issues is that New Zealanders don’t, by and large, feel an immediate sense of threat from COVID-19. That, of course, is a sign of our success as a country and the team of 5 million in stamping out COVID19. But the message from the Government is that there is no room for any of us to be complacent here. We all need to do our bit. I’d encourage all members of Parliament to make sure they are using the app, and I also say to any member of the public: if they want to know why things like the app are important, they could sit down one evening and try and record down everybody that they had come into contact with in the last two weeks. Anybody who has tried to do that exercise will know it’s a lot harder than they might think it is.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Given that reply, does the Minister have the app and does he scan each QR code he comes in contact with, given his recent statements that these numbers are low and we do want to lift our game here?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, I do. In fact, I even scan in and out of Copperfield’s every day when I’m using it here in the building.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: How can he have confidence in the effectiveness of the app, when nearly half of the 1,558 reviews on the Google download site give it a one star with complaints it’s too hard to use?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There’s no question—[Interruption] There’s no question that there’s room for improvement in there. The next—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I’m taking this as a serious question and I’d like to hear the answer and not have it shouted down. Some of us think this issue is important to New Zealand.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There’s no question that the app was developed at speed during an emergency situation, and of course there is room for improvement. The next update of the app, which will be released before the end of this month, will deal with many of the common complaints from users, including that they can’t manually enter in contacts where there isn’t a QR code—that will be addressed—and that they can’t retrospectively add information into the app; that will be addressed as well. But even if people aren’t scanning QR codes, it’s merely registering for the app that helps the Ministry of Health where contact tracing is required. Already, people’s contact details from registering for the app have been used on multiple occasions as part of legitimate contact tracing exercises. So even signing up for the app and making sure that your contact details are up to date is actually a significant step that all New Zealanders should be taking.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Can the Minister confirm the recently found information that we’re up to 3½ stars on Apple and does he credit himself with that?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Of course, popularity is growing on this side of the House on a daily basis.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What role does an effective coronavirus tracing app have in recovering an economy and could a poorly performing app hinder recovery?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the things that of course could hinder a recovery is another outbreak of COVID-19. That could, of course, be caused by a variety of things, including premature reopening of the border, which is being advocated by some members in this House—not on this side of the House, though. Our first line of defence is our border. The second line of defence is our testing and contact tracing regime, and we need everybody to play their part in ensuring that there is an effective contact tracing regime in place should we need it.

Question No. 5—Small Business

5. to the Minister for Small Business: Is he concerned with the ANZ report issued yesterday that “a net 48 percent of small businesses feel pessimistic about general business conditions in the year ahead”; if not, why not?

What I am concerned about is that perhaps the member hasn’t realised, but we are in the middle of a global pandemic, and what has been proven is that this Government’s decision to go hard and go early with a health response was also the best thing to do from an economic response. I refer to the MYOB report that was highlighted in the House yesterday by the Hon Grant Robertson that shows confidence amongst small to medium sized enterprises is cautiously improving, that more businesses are expecting to see growth in the next 12 months following on from March when the economy was heading into lockdown. I’d also like to draw the member’s notice to the June Xero Small Business Insights report, which also showed that 65 percent of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that New Zealand has an opportunity to rebuild its economy better than before COVID.

💬 Andrew Bayly: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was a great question, but I actually asked him whether he was concerned, and I haven’t actually heard that.

💬 Hon Member: It wasn’t a great question.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, that’s right. It was a very long answer, rather than a question, I think the member was referring to. Have a go via supplementary. The member said it was a great question.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Thank you. So I get a supplementary?

💬 SPEAKER: It may or may not have been.

💬 Andrew Bayly: I get a supplementary—thank you. What policies has he implemented, if any, over the past four months of this economic crisis to cut regulations for small businesses given this is the biggest problem identified by small businesses in the ANZ survey?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Mr Speaker, you said my last answer was too long. This one may be even longer if the member really wants me to list what we’ve done for small businesses since COVID lockdown. We have done a substantial amount. There’s the Small Business Cashflow (Loan) Scheme, which was rolled out in two weeks—no personal guarantees, money out the door. There was the wage subsidy scheme, and in fact we were the first Government in the world to get money into the pockets—again, high-trust model, and it kept 1.7 million Kiwis employed. We rolled out a whole lot of tax measures which made it very easy for small businesses to either comply with their obligations or enter into—

💬 Hon Shane Jones: Less red tape.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: —an arrangement with Inland Revenue to meet their obligations. There are a number of things that this Government has done across—

💬 SPEAKER: OK, OK, between the Minister and Mr Jones, I think you’ve answered it.

