Oral Questions

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

Yes, in particular our announcements on the weekend to support cancer screening. Budget 2021 will see investment of up to $53 million to complete the design and implementation of a new test which will replace the current smear test for the 1.4 million eligible women aged 25 to 69 years old. The new test will be a simple quick swab that women can eventually choose to do themselves. This will help, we hope, to reduce the barriers to getting screened. In addition, the Government announced support for a new breast-screening system that can proactively identify and enrol eligible women, to reach 271,000 more people who currently aren’t in the programme. These investments continue our work to address some of the country’s longstanding issues and help to reduce the number of people who tragically die from these two diseases.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister stand by her various statements that her Government’s COVID response went “hard and early”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes.

💬 David Seymour: How, then, would she characterise her Government’s roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: In keeping with our strategy of keeping our people well and safe. If you look around the world and compare ourselves to those countries who have had similar strategies or, indeed, similar relative success in terms of both incidence, infection, and, tragically, the loss of life, you’ll see the likes of Australia, New Zealand—from memory, South Korea, Vietnam, sitting at similar rates of vaccination. In part, that is because, yes, we really were at the front of the pack in terms of securing agreements with companies for the delivery of vaccine. However, distribution is a secondary question. And in my view, I think that we should hold our heads up, that whilst we are in a global environment where some are seeing the devastating impacts of COVID, we have taken our rightful place in the delivery of vaccine, because people simply are not dying in New Zealand.

💬 David Seymour: Is the delay because (a) the Government has a working distribution and booking system but no vaccine; (b) vaccine but no way to distribute it; or (c) a little bit of both?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: All of those are incorrect. In fact, what I would say is we’ve been very deliberate about the fact that our roll-out continues on an upward trajectory in line with the delivery of vaccine that we have certainty around. So we’ve always said we’re working towards a July date for general population roll-out. That sequencing is aligned with when we expect having enough vaccine in the country to start that. We’ve also aligned our roll-out, we hope, with not being in a position of running out—that’s been a risk throughout the roll-out—because one of the issues we face then is if you have a large period with no vaccine to deliver, we have staff sitting idle, vaccination centres sitting idle, and I think none of us want that. So it’s very carefully calibrated and it may be that we run the risk at some point of potentially running out, but we’re working very hard not to have that situation.

💬 David Seymour: Does she stand by her Government’s action of proposing so-called fair pay agreements for any sector where 10 percent of workers want them, instead of the one or two sectors, as her Government long led people to believe over several years?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I think, just to put this into context, we do have an expectation that there will be limited ability to negotiate fair pay agreements over multiple sectors. We anticipate we may have three to four. The one or two, if I recall, was at the time of where we were in establishing fair pay agreements in the last term in office. We, of course, will have the limited ability to complete large numbers of them. They will include significant resource from both parties. But examples of where we think these will make a big difference are some of those people that we consider to be the heroes of our COVID response. They are those who often through procurement processes do see a continual race to the bottom: our bus drivers, our security guards, our cleaners—those who have not been necessarily well served by our system to date. And like Australia and many others in the OECD, a system like this is designed to rectify that.

💬 David Seymour: How many fair pay agreements does the Prime Minister believe will be initiated within this parliamentary term, then?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, of course, whilst I’ve just given the member an expectation of some of the sectors we think it may be likely that they may be instigated, ultimately, it will very much depend on those who meet the criteria—and just to be clear on that again: 1,000 workers or 10 percent of the workers in proposed coverage, or there is a public interest test. But that’s very clear. It has to be low paid, low bargaining power, lack of pay progression, long or unsocial hours, or contractual uncertainty that is uncompensated. So, very clear direction there. It came off the back of a large amount of work, the likes of which was led in the first instance by Jim Bolger. That has involved discussions between the unions and Business New Zealand and will go through another process that will involve consultation. Ultimately, though, we believe a system like this—not too dissimilar to what we see in Australia—will be to the benefit of low-paid workers in New Zealand.

💬 David Seymour: How is it democratic for 10 percent of workers in a sector or occupation to start a process which can only end in the compulsory imposition of a contract on everybody in that sector, even if the majority voted against it twice?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, actually, the member refers there, rightly, to the ratification process, which does, of course, require a simple majority of both employers and workers voting in favour. So I certainly wouldn’t characterise fair pay agreements in the way the member has, based on that process. The member rightly acknowledges, though, there may be areas in which we have an impasse. And here, I think, an important comparison between us and Australia: Australia’s system right from the outset is an arbitration process of the sort where you are using an independent body; New Zealand’s brings everyone around the table, goes through a bargaining process, and, if you’re unable to get that ratified, then it goes through more of an arbitration-style process. I think that’s right for New Zealand’s context and I think it’s most likely in those circumstances to get us in the right place. The member also mischaracterises fair pay agreements and he makes an assumption that there is generic non-support from employers. There have been queries from employers who wish their industries to be involved, because you’ll find there are some excellent employers who find themselves, for instance—