💬 Andrew Bayly: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Again, I asked about regulations; I’m not sure I heard anything. I heard about tax changes, but they’re not regulations. I asked him specifically: what has he done to cut regulations for small businesses?

💬 SPEAKER: The member can have a go on the very narrow issue, rather than a general rave.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Well, we make an assumption that cutting regulations means it’s easier for businesses to do work. I just have to highlight what we have done with Inland Revenue to make it so much easier for small businesses to comply with their tax obligations. What we did do—

💬 SPEAKER: All right, OK—the member’s addressed the question.

💬 Andrew Bayly: What policies has he implemented, if any, over the last four months to support small businesses hiring new people given that a third of businesses now expect to shed jobs over the coming year?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Minister Hipkins actually released an apprenticeship and training package worth about $450 million. I think that what we have done in terms of allowing New Zealanders to re-engage with business, to retrain, to get back on the horse, so to speak, has been phenomenal. So for that member to suggest that we have done nothing in terms of allowing small businesses to grow, for workers to become engaged in the economy, to retrain, to train, and get back into work—I will note one thing: that member is the fourth small business spokesperson, so I suppose we’ve got to give him a little bit of latitude.

💬 Andrew Bayly: In view of the report stating that over half of all small businesses now expect their profits to deteriorate, will the Labour-led Government provide meaningful rental support to small businesses, and if not, why not?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: I think the member would know that’s not part of my portfolio responsibility.

💬 SPEAKER: Question No. 6, Priyanca Radhakrishnan.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Mr Speaker?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, we will go back to Mr Bayly, but it’s really important, if the member wants another supplementary, that he stands up.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Thank you, Mr Speaker. As the Minister for Small Business, did he support the increase in the minimum wage, effective 1 April 2020, at a very time when most small businesses were not receiving any income?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: What we do know is an increase in the minimum wage provides an economic fiscal stimulus package.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Answer it—answer the question.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Yes, I did support that, because—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Who was that interjecting then? Well, the member will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: What I was saying is that an increase in the minimum wage provides a level of fiscal stimulus much needed. What we do know is those on the minimum wage tend to spend a lot of their income, and that is exactly what we need at this point in time.

💬 Andrew Bayly: What hope can he offer small-business owners who only see a bleak future, with over half of them pessimistic about business confidence or conditions during the next twelve months?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: I’ll go back to my original answer: we are in the middle of a global pandemic. In essence, what we are is we have one of the most open economies in the world at this point in time, because what we did is we went early, we went hard, and, as a consequence, we can all be where we are at the moment, because there has been no community transmission for weeks. What we have done by addressing the health response is allow our economy to open and, therefore, for small businesses to do as well as they possibly can.

Question No. 6—Social Development

6. to the Minister for Social Development: What recent announcements has she made about supporting employment initiatives in partnership with local government?

On 9 July, along with Mayor Phil Goff, I announced an extension to our partnership with Auckland Council, the Ngā Puna Pūkenga—Skills for Industry programme. The programme will fund up to 700 placements in Auckland through an investment of $4.34 million, to support people into infrastructure and related environmental jobs. Of the 700 placements, 420 will be for youth in receipt of a benefit; those over 25 with three or more months on benefit; Māori and Pasifika; and our long-term unemployed; as well as people not in education, employment, or training. A further 280 placements are for people made redundant as a direct outcome of COVID-19. This is a key partnership with Ministry of Social Development (MSD) funding to support pre-work training and job matching, Auckland Council providing opportunities for employment through infrastructure projects, and industry partners taking up new recruits and supporting them to gain new skills and remain in the industry.

💬 Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What other announcements has she made in partnership with local government?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I also recently announced, alongside the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs, another extension of a pilot which supports rural councils to implement employment initiatives focused on connecting youth with local small businesses. This extension will see 19 additional rural councils able to access up to $500,000 each to create sustainable employment positions in their regions. The initiative was piloted with four councils—Ōpōtiki, Central Hawke’s Bay, Rangitīkei, and South Wairarapa—under alert level 2, and has been highly successful with three of the four councils meeting or exceeding their target of 30 employment outcomes within five weeks. Despite challenging circumstances during this COVID recovery period, we continue to see innovative partnerships like these having a positive effect on employment outcomes, local communities, and small businesses.