💬 David Seymour: Point of order. Point of order. I actually didn’t say that about employers; I asked about the workings of the policy in such a circumstance as the majority of people voted against a particular agreement. Now, for the Prime Minister to go on and give a running commentary is well outside Standing Orders, which say that she should only be giving information necessary to answer the question.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think the Prime Minister earlier on answered the question and I’ll take notice of the member’s wish to be tighter during questions and answers.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister agree with the recommendations of the Department of Conservation’s Options Development Group her Government commissioned, when it said it believes in the “delegation, transfer and devolution of functions and powers within the conservation system to tangata whenua”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I simply have not read the document in full that the member refers to but nor would I expect to at this stage.

💬 David Seymour: Does she think that the delegation, transfer, and devolution of functions and powers within the conservation system to tangata whenua would be of great interest to New Zealanders, and, if so, why was it not in the Speech from the Throne?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I would contend that, actually, some of these principles have been contained in the Conservation Act since 1987.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

Securing the economic recovery in New Zealand is being supported by household spending. Today, Statistics New Zealand announced that seasonally adjusted retail card spending rose to $6.1 billion in April, the highest it has been this year, and up 4 percent on the previous month. The gains have been broad-based, led by the hospitality sector, groceries, apparel, and household durables. While there was a large increase on April 2020 levels, when the country was in lockdown, card spending in April was also up on 2019, rising by 6 percent. The durables industry saw the largest increase compared with April 2019, and this industry includes spending on things like furniture, sporting goods, and pharmaceutical products, and shopping in department stores.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What other reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The latest global dairy trade auction shows a consolidation of prices for whole-milk powder and skim-milk powder, which rose 0.7 percent and 2 percent respectively. These increases come after the strong gains from earlier in the year and are due to the robust global demand for New Zealand dairy products. This is a positive outlook for farm incomes, those in the regions, and the national economy. Economists are optimistic that the recent strength in prices will persist well into the next season. Nevertheless, the overall index declined 0.7 percent, with butter prices falling 12 percent. This is an important sign that we are still operating in a volatile and uncertain global environment.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What other reports has he seen on the health of the primary sector?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The dairy industry is not the only one in the primary sector feeling a little more confident. The monthly ANZ Commodity Price Index shows a number of producers are experiencing better returns due to stronger global demand and higher prices. The commodity price index rose 2.3 percent in April, extending its record high. Other than the dairy sector, the lift was driven by strong prices for beef and lamb, which rose 6.2 percent and 8.3 percent respectively, and the forestry index, that rose 3.5 percent in April to hit an all-time high. Throughout COVID, our exporters have helped lead New Zealand’s recovery. They are operating in a market of considerable volatility.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

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

Yes, in particular our announcement that New Zealand and France will jointly convene a Christchurch Call second anniversary leaders’ summit in May, which will take stock of progress and develop a new shared priority work plan. The Christchurch Call shows a shared commitment by Governments and tech companies to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online. It was great to hear on the weekend that the United States will attend this summit. The United States Government’s support for the Call, which they’ve also recently signed up to, recognises the importance of a multi-stakeholder approach to an issue that increasingly transcends borders, ideologies, and nationalities, and the ability of any one group or country to address on their own. I’m proud of the work New Zealand is leading in this space.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree with her Minister for Children that Oranga Tamariki removing Māori children from dangerous situations is a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: My view is that, actually, the debate that we are currently having around Oranga Tamariki and whether or not we have succeeded in protecting children as well as we could have was initially instigated in 2016 by Anne Tolley. I want to recognise that Anne Tolley tried to start a conversation which we are trying to continue and complete. And that is a recognition that I think we are all of one view that we must do better to look after the wellbeing of our children and tamariki in New Zealand, and that includes trying to prevent situations where they are uplifted, and trying to continue their relationships and care within whānau.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Is it a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi for Oranga Tamariki to uplift a Māori child from a dangerous home?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I don’t believe that that will be a fair attribution to the Minister’s comments.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Well, then, does she agree with her Minister when he was asked, “Can you see how the Tribunal has come to the decision that Oranga Tamariki has broken the Treaty of Waitangi?”, and he replied, “Yeah, absolutely, I agree.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The Waitangi Tribunal—if I’m summarising what they said in what was a lengthy and helpful contribution to the discussion, it was that we must do better on behalf of tamariki who are in the care of Oranga Tamariki. My offer to the member and to that party would be: how can we work together to improve these circumstances for kids? If their view is that anything that we are currently doing is not about the best interests of children, I would be happy to debate that, but that is not the sense I am getting from these questions.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree with her Minister for Children that families who have, in the eyes of the Government, presented such a danger to their children that the children have had to be removed should now be considered for financial compensation?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, if the member wishes to have a conversation about improving the lot of children, we are here for that conversation. Let’s get back to the fundamentals here: thousands of children are in State care, uplifts are traumatic, and we must stop children from being in circumstances where they are hurt and abused. The best thing we can do is start from preventing the need for them to be uplifted in the first place. If the member wants to discuss the best way to do that, let’s hear it.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does her Government support the Hon Kelvin Davis directing Oranga Tamariki to begin preparing to devolve power and resources to a new Māori Transition Authority?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, I come back to everything that I have said: if the member thinks that we are doing well at the moment, she has not read any of the statistics about what’s happening to kids. Equally, we have statutory obligations that sit with Oranga Tamariki, and those statutory obligations continue to sit with Oranga Tamariki. What we are discussing—and, actually, a conversation that Anne Tolley rightly started—is whether or not, in working more closely with iwi organisations and whānau who know these families well and the children well, we can do a better job at prevention. Now, I would like to hear how we can continue the discussion that Anne Tolley started, because that is what we are trying to do.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she believe it is acceptable for the Government to remove itself from the protection of all children, regardless of ethnicity, when a New Zealand child is killed by its own family every five weeks?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I reject the claim that was made. The member did not listen to my previous answer around the statutory obligations that still exist within Oranga Tamariki. And, secondly, everything we are doing is about the care and wellbeing of children.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree with the Treasury document He Ara Waiora that taxation is an expression of Crown authority and, to best reflect the Treaty, should be exercised in partnership, and, if so, what would this look like?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member would like to put on notice specific documents for discussion, I’d be happy to discuss them.

💬 Hon Kelvin Davis: Does the Prime Minister—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon Kelvin Davis: Does the Prime Minister agree with the comments made at the Iwi Chairs Forum in Porirua on Friday that when Kāwanatanga and rangatiratanga work together in partnership, we’ll see great things happening?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I mean, it’s long been the endeavour of Governments, I would have hoped, to make sure that we’re upholding our obligations as Treaty partners in the work that we do. There are actually some examples that I would have thought the member would have been proud of when they were in Government: the work that, actually, they did with Tūhoe around conservation; Waikato, with the Waikato River Authority; Whānau Ora; kōhanga reo. It seems that in Government there is a commitment to partnership, but in Opposition there is a race to the bottom in terms of politicising a debate that we need to have as a nation.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What is her response to the draft recommendations of the Department of Conservation that tangata whenua rights and interests in the marine domain still need to be resolved?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, if the member wants to get into specific details on recommendations from the Department of Conservation, I would defer the member to the Minister or ask her to put on record those specific documents she wishes to discuss.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I understand you just took two supplementary questions off the Opposition during that exchange, Mr Speaker. I’m just wondering what on earth that was for.

💬 SPEAKER: For the raucous laughter when the Hon Kelvin Davis stood to ask a question. Arena Williams—question No. 4. [Interruption] Order! Again!

Question No. 4—COVID-19 Response

4. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What recent announcements has he made on MIQ allocations in relation to supporting economic recovery?

Yesterday, the Government announced that, over the next 10 months, thousands of skilled and critical workers will be allocated spaces in our managed isolation facilities. To help provide a boost to key sectors, about 500 managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) rooms will be made available every fortnight for this purpose. To date, we’ve already been consistently averaging more than 10 percent of MIQ spaces set aside for economic purposes per month. That was something that the Labour Party promised at the election.

💬 Arena Williams: Who will this announcement apply to?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Of the 500 MIQ rooms to be made available fortnightly, we have agreed to allocated spaces for the following groups: around 300 Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme workers every month, from June, with a total of 2,400 arriving by next March; 300 specialist construction workers between June and October; 400 international students for arrival in June, out of the thousand previously announced for the start of semester two; and a hundred refugees every six weeks from July. This is, of course, in addition to those who can enter MIQ through the regular booking system.

💬 Arena Williams: How will this announcement support economic recovery?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: This announcement helps some critical sectors in New Zealand get access to the workers they need. It comes off the back of world-leading quarantine-free travel arrangements between Australia and New Zealand and the Cook Islands, and part of our plans to reconnect New Zealand to the world. All of these milestones show momentum that we’re building; seizing opportunities created through New Zealand’s collective response to COVID-19 and the work of our team of 5 million.