💬 Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Why are initiatives like these so important?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Partnerships are crucial in our COVID recovery phase. Local government and the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs have important local insights into the specific needs of their communities and are well placed to work alongside the Government to develop solutions that will work on the ground. Establishing effective partnerships means that we can leverage local government projects, their relationships with both big and small businesses, as well as contribute MSD’s expertise of job matching and training and employment support products and services. This Government is committed to investing in jobs, people, and industries, and these initiatives demonstrate this commitment.

Question No. 7—Conservation

7. to the Minister of Conservation: Does she stand by all her statements and actions in regards to tahr management in New Zealand?

Yes, in the context in which they were made or taken. As Minister of Conservation, I stand by the work that the Department of Conservation is doing to implement the Himalayan Tahr Control Plan to ensure that the tahr population in the iconic Southern Alps is managed in accordance with that statutory plan. Over the last 2½ years there has been extensive consultation with hunting groups and control is now under way to bring tahr numbers down to a more sustainable level.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: What is the total value to New Zealand’s economy of commercial and recreational tahr hunting in New Zealand?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: I have heard estimates of around $14 million, but I would note that the borders are now closed, so the commercial trophy hunting industry does not have a lot of clients. I would also note that the national parks that she and the Tahr Foundation have been worried about, in the last five years there was an average of only 65 bull tahr which were shot as commercial trophy animals, and so 65 tahr in national parks is a niche industry, not a major one.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she agree that recreational and commercial tahr hunters add economic value to the regions of New Zealand, including the South Island’s West Coast?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: If the member read the Himalayan Tahr Control Plan, she would see that it recognises the value of recreational and commercial hunting. However those hunters have failed to get tahr numbers down to the level that the plan provides for—an upper limit of 10,000 animals. That is why official control is needed, and I’m disappointed that the National Party—and that member—is turning its back on national parks as a safe haven for our indigenous plants and wildlife.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she consider that expenditure by commercial and recreational tahr hunters on accommodation, on travel, hospitality, ammunition, and gear supports regional economies?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: What I’m concerned about is the threats that are being made to commercial helicopter operators which are causing those operators to retreat from work they have been doing for decades in controlling tahr in the central Southern Alps. What I’m concerned about is the threats of violence that are being made to the department and to those operators, and they are reported to the police.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was quite specific. I was asking whether the Minister considered that expenditure by commercial and recreational tahr hunters supported regional economies. I did not hear the Minister address that question at all.

💬 SPEAKER: I thought she started with a yes, but I’m not—I’ll just ask her to confirm that.

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: There is regional economic benefit from tahr hunting, but the misinformation that is being put about by the Tahr Foundation and others that there is a plan to eradicate tahr is simply that—misinformation. When these control operations are completed, there will still be thousands of tahr across thousands of hectares which recreational and commercial trophy hunters can go out and hunt.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: Does she believe that tahr control, supported by recreational and commercial hunters, and the revenue they generate to the tune of $17 million per annum, is an important part of our economic recovery post COVID-19?

💬 Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The member may not have noticed, but the borders are closed, which means that a lot of those international trophy hunters cannot come to New Zealand at present. It is open for recreational hunters to go and hunt tahr, and the Department of Conservation has an app on its website which shows where control operations have been undertaken, and there will be thousands of tahr available for recreational and commercial hunters to hunt.

💬 Hon Jacqui Dean: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question, again, was quite specific. I did ask the Minister—

💬 SPEAKER: And I’m absolutely convinced that it was not only addressed, but answered.

Question No. 8—Health

8. to the Associate Minister of Health: What recent announcements has she made about primary maternity services?

Last week, I announced the largest ever increase in funding for primary maternity services and the women and babies they support—$242 million. That includes $85 million for additional modules, indicating a broader range of services under the section 88 notice; $60 million to support community maternity initiatives; $35 million for the maternity action plan; $57 million for cost and volume pressures, which includes a 2.18 percent increase to fees paid to lead maternity carers—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Can I just ask the members down there to be bit quieter. You’re coming across through the two mikes which are open down there, and it means that people up this end are having trouble hearing it.