💬 Arena Williams: What about spaces in MIQ for Kiwis looking to return home?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the things that we have balanced very carefully is the need—

💬 Chris Bishop: What about migrants just trying to move here?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: If the member wants to ask a question, he’s allowed to. In making—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! I mean, I’m probably stating the self-evident. Well, it’s not helped from that case—continue.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: —this decision, the Government has carefully balanced the need to bring in additional skilled workers, with the need to ensure that New Zealanders have a pathway to return home. At the moment, we have around 20,000 rooms, over the next three months, available to book through the managed isolation system. Now is a good time for New Zealanders to return home. There is space available. And I would also add a word of caution that it’s possible that there will be increased demand later in the year. So for those New Zealanders who are looking to come home, now is good.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. to the Minister of Finance: Does the Government intend to restrict new spending in Budget 2021 to the operating allowance of $10.5 billion and capital allowance of $7.8 billion over the four-year period, as set out in the Budget Policy Statement 2021; if not, what are the new operating and capital allowances for Budget 2021?

As I said yesterday, our better-than-expected economic recovery does provide us with more options. There is a bit more space in our operating and capital allowances to support the recovery, but this will be balanced against keeping a lid on debt and allowing us to start reducing debt from the middle of the decade, as outlined in the Budget Policy Statement. This approach is in line with what we said at the time of the Budget Policy Statement—and I quote—“The allowances are subject to change, as economic and fiscal forecasts are updated for both the New Zealand economy and the global economy.” In answer to the second part of the question, the member has to wait just nine more sleeps, not counting his afternoon naps.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he agree it is important to keep the legacy of debt our children and grandchildren will struggle to repay as low as possible?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I think the record of this Government shows that, prior to COVID-19, we had managed to continue on what previous Governments did of keeping New Zealanders’ debt low relative to other countries. That has continued. Debt remains very low relative to other countries, and we will continue to keep a balance on investing in our future, which involves both the investments we make to build public services but also in keeping debt under control.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: So why does he think a marginal improvement in Crown accounts is a reason to increase spending in money the Government doesn’t have, when we’re still on track to be over $100 billion more in debt than projected before COVID?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I’ve said in my first answer, this is all about striking the right balance between investing in the things that New Zealand needs to do now, the things that many of the member’s colleagues raise in this House around issues like housing or around issues like climate change or around issues like child wellbeing. They all require investment. What is important is keeping a balance to make sure that we do that alongside keeping a lid on debt.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does the Minister regret the 10,000 new bureaucrats hired during the Government’s pre-COVID recruitment binge now that they have to freeze their pay?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I reject the latter part of that member’s question, and, in answer to the former part of it, I pick up what the Minister for the Public Service said in the House the other day. The people he’s talking about are the people who’ve been keeping us safe at the border, the people who keep us healthy, the people who educate our children. I’m sorry the member doesn’t think that those things are important, but on this side of the House, we do.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Why can the Government fork out more than $100 million for private media organisations but has to recommend that teachers, nurses, police, and the defence force get a pay freeze?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again, I reject the second part of the member’s question, and I well recall in the last term the enormous pay increases we gave to teachers and nurses because the previous National Government had failed to back them.

Question No. 6—Police

6. to the Minister of Police: What recent announcements has she made regarding combating organised crime?

[Uses sign language] Thank you, Mr Speaker. This morning, alongside the Minister of Justice, I announced a range of new tools to aid police in their fight against organised crime. The Government will make it illegal for high-risk people to own firearms by introducing the firearms prohibition orders (FPO). FPOs will protect the public from harm by prohibiting high-risk people from accessing, being around, or using firearms. Breaching these conditions of a firearms prohibition order will be a criminal offence. Alongside this, the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act will be amended to introduce a new power-enabling seizure of assets of those associated with organised crime where the person’s known legitimate income is likely to have been insufficient to acquire the asset. This Government is taking meaningful action to make sure that we keep our communities safe.

💬 Ginny Andersen: Who will be targeted by the Government’s firearms prohibition orders regime?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: It’s no secret that gun crime is an increasing concern in our communities, and we need to take further action to make sure that New Zealanders and their families are kept safe. FPOs will protect the public from harm by prohibiting high-risk people from accessing, being around, or using firearms. High-risk people include those who commit serious firearms offences, serious violence offences, an offence of participating in an organised criminal group, and terrorism-related offences.

💬 Ginny Andersen: How will amendments made to the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act further disrupt organised crime?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Police are hitting gangs where it hurts—their pockets. The new organised crime power will help prevent those involved in organised crime from benefiting from crime and remove the primary reason for organised crime to exist—profit. Police have recently undertaken Operation Cartwright / Chanute in Dunedin, which has resulted in the arrest of four people for various drug offences, and seized $115,000 in cash and eight firearms, and restrained an estimated $4.8 million in illicitly gained assets. Operation Oats in Whangārei has resulted in two arrests for drug activity and restrained an estimated $1 million in illicitly gained assets. Operation Bronco in Flat Bush has seized 6 kilograms of ephedrine, 2,260 grams of methamphetamine, and $1.07 million in cash.

💬 David Seymour: When announcing her policy, was the Minister aware that the ACT Party had announced and advocated a near-identical policy for six months before she announced it?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I thank the ACT member for that question and welcome his support of this particular piece of legislation.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order. The question was about the Minister’s awareness. She didn’t address that. She just thanked us for support, which we haven’t even given yet because we haven’t seen the detail.

💬 SPEAKER: I think it was implicit in the reply that she was aware of what the member was talking about. [Interruption] I will remind the member he can’t require a yes/no answer—longstanding Speakers’ rulings.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: A new point of order?

💬 David Seymour: Well, no, Mr Speaker, I just seek, for the benefit of the people at home—when you say that it was implicit, are you saying that it sounded like she was saying yes or no?

💬 SPEAKER: I’m not going to answer for the Minister.

💬 Simeon Brown: Does she agree with the Police Association, who have said that firearm prohibition orders without search powers are useless, and, if so, will the Government’s legislation include warrantless search powers?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: No, we won’t. But what I do want to say to this House is that the member’s bill didn’t include these either.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: What is the Minister going to do about the recent incident in Taupō where police violently used excessive force in arresting a 14-year-old Māori child, digging their knee into the child’s neck?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! That’s not an area for which there’s ministerial responsibility.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Supplementary—

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, which one?

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, it’s just—your colleague was standing up as well. Rawiri Waititi.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Age before beauty. Anyway, this is entirely her responsibility. No? She’s the Minister of Police.

Yes, and the Minister of Police does not have responsibility for operational matters. Debbie—

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

Well—sorry. I’ve just got a slight reluctance here when a certain member’s been going for the call on a number of occasions. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Kia ora. Supplementary—

Oh, sorry—sorry. I didn’t realise it was a supplementary. A point of order.

💬 Chris Bishop: Well, that may well be the case, Mr Speaker, in relation to operational matters. That is for the Minister to say. I have previously been a police spokesperson in this House and have asked dozens of questions around live police—well, not live operations but operations in the past that the Minister is clearly responsible for. So it’s for the Minister to say whether or not something’s an operational matter and she declines to comment; not for you, Mr Speaker.

Well, it may well be that the member has asked those questions or has made comments in those areas or has seen them, but it has been the long-term decisions of Speakers in this House that the Minister’s actions and stuff that she has done are her responsibility—

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order.

Well, am I allowed to finish or not?

💬 Chris Bishop: I thought you had, sorry.

There has been a longstanding approach in this House whereby Ministers are asked about Government policies, their actions, and their resourcing. Their views on whether a matter should be taken further, especially where there is a possibility of prosecution, has been long ruled out in this area, and I’ll see if I can find the relative—

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: He won’t.

Who said that?

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I did.

Right—the member who’s just about to leave the Chamber.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: I’m being asked to leave the Chamber, am I, Mr Speaker?

Yes, you are.

Hon Simon Bridges withdrew from the Chamber.

Speaker’s ruling 169/2 is probably a good place to look.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

A further point of order.

💬 Chris Bishop: Look, we are going to get into difficulty here, because Ministers are responsible for the actions of their departments. To take an analogy, for example, if I asked Minister Hipkins around the actions or statements made by Dr Bloomfield as the Director-General of Health, that would clearly be—I think we would all agree in the House—within the scope of questions that would be allowed to be asked and answered in question time. Likewise, the actions of—to take Corrections, for example—the chief executive of the Department of Corrections, in response to activities undertaken by corrections officers or prison management, for example, I think, would clearly be within scope as well. So is it your position, Mr Speaker, that the actions of officials or the actions of public sector agencies that the Minister doesn’t have operational responsibility for but has responsibility to the House for are not able to be asked questions about, because that would be, I think, quite a stretch and, really, I think we would have quite some difficulty with that in the Opposition.

The answer to the member’s question is no.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: I ask the Minister: what is her view, as Minister, of the recent action of police in Taupō?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There’s no doubt that that case is very distressing for all concerned. I believe it’s a matter of investigation with the Independent Police Conduct Authority—it may have already been determined—and that is the appropriate place. What I can comment on, though, is the work that the police are doing to recognise the disproportionate arrest rates for Māori and Pacific, and I support the work that they are doing to look at how they speak to and stop people, and how they make their charging decisions. I think that speaks to a broader programme of work that the police are undertaking to ensure that we do everything we can to reduce the rates of arrest for Māori and Pacific.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What is the Minister doing to address the fact that the police pull guns on Māori children 3.8 times more than any other ethnicity nationally, and 16 times more in Whanganui—100 percent being Māori?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I just want to reiterate that I applaud the work that the police are doing to understand how it is that we have got these disproportionate rates against Māori and Pacific. At the end of the day, we are talking about our whānau and our people. I support the police in looking at how they stop and speak to individuals, and their charging decisions, as part of the broader piece of work that they are doing in terms of institutional and other unconscious bias. This is work that is difficult, but the police are owning up to the fact that there have been decisions and conduct in the past that has not been helpful in this situation, and I support that they are looking at this work.