💬 Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: —$5.4 million for a $2,500 payment to eligible lead maternity carer (LMC) midwives to cover extra COVID-19 - related costs. I am proud that independent community midwives under this Government will receive better support for the vital role they play in supporting 60,000 newborns and their parents every year.

💬 Marama Davidson: What specific support will this new funding provide for midwives caring for rural and high-needs women and babies?

💬 Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: Previously, all midwives were paid a standard rate, even though midwives supporting women in rural locations and women with complex pregnancies had extra time and cost associated with caring for these women. The new funding will mean that midwives who travel long distances to care for women or who provide extra attention throughout a complex pregnancy, labour, and birth will finally be able to be compensated for this additional cost and work.

💬 Marama Davidson: How will this extra support better meet the needs of wāhine Māori, their pēpē, and their whānau?

💬 Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: As part of the $35 million maternity action plan, there will be a specific focus on kaupapa Māori approach to maternity care, and this action plan will help reduce avoidable inequities of service by targeting funding and delivering more culturally responsive maternity services. This will be part of the ongoing work undertaken by the Ministry of Health to improve maternity services and working conditions for midwives.

💬 Marama Davidson: How has the Government supported midwives affected by the challenges created by COVID-19?

💬 Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: We all know that during alert levels 4 and 3, many LMC midwives experienced a much higher workload and incurred additional costs due to the need to socially distance. This included taking additional visits to care for expecting mums and newborns during this stressful time. As a result, last month the Government announced that all eligible LMC midwives would receive a one-off $2,500 payment to help cover those additional extra costs incurred during COVID-19. All midwives work extremely hard to care for the women and their babies nationwide, and I’m very proud that they are receiving the support that they deserve.

Question No. 9—Corrections

9. to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by his statement regarding community sentences, “we expect offenders to complete their hours”?

Yes. My expectation is that people serving community sentences complete them. Currently, 80 percent of community sentences are completed, so there is still room for improvement.

💬 Simeon Brown: How many offenders who had hours remitted from their community service sentence during COVID-19 had failed to report for community service during the two months leading up to level 4 lockdown?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: That’s a very specific question. At various alert levels, community work was unable to take place—10,745 people were subject to a sentence of community work through the lockdown period, with more than half of these sentences imposed for traffic offences and non-payment of fines. Corrections identified 5,576 people who had demonstrated compliance with their sentences during the month prior to lockdown and remitted, on average, between four to seven hours a week of community work per offender from 23 March to 5 June.

💬 Simeon Brown: Has the Minister’s expectation been met that offenders complete their hours, when half of the offenders serving community service sentences had their sentences reduced during COVID-19, and according to the written question No. 13740, which he provided to me, 2,539 offenders failed to report for their sentence in the two months leading up to lockdown?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Well, like all New Zealanders, we had to stop undertaking a range of activities at different alert levels, and Community Corrections sites were closed to people reporting, and staff worked remotely. Community work was unable to take place. The offenders on other community sentences continued to be monitored by phone, with home visits carried out where a case had been assessed as higher risk or where there were safety concerns. Corrections did a very tough job making sure that people who had community sentences did as much of it as they could.

💬 Simeon Brown: So is the Minister telling the House that, essentially, he has an expectation that those on community service sentences should complete their hours, but his policies have left 2,539 people who didn’t turn up in the months leading up to lockdown essentially having more hours off than before?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No.

💬 Simeon Brown: Did Corrections consult with victims of crime prior to the decision being made to reduce court-mandated community sentences?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The offenders who were asked to do community hours—most of them, as I said earlier, were there for traffic offences and non-payment of fines, so I’m not quite sure who we’re expected to consult with when he’s talking about victims.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister, during the COVID lockdown, which option did he prefer: mindlessly and myopically pressing on with enforcement of the law, or protecting the public’s health during a crisis?

💬 Chris Bishop: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I’m just wondering how that supplementary relates at all to the primary question around community sentences.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, it relates to about five of the supplementaries. Can you ask the question again, or—have you got the question? Ask it again.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: During the COVID lockdown, which option did he prefer: myopically and mindlessly pursuing with the enforcement of the law, or seeking to act in the public health interest?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Well, of course, the public health interest, because if we had people doing community hours during that time—often they’re picked up in vans; they’re carted around the country—that would just have been impossible. They would have been in danger of transmitting COVID amongst themselves.