Question No. 7—Workplace Relations and Safety

7. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What is his response to Treasury’s advice that implementing a Fair Pay Agreements regime will have uncertain implications for productivity, and that there is “minimal empirical evidence for the problem or policy response” it seeks to address?

Sector level bargaining, of which fair pay agreements are a kind, are recommended by the OECD and are commonplace in many advanced, prosperous economies like Australia, Singapore, and large parts of Europe, many of whom have a stronger productivity record than New Zealand does. In answer to the second part of the member’s question, I would encourage the member to read the report put out by the Rt Hon Sir Jim Bolger and the—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! He’s certainly not a knight.

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Yes, thank you, Mr Speaker—the Rt Hon Jim Bolger, who produced, along with a range of others, a Fair Pay Agreement Working Group report, which shows that while New Zealand has experienced economic growth and productivity growth over the last 30 years, the share of that going to people—working people—has declined over that period. This is the graph reproduced from that working group report. That is the fundamental problem that we are trying to resolve. After 30 years of a trickle-down model that has failed to deliver for working people and that has not produced the improved productivity performance that was promised, we say that it’s time for a new approach. It’s time to stop the race to the bottom.

💬 Hon Scott Simpson: What is his response to Treasury’s advice that fair pay agreements may make substantial changes to the economy and risk widespread negative effects on employment?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: In respect of making changes to the economy, this Government is a Government which does propose to make changes which benefit those people who are currently being left behind. After the year of COVID, in which we have been reminded of the value of the cleaners, the bus drivers, the supermarket checkout workers—people who have to exist at barely over a minimum wage—we believe it is time to make a change so that those people’s terms and conditions are not driven down by competitive processes. We quite happily stand up and say that we support that change. The other side of the House may be happy with it, but we’re not.

💬 Hon Scott Simpson: Does he consider that Treasury’s concerns about there being minimal empirical evidence for implementing a fair pay agreements regime could possibly relate to his plans that would allow just 10 percent of workers in a sector being able to force the other 90 percent into the regime?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I don’t think those two points are related at all.

💬 Hon Scott Simpson: Does he consider that Treasury’s concern about there being minimal empirical evidence for implementing a fair pay agreement regime could relate to his plans that would see a small business in Invercargill having the same conditions imposed on them as a major employer based in the Auckland CBD, just because they’re operating in the same sector?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I’d make two points in response to the member’s question. The first is that I believe that Governments which are elected on manifestos, that have a mandate to govern, need to listen to the advice that is given by officials and to carefully consider it, but also to listen to the advice and views that come through from a range of stakeholders, and to hold faith with the commitments they made when they were elected. So members on that side of the House might think that it’s a good way to govern—to just go along with whatever the officials tell you. We actually bring a range of wider considerations into the mix. Secondly, I would encourage the member to actually read the policy which has been put out. He might be too busy at the moment reading Simon Bridges’ biography—

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

Question No. 8—Tourism

Before we go to this question, I will warn members that the Minister has been in touch with me to indicate that this answer is longer than I would generally consider desirable.

8. to the Minister of Tourism: What is the Government doing to support the recovery of tourism communities?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Last week, I announced the Support, Recovery and Re-set Plan for the tourism communities, to support the social and economic recovery of tourism communities after the impacts of COVID-19 and rebuild tourism on a more sustainable foundation. There were 12 key points in the Tourism Communities Plan. Half are focused on the most vulnerable South Island regions—Fiordland, South Westland, Queenstown Lakes, Mackenzie District, and Kaikōura. The remaining six are nationwide initiatives.

Support for the five South Island communities will address: (1), mental health and social wellbeing support and training; (2) grants for businesses to get expert advice on planning and decision making in response to COVID-19—$5,000 per business; (3) grants to help businesses implement these plans and advice—that’s $5,000 per business; (4) a $49 million kick-start fund so that businesses that have gone into hibernation or suspended operations can receive grants to help them reopen and resume trading once international visitors return; (5) a reset to the Queenstown/Wanaka regional economy, with a $20 million fund to attract private sector investment to diversify and develop alternative industries; and, finally, (6) $15 million to enable the Milford Sound Opportunities Project to move to its next phase. Transformation is needed to protect Milford Sound and create a more sustainable and high-quality visitor experience.

💬 Rachel Brooking: What are the nationwide initiatives in the recovery plan?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: This Tourism Communities Plan also offers wide support for the industry as a whole. It is an opportunity for Government, councils, iwi, businesses, and tourism operators and communities to work together and reset the industry on a more sustainable model for the future. There are six additional components to the plan to address longer-term challenges nationwide.