Question No. 10—Biosecurity

10. to the Minister for Biosecurity: What progress has been made in the eradication of Mycoplasma bovis from New Zealand?

New Zealand’s world-first effort to eradicate the cattle disease Mycoplasma bovis has made significant progress. Three years to the day since it was first detected in New Zealand, there have been 250 properties infected by the disease, with all but four now clear of it. As we have with our response to COVID-19, this Government showed leadership, made a tough decision, went hard, and went early. This Government made the decision to put $880 million into eradication, because we back our primary sector. It was estimated that allowing the disease to spread could have caused $1.3 billion in economic losses to the sector in the first 10 years alone. As we have with COVID, we’ve been guided by the best science and a technical advisory group made up by world experts. Almost 2½ years into the 10-year effort, I’m pleased by the progress we’ve made. Our farming communities should be really proud of their efforts; this Government is certainly very proud of them.

💬 Kiritapu Allan: What changes have been made to the programme over the past year?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: The eradication effort has not been without substantial challenges. No one in the world has ever attempted this before, so we have been learning as we go. It’s not always been perfect, but we have learnt and made changes over time. We are serious about learning and improving. Some of the changes we’ve made include a greater regional focus, more farmer-focused processes, testing is timelier, research is under way to improve testing further, and compensation processes have improved for affected farmers. There is still work to be done and there will be more infected farms to find. But we’re well and truly on track to do what no other country in the world has done to eradicate this disease.

💬 Kiritapu Allan: And what support has there been from industry?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Well, I’m very pleased to say that the key to the success of our programme are the partners DairyNZ and Beef + Lamb New Zealand. They were part of the bold decision to attempt to eradicate this disease and have been part of our efforts since the very beginning. The Government Industry Agreement programme has been established, jointly funded, governed, and delivered by the Ministry for Primary Industries, Biosecurity New Zealand, DairyNZ, and Beef + Lamb New Zealand. Through farmer levies, industry is funding 32 percent of the cost of eradication. There’s also been support from volunteers of the rural support trusts around the country—outstanding organisations—as well as Fonterra, Federated Farmers, the Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand, the Meat Industry Association, and the New Zealand Veterinary Association. Everyone is united in our common goal to free our country of Mycoplasma bovis.

Question No. 11—Prime Minister

11. to the Prime Minister: Does she have confidence in all her Ministers?

Yes.

💬 David Seymour: How can she have confidence in Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters when Radio New Zealand reports that he arranged for his personal friends Bee Lin Chew and Su Arn Kwek to go on a taxpayer-funded trip to Antarctica?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I reject many of the assertions made in that question. First of all, the Minister has pointed out in a statement that I believe that he has made publicly that, alongside the varied interests that visit Antarctica, including politicians, scientists, musicians, historians, and artists, of course, we also have an interest in redeveloping Scott Base. That was a Cabinet-mandated request of Antarctica New Zealand that they seek extra sponsorship for that redevelopment, and that is the vein in which those individuals visited.

💬 David Seymour: Then can the Prime Minister please outline to the House the open and transparent process her Government went through to select philanthropists who might donate to Scott Base before the friends of the foreign affairs Minister Winston Peters, Bee Lin Chew and Su Arn Kwek, were selected to go on that trip at the expense—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order!

💬 David Seymour: —of other scientific activity?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: To answer the many parts of that question, firstly, I’m advised that no one lost their spot as a result of—[Interruption]—Mr Speaker?

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m advised that no one lost their spot as a result of the two individuals attending. Secondly, of course, individuals who visit Antarctica are available or publicly known. Many members on that side of the House will have visited it at some time in their career. Thirdly, it is part of the public record and a proactive Cabinet release that there was a requirement or an expectation that Antarctica New Zealand would start looking at additional ways to supplement the substantial funding that Cabinet was putting forward for the redevelopment of Scott Base.