The first is regional tourism organisations to receive a new round of grant funding of $26 million to coordinate, promote, and market tourism activities in their regions. Two, $14 million to existing loans to inbound tour operators (ITOs) from the 2020 tourism recovery package will be converted to grants. That means 26 ITOs will receive up to $500,000 each. Three, further investment in Māori tourism businesses. The details will be announced by the Minister for Māori Development later this month. Four, $10 million for the Department of Conservation to extend the fee waiver for around a thousand operators on conservation land who pay a tourism concession free. Five, $16.5 million for local councils to be able to apply for another round in the Tourism Infrastructure Fund. And, finally, $10 million for the development of a new tourism industry transformation plan, which will see the Government work in partnership with tourism businesses and the tourism workforce, councils, iwi, and researchers and independent advisers. It will build on recent work by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Tourism Futures Taskforce, and Climate Change Commission, among others, to lift industry standards and transform to a more sustainable model.

💬 Rachel Brooking: What feedback has he received on the Tourism Communities Plan?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: A lot of positive feedback. Queenstown Mayor Jim Boult said the announcement would “ ‘turbocharge’ the work done to date on diversifying the economy and ‘move us to another level’ ”. And Destination Kaikōura manager, Louise Frend, said, “On behalf of Kaikoura it’s up to me to express heartfelt thanks for this very targeted support.”

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Usually when Ministers are allowed to take a bit of extra time to answer a question, they’re in relation to very technical or complicated primary questions. I don’t think anyone could reasonably say that question No. 8 on the sheet today is a technical or complicated question. Instead, we’ve just been subjected to about a three- or four-minute speech from the Minister. Mr Speaker, you’ve made it pretty clear your views about that sort of behaviour in this House.

Question No. 9—Public Service

9. to the Minister for the Public Service: How is restricting the wage increases of nurses, teachers, and border workers who earn between $60,000 and $100,000 in order to “control the public wage bill” going to “reduce inequality”?

I reject the premise of the member’s question. Let me restate what I said in my media statement last Wednesday: “We want to see those on lower wages be the focus of any increases in pay. This is about prioritising spending. The policy will also help protect jobs by taking financial pressure off the public wage bill. It will not impact the work we are doing within the Public Service to close gender and ethnic pay gaps. The public service is doing a good job implementing the Government’s COVID-19 response, and we ask that they lead the way in supporting the Government as we ensure [that] our spending is targeted to where it is needed [the] most.”

💬 Jan Logie: Then, why does the recently issued Public Service pay guide say, “The default position is that there are to be no increases” and that “salary increases [should] remain low averaged across all staff.” and that “executives in the Public Service should ensure that pay increases do not occur” unless they meet a narrow set of principles?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I think the member, rather than selectively quoting particular pieces of the guidance, needs to read the guidance in its totality. What the Government is endeavouring to achieve is to stop the significant growth in the gap between those lowest paid and those who are higher paid. Across-the-board percentage increases, which we have seen in the last three years, have increased the gap between the lowest paid and the highest paid, and that is unsustainable.

💬 Jan Logie: Why does he keep playing off low-income workers who earn under $60,000 against other essential workers like nurses, teachers, or border workers, who have also been working their guts out for relatively modest incomes?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Again, I reject the premise of the member’s question. I don’t believe that that is what the Government is doing. What the Government is saying is if we continue to provide across-the-board pay increases that see the majority of the money going to people on the highest salaries, the inequality in the public sector will continue to increase, and that is not something that this Government wants to see continue.

💬 Jan Logie: Is he aware that in May 2018, 70 percent of nurses and midwives were already employed on the top pay band, with no further progression possible, as was stated in the 2018 New Zealand Nurses Organisation submission to the independent panel to resolve the DHB multi-employer collective agreement negotiations?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Our awareness of the fact that many nurses and teachers sit at the top of their current pay scale is reflected in the fact that over five years, this Government has injected an extra $4.2 billion into pay settlements with those workforces. What the Government is saying is it’s time for those at the bottom end of the salary scale, who are not reflected in the settlements reached with those workforces, to get a bit of a break.

💬 Jan Logie: Will he revise the recently released Public Service pay guide document so that those earning over $60,000 can also bargain in good-faith for the pay increases they surely deserve after a really tough year?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Nothing in the guidance stops bargaining in good-faith.

Question No. 10—Health

10. to the Associate Minister of Health: What recent announcements has she made about improving cancer screening programmes for women?