💬 David Seymour: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was for the Prime Minister to outline the process used—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume his seat. The question was addressed.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does she know why an Official Information Act (OIA) response to the National leader’s office about the visit of Bee Lin Chew and Su Arn Kwek to Antarctica had redactions under section 6(a) of the Official Information Act, which is designed to prevent prejudice against New Zealand security, defence, and international relations, and, if so, what was specifically discussed with them that caused section 6(a) to be used to stop that information being released?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member will appreciate, obviously, I don’t have that Official Information Act request in front of me, so therefore it is impossible for me to speak to a specific redaction. If there are requests on notice, or, indeed, questions on notice, it makes it more plausible for someone to answer a question of that nature.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: So has the Prime Minister asked the foreign affairs Minister what was discussed with these two people who were selected by him to travel to the Antarctic?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, I could not have possibly asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs a question around a redaction which the member has only just asked me about. Secondly, it has been—

💬 David Seymour: Why is the Deputy Prime Minister twitching so much?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Mr Seymour, National are giving you two extra supplementaries, if you missed that signal. Also, the Minister of Foreign Affairs—of course, it has been a longstanding practice that they can support or make suggestions around visits to Antarctica. That is not a new process, and Murray McCully, I’m sure, would have been involved on many occasions in that regard.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was an interesting answer from the Prime Minister, but I asked the question if she’d asked the foreign affairs Minister why they were chosen.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’ve obviously given that answer in this House—the rationale that has been provided. The member asked me about a redaction in an OIA, which I cannot speak to.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is the Prime Minister aware that over the years many Ministers have sought to expand the international understanding of the importance of Antarctica to us, including asking ambassadors from the EU, asking international shipping registers who imperil the fishing resource of Antarctica? This has all been done over the years, but not one of them has been the source or origin of a race attack.

💬 Hon Member: Is there a question for the Prime Minister?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, there is a question there.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m aware—[Interruption]—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m aware of a number of different circumstances under which different individuals who have an interest in Antarctica have been part of the visitation programme. As I’ve already said, it is the prerogative of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade to make recommendations from time to time.

💬 David Seymour: Supplementary?

💬 SPEAKER: No, the member knows very well he doesn’t have any more supplementaries. Sit down.

💬 David Seymour: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I was responding to the Prime Minister, who said the Labour Party was happy for me to ask more questions.

💬 SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat.

Question No. 12—Police

12. to the Minister of Police: How many incidents were there between 1 January and the end of March in 2020 involving firearms and gang members or associates?

The crackdown by police on organised crime, which has been made possible by a significant increase in police numbers and a greater mandate by this Government to go hard on gun crime, is having a marked impact. I’m pleased to report that police have detected, disrupted, or attended just under a thousand firearms instances during that period; 88 percent of these instances were by members of the general public. The incidents ranged from selling ammunition without a licence to pointing a firearm at a police officer. For example, of those charged with presenting a firearm at a person, five were gang members but 29 were members of the general public. This is why we needed tougher penalties for gun crime, which that party opposed.

💬 Brett Hudson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister gave a lot of information there about general members of the public in firearms incidents or offences. The question was specifically related to gang members and associates, and it was on notice in writing.

💬 SPEAKER: And I think the member at least addressed the question. Whether he gave all the information that the member wanted, I’m not sure.

💬 Brett Hudson: Is the Minister concerned about the number being 156 incidents between 1 January and 9 March, at least—is he concerned with that number of offences committed by gang members or gang associates?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: What I can tell that member I am concerned about is that when we came to office, police numbers had dropped in the previous five years of the past Government, and, thanks to New Zealand First, we have delivered over 2,250 new front-line officers into our communities. My concerns around the lack of police have been addressed due to this coalition Government.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Now the member will address the question that was asked.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Whenever there is a firearms incident that has occurred in this country, no matter by whom, I have concerns. It is why we have significantly increased the penalty for gun crime, and if that member was as concerned as I was he would have backed the bill.

💬 Brett Hudson: Has he seen reports of firearms incidents involving gang members or associates resulting in significant physical harm or death to others?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: I have seen reports and concerns of firearms crimes being committed, but, as I mentioned, 88 percent of firearms crimes committed in this country were actually by members of the general public, not by gang members. I think that member needs to widen his scope if he is really concerned about fighting firearms offences.

💬 Brett Hudson: Why, then, did he not support my firearms prohibition orders member’s bill to take guns out of the hands of gang members that present the greatest risk to public safety, along with the majority of Parliament this morning?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: I think I made it clear in my primary answer: 88 percent of gun crime was not committed by gang members. That member’s member’s bill dealt specifically with gangs. The regime we are looking at deals with every single person who poses a threat to our communities—it’s not just gangs. The other thing I would say is two Attorneys-General and his previous Prime Minister, Bill English, said that his bill was absolute rubbish.