Budget 2021 focuses on securing our recovery while making investments that improve the lives of New Zealanders. This year’s Budget will deliver a better cervical-screening test and a major upgrade of the breast cancer screening system that will save lives. These initiatives build on our last three Budgets, where we have made significant investments in health, including delivering the biggest funding boost to maternity care in a decade.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: How will the new cervical-screening test increase the number of wāhine who get screened for cervical cancer?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The persistent inequalities around cervical cancer has been one of the longstanding issues in women’s health. Our investment of up to $53 million to complete the design and implement a new test for human papilloma virus—or HPV; the cause of 99 percent of cervical cancers—will make a real difference. The new test, which will replace the current cervical smear test for the 1.4 million eligible women aged 25 to 69 years old, is a simple and quick swab that women will eventually be able to choose to do for themselves. This will help reduce the barriers to getting screened. Modelling predicts that the move to HPV screening will prevent about 400 additional cervical cancers over 17 years and will save about 138 additional lives. Around a third of the cases prevented and lives saved will be wāhine Māori.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: What are the changes to the breast-screening programme?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The Government is committed to improving the health outcomes for our hard-to-reach communities. The existing breast cancer screening programme operates as an opt-in model, where women choose to enrol for screening by calling their GP or an 0800 number. This relies on women knowing that they are eligible for free breast screening and making an appointment themselves. The new technology funded through Budget 2021 will better equip the programme to reach the 271,000 women who are currently eligible to access breast screening but are not currently screened. With more Māori and Pacific women dying from breast cancer compared to non-Māori, non-Pacific women, the new system will allow BreastScreen Aotearoa to identify and target groups of women who may not currently be part of the programme.

Question No. 11—Public Service

11. to the Minister for the Public Service: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions in relation to public sector pay?

In general, yes. However, I do regret that details of the new pay guidance for Public Service agencies has been inaccurately characterised as a pay freeze. It is not.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Will he consider backing down, changing, or amending the decision in relation to public sector pay restraints?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The member clearly wasn’t listening to the answers I already gave to my colleague from the Green Party: no.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Why not?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Because this Government is unashamedly wanting to ensure that pay increases are targeted at those on the lowest incomes.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does the Minister think it’s fair to restrain for three years the pay of a teacher or nurse earning $60,000?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Again, I reject that that’s what the guidance does.

Question No. 12—Rural Communities

12. to the Minister for Rural Communities: What concerns, if any, have been raised with him about the impacts of Government policies on rural communities?

As I get out around my electorate and the wider country, there is never a shortage of opinions on many issues, and I listen to what is top of mind for many of those communities. There are issues like water, bank closures, live exports, climate policy, and afforestation. I’m honoured to be in Parliament here with a large number of Labour MPs who are passionate advocates for rural communities, as well, and they pass on to me the issues as raised with them, on a regular basis.

💬 Mark Cameron: Does he still believe that the Government’s freshwater reforms will need to be “tweaked” to better accommodate regional differences, and, if so, what further actions will be taken?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Yes, I do, and we have indeed tweaked them; we’ve just parked them for 12 months to work through the issues to ensure that when they are implemented—and the goals of better, cleaner water across New Zealand, I think, are ones that every New Zealander aspires to—that we can give effect to the right outcomes in each of the regions. The regions will have different challenges; we acknowledge that.

💬 Mark Cameron: Is he concerned at the findings of Tailrisk Economics, who concluded that the Government’s freshwater reforms will cost the country $3.2 billion?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: No, I don’t agree with that at all. And what I will say is that, actually, “Brand New Zealand” is worth a huge amount across the world. And as I regularly speak to trade Ministers from across the world, they acknowledge two things. Firstly is our progress and, I guess, our achievements in COVID—that’s the first thing. The second thing is that they aspire to be like us when it comes to animal protein production in our faming systems. And, of course, that’s built off the back of a reputation for good environmental management, good labour management, and good animal welfare management. It’s up to us to make sure we adhere to those high standards.

💬 Mark Cameron: How does he respond to Federated Farmers, who stated, in relation to the managed isolation policy, that they were “deeply disappointed the government’s exception announcement today shows it could not find a way to bring 500 desperately needed skilled dairy employees into the country.”?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Look, I’m happy to speak on that. The dairy industry is our biggest industry in this country. It is important that we have people working in that sector. I’d like to quote Andrew Hoggard, the president of Federated Farmers, who said that, actually, farmers now have to realise that people should work probably on maximum about 50 hours a week, and get two days off. That’s what he said because that is what is needed to provide fair labour conditions to attract people. I’d also like to go on to say that, actually, the Ministry for Primary Industries, the Government, and taxpayers committed $900,000 to a campaign called GoDairy, which was to attract people into the dairy industry last year. And, in November last year, the dairy industry decided to pull out of that campaign because it was after spring. It’s a reminder to them that, actually, we need enduring, well-meaning, and well-focused campaigns to attract people into dairy. Simply knocking on the door of Government and saying, “We need $500 now, but not later” is a big challenge, when my colleague is trying to manage limited space in managed isolation and quarantine facilities.

I declare the House in committee for further consideration of the Appropriation (2019/20 Confirmation and Validation) Bill